User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2017/August

ClueBot NG is down

@Cobi, Crispy1989, K6ka, and Rich Smith: ClueBot NG is currently down. Just thought I'd let the masses know so it can be fixed, thanks... 111.169.210.252 (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

No need to ping me, since I don't have access to the bot :) —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 01:47, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

@K6ka: you sure about that? —usernamekiran(talk) 00:07, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

@K6ka and Usernamekiran: It appears to be fixed now (and has been fixed for awhile now)... :-) 73.96.115.28 (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Help setting up ClueBot NG

Hi, I'm a sysop on The Elder Scrolls Wiki on Wikia, and I'm interested in setting up the code for ClueBot NG to revert vandalism on there automatically. The FAQ said to come onto the #cluebotng IRC channel to talk to the creators for help with training the bot and setting it up, but no one seems to have been there for a long while (unless I'm on the wrong server... pretty sure I'm not). Can someone help out in this regard? Thanks! —Atvelonis (talk) 17:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that Wikia uses MediaWiki, thus, Cluebot NG probably wouldn't work. Terrariola 12:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrariola (talk • contribs)

Wikia definitely does use MediaWiki, they're just on 1.19.24 (from 2012-ish, I believe). My worry is that the code would need tweaking to support that. —Atvelonis (talk) 18:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

@Atvelonis: Is there anyone tech-savvy on your wiki that can help out with this? You will need someone to run a Linux/UNIX system (and be experienced with using it) on a server they have access to. You should also consider if ClueBot NG is really worth it, since it's a pretty advanced and complex bot that was designed with only the English Wikipedia in mind. There are probably simpler anti-vandal bots out there (Like, say, the original ClueBot) that might be better suited for your wiki.

@Terrariola: Wikia definitely uses MediaWiki; please double-check your facts before making such statements. They, in fact, use a heavily-modified version of MediaWiki. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:02, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Yes, we do have someone with a lot of Linux experience, though much of his attention is directed towards real life for the foreseeable future. I wasn't expecting to get this going for several months, though; for the time being, I'm more interested in learning about the details of the training process and the general practicality of the bot on my wiki.

I've considered setting up a less complicated bot, but with too many false positives we would have to focus a lot of attention towards cleaning up its mistakes, which I feel wouldn't really end up saving time. We're short on manpower as it is, and I'd prefer it if our editors could spend more time adding content than dealing with vandalism. I know this is pretty ambitious, so even if I can't get ClueBot NG set up on my wiki soon, I would still be really interested in doing so at some point in the future. —Atvelonis (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

@Atvelonis: I'm not a bot operator nor am I experienced with Linux or running a server, so I am afraid I can't really offer much help with setting up CBNG on your wiki. However, I can help out with the vandal fighting there if you need more hands (I used to be a pretty big Wikia editor. Used to.). —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 01:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Well if you have the free time, we could sure use the extra set of eyes on Recent Changes. Much of our staff is presently a little occupied (internships, work, etc.), myself included, so it's been difficult to keep everything in check. Some of it is straight vandalism, and some of it is more subtle misinformation or poor formatting from well-meaning but inexperienced contributors. ClueBot NG wouldn't be able to help much with the latter, certainly a job for us humans. :)

If anyone else is in the loop about the technical specifications of the bot, I would love to get in contact on Discord, Steam, Reddit, or whatever other platform is more efficient for you. —Atvelonis (talk) 02:03, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism by a user reverting ClueBot NG's correctly identified vandalism

Here [[1]] is a link to reverting ClueBot NG's correctly identified as Vandalism. The "Edit Summary" states, "(not vandalism by ClueBot NG (talk))." Was this text added by the user or by ClueBot NG? A ri gi bod (talk) 16:27, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

A ri gi bod An IP added vandalism, ClueBot reverted, the same IP repeated the vandalism with a nonsense edit summary, but this time ClueBot left it alone because in its programming the same user/page combination is not reverted more than once per day (per this). It is then left for a human to check and see if the reversion was correct, as you did: Noyster (talk), 17:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 29 August 2017

Please add {{pp}} to the userpage. Ups and Downs (↕) 22:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@UpsandDowns1234: While your request isn't really unreasonable, it does beg the question: why are you concerned about whether User:ClueBot NG is editable or not? Sorry to say it, but a review of your Talk page shows, or at least suggests, a preoccupation with editing other users' userpages, something you have been strongly advised not to do. There should be no reason for you or anyone else other than the bot owner to edit that page, so no real reason to advertise that they can't. General Ization ^Talk 22:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@General Ization: Good point. Deactivating request. Ups and Downs (↕) 23:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)