Beetstra
 | Dirk is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Meta-Wiki soon. |
Archives:
COIBot not reporting in
Leaving you a note here since I'm probably not irc tomorrow. Coibot seems to hang regularly in saving linkreports, I did one restart this afternoon but now it seeems to be hanging again... I'll restart it now, but you'll probably want to check Special:Contributions/COIBot when (if?) you check in tomorrow. Regards, Finn Rindahl 00:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have to write a bit better logging for the bot so I can finally figure out where it hangs. I as yet don't understand. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Could you leave cells blank instead of "ND" where applicable? I think this will allow the table to be sorted as numbers instead of text, which would be useful, I think. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I'll try that. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Looping/hanging of the LinkSaver
Seems it got itself into a bit of a loop regarding User:COIBot/XWiki/fuck this one... Finn Rindahl 23:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- This is the same problem as the hanging of the LinkSaver. I built in a catch for cases where the LinkSaver can't save a link for some reason, where the link is put back into the database for another attempt (e.g. if there was a timeout or the wiki was down at that moment, as that might result in loss of reports). However, this did not catch the cases where the bot, for whichever reason, REALLY can't save the report for other reasons (blacklisting of a link, title-blacklist, impossible names for the page, etc.).
- I patched it, it now should do three attempts to save a link, if it fails, it deletes it (but restarting the loop of three until the link is not returned into the database for other reasons, like ongoing spamming, poking or IRC-report-requesting). Error messages regarding this go to #wikimedia-external-links. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
coibot report swmt ___domain.com
The SWMTBots got renamed... could we use CVNBot9 now, instead of SWMTBot1? — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
- It's now a setting in User:COIBot/Settings. Hence: {{solvified}}. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
broken regexes?
Broken regex \bbr\.geocities\.com\ (perl-corrected: \bbr\.geocities\.com\) on pt.wikiquote.org blacklist, error: Trailing \ in regex m/\bbr\.geocities\.com\/ at LinkSaver.pl line 2041, <LIST> line 853.
Something like this appears on a lot (all?) of reports. Is that normal? — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well .. no, it is not normal. I have contacted a local admin to repair it (as the regex is broken!), but to no avail. Maybe I should poke somewhere someone again. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- See q:pt:Usuário_Discussão:Chico#Question. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
COIBot rights command
Hello Beetstra, I've found a bug on the COIBot rights [...] , here is the source:
[10:20] <MrDferg> rights Dferg
[10:20] <COIBot> Dferg is sysop on w:es, meta; bureaucrat on w:es; rollbacker on w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en, w:en
I think the bug is only in the rollbacker group cause I checked Drini and:
[10:21] <COIBot> Drini is sysop on w:en, w:es, w:nah, n:es, q:es, meta, commons; bureaucrat on w:es, w:nah, n:es, meta; steward on meta; checkuser on w:es, q:es, meta, commons; editor on w:als
Best regards, —Dferg (talk) 08:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yep .. it was one of the things that the LinkSaver was hanging on (this was a secondary task of that part of the bot, when it did not have to save linkreports). I have separated it from that bot now .. annoying, I'll have to write something special for this. Don't know though why it duplicated. Thanks for reporting. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
q:pt
--Chico 22:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Gracias! --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
coibot has left the building
or #external-links at least, guess you're the only one who can start it again.... Finn Rindahl 15:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- Heh, most bots left the building. Most reconnected after the, what I assume was, a netsplit, others have been restarted. It is one of the ways of getting the bots 'down' (though most still run, and still work in the background, we only lost the IRC tools .. ). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
COIBot stats
Hi!
COIBot does log (almost) all link additions, doesn't it? So are there somewhere statistics about the number of link additions for example in w:de?
related: de:WP:FZW#Externe_Links. -- seth 10:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- I could write a command for that in the Commander. Yes, in principle the linkwatchers log everything, except for some hard-ignored links (xxx.wikipedia.org/xxx.wiktionary.org, say, the internal links which look like external links). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks, that would be a nice gimmick to have, although it won't really help us in anti spam fighting. -- seth 15:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, mostly a gimmick, but it may help making general statements in guidelines and policies. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 20:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I had...
...to ban-forward (from cvn-wp-es and -external-links) your bot to #wikimedia-overflow because it is part/joining constantly the channels. Please unban it from #wikimedia-external-links when the connection of the bot is fixed. Regards and sorry, —Dferg (talk) 11:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Dei Beetstra, ter ynformaasje: itselde is niiskrekt dien op #cvn-sw troch Kylu, wêr't itselde oan 'e gong wie. Groetenis, Wutsje 12:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Versageek took care and the bot is fixed and unbaned, regards. —Dferg (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Nothing in the logs, nothing to see. No clue what happened, but ping me or Versageek, we both can kill it and restart it if it happens again. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sometimes strange things happens :) Regards, —Dferg (talk) 10:04, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
COIBot reports
Hello Beetstra, please correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't COIBot reports suposed not to be indexed by search engines? (see diff of Robots.txt). I saw that sometimes those reports appears in Google results. Would be possible for COIBot to add {{NOINDEX}} to every new report it creates? Thank you. — df| 15:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- No, you are correct. Thing is that, already before that edit to the Robots.txt, COIBot is adding {{NOINDEX}} to all his reports (I added that because of the complaints, while we were still waiting for the 'global' noindex). I am however curious to see a couple of those reports which show up on Google, somewhere must be something wrong. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 19:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hello Beetstra, thanks for your reply. I asked because I've found the reply on Talk:Spam_blacklist#www.travel2macedonia.com.mk strange. I quote: [...]The Google hit (ranked 12 in my search) links to the COIBot report[...].
- I checked this on my own and I have found that it is true, at least for User:COIBot/LinkReports/travel2macedonia.com.mk and I supose it is not the unique. Perhaps Google is ignoring the {{NOINDEX}}es tags? Thanks for your time. — df| 20:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Now I don't know. Maybe we should either first discuss it on the spam blacklist, or maybe immediately a bug-report? It would be really bad if Google is ignoring the noindex. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'll post this discussion on the discussion section of the SBL so that other admins/experienced users can share their opinions. Thank you, — df| 10:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC) P.D.: Talk:Spam_blacklist#COIBot_reports_showing_up_in_Google_results — df| 11:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Will it be possible for COIBot to close all the reports on that category that are older than 2 weeks? Thanks, —Dferg (disputatio) 15:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
- I am regenerating, that will clean the old ones. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 20:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Huge resource consumption by your bot
Hi, did you know that your bot produced 217775 edits of avg. 95732 bytes for a total of 19 Gb raw data. Is meta the right place for this kind of data? Erik Zachte 03:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC) http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TableRankArticleHistoryByArchiveSize.html
- Eh. Wow. Well, yes, the problem is, where else? Meta is the place where the global spam blacklist is located, and that is also where the bot reports it's reports. I could consider localising a subset of it, but I think that it will still be by far the largest editor then anyway. I must say, we are working on another solution, but that will take time. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
- Are these operational data where older history is irrelevant ? (I have no idea). I don't assume you could autodelete obsolete info with a bot? Probably not, if bots could do that that would be very risky. Maybe you could start a new page each month, and file pages older than x months for deletion? But then I see you have many satelite pages. Maybe you could host a separate wiki? Or we could discuss a separate WMF wiki for operational data like this, where auto delete is allowed. Besides general concern my worry is that dump creation gets more and more difficult when more and more bots use this online storage scheme. (Ronald also does this for proxy data) Erik Zachte 18:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Can the dump process be modified to exclude these pages? They might be useful to dump if we ever want to import them to another wiki, but they're useless for most applications. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 06:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- Are these operational data where older history is irrelevant ? (I have no idea). I don't assume you could autodelete obsolete info with a bot? Probably not, if bots could do that that would be very risky. Maybe you could start a new page each month, and file pages older than x months for deletion? But then I see you have many satelite pages. Maybe you could host a separate wiki? Or we could discuss a separate WMF wiki for operational data like this, where auto delete is allowed. Besides general concern my worry is that dump creation gets more and more difficult when more and more bots use this online storage scheme. (Ronald also does this for proxy data) Erik Zachte 18:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hosting them on another wiki removes the difference between User:COIBot/LinkReports/example.com and User:COIBot/LinkReports/noexample.com (i.e., we now that example.com has been examined in the past, while that was not done for noexample.com). That is information which we would want to see immediately, and may even be interesting for very old reports. I'd be more inclined to await a live-linksearch (something that is being worked on), so the bot-data could be made smaller (I could remove a big part of the pages under User:COIBot/LinkReports, while keeping that only in the pages under User:COIBot/XWiki). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Autoclosing when blacklisted
Could you put some newlines in, and double-check the bot is using only one signature? See [1] for my example tweaks. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Oi, that is not nice. I will repair that. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
test
--Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hoi Beetstra. Can you restart COIBot? It's flooding with part/joinings on IRC. I had to ban it from the -es channel. Thank you! — Dferg (talk) 21:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
¡hola! Dferg. It seems to have stopped, and the bot was unbanned again. I have to figure out why it is doing that, it is annoying. Seems to happen every now and then. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Coibot taking a break...
...from refreshing the Xwikilist, [2], no update since yesterday. Finn Rindahl 11:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, bot died (don't know why). Versageek restarted it. Please poke me or en:User:Versageek (or better, both) on en.wikipedia, at least I read en.wikipedia more. Thanks anyway!! --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- Will do - didn't know that Versa was still around or I would have poked them as well. Finn Rindahl 19:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Something odd about the summary display
FYI: Starting with this edit, the tablular display at User:COIBot/XWiki has changed to display much less information. --A. B. (talk) 02:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- The box is down .. no bots (at all) for some time, and a, by now, huge gap in the database. Sorry. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, I appreciate what we have, gaps or no gaps. It's not as if you don't have a day job, too. --A. B. (talk) 16:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- The box is back .. now the database again. Thanks for the nice words, really appreciated! --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Broken regex
Hi, I've just noticed a following message in several COIBot reports ([3], [4]):
Broken regex (?<!www\.)\bmybrute\.com\b (perl-corrected (?<!www\.)\bmybrute\.com\b) on meta's global blacklist, error: Sequence (?&...) not recognized in regex; marked by <-- HERE in m/(?& <-- HERE lt;!www\.)\bmybrute\.com\b/ at LinkSaver.pl line 2584.
Is it possible to fix it anyhow? Cheers, --Mercy 07:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, that one. I will have to look at that, I think I did 'solve' that, but it takes some time to update (COIBot makes off-wiki copies of the all 'blacklists' every now and then, and uses those, it is impossible to load all '3 x 750' blacklists on every save). Is it still there in the new reports? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Solved .. my mistake, I did do it correctly for all saved lists .. I only forgot that the global blacklist is not saved but read before every save. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- Great! Thank you! :-) --Mercy 12:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
How being unlocked ??
Dear Sir Beetstra ( beste Dirk ) I'm herewith confirming next request on my talkpage user talk: D.A. Borgdorff as follows and perhaps FYI ... hopefully ...:
- I still don't understand this in advance quite simple-minded It-Nick (to be stated in 1915?) conclusion of narrow awareness to my opinion, because I've done no-one & nobody harm to defending myself, but with writing about modern Traction Systems for Railroads / Tramways * Light Rail Transit. Further a treatise on the famous Van der Pol equations and i.c. nl:overleg:Van der Pol-vergelijking Quantum-Electro-Dynnamics and also Electro-Medical as on Cardioversion et cetera. Further see my contributions on various Philosophical and Maths-paradoxes as described in nl:Overleg:Driedeurenprobleem to be found in title under the en:Monty Hall problem ... Sofar and in my humble opinion, where and while the ArbCom didn't answering at all, I should be unlocked and wishing to appeal the block to be unblocked as well.!! I'm reading: "You may be an innocent victim of collateral damage, but are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia (*even*) with Disabled Email" and so onwards ... I'll remain with my last quote: *Thank you so much for your welcome again mr. Beetstra, and You're welcome too.!...
With Kind Regards & Sincerely Yours: en:user talk: D.A. Borgdorff 17:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)* so ... Saludos Cordiales Y Atte: user: D.A. Borgdorff = 86.83.155.44 11:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Again most obliged with greetings from D.A. Borgdorff - e.i. = 86.83.155.44 11:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the text says "You may be an innocent victim of collateral damage", but here it is certainly not the case. You have been warned, blocked, unblocked, re-warned and re-warned, reblocked and re-unblocked, you have (been) brought (it) to ArbCom on NL (where I am not even able to unblock you), on en.wikipedia you have been repeatedly warned and blocked, but you don't seem to get it. Your style of editing, your self-promotion, you have to adapt that, and in my humble opinion, you have had all the chances to do so, but you never took any of those chances. I am sorry, you will need to contact ArbCom via email, and explain your situation to them, I am not unilaterally going to unblock you again, I've tried to show more than once good faith in you (I have unblocked you twice on en.wikipedia), later blocks where by other admins. Good luck and all the best, --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 08:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- I really thank you for commenting, but it seems to me that you're repeating those subject statements, that were delivered only by (my) Dutch *stalkers*, like Robotje - MoiraMoira - Baas c.s. (bias which you yourself dealed and dealt with, e.g. about the above stated nonsence of selfpromotion etc.) is more prominent than my scientific work mentioned. What is this for Encyclopedia to smear ones Name and fame with shame and blame./?. Nevertheless, I still will thank you for your opinion, for I once trusted you too :-) and you corrected some of the most absurd blocking-policies on this planet.
- In time and advance, I got warnings from my scientific colleagues on the strange way of handling matters, but unfortunately neclected them. So far: it seems I'm one of those few exeptions as ostracized victims, I believe of them would calling it, mostly because of my extraneous style of writing /?? Again, most sincerely Yours, I am D.A. Borgdorff 86.83.155.44 12:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- P.S.: [the] ArbCom never responded or I'm blocked there too, where my messages and requests didn't seem to come though ... i.e. I never got any reply.!
- D.A. Borgdorff, you can call them stalkers, but I think that I saw the problems before they also came to the English Wikipedia. Other editors indeed came, but if so many editors have problems with your edits, maybe it is time to adapt your style. Something that, on the English wikipedia at least, never did. Please start to reflect on yourself. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay Beetstra, you shot and I got the ball in return, without the possibility of a personal style, only (to have) conform a doubtful *policy*... I ought to be the understanding people, 'cause of enduring threatening with the ultimo blockages and lockouts I underwent, without parole for the 2nd, 3rd & 4th et cetera time for the same socalled crime in that system(s) thinking, not personally meant of course. I'll keep my obligations in behalf of my ethics "notwithstanding" those absurd Wikipediae-*paradigmeta* :-) dAb per 86.83.155.44 12:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Beste D.A. Borgdorff. 'absurd Wikipediae-*paradigmeta* ... maybe they are absurd, but those policies and guidelines have been established by many editors. This is not blogspot.com, this is not forums.yahoo.com, this is not the next experiment of geocities .. we are writing an encyclopedia here, and rules have been established for that. If you run in to so many warnings, and in the end get blocked a couple of times, since you do not want to follow even some simple rules we have established here .. en:WP:NOTANARCHY .. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- If the police is warning you 10 times not to drive faster than 120 on the highway in the Netherlands .. and on the 11th time gives you a big fine, and on the 15th time withdraws your license .. are you then going to say that 120 km/h is an absurd Dutch rule? And then you wait until you get your license back, you do it again? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Dear Beetstra, I've never done so: for 40 years keeping my licensce witout any warning, even driving as testdriver a couple of HTM-pioneer trams and trains, t'm not against rules -- in the ccontrary -- but only protesting the absurd, wrong application of those rules: = *unilateral* against my person only, where lots of contributors find no harm of/or consequences of their edits. This problem started as mentioned with Robotje, Erik Baas ans (specifically) MoiraMoira, who *nailed* me for fringe science on the Meta-wall, while self writing that same lemma about Matter-waves (only in the Netherlands) subjective, even wrongly about i.e. Vallée, and deleting all my refs on Tramarticles and continously prejeduced, biased against this Science they didn't / don't even understand ...!!, only to further put harassment onto me [...] that's their only goal in those possibly simple minds: destruction of too scientific lemmata, I suppose ...
- Sorry coll. Dirk Beestra, that is part of my humble opinion so far: a them sort of biased reaction without enough tolerance.!... -- Though with full respect, I remain Yours Truly: D.A. Borgdorff via 86.83.155.44 15:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)