Archive for %(monthname)s %(year)d
Hi, I have a question here. I have a bot and it's script, but I don't know how to run it.--Gabrielchihonglee (talk) 14:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) @Gabrielchihonglee: Misza13 hasn't been editing much at the English Wikipedia recently, so is unlikely to see this message. I don't know the answer to your question. Does anything at Wikipedia:Creating a bot help you? -- John of Reading (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict) This is not the best place to ask questions about bots. Most information about bots is at WP:BOTS and its subpages; but before running any bot, you need to obtain approval from WP:BAG. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The bot hasn't archived anything in three days, including ANI, which is what brought me here.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) This has already been raised at Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#MiszaBots down. We'll just have to hope that Misza13 reads the email. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Add {{#if:{{{key|}}}|[[Category:Pages archived using a key]]}} to the beginning of User:MiszaBot/config.
Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done thanks. Legoktm (talk) 03:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Misza13. I am here to tell you that the 3 bots that you are operating have not been doing any archiving since 3 October. Can you please address the issues? Thanks. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 07:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) See #Not working, above. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MiszaBot has always done my archiving... what is this? Legobot archiving? -- t numbermaniac c 11:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) Yes. See Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#MiszaBots down. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Wikipedian. I notice that you and your colleague Legobot archive ‘threads with no replies in 30 days’, on some Talk pages. Why is that? Was this line of action ever democratically decided? I would think archiving is only good in situations where the Talk page gets rather full, rather big. If that is not the case, I would recommend to let all 'older' discussions stand. They don't automatically stand in anyone's way if the page doesn’t get very long. That a certain discussion does not get a new reaction within one month does not automatically mean that some (perceived) problem is solved, or that it cannot be fruitfully discussed further at a (much) later moment. Even if a problem for the moment seems totally solved, it can still sometimes be worthwile at a later stage to re-read that discussion – which would be made needlessly difficult if one first has to go to some archive-page to search for it. Corriebertus (talk) 18:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) I'll have a go at answering this, since Misza13 hasn't been active at this site recently.
- The archive bots only archive from talk pages when they are told to do so, where there is a "Miszabot/Config" section hidden at the top of the page - see User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. It is up to the editors working at any particular page to decide if archiving is necessary, and if it is, to decide on the delay period. If there's a particular page you have in mind, you could be bold and delete or adjust the "Miszabot/Config" instruction at the top and see if anyone objects, or else begin a discussion there to ask whether archiving could be turned off or delayed for longer than 30 days.
- And, of course, some pages do generate lots of discussion and would be far too big if threads were not removed somehow. For example, the archives at Talk:Muhammad total about 10 megabytes. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Users can set the archiving instructions for talk pages to other values than 30 days. I think that 90 days is a good value.
- I have experienced problems with talk pages that do not have archiving. Sometimes users in 2013 start posting replies to comments made by people in 2006. This gets very confusing. If someone wants to restart a 7 year old discussion, it is much clearer to start a new section, and simply reference the old discussion. You even get people "correcting" statements made by people in comments long ago. One person tried refactoring a talk page to make it support him point of view - an admin told me afterwards that we could have avoided most of the problems we had on that page if there had been an archiving bot set up.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- See also replies at User talk:Legobot#Why archiving. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed a changing of the guard vis-a-vis archiving bots on my talk page. Looks like you're taking some well-deserved time off; I just wanted to drop in to say thanks for the many years of service. Best regards, –xenotalk 13:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
