User talk:Daniel78

I respond to messages left on this talk page here, not on the talk pages of the users who left them.

Archives 2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013 Note that a thread will be archived based on the date of the last comment.

FPC Bot died

FPCBot missed his 7AM round, and his 15PM round as well. Something happened? Béria Lima ^msg 15:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I did a manual run now and it seemed to work. Possibly there were simply no changes to be made earlier, but I have not followed the candidates for a while - is it something it should have done ?

I also see I have several messages about the bot here from other people, I have not much spare time over for the bot but I'll try to take a look when I get time. And it's of course fine to submit patches to the code if needed, it's on github and linked to from the bot page. /Daniel78 (talk) 12:10, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

The bot is working perfectly fine :D It had only missed the round, and i was not sure if was because you stopped him for some reason, or because Toolserver died in some way. It had a couple of nominations to close, but I did it manually (and now i love your bot even more) until know what had happened :D I also saw he running today, so all is good again  :D but thanks anyway! :D Béria Lima ^msg 21:32, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

PS.: Sorry in advance if you hate barnstar ;)

Thanks a lot, I am happy the bot is useful :) /Daniel78 (talk) 08:23, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For having created one of the most useful bots in Commons, the FPCBot, I give you this barnstar! Béria Lima msg 21:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

FPCbot results

Please have a look: In at least two recent FPC's (that and this one), the bot did not count one valid oppose vote each, leading to wrong promotion. The support votes are being taken into account correctly so far. Thanks --A.Savin 23:34, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

See Pine's votes: they're probably the reason (he uses "subst:"). Tomer T (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

And this is one of the reasons why we have a human checkpoint in the promotion process. It would not be reasonable for the bot to also look for subst'ed templates. --Slaunger (talk) 22:09, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, my God... yes, that was certainly the reason ;) A.Savin 22:50, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

One more about your bot

Daniel, they changed the Assessments template and now the "subpage" value does not work, was replaced with "com-nom" which leads to errors like this one since the bot didnt got that changed. Can you change it please? Thank you a lot! :D Béria Lima ^msg 22:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Delay due to holidays, but I have updated it now. There were no such candidates to be updated now so the code change has not yet been properly verified. But just ping me if there is a problem. /Daniel78 (talk) 10:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Change to FPC delisting procedure

I have just implemented a proposal to have have delisting nominations run in the same area as regular FPCs as well as introduce "delist and replace" nominations. They will continue to be prefixed with Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/ as before, but their location will be Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. Could you see if such a nomination won't break the bot? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I looked at the code now and unfortunately it currently only base if it's a delisting or not on the section. Here: https://github.com/Zitrax/FPCBot/blob/master/fpc.py#L1164 So if the bot should be able to distinguish between them if they were mixed it needs to be fixed to detect them in some other way, /Daniel78 (talk) 06:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

In addition it seems like the bot is not really handling the delist candidates (i.e. the script is not running with that flag), I did not remember this - was a while since I looked at this so I don't remember why. /Daniel78 (talk) 07:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's not really that important that the bot be able to handle delisting nominations immediately; they can be closed manually. My only concern is, is there a reason the bot might crash and burn when it comes across a delisting nomination in the regular section? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I think the bot would try to handle it as a normal candidate if they were put in that list, so I think the bot really needs to know at least that it should ignore them if they were there. /Daniel78 (talk) 08:36, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you think you could implement a fix to ignore delisting candidates? (If you don't have time right now, that's fine, but I just want to make sure: Let's say the a delisting nomination is submitted right now and the bot tries to handle it. I don't care what kind of garbage the bot does to the delisting nomination, but it won't shut down the operation of the bot, right?) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it would kill the bot, although I can't guarantee anything as I have not tried. Feel free to add a delist candidate there to see what happens and ping me if there is something serious. I don't have much time for bot work right now. But I'll have it in mind. And of course anyone is welcome to help with work on the bot. /Daniel78 (talk) 09:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bot currently misbehaves on a delisting candidate because it sees no support votes within a 5 day period and therefore tries to close the nomination. There are obviously no support votes as it is a delisting candidate. It would be great if this could be fixed at least in a temporary way, for example with some ignore-flag within the nomination. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes some ignore flag would be the easiest quick-fix. Can you suggest a flag to use, and add it to the candidate and I can try it out. /Daniel78 (talk) 10:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I have no idea of how the bot (or any Wiki-Bots) work (whether it checks the Wiki-Code or the html result etc.), so I don't know what would work there. Also, anything better than the current <div style="display:none">*{{s}}*{{s}}</div> would be fine for me as a user. Or, maybe that's even enough for now, just found out that this works. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)