ClueBot Commons
False positives and false negativesIf you believe that ClueBot NG has missed an edit that is vandalism, again do not report it here. ClueBot is unable to catch all vandalism. Just revert the edit and warn the editor.
The current status of ClueBot NG is: Running
The current status of ClueBot III is: Not running - last edit was Wikipedia:Closure requests 23275s ago
Praise should go on the praise page. Barnstars and other awards should go on the awards page.
Use the "new section" button at the top of this page to add a new section. Use the [edit] link above each section to edit that section.
This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III.
The ClueBots' owner or someone else who knows the answer to your question will reply on this page.
| ClueBots | |
|---|---|
| ClueBot NG/Anti-vandalism · ClueBot II/ClueBot Script |  |
| ClueBot III/Archive · Talk page for all ClueBots |
 | Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. |
ClueBot NG Needs You!
editDamian has been working hard to bring the Report and Review interfaces back. We are now happy to announce that all is ready!
Report Interface: We need Wikipedians to assist with clearing the backlog of false positive reports
Review Interface: This has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to effect how the bot should be trained.
Please reply under this message if you want to get involved - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'd love to get involved, as a new rollbacker, I wish to help out! Valorrr (lets chat) 03:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith I would be interested in helping out. I just happened to stumble onto this today, as ClueBot kept beating me to several rollbacks I thought I caught instantly! Nubzor [T][C] 20:19, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: You need to login to either Report or Review first before I can give you the relevant rights, although a new update may have you the rights straight away - RichT|C|E-Mail 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Sorry about that. I didn't even try to log in earlier. I (believe) I was successful at logging into both. I will look into this more tomorrow before I start tinkering. Seems like something more useful/helpful than just patrolling RC. I always chuckle when I am positive a rollback will be successful, only to see it was ClueBot that beat me to it :) Nubzor [T][C] 00:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Quick question for you after taking a look--The Reviewer Interface & instructions provided there make perfect sense. But I'm not 100% certain on the Report Interface. Are we "defer[ing] to reviewer interface" regardless if it's a false positive or not, so that it can then be potentially incorporated into the dataset, either as vandalism or as constructive? Are we just filtering out bugged/invalid entries? Or am I misunderstanding. Nubzor [T][C] 02:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: Essentially yes, if it's an edit that would be helpful for the bot to learn what is/isn't a FP, then defer. If the edit has been suppressed or deleted, then mark it as invalid - RichT|C|E-Mail 10:07, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Perfect, thank you! Nubzor [T][C] 14:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: Essentially yes, if it's an edit that would be helpful for the bot to learn what is/isn't a FP, then defer. If the edit has been suppressed or deleted, then mark it as invalid - RichT|C|E-Mail 10:07, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Quick question for you after taking a look--The Reviewer Interface & instructions provided there make perfect sense. But I'm not 100% certain on the Report Interface. Are we "defer[ing] to reviewer interface" regardless if it's a false positive or not, so that it can then be potentially incorporated into the dataset, either as vandalism or as constructive? Are we just filtering out bugged/invalid entries? Or am I misunderstanding. Nubzor [T][C] 02:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Sorry about that. I didn't even try to log in earlier. I (believe) I was successful at logging into both. I will look into this more tomorrow before I start tinkering. Seems like something more useful/helpful than just patrolling RC. I always chuckle when I am positive a rollback will be successful, only to see it was ClueBot that beat me to it :) Nubzor [T][C] 00:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: You need to login to either Report or Review first before I can give you the relevant rights, although a new update may have you the rights straight away - RichT|C|E-Mail 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm relatively new to editing but I'd love to help out if I can.
- Seantavius (talk) 21:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I see that I've been granted access to the review interface. Thanks
- Seantavius (talk) Seantavius (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Sign me up. I'm busy this month but hopefully I'll have more time to dedicate in the coming months —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @K6ka: You should be able to just sign in, your Wiki rights will give you instant access :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- Snazzy snazzy! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:25, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @K6ka: You should be able to just sign in, your Wiki rights will give you instant access :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith: I can help :-) —usernamekiran (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Your Wiki rights will automatically give you access upon login - RichT|C|E-Mail 11:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Rich Smith, yes, I logged in, and reviewed some edits successfully. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:38, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Your Wiki rights will automatically give you access upon login - RichT|C|E-Mail 11:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Sure it is not fake even Czello claim
editAndrew MacGregor Marshall hates UK monarchy and BBC edit by reliables source from Czello 113.53.162.32 (talk) 08:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Please report this bot from Error program 2804:14C:5B41:85D7:4D6D:FDAB:A290:4B54 is Write all articles about Thai protest and andrew Marshall by using VPN in Thailand to edit page 113.53.162.32 (talk) 08:44, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
Cluebot not archiving talk page
editPlease let me know if this is the wrong place to post, but I have had issues with Cluebot recently, either being quite inconsistent or simply not archiving my talk page. I have since tried to tweak the template after reading the documentation more thoroughly, but both the date archive function and archive now function seem to not be working anymore on my page.
I did manually archive the last two items on my talk page since this issue arose! I would appreciate it if somebody more familiar with the bot and the template quirks could take a quick look at my talk page.
Thanks sksatsuma 10:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- The Achilles' heel of this bot is that it's not very consistent with timing. It just comes around to archiving things "eventually". I love this bot for its features, but in its last archiving, it was 15 days late for me. If you want archiving to be done as soon as possible, probably use User:Lowercase sigmabot III. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Talk header § RfC: tooltip wording, minthreadstoarchive. (DNAU=31 days) Mathglot (talk) 05:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
ClueBot III blocked
editClueBot III has incorrectly archived all active discussions on Wikipedia:Closure requests twice today. Another editor said they pinged the authors after the first instance. The emergency bot shutoff button lead me to the block page, so I blocked the bot for 3 days in the hopes this will be long enough for the authors to notice the problem and either fix it or disable this activity so the page doesn't keep getting blanked. -- Beland (talk) 17:39, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Beland It looks like perhaps this change changed how the bot interpreted the commented out archivenow parameter on that page, correctly parsing it as an empty string now. Any section that contains any of the archivenow strings will be forcibly archived during the next run. Every section contains the empty string, and so every section was archived. The page should be corrected to not have an empty archivenow parameter, and I'll see about making the bot to treat an empty archivenow string as the default setting. — Naomi Amethyst 22:09, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the diagnosis. I have updated the page to not comment out the desired archivenow parameter. However, because the strings have double curly braces, the bot will need to handle nowiki tags correctly. By correctly, I mean only looking at the contents of the
<nowiki>...</nowiki>structure and not at the nowiki start and end tags. (Discussions that use nowiki tags should not be archived now.) -- Beland (talk) 01:50, 27 August 2025 (UTC)- @Beland: The bot documentation (archivenow) shows an example of what should follow
archivenow=. There should be no comment—just nowiki tags. I might be missing something as I not familiar with the archiving syntax but it appears that Wikipedia:Closure requests had undocumented wikitext which you have now corrected. Why should the bot remain blocked? It might be argued that a blank archivenow value (after stripping whitespace) should be interpreted as "never archive now" but the way to achieve that would be to omit the archivenow parameter altogether. Johnuniq (talk) 05:39, 27 August 2025 (UTC)- Sure, it sounded like there might be other pages with the same problem that a bot code tweak would be needed to avoid. However, a live regex search doesn't show any, so I'm unblocking. Hopefully bot maintainers can take it carefully from here. Thanks for the quick response and the useful bot! -- Beland (talk) 07:56, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Beland: The bot documentation (archivenow) shows an example of what should follow
- Thanks for the diagnosis. I have updated the page to not comment out the desired archivenow parameter. However, because the strings have double curly braces, the bot will need to handle nowiki tags correctly. By correctly, I mean only looking at the contents of the