User talk:ClueBot Commons
The current status of ClueBot NG is: Running The current status of ClueBot III is: Running Praise should go on the praise page. Barnstars and other awards should go on the awards page. Use the "new section" button at the top of this page to add a new section. Use the [edit] link above each section to edit that section. This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III. The ClueBots' owner or someone else who knows the answer to your question will reply on this page.
False positives and false negativesIf you believe that ClueBot NG has missed an edit that is vandalism, again do not report it here. ClueBot is unable to catch all vandalism. Just revert the edit and warn the editor.
The current status of ClueBot NG is: Running
The current status of ClueBot III is: Running
Praise should go on the praise page. Barnstars and other awards should go on the awards page.
Use the "new section" button at the top of this page to add a new section. Use the [edit] link above each section to edit that section.
This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III.
The ClueBots' owner or someone else who knows the answer to your question will reply on this page.
| ClueBots | |
|---|---|
| ClueBot NG/Anti-vandalism · ClueBot II/ClueBot Script |  |
| ClueBot III/Archive · Talk page for all ClueBots |
 | Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. |
ClueBot NG Needs You!
[edit]Damian has been working hard to bring the Report and Review interfaces back. We are now happy to announce that all is ready!
Report Interface: We need Wikipedians to assist with clearing the backlog of false positive reports
Review Interface: This has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to effect how the bot should be trained.
Please reply under this message if you want to get involved - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'd love to get involved, as a new rollbacker, I wish to help out! Valorrr (lets chat) 03:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith I would be interested in helping out. I just happened to stumble onto this today, as ClueBot kept beating me to several rollbacks I thought I caught instantly! Nubzor [T][C] 20:19, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: You need to login to either Report or Review first before I can give you the relevant rights, although a new update may have you the rights straight away - RichT|C|E-Mail 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Long time no speak! Been busy learning a new job which is why I didn't initially reply. I'm happy to help though. I just logged in and looks like I still have rights from last time 5 albert square (talk) 18:19, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
- @5 albert square: Good to hear from you! Perfect, glad to hear it :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 11:22, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Sorry about that. I didn't even try to log in earlier. I (believe) I was successful at logging into both. I will look into this more tomorrow before I start tinkering. Seems like something more useful/helpful than just patrolling RC. I always chuckle when I am positive a rollback will be successful, only to see it was ClueBot that beat me to it :) Nubzor [T][C] 00:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Quick question for you after taking a look--The Reviewer Interface & instructions provided there make perfect sense. But I'm not 100% certain on the Report Interface. Are we "defer[ing] to reviewer interface" regardless if it's a false positive or not, so that it can then be potentially incorporated into the dataset, either as vandalism or as constructive? Are we just filtering out bugged/invalid entries? Or am I misunderstanding. Nubzor [T][C] 02:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: Essentially yes, if it's an edit that would be helpful for the bot to learn what is/isn't a FP, then defer. If the edit has been suppressed or deleted, then mark it as invalid - RichT|C|E-Mail 10:07, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Perfect, thank you! Nubzor [T][C] 14:40, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: Essentially yes, if it's an edit that would be helpful for the bot to learn what is/isn't a FP, then defer. If the edit has been suppressed or deleted, then mark it as invalid - RichT|C|E-Mail 10:07, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Quick question for you after taking a look--The Reviewer Interface & instructions provided there make perfect sense. But I'm not 100% certain on the Report Interface. Are we "defer[ing] to reviewer interface" regardless if it's a false positive or not, so that it can then be potentially incorporated into the dataset, either as vandalism or as constructive? Are we just filtering out bugged/invalid entries? Or am I misunderstanding. Nubzor [T][C] 02:18, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith Long time no speak! Been busy learning a new job which is why I didn't initially reply. I'm happy to help though. I just logged in and looks like I still have rights from last time 5 albert square (talk) 18:19, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Nubzor: You need to login to either Report or Review first before I can give you the relevant rights, although a new update may have you the rights straight away - RichT|C|E-Mail 21:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm relatively new to editing but I'd love to help out if I can.
- Seantavius (talk) 21:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I see that I've been granted access to the review interface. Thanks
- Seantavius (talk) Seantavius (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Sign me up. I'm busy this month but hopefully I'll have more time to dedicate in the coming months —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @K6ka: You should be able to just sign in, your Wiki rights will give you instant access :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- Snazzy snazzy! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:25, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @K6ka: You should be able to just sign in, your Wiki rights will give you instant access :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith: I can help :-) —usernamekiran (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Your Wiki rights will automatically give you access upon login - RichT|C|E-Mail 11:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Rich Smith, yes, I logged in, and reviewed some edits successfully. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:38, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Your Wiki rights will automatically give you access upon login - RichT|C|E-Mail 11:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith, I'm interested. However, when I go the review interface, my username shows as "Chessenjoyer", an account that doesn't exist, and it says it's "pending approval by one of the administrators." Is this a bug? Chess enjoyer (talk) 05:38, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Chess enjoyer Thats a bit odd, either way, I've given you the relevant rights (I'm too lazy to log in to the Wikipedia app...) - RichT|C|E-Mail 09:09, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- This is because the mediawiki social auth backend passes the username with a space (as returned by the API) and the default clean username function strips spaces out.
- We have a scheduled job that updates usernames (in case they change), but this can be better during creation.
- - Damian Zaremba (talk • contribs) 19:49, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- This should be fixed for future accounts creations by [1], I just ran the username update script which fixed the existing entries for Chess enjoyer and Bowler the Carmine.
- - Damian Zaremba (talk • contribs) 20:02, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Chess enjoyer Thats a bit odd, either way, I've given you the relevant rights (I'm too lazy to log in to the Wikipedia app...) - RichT|C|E-Mail 09:09, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Rich Smith I'd love to help with this! AaronNealLucas (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Aplucas0703: I have given you access on the Report interface, the Review interface gave you access automatically. - RichT|C|E-Mail 02:00, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
- i want to get involved! ToTheLightmama (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
- The correct spelling is "affect", not "effect", unless there is some obscure meaning that makes it grammatically correct. SeaDragon1 (talk, contribs, happy birthday!) 16:27, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
- @SeaDragon1: No, "effect" is the correct spelling. "Affect" is generally a verb, while "effect" can be both a verb and a noun. In this case, "effect" is a noun being "The result or outcome of a cause."—that is, work in the review interface produces a result in the bot. "Affect" used as a verb can include, "My work reviewing false positive reports affects the bot's performance", or "The work Wikipedians invest in reviewing false positive reports have positively affected the bot's performance". "Effect" is usually a noun (e.g. "Your work reviewing false positive reports has a positive effect on the bot's performance"), but it can also (confusingly) be used as a verb: "More accurate false positive reviewing effects better bot performance". I know, English is weird. My day job involves professional writing and sometimes the better option is to simply avoid using those two words. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 17:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
This has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to affect how the bot should be trained.
seems better thanThis has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to effect how the bot should be trained.
, but I could be wrong. SeaDragon1 (talk, contributions) 17:33, 23 February 2026 (UTC)- Text diff:
SeaDragon1 (talk, contributions) 17:33, 23 February 2026 (UTC)− This has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to effect how the bot should be trained.+ This has a direct effect on the bot and what it knows about vandalism or constructive edits. We need Wikipedians to review edits to affect how the bot should be trained.- Ah, thought you meant the first use of "effect" in there. The second instance of "effect" should be "affect", yes. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 18:23, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry, should've clarified. SeaDragon1 (talk, contributions) 18:34, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, thought you meant the first use of "effect" in there. The second instance of "effect" should be "affect", yes. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 18:23, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- @SeaDragon1: No, "effect" is the correct spelling. "Affect" is generally a verb, while "effect" can be both a verb and a noun. In this case, "effect" is a noun being "The result or outcome of a cause."—that is, work in the review interface produces a result in the bot. "Affect" used as a verb can include, "My work reviewing false positive reports affects the bot's performance", or "The work Wikipedians invest in reviewing false positive reports have positively affected the bot's performance". "Effect" is usually a noun (e.g. "Your work reviewing false positive reports has a positive effect on the bot's performance"), but it can also (confusingly) be used as a verb: "More accurate false positive reviewing effects better bot performance". I know, English is weird. My day job involves professional writing and sometimes the better option is to simply avoid using those two words. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 17:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hi, I've been active on the review and report interface lately, but I just have one question: What do all the buttons on the report interface mean? I understand refer to review interface and invalid but not the other ones. FantasticWikiUser(Ts and Cs) 19:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
There is discussion in Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Archive_page_article_link that I started, and it seems more in phab:T262656 about having the Article tab on archived talk pages to point to the actual article, instead of the non-existent archive of the article page. If there is no way to change the tab, the other choice would be a redirect for the otherwise non-existent page. Could ClueBot III generate the redirect pages? Thanks. Gah4 (talk) 01:11, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- Technically the bot could do this (create redirect pages), but I'm not sure where we would stand effectively cluttering the namespace with redirects. If there could be a tag exposed to set the article page, which the bot could apply to the archive pages, that would be cleaner I think. - Damian Zaremba (talk • contribs) 14:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
Hello! ClueBot NG does very well!
[edit]Thank you very much, so here is some microchips, transistors, motor oil and a barnstar!
Zahrazamedahmedi has given you microchips! Microchips promote WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more efficient. It is the food best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else microchips, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of microchips by adding {{subst:Microchips for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Zahrazamedahmedi has given you transistors! Transistors promote WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more efficient. It is the food best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else transistors, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of transistors by adding {{subst:Transistors for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Zahrazamedahmedi has given you motor oil! Motor oil promotes WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more efficient. It is the drink best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else motor oil, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of motor oil by adding {{subst:Motor oil for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Thanks so much for cleaning up vandalism, ClueBot NG! Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 19:17, 18 April 2026 (UTC) |
Happy editing, ClueBot NG! Zahrazamedahmedi (talk) 19:17, 18 April 2026 (UTC)