This is an archive of past discussions. 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.
Please stop removing messages entirely. If something's wrong with the archiving code, then don't archive, but you are presumably not authorized to remove messages without archiving. --NE214:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what page are you talking about, so if I were to make a wild guess, someone compacted the template into one line (removed linebreaks), which is exactly against the instructions. Or, someone left the archiving target blank, which is a legitimate way of automatic removing without archiving (everything stays in the page history, so you are not obliged to archive anywhere). One way or the other, bugs me. Don't like it? Don't use it. I'm not getting paid for this job. Миша1315:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not using the archivebot, but a talk page I have on my watchlist is, and I've been reverting your bot's edits as vandalism. Can you show me where your bot is approved to remove messages? Thank you. --NE216:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just fix or remove the archiving code if it bothers you. It is not Misza's fault that someone set up the page in question incorrectly and/or in a way you don't like. (I'd do it myself, but you haven't specified the page) --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is it the bot that fails gracelessly or is it the users? Agree with the above from Misza. IF you don't want the archiving, simply remove the relevant code and the problem is solved. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're not understanding. I am a third party here. One editor added the archiving code to a project talk page. Another later combined it all on one line, without realizing that this would screw up the bot (how is anyone to know unless they are the one adding the code?). Now I notice, three months later, that the bot has been misbehaving. Sure, I could fix the code, but I'd rather teach the bot to fish, so next time it won't need someone like me to realize it's out of fish. --NE222:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you caught the issue in two days...oops misread history Perhaps MiszaBot could log archiving to /dev/null unless it's explicitly set that way. *shrug*. no fish for the bot, but i left a trout for the next user who tries to muck about with the page code. –xenotalk22:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not. I'm extremely busy in real life and other projects and don't have time to develop this bot further. I have a side project of implementing a MediaWiki bot framework from scratch, in Java, and possibly rewrite the archiving bot to use that, but that'd be a matter of months to come. Anyone with knowledge of Python can however develop the current bot as it's part of the pywikipedia framework. Миша1318:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Misza,
I've registered a sock account for making certain types of edits at certain types of computers (User:Fox) and I would like to be able to archive posts on the sock's talk page (User talk:Fox) to my own archives (subpages of User:Foxy Loxy) so that I can keep things all in the same place.
So; I can haz bot key? ;)
Thanks, ~fl09:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't aware my sig could goof up the archive bot. Is there anyway to fix this so I can have the same sig (I kinda like it) and so everything works properly? - Neutralhomer (talk) 23:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Misza, I did indeed see your fix a day or two ago, and I seemed to have totally forgot when leaving this followup. Can I claim old age? ;> –xenotalk16:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how difficult it is to set up bots, but I was wondering if you could set up a bot like MiszaBot III to work at simple wikipedia. Griffinofwales (talk) 20:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User:Misza13/Archives/2009/05 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Misza13/Archives/2009/05's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Misza13/Archives/2009/05!
Btw, something about the subst: in your template doesn't seem to work as expected - it's producing more wikicode junk than I guess you wanted it to. Cheers, Миша1309:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category rename
Together with User:Rich Farmbrough we are doing a little standarisation. In connection with this we would like to rename all dated categories in Category:Wikipedia files with unknown source from "as of" to "from". This might make working with files tagged before 24 May 2009 a little more complicated as they might show up in any of the two categories if the file was tagged by transclusion in stead of substitution, but that should be a matter of two weeks at most, while files tagges from 24 May 2009 onwards will be in the new category. You might want to reflect this on User:MiszaBot/Trackers/CAT:NS. Please contact me on my talkpage if any problems. Thanks, Debresser (talk) 19:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My bot should be able to track them both even at the same time if required, but do give me a note on the final decision regardless, please. Миша1308:59, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
MiszaBot on other wikis
I've seen MiszaBot doing archiving over at meta, and it seems it's chugging away on a few other projects as well. Would it be possible for you to get it running over at mediawiki.org?? One doesn't realise how amazingly valuable auto-archiving bots are until you go somewhere where there aren't any :DHappy‑melon21:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! One thing more: the Support desk archives are, I've just learnt, not subpages of the respective desk pages, they're in a separate tree. IIRC MiszaBot usually demands a special key to allow archives to be not subpages; is it possible to disable this for mediawiki.org? If not, can we have a batch of keys please? Happy‑melon21:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, someone has just pointed out a bug: in this diff, at the section marked "line 382", the bot removes a section defined inside <pre>...</pre> tags, removing the header, some of the content of the tag, the closing </pre>, and the rest of the actual thread. Presumably that's not a mw.org-specific bug, but general. Thanks, Happy‑melon10:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. It's an uncommon bug caused by the fact that the bot does not have a true wikitext parser (I don't know if one even exists, except the one built into MediaWiki). Replacing the equal signs (even only the first one) with their equivalen HTML entities should do the trick in those cases.