User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 19

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cyberpower678. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

→

Senior Editor II

Suggestions for the User Analysis Tool

Fantastic job on the tool! It's the first Wikimedia Labs tool I've found that doesn't look like complete ballucks, and yours actually looks quite good! I wanted to make a few suggestions, feel free to tell me if any of them are unreasonable.

Have you entertained the thought of adding a line graph "option" or toggle for the monthly stats page? While the bar graph is fine, I would personally prefer a total edit counter regardless of namespace, and I think a line graph would be the best way of visually representing that data.
That's to come with detailed user analysis, the next step in the development of the edit counter.
I'd recommend adding a tooltip over the "Deleted edits" in "Overview" that explains that this refers mostly to reverted edits, as deleted edits sounds a lot more punishing.
Umm...Deleted edits are actual edits that have been deleted. You physically cannot view its diff anymore.
In the FAQ, it would be helpful if you linked to the "User:Nicereddy/EditCounterOptIn.js" and/or "User:Nicereddy/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js". While I realize the former is dependent on the preferred Wiki you're viewing, the latter is only relevant to Meta-Wiki, so that should be easier to link.
Ok.
Since Global Usernames have been implemented fully now (as far as I know), would it be possible to link together all the data for Wikis a user has edited? For example, I'd be viewing my English Wikipedia stats and at the top of the site there'd be links to my stats for Commons, MediaWiki, etc.
Have they? I'm not aware of this. It would likely be lower on my todo list.
On the tool's home page, the URL must be manually entered. Would it be possible to include a list of all Wikimedia Wikis as a dropdown, or suggest wikis based on what the user types?
Yes, but it would make migrating this tool to a new location significantly more difficult. I designed this to keep in mind that it should be easy to move to a new location. X!'s tool took forever to setup on a new server.

This is really useful, I've found looking through my data to be incredibly interesting. Thank you for improving upon X!'s version! --Nicereddy (talk) 17:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Responses are inline.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:27, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Some more suggestions:

Will "Files uploaded" be refered to Commons ?. Actualy, just a few images are still uploaded on a wiki spaces.
May we have a summary by category (probably not the category of the article, but the higher one), in order to have some kind a "profile of areas of interest".
We are not the owner of an article, I know. But, could be amazing to know how many articles have more than 50% of edits made by us (# of bytes or # edits, u decide).

Congratulations for the tool.--Amadalvarez (talk) 04:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Signatures

Hi. Just a note to say that I enjoyed your April Fools' Day signature copying. Well done, again! Northern Antarctica (₵) 14:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. It's actually automatic. See User:Cyberpower678/SignatureAprilFools—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I missed 1 April (and any shenanigans that took part on said day), but am I to understand that you were using the format of well-known^{[citation needed]} Wikipedians in your signature on that day? What a remarkably clever, and non-disruptive way to celebrate. I do say, well done <slow clap>.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 21:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll second that. I'm all for harmless levity. Alas, I missed it on the day, but this gave me a chuckle, which is rare when looking at AN! Best, —HJ Mitchell ^Chat_Online 00:23, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I should go looking for where my last Bwilkins sig was used LOL! D P 00:28, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Haha. Speaking of which, I just updated my permanent signature. How does it look?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 00:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

You didn't include my iconic, now defunct signature :( → Call me Hahc21 05:58, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I haven't updated that signature in a while. I will do it now.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:11, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Done Have a look.

Nice :) Now to wait till April 2015! → Call me Hahc21 17:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Pie graph colors

I'm impressed with the new counter, but am wondering if you would be amenable to changing the colors as part of the rebuild. I'd like to pair up the color each namespace and its talk (i.e. Wikipedia in one color, Wikipedia talk in a similar color), so that there's a stronger visual identity for each area. If you're willing to make this change, please let me know and I will come up with a set of proposals.

Also, it gives me the user right "*", which may be a bug.

Sven Manguard Wha? 22:34, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

This (above) is the kind of thing I was thinking of. I think it makes a lot more sense than the current version, which reflects that colors were just added as they were needed, and has colors (Template/TimedText/TimedText talk) that are too close to one another. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:06, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Those are very beautiful colors. But there are several more namespaces that you would need to create colors for. Would you be willing to do those too?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Sure. I mistakenly thought that no project would have more namespaces than English Wikipedia's 28, but Commons has 32. How many namespaces does the project with the most namespaces have? We only need as many colors as that number, because if a namespace only appears on one project, it can share a color with a namespace that only appears on some other project (so the Education Program namespace on enWiki could share a color with the Query namespace on Wikidata). Sven Manguard Wha? 17:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I sent you an email a few days ago identifying all the namespaces. With 700+ projects, I can't tell you which has the most.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I didn't get an email from you. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I sent another one right now.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's going on, but I haven't received either of your emails, and I receiving other mail. I just sent you an email from my email address; if you reply to that, it should work. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Backlisted link

Hello Cyberpower678, Two days ago several articles, including Water supply and sanitation in Israel were tagged because blacklisted links were found in them. The links in question are to the website http://www.water-technology .net/. As far as I can tell, the site is not "highly inappropriate", which is one of the possible reasons given for blacklisting. The other reason given for blacklisting is that a site has a history of being spammed. Now I do not know why the site has been blacklisted. I also do not know how to find out if it has a history of being spammed or not. I was thinking about removing the links, but they do provide substantial source material that backs up the content of the article. I was also thinking about requesting a whitelisting, but since I do not know why the site was blacklisted I am a bit of a loss. Can you tell me why the site was blacklisted?--Mschiffler (talk) 14:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

This is the wrong place to ask. The blacklist isn't the bot's; it's Wikipedia's own. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. Cyberpower, would you considering adding an editnotice to this effect to your talk page since this question comes up here so often? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

If this is the wrong place to ask, who or where should I ask? This is quite confusing, except perhaps for a few who know more about this and I thought you were one of them and could help or at least could clarify who can answer my questions. Bots are not users, but ultimately there are real persons behind any decision and not bots or an amorphous and anonymous "Wikipedia".--Mschiffler (talk) 14:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

You've as have been directed above need to go to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. This is in no way controlled by a bot operator.Blethering Scot 14:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

@Mschiffler: More specifically, see the section MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#cbronline.com. http: www.water-technology.net is a site operated by Kable, an outfit that has been blacklisted by a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS on that page, i.e., all sites they operate are blacklisted, and the actual content and usefulness of those sites is not really a consideration in blacklisting decisions. You can try to whitelist it at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist if you have a lot of patience. Good luck. Wbm1058 (talk) 15:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. If I understand correctly there has been a suspicion that an anonymous user posted links to this site on Wikipedia to increase traffic on the site. This has somehow led to a situation where suddenly all links to that site have been blacklisted, irrespective of the content, who posted the links and for what reason. Sounds pretty drastic. It also seems that it requires a lot of patience to whitelist the site. I am not sure if I want to go down that road. I have no experience with the process of blacklisting and whitelisting sites, but to me the process seems to be in need of improvement.--Mschiffler (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Mschiffler, yes, that's basically my assessment, but it's not just one alleged anonymous user, probably many, who may be editing from India, and the suspicion is that they are being paid to introduce link-citations in order to drive traffic to their sites. But, see MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#www.water-technology.net. Supposedly www.water-technology.net has been Temporarily de-blacklisted pending further investigation. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Monthly edit counts by percentage in mouseover?

First, let me thank you for your fabulous rewrite of this tool. Second, let me apologize if the feature I'm going to request has been considered. I checked, but may have missed it. I wonder if you'd consider fixing it so that not just the absolute number of edits appear in the mouseover thing in the monthly edit count bar, but also the percentage of that month's edits. It seems to me that the old version had this feature, although I could be wrong. In any case, I'd find it extremely useful. Thanks again!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:50, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, having that would be very useful. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 18:07, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Supercount isn't understanding a rename

Hi there. Thanks for the new counter tool, it looks great. However, it seems to have a bug relating to user names and first edits. It shows my first edit as being Nov 28, 2001 17:04:34; but in fact that's the first edit of Scott (usurped), a user whose account name I usurped recently. Best wishes, — Scott • talk 14:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Ugh. Leave it to the devs to not change the rev_user_text field in the database when usurping. -.-—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:48, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Incheon International Airport assuming section (George Bush Intercontinental Airport)

Uh, why are you resolving this. I see it the section "George Bush Intercontinental Airport" was resolved. --Allen Nguyen (talk) 23:07, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Huh?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

@AllenHAcNguyen: The bots comment wasn't related to your discussion, a quick look shows it was commenting in the thread above yours and a misaligned header in your section caused it to appear relevant.Blethering Scot 15:54, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Cyber you may wish to take a look at this as it appears the bot itself caused the section header break.Blethering Scot 15:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

That's very odd. Never seen that happen before.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Neither have I, originally thought was caused by a user but on further inspection saw that.Blethering Scot 17:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Cat:Unblock table notice

"This table is out of date. Contact User talk:Cyberpower678." So reads the text above the handy summary table at CAT:UNBLOCK, and so I am doing. I hope that bringing this to your notice is helpful rather than an annoyance, and apologize if the latter is the case! - Vianello (Talk) 10:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

It looks like it stalled. I'll look into it.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Votes

Hey Cyberpower, there is Octodata now, which allows fetching user votes of big ballots; the database is maintained by me and Ricordisamoa but if you like, I add you as a maintainer. The database is public and called s51816__krakenbase_p. If you need a different API, database schema or have an idea for an improved design (I feel it's very ugly currently, not talking about GUI), let me know. -- Rillke (talk) 11:09, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Is it something you're offering to let me add to the User Analysis Tool?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:23, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

What you do with it and how you do it, is your choice. However, if you use it, drop me a line so I do not accidentally break it, can adjust it to your needs or add you as a maintainer. -- Rillke (talk) 01:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand .tk domain blacklisting in the .tk article

https://www.robtex.com/dns/dot.tk.html#blacklists only lists rhsbl.ahbl.org as "timeout" otherwise greenlisted. https://www.robtex.com/dns/dot.tk.html shows no issues at "Google safe browsing", Spamhaus, or SORBS, et al. So why is Wikipedia having a problem with this country code? The whitelisting page suggests that it will continue to be blacklisted no matter what I do. There was references/comments in the article about McAfee (one of the least effective anti-malware) and a silly article about spamming China yet China ranks #1 and #2 in terms of outgoing spam. Again none of the third party Spam filter companies had the .tk on its lists and as mentioned in the wiki article, no other Antimalware provider lists .tk in its threat matrix. Again, from what possible unknown source is this Wikipedia blacklist coming from? (I did check SORBS, Spamhaus, and Forefront pages directly.) Shjacks45 (talk) 19:11, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I was logged in before I clicked "save page". May have missed something retyping my post.

Wrong place to ask. Ask at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:16, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot I issue?

This edit lists nearly every photo or graphic from the articles in Book:Interstate 96 as being "non-free", when none of them are. Also, if it is the bot, it's editing while logged out. Imzadi 1979 → 11:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I have blocked the IP in question [1]. Have rolled back the first 50 edits but there are hundreds. Can you revert the rest of them. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 11:50, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Two further issues:

User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report has stopped updating
The last month's history of User:Cyberbot I/Current AfD's

Cheers, Amalthea 22:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Overview table on Supercount

Hi. I have a suggestion for adding a section in the Monthly Stats section of supercount. As of now, the Monthly Tables section shows a separate table for every month. How about adding another section named Overview Table. The overview table could look something along the following lines:

Month	Main	Talk	User	User talk	Other namespaces (each in a separate column)
2014/04	edits	edits	edits	edits	edits
2014/05	edits	edits	edits	edits	edits
2014/06	edits	edits	edits	edits	edits

The edits could contain percentage change over the previous month as rollover text, with a checkbox option at the top to show the change alongside the number of edits.

This would help easily identify (for logged-in users) when one made more contribs in which namespace.

Views?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 14:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

RfC

Hi Cyberpower, would you mind adding a link to an example of an opt-in at the top of the RfC? I think it would be useful for everyone to see what's being discussed. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, just pinging you here in case you missed the above. Also, I'd like to discuss how to choose the closing admin(s) before the 30 days is up so that they're ready to close. It would be good to find someone that everyone would regard as neutral, and given the importance it might be a good idea to have three, and also to alert the Foundation about the privacy concerns. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I volunteered my bots and myself to be examples. Yes, I agree that a neutral third party should close it. Wbm1058 (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that, Wbm. Cyberpower, as I didn't hear back from you I went ahead and asked WJBscribe if he'd be willing to close it and he has agreed. I've left a note on the RfC page here. I hope this is okay with you. If you object for any reason or have another suggestion, please feel free to say. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, for the late response. I've been scattered about lately. I am OK with having more than 1 closer. I myself am impartial to it and don't mind changing the opt requirement if consensus sees fit, so I would like to participate as one of the closers. However, if people object, I will stand down from closing.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, Cyberpower, I would object to that. RfCs are closed by uninvolved people unless they're straightforward and not contentious. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:47, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

That was fast. :p Oh well. So who else is going to close it?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:02, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

WJBscribe is going to close it. He can probably do it by himself, but he can choose other uninvolved people to help him if he wants to. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Have him then report to me the results so I can enforce it.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

He's likely to close it publicly the way RfCs are normally closed, so if you look out for it you'll see it. I suspect he'll do it after the 30 days are up. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:41, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Editnotice

Cyberpower, can you add an editnotice to your user talk page saying that queries about why a link is blacklisted should be posted to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist rather than here? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Done—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Bugreport for Editcount on wmflabs.org

Hello Cyberpower678,

I tried your edit counter tool on wmflabs.org (Thanks for the great work!). I have found a little bug. When I look at the Monthly Chart with my Firefox 28.0 I do not see the whole month label (see this screenshot). Adding a margin-left:... or left:... to the <svg> does not help, so it may be a bug inside the SVG...?! Greetings, Stephan Kulla (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I use FireFox 28 too and cannot replicate this issue. I cannot fix it. Sorry. Perhaps you can provide me with more details. Browser settings, Windows settings, DPI settings, etc...

cyberbot I editing logged out

Because of this, I've blocked the bot, so we can unblock the relevant IPs. Seems this is a relatively widespread problem as another bot also had to be blocked for the same reason. Feel free to unblock as soon as the bot is logged in again. Risker (talk) 22:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

That makes absolutely 0 sense. Blocking the bot will not stop it from editing logged out. In addition to that, this is causing collateral damage, as it is now blocking various important tasks. Also the bot task is likely finished and inactive at current. It logs in at the start of each run.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

@Risker: I have unblocked the bot. Your block did not solve anything (it actually created some collateral damage), since the bot would still be able to edit from the IP, even if its account is blocked. Anyways, I have discussed this comprehensively with Cyberpower and he is already updating the bot to prevent this from happening again. → Call me Hahc21 03:22, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, Hahc21, we can't have that IP blocked, it was screwing up other correctly programmed bots and other activities coming from WMFLabs. There's very high risk for significant collateral damage when blocking any IP starting with 10.xxx as has already been noted by Legoktm. Frankly, I don't care if it's "blocking important tasks" - it's one line of code that's missing, and should have been there all along. Once it's fixed, it can do its important tasks. The project will not fall because a couple of bots without auto-shutoff when logged out don't operate for a day or two. Your actions are inappropriate until the bot is fixed. Risker (talk) 03:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

And how exactly will blocking the bot account stop it from editing from an IP? That block on Cyberbot I only stopped tasks that were actually working as should while still allowing the IP edits to happen which is what should be avoided.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 03:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, Risker, I am well aware that blocking these IPs must not be done, but blocking Cyberbot was pointless, don't you think? My logic tells me that blocking a bot that is editing logged out is like blocking the sockmaster without blocking the sock. Useless. And since we cannot block the bot account using the "Autoblock any IP addresses used" option because it would be the same as blocking the IP, it was kind of.. unnecessary. It would have been way better to inform Cyberpower about the issue, so that he could check. However, this would have been a bit.. useless either given that this issue is happening because the Wikimedia Foundation is constantly resetting session tokens, which force logs out not only bots but most users, because it happened to me too. The only difference is that we notice, bots don't. → Call me Hahc21 03:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

That's where you're incorrect, Hahc. Almost all bots *did* notice that they were logged out, and had the line of code written in to do so; this one is an exception. The bot had already been stopped by the blocking of the IP (it shouldn't have restarted once blocked without "owner" action - if it did, then there's another problem with its code), but it shouldn't be restarted until this is fixed, because it will do it again whenever it loses its session cookie, which can be caused by more than WMF actions. The resetting of session cookies is happening at different times on different projects because of the absence of site-wide, all-account SUL; until that is resolved, this will happen again. Blaming the WMF for taking an external threat seriously is a bit much; I'm sure we've all had plenty of password resets to do as well this week. Remember, I was correcting the situation of the blocking of the IPs by lifting those blocks, and addressing the coding problem with the bots (i.e., they should know when they're logged out and either log in again or stop by themselves) by blocking the bots. Neither of those blocks included IP autoblock; in fact, I didn't have to block ClueBot III, it has a special page where one turns "true" to "false" and shuts it off. Risker (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I am aware. If I unblocked the bot is because I am satisfied that Cyberpower is doing the corrections that need to be made and that this won't repeat itself, given that I understand what happened with Cyberbot I and why. However, that doesn't justify a block of the bot even *after* it already stopped given that the IP it was using was blocked. → Call me Hahc21 04:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Regardless now, the bot should be fixed and should never again edit logged out.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Feedback on your supercount tool

Just some feedback on your new tool (using Firefox 20):

On the "Monthly Chart":
- Rather than the full date "2013/12" I only see "13/12" plus the right edge of the 0. (Same as #Bugreport for Editcount on wmflabs.org)
- I get a horizontal scroll bar at the bottom on a 1024x768 monitor because one of the bars just barely extends out of the table, though there is enough screen real estate for it to be shown without a scroll bar. There is an excessive amount of whitespace that can be revealed by scrolling. It would be nice if the tool could scale the maximum bar length to keep it from requiring scrolling.
- It would be helpful if hovering over a bar-segment would display both the absolute number of edits and the percentage of that months edits for the given namespace. (Same as #Monthly edit counts by percentage in mouseover?)
Rather than "Monthly Tables", the data might be easier to understand in a single table. Each row could represent a month, each column a namespace. This could get a bit wide, but it would allow for easier comparisons of month-to-month data. (Same as #Overview table on Supercount)
It would be cool if hovering over the "other" pie section on the "Overview" would enlarge it to show a breakdown of all the wedges in other section.

Otherwise, looks good! Thanks for your work improving this much used tool! TDL (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

To start, you should upgrade your Firefox as it is 8 Versions out of date. And I really can't fix anything if I can't replicate the bug myself. The graphs are an SVG file, so scaling won't be that easy. I can add percentages to the bar count. And I'll work on a new table.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Supercount opt-in on meta

Hi Cyberpower. :) There seems to be a problem with opting in to the Supercount tool on Meta. User:Lady Lotus created an opt-in page on Meta here, but her Supercount analysis for enwiki lists her as "not opted in". Any idea how to fix this? Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 05:05, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Opt in globally. :p That's only a local optin.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 12:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

D'oh, that figures. I should have checked that first - thanks for your help. So that this problem happens less often for other people, could you change the Supercount tool text for me? At the moment under the "Not Opted In" heading, it says "To opt in please create User:Xxx/EditCounterOptIn.js on your local wiki or create User:Xxx/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js on meta.wikimedia.org." Could you change the text "User:Xxx/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js on meta.wikimedia.org" so that it is actually a link to the relevant page on Meta? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Possible sulk

Hmm. I'm not sure which is worse, the fact that http://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/ has not been working for quite a while now, or the fact that I'm not in User:Cyberpower678/My Wikifriends. If you could manage to put the former right, I could perhaps forgive you for the latter, and not sulk. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, RL is in the way again, so I haven't been able to respond to my talk page as much as I like.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

xtools/pages

Hi CP, what's the future of xtools/pages? Some people from ol' germany are looking for answers... ;) de:Wikipedia:Fragen_zur_Wikipedia#xtools.2Fpages_down. Btw. the 301 from xtools seems to be stuck or borked (times out).

I still have to check out Supercount's new (mindbreaking) API. Cheers. Hedonil (talk) 23:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

That's the articles created tool, correct? It's going to be merged into the new user analysis tool soon.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 01:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your work on the User Analysis Tool. — AjaxSmack 01:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 01:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis tool bug

On the User Analysis tool I've noticed a bug that isn't really a big deal but I still thought I'd tell you about it. Anyway, on the pie chart, if you hover your cursor over a "slice", then go left to right, the "slice" gets very large. If you do this enough, it will eventually look more like a block. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 22:55, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Not in my control. But I see it as a fun bug to play with.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok. By the way, on your My Wikifriends list, an IP added Jesmion to the list. Jesmion is blocked indefinitely here and on Wikidata, where I'm an admin. He also had to have his talk page access revoked and was IP hopping (See discussion). Anyway I thought I'd tell you. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 15:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I removed it.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 15:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Thanks, bot. For moving the deletion discussion regarding Graf Mr. Guye (talk) 02:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sperre / "Blacklist"

Hallo, wenn mir die Einsicht in meine Bnutzertätigkeit verweigert wird, kann mich Wikipedia am Arsch lecken. If I am refused to get a regular insight into my edits, then Wikipedia can kiss my ass. Altaripensis (talk) 19:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hää? Verstehe ich jetzt nicht von was sie reden.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:08, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm saying that I will stop to work on WP if I get such refusals. What is the problem to look on what I have edited frequently? If I am banned because of "excessive queries" WP needn`t worry about any queries nor any edits, because I will stop to contribute on WP after 3 year and 3300 edits.--Altaripensis (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

See below. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 20:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit counter blacklist

Um, really? Giant Snowman 19:09, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

What about the blacklist?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what GiantSnowman is referring to specifically, but I tried to look a user up and got this message: "Blacklisted:

You have been disallowed access to the tool for excessive queries, or are a bot. Please use the API." I am not a bot and I don't think I've made excessive queries. Can ye help me? Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Urgh. I was testing the new blacklist and may have left in a keyword blocking human users. I implemented the blacklist because spiders and bots were hammering the tool. I'll have it fixed after I finish eating.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, should have explained better - was just a bit shocked - but yes I am blacklisted. Giant Snowman 19:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Heh, I blacklisted myself too so no worries. :p—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I too have been blacklisted. Per above, I guess I'll have access back soon? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 19:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis Tool Blacklisting

Hi. When I tried to check my edit account on the user analysis tool, I got "Blacklisted: You have been disallowed access to the tool for excessive queries, or are a bot. Please use the API." I am not a bot, nor have I been making excessive queries (unless 1-10 per day is too many). You're the only contact listed on the page, so ... what do I do? Thanks, Kirin13 (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

The answer is one section up.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Same as the editor above. The tool is at the bottom of the list of user contributions and gives no indication whatsoever that there is a limit on use. Can I suggest either posting this information along with the tool or get rid of the tool entirely? Sarah777 (talk) 20:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry - read the response above! keep on eating but please fix the tool :) Sarah777 (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis Tool: Blacklisted

Hi. Why I recieve this message when I use User Analysis Tool?!:

Blacklisted: You have been disallowed access to the tool for excessive queries, or are a bot. Please use the API.

I don't think I did "excessive queries" or I acted like a "bot". Did I overuse this tool? How many times I can use this tool in every 24 hours? I don't know about that. Please verify it and remove me from the blacklist. --Zyma (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

See above. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 20:33, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you should change your edit notice

Hi Cyberpower. Maybe you should change your edit notice; it currently states we are to go to MediaWiki to try to get white-listed. They don't want us posting there regarding our inability to look at the User Analysis Tool, and we're being directed back here. Diff of MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist -- Diannaa (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That applies to the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Not the tool.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:36, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

The Fixing-while-eating Award

This barnstar is richly deserved ;) Sarah777 (talk) 20:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 00:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis Tool suggestion

Would it be possible for it to list more than just the top 10 most edited articles by a user or allow each user to define how many can be displayed? Spidey104 14:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Already planned.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

this again

Cyberbot I (or the page) needs a thump, hasn't been clerking WP:RFPP for a while and I'm not seeing anything out of place on the page to prevent it. tutterMouse (talk) 06:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed with this edit.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Supercounter translate

Hi Cyberpower678,
Is it possible to translate https://tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/ ? If yes, I'd like to translate the interface to Dutch. :) Southparkfan 12:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

There are plans to support multiple languages, but to make development easier and less time consuming, I have placed it last on the todo list. I let you know when the translation interface is ready.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Dead Parrot?

It may be just me but your tool appears to be as dead as Basil Fawlty's parrot! Sarah777 (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I maintain zillions of tools. You'll need to be more specific.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The edit count one - the one at the bottom of you user "contributions" page. Sarah777 (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

It's just you. It works for me.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

It says - "High Repication Lag:Oh dear. The database appears to be lagging behind. I won't be able to present you with information newer than 126562 seconds."

That's 35 hours and counting...each time I try it I just get more seconds added - HELP!Sarah777 (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

It's not an issue with my tool. It's an issue with the database.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Please excuse my technical idiocy, but which database is involved? I thought all these tools had been migrated away from Toolserver, but the only discussion of lags I can see at Village Pump (Technical) appears to be about the Toolserver. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The database clusters on the labs server. The only way the tool can run properly.—cyberpower _Online^{Happy Easter} 13:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Nit police

The user analysis tool message:

High Repication Lag:

should be

High Replication Lag:

--S Philbrick (Talk) 13:49, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis for Drzewianin

Hi:) Can you add me detailed information in bg.wikipedia (statistics) - [2]. Drzewianin (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC).

No, he can't. As it says on the tool page: To opt in please create User:Drzewianin/EditCounterOptIn.js on your local wiki or create User:Drzewianin/EditCounterGlobalOptIn.js on meta.wikimedia.org. — HHHIPPO 19:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

User name in 'User Analysis Tool'.

Hello, 'Cyberpower678';

In your subject tool, I replaced the default user name (Jimbo Wales) by my user name (Pdebee) and the tool returned an error message (in red), stating that it needed a project name.

The default data in your 'project name' field is 'en.wikipedia.org', which is where my username is registered; therefore, I didn't think I needed to change that.

Thinking that, maybe, your tool needs the fully qualified user pagename, I entered 'User:Pdebee' in the user name field (even though the default example isn't displayed as 'User:Jimbo Wales') but it made no difference.

At your convenience, please would you kindly let me know what I need to type in your two fields in order to obtain the usual stats? Thank you very much, in advance.

With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee. (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Cyberpower678. My experience is identical to that above and I would welcome the same guidance. Brianboulton (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Those are empty placeholders, showing an example of what needs to be typed in. They don't carry any value when submitting the form.

Hello again, 'Cyberpower678'; [I assume it was you who provided the previous, unsigned reply?]

Thank you for your prompt reply. It was clear to me that the default data ("Jimbo Wales") shown in the 'User Name' field was a placeholder, as you confirmed.

What wasn't clear to me, as I explained in my earlier submission above, is why entering either my username ("Pdebee") or my fully qualified username ("User:Pdebee") caused the tool to tell me it needed a "project name to work on".

However, since the tool is no longer behaving like this today and is now working fine, I conclude that the problem was a temporary glitch, or that you must have applied a fix behind the scenes.

In any case, thank you.

With kind regards;

Patrick. ツ Pdebee. (talk) 15:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Supercount

I don't know if this is the right place to ask about it, but the supercount edit counter returns 404 Not Found nginx/1.5.0 whenever I attempt to use it. Yesterday, it was working fine; also, the day before yesterday, and a few days before that, the counter wasn't able to display up-to-date information. Prior to that, it has been working fine; all of the problems I have been having are recent. I don't know if you already explained the problem in an obvious location and I just haven't seen it or something similar, but the edit counter apparently was created by you, so I thought I would ask here. Thank you for any responses. Dustin (talk) 00:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Try now.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 00:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the rapid response; you fixed the problem rather quickly! The edit counter works again! Dustin (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Feel better soon! AmaryllisGardener ^talk 20:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:33, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Get well soon!

--Hedonil (talk) 21:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm feeling better already.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:33, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

missed tagging

IIRC, you can't see the blacklist log, so here it goes. Cyberbot II fails to tag 6 articles. I've been trying to resolve that, but maybe you can figure out why it fails, and solve the problem in the code. It is a bit annoying to see them back every so many hours:

01:02, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Elena Sheynina by attempting to add my.mail.ru.
00:38, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Islam in Luxembourg by attempting to add server14.kproxy.com.
00:30, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Port of Belfast by attempting to add belfast.ports-guides.com.
00:26, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Chris Bell (politician) by attempting to add www.political.com.
00:26, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Gobstopper by attempting to add www.qwiki.com.
00:24, 23 April 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Batik by attempting to add www.samuibatik.com.

I've resolved the second one, still it is curious that also there Cyberbot II can not re-add a link that is already there. Maybe you don't get the whole link due to an unexpected delimiter, or you de/encode a character in the string, and you thereby change the link a bit and therefore MediaWiki thinks it is a different and new link? Anyway, no hurries, we have enough requests at the whitelist ;-) (I am more interested in the other request a bit up). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:28, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

(heh, that did not work, I had to remove http:// from the front of the link). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:28, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. Interesting. I have been seeing Peachy throw edit errors, but I assumed the links were removed sometime after spambot reprocessed the buffer after the extensive scans it does.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:33, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Add urwiki link

Hi :) Would you please add urdu wikipedia link to Template:Wikipedia languages in More than 50,000 articles wikipedias:? Thanks. Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 08:55, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't have the rights to.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 11:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Ohh, np. has been added by another admin. I would like to set permission on my tool account on tool labs, when I set it, get error of permission denied. So what should I do? Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 11:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what permission you're trying to set. Explaining to me exactly what you are doing will help me to better help you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:04, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I am trying to set permission on my account so that only me and my service group users can access the account. Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 13:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

You should not ever allow anyone else access to your account. Every account is to be used by one person only.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:58, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Okeh, How to set permission for this? Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry!

Okay, i'm sorry! God bless you! :) --187.56.58.236 (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, sorry, sorry! Please do not block me!

I'm sorry, at the time you warned me the first time I had edited all of these articles! --187.56.58.236 (talk) 15:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

User analysis tool in IE9

Hi, unfortunately the colour used for describing the meaning of the pie chart segments seems to be not appropriately chosen. At least I can't read anything ("black on black") when IE9 is used as browser. There are no issues with Firefox though. Can you have a look please? Thanks and regards --RonaldH (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I have no access to IE9 and the description is way too vague to even help me.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 11:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you cyberpower678

You certainly did a Nice Work and very useful for me. On fr.wikipedia I am Lepetitlord. Best regards. (Let's see what happens here if i put my signature : --Lepetitlord (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2014 (UTC)) (woooww!!!)

If you are referring to the edit counter, then thank you. Otherwise, I have no clue what you're talking about, but thank you anyways. :p—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit Count for GLAMs

I like the new edit count!!! Can it be adapted for GLAM projects with known participants (like those users declared on a GLAM's project page)? This would be really helpful for GLAM institutions in encouraging and documenting their collaboration with Wikipedia, especially since institutions like statistics and monthly reports to measure outcomes. TeriEmbrey (talk) 16:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Can you possibly provide me a link of the wiki. I tried to find a GLAM wiki but couldn't.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:34, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Pritzker's GLAM link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Pritzker TeriEmbrey (talk) 18:46, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

So GLAM is a wikiproject? I fail to see what I need to adapt to allow members of GLAM to use the edit counter. Perhaps you can elaborate?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:48, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Is it possible to have the Edit Counter count all user edits for the GLAM project pages linked with the GLAM tag and give a pie chart of pie pieces for each user name? Sometimes participants in a project also edit Wikipedia pages outside the project and we would want to exclude those pages from the total. I hope that helps to clarify. TeriEmbrey (talk) 14:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Ahh. I can make a separate tool which I would call, "Special User Analysis", where you can configure on wiki, how it operates.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! If you could do that, it would be really useful to the GLAMs. TeriEmbrey (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

LinkSummary-template maintenance

Hi '678! Hope this finds you well. Maybe something that can be tackled with a bot/AWB.

We are using the {{LinkSummary}} (and its redirect-templates) to 'track' and examine domains in discussions related to spam (mainly on WT:WPSPAM and the black/whitelists, to a lesser extend also on AN/I, AN, RS/N, EL, EL/N). We use it for research (whois etc.) and for tracking (where did we discuss this link before).

That template takes as a parameter only the domain (so the link, stripping of 'http://', everything behind the first '/', '?' and also of 'www.' (if the link starts with it - sometimes 'www3.'; COIBot/LiWa3 internally remove 'www\.' and 'www\d\.'). Sometimes it is also nice to cut down links to the basic domain (if blah.example.com is discussed, then having example.com as well is sometimes informative).

People who are not regularly on those pages, sometimes don't get that (RTFM and such), which means that often we have to .. repair the tracks:

remove www.
remove the path from the domain (note that I then put the whole domain on the next line)

and, more difficult:

Also, I prefer to have the {{LinkSummary}} preceded with a asterisk on an own line (that could also be done with template-coding - though many are now preceded with an asterisk which may interfere).

Could you write a bot for this, at least for the black/whitelist and WT:WPSPAM. At least the first 2 would be great. Thanks for thinking about it. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Should it go through the archives and fix them as necessary so the tracking will stay consistent? It would certainly be an interesting challenge.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:43, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

The templates in the archives are generally fixed (I regularly go through the page before sections get archived, and make the tracks correct). Only the archives predating the LinkSummary template would simply (obviously) not have them (though it would be nice, that might be quite a challenge to put those in there, those would almost all be cases like the latter three examples). I guess this would be a 'once every so many hours' - check to see if there are malformed ones (or link it to the live-feed and do it a couple of minutes after the edit while giving the signature bot a chance to sign if needed). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Can that template be reduced to template protection?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I guessed it - done. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Are you thinking what I was also considering: LUA? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I have absolutely 0 experience with LUA. :/ But I suppose it could be done. But I was also, considering creating a clerking bot for the request pages over there. Also that template is transcluded into User:John Reaves/PT which has cascading full protection. That means template editors such as myself can't edit it. :/

I think I solved the cascade problem .. let me check. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 20:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Clerking would be nice - moving 'handled' requests for some time to the 'handled' section, before archiving them, e.g. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 20:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Also regarding the clerking on the pages, you may be interested in this request - which should handling listing and de-listing of domains faster and easier, hopefully speeding up both blacklisting and de-listing requests. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 20:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Clerking

Regarding the clerking, I was considering that we need a custom archiving bot for this (the black and whitelist talkpages, the XLinkBot revertlist talkpage). The common practice is that when a discussion is closed (link added, removed or denied, whatever) that that discussion is semi-archived to the 'handled requests' section. That can be done within 24 hours. It then stays there for a certain time (1-2 weeks) and then is really archived. Clerking could also mean that if links are blacklisted (or were already blacklisted and the requester did not notice) that the thread could be closed ASAP with 'already {{added}}' (or similar). Same goes for whitelist requests on links that are not blacklisted ('{{not done}} - not blacklisted'), and for de-blacklisting requests for links that are not locally, but globally blacklisted ('{{defermetablack}} for global de-listing, {{deferwhite}} for whitelisting a specific link or the whole domain'). The discussions and troubleshooting sections should be archived according to yet another rule (after a month or so). This may lead to a whole bunch of settings at the top of the page. Thoughts? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 17:23, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Also keeping up a 'admin backlog template' if there are requests that have not been handled after xx days .. Not that that would speed up things. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 17:25, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

It would most certainly be a complex bot, more complex than spambot. I could program it, but I will need some time, to do so.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Time, what time .. all I see you do is chatting in #wikimedia-labs .. ;-). Deadlines, 678, deadlines. I want this by yesterday, I am already waiting for 2 days .. :-p. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 20:59, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Yea. I've also got a clerking bot on my workshop for the ACC interface as well. I've been working on it for quite some time, ensuring that it won't blow up the interface.

Revert former advertisement

Hello, you reverted my advertisement so I modified it so that it was not an advertisement anymore. If it still bothers you then delete the part of the text that says that people can participate in a study. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:03, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I felt like that statement is diverting the attention away from the RfC. But that one sentence revision, makes it sound much less like an advertisement. Could you perhaps kill the last 3 sentences?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh, wait, you made the tool in the RfC? Have you talked to the researchers presenting the tool to which I linked? You two have competing products and presumably would be seeking the same funding sources if funding ever happened. Obviously they have funding - are you paid to do what you do? Have you talked with those guys? Could I introduce you?

Yes, I was hoping to divert attention from the RfC because the RfC does not have a lot of meaning if it is about banning one tool when others are available and more developed to do the same thing. When I spoke with you I thought you were just some guy - you made the RfC tool, right? Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:14, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I made it. No, I'm not paid to do it, and because this tool is the officially linked tool from the contributions, it carries some merit. Also this tool will have more data aggregation abilities in the near future.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:20, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

How would you feel about my having the other team contact you to explore options for collaboration? I expect they would like an official link too, and their tool has some really impress graphical polish to it. Let me remove the link to what they are doing as you requested... Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:23, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I took interest in this when I found out they were supporting WikiProject Medicine. They are also from my university - I have more interest in what they are doing but as I said, no affiliation and I only know them because I took their survey. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Tools_for_spying_on_your_Wiki_friends. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Can I see the tool?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 15:37, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I sent you a link by email because to share the link here could disrupt the research. However, perhaps I ought not to have even done that, as now you cannot participate in the research if you wished to do so. I had a nice experience going through they steps they suggested to me, so you are not getting the full experience, but even so the tool as it is displayed now is useful to me. Check the legend to see what is going on. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)