User talk:QuasiBot

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

depreni[edit]

Your job is strictly to conjugate Latin. —AugPi (t) 06:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, master! QuasiBot 07:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, master! QuasiBot 07:05, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Let's see: if I use Firefox and you use Safari, then maybe we can edit Wiktionary simultaneously. —AugPi (t) 07:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, master! QuasiBot 07:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

count page and AF[edit]

Hi QuasiBot!

AutoFormat only reviews changes from recent changes from humans. Bots are expected to be perfect.

(well, maybe not ;-)

You should generally include {{count page}} if you are writing something that doesn't have "[[" in it. But if not, don't worry, AF will get to it, but on background, so it may seem (and is) a lot slower. But AF is relentless, so it will get there.

No worries. Robert Ullmann 18:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for confirming (what I suspected: my updated templates now add a page counter if parameter new is not set to 0). —QuasiBot (t) 21:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Um, you have an extraneous ": " in front of the template. If and when AF or IW removes the template, the ": " will remain. It shouldn't be there, the template is the entire line by itself. Robert Ullmann 11:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I should note that if you would kindly fix the bot generation of ": ", I will be happy to run a one-off to fix the existing cases. (:-) Robert Ullmann 16:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I had trouble getting the MediaWiki to behave the way I wanted it (or expected it) to behave. When I tried adding the page counter template conditionally, I found that either one of two things happened: (1) the page counter is added correctly, but when it is left out, there is an extraneous extra empty line under the definition line, (2) when the page counter is left out, there is no extraneous space under the definition line, but when the page counter is included, it "runs in" (as a continuation of) the definition line, instead of under it. I included the ": " so that the page counter, when included, wouldn't run in with the definition line, but would go under it. I vaguely suspected that the ": " might itself be problematic, but now that you have explained it to me, I understand why that is the case... Also, a solution to this problem has popped into my mind: it might be inelegant: I might have to create pairs of alternative entry-creation templates: one that includes page counters within each one of its conditional blocks (there is one for each verb form), and another one that doesn't. But, hey(!), if that's what it takes, then I'll have to do that. An alternative idea has also popped up in my mind: it is more elegant, but I'm not sure if it would work. It is this: the calling template (i.e. the one which I subst in directly into new articles) would no longer be the actual content template, but it would be a conditional "wrapper" which does either of two things (depending on parameter new): (1) call the content template and then the page counter template under it (it might not work though: it might have the same "run-in" problems I have had so far) or (2) call the content template alone. Anyway, I'll see about it... —QuasiBot (t) 18:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
And, by the way, if you know of any little "coding trick" that would serve as a magic bullet for the above-mentioned problem, I would be (if you informed me of it) very grateful... —QuasiBot (t) 18:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Phew! I found a solution... and it is rather simple! —QuasiBot (t) 20:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
The "coding trick" that immediately comes to mind is: use an actual programming language, rather than trying to do tricks with template substitution. Exempli gratia, in Python, just before saving the text:
if '[[' not in text: text = text.rstrip('\n') + '\n{{count page|[[Wiktionary:Page count]]}}\n'
would make a lot of other things easier too. Given your boss's understanding of the template language, Python should be easy.
Don't worry about the existing entries with ": ", one of my minions is fixing them. Hakuna matata. Robert Ullmann 12:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
And using Python (like French, Spanish, Italian does) all the logic is on your home computer, and you don't need to generate a thousand templates. SemperBlotto 16:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I already have got Python set up on my computer... Some days ago I ran the Python interpreter and tried some of the examples that are on that online tutorial, and I did get the impression that the Python way would work for me, at least eventually... With Python I should be able to do things I can't do with templates, like easily converting a macronized spelling to a macron-free spelling: this could help with built-in error-checking. So, yeah... it's something that might happen... it's on my radar... —AugPi (t) 19:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I like the O'Reilly series of programming books (even though I don't yet own any of such books), so if I might get a hold of a Learning Python book, that might help get my mind immersed in it: something for me to think about/keep in mind... —AugPi (t) 19:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

obserenda[edit]

Bot has created some empty pages. You might want to delete them and start again. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:21, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

See Special:UncategorizedPages. DCDuring TALK 23:35, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you [both] for the notification: I'll look into it... —AugPi (t) 04:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Problem fixed! (It didn't take long: thanks to delete.py.) —AugPi (t) 05:21, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Major deletion errors[edit]

Your bot has been deleting significant content on many pages. See for example [1], where the second pronunciation section was inexplicably deleted as part of page modification. you will need to track down and repair all these errors before continuing with your bot. --EncycloPetey 02:28, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed this as I was getting Python to start uploading (so I will look into it...) —AugPi (t) 10:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
I had just merged the two pronunciation sections into one, trying to solve the {{rfc-pron-n}} problem. However, instead of "Pronunciation 1", it should have been simply "Pronunciation", like so: http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=amaverimus&oldid=10864450 . Perhaps I should have consulted, though, before performing such changes (actually, they should not have been done by QuasiBot at all, since such changes deviate, in a significant way, from QuasiBot's routine, so I will look through and reverse them...) —AugPi (t) 11:17, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
...It appears that the easiest way to find such errors is (for me) to go through FitBot's contribution history and check entries which are not marked (top)... —AugPi (t) 11:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
...Check the hist(ory) of such entries using Lupin pop-up... —AugPi (t) 11:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Latin verbs conjugated by FitBot[edit]

nomino (top), canto (iwicket), nobilito (top), nodo (top), noscito (top), noto (top), novo (iwicket), nudo (top), nuncupo (top, AF), nuntio (iwicket), nuto (top), oppugno (iwicket), opto (iwicket), ordino (top), orno (top), oro (top), ostento (top), ovo (top), onero (top), nutrico (top), obliquo (top), obligo (top), oblecto (top), obiurgo (top), obiecto (top), oberro (top), obscuro (top), observo (top), occulto (top, AF), occupo (top), occurso (top, AF), offenso (top, AF), audio (top), vestio (top), venio (top, iwicket), advenio (top), circumvenio (top), contravenio (top, AF), convenio (top, IW), devenio (top, EP), evenio (top, IW), intervenio (top, IW), invenio (top, AF, EP, IW), pervenio (top, AF, IW), praevenio (top, AF), provenio (top), revenio (top, IW), subvenio (top), supervenio (top), circumvenio (top), contravenio (top), convenio (top), invenio (top, IW), vincio (top), transilio (top), tinnio (top), voco (IW), eo (top, IW), abeo (top, AF), adeo (top), exeo (top), ineo (top), intereo (top), obeo (top), pereo (top), subeo (top), transeo (top), revincio (top), saepio (top), scio (QuasiBot), servio (top), sentio (top), sepelio (top), punio (top), suffio (top), sopio (top), salio (top, IW), saevio (top), gelo (IW), gemino (IW), gemmo (top), genero (IW), gesto (top), gravo (top), guberno (IW), gusto (IW), glomero (top), habito (IW), haesito (IW), hebeto (top), hiemo (top), hilaro (IW), honesto (top), honoro (top), humo (top), iacto (top), ignoro (top), illumino (IW), illustro (top), immolo (top), illigo (top), immuto (top), imperito (top), impetro (top), implico (IW), neco (AugPi), navans (top), navigans (top), natans (top, other bots), narrans (top, AF, Mg), maceratus (top, other), mactatus (top, other), maculans (top), ..., offirmo (top), imploro (AF), impugno (top), imputo (top), inauguro (top), dicto (top), amo (QuasiBot), visito (top), inauro (top), incito (top), inclamo (top), trunco (top), obtrunco (top), integro (top), incoho (top), incuso (top), induro (top), inflammo (top), ingemino (top), inclino (top), inculco (top), incurso (top), incurvo (top, IW), oblittero (top), obnuntio (top), occaeco (top), obumbro (top), obturo (top), obturbo (top), obtempero (top), obsigno (top), obsero (QuasiBot), obsecro (top), obrogo (top), indago (top), indico (top), inebrio (top), aequo (IW), infesto (top), credo (top), ago (AugPi), infamo (top), infirmo (top, AF), inflo (top), informo (top), inhio (top), initio (top), inquieto (top), inquino (top), insimulo (top).

Track-down & repair[edit]

scio: sciveris ✔, sciverimus ✔, sciveritis
neco: necaveris ✔, necaverimus * ✔, necaveritis * ✔, necatis
amo: amaveris * ✔, amaverimus ✔, amaveritis * ✔, amata ✔, amatis * ✔
obsero: obseratis ✔, obseraveris ✔, obseraverimus ✔, obseraveritis ✔, obseratis ✔, obseveris ✔, obseverimus ✔, obseveritis ✔, obsereris ✔, obsita
ago: egeris * ✔, egerimus * ✔, egeritis * ✔, ageris * ✔, acta

That's it! All Pronunciation 1 + Pronunciation 2 (by FitBot) merged by QuasiBot (or AugPi) (the above articles marked with * ✔) have been restored. —AugPi (t) 05:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Esperanto POS[edit]

I think all of these should be "verb" not "POS"? Conrad.Irwin 08:22, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

They should be Noun and I have (by now) corrected them (and also the typo in the entry-creation template). Thank you for pointing these out. —AugPi (t) 11:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Ido[edit]

Special:UncategorizedPages has some erroneous creations. DCDuring TALK 22:42, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

"Missing" templates[edit]

Special:WantedPages shows about 200 missing templates that are "wanted" by pages created by this bot. They seem to have been "wanted" virtually since creation and would remain wanted indefinitely AFAICT. Is there a way to recreate the entries without leaving behind this kind of detritus? This kind of thing makes Special:WantedPages less useful for its main tasks: identifying pages that are truly needed and identifying some problematic practices. DCDuring TALK 15:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)