User talk:Ladsgroup/Archive 1

Really sorry about this

I've blocked this bot for 10 minutes for flooding recent changes. I'm going to give it the autopatroller flag in a second, but please throttle it. Was going wayyy too fast. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 09:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

In retrospect, I should've autopatrolled first, and then only blocked if it was still an issue. Editing's slow this time of day, so all the edits showed up in Special:RecentChanges all together. Anyways, sorry for any problems. This was the first block I've done, so it was pretty much a given I'd screw it up. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 09:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry for running this fast, i put throttle but it was a little and i was doing test edit for the approval Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/Dexbot I'm soLadsgroup (talk) 09:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Someone needs to make a bot which retroactively patrols edits by autopatrollers/bots... Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:34, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

&bot=1

Hey, Dexbot edit's aren't being flagged as bot and are showing up in recentchanges. Please fix this :) Legoktm (talk) 11:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I did r11268 to fix it, sorry. Amir (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Record label

Hello, record label can't be Wiley (example edit), because Wiley is a rapper, not a record label. --Stryn (talk) 08:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, This is really really weird, I'm working on finding out how this bug could happenAmir (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I ran it on the Q890 (890? really?? :D) and it worked correctly so i assure you the bug is not from my bot I thought the bug is garbage variable remained from the last edit but I checked and Wiley has not been added closer than half of hour to the edit, anyway I rewrite the code and I run it again Amir (talk) 11:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Import bug

Hi, on Q5003902 (music album) the bot linked to a rugby player instead of the musician of the same name (fixed now). Does it not use the actual linked page but rather the link title? --Magnus Manske (talk) 10:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

the code is:

    R=re.compile("\|\s*?Artist\s*?=\s*?\[\[(.+?)(?:\||\]\])")
    search=R.findall(text[:1000])
    if search:
        if isinstance(search,list):
            artist=search[0]
            try:
                artist=str(artist)
            except:
                pass
            else:
                if not "#" in artist:
                    DO=True
                    for claim in items['claims']:
                        if claim['m'][1]==175:
                            DO=False
                    if DO:
                        try:
                            data.editclaim(175, artist ,refs={("imported from", "English Wikipedia")})
                        except:
                            pass

I think the problem is happened by changing the main PWB framework, The main code I've written (r11209) uses string as an item in the function of editclaim but the code is changed (I don't know by who) and accepts int as an item, so when i ran code and gave string to the function, WD's API considered it as a raw value and changed it to an item which did it very wrongly Amir (talk) 11:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Bot speed

Could you pleas look at Wikidata talk:Bots#Bot speed and maybe change your bot so it only makes one edit per second (60 edits/minute). --Sk!d (talk) 18:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

bot editions

Your bot is making editions with errors. Q7993590. --Kizar (talk) 12:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I stopped bot, I'm working on debugging it and solving the past wrong editsLadsgroup (talk) 14:12, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I wrote a patch in order to fix it, and I gonna write a code to find wrong past editsLadsgroup (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Wrong on "All Apologies"

Q891196 links to Wikipedia articles in English and French for the song ("chanson"), not the double A side single All Apologies/Rape Me. At Eng Wiki, "All Apologies/Rape Me" is merely a redirect to the article for the song "Rape Me," too. I fixed changed the statement from single to song at "All Apologies" but I imagine this may be a wider problem? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The problem comes from using w:Template:infbox single in the article of Q891196, I mean w:All Apologies, the article in the English wikipedia must use w:Template:Infobox song instead of singleAmir (talk) 12:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Well, I guess this underscores the need for real live breathing editors here at WD, after all. Short of making the wiki perfect, bots can only do so much and we need to tweak. Anyway, I fixed it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

IMDb codes

Please insert trailing zeroes while setting IMDb identifier: see this. --Ricordisamoa 20:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

P.S. SamoaBot was importing IMDb identifier as well, but it overlapped with Dexbot, so I temporarily stopped it. --Ricordisamoa 20:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll work on that, by adding this code (If you're using PWB) you can simply avoid overlapping:

    DO=True
    for claim in items['claims']:
        if claim['m'][1]==345:
            DO=False
    if not DO:
        continue

Thank you for reporting Amir (talk) 09:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not using Pywikipediabot at the moment (JavaScript) but I'm planning to swich in the next weeks. --Ricordisamoa 17:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Wrong performer for Beach Boys albums

Dexbot has set the performer property of quite a few Beach Boys albums to The Beach Boys (album), where it should have used The Beach Boys (band). See for example the album Little Deuce Coupe. I changed it for a few albums, but it probably is faster, if you let your bot correct it, since the Beach Boys have quite a lot of albums in their discography. --FelGru (talk) 22:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Same with Kotiteollisuus (album). And how performer for album can be the same album (=same item)? --Stryn (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

This bug was caused by the same way as this. The main reason was changing the wikipedia.py by another dev, It won't happen again and I'll write a code to fix old ones ASAP. Amir (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

A new bot list

Hi there! Per a request I have been working on a new informative bot list (that has secretly been hidden under the current list at Wikidata:List_of_bots. I think I am finished and it would be great if every botop (including you) could add your bot to the new list. I have added Addbot already and tried to make the template simple! Goodluck and if you have any problems get in touch on my talk page! ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 20:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll do that soon Amir (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

wrong on Q5705934

The Persian Wiki entry for Ivanhoe آیوانهو is the same as Ivanhoe . Can you fix it ?--2.176.233.250 16:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure, The item will be deleted soon Amir (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Invalid Commons links

Hi, please this edit. This category is not valid for Q1051675, the category is relevant for Q669895. Please check another bot edits and correct same problems. -- — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 18:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, see w:Lunokhod 2. Linking to the Lunokhod program is used in the article. It's not unrelated (in my opinion) I don't think it's a bug Amir (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

There are different traditions in different areas of mediawiki projects. Somethere linking to more general Commons category is acceptable, somethere - no. But Wikidata is common for all these areas. This is the reason because it must be more strong than any of local Wikipedias. Please do not link item to more general Commons category. To check this situation you can use iwiki back links in Commons. Another sample: [1]. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Another problem: [2]. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 19:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll do something about the both tomorrow. The latter is really annoying and of course improbable to happen Amir (talk) 23:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Wikimedia Commons

Hi. I noticed you are importing Commonscat links from en:wikipedia as Property:P373 to WikiData. Please give short reports about your steps, advancement and intents at the page Wikidata:Wikimedia Commons in order to inform all users who are awaiting interconnection between Wikipedias and Commons or who are participating in related processes. Thank You. --ŠJů (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

You added my name but I'll write more about it on that page Amir (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

wrong artist link

Hi. I think this was already pointed out above but it hasn't been fixed as far as I can tell. Dexbot has made numerous mistakes when assigning a performer to a song or album. It's quite common for bands to have eponymous albums but this leads to two items with the same title and Dexbot has picked the wrong one in a number of cases. For instance [3]. I know that this might be non-trivial to fix but fixing it should be a priority. Best, Pichpich (talk) 14:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

hi, yes it has been told #Import bug and the problem was caused by changing of my commits by another dev. I wrote a code in order to fix it. It worked (example) but I assume there is bug in the debugging code so this has not been fixed. I'll check and tell you again :) Amir (talk) 15:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

There was bug, I fixed it and now it's working :) [4] [5] [6] [7] I really thank you for noticing persistence of the bug Amir (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok good. Is the bot going to review its edits systematically? For instance I just found another one [8] and I don't know if it's worth reporting further problems. Best, Pichpich (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Here are more: [9] Pichpich (talk) 21:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Be patient. My bot is working (see this and search remove) all of wrong edits will be eased by the next week (or sooner) Amir (talk) 07:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Bug report

Hi. I think there is a mistake here. see [10]. Thieol (talk) 04:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I saw that and I wrote a code to remove them, I'll run the code again Amir (talk) 07:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I wrote a patch to prevent happening this again Amir (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I fixed one or two edits like Q5270459 that appeared on Constraint_violations/P345. You might want to check that list. --  Docu  at 05:29, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

That was GIGO, w:Dial M. the link is incorrect Amir (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

If the bot would check the value against a regex such as "(tt|nm|ch|co)\d\d\d\d\d\d\d", we could avoid it being propagated. --  Docu  at 06:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I did something like that but the bot checked only tt in the title. Amir (talk) 08:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

en:Template:GCM

"GCM" on Q1432815 seems to come from that template on en_wiki. --  Docu  at 16:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh boy, OK. I'll do a check to see how many items have more than one IATA code. sorry for happening this Amir (talk) 05:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems fairly limited. Have a look at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P238#.22Unique_value.22_violations. --  Docu  at 07:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Inheritance of taxon properties

Please read this. --Ricordisamoa 17:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I wrote something Amir (talk) 05:45, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, would you mind stopping your bot adding taxon rank properties until the discussion at Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inheritance of taxon ranks is closed? That would be appreciated. --Izno (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Done :) Amir (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Mammals kingdom

I come to such errors almost every day. What's wrong? Infovarius (talk) 17:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe that Dexbot should correct most of Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P75. Infovarius (talk) 19:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm reaaly sorry. I'll write a code and fix asap but at first I want to know where the hell this bug comes from!Amir (talk) 20:54, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read...

...these comments. It is not wise to let your bot adding date of birth (P569) and date of death (P570) to items until all raised issues have been resolved. Thanks, --Ricordisamoa 06:00, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I stopped my bot, please inform me when all of issues has been resolved Amir (talk) 09:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Date values with spaces

Hi, some of the dates that was added by this bot was malformed as they contained a space character inside the time value. Two examples:

• http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q441536&diff=48523994&oldid=48523992
• http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1825747&diff=48577191&oldid=45206040

Wikidata shouldn't have accepted these statements, but it did (See Bugzilla:49425).

The examples are from May 31, 2013, and I see that the bot is not currently active, but please try to avoid these spaces when it starts again. Thank you, Byrial (talk) 10:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I turned this dates to integer so I was sure this couldn't happen but it happened and I'm working on it to find out how. I'll write a code to correct it Amir (talk) 14:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

55 malformed time values was added. There is a list at User:Byrial/Bad time values. I have corrected all of the dates. Byrial (talk) 20:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

thank you so much Amir (talk) 13:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

sexual orientation

Hi Amir. I know I'm being a pain in the ass about adding unreferenced statements but you absolutely cannot blindly import statements about the sexual orientation of people and especially not about living people. I don't know how many such statements were added by Dexbot but here's one example. The exact policies on biographies of living people differ from Wikipedia to Wikipedia but on en.wiki, on de.wiki and on fr.wiki, adding potentially controversial content without a source is a major no-no. In fact, en.wiki even has a warning template for users who do this and this all goes back to a resolution by the Wikimedia Foundation Board. Now I don't know Lady Sovereign. Maybe her sexual orientation is well-known and maybe the statement about it on en.wiki is well-referenced. But the point is that Dexbot doesn't know that. You should remove all sexual-orientation statements added by Dexbot and at the very least, all such statements about living people should be zapped as soon as possible. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 05:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi dear, We all are thinking about improvement of free knowledge and this is important and nothing else matters :D about sexual orientation you can see my RfBA. there is just 2000 statement (i don't know much of it are BLP) but as I told before English WP is very strict in adding sexual orientation (you can see endless arguments for Jodie Foster or Jim Parsons) My idea is we can make a list of added statements for BLPs (I gonna write a code for it) and we can add sources from WPs to the list. Amir (talk) 14:02, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

There is some disagreement on whether we should have a property for sexual orientation. The debate about that is pretty much over and the community has decided to keep that property. I respect that and I think it's the right decision. But people also agreed that we should be careful with it. Please check Property:P91. It says "use IF AND ONLY IF they have stated it themselves, unambiguously, or it has been widely agreed upon by historians after their death". Clearly Dexbot cannot provide this guarantee. I also urge you to re-read the resolution of the WMF board: you cannot be careless with data about living people. Pichpich (talk) 14:34, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

of course we should careful about it, my opinion is people of English WP are already careful enough that using their data won't cause any problem but I agree with you so I'll make a list asap and try to figure out how can we do something without losing these data Amir (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, that opinion is wrong: en.wiki is not a reliable source even though it's true that on average it's pretty careful about this. On average is not good enough for potentially controversial and privacy-violating material about living people. Pichpich (talk) 16:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Any progress on this? Like I said, this is not just my opinion, it's backed up by the current description of the property and by the Wikimedia Foundation... Pichpich (talk) 21:29, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I wrote code and I'm running it, the result will be come out in an hour Amir (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

this is list of living people (based on English WP) that have sexual orientation statement These are 1400 and some of are really obvious like Rachel Meadow. We have to find out a way to remove these names in the list and after that we can search them one by one for violation BLP policy Amir (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

It's easy to decide which of these should be removed using Dexbot: they should all be removed. If after that you want to manually go back and decide to add that statement when it is ultra-obvious, you can do that. That's the whole point: a human may be able to make that call but a bot cannot. Pichpich (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

This is list of ALL sexual orientation statements of living people (so many of those are not added by my bot) I can't do this removing without permission of community, a policy nor resolution like that won't be enough Amir (talk) 11:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

So a policy is not enough for you to act? That's an interesting concept. So let's see. We have the guideline Help:Sources in favor of referenced statements, we have a pretty relevant a resolution by the Wikimedia Foundation Board, we have a recent bot request that was turned down because a significant number of people objected to a bot adding unreferenced dates of birth and death (which you'll agree is much much much less controversial), a property sexual orientation (P91) with very clear requirements that your bot cannot guarantee, a recent discussion where the idea of dropping that requirement found no support, policies on just about every Wikipedia that require careful referencing of potentially controversial statements about living people. Against that, you have an approved bot request where 2 out of 5 people who participated expressed concerns with the referencing. This is ridiculous. Pichpich (talk) 17:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

PS: don't pretend that you can't undo what your bot did. It's trivial to check which of these statements were added by Dexbot. Pichpich (talk) 17:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I requested a third party opinion for this in WD:PC, I don't say I can't undo, I say It's sounds insane to me, but I'll obey what community say Amir (talk) 22:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

@Pichpich: SamoaBot 26 is just On hold at the moment. --Ricordisamoa 23:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Ricordisamoa, it's on hold because there's no consensus on letting bots add unreferenced dates of birth. That consensus may come one day but it's not there, I believe we both agree on this. I think it's a pretty safe bet to say that there's no consensus on adding potentially contentious statements such as sexual orientation, especially not of living people. I would also like to hear your opinion on whether blind bot additions of such statements squares with the Wikimedia Board resolution and whether that resolution should matter. Pichpich (talk) 23:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Dexbot's current edits

Hi Amir. The user page of Dexbot doesn't have a link to the approval for the task it is currently performing. This should be added if the task is indeed approved. Otherwise the bot should stop. Best, Pichpich (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Pichpich, It's Task 1, that you can find link of approval in userpage of Dexbot. Amir (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

P.S. API doesn't let us to have edit summary but It's linked in userpage of bot Amir (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

my bad. I was actually looking at the contributions of a different bot... Sorry about that. Pichpich (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Also, I introduced some time ago the new Module:RFBOT, which is used in {{Bot}} to link all Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot ever filed. --Ricordisamoa 22:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I use it Amir (talk) 23:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Your creations

Could you please avoid creating items for taxa on nl.wiki? Many of them are listed in User:Soulkeeper/dups as duplicates. Thanks, --Ricordisamoa 23:31, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

It should be enough to simply skip pages in nl:Categorie:Wikipedia:Beginnetje biologie. --Ricordisamoa 23:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, My bot hasn't edited since three days ago, but for the next time. of course I'll do, thank you for informing me Amir (talk) 23:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok, that's a bit unfortunate. I did this query to get a list of articles to link (bot formated). I'm now adding these sitelinks. Multichill (talk) 14:45, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I try to fix as much duplicates as I can. But could you please make wikidata items for everything listed under the letter T at this page on the dutch wikipedia? [[11]]. --Natuur12 (talk) 20:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Statements with wrong P358 (discography) statement

Hi. Items Bård Faust (Q554527) and Faust (Q679697) are about different musicians/bands named Faust. Dexbot claimed discography (P358) Faust discography (Q5438281) for both of them and was wrong in both cases. The very strange thing is that Dexbot indicated "imported from English Wikipedia" in both cases, but there is no link from any of the two band articles to the wrong discography page, so how did Dexbot find that wrong information in the English Wikipedia? If it is some kind of program error that affects more items with this property, they should be checked. Regards, Byrial (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Also War (Q1710686) and War (Q2295871) both had discography (P358) 2MASS J18101772-1633548 (Q79686021) with enwiki as source. But one was wrong, and not indicated in enwiki. How can Dexbot import information from enwiki which is not in enwiki? Byrial (talk) 12:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, There are some same bugs above. problem happened when I wrote the code of finding item based on Wikipedia page but another developer came and change to finding item based on search of title of Wikipedia page in Wikidata I didn't aware of the change and I ran my bot so bot search for "Faust (band)" in Wikidata instead of finding of item connected to the w:Faust (band) and you can see what happened. I assure you this wont' happen again (didn't happen since April I think) but If still bug exists, tell me to rerun the code I wrote for correcting this bug Amir (talk) 13:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I went through Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P358#"Unique value" violations and removed more than 80 false statements with P358, so the error happened many times. Byrial (talk) 11:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm feeling upset when I heard that. I'll write a code for checking it this week. Amir (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Item Q2667251 and Q5721809 are the same !

Can you merge Rosette with Persian Wiki link for Rosette (cookie) ? --2.176.179.167 17:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

done :) Amir (talk) 04:57, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Stop the bot adding

Could you please stop the bot adding P107 (P107) per this RFC? Thanks. --Izno (talk) 17:21, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

done Amir (talk) 17:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Geocoordinates on people

[12]?!? Please stop adding coordinate location (P625) to items of people. Thanks, --Ricordisamoa 17:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Persian Wikipedia's community has decided to use display coordinates (like geographical features) for dead people who has certain and constant place of burial because they think it's a valuable datum for the person (determinate place of burial) specially when burial place is not notable enough to have separate article , though I opposed in the decision I think we need to import them in Wikidata because It's a valuable datum and you use these coordinates for wikivoyage (e.g. get a query and see who is buried your nearby) and you can exclude these information (and maybe some wikis decide as the same as fa.wp) very easily. We can bring up this issue in PC or make an RFCAmir (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Importing coordinate location (P625) for people without an apposite qualifier is simply nonsensical: it will throw hundreds of constraint violations/P625; you should stop adding it and maybe file a RFC on that. Regards, --Ricordisamoa 20:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Is there any "an apposite qualifier"? can you make it if there isn't? I'll add as soon as I can Amir (talk) 21:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I made the RfCAmir (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

duplicated claims

your bot should not add duplicated claims. (example 1, example 2) --Akkakk 13:27, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

hi, sorry for that. I'll fixAmir (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

director of photography (P344): Technicolor (Q674564)

Hi. You recently added "director of photography (P344): Technicolor (Q674564)" statements to a couple of film items. Could you possibly do some kind of plausibility check when adding such statements (target item or linked article somehow marked as a person, skipping infobox information that's put in brackets or something like those)? --YMS (talk) 12:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC) PS: Sorry, forgot to mention some example items, in case this would be helpful for you. Some of those articles were Q2006294, Q2066379, Q3071601, Q7715862. I removed all Technicolor links already, but it's likely that similar problems have also occurred. --YMS (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll check and I'll correct, thank you for your notice Amir (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Bot error

Hi, i just reverted edit of your bot, that added place of death for living person Q317521. The claim was "sourced" from enwiki, but enwiki article (nor its ifobox or Persondata templated) is clearly not stating this. I have no idea where your bot get this incorrect information. Jklamo (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

hi, thank you for notice. I think there is problem in regex (ignores \r and \n) I'll fix the bug and I'll write a code to correct possible mistakes, Amir (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Large scale bot error

Hello,

Over the past weeks I spent a lot of time getting junk like P70 (P70) and P75 (P75) out of the plant items. These have no information value (even where they are not actually misleading) and clutter up the items, making it hard to get them in good shape. I see that this bot is now reversing me (as in the edits undone here). You will understand I am not happy with this.

Also it should be obvious that the English Wikipedia is not an authoritative source; there is plenty of nonsense there. A source should be an actual reference. - Brya (talk) 15:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, If you think P70 (P70) and P75 (P75) needs to be deleted comepletely. You need to add them to WD:RFC not removing them in items that has been used correctly. General properties are as good as precise ones for example in future you can get a query of plants without interwiki in you language and try to make them in your wikipedia

about using English Wikipedia as a referances, we call this kind of information "trivial" (It's obvious that a cat is an animal) and adding them into Wikidata won't cause any harm. If you find any incorrect information that has been added by bot (and that's an error in the source not the bot) you can simply remove it Amir (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't think P70 (P70) and P75 (P75) need to be deleted completely, so I don't need to add them to WD:RFC. I have no idea if they may be used in items not about plants. I would guess not, but I don't know, nor do I care. However, in the items on plants, they have been used incorrectly (and you are adding them incorrectly). Order is (mostly) used in violation of Wikipedia's NPoV-policy, and having them there is just a handicap at best. It has no information value; it is just junk.

Any mention of "order" in a plant item is an error, and the error is in the bot. - Brya (talk) 15:54, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I can tell my bot not to add them in plants and I can tell it to remove incorrectly added orders (no matter my bot added it or someone else) but can you show me some reliable sources that support your opinion? If it's against NPOV, why it's used in English Wikipedia? (I'm not an expert in biology so I can't say your opinion is right or wrong) Amir (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Any order in plants is pretty much incorrect, as there is already parent taxon (P171) for all families of flowering plants, fully referenced, so anybody can go up the tree of his choice. Taxonomic placement in plants is highly dynamic, and for many taxa there is at best a mainstream view (and this may have no more than 20% support). As to why the English Wikipedia does it wrong, it is a matter of a sectarian cult that want to suppress all other viewpoints (and information in general). I don't really know why this is allowed, presumably others are afraid of a fight.

        It would be great if you stopped your bot till it has been adjusted to leave out plants; and reversed what you did today. - Brya (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

If you give me one hour to do some stuff I will stop my bot, correct it, and re-run it again with implementation of removing order in plants and help you in correcting them. but as I said before we need to keep kingdom. is it okay? Amir (talk) 16:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Kingdom is in a sense not so bad, in that it generally is correct. However, it is superfluous in 99% of the cases as parent taxon (P171) will get there anyway. Also it is inconsistent to add this and not the immediately lower ranks. In practice it is just taking up space, and making editting harder. Not to mention its taking up disk space and adding to the global warming problem. - Brya (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

It's working [13] but I won't restrict my bot on kingdom because It's useful for queries Amir (talk) 17:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your bot actions and discuss them with the Taxonomy task force . --Succu (talk) 17:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Please STOP. --Ricordisamoa 17:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

That would be a very limited usefulness, and only for somebody who is very lazy. This won't give any information that one would not find anyway with very little work. For many items the fact that it is a plant is being added to the description where it is visible in a listing of items. Please delete P75 (P75) where you have added it. - Brya (talk) 17:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Block

I have blocked the bot indefinitely for editing without the consensus of the community. I have no prejudice to or not for unblocking.

I will also note that this is not the first time I have noticed the bot editing without consensus. Please consider filing an WD:Requests for permissions for each task that you want your bot to perform.

Thanks. --Izno (talk) 20:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

1. When you blocked my bot, It was working on infobox person and importing articles from Dutch Wikipedia, the both tasks were fine and not manufactured. issues about taxbox isn't related because my bot was stopped (fortunately the code crushed before I could stop it) working on it like ten minutes after Ricardosomoa's comment
2. For importing articles (making new items from Dutch Wikipedia) the bot has approval and for harvesting infoboxes (whether person, film, song, single, company, or even taxobox) the bot has general approval and I can't ask for new approval everytime that I want to harvest a new infobox. for example see my third request for approval which opened three months ago (17 June) and nobody has edited in the request 21 June and It's still open. If every request wants to take this much and I have to request for every infobox I rather not to edit anymore. There are a very few people interested and nobody shows passion on discussing until I have done something wrong Amir (talk) 01:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

If you're finding it hard to get people to participate at RFBot or elsewhere, leave a note at the project chat of your choice. Even with general approval, there will be cases like this one where you need to ask someone. As for when they discuss, you should know that as a bot operator you have a lot of power in your hands, which you need to use carefully. If there's a task force for a bot, why not ask them how they want an infobox imported, or even if they do or not? I am completely understanding in that there aren't people who will participate in process, but that doesn't mean it's okay just to run a task arbitrarily... --Izno (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

And because of that, quite frankly, when someone says stop, regardless of whether you agree with them, you should stop until they either agree with the botting, you change the code, or you can't resolve the dispute and so you leave the bot stopped and go request some help at WD:PC or elsewhere. It is not okay to say "show me reliable sources"—with a bot, the onus is on you to show why what you're doing is correct, not on the people asking you to stop or who disagree with your actions. --Izno (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

About the first section, I convinced to do so, So this is my suggestion: 1- For any harvesting of infoboxes I'll leave a message in the related taskforce page, and one week after last comment in the discussion of taskforce, if we couldn't reach consensus. I'll leave a message in PC and after that one week of last comment in PC on the discussion I'll run my bot. 2- this is not included about using P31 (i.e. it's okay to run P31 on taxoboxes even now). About stopping my bot I need to say I didn't have access to labs at that moment and the script had crashed before we were talking. the code had an issue and It was crashing periodically so I said please tell me why and If you're right I'll help you to clean orders from items of plants (which is very hard for human beings) so It wasn't about stopping it it was about running a new task in my responsibility so I need to demand reliable supporting references in order to do something like thatAmir (talk) 04:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

[14]: It's not okay to claim instance of (P31) = taxon (Q16521) based on enwiki taxoboxes. A lot of these taxoboxes are messy. And sometimes the correct claim is instance of (P31) = monotypic taxon (Q310890). --Succu (talk) 06:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay I won't run the bot on P31 of taxons too, (A question, is there a way to find out when it's okay to add P31: taxon and when it's not? for example by categories used in the article or order or kingdom Amir (talk) 07:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Can you tell me what else needs to be cleared? Amir (talk) 12:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Talked with Amir. He confirmed that he won't work on importing taxobox data. Lifted the block. Please stay clear of this minefield. It seems that a lot of bad data has been imported in the past to some Wikipedia's and that bad data is now finding it's way to Wikidata :-(

Plenty of non-controversial work you can spend your time on. Multichill (talk) 15:17, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Catrin Collier (Q13416998)

You added:

• instance of (P31):person (Q215627). That should be instance of (P31):human (Q5) per the discussion about replacing P107.
• place of death (P20):Welsh people (Q188353) but she is still alive.

--Filceolaire (talk) 15:56, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI: Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#DexBot 2. Multichill (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

• We can add both "human" and "person" , It's not like P107 but let me check and stop my bot
• I can't see name of my bot in the history [15]

Best Amir (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

It's stopped As far as I checked Amir (talk) 18:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I found the problem. I will write a code to fix the mistakes Amir (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I fixed the code, and I fixed mistakes are made by my bot [16] Best

human (Q5) in Edward Braddon (Q5341989)

Your bot added Q5 and Q5 twice. --Succu (talk) 18:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I fixed it, Amir (talk) 18:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Please remove P107 claims as P31 claims are added

Hi Amir, I see Dexbot is adding P31 'human' claims but not removing P107 'person' claims as expected. Could that be fixed? The purpose of this effort is to remove all P107 claims and replace them with appropriate P31 and P279 claims. Thanks, Emw (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

don't worry, It will do when I re-run it. Amir (talk) 18:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

STOP!

It's unbelievable. --Succu (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Woah! it constantly duplicates statements, see Frederick Bellenger (Q5497365) & Juan Andrés Ramírez (Q258340) in the same half-minute LaddΩ chat ;) 23:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Stopped, I swear I've put something to check it, I'm gonna check where is wrong and fix mistaken edits Amir (talk) 05:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I wrote a code to remove duplicates, and It's working correctly, I'm terribly sorry for happening of this mistake. Believe me, I'm not vandal, I only made a lapse and that happened and I do as much as I can to fix it so I wrote n script to fix it 07:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you have to test your code a little bit better. By the way: Barry Andrews (Q3777503) is not fixed. Greetings --Succu (talk) 13:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I test every code before running but you can't determine every possible aspects of wikidata in the test unit, for the fixation be patient :) Amir (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Item Barry Andrews (Q3777503) not fixed, item Cees Veerman (Q2132224) not fixed... Also, you are not removing P107 (P107)==person (Q215627) ?? - LaddΩ chat ;) 21:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Dexbot is removing P107 'person' claims. It's just doing so in a large batch after it adds a large batch of P31 'human' claims. Emw (talk) 23:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

It looks like Dexbot is still adding duplicate P31 claims: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q7607994&oldid=78032427. Any ideas? Emw (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I checked it, It was a little mistake that won't happen again and these additions was a few, the reason of duplicate adding is, we use "PreloadGenertor" which caches information of pages in group 60 pages, and running two scripts at the same time causes this problem (I ran it in order to test and check it's working properly or not Amir (talk) 12:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Instance of human error

Hey your bot does some(?) false edits by removing P107:Person. You should not autmatically add instance of human. Fictive Persons don't have to be humane see e.g. my revert: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q11965&diff=79156096&oldid=78843486 I think you should pause this task and add the instance of human from an another source. --Sk!d (talk) 22:17, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Stopped, Is there a way to identify a fiction person out of persons? including gods. Thanks Amir (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Is Dexbot currently distinguishing fictional characters and deities from humans? Your question seems to indicate that that is not the case. Is the source code for Dexbot available? It would be nice to be able to review the code. Emw (talk) 01:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I checked the code, That was a very improbable thing to happen because the bot adds P31:5 if there is no P31, I fixed it by removing this line (the bot doesn't work on items with P107:person and without P31) and I'll check for a solution for correcting mistakes. @Emw: What I was saying is some kind of improvement in bot (in future), The bot doesn't remove P107 (and/or adding P31:5) for fictional persons and deities. what happened here was a bug and It's fixed Amir (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Please stop using the 'no' language code

Hi, could you update your bot so that it uses language code "nb" instead of "no"? Or perhaps in general that it uses the language specified as content language (see e.g. 'lang' here). See my bot proposal for more info on the no/nb case. Cheers Danmichaelo (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, fixed thank you for notice and reporting :) Amir (talk) 23:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem :) Danmichaelo (talk) 20:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

pt-br labels

Hi!

Could you update the bot so it adds both pt and pt-br labels on edits such as this one? They are usually the same, but a human could change the label added by the bot afterwards when it needs to be different. Helder 19:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

It'll be in a very huge scale so I think It's better at first to make list of items with pt label and without pt-br, extract pt labels and someone reviews it and after that my bot will add it Amir (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh well... no fallback, no labels, ... =/ Helder 21:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Ming Dinasty

Hi. This bot tagged Tomé Pires (Q2735555)'s place of death (P20) as Ming dynasty (Q9903), which obviously makes no sense. Pikolas (talk) 02:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry. It was a known problem that happened very rarely and I removed possible mistakes and this remained, Amir (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Cross namespace issue

Hi Amir, I don't understand this edit. It popped up at User:Multichill/Cross namespace. Multichill (talk) 19:20, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Multichil, I think you found the reason [17] sorry for the bot goof Amir (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Wrong identification as a disambiguation page

How does this come? As far as I can tell, no sitelink is a disambiguation page or was one recently. --YMS (talk) 12:06, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

It because It had GND (P107) of disambiguation [18] :) Amir (talk) 16:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

D'oh. Completely missed that ... multiple times. Sorry for the circumstances, thanks for the info, and have a nice day. --YMS (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

You too have a nice day Amir (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Labels with brackets

I notice that in this edit, your bot added the German label "Yrjö (Vorname)", which is incorrect. Perhaps it should handle titles with brackets differently? --Yair rand (talk) 01:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

hi, fixed, thank you for notice Amir (talk) 05:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Duplicates

Hi!

Can you please check your bot again? It still adds duplicates: [19]. It should probably check systematically before each addition...

Best regards. Peter17 (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

hi, the adding duplicates was from the old code (that harvests templates) but this error exists in another script and problem is I ran it twice (parallel) and that happened, so It won't happen again, I wrote a code to fix every duplicates and I'm going to run it :) best Amir (talk) 10:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

P107

Why did you remove this?--Ahonc (talk) 22:44, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

@Ahonc: Consensus at WD:Requests for comment/Primary sorting property is the larger reason why, the smaller reason is due to the implementation decisions at this project chat topic. --Izno (talk) 02:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Mr. Atatürk's personal life

personal life of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (Q1180109) is a dedicated article about "Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (Q5152)'s personal life". So Q5152 is a person, Q1180109 is only about some sub-aspects of this person. Nonetheless, en:Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's personal life contains an "Infobox person" containing all the biographical data of en:Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, and so your bot repeatedly transferred those information to Q1180109, where they IMHO don't belong. I'm not sure what the ideal solution is (maybe don't import data from Wikipedia infoboxes if the article's categories don't match the infobox type?), but anyway I want to raise your attention to that problem. Thanks for listening ;). --YMS (talk) 14:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Same problem existed on w:Mohammad Khatami's reforms (Mohammad Khatami's reforms (Q6892139)) and I fixed it by removing the infobox person from the article (because It wasn't related at all) but this time it's related and I can't remove it but I think a check like "\[\[[Cc]ategory\:\d{1,4} births" is good. I'll add it to my code. Thank you for noticing the problem Amir (talk) 14:22, 10 December 2013 (UTC)