User talk:ClueBot Commons
False positives and false negativesIf you believe that ClueBot NG has missed an edit that is vandalism, again do not report it here. ClueBot is unable to catch all vandalism. Just revert the edit and warn the editor.
The current status of ClueBot NG is: Running
The current status of ClueBot III is: Running
Praise should go on the praise page. Barnstars and other awards should go on the awards page.
Use the "new section" button at the top of this page to add a new section. Use the [edit] link above each section to edit that section.
This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III.
The ClueBots' owner or someone else who knows the answer to your question will reply on this page.
Archives |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4166.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
| ClueBots | |
|---|---|
| ClueBot NG/Anti-vandalism · ClueBot II/ClueBot Script |  |
| ClueBot III/Archive · Talk page for all ClueBots |
 | Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. |
About ClueBot III JustArchiveThis
Why the default are set to |format=Y/F when format= %%i is better according to the documentation?
Also can I to switch to numbered formats later? Or it's not possible because it will break the bot? - Ivan530 (Talk) 14:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because someone added that comment to the documentation without updating User:ClueBot III/JustArchiveThis. But I prefer dated archives, myself, because they just make more sense to me, but it's a debated issue. From a technical perspective, it's (slightly) better for the bot and the Wikipedia servers to use dated archives since then the bot doesn't have to "find" the right archive by checking the sizes of archives, it just knows based on the date. This isn't a big deal, but when it comes to defaults for a popular bot where most people won't care one way or another, it's better generally that the default be the more efficient option. — Naomi Amethyst 23:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
)
ClueBot-related statements
I have three statements about ClueBot Commons.
- For some time, I have wondered if we should reinstate ClueBot so it works alongside ClueBot NG in finding and reverting vandalism. It has been on a WikiBreak for a long time, and I wondered if we should reinstate it and improve upon ClueBot so there would be two anti-vandalism bots working concurrently, similar to how we have ClueBot III and Lowercase sigmabot III archiving pages.
- When should an administrator switch ClueBot II/Run to "True"? This bot has not been used since 2014, and I have wondered when ClueBot II will be back in service.
- I am interested in helping review ClueBot NG's dataset to help identify vandalism and constructive edits in its corpus and to learn machine learning. I signed up for helping review the dataset, but my account is pending approval.
Z. Patterson (talk) 03:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi,
- Regarding : "Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kannappa (film), you may be blocked from editing.
- Your edits have been
- automatically
- marked as
- vandalism
- and have been
- automatically
- reverted
- . The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism:
- Kannappa (film)
- was
- changed
- by
- Aaranreddy
- (u)
- (t) ANN scored at 0.956748 on 2025-02-06T15:36:14+00:00"
- All changes i have done as per movie cast only. I am one of the person in this film. removed persons are not part of the film so we have removed as per the instruction by the production team only.
- Aaranreddy (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)