User talk:Shubinator/Archive 28

User

Talk

Scripts, Templates, & Bots

Contributions

Email

Awards

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Shubinator. 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 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 35

A tag has been placed on File:First Class Restaurant of the SS Kaiser Wilhelm II.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Sphaeromimus.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 20:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Shubinator, I hope you are around ... the bot did not update, and I can't see any mistake with my use of the formula this time (which isn't to say there isn't one). I will update the Main Page manually. Eek! Help, please! Yngvadottir (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

The required image protection was not performed. The problem was reported at User:DYKUpdateBot/Errors in a 14:05 (UTC) message from the bot. The bot's refusal to load an unprotected image is an intentional feature to prevent vandals from sneaking inappropriate images on to the Main page. --Allen3 ^talk 17:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Allen3's correct. Looks like the image is still unprotected, and now on the Main Page. I'll run over and protect it. Shubinator (talk) 18:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

[edit conflict] I see. Before doing the manual update, I had checked and seen cascade protection listed on the image page, but then I remembered the bot errors page and saw that edit; only the bot overwrote it after the scheduled update time with an error message about the image for the next queue. In case the bot had merely moved on to the next scheduled update rather than rechecking and seeing that cascade protection had belatedly happened, I left a panicky message on PumpkinSky's talkpage and he protected the image at Commons. It turns out my suspicion was correct and the bot overwrites error messages without their having become no longer valid. Eek. I think I need to look at an example to see what cascade protection actually looks like when it has happened. In case this happens again and I am again the first one to notice. But it would be nice if the error messages were not overwritten but became a list if earlier ones were still valid. ......... I thought PumpkinSky protected it on Commons?! Yngvadottir (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Not quite true. If the bot encounters errors during crediting (or in general during the update), it will wipe the error later even if it hasn't been resolved. If the bot encounters an error in its pre-update checks, it will wait until the error has been resolved. Let's go through this update step-by-step.

• File:Păstorel postcard.jpg was the image in queue 2. Half an hour before the update, DYKUpdateBot performed its pre-update checks, and noticed the image in the next set (queue 2) wasn't protected. It then edited /Errors.
• You noticed the bot hadn't updated, and manually updated DYK. During this process, you changed Template:Did you know/Queue/Next since the next set is now queue 3.
• The bot then performed a pre-update check after you had changed the next queue number but before you had reset the time. So the bot did a pre-update check on queue 3, then spat out an error about the queue 3 image.
• You then left a message on PumpkinSky's talk page about the bot's error messages. He went over to /Errors, saw the error message about the image in queue 3, and protected the image in queue 3 at Commons. However, he didn't realize the image that was in queue 2 (and now on the Main Page) was also unprotected.

Long story short the bot doesn't validate DYK sets *already on the Main Page*, only the next set. Hopefully that was clear...let me know if you have questions. (Oh, and if you want to see what cascade protection looks like, head over to File:Păstorel postcard.jpg; I didn't manually protect it.) Shubinator (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks like there was another element of confusion: the cascade protection for File:Păstorel postcard.jpg was delayed. This is a known issue, but unlikely to be fixed any time soon (it's in the Mediawiki code). I'm guessing File:Păstorel postcard.jpg was listed at Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en, which is why you thought it was cascade protected. Cascade protection can take a while to kick in though. How do you tell if an image is actually cascade-protected? Try to edit it. If it's cascade-protected, you'll see a pink warning message. And trust the bot when it says an image isn't protected. Worst case scenario, the bot is wrong, and you wasted a few minutes by manually protecting it. Best case scenario, the bot is right, and you didn't put an unprotected file on the Main Page. (And I haven't seen it be wrong about image protection in a *long* time.) Shubinator (talk) 19:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to say; I was aware cascade protection is often delayed, but I was acting over an hour after the update should have happened. And asked PumpkinSky after I'd seen he had fixed the Queue 3 image on Commons (hence it was likely he was still editing and would see my message). OK, next time I will try to edit it. I've been going by whether it says cascadeprotection. Thanks again - my fault, no question about it. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

No worries; no harm done. If a Commons admin isn't around, you can upload a copy of the image to English Wikipedia under the same filename and manually protect it here. Shubinator (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Caylua.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Zmajski most-Ljubljana.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

The bot hasn't run in the past two hours, despite article promotions and the like that occurred during the period that should have triggered a revised list of numbers of approved hooks per date. Can you please give it a tap to get it going again? Many thanks. (I know we don't say this often enough, but thank you so much for the bot and the listings it provides: it's a wonderful thing to have.) BlueMoonset (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Away from my computer :( But I'll start it up once I'm back. And it's good to know the bots are appreciated :) Shubinator (talk) 21:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Whenever you get back to your computer will be great. The timing is what it is. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Done :) Shubinator (talk) 00:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The bot appears to have stopped right after the new day began (according to UTC, that is). It may or may not have something to do with the end of summer time in Europe, but it has been over four hours since the last update. Many thanks for anything you can do to get the bot back to work. (Did it sneak out to do some early trick or treating?) BlueMoonset (talk) 04:44, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

And three minutes later, it ran. Of course, it could be that there was just no activity to cause the thing to wake up in those four hours. If that's the case, my apologies for the false alarm. Either way, it's great to have a new list of available approved hooks by day... BlueMoonset (talk) 04:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the bot log shows the bot didn't find anything new to report. No worries :) Shubinator (talk) 05:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)