Jump to content

User talk:Aaron Schulz/Archive/2007/November

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Wrong Reversion

[This http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=OSx86&diff=159287056&oldid=159287021] edit being reverted due to the information reason does not seem to me to be any FaceBook, MySpace style junk and was a legitimate link to be made. Is this not so? If it's a bad link to make I'd like to know why (so I don't ever do anything similar) and if it wasn't then perhaps your regexps should be more restrictive and restrict to facebook, etc rather than /forum/... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.14.24 (talk) 06:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

For User:PANONIAN's query [1] your answer was "possible". Could you please clarify which one of us is a possible sockpuppet of VinceB? Thank you. --Koppany 10:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

User:PeeJay2K3

Could you answer my questions on this matter: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/IP_check/Archive#User:PeeJay2K3. Thanks. --ClaudioMB 18:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

voabot II

Hi, I reverted this:[2] revert of the bot. The edit seems to be legit. According to Bozaci's edit history s/he once blanked a page, but it was to move the page after a successful survey for the move. Certainly that wasn't necessary, but it wasn't vandalism either. Do we have a blacklist of vandals used by this bot? DenizTC 03:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Javascript/Template question

I thought you might have an answer to this. Is there a template that I can use that when placed on a page converts into the articles name? for instance if I put {{Page}}(an example) it would automatically convert into the name of the article which it's placed on? Does such a thing exist? If not, What javascript would be required to make such a script possible to create such a template? Wikidudeman (talk) 19:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

{{PAGENAME}} and {{PAGENAMEE}} Voice-of-All 21:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Auroranorth has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Bot mistake

diff ... richi 16:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible Improvement

Have a look at the bot's handling of Rashomon vandalism today. I suspect it was fooled by multiple changes within several minutes. Jok2000 19:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

David Irving

I do not know why you are reverting this [4], but I would like for this edit to be restored. The word "yet" is not necessary in that sentence. 209.99.108.22 19:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

VoABot

VoABot seems to be broken. It has not made any edits in a couple days. Mr.Z-man 03:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Reset. Voice-of-All 22:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

RE:Admin Misuse of Powers

I would like to bring to your attention of admin User:Dmcdevit. I have did a usercheck here and here. The case was thrown out by admin Mcdevit without even looking into the matter. Not too long ago, he has confirmed that Sarvagnya/Gnanapiti are sockpuppets here and a couple of months later he let them off the hook here under the condition that both usernames are not used to edit the same article which they have notoriously have ever since. I am taking this as favoritism and abuse of powers on his part. Please advice me what I should do. Furthermore, I am now being harassed on my talk page by users Amarrg here, KNM here, Sarvagnya here, and Dineshkannambadi here. Please advise me as what I should do. Thank you. Wiki Raja 04:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


Duplicate warnings

The bot was beaten to a revert by ClueBot, but still issued this warning [5]. So the vandal was warned twice for the same offence. Philip Trueman 18:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Odd bot mistake

[This edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_the_Ripper&diff=157444850&oldid=157444730] does undo vandalism but for some odd reason screws up code on a link later on in the article where no vandalism or editing had happened. 71.203.223.65 22:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Melbourne_Cricket_Ground&diff=157847170&oldid=157847048 Another example of the same mistake. Easel3 14:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


It says I vandalised the Isaac Newton page, which is bullshit. I capitalised the first letter of a sentence! It seems as though something is rotten in the state of Denmark. 144.137.208.98 20:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It's this diff that the user is talking about. And I'd also like to know the reasoning behind that revert -- as it makes no sense to me either. Gscshoyru 20:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
According to the bot's reasons page it was reverted because of "Vandal comment - The edit had vandalism or email addresses, Facebook, or MySpace links in the summary." - Methinks the regexes it uses are probably a bit too sensitive. Mr.Z-man 20:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, made it more specific. Voice-of-All 22:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

VoABot went a bit crazy

Hi Voice of All, your bot went a bit funny on WP:CHU/U before, see this: [6]. It said "Archiving 0 completed requests" then archived the most recently submitted request. Just thought I'd bring this to your attention for the purposes of debugging. Thanks. --Deskana (talky) 10:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Alex/cashies

For some reason your bot created this page Alex/cashies (probably deleted by now) and posted a warning there. Just letting you know as it could be a bug. --Hdt83 Chat 07:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, appears that the user moved his talk page there. --Hdt83 Chat 07:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Fix it or Kill it

the stupid bot is taking off my source. - Iosis 09:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Common problem

This bot commonly reverts only one of multiple IP vandalism edits. For example, diff shows the bot reverting one of two vandalism edits from the same IP. This cause the vandalism to remain on the page for several days, since the last edit on my watchlist looked trustworthy. Would it be possible for the bot to be set to revert all of an IP's edits to a page if it recognizes one of a set of contiguous edits as vandalism? Tim Vickers 16:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

More Attention

Please more attention, if you work with youre Bot. [7] was ab big mistake. Marcus Cyron 17:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

What was with the all caps? Odd. Voice-of-All 02:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother 8 Highlights

Just so you know, on the Big Brother 8 (US) highlights page, the bot reverted a revert to a proper version, and deemed it vandalism. --Tyman 101 02:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Regexps changed. Voice-of-All 02:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I was undoing some vandalism (someone replaced Dick's name with "Derek") on the Big Brother 8 (US) highlights article, and you thought that it was vandalism. Please help me. --72.235.67.94 02:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Talkpage comments

It use to be that personal attacks or especially uncivil comments were reverted on policy... is this no longer policy? Perspicacite 03:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

It never was...WP:NPA discourages them, and users making disruptive comments can be blocked. Libel/personal info can be deleted, but being "rude" does not warrant deletion. In fact censoring/deleting comments people think are rude often leads to much more frustration and sometimes misunderstandings. It's not really worth it. Voice-of-All 03:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

"KCBS-TV"

Please allow me to add or delete my own material. Thank you ever so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.43.63 (talk) 07:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Turkey

Hi, the bot has reverted me twice in an effort to clean up Turkey. I am reducing the article in size by about 10k and I think that's tripping things up. The last dif is here: [8] Any chance we can get that squared away? Thanks! Hiberniantears 16:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I think we're all set on this for the meantime: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Turkey Hiberniantears 17:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Your Robot Just Took Credit For My Revert

I reverted this edit and went to the talk page to warn the user and found your bot warned him claiming it reverted. O_o -WarthogDemon 19:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Moving pages

I am glad that your bot has the functionality of moving back pages after a userpage move vandal. M.(er) 01:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

thanks for the continual good work. Much appreciated Charles Frederick Worth has needed your assistant. Especially from 81.145.242.67 .Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 18:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Bot False Alarm

I was reverting to a previous edit on a page arab diaspora that wasn't copyright infringed, but i did remove a lot of text, so i kind of was my fault. will this affect my "record" with wikipedia at all. I don't want them to block me. Bensci54 23:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

My Previous Edits to "KCBS-TV" article

Hello. A look at the article's history shows that I have considerably expanded this article. I wish to delete my expansions and revert the article back to a former version. Though I believe that my contributions are scrupulously accurate and verifiable, and written to meet Wikipedia standards, I think the article is lacking in citation and sourcing--and perhaps overly long. I want to remove my expansions and let others who may be better able to provide sourcing take a crack at adding material. My new downsized version includes edits that other Wikipedians have made in the interim. Please do not consider my removal of text vandalism or the result of any destructive or unfriendly motive; I simply would be more comfortable doing this. I am a relatively new member, and I wish to do things properly. Thank you for your consideration. 76.103.43.63 07:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)76.103.63.43

Sock puppetry

In Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pastorwayne which you've recently closed, (a) do you automatically check the ips against all the other cited potential socks (eg OfficePuter) and (b) would the ips be consistent with the user PW (based in Ohio) travelling locally to use a different computer? (Eg a friend's or one in a library/college.) -- roundhouse0 10:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

An external link to a youtube video in leeches, by an anonymous IP, was removed by the bot. I gather that's as intended; it said "(BOT - Reverted edits by 71.182.123.65 {information} to revision #159685205 by 'VoABot II.')" and the "information" reason says "The edit was identified as adding addresses, phone numbers, MySpace, Facebook, Geocities, YouTube, FreeWebs or other such pages. Note that older users will be allowed to add these." If that's a policy, can you point me to it? I've made an effort at finding it, but likely sources such as WP:External_Links, WP:POLICY, Wikipedia:Who_writes_Wikipedia don't seem to mention age or anonymous IP restrictions. I think it would be useful to include in the explanation page. Even more helpful would be if the bot included a bit more explanation in the change log itself, to reduce the need for editors to visit the VoABot page to understand the rationale, but I realize there's a space issue. Keep up the good work! :-) -Agyle 23:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The thing is that a very small portion of the time, such facebook/myspace links are OK. New users almost never add such (and the bot does allow ones that say "official"). Older users are more likely to be aware of link policy and not add them. If they are, it may be one of the few rare times it's OK. Voice-of-All 17:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The explanation says "The edit was identified as adding addresses, phone numbers, MySpace, Facebook, Geocities, YouTube, FreeWebs or other such pages. Note that older users will be allowed to add these." The way I interpreted that is that younger users are not allowed to add YouTube links. I would like to know what the criteria are. For example, what was the rationale for removing the Youtube video on asian mountain leeches? Is it that anonymous IPs aren't allowed to add Youtube links? If so, what's the rationale for that? By older users, does it mean older-aged users as opposed to children, or accounts that have been around for a certain duration? I don't care about the video link in question, but I don't understand the rationale here. Thanks. -Agyle 20:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Age as in account age/edits. Voice-of-All 21:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
So no anons. Content in the target link isn't a factor, either human- or bot-checked? How long does an account need to exist to be allowed to post Youtube links? -Agyle 00:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Bot error

Hi! Your bot just clobbered me on a legit A1 speedy. Now I'm a vandal??? :) Seriously, the article is only one sentence. --PMDrive1061 06:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

About Nicola da Urbino

About this [9]

Castel Durante is the old name of the town of Urbania, that is in the Province of Pesaro and Urbino, in the region Marche. At the time the town was in the Duchy of Urbino, but NEVER in Umbria.

Please revert your change! Thanks! --193.205.129.164 09:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

unjustified revert by VoAbot

Hey, I edit the human height page from time to time, just making sure the statistics are accurate (agree with verifiable sources) etc and I find new sources and put them in. The problem that we have been having on this page is a user previously known as unfreeride - but now known as any number of sock puppets - keeps POV pushing by making lengthy edits about comparative Asian shortness being due to among other things - skin whiteners and soy milk, the links this user provides don't go as far as saying that so it's really original edit and extremely persistent POV pushing.

Unfreeride has been banned a number of times and is pretty infamous on a few different pages here on wikipedia eg human height, race and intelligence, asian stereotypes etc.

Unfreeride has said that northern chinese are the tallest and most intelligent race etc.

I'm only giving you this background because Unfreeride's edit (as in word for word what it was before he was banned a couple of times before) has reappeared and this was what I deleted when your bot reverted my edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:220.253.76.54&redirect=no

You can see here that Maroug, another use of the human height page was quick to back me up and revert the bots revert, but I'd like it if this didn't happen again - thanks.

I'm among a few people trying to deal with a very persistent troll - POV pushing, assuming bad faith, original research and sock puppetry. If you'd like to do me a favor then watch the race and height section. Thanks alot.

Thank you

Hey, thanks a lot for reverting the vandalism on my user page :) Razorblade666 20:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Twin

I went to the request for protection page to ask for full protection for the Twin article but when I search my keyboard for the vertical line that seems to be required I do not find it. Can you please instruct me as to how I proceed from here ? My reason for requesting full protection is that it is being vandalized far too frequently by more than one IP address. Thanks :Albion moonlight 07:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

See WP:RFPP. Voice-of-All 12:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I know where to ask but as I said there is a vertical line that I cannot locate on my keyboard that seems to be required in the template Albion moonlight 12:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

never mind I managed to do it by pasting the line in question Albion moonlight 13:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

"restricted changes"

I seem to be in an edit war with you or your bot. It's done this [10] twice, explaining "Restricted changes - Either A) the edit was identified as being consensus rejected edits of a banned user or B) the edit was identified as changing too much text at once for a shared IP/very new user on a page that banned users tend to attack." I am neither banned nor a new editor of this page. Please revert yourself. Andyvphil 10:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

VoABot II

How? RulesLawyer 17:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting bots ?

18:03, September 28, 2007 on War_of_1812 VoA seems to have conflicted with ClueBot. Only involved a minor removal of two brackets ]] but had the wrong effect on text and may indicate somethings not right johnmark†

VOABOT II reversion

Your voabot reverted by copyedit typo fix. What's up with that? 70.55.84.34 06:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Reporting to AIV?

Your bot didn't report to AIV? Special:Contributions/71.112.238.91 vandalized an article after being given a final warning and VOA bot reverted but did not report to AIV, instead it gave out another warning. The vandal continued for another 5 times with VOA reverting each of them before another user reported manually to AIV. What happened? --Hdt83 Chat 08:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

History gotisince script

The functionality of this script has seemingly gone away since I purged my browser. Can you give me a link to it or tell me what the fancy JS coding is? —[[Animum | talk]] 16:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed it, too much cruft :) Voice-of-All 19:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Venki123

Hi, I noticed you indef'd User:Sriramwins as a sock of Venki123. I was wondering if you could have a look at User:Saedirof. I'm not familiar enough with the situation to recognize a sock here, but there are a couple of things that Saedirof is doing at Mudaliar that makes me a bit suspicious this is another sock. If you are more familiar with the situation, could you have a look and let me know what you think (either at my talkpage or via email)? Thanks.--Isotope23 talk 17:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

email

You have mail. Hiberniantears 13:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Ideas for User:VoA/monobook.js

Hello Voice of All, I use non admin warning script and I noticed a few changes you could consider makeing such as:

If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits.

to

If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, consider creating an account if you did not make any unconstructive edits.

and perhaps you could add onto it test4 and blank4.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions) 03:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

IP Checkuser on Starwars1955

I suspected those last 3 were different people and SW was just trying to make his latest sock look legit by tagging others as "socks" of his original account (that's why I seperated them out). Thanks for the confirm though, I'll add that to his bag of tricks to look for.--Isotope23 talk 14:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

RC Script

Unfortunately, I think my RC Script is messing up. How do I get rid of it?--Falconus 23:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

How so? Voice-of-All 02:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I use a lot of different browsers (IE Explorer, Netscape Navigator, Konqueror) and on IE Explorer and Konqueror it is very slow. On Netscape it bombs. I am fairly sure that this is because of the script. It is unfortunate, because it does make things a bit easier.--Falconus 19:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Aaron Schulz/Archive/2007/November

This editor is a
Veteran Editor II
and is entitled to display this
Bronze Editor Star.

Sandahl 02:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Your revert to Dick Latvala

The "Controversy" section of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Latvala had been unedited since September 1, 2006. On October 3, 2007, someone edited that to remove the cited links from Google Groups and added a personal POV. I reverted that edit to the previous version and your bot reverted my reversion as vandalism. I suspect your bot accidentally considered my reversion "vandalism" as the reversion includes a quote from Dick Latvala which includes several profanities. Please unrevert your bot's changes and edit the comment on my talk page that falsely accuses me of vandalism. Thank you. 68.45.106.216 20:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

You should be proud of work you do thank you again Gang14 06:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Your bot

Clashed with Cluebot, which had already reverted the vandalism, and broke wikilinking by removing the closing square brackets on the McLaren article. Narson 12:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

splish splosh on marci bower page

hes is going to be a pain, maybe black list his ip address? thanks, i just dont want the page i worked so hard on ruined or deleted. Marci Bowers Helper 22:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

bot revert

Hi - Can you look at this edit? The bot reverted one of three consecutive deletions from the article by the same IP. Seems like it could perhaps have reverted to the last non-delete (sort of what an admin rollback would have done). This is not a real big deal, but suggests a sufficiently clever vandal can defeat the bot. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

VoABot II revert of Tea

The bot did this revert saying back to revision #165010108 by "B. Jennings Perry", but it's over 5k chars short, as show by this compare. It's one big chunk missing, plus one other char in a second place. Seems there's a bug around. (I've corrected the article.) -R. S. Shaw 09:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

p.s. A further look suggests it might be a concurrency problem. This edit by the vandal happened around the same time, and almost matches the missing text. It's close to what might happen if, for revisions A, A+B, A+B+C the bot tried to do (A+B)-B but actually did (A+B+C)-B. -R. S. Shaw 09:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
All the bot does is load the revision and save it. I wonder if it is an automerge problem. Maybe the time tokens should be manually set or something... Voice-of-All 19:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
This stuff is often mysterious. A thought: do you know how the bot and the mediawiki handle the case where there is an edit conflict? If the current version is A+B, which the bot references(or fetches or something) but before the bot's submittal (back to the image of version A) becomes effective another user submits another update (version A+B+C), then that's an edit conflict. In the human GUI, this comes back to the user for inspection/resubmittal, but I don't know about whatever interface the bot is dealing with. If the mediawiki sw offered a "auto-merge" draft of its own devising, that draft might look like the (A+B+C)-B version which is approximately what was seen. I don't really expect this glitch to provide enough data to be able to uncover the bug, but it's something to be mulled if similar instances crop up. -R. S. Shaw 06:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad Reverting of Howard Dean

VoABot: this page which reverted my reversion of vandalism and gave me a warning. Mine: not vandalism Reverting Vandalism of This Page: original vandalism 71.141.91.49 16:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

A minute earlier the bot did the same thing to another anon user's undo of the same vandalous edit; here's the dif. -R. S. Shaw 07:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

VoABot

Your bot was archiving discussions from the WP:RFPP until October 19th, but seems to of stopped. This is causing a huge backlog. Any reason why its not doing anything? Davnel03 17:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I had computer issues, using some temp equipment now. Voice-of-All 03:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring previous warnings

If you look at User talk:204.39.82.41 you will see three "last warnings" in four days, 15-18 October, and then further vandalism the same day met only by a polite "consider using the sandbox" from VoABot, which was of course followed by further vandalism. I worry that "last warning" does not mean what it says, and threats not implemented are soon ignored. Could VoABot not look at the previous warning record? If the last warning is recent the Bot should not issue a lower level one. In particular if, as in this case, there is an immediately preceding Last Warning, the Bot should do an AIV report. - JohnCD 16:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I hear you're good with scripts...

Hi, I'm trying to help out User:Angel David, he's had a RfC filed about his excessive userspace counts. I was trying to help him out along with Neriani, by letting him make one userspace edit to 50 mainspace ones. I've gotten this far, but there are kinks, and you being on Wikiproject Scripts, I was hoping you could help him. 

function blockEdit() {
	if( wgNamespaceNumber == 2 ) {
      alert ("You may not edit this articlespace"). Bye!");
      window.location.href = ("http://"+document.location.host+"/w/index.php?title=Special:Userlogout&returnto=Main_Page");
	}
}

The previous would work, but he wouldn't be allowed to make any userspace edits. 

function a() {
	if( wgNamespaceNumber == 2 ) {

<!-- Here -->
}

function initPage() {
	var expireDate = new Date();
	expireDate.setMonth(expireDate.getMonth()+1);

	var editLeft = 50 - hitCt
	var hitCt = parseInt(cookieVal("pageHit"));
	hitCt++;
<!-- Here -->
	document.cookie = "pageHit=" + hitCt + ";expires=" + expireDate.toGMTString();
	document.getElementById("pageHits").innerHTML = "You have to make " +  editLeft + " times.";
}

function cookieVal(cookieName) {
	var thisCookie = document.cookie.split("; ");
	
	for (var i=0; i<thisCookie.length; i++) {
		if (cookieName == thisCookie[i].split("=")[0]) {
			return thisCookie[i].split("=")[1];
		}
	}
	return 0;
}

Since I'm not good at splotching languages together, I managed to try for this. Could you please help us? YДмΔќʃʀï→ГC← 10-23-2007 • 21:09:04

I'd rather the user use self-control rather than make a somewhat ridiculous script just to do this :) Voice-of-All 16:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:RCU

Hello Voice of All, I see you are a checkuser, and would like to ask for your experience in a small, but nonetheless, important case. Please see here for details. Thanks, Rudget Contributions 13:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

VoaBot did not fully revert

I just discovered that VoaBot did not fully revert some vandalism [11]. It's the first time I have seen this happen. If it was some kind of glitch you might want to check it out. I'd be curious to hear the explanation. Sbowers3 18:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

Hey Voice of All! I was wondering if you could help me a bit :) I know that you are a good programmer, and figured you'd be the person to ask my question to. I'm creating a bot that archives threads on ANI that are marked with the {{resolved}} template. I have the source code below, written in Python with the Pywikipedia framework, and any tips or fixes would be appreciated. Thanks! ( arky ) 00:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, not sure I'd have the time to look at that :( Voice-of-All 22:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Compare contribs

The compare contribs functionality of your JS tools does not seem to be working for me. Is it broken or just me? Mr.Z-man 03:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Should be fixed now. Voice-of-All 17:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot malfunctioning

Erroneously reverted an edit of mine. Please fix it, thank you. 82.71.48.158 11:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot archiving

The Bot is archiving this month's unsuccessful WP:CHU requests to Wikipedia:Changing username/Unfulfilled/2007/Novemeber instead of "November". Could you fix it when you have a sec? Cheers, WjBscribe 05:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Opps, fixed. Voice-of-All 06:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

RfCu

Would you mind looking into this: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LossIsNotMore#LossIsNotMore - 6, I think a huge mistake has been made, and if not rectified, means that a long time banned user is going to have free reign again.

There were just too many similarities between the behavior and interestes of the accounts, and the final disposition does not clear much up. Thanks. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 13:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

A quick question

I bow to you, JavaScript guru. I wonder if it's a simple thing for you to explain to me (or provide a link) how I might add a new link to the menu items at the very top of my Wikipedia screen? (Where it says "Scartol/my talk/my prefs/etc".) Thanks in advance. – Scartol · Talk 02:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

If you have a minute...

This was posted at WP:ANI but it has slipped through the cracks. See: This WP:ANI report here Since you have some familiarity with User:SEGA, I was hoping you could take a quick look and provide some comment/assistance on it. Thanks. 156.34.209.0 04:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

PPG Industries...Terms

I've been trying to add terms to PPG Industries' page. Several times I've tried to add the data, it's been kicked off. What can I do to add this information? I'm doing it for them, they are my client. Thank you.

It's been reverted by a user as a copyvio, so I can't help much there. Voice-of-All 18:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

user talk header format

I'm generally happy with VoABot II. However, the headings it places on user talk pages when issuing a warning message doesn't meld with the apparent convention used by Popups , Twinkle, Cluebot, etc. Undoubtedly you are aware that is a monthly section for each batch of warnings in 

== monthname year ==

while VoABot II uses

 ==Regarding your edits to [[:article name]]:==

Usually this isn't much of an issue, but here it confused the level of warning to choose for a vandal. Any chance VoABot II could honor (and merge with) the convention? —EncMstr 18:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Broken bot reversions

I noticed this bot twice reverted valid content here and here, and placed a rather unhelpful warning on the editor's talk page here. The editor was making a good faith expansion to the article by clicking on the "External links" editing link and then inserting text above the "External links" header. The bot should provide the specific reason for reversion (not a list of possible reasons) so that new editors will know what went wrong. -Amatulic 22:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know...

...There was vandalism on your talkpage, it has now been reverted.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions) 02:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent bot

What a good bot! I have encountered it many times today, while I have been on vandalism patrol. Cula 16:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

bad revert

Your Bot reverted an edit to the crash bandicoot series article that was'nt vandilisim. What happend is that a section about the pop cultare refrences about the series had a trivia tag but it was'nt. It obviuosoly is'nt trivia. Thank You.88.110.209.106 18:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't find any edits by the bot to that page recently (the last few months). If there are any they'd be really old. Voice-of-All 23:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

incorrect identification of vandalism to article Alcoholics Anonymous

Your Bot reverted an edits to the Alcoholics Anonymous article several times despite the edits having a correct Edit Summary. 80.194.237.22 13:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I altered an over inclusive regexp. Voice-of-All 18:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Bloodhound gang

WHY is the great white dope a rock song????????? its just hip hop! he raps and there are no e-guitars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh my god i will change it back! when you have reasons why is it an alternative rock song than say it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.167.207.3 (talk) 20:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Reversion

Your bot keeps reverting my edits to the article Big Time which has large amounts of repeated material and is really needs to be fixedBauerPower 03:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

See here. My bot only reverted the IP twice. Some other user did the other times. It tends to reverted massive deletions by very new users. Voice-of-All 18:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

please stop

do not revert my addition of reference - whoever is in control of this bot, please note it works imporperly! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rimerimea (talk • contribs) 01:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

That was a youtube link, one that should best be avoided. Voice-of-All 18:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot reversions minor?

Bot is marking the reversions as minor (example), and I don't see why. If it has any algorithm of qualifying reverts as minor, it is malfunctioning. As a matter of principle, I think reverts should not be marked minor. --Kubanczyk 14:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Not sure on this. The idea of reverts is that "I just removed some vandalism, nothing to see here, move along" rather than reverting/making a large good faith change. This is why admin rollbacks are marked as minor. Voice-of-All 22:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree. A minor edit is something that doesn't substantively change the content of the article from what the article editors intended. Restoring a vandalized page doesn't change the original content. -Amatulic 23:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh silly me, I was unaware that this bot never makes mistakes. By definition everything reverted by the bot is vandalism. Very well, "nothing to see here, move along". --Kubanczyk 20:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Borat&diff=next&oldid=169936149

If a human did that, they would be blocked. To be honest, I don't see why you should be treated any differently, just because you're running a computer program through a separate account. I will be asking for it to be blocked if that continues to happen – Gurch 19:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering what was up with that edit too. (Sorry if you already responded to Gurch, I couldn't find a reply on his talk page, though.) Rocket000 20:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I've already changed it so that diff doesn't trigger a revert anymore. Voice-of-All 20:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey!

Hello, your bot, User:VoABot_II isn't marking its edits with b for bot like all the other bots do, should it? PhilB ~ T/C 20:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No, that would mean they would be hidden from RC by default. Anti-vandal bots need to be watched over, so that shouldn't be the case. Voice-of-All 20:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Ahh cleavvver, that makes sense! Thanks PhilB ~ T/C 20:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Reverted edit in the Eschalon:_Book_I article

I don't see why the link to the teaser trailer of Eschalon, along with the link to the Official forums of Basilisk Games was removed from the Eschalon:_Book_I article, as they are completely relevant to the article at hand. Could you please undo the changes that you did, and if you cannot, could you please explain either in my personal discussion page, or the Eschalon:_Book_I discussion page what I have to do. I'm new to Wikipedia, and I hope we can resolve this in a timely manner. Thank you. (Learner Jedi 12:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

Can you find an official teaser link or game site link. YouTube really is not the best place for decent/stable links. Voice-of-All 18:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I found a more suitable, stable link for the teaser trailer and have updated the article. Thank you. (Learner Jedi 21:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

Death Note revert

May not be worth pointing out, but someone added the same word a few hundred times to Death Note, an ip reverted it, and your bot reverted it back to the vandalized version. Doceirias 22:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

A somewhat strange case

I'm sorry for asking here, but I didn't want to make a mess with the checkuser. I'm asking you, cause you closed the case I'm referring to. What should I do if a certain sockpuppeteer has created tons of accounts to push POV in an article and lately a new account with which he edits the articles falling into the area of interest of the original sockpuppets (and to the sockpuppeteer in some cases) and who within a few days started pushing the same POV on the very same article he started with. Should all these be added to the case? And should they be with one and the same code letter. Sorry if I'm killing your time for nonsense, but I'm really not confident when it comes to requesting a checkuser. --Laveol T 23:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

VoA Bot II

Your bot was doing something weird earlier... Got stuck in a loop at the above article, removing 'Infobox musical artist'. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 04:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Annoying headings on user warnings

I'm wondereing why VoAbot II attaches warning messages such as this to user talk pages. For one thing, the heading doesn't meet with the recommendations at WP:UW which suggest that such warnings be grouped by month. Secondly, the thing is annoyingly redundant since there's another link to the vandalised article just a few words later in the very first line of the warning. Is it really necessary to link twice to a vandalised article for each warning? I'm just thinking that, at some point after a page move or something, that's two links on a 'What links here' page instead of just one, swelling the apparent size of clean-ups needlessly. So, in summary, it appears, to me, to be non-standard and redundant. Is there a reason you've chosen to code it this way? — Dave (Talk | contribs) 16:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

(I know, I know -- replying to myself!) Sorry, VoA, I hadn't noticed that I was duplicating a report from 11 hr previously. I spoke of redundancy and then I was guilty of the same... In any case, I did add another reason why the heading format seems suspect. Cheers! — Dave (Talk | contribs) 16:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The warning are very old, I'll have to change that. Voice-of-All 20:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Malformatted warning messages

VoABot II is attaching vandalism warnings which are not in the standard format. See, for example, [12] recent warning. Specifically, the bot is attaching a top-level header to the warning. Those headers are not part of the preferred format for warning messages and make it harder for subsequent readers to scan the list of warnings to determine if/when a block is appropriate. Templated warnings are supposed to be added to the anon's page as comments. To the extent that there are any headers on the page, they should be time based - usually in monthly buckets.

If this were a one-off warning, I wouldn't be worried about non-standard formatting. But as a bot, the mistake gets propagated very widely. I would appreciate it if you could update your bot's formatting. Thanks. Rossami (talk) 05:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Rossami (talk) 23:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot warning when beaten

I have been doing some vandalism patrolling recently, and at least twice I have reverted faster than VoABot but had it warn the user, saying that the edit was reverted by a bot. Since I'm not a bot, I've overwrote the warnings with my own, manually, in these cases, but it's a problem you might want to consider - the bot should warn after reverting, and only if the revert succeeds (i.e. iff the bot is not beaten). Otherwise, great bot. :) Nihiltres{t.l} 00:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a tricky issue to get around cleanly. Voice-of-All 00:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, my personal algorithm is
1) revert article
2) examine article history
3) if my revert edit appears
4) issue user warning
Otherwise, my revert didn't take which 99.9% of the time someone else beat me on the revert, so it's their responsibility to issue the warning. Is there something not obvious about this algorithm which wouldn't be good to implement? —EncMstr 00:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I'd want a quick way for a bot to do it. The bot may revert the same page more than once or edits may have been made since the bot reverted but before the bot gets around to check it (not very likely, but possible). It would probably need some rough timestamp checking. Voice-of-All 01:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot II

Would it be possible to have VoABot II not revert to itself? Most other anti-vandalism bots already have this functionality enabled (such as ClueBot, and MartinBot, as long as it's not in "angry mode"). It would seem that it causes more harm than good; in situations such as this, it only serves to inflame the existing situation.

Thanks! — madman bum and angel 06:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Interesting heuristic. I'm adding it now. Voice-of-All 06:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, I set MAX_BOT_REVERTS=2 for now. Voice-of-All 06:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response! :D — madman bum and angel 07:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
This should really have been done before. Situations such as this are blatant violations of the three-revert rule, and could lead to a block of both bot and operator if an administrator was so inclined; having a bot account is not an excuse to violate policy. The edit repeatedly reverted on that page was not blatant vandalism, so the three-revert rule applies. Bots should not become involved in content disputes, and this is dangerously close to just that – Gurch 11:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
What does "Dubious information" even mean anyway? It's not in the list of reasons why the bot reverts edits. Please obtain approval for and document any new additions to your bot, otherwise it may be blocked simply for being unapproved, three-revert rule or not – Gurch 11:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how a block of the operator would be justified, especially as Voice of All is an established, respected, and trusted user. The three-revert rule does not apply to reversions of blatant vandalism, which is what VoABot II usually reverts, and when VoABot II makes a mistake... well, it's a bot, and it doesn't have human judgment. For the same reason, it can't become "involved" in a content dispute; it can only become an unwilling participant. Even given the lack of judgment, the benefits of this bot to the project outweigh the drawbacks. Please continue to report incidents such as these to the operator so the bot can be tweaked to prevent such situations from happening in the future. — madman bum and angel 15:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
If a user repeatedly reverts an edit that was made in good faith, that's edit-warring, regardless of whether or not the user is aware of it. If the user is a bot, then the bot's owner is effectively edit-warring through their bot account; if they don't take steps to correct this there's no reason why they should be treated any differently to someone who is edit warring using their own account.
I am sick and tired of hearing "it's only a bot, it doesn't have human judgement, it's bound to make mistakes" as an excuse for committing blockable offenses through a bot account. A bot that makes errors of such magnitude should never have been approved in the first place – it is trivial to check programatically whether you are about to revert to the same revision for the fourth time in a row. As someone who has been several times warned and once actually blocked for "violating the three-revert rule" when reverting obvious vandalism, I am appalled that people are able to get away with genuine violations of the rule by hiding behind the "oh, it's only a bot" excuse.
The bot policy states quite clearly that a bot must be harmless. If I edited the way this bot has done, either anonymously or from a regular account, I would have recieved several blocks for vandalism and at least one for violation of the three-revert rule. If I was logged in I would probably be blocked indefinitely. That is not harmless – Gurch 16:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
In any case, this problem (which I don't dispute was a problem) has been fixed. — madman bum and angel 16:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot_II still reporting editors after two edits

I've opened up a report at WP:AN/I (as recommended by the bot's page) as I am unable to shut the bot down or change its settings. The link to the report is here. The bot is reporting editors after two "violations", including at least one false positive where an editor (User:Eng rashid, (contribs)) was warned and reported for edits to an article he or she had created and was making updates to (Grid fabric). --健次(derumi)talk 15:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#VoABot_II, the bot has been temporarily blocked to prevent any further false positives. Neil ☎ 15:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. This bot has been disrupting the penis enlargement article too. I see some editors fighting the bot, the bot restoring vandalism, etc. =Axlq 00:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Ghost from the past

Hi there. I was wondering if you could give me some tips on editing my monobook, as I think it isn't working 100% well (some tabs it makes do nothing). I'm asking you because you did it for me before, but as I don't want to force you to do it I thought I'd learn how. Thanks, Master of Puppets Care to share? 03:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Have a barnstar botstar!

The BotStar
This botstar is awarded to VoABot II for excellent design and programming! You're so active its almost like you're a robot! (nobody expected that joke) Keep it up! Master of Puppets Care to share? 14:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll give this to you, as your bot lacks a talk page. Cheers, Master of Puppets Care to share? 14:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Odd behaviour

VoAbotII, not long ago, added this warning. I find it strangely troubling. Firstly, where did all that stuff about Facebook come from? Check out the edit the user made. There's nothing like that in there. Secondly, the previous warning was a uw-v2 and VoAbot gave a uw-v1 briefly thereafer. What's up with that? — Dave (Talk | contribs) 05:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The bot spotted the email address; that's where the Facebook/Geocities thing comes from. I can offer no explanation for the wrong order of warnings, however... Master of Puppets Care to share? 05:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, ok, that explains half of it, thanks... — Dave (Talk | contribs) 06:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I'll add an auto-incrementer. Voice-of-All 08:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
=====================()=========================
   | DO NOT ADD MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A COLLECTION OF |
   | LINKS. If you think that your link might be useful, do not add it here, |
   | but put it on this article's discussion page first or submit your link  |
   | to the appropriate category at the Open Directory Project (www.dmoz.org)|
   | and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template.             |
   |                                                                         |
   |           Links that have not been verified WILL BE DELETED.            |
   |  See Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Spam for details    |
   ===========================()==========================

Reversion 2

Why did this bot send me a vandalism notice when all i did was delete the vandalism and revise the article back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.55.166 (talk • contribs)

Fixed. Some credential checks were not running. Voice-of-All 01:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a heads up, your bot did the same thing to me while in middle of reverting multiple vandalism posts.172.131.246.121 06:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Why did this bot activate when I tried to add this

<!--== I'm really starting to get tired of this ==

I told you a while back to either seek approval for the error-prone "dubious information" part of VoABot II's operation, or get rid of it. I'm not going to ask again. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rosette_(singer)&diff=171756739&oldid=171756712 This] is the last thing that is needed when we are trying to get the subject of an article to understand our policies and co-operate. ''Bots need to be harmless'' - this is ''policy''. Either find out a way to do whatever it is you're doing without false positives (I really don't know ''what'' it is you're trying to do, because I see absolutely nothing wrong with that edit, given the informative summary), or get rid of it altogether. It is ''not'' our job to babysit your bot for you, it is ''your'' job to keep your bot out of the way and not revert constructive edits – [[User talk:Gurch|Gurch]] 22:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
:Bah, scaled back. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 00:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

== VoaBot II ==

I would like to clone this bot, as it might go offline if you are not using it and it would get all of it done faster. With a clone, it would get all of it done. If you will allow me to clone it, I would prefer you to comment on it on [[User talk:Dreamafter|my talk page]]. I know that we already have two anti-vandalism bots running, but would it not be better to have three? At least for blatant mistakes... <span style="font-variant:small-caps"><font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:Dreamafter|<font color="red">Dreamy</font>]]</font> <font size="2">[[User talk:Dreamafter|<font color="purple"><sup>§</sup></font>]]</font></span> 22:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
:The codebase is way too unstable atm. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 00:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
==Bot not signing==
VoABot II is not signing edits on user talk pages. <font face="Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056366">Mr.</font>]]''[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056625">'''Z-'''</font><font color="#054F66">man</font>]]</font>'' 01:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
:I was about to mention this. It's leaving proper warnings, just forgetting to sign. [[User:Master of Puppets|Master of Puppets]] [[User talk:Master of Puppets|<span style="font-variant:Small-caps;color:;"><sup>Care to share?</sup></span>]] 02:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
::Fixed. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 03:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
== VoABot and AIV ==
It is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrator_intervention_against_vandalism%2FTB2&diff=170939893&oldid=170933762 listing vandals] at [[WP:AIAV]] after only [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.176.21.43&oldid=170939276 one warning]. <small>I think it reports them if it vandalizes the same article more than once?</small> Regardless it produces reports that backlog AIAV because they haven't been warned to a level 4, can you modify this? [[User:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#151B8D">Knowledge</font><font color="#6D7B8D">Of</font><font color="#461B7E">Self</font>]] | [[User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#461B7E">talk</font>]] 10:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
:It [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism/TB2&oldid=171084124 is] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:68.37.65.33 still] doing it. [[User:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#151B8D">Knowledge</font><font color="#6D7B8D">Of</font><font color="#461B7E">Self</font>]] | [[User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#461B7E">talk</font>]] 00:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC) 
::I've moved these comments to a new thread, because I feared they were being missed. Hope you don't mind. Happy editing. [[User:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#151B8D">Knowledge</font><font color="#6D7B8D">Of</font><font color="#461B7E">Self</font>]] | [[User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#461B7E">talk</font>]] 01:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
:Still doing it. [[User:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#151B8D">Knowledge</font><font color="#6D7B8D">Of</font><font color="#461B7E">Self</font>]] | [[User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf|<font color="#461B7E">talk</font>]] 12:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
:::I've also notice that after reverting a vandalism edit on [[Maya civilization]], the bot posted [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:76.4.133.106 twice] for the same vandalism edit at 02:10. Probably a rare occasion, that this bug happens.--[[User:JForget|<font color = "orange">'''JForget''' </font>]] 02:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
::::This should be fixed now. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 02:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Is the Bot correctly upgrading its warnings? I've seen quite a few examples like [[User talk:24.22.126.118]] where the Bot seems to have given rather mild warnings twice and reported to AIV. Should the second warning not threaten a block (something along the lines of test3)? <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:WJBscribe|'''WjB''']][[User talk:WJBscribe|scribe]]</span> 03:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

why did my ediot get revised!?!?! i just replaced it with "lolz! dis artikle just got OWNED!!!! it wuz encyclopediacly veryfiable cus it's TRUE wasn't it?????!?! 
----
Hi! Could you please add <nowiki><!-- Template:uw-(whatsoever) --> to your warning? Otherwise scripts and bots are not able to identify this template. Please don't warn users not ''you'''ve reverted (but ''I''). And at least please fix [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wafyl&diff=171016390&oldid=171015602 this] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.45.5.49&diff=prev&oldid=171018621]) so that the account will be reported. … And not [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahayana_sutras&diff=next&oldid=171023398 every removal] is vandalism esp. if the summary is used. Thanks! —[[User:DerHexer|DerHexer]] <small>[[User talk:DerHexer|(Talk)]]</small> 19:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
:OK. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 18:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
::I think you took that a bit too literally as you added Template:uw-''(whatsoever)'', when DerHexer meant something like Template:uw-''vandalism1'' or Template:uw-''vandalism2'' as per the usual warning templates.  See [[User:ClueBot]] on how it does it. -- [[User:Gogo Dodo|Gogo Dodo]] 08:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
== Information ==

I just want to decrease the article information.-Wikihiphopeditor
yeah me also
== Another VoABot II Question ==

Is there some reason that VoABot II [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AVoABot_II%2FWatchlist&diff=170852365&oldid=170785773 removed] it's entire watchlist? Just some housecleaning? -[[User:Royalguard11|Royalguard11]]<small>([[User talk:Royalguard11|T]]·[[User:Royalguard11/ER|R!]])</small> 22:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
:It was kind of old, and the bot was not used (or used sporadically) since the list was used much. I just manually emptied it out a while ago. '''[[User talk:Voice of All|<font color="blue">Voice</font><font color="darkblue">-of-</font><font color="black">All</font>]]''' 23:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
::Ok good, I just wanted to make sure it wasn't going haywire or anything. -[[User:Royalguard11|Royalguard11]]<small>([[User talk:Royalguard11|T]]·[[User:Royalguard11/ER|R!]])</small> 20:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
==sorry==

sorry for my last revision, I was just trying to experiment, not vandalize, I'll use the sandbox in future.
== [[Kolhapur Institute Of Technology's college of Engineering , Kolhapur]] ==

This article has been continually deleted, and the current version is no different and I would've already deleted it if not for your edit. It is a copyright violation from [http://www.kitcoek.org/index.htm http://www.kitcoek.org/index.htm] and has yet to contain anything notable about the organisation. I'm leaning towards salting the article. –– '''[[User:Lid|Lid]]'''<sup><small>([[User talk:Lid|Talk]])</small></sup> 08:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
:{{aye}} – no further action required.  I have salted the article.  — <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">[[User:Madman|madman]] [[User talk:Madman|bum and angel]]</span> 08:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
== PhpOrganisation ==

I deleted a redundant category (another listed category is nested in the deleted category), supplied a minimal edit summary as I delete many of such categories and choose not to spend a lot of time typing explanations for trivial actions.  Wasn't logged in at the time (I forget to check and get dropped - I assume there is some Wikipedia "inactive" time limit), sorry.  Could you please look at the edit and summary, seeing if there is a reasonable update to your bot.  And if that unlogged userid has been flagged/recorded somewhere as doing something bad, could you fix that also, please. Thanks [[User:Rwwww|tooold]] ([[User talk:Rwwww|talk]]) 17:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
== Why? ==

A month ago your bot falsely labeled my reversion to [[Dick Latvala]] as vandalism, when I was actually just restoring sourced material that had been removed.   Your bot called me a vandal on my talk page.  I asked you to clarify that I am not a vandal but you refused.  Why?  Is my reputation worth so little that it is worth your bot sullying my reputation?  [[Special:Contributions/68.45.106.216|68.45.106.216]] ([[User talk:68.45.106.216|talk]]) 09:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
:Bots' warnings are for your own benefit.  Should they be the result of poor judgment, you may feel free to remove them.  — <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">[[User:Madman|madman]] [[User talk:Madman|bum and angel]]</span> 18:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
=====-->
</nowiki>

in an article: external links section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.101.132 (talk • contribs) 23:04 2007-11-15

That reversion wasn't made by this bot. The version reverted to was by this bot, but the reversion of your edit was by a user using popups, and that user corrected it. -Amatulic 00:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes i know about that reversion but I was interested to know why the morelinks tag cause the bot to activate first. Was it because I did not add a summary though that would silly since the tag should not need an explaination as it cause nothing that can be seen unless in the edit page. Though Karlhahn revision also confused me as well as his explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.101.132 (talk) 07:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Don't assume that your edits are self-explanatory without a summary, especially when you're an anonymous user. Anonymous edits without summaries are often immediately suspected as vandalism. I believe the persion who reverted you did so hastily, assuming vandalism (and based on my own experience, most large anonymous edits without summaries are vandal edits) and then realized the mistake and restored your edit. =Axlq (talk) 07:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot II

Decided to show my appreciation for your Bot by sticking a barnstar on its page - hope that's alright with you. Happy editing, Lradrama 09:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

History script and new page patrol

Could you update your various history-related JavaScript to count the mark as patrolled feature now used on Special:Newpages? It currently doesn't count patrolling actions when it gets data from the log. Thanks, Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 21:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

A Christmas Story

Hi. Some just redirected A Christmas Story to A Christmas Story (1983 film), thus jettisoning the talk page, history, etc. Considering there is a disambiguation notice, no discussion of the move and no other film by that title as far as I know, this seems inappropriate to me. I notice that you're the one who unprotected the article back in January, so I'm turning to you for help. I've got to rush back to work now, but could you take a look and see what should be done? Thanks! --Karen | Talk | contribs 17:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. And the nine or so other cut-and-paste moves they also performed. -.- — madman bum and angel 18:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

fixtabs.js upgrade

Hi, Voice of All! I found your script in Ioeth's arsenal and made some modifications to it. I initially thought it was Ioeth's script, and posted a note on his talk page, where he referred me to you, the original author. (Or am I wrong on that count, too?)

Anyway, my updated version is at User:Voyagerfan5761/fixtabs.js. It changes the function from a static list of if statements to a for loop that iterates through objects in an array, each containing the ID of the tab to rename and the text to use. He said you might find my update interesting. So there it is. Hope you do, indeed, find it at least interesting, if not immediately useful. It should be easily configured by overriding the array variable with a custom array, or added to by using the syntax idsToRename[] = { name : 'id', text : 'Display this' }; I haven't verified configuration abilities yet, seeing as how I just wrote this as a personal mod, but let me know if you like it. This was good scripting practice for my course. Cheers for the inspiration (made possible by Ioeth's little oops)! Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 19:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA: Accept

Hi. I would like to thank you for your nomination for adminship. While I had expected to do so in a few months, I appreciate that you went ahead and nominated me now. Your words were also very kind. At any rate, thanks a lot. I am going to go ahead and transclude the nomination myself. Cheers! SorryGuy 05:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

VoA bot II revert

Your bot reverted my revert of an attack job on a living person. 35.9.6.175 (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

About Puja

Helllo, my username is LisaLima. I'm a practising Hindu and the information I added on the article Puja is pretty commonplace, that is to say, I've edited the article after consulting a number of priests. So I don't see why it should be reverted. I'm new to editing wikipedia, and if you got any suggestions please talk--Lisalima (talk) 14:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Note to Voice of All: I restored her edit and left a note. Any additional suggestions you may have would be much appreciated. Cheers! Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 14:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
The "____" bits made it revert. Voice-of-All 18:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Bad revert

Your bot reverted an edit I made that was using a blog (or, more accurately, a blog's with-permission scan of an academic journal article) as a source. This strikes me as a poor use of a bot. The Audient Void (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot reverted good Hollywood sign change

I'm writing about this: [13].

I didnt vandalise the page.
I added info about the sign loosing "LAND" when commerce chamber took over.

Another bad revert

Hi, your bot made a bad revert. If you can, please make your bot avoid such things. And thanks for all of the good reverts, of course. -- Pepve (talk) 22:01, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What were all of those underscores for anyway? Voice-of-All 07:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I guess they were an attempt to a horizontal rule, to divide the two lists. -- Pepve (talk) 14:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Bug report

Hi, your bot reverted text don't match specified ClueBot content here. Maybe an error in your code? --F. Cosoleto (talk) 08:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Have you fixed the problem? Let me know it. --F. Cosoleto (talk) 14:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
That sometimes happens. I have know idea why, I'm still looking into it. Something is either wrong with POST requests. Voice-of-All 01:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Buggy revert

Howdy, I thought you might want to know the bot did not successfully revert an edit, but did edit an article with such a change summary. Here is the diff between the clean version and the "reverted" version. [14] note the version number matches the edit summary. If the bot is not purely automatic, then it is possible your cat leaned on the keyboard at the wrong time and no worries, the edit was fixed in under a minute. If it is purely automatic, then it might be a bug, so I thought I would report it. JackSchmidt (talk) 01:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

This is the same problem as above. Voice-of-All 01:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

VoABot

Hi, just to let you know that VoABot seems to have stopped editing on the 25th. Could you take a look when you have a sec? WjBscribe 00:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

By box is a bit broken atm, so it won't run until I get it fixed. Voice-of-All 01:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Aaron_Schulz/Archive/2007/November&oldid=1252159666"