Xqt

Hi Xqt I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Xqbot is labeled as needing your comment. Please visit the above link to reply to the requests. Thanks! --BAGBotTalk 02:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Why was this removed? [1] Also, if you are going to run a bot, you should have a way to communicate and turn it off on each project you run it on. Jokestress (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

See User talk:Jokestress #Dušan Simović --Xqt (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please make a clear link on your bot page and bot's talk page indicating that users can leave a message here if there are problems. I do not like to leave messages on other Wikimedia projects, so there should be clear instructions on how to leave them here as well as on the German one. Thanks. Jokestress (talk) 07:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I thought it would be enough, to put the bot's template on the page, which also contains the operators contact address. Isn't it? On the discussion page of the bot is a further link to my home wiki. --Xqt (talk) 08:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, this is just informational, because I doubt you could have anticipated it, but [2] shows your bot making a bad change on behalf of a subtle vandal who had redirected the original target (Tard, Hungary). I've requested permanent protection of Tard, but I'd also like you to consider a blacklist of terms that your bot shouldn't edit, to stop things like this. In any case, please try not to these sort of bad edits unintentionally.

I would also join previous posters to this page in asking that you not point your bot's talk page to de.wiki when it should point here instead. I understand that you don't want to miss talk messages, but communications with an en.wiki bot's operator should take place here. Thanks in advance for your consideration of both points. — Gavia immer (talk) 19:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Guten tag. Do you know what might have caused Xqbot to change the en:Tard redirect target from en:Tard, Hungary to en:George W. Bush? Danka, Kralizec! 07:47, 1. Mär. 2009 (CET)
copy from de:User Talk:Xqt #Xqbot on en.wikipedia 2 --Xqt (talk)

I checked the bots edit and I suggest it was not a good idea to change the redirect but teh but isn't be able to detect vandalism. Tard, Hungary was overridden with a redirect yesterday on 2:40 but the RCs patrol doesn't identified it. At 10 o clock the Special:DoubleRedirects was updated an my box begun fixing them four hours later. I am sorry for the mistaken edit but there are no possiblities for the bot which acts in standard manner to detect vandalism or to see whether is link may be right or not. On the other hand it wasn't also detect by human beeings for a long term. You can prevent a page not changed by a bot but I think this wouldn't make sense. My bot fixes double redirections of more than 1000 pages a day on this wikipedia. I think it's not a good idea stopping it because one doesn't detect potential vandalism in lead time. Bot it is normal to correct pages they are changed by vandalism. Btw I agree to communicate here as well as on de-wiki. If I didn't answer, please give me a hint there because it is not possible to have a view on all my SUL talk pages (perhaps I'll write a bot to solve this). Sorry if my English is not so good and thanks for your messages, which gives me a hint improving my bot --Xqt (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I notice you run a bot that fixes double redirects. You might be interested in participating in the thread at WP:Village pump (proposals)#Double redirects, which discusses the possibility of having certain double redirects left unfixed. If we adopt that solution, I would be interested to know how such redirects might be marked so that bots know to leave them alone.--Kotniski (talk) 10:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The simpliest way is to mark such articles with a {{nobots}} template. But I don't see any sense because my redirect bot solves only redirects which points to other redirect pages and btw is the result of moving an article. It doesn't change any links on articles which points to a redirect page. --Xqt (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

It seems {{nobots}} doesn't work on standard pywikipedia bots. I've changed it on my bot and I'll looking vor other solutions and comment it on the given discussion page. --Xqt (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that this bot removed a language link to a redirect, I corrected that link here. I wonder if you could make a change that improves links rather than removing them. cygnis insignis 14:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for fixing the iw-link. The target page has been moved and the bot couldn't find it because no site pointed to the new one. But it would be fixed some steps later if a bot checks the iw-links of the sv-wiki. I am working on a feature to run my bot especially for moved pages. This would improve these edits. Regards. --Xqt (talk) 07:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I couldn't find any link that proves that this bot is approved? Is it? I noticed for example that it changes Image->File but I think it was a discussion for that and there was no consensus for that action. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:03, 19 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh sorry, I saw this switch for cosmetic_changes was wrong. I just changed it. --Xqt (talk) 08:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

In doing "cosmetic changes", Xqbot created a syntax error in Balochistan by inserting a space between the asterisk and number sign (*#) used to created an ordered (numbered) list within an unordered list. This wiki markup only works if the symbols are adjacent, with no whitespace. Please fix this in your bot.

I suspect the bot's problem is that it incorrectly assumes that it can safely insert a space after an asterisk if it's the first character in a line (i.e., markup), or possibly after the last asterisk in a series (allowing for indented lists). I commend the effort, as we really should have spaces separate markup from text wherever possible because it's easier for newbies to understand what's happening. But you should account for all nest-able markup, which includes asterisks (bullet list), number signs (numbered list), colons (indentation), and semi-colons (definition lists, which are often used for non-TOC headings). I believe a substitution pattern replacing "^([*#:;]+) *(.)" with "$1 $2" should do the trick. Thank you for your attention. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've switched this feature off for the en-wiki as requested above but you are right. I'll fix it for the others. Thanks! --Xqt (talk) 15:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your bot is adding, among other things, tk:2099 to 2090s. This is incorrect, as tk:2090 also maps to 2090s. It's possible the fix needs to be made on tk (and mk:2065), rather than here, but I thought I'd report it to you. Bots are DumZiBoT (talk · contribs), GrouchoBot (talk · contribs), and Xqbot (talk · contribs). — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'll try to fix it with bots support manually. --Xqt (talk) 10:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

This should solve the problem --Xqt (talk) 11:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

bot did this [3]--74.13.99.207 (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, but I couldn't found any malfunction there. What's going wrong in your opinion? --Xqt (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Any reason why it did the date change [4] ? feydey (talk) 07:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The date wasn't changed by bot. There was one previous editor who did the vandalism. [5] --Xqt (talk) 15:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Two days ago I created the page Husch. I included a link to [[de:Hüsch]]. Take a look at the English and German pages: they are obviously appropriate for linking.

Yesterday your bot removed [[de:Hüsch]] from the article. It did not even give any justification - the edit summary was just (robot Removing: de:Hüsch). I find this very irritating - it's a time-consuming process to go through looking for links to Wikipedias in other languages, and if I put it back I could quite easily find that your bot removes it again.

I'm sure you constructed and run the bot in good faith, but I wonder how many hours of people's good work your bot is undoing in this manner.

Please explain, and prevent it from happening again. Cheers, Hebrides (talk) 05:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

de:Hüsch is a disambiguation page but the {{surname}} is not listed at MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage. This forces iw-bots removing links to different page types. My Bot would not touch this page for a while but you may solve this by adding this template to the MediaWiki-page or to exclude bots from the given page by marking it with the {{nobots}}-template. --Xqt (talk) 17:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

This is ridiculous. I cannot edit MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage. I'm happy for well-behaved bots to visit and update the Husch page, so do not want to add a {{nobots}}. Husch and de:Hüsch are very obviously pages that should be linked by iw links. Please please please make your bot behave in a sensible manner. -- Hebrides (talk) 19:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I know about this behavior and I made a two feature requests to the pywikipeda framework to solve this. And I've found an additional request there for changing MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage for a similar bot edit of another bot owner. In this case my bot will not return to change this and I'll mark this page on a exception list until this behavior would be changed in a global manner. On the other hand It would be a good idea to use a {{disambig}} instead of {{surname}} because this really seems to be a disambiguation and not an article. btw: please see the version history of the given MediaWiki page. The {{surname}} template has been removed from this page on february and this leads to a new behavior of iw-bots. --Xqt (talk) 08:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please see MOS:DABNAME which clearly states, "Pages only listing persons with a certain given name or surname (unless they are very frequently referred to by that name alone) are not disambiguation pages, and this Manual of Style does not apply to them. In such cases, do not use {{disambig}} or {{hndis}}, but {{given name}} or {{surname}} instead." If I were to take your advice and use {{disambig}} I am sure another editor would correct my mistake.

It seems that German WP regards pages of people with the same surname as disambiguation pages, whereas English WP does not. Your bot wrongly assumes agreement on this – an invalid assumption on which to operate. This logical contradiction needs a radical solution which is beyond the realms of a humble editor like me. Are you able to get something done to correct this? -- Hebrides (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The solution

I've been directed to the solution. Please make your bot compatible with the solution at MediaWiki talk:Disambiguationspage#Re-add_.7B.7Bsurname.7D.7D. Since MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage actually contains the line "((Surname))" you should be able to pick this up and avoid removing valid surname-to-disambig links in future. Hope this helps. -- Hebrides (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please stop!

I just had to revert another ten links vandalised by this bot. Please suspend its action until it respects the protocol described in the paragraph above. I'm getting desperate! I don't want to spend the rest of my life reverting this bot's changes... -- Hebrides (talk) 19:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that you are using the -force parameter at the same time as -autonomous which is something you are not supposed to do because it breaks on disambiguation pages as you have seen. It is a common error, as long as you stop using the two paramters together you will stop having this problem. -Djsasso (talk) 03:49, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right. I've changed my bots behaviour now and testet it since about two weeks. It would skip pages if it founds a disambig mismatch. Can someone unblock my bot, so he can start working again. That would be very nice. --Xqt (talk) 19:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am not sure of the purpose of this bot. Could you please explain it to me? I am considering blocking it. Thanks. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi again, given the lack of reply to the concerns expressed above by another user, I have blocked this bot. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am wondering. The purpose of the bot is described at User:Xqbots page. It is the normal funktion of a interwiki and redirect bot which comes from the pywikipedia framework. --Xqt (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have blocked this bot again. I would like to see the concerns expressed above fully resolved. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thanks for your contributions to the Afrikaans Wikipedia. It seems your bot is programmed to organize interwiki links alphabetically. While this may be acceptable on the English Wikipedia, this is not the policy of the Afrikaans Wikipedia. Please reprogramme your bot to organize interwiki links according to the alphabetical order of the language name of the Wikipedia, and not according to the link name of the Wikipedia. For reference, see how your bot moves the Finnish language between the F-languages at [6], while the language name is Suomi and belongs between the S-names. Thanks for your co-operation. — Adriaan (T★C) 18:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Adriaan, thanks for this report. I will report it to the framework to fix the sorting of iw-links for the bots too. --Xqt (talk) 16:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the reply. The Afrikaans Wikipedia doesn't have a custom policy about this, so if this is the case as you explained it, then it is infact correct. I was mistakened by thinking the default policy would be not to categorize the iw-links alphabetically, but to do it alphabetically in its language name or transliterated version of its language name form. But that is an incorrect assumption. Thanks for the reply and sorry for the trouble. — Adriaan (T★C) 10:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. Xqt (talk) 15:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Misspelling redirect. I thought this was a bot edit, but see it's yours. For genera names, or taxon names, two names may be very close in spelling but not be the same. Pelagorhynchus appears to be a dinoflagellate. Pelargorhynchus is an extinct fish. Particularly when dealing with marine single-celled organisms, the genus may be so obscure to appear to be a misspelling. It still could be, but in the absence of a source for it, and a top note for the redirect, I'd rather the redirect simply be deleted. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 09:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well I found a broken link and tried to repair it. But if you prefer to delete the redirect, it is ok to do so. --Xqt (talk) 19:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's probably a broken link because the dinoflagellate genus was deleted; however, this doesn't mean it's a misspelling to the extinct fish. It's a tricky edit, though, so no fault on your part, just a suggestion that with genera names misspellings may require more looking. --69.226.103.13 (talk)

Hello, since the French Princess page links to the English Princess Royal page, I don't see why the English page can't link to the French, but the bot removed my edit. Madridrealy (talk) 03:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

fr:Princesse royale was marked as a disambig. But it is not. Your ar right but the bot didn't know about this. I've removed the disambig template on the french site and let the bot correct the rest. --Xqt (talk)05:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please learn the difference between Little Dorrit (film) and Little Dorrit (TV serial). Thank you. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 14:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, but I do not understand your message. Could you give me a hint? --Xqt (talk) 04:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

• I have stopped the bot from work for the last few days because of problem with order odf the links , and will change the scripts before making it work, when I restart it I will let you know, please let me know if there is any problems , I am planning to make it work only if all the scripts are updated to latest version. many thanks. Ghaly (talk) 12:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

• The Change you mentioned , appears to be due to MenoBot changing the page on wikipedia arabic, and GhalyBot was following that. MenoBot has done the changes to all the years pages on Arabic wikipedia , please let me know what you think. Ghaly (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

• I am running a test edit for GhalBot on .af , please let me know what you think. Ghaly (talk) 13:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, it doesn't work properly. Changing the iw-link from ar-wiki is quite right, but the the interwiki sorting is a misorder; you can see here that mhr: appears on top of the list but it must not. Is your local version the actual one? mhr-wiki has been added to the family few days ago.

Modifying the ar-wiki links was ok an I have wondered that your bot was one of the first who solved this in correct manner. That wiki just created a new extension namespaces for years articles and on de-wiki there was implemented an abuse filter until I supported some bot owners to change the crossing namespace table.

BTW: did you have a pywikipedia-Bot or sth else? --Xqt (talk) 07:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

• GhalyBot is a pywikipedia-Bot
• What you mentioned about the sorting of the codes is the reason I stopped GhalyBot from working on 23 July 2009.
• Since then I have updated the pywikipedia file on my computer and ran a test on .af and now the sorting order is correct , so I let ist update more pages.
• I hope this will clarify matters , Many thanks . --Ghaly (talk) 17:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

If your bot speaks python, did you changed the crossnamespace-table? This seems good because you recognize the extension namespace of year on ar-wiki. This is quite fine. But on the other hande there was a sorting problem of iw links to mhr-wiki. I looked through the last edits but these pages doesn't contain a mhr-link. You should test your bot on those pages which contain such a link like 1962 or sth else. But I am wondering about this of cause my bot is also python and it could correct the missorting of yours [7]. Good luck --Xqt (talk) 06:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

• GhalyBot has been running on an updated version since 26 July , and I think this has sorted the order of links now, many thanks. --Ghaly (talk) 06:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've blocked your Bot because it is still out of date. --Xqt (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• • I have updated the software and GhalyBot has been running on an updated version since 26 July, but now because of what you told me on the arz.wikipedia page , I stopped the bot from working until I further udpate the sofware , I will let you know when I manage to update its software again. so if you dont mind I can run a trial , but I am not going to make it work before the new updates. Thanks. Ghaly (talk) 08:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

You have to keep you bot up to date. This means not only monthly because there often comes a new software version, a bugfix, new translation and localisation or new wikipedia families. I strictly recommend to do this. You can get the actual version from the toolserver here. Your bot is blocked on pdc:- and de:-wiki until 17th september; enougth time to actualize it. I just trust you that you will keep your bot okay for the future. Thanks for your kind attention. --Xqt (talk) 12:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your bot has been making wholesale unexplained deletions of interwiki links under the guise of Cosmetic changes. Please revert these deletions. --Redaktor (talk) 22:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think this has been solved [8] --Xqt (talk) 11:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your bot modified the redirect for Annihilate from pointing to Annihilation to My_Little_Pony. It cited (Robot: Fixing double redirect) but I could find no evidence of this. Extols (talk) 13:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

IIRC, some bots respect reverts: When you revert them, they don't re-revert. Can Xqbot do that too, please? There are legitimate reasons for double redirects, and there seems to have been a majority for allowing longer redirect chains at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_44#Double_redirects, and if your bot doesn't have the human intelligence to recognize them, it should leave the judgment to humans, and not edit war with them, as it did here. — Sebastian 23:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Xqbot keeps doing it, and there is no emergency button. I therefore had to block the bot; sorry about that. — Sebastian 00:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sebastian, I think you are right blocking the bot in this case. This was the second best choice for this problem. A better ability would be to tell the bot, what it should do with this page as you did it for human editors (here:leave it unchanged). I placed a {{nobots}} there to do this. This bot uses a standard script from Python Wikipedia Robot Framework as by others and its behavior is unchanged. But a better solution would be, to mark the middleman of double redirects and to change the bots behavior leaving the middlemans references unchanged. As I am in process becoming a developer of this framework, I could help to solve this problem in another manner. But in conclusion it is necessary to give bots an hint, what to do with such double redirects as you did for the human ones. BTW: There is no script by the PWRF which recognized its own reverts. It is a good suggestion but it would degrade the performance a lot. It is better to improve the bot to prevent malfunctions.

Remark: {{Emergency-bot-shutoff}} is the same as blocking the bot. --Xqt (talk) 10:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your friendly reply to my somewhat breathless post! I see your performance argument, but checking the history is something we humans have to do, too, and it hampers our performance as well. Maybe there is a way to make life easier both for humans and bots? (Any solution would probably be well beyond the scope of this bot. (E.g. de:WP:Sichten comes to mind.) But maybe you have a better idea.

Thank you also for placing {{nobots}} on the page in question; I wasn't aware of this. It would be better if the bot told us of this option in the edit summary. However, this is not in general a good solution; imagine what you would say if we had a human user who busily reverts edits of others, and if you want him to respect those edits, you would have to speak in Chinese with him - in each single case! I quickly looked at the last 20 edits the bot did, and found that seven of these are potentially the same situation as described at the village pump. I don't know what the conclusion of that discussion was, but I'm only mentioning this to show that the problem may go far beyond this one single redirect.

A simpler and more effective solution may be more specific to this bot: This is one of a class of bots that never should go back to an article it has edited before, and does not do urgent edits. I don't know how the bot proceeds from article to article, but off hand I could imagine two solutions: If it is possible to go by creation date of the redirect, then the bot can start with the oldest, and it would be guaranteed that it would never revisit a page. If that isn't possible, then maybe it could work off a list that is created once every week or so, which would be created by taking into account a "master list" of articles already visited. To better compare the two lists, they could be sorted alphabetically, which would also have the added benefit that we humans get a feel for what the bot is up to. — Sebastian 15:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

That same page now got changed again by another bot. So, obviously, {{nobots}} doesn't even work as its name promises. That makes that even less of a solution than I said above. Please, therefore, take my concerns and proposals above seriously. — Sebastian 14:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Sebastian, this is a good example why your proposal won't work. I've discussed it with other bot owners and developers. In general there are several bots who does the jobs, but there is no way to disable an edit except looking for {{nobots}} (and the bot has to be exclusion compliant and on actual state) or giving the bots an other syntax to handle that stuff. I've changed my bot to respect {{nobots}} on 10th March to prevent the given problem and the bugfix of the PWRF came on 15th march with release 6508. It is strongly recommended to keep the bot actualy. The exclusion compilant is described at WP:Bots as well. In this special case, there is no difference between a redirect which links to a target who contains an article and on the other hand a redirect which belongs to an other lemma, which could be a redirect itself or an artice, but this link should be fixed. There is a meta-tag __STATICREDIRECT__, but this is never supported by any bot. A possible solution for the last one would be to mark these redirects with a template like {{softredirect}}. This would work of cause normal redirect bots wouldn't see these pages as redirects and won't try to fix that. This softredirect could link to a redirect as well which derives to the article. This not differs significantly from a double redirekt of cause mediawiki solves only one hop. --Xqt (talk) 14:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

This problem started when an editor moved Social Security (United States) to Social Security in the United States with no prior discussion on the talk page. There are reasons not to make this move, and I've reverted it.

The editor who made the move didn't trouble fix any of the redirects, though. Accordingly, they all became double redirects. The bot jumped in and "fixed" them. As a result, they now reach a dead end. For example, reader who enters Social Security Act of 1935 used to get to the relevant section of Social Security (United States), but now reaches a redirect page.

I don't want to have to go through and fix all of these by hand. Is there a way to automate it?

Thanks for your help. JamesMLane t c 03:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

This has been done by DarknessBot who also fixes double redirects. Isn't it or does I guess wrong? --Xqt (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if the bot prefers working on articles who have been most recently changed, which would also explain the revert war I mentioned above. — Sebastian 06:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Struck out above; that was an edit conflict. Xqt, if you're there, could you please reply to what wrote above? Thank you! — Sebastian 06:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The other bot handled some of the problems, but quite a few were left. On closer examination, though, I realized that this was because the editor who moved the article also edited the "ssusa" template to direct to the new title, so it showed up as being linked in all the articles that used the template. I edited the template and that seems to have solved the problems that the bot didn't fix. Thanks for your help! JamesMLane t c 03:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Henmor (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC) i see you was looking at my article Arthur Sarkissian (artist) there are two request's. and i change and add what ask's there.... please if it's ok delete that request if no't please tell me what to do..... Henmor (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Only my bot acted there. I am fine with your edits. --Xqt (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

For some reason, your bot keeps changing the correct spelling of Never Shout Never to NeverShoutNever! for the languages other than English. --Russ is the sex (talk) 04:30, 31 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry but the bot corrected the interwiki links to the given articles as writen in the foreign languages. For the spelling you have written there exists no articles on other wikis. I've reverted your edit thus iw links works again. --Xqt (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see what happened now. Sorry about that. Technically speaking, the bot is correct. However, the correct spelling of Never Shout Never is not NeverShoutNever! and it is incorrect on those select pages in other languages. Could you correct it on the Español, Norsk (bokmål)‬, and Português pages? Thanks! --Russ is the sex (talk) 13:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think it's up to the local community to change the title. For es-wiki IMHO it's ok to move the page but my normal local user account is not autoconfirmed and I couldn't do this. Try to explain your request on these local talk pages to get the title changed. Regards --Xqt (talk) 06:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your bot just added ru:Alex Van Halen to Eddie Van Halen. I've fixed it. Rodhullandemu 15:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for that. I found the iw links at ru site are still wrong. But I've fixed it manually yet. --Xqt (talk) 12:43, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I really don't understand what's going on over at this article illustrated by this edit. It appears to be a bot war. Thanks Nelson50^T 14:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

It is not a bot war [9]. My bot just removed a non-existent link but SieBot found the right link to that wiki first. Maybe elsewhere the right link has been changed manually. --Xqt (talk) 23:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

A vandal redirected hip hop to shit, and Xqbot dutifully fixed many of the double-redirects, even though the redirect was only in place for 42 minutes. Although I may agree with the sentiment, it was difficult for me to find all the redirects. Any suggestions? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Increasing the time offset would not solve this problem. I found this behaviour two times in one year and it was never reported to the robot framework. This miss-edit is annoying but it might be not a big problem. I will change the bot scripts on occasion to detect some cases of vandalizm. Thanks for your request --Xqt (talk) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

May I suggest that the edit summary might be a good way to reduce this? "Fixing double redirect hip hop to shit" would be easy enough to search for. Rich Farmbrough, 19:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC).Reply

Sounds good. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good idea. Will be implemented asap. Xqt (talk) 07:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done in r7499 --Xqt (talk) 08:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Can you check that any ":" is preserved? Other wise Category:X becomes a category of the redirect page, rather than merely the target. Rich Farmbrough, 18:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC).Reply

Do you have an example for me? --Xqt (talk) 06:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think Rich is referring to this. 66.57.4.150 (talk) 21:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I see. Thanks. In my opinion this is a mediawiki-Bug. Anyway it should be solved. --Xqt (talk) 10:35, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't remove the robot add from Kuvempu University (Kn:)--122.173.185.1 (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry but the interwiki target for kn-wiki does not exist Xqt (talk) 12:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your bot just 'fixed' a double redirect - effectively reverting my edit from Heme C to Heme c. However, the former name (my change) is actually correct, given the context of the target article. I've undone its change. Is there any reason why this change took place please? Brammers (talk) 15:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Addendum: please could you clarify if your bot is approved? I've only been able to find its "Request expired" page. Looking at your talk page, it seems to be misbehaving quite a bit. Brammers (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry I don't understand your opinion. If Heme C is the right one, you should move the article to that place. This bot only solves double redirection like some others too because mediawiki doesn't solves it yet. These pages are listet at Special:DoubleRedirects. Btw my bot has a global bot flag. --Xqt (talk) 05:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please accept my apologies for being a little terse; my understanding of the double-redirect was mistaken. All sorted now. Best wishes, Brammers (talk) 14:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Swahili Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 13:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

This behavior is the result of namespace mismatch. I wouldn't free all of these crossnamespaces. So I blocked the page instead for bots --Xqt (talk) 13:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Norwegian Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 20:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please try to understand that the different language wikipedias have their own individual different ways of organizing their articles. German Wikipedia does not organize german articles on different language wikipedias in the article namespace. German Wikipedia has a special namespace for this here. Thus You cannot remove such valid language links from english wikipedia articles. If, for instance, you create a german article on the Norwegian Wikipedia, and place that article in the german article name space, what will happen is that a german admin will come along and take that article out of the article namespace, and place it into the appropriate name space in German Wikipedia. So the language links are correct. This is not a typical "namespace mismatch". Please adjust your bot accordingly and refrain from removing valid language links from english wikipedia articles. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your are rigth. I just blocked the page for now. Fix for crossnamespace coming soon --Xqt (talk) 06:02, 4 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've fixed the crossnamespace on my local copy now. After testing the behavior I will upload the new revision to svn repository for the other bots too. I hope I get my bot unblocked for doing this stuff --Xqt (talk) 17:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Recently a hyphen was added in Rosie Malek-Yonan's last name when spelled in Farsi. Though her last name does have a hyphen in English, when translated into Farsi, there should be no hyphen. I've removed it a few times but it appears again. Can you please help remove it. Thanks! Zayya 17:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Since this part is a link to a given farsi article, you cannot change its spelling here. The only way is to move the Farsi article to its redirect --Xqt (talk) 18:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've blocked Xqbot from editing, it has not went through a request for approval and is editing outside the scope allowed for global bots. Per WP:GLOBALBOTS, The English Wikipedia allows the use of Global bots to update interwiki links . . . Use of global bots for any other purpose is not currently permitted. Q ^{T C} 11:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I do not agree. You cannot change the rules and hang the delinquent. Since I've startet fixing double redirects in january 2009 this was allowed for global bots long time ago [10]. This was never recalled by global bot policy. I found no restriction to that policy by local policy [11] at the time I startet this task. On the other hand I informed the comunity about my bots tasks on its user page as well as on Wikipedia:Registered bots #Other registered bots. So far I can not understand why my bot was blocked after this long time and its maintainance was well known. Anyway I have switched off fixing double redirections at en-wiki and it would very helpfull unblocking it now to enable fixing interwiki links again. Thanks a lot --Xqt (talk) 17:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

English Wikpiedia opted-in to global bots, not the global bot policy. Global bot policy does not overrule local policy. As agreed, ENWP bot policy would only allow global bots to do interwiki work. When the global policy expanded to include double redirects, that did not give the authority to do so on English Wikipedia, as ENWP does not agree to the global policy, but allows global bots under local restrictions. While this might have been ambiguous for a period of time since adoption, the Global rights page was updated to explicitly state that it is against policy to perform tasks outside of the original consensus of interwiki-only. Despite the fact that it was running, did not constitute approval that it was running within policy. It only came to my attention after it 'fixed' some malicious redirects. You're more then welcome to do double redirect fixing, but only after gaining approval for this task. I've gone ahead and unblocked the account so it can continue to do interwiki work only; as mentioned, any other tasks will require approval. Q ^{T C} 01:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I respect this policy without any doubt. But as I came here I had also no doubt that fixing redirects is allowed here. I felt it as a overreaction blocking the bot instead of informing me about this misunderstanding. I check all talk pages every day and I am reachable at #pywikipediabot. Anyway it's quite ok for me. Thanks for unblocking and best regards --Xqt (talk) 07:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

See the history of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Epitaph_of_Twilight&action=history There was redirection to .hack#Setting, which was changed to URL redirection (the article) to fix the non-existant double redirection.

There was another article like this for which I undid the edit also, but I can't recall what it was (it also redirected to .hack#Setting). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.110.201.130 (talk) 19:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

This was caused by vandalism here --Xqt (talk) 07:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I see. I'm sorry, then. A suggestion: perhaps the bot should check if any part of the page name (a "part" being a word separated by a space from the rest of the name) exists in the second redirected page. This should be true 100% of the time (real double redirects will always be fixe), although it would not always prevent vandalism like this. Perhaps you have another idea which might make it prevent more vandalism. The problem with this kind of vandalism, combined with bots, is that when it gets "fixed", it seems to be a mistake rather than vandalism.

P.S. This is my WM account - I'm the previous IP poster. Thanks, Comanoodle (talk) 16:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your suggestion. Maybe it works. I am just in experimenting for one of a further release to detect whether a broken redirect or redirect loop may be fixed or should speedy deleted. This might be a bit similar to get potential vandalized pages and write this to a service page for checking. By the way, my bot has a delay time for giving the rc patrol a change to detect such vandalism. But also as described at #Merde above, I changed the bot behaviour in Release 7499 writing the redirect target into the comment line. This helps to revert such derived links to its origin. --Xqt (talk) 18:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Xqt. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Xqbot. Thank you..— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, your bot made this edit, which doesn't seem very plausible to me. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The whole thing is not plausible. There are iw links from a portal namespace to tempates and normal articles. This doesn't make any sense at all. The bot just tried to unlink crossed namespaces --Xqt (talk) 12:40, 20 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your bot has been repeatedly and mistakenly adding the french link fr:Barbarian II: The Dungeon of Drax to Barbarian: The Ultimate Warrior.[12][13] The sequel has its own page Barbarian II: The Dungeon of Drax. Please make your corrections to this bot. Jappalang (talk) 00:04, 25 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's not a bot's malfunction. It is a normal way interwikilinks works. I've changes the source pages at fr-wiki thus it would lead the new links to the correspondig targets. --Xqt (talk) 11:08, 26 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

How did this redirect happen? Woogee (talk) 01:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

First I guessed this was a kind of artifical intelligence. But sorry the reason was this edit. --Xqt (talk) 10:16, 27 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I figured it was some sort of vandalism. NOT on your part. Woogee (talk) 23:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Xqt made this edit because it was "fixing double redirect", but it was not a double redirect. Adabow (talk) 04:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

It was at the time it changes the link, but the redirect was reverted here --Xqt (talk) 05:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Xqt, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page. --Marmzok (talk) 20:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Xqt, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page.--Marmzok (talk) 15:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

sv:Kategori:Delstatsvapen i Tyskland should not be interwiki linked to en:German coats of arms etc. The Swedish category is just for German Länderwappen, not for German arms in general. E.G. (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply