User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 35

Senior Editor II

A beer for you!

You look thirsty. The first round is on me! Happy Friday, Cyberpower678. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 14:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

A Special Barnstar For You!

	The Special Barnstar
	You clean up the Sandbox with the awesome Peachy App Chazpelo (talk) 20:10, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

RfX report

Hey Cyber! Not sure if you were already aware, but it looks like the bot is counting the bullets under "General comments" as a neutral !vote at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Wikicology. Not seeing this issue with the other active RfA. Many thanks and hope you are well — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not seeing this problem.—^cyberpower_{Trick or Treat:Limited Access} 17:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have produced some permalinks. Here ya go: Special:PermaLink/688207908 (RfA), Special:PermaLink/688208726 (RfX report). My guess is this happens when there are general comments but no neutral votes. Hope you had a great Halloween! — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview

Hi Cyberpower678, for background, please read this thread. I have no idea when Amalthea will see my post, so I wondered if you could take a look at the bot and see if you can figure out what's wrong. If not, that's fine. Just let me know either way. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Real Life Barnstar
	a random act of kindness can go along way and I feel that those who contribute to wiki and the ever growing information that is here on the world wide web, will enable us/ I /we to expand the knowledge and wisdom to benefit the future of mankind, entities and others. Joanne Thompson 19:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Wondering

I was trying to help. Besides I know what I'm doing and I've been watching this show longer than anyone else. And furthermore, it doesn't matter if it has to be short, just proofread and add your own words. I know how summaries work. You don't have to judge me how long it has to be. I made a short summary plot one time and somebody deleted it. This is why I have to make it not so long. So just let it go and leave it how is written.--Funnycoolman (talk) 22:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Your summaries are grammatically incorrect. I have no problems with summaries being updated as long as they are concise. Yours aren't, and you're not the only one who watches the shows. Stopped inserting your preferred versions.—^cyberpower_{Trick or Treat:Limited Access} 23:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

My summaries are correct. Short or not, there is no right or wrong. It can be written as anything. And after all, I can fix anything, even when someone made a mispelled word. I can write whatever I want. Don't act like I'm trying to add spam words or something because I'm not like other users. Just don't try to change what I write okay? Because writing any type of summary can go either way.--Funnycoolman (talk) 23:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

You have WP:OWNership issues and that last response of yours wreaks of it. I suggest you read that essay, as it can and will lead to you getting blocked.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 00:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Fine, I'll agree on the essay. But I'm still going to help improve on this wiki. Don't expect me to do things prematurely.--Funnycoolman (talk) 00:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

You are free to improve Wikipedia, and I have no objections to it. Keep in mind that I am not hounding you, I'm simply monitoring Pokemon related articles and acting as I see appropriate and within policy.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:11, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

User Analysis Tool

Hi Cyberpower678 I am trying to use the user analysis tool but it doesn't seem to work. Is it possible that I could get help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KafeelChanna (talk • contribs) 15:55, November 4, 2015 (UTC)‎

It seems to be working fine for me. What's broken about it?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Peachy and action=tokens

FYI, Peachy hits deprecated action=tokens a lot. It'd make a difference if you'd switch to action=query&meta=tokens. Anomie⚔ 19:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Why do you guys keep moving the token query around though?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Tokens were sort-of moved once in April 2012 but it wasn't done completely (e.g. rollback and userrights tokens weren't included) and none of the old methods were actually deprecated, so it took until I fixed the whole thing in November 2014 to really make API token handling sensible. It's also now explicitly allowed to cache all tokens until you get a badtoken error, the help now always explicitly says what kind of token is needed (and action=paraminfo does too), and I got rid of the plethora of aliases for the general "edit" (now generically named "csrf") token.

There's no push to make everyone transition like there was with continuation. But since Peachy represents about 52% of the nearly half-million weekly hits to action=tokens, reaching out to you to fix it seemed like a useful idea. Krinkle is working on fixing the mediawiki.api JS module, which is potentially another 38% (depending on how many of the browser-looking agents are really using that). Anomie⚔ 17:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I never realized Peachy was widely used. :p I'll put in a fix as soon as I can. That would require significant edits to peachy since they each use the name of the token for the name of the action.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 17:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

a AWESOME barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar 2
	Wow. just kidding.you're the best user ever! Chazpelo (Talk), 16:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

??? Bot?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

changed to user.... -- Chazpelo (talk) 16:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

(Note the sign got changed)

i doing the thing what you sayed

okay. i decided to remove Yoshi. Mario and Bowser. to my sign... Chazpelo (talk) 16:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Asking for help in programing a bot

Hi Cyberpower678. i'm trying to program a bot in the Hebrew wikipedia that doing basicly the same like your new Cyberbot II 5 bot (replace dead-links in Archive links). i'm writeing the bot in C# using DotNetWikiBot. i' want to ask you what is the Internet Archive's API you working with (can you reffer me to the documentation)? how do you ask from the Archive to back-up the "live" links (There is an API for that too)?

Thanks Badidipedia (talk) 20:53, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd currently advise against making such a bot as Cyberbot will be deployed on other language Wikipedias when finished, and Cyberbot is getting dedicated tech support from IAs staff and founder as well as dedicated support from the WMF.—^cyberpower_{Trick or Treat:Limited Access} 21:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's good idea to active this specific bot in all wikipedias. All wikipedia are diffrent from the others. therefor the bot need to be adjust for it. Of course' it will be great to get some basic function that hendeling the dead-links-IA isue or use your code. any way, can you reffer me to this APIs?!

i have some ideas for your bot so if you are interest, just tell me.

Badidipedia (talk) 21:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

The bot isn't at all Wikipedia specific. It's functional configuration can be adjusted on Wikipedia itself. Also, I'm also going to say it's not a good idea to refer you to the APIs as they are experiencing technical problems with it so it's not very reliable at the moment.—^cyberpower_{Trick or Treat:Limited Access} 23:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm think it's not enirely true. for example i prefer the link himself will link me to IA copy (CNN --> CNN instead of CNN --> CNN archive). i want also to allow editors to verify links using dates and flag them as "Link Changed". The bot will able to tranform the link to the IA using the date.this such things, you can't do only by configuration page in wikipedia.

I'm aware to problem in thier API, and i'm guess thay will take care the problem (mybe before thay will create a new API for wikipedia). Can you reffer me to the API anyway? Badidipedia (talk) 00:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry I can't make much sense of your response. There's too many grammar errors for me to accurately comprehend this. Could you try to fix them as best as you can or try to clarify your response?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 01:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about it, i worte it in late hour.

• The main idea is that despite of a configuration page the bot follows, there are things i'm plan to do, and your bot can't. I think it will be better that any language Wikipedia, will be able modify the bot's code by itself.
• Since your bot is active, i assume that good API is exist. can you refer me to it anyway?

Badidipedia (talk) 07:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

It would seem the API has been fixed, so here you go. Keep in mind that Cyberbot II will still be deployed on other wikis, as Cyberbot II has become of great interest to WMF and IA, and it's development will not stop until that is done.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Great! Thanks! Can you direct me to the discussion in the WMF?

I realized that there is a a way/command that ask from IA to archive specific web page if they didnt do it yet. can you tell me how? Badidipedia (talk) 10:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry the discussion with IA and WMF is email. There's no way to refer you.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 16:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

what about the other thing? Badidipedia (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Your bot

Issued me a level 2 warning for removing a template. I already requested the deletion of the AfD discussion as it was done in error on a userpage. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:50, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I see no error. The bot stopped after the page was deleted. As a matter of fact, the bot would remove the template by itself. It may have been better to simply wait or close the discussion.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 20:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The article was originally prodded which was removed by the author. The author then redirected the page into the userspace. When I went to the original article to nominate it for deletion, I was redirected to the userpage without knowing. The AfD transcribed everything on the userpage and not the article page. I removed it the first time and requested the deletion of the page created for the deletion discussion. However, the bot added the information back to the userpage and provided me with a warning. When I removed a second time, it duplicated the first response, then gave me a second level warning. Appears it is set to escalate warnings with possibly even reporting users. While a good idea, there is no oversight when correcting such mistakes and the bot sees it as someone engaging in inappropriate behavior. No big deal, just hate bots leaving messages on my page. I think I have 50 bot messages and maybe 1 (exaggerated) from an actual person. Cheers! --CNMall41 (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Like I said, as long as an AfD exists and is open, it will re-add the template. Try closing the discussion first. Closing it as keep will make the bot go away right there.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Wish I could, but I don't have the authority. If I did, I could have corrected things in the beginning. Instead, it became a mess. Like I said, no big deal. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

copyright of tools.wmflabs.org output-data

Hello cyberpower678, your name is listed at the bottom of https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec as one of the copyright-holders. I was interested in putting some of the output-material (e.g. the graphs) into an on-wiki talkspace thing I'm working on. There is no mention of ccbysa3 nor gfdl on the output, unlike most wikimedia-related webpages, so I wanted to check first that I wouldn't be getting into WP:COPYVIO territory by mistake. Or, instead of copying 'n' pasting content from the xtools-ec HTML output, maybe there is an on-wiki template that generates similar graphs and such? Thanks for your time, and thanks for the tools themselves as well. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Go ahead.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 17:59, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

A (fake) bowl of strawberries for you!

I love the things you do mate, keep it up you are making the world a better place. Wikiexpertpi (talk) 07:42, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Removing AfD template

This is in reply to the message listed below. The AfD template on Admiral Jachimov was entered by myself and reverted immediately by myself. The article is new and hence didn't generate any discussions to qualify for an AfD. I apologize for this. The article in question qualifies for a speedy deletion, but I am leaving it as it is. MarkYabloko 17:41, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Admiral Jachimov. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Once the template is there and the discussion is open, the template cannot be removed until the discussion is closed. To remove the template, you must withdraw the AfD discussion first.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 17:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

False Positive

This is the second time I see in two days that Cyberbot nominated an article for an AfD, when it should NOT. (Please see also my earlier message, where I attempted to revert Cyberbot's false positive, for the same reason, and received a warning). The article, in this case, خراج بارد is/ was tagged appropriately for a speedy deletion WP:A10, and it should have stayed that way for the reason stated below, NOT nominated for an AfD!

"Article is completely taken out from Wikipedia's article: Cold abscess, roughly translated into Arabic, and reposted as an original article!" MarkYabloko 16:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Please read the responses I leave you rather than posting a repeat of something I already answered.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the pointy ^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access}, but your page was (still) marked as offline. Best. MarkYabloko 07:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Age of Consent

Nice work with wayback machine on the references for that page. Interesting that the first of the three mentioned "moral panic" -- link to that WP page? Any thoughts on updating the map? It appears to have several errors, such as indicating 19 as age of consent for Indonesia where legal adulthood is 17 (national ID card, right to drive) and right to marry w/o permission is 19 for men but only 16 for women. It seems that all international NGOs are obsessed with following WHO definition of 18 = biological adulthood. Martindo (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the praise and will forward it to my bot. :-). Unfortunately I have no personal involvement with that article.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:48, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for the second time.

I've worked in and around programming for longer than I care to say (remember COBOL!) but our markup is a mystery to me. Leaky Caldron 19:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. It does take a bit to understand. If you ever need help with the syntax, you know where to find me. :-)—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

xtools-articleinfo down?

Hi Cyberpower678!

It seems that xtools-articleinfo is down. Since you're on the page of the maintainers, do you have an idea of the time required to fix this issue?

Thanks for any help you can provide, A455bcd9 (talk) 19:50, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Given the time invested in this already and the progress I've made, and factoring the time I have available right now, I would say 17 years. :/ I'm unfortunately stuck with this tool and no longer have any time or steam to put in the effort to fix it. Sorry.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 01:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey!

No problem, I understand.

Is there any similar tool? (to see the top contributors of an article)

Best, A455bcd9 (talk) 07:44, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Try toollabs:xtools/wikihistory.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! It only works for the English Wikipedia unfortunately... A455bcd9 (talk) 21:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot I cutting page contents in half when archiving

See [1]. Samsara 18:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened. It seems to be an isolated incident, possibly as a result of the vandal edit prior.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot I placing random warnings

Your AfD clerking/warning bot task may be broken - it has decided to place four "removal of AfD templates" on my talk page on an article that I did not even edit. Esquivalience ^t 12:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Now that is strange. It could be a caching issue. I'll have to have a look next week.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The bot cited this edit from April 2015 when it placed the warnings. Very odd behavior! Etamni | ✉ | ✓  07:26, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Like I said, it could be a caching issue.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:20, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Re:Pokémon English translations

If you're referring to either the English names which aren't to be used until the episodes air or the air date rumours that haven't been confirmed by reliable sources yet, then I agree. - EvilLair (✉ | c) 07:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Requests for page protection

"This request cannot be parsed. Please ensure it follows formatting consistent with the current or previous methods of submission." I have no idea about "follows formatting consistent with the current or previous methods of submission." Please help and do this, I am just a beginner here, I have no idea what you are talking about, I just want this article to be protecting by vandalism and anonymous users.--Alexiulian25 (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Supercount problems

Hoi, What's about Supercount? Meanwhile for 28 hours (> 100.000 sec High replication lag) Majo statt Senf (talk) 21:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

high replication lag here a screenshot Majo statt Senf (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I can't do anything about the replication lag. Please contact User:Coren.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

30 day page stats counter is down

https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikiviewstats/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&locale=en&page=Sir_and_Star&latest=30

I reached it via XTools gadget. Ping me back when it is up. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 06:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Unprotection Akhtar Raza Khan

Hi, I have requested for the unprotection of Akhtar Raza Khan Please read the full request HereEjaz92 (talk) 11:32, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. I cannot grant your request for a number of reasons. First off, your article has been declined many times, and in its current state will likely still be declined. Secondly, I'm not an admin. I'm not sure why you came to me, or how you found me, but I suggest you go and continue to improve your draft first, and then try to submit it again. They will move it for you when they deem it article worthy.—^cyberpower_{Happy Thanksgiving:Online} 13:32, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Added another decline to the Template:RFPP template

I would just want to notify you that I have added another decline message by myself. It says "current protection level is fine" and has two shortcuts - pf and cpif. Just check the template if I have expanded the template correctly, and don't forget to change the bot a bit. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 01:34, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

AfD error

The discussion for the page Painting With has concluded and thus the template was not removed before discussion was completed. Bot error. MWill75 (talk) 13:18, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I see no error.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata Activestats

Shouldn't "total actions" show all admin actions of an admin on Wikidata, and not just the actions in the last 6 months (which is ideally covered by "admin actions")? Referring to d:User:Cyberpower678/ActiveStats. Just asking, eh. :) Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 23:48, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot I has been talking to itself these days, it seems

Hey Cyberpower678,

Cyberbot I had a bit of a silly hiccup here. If you look at what it added to the section it moved, the bot pinged itself. This is kind of a funny bug; I guess even bots need someone to talk to. Steel1943 (talk) 01:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

To my talk page stalkers

Hello everyone. I regret to inform everyone that my computer bit the dust. On it are all my access keys to my bots, or all the software to maintain them. I am using a borrowed laptop, so my bots, tools, and scripts will remain unmaintained until I get my laptop back. This also means reduced activity on my part. I will however continue to monitor the RfC I have volunteered to close. Sorry.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 18:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Re: Your comment on m:2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Bots_and_gadgets#Migrate_dead_links_to_Wayback_Machine

Hi,

are you aware of de:Benutzer:GiftBot? This bot checks for dead links on german wikipedia and adds information on them on talk pages (example), but does not change articles. There is opposition on dewp to automatically linking archive.org, as this should only be used as a last resort. See for example: de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Kurier#Defekte_Weblinks:_Der_Bot_als_archive.org-Propagandist. So your idea of running your bot on 30 biggest wikipedias (why limit this to 30 top wp? wps with small number of contributers might profit more from this) might be met with opposition on dewp. You might want to disscuss this with the german community and the GiftBot operators. --° (Gradzeichen) 11:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Of course nothing gets deployed before discussions on the local wiki, and operators of bots already involved in projects like this. 30 wikis is just a start. It depends on how many resources are required to run the bot on multiple wikis. This bot is going to be designed to be configurable. Every wiki can customize it to meet its needs and wants.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 15:07, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot I dereliction of duty!!!!!

Hey, Portal:Current events/2015 December 13 doesn't seem to have been created by Cyberbot I. Can you check and see what's going on? Thanks, ansh666 00:54, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Book:The Spinners

According to book article, there is no article for the Spinners second album, 2nd Time Around, and it goes to a disambiguation page. But there is one: (2nd Time Around (album)). Please update. Thank you.--Halls4521 (talk) 19:13, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

?—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 20:15, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Tried to redirect the link to the correct article, but Cyberbot I didn't recognize the articles existence, and changed it back.--Halls4521 (talk) 05:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Bot leaving indecipherable messages?

I can't figure out the meaning of the message your bot left. Perhaps it's a bug, or perhaps I'm just thick-headed.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

This was left on Talk:Mechtilde as shown in this revision.

Sondra.kinsey (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

That bug was fixed long ago.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 06:03, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

RFA

Hi Cyberpower678, on the RFA talkpage, don't you mean 65-75 instead of 55-75? Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 08:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I do. I just noticed that typo.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 08:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I think that needs more discussion. Some editors, myself included, supported two-thirds as a minimum but not 65%. Jonathunder (talk) 15:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

It's true some users expressed a preference of 67%, some of those stated that they were also okay with 65%. A good deal of users supporting had no issue with 65%, so this lead me to conclude to close the proposal as worded using 65% and not 67%. You are free to open another discussion on it, I have no opinion on the matter.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 15:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, yeah. Since you have a failed RfA in your past which fell in this new discretionary range, you should have considered yourself an "involved editor" in this regard, and let someone else close it. I was hoping to support you the next time around, and this type of action isn't really warming me up for that. Wbm1058 (talk) 15:53, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't think this closed RfA makes Cyberpower678 "involved" as the term has come to be used, but I do disagree with the close of this discussion and I've undone it. I would recommend asking a bureaucrat to determine consensus and do the close. Jonathunder (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. When I offered to close I never factored that my previous RfA would make me involved, because it changes nothing about it. Going by your logic, I already fell into the old discretionary zone. I don't consider myself involved because that RfA is from a while ago, and I wasn't phased by the close. As a matter of fact, I withdrew from the RfA during the crat chat. I do not seek the power of an admin. I'm not adamant at getting the bit. I only wish to contribute to improve the wiki. This does not mean I wouldn't like to be an admin, but I leave it to the community to decide if I'm ready or not. And if I fail again, then so be it. Wikipedia is a great place and I will always do what I can to help improve. Sure I'll make mistakes along the way, but I will learn from them and become even better at what I do. I have no opinion of whether discretionary is 65%,67%, or even as high as 90%. I simply read the proposal, saw that many agreed with 65, some stating they would like to see 67 but could also live with 65 and very few suggesting it be 67 instead. This how I came to conclude it to be 65. It was a very grey area in this case, so I didn't make the close lightly. With that being said if it is too much of a problem, I can reverse the close for that section.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 16:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Your previous RfA doesn't disqualify you or make you involved, but the close is premature, and since it is now contested, I think it would be best to ask a bureaucrat to close after further discussion. I'm asking you to undo your close for now. Jonathunder (talk) 16:54, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• The close was just fine, in my opinion, but if you want I'll ask a 'crat or someone else to close that particular portion of the RfC. I think the result is very clear, though, so really, what's the point? Biblioworm 16:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Let's discuss that, please. I think a proper close needs to take into account the discussion, not just the !votes. Jonathunder (talk) 16:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I did take into account the discussion for all the proposals, for the record. As mentioned before, it was a grey area that I did some thinking on first. Because, I'm on a mobile phone can somebody reverse that section for me?—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 17:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

What will we discuss? I think I'll just ask a 'crat to confirm the close, so there isn't any dispute about some "unqualified, involved" user (with which I strongly disagree, but anyway...) closing the RfC. Biblioworm 17:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)Cyberpower678 would stand to potentially benefit personally from the result of this RfC. If it lowers the range of discretion in some way, then possibly if he had a future RFA that went about the same, it might close above the discretionary range rather than inside it. I agree this may be stretching the conventional meaning of "involved editor" as it applies to being involved in disputes, but waiting for at least an admin, if not a bureaucrat, to close it, would be the safer thing to do. BTW, I still haven't gotten up to speed on how the question I asked about this was resolved or answered. Wbm1058 (talk) 17:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  I've asked a 'crat to give their opinion on the close. Will there be any more disputes if it is endorsed by a 'crat? Biblioworm 17:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  The question is not just who closes, but when. I absolutely object to closing without more discussion. But asking a 'crat is not a bad idea, as I think they would see that forcing a close in the midst of discussion is a bad idea. Jonathunder (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• I'll just point out that you asked if anyone objected to you closing, someone did, raising the same point which is being raised here, and yet you went and closed the RfC all the same (and early, at that). Not what I'd call good judgement. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  If you don't mind, could you point out to me who objected? I know xaosflux mentioned that the details of the proposed watchlist notices for RfAs were unclear, but Cyberpower went with the "safe" option when closing that particular proposal and I don't see how anyone could dispute it on the grounds that it is excessive. Biblioworm 17:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  See Wikipedia talk:2015 administrator election reform/Phase II/RfC#Closers?, where Michael Scott Cuthbert, the only editor who commented in the section where Cyberpower volunteered to close the RfC, said No, I definitely think that an admin should close all of these, even the uncontroversial, and that probably a bureaucrat should close anything between around 30 and 80% support. [...] For instance, I think the "expand discretionary range to 65%" should be closed as "passed" if it remains around the 80% level that it's currently at, but if you (or I, or any other non-admin) were to close it, someone might legitimately think that we were involved by virtue of potentially benefiting from a lower bar at AfD in the future. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  He also retracted that statement afterwards, here.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 17:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  He merey spoke of bureaucrats, he never said he had changed his mind concerning non-admins closing the discussion. This was a very important RfC, it should have been closed by someone experienced in interpreting consensus. You were, I'm sorry to say, unqualified. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  Are you saying I'm not experienced in gauging consensus, or because I'm not an admin?—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 17:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  Not only are you not an admin, you tried and failed to become one before and have stated that you intend to run for adminship again (and, therefore, stand to benefit from a lowering of the discretionary zone). As I said, closing this RfC is evidence of poor judgement. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:55, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  @Salvio giuliano:: I don't see it that way at all and I think personal criticism is out of line. But Cyberpower678 has reverted his close, so let's get back to discussing the outstanding issues on the page itself. Jonathunder (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  So, by my understanding, the dispute is not about expanding the range per se, but rather conditional !votes that supported the proposal on the condition that it would be 67% (2/3)? Biblioworm 18:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  Several editors said, in various places, that 2/3 is a better formula than 65%. I would be happy to see a poll of just that issue. Jonathunder (talk) 18:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  Indeed, I see your point. Though when closing, I never considered how I may personally benefit from it, I do see that it could be seen that way, and I apologize. I should have left the discretionary zone proposal for someone else like you. For now, I have reversed the close, but left the RfC closed to further discussion until a crat chimes in. I think this a better venue that undoing everything just to close it again. Officially the discretionary zone is back to the original for the time being.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 18:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) As I already mentioned, I have asked the bureaucrats to review the close at BN and give their opinion. We will move forward from there. Biblioworm 18:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  The notion that the closer could personally benefit is farcical. Give the guy a break. Leaky Caldron 18:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  ^That. Keegan (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

  Yes, it is! Just as it would be for an admin or crat who has to (or wants to) do another RFA again. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:20, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Pokémon revert?

Hi Cyberpower 678,

Care to explain this? Pokémon is written in italics, the word generation is not capitalized, country release dates aren't written in italics either. --Soetermans. T / C 10:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC) Soetermans.

Further more, that article concerns video games, not just games in general. Video game genres like role-playing video game are written out in full, not shortened to RPG (unless introduced because the abbreviation is used extensively). --Soetermans. T / C 10:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what I'm staring at. It looks like Christmas.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 14:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

And happy holidays to you too! I'm talking about this. --Soetermans. T / C 14:36, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh whoops. Looks like I inadvertently clicked rollback without realizing it. It happens occasionally when I'm on an iPhone. Sorry.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 15:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks, and happy editing. --Soetermans. T / C 15:18, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

What is the purpose of Cyberbot II?

Cyberbot II has been adding some information to the page: Criminal sentencing in Canada and to the associated talk page. I have no idea what it's doing or what it's purpose is? The links have previously been marked as dead links; Cyberbot II hasn't added anything to the fact that they are dead links. I just don't understand what function it serves. Nor do I even understand the message it left on the talk page. I have no idea what it's asking editors to do. Can you help, please and thank you? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

It attaches archived versions of the now dead link to the dead link. This prevents LIBKROT. Just check if the archives work by clicking their links on the talk page. If they do, set the template in that message to true and your done.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 14:10, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

All it does on this page is link to additional "Page not found" from the federal government, so now each citation has two "Page Not Found" dead links. I'm afraid I don't see the utility? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

How do you set a template to "true"? and what do you do if it's not true, as in this case? there doesn't seem to be an option for that?Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

In that case, you should revert the bot's edit, and find better links, or attach to {{cbignore}} to the appropriate links, if none exist. Cyberbot II does it's best to provide working links, but sometimes it fails. Delete the sourcecheck template on the talk page afterwards, to remove it from the category.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 17:13, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

You, at BN

Hi Cyberpower; i hope you didn't take my response to HighinBC at the BN as in any way a criticism of you. It certainly wasn't intended that way. Had he not implied it was no problem to move the goalposts during the course of the RfA i would have been silent; it was his statement/implications i felt the need to correct. Thanks, and cheers, Lindsay^Hello 08:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

No exception taken. I clearly made bad mistake, so it only feels right to try to address concerns about me or the RfC. Oddly enough, this RfC might be what tanks my next RfA. Oh well. You live and you learn.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 15:58, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Learning a lot of the upper power structure of en.wiki is built on hypocrisy, vindictive politics and grudges is a lesson I suppose. tutterMouse (talk) 16:50, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Labs bots down

The bots are asleep, probably connected to the Labs outage earlier but might need a wakeup call. tutterMouse (talk) 12:17, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Just as clarification, I mean Cyberbot I and II as some of the tasks aren't running. Don't ask why I called them Labs bots. tutterMouse (talk) 17:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

They are indeed down, and should revive on their own midnight tonight. Even if I was away from Wikipedia, Cyberbot should be able to cope with Lab's failure on it's own.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 17:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Okay, as long as it's not some huge issue but ask me again after midnight if it's a huge issue or not. tutterMouse (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Looks like they revived on schedule.—^cyberpower_{Merry Christmas:Unknown} 02:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Huh, so they did, shouldn't have doubted them. Maintenance note, the RFPP task doesn't understand {{RFPP|tp|indef}} for some reason, pick up on it at some point once you can maintain the bots again. tutterMouse (talk) 06:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Hello Cyberpower678: Enjoy the holiday season and upcoming winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Seasons' greetings!

Steel1943 (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Steel1943/HappyHolidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cyberpower678, hope your holidays are happy, and a happy new year! Steel1943 (talk) 17:37, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas!!
	Hello, I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!    –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 21:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Its not fault

You left a message on my talk page saying that I removed an AfD template. I did do that, however, I was the one who placed the AfD template there, and I removed it seconds later. TheJack15 (talk) 04:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Cyber

And may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:14, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Quick Question

Sorry to bother you, but you just said "No problems found" on the username changing page - do I have to respond to that in anyway? Thanks! - William Drake (HahaLolXD) — Preceding unsigned comment added by William Drake (talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot II

Hi Cyberpower678. How often/over what articles does Cyberbot II run? Do you run it over specific articles on request? If so, then would it be possible for you to run it over the articles in Category:2003 Formula One races? (I'm particularly interested in Cyberbot II's dead-link-fixing capabilities). Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 00:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot is still in it's development stage so it is running over very little articles at the moment. But the development is pretty far. It should be ready in a matter of weeks, I hope.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 23:27, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 07:01, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your positive participation in this RfC I award you a barnstar! — xaosflux Talk 15:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, though I don't think I deserve it. I made quite a mess a few weeks back. :p—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

You were clearly good intentioned, and I think you got a lot more flack then was deserved. Happy editing, — xaosflux ^Talk 18:33, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Well thank you. I seem to cause that unintended drama. As long as it settles down with no one getting blocked, I can handle the flack. I've learned to keep a cool head over the years. :-) Happy Holidays.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 18:38, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

User analysis tool FAQ

In the FAQ for the user analysis tool, the instructions say that to opt in, a user needs to add content to one of two js pages. Not to be picky, but users who understand what js is, but don't know enough about it to make changes to it, are reluctant to add some random bit of "content" to the page, lest it break something. Perhaps those instructions should give an example of what can be added (safely), even if any content will accomplish the same purpose. _{Please ping upon reply} Etamni | ✉ | ✓  12:19, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Any content is sufficient. I wouldn't be suggesting something that could end up breaking something.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

bot tasks

The RFPP clerking task is still down, fell over around 2am UTC on the 30th and hasn't come back up yet. I think most of the other tasks are still going but I feel like a few aren't so is it just one of those "wait for midnight" things? tutterMouse (talk) 07:10, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually not this time. It looks like it stalled, but is still considered running. I'll have to restart it myself. I should probably create an interface for that.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:24, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

I rebooted the bot.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:26, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

All good again, having an interface for that wouldn't be a bad idea. tutterMouse (talk) 15:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Seeing as I'm on the topic, the bot task tends to tag things as unparseable, usually because it lacks a {{pagelinks}} template below the header which occurs often meaning someone has to add it. Could the bot not try and resolve this by adding the template? tutterMouse (talk) 08:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cyberpower678!

Happy New Year!

Cyberpower678,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

By the way, did you know that this edit was the last edit made in 2015, and this (made by one of your bots!) is the first edit of 2016? (Times in UTC, of course). —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hah. My bot is amazing. It kicked of 2016 by updating its readiness status. :D—^cyberpower_{Happy 2016:Limited Access} 03:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Cyberpower678!

Happy New Year!

Cyberpower678,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 11:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.