User talk:Chris G/Archives/2009/August

Hello, You deleted two of my pics that I posted on the site. The only problem is they were pics that I took myself, therefore no copyright practice should be applicable. Please can you look into this and reinstate them where possible. --Cexycy (talk) 19:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Which license would you like to release them under (e.g. {{PD-self}}, {{GFDL-self}}, {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} etc - more info) ? --Chris 10:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see this thread. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Chris, if I may provide an executive summary. Your AntiAbuseBot has been functioning exceptionally. Apparently, you need to file a re-certification BRFA per a statement by the closing BAG member. Best regards, –xeno^talk 19:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Hm, I had previously thought that AntiAbuseBot always left an unblock request, to make sure that all blocks placed were vetted by hand at some point; Delicious carbuncle has pointed out at least two recent-ish situations where that doesn't seem to have happened, 80.179.192.75 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 84.105.147.100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). – Luna Santin (talk) 08:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
  • The bot was running supervised by me, so I was reviewing the blocks making that step unnecessary. If I ever have it running full auto again I would re enable the notices. --Chris 09:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Ah, gotcha. If it's not tooooo much trouble, it might avoid future confusion to indicate that somehow (sorry if I missed it). Thanks for the reply, either way. – Luna Santin (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

There was dispute over the picture I have uploaded. I have put a licence on it. Is it fine you may even verify the licence. I hope it is ok. If there is a problem please update me at the earliest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camcool (talk • contribs) 22:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you please try and wait more than 6 minutes for a reply before blocking administrators, and creating block logs for them? A better thing to do would have been to recreate User talk:BD2412 so that he would get a 'new messages' notification, rather than just blocking an admin without discussing it with them first. You shouldn't block anyone without attempting to discuss with them first, but that BD2412 is an admin just adds to that. Prodego ^talk 15:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Um, I did try to discuss it with him first. Also bear in mind that at the edit rate he was going at 6 minutes equals about 175 edits. If you edit at bot like speeds and don't respond to concerns on your talk page expect to be blocked, admin or not. --Chris 04:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the <source> tag now that I know about it! @harej 10:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, how do you change your Anti-Vandalism task force status to green?--David - (Wikipedia Vandal Fighter). 00:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure anymore - the system used to use the User:StatusBots (which are now dead), but I'm not sure how it runs now. --Chris 10:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

The issues I still need to resolve with the full-date unlinking bot is that it needs to be able to check for API errors and edit conflicts. Is there something from within your API framework that would allow me to do such things? @harej 05:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I've just implemented a quick hack for edit conflict detection - it works like so:

// get the page content - note the true value at the end - this enables the edit conflict detection
$content = $wiki->getpage($page,null,true);
// do something with the content
$content .= 'hello world';
// edit the page - once again notice the true value at the end - this enables the conflict detection
$error_checking = $wiki->edit($page,$content,'Edit summary',false,true,null,true);
// now we check for errors - this also covers your api parsing question a bit
if ($error_checking['error']['code']=='editconflict') {
    echo 'Edit conflict detected....';
}

Most of my framework's functions return a direct api result which you have to parse yourself (the api manual may be useful - also print_r($error_checking) can be used when debugging to see what the api returns on a specific error) although there are a few functions that return false on an api error - the return type of a function should be documented in the comment above it.

Neither the edit conflict or error checking situations are ideal, but hopefully they will be improved when I finish my rewrite of the framework. --Chris 10:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. At what point in the script should I insert that? (I would substitute "$wiki" for "$objwiki", however, to maintain consistency). @harej 17:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

this should do it. Don't forget to update to the latest version of my framework or else it won't work. --Chris 08:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

This looks great. What do you recommend for other API errors? @harej 20:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)