Greetings. In [2012], you added to a maintainance tag @ 1976 swine flu outbreak. The article looks OK to me. The original box was also created by a bot, but the person/bot, but the originator no longer operates the bot. I think the tag ought to be removed. Please let me know what your reasoning was and if you agree that the tag can be removed. Regards Tapered (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

@Tapered: Have a look again at the edit that you linked. All that AnomieBOT did was to alter two instances of 17 October 2012 to October 2012 (without the 17). Both of these were in the |date= parameter of two {{dead link}} tags, which were added by Graham1973 (talk · contribs) in the previous edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Tapered (talk) 07:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Over 130 articles popped up today with #if statements that were generated by AnomieBot. It looks like the majority were translating German citations into English. Capacitor types added |language={{#ifeq: |en-US||German}} Culture of Remembrance and Barbarine are two other examples. There are different cases of #if, such as Albion (Saxon) having |language={{#ifeq: lat|en-US||{{ISO 639 name lat}}}} and Geneva having |title=Ständige Wohnbevölkerung ab 15 Jahren nach Religionszugehörigkeit, 2012{{#if:|: {{{TitelErg}}}}} Bgwhite (talk) 04:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Someone apparently instructed the bot to substitute {{Literatur}} and {{Internetquelle}} without first making sure that the substituted output was appropriate. Anomie⚔ 16:40, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there any way to stop it? There are ~450 today and another waste of my time to fix. Looks like Pigsonthewing added the two templates. Bgwhite (talk) 04:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Several:

1. The real fix is to edit the template being substed to subst properly. That means adding additional safesubsts to the parser function invocations so they get substed too when the template itself is substed.
2. You could make the appropriate edit to remove the template from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted until that is done.
3. As an emergency measure you could edit User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/TemplateSubster, but note that will stop all bot-substitutions so it would be best to only do that until #1 or #2 is done.

At this point it's too late for any of these for the two templates in question, since they both have already been substed everywhere they were used. HTH. Anomie⚔ 16:39, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Apologies; I checked, and both templates seem to already be marked up with "Safesubst". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I am here for the same reason. Today we got ~500 pages with errors. -- Magioladitis (talk) 04:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi all, in this edit at Narasimham (film), a user created an orphaned ref by renaming an existing reference. In this edit AnomieBOT attempted to resolve the matter by taking a reference from an unrelated article, Premam. Naturally this is a problem, since so many references across the project might be closely named, especially when we're lazy and use ref names like "NYTimes" and whatnot. Appreciate if this could be looked into, please. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: This is an intentional feature to catch people copying text from one article to another that contains some refs that would be orphan in the target article. Pppery 20:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I am so sorry. I will never done this tipe of acts. Cgoi1997 (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi AnomieBOT, please help to remove protection mode under International American University page and I think your previous edits are good enough to represent the current fact of the school. thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cipack (talk • contribs) 16:04, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

You seem to be confused. AnomieBOT is a computer program that makes certain kinds of simple edits to articles, not a human editor. I'd suggest you attempt to contact human editors interested in the topic of the article. Anomie⚔ 22:17, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The OnThisDayTagger job failed from September 25 through October 4 (inclusive). Articles that were featured in this range did not get their talk pages updated accordingly. Normal service resumed on October 5. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 23:14, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

It looks like it was stuck on Talk:Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty thanks to a {{nobots}}. I removed the {{nobots}} and updated the bot to handle that sort of situation better in the future. Anomie⚔ 17:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

This bot deleted the ActivTrak page for no real reason.

How can I make sure this doesn't happen again? The page had been up for almost 4 years, and was not self-promotional in any way. I had recently added citing to add credibility, but now it's deleted.

Why has this happened? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk922 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

AnomieBOT did not delete ActivTrak, it was deleted by Sarahj2107 following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ActivTrak. Anomie⚔ 21:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

You may want to change the bot to use {{Redirect category shell}} instead of {{This is a redirect}}, as the latter is deprecated. Use it like this:

{{Redirect category shell|
{{R from modification|{{-r|Talk:St Kilda – Chapman Creek Aquatic Reserve}}}}
}}

(Also consider leaving a blank line between the redirect line and the rcat shell for readability.) nyuszika7h (talk) 13:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Stop "Substing templates: {{colorbox}}", I think it is the wrong template to sub. Msjraz64 (talk) 06:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

You fixed this properly with this edit. Your next step should be to discuss with the person who made the edit you reverted there. Anomie⚔ 16:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you; it looked like the bot was still processing after that edit so that's why I posted here, I was just hoping I was doing things right. A discussion is already begun on this possible error. Msjraz64 (talk) 17:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, first of all thanks for running the AnomieBOT. There is one bug I wanted to report: As you can see here the bot inserts |language=German when it substitutes the template:Literatur. However, the template was quoting an paper in English ("Catalysis of the specific Michael addition: The example of acrylate acceptors" (in German)). As you can see, nothing about it is German. --Minihaa (talk) 10:45, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@Minihaa: {{Literatur}} is a German citation template, so the default language is assumed to German unless specified. The template's output include's (in German) before being substituted. See Ethyl acrylate before substitution. — JJMC89 (T·C) 14:21, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I understand the reason behind the assumption. However, the the bot makes it even worse: Before it wasn't written in the source code, now it is. Do you agree that it is a little problem? --Minihaa (talk) 15:46, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

The bot simply substitutes the template. It doesn't add anything the template isn't already doing on its own. Anomie⚔ 16:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, ok. Thanks a lot anyway for running it! Best regards --Minihaa (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey Anomie, just wanted to let you know that for some reason the bot has failed to update the TFD lists twice in the last week, meaning other editors have had to manually fix it. I looked through the code on the templates themselves and didn't see anything odd about those two sets of days, so I thought I'd mention it to ya. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 20:00, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I adjusted the times that the cronjob restarts the task if it happens to die, including a check shortly before the 00:00 UTC jobs run, so hopefully it'll be a bit more reliable. Anomie⚔ 00:27, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand why this edit was made. Several instances of {{colorbox}} were edited: changing to {{Color box}}, when the latter is to be merged with the former, as well as capitalizing when template examples show lack of same; setting a border color that seems unnecessary; and not doing any subst:ing, although {{Colorbox}} (but not {{Color box}}) is in the appropriate category. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, never mind. I see that what was puzzling is the result of the substitution process. Dhtwiki (talk) 20:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanu N (talk • contribs) 17:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I restored the redirect since someone restored the target page. Anomie⚔ 21:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

• Talk:Main Page#TFA Title template for Oct 19 2016

You might be interested, seeing as this concerns your bot! A rare glitch, probably caused by a template in an unexpected place in the TFA blurb. Bencherlite^Talk (using his alt account Bencherheavy) 17:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

FWIW, if this saves you some work, I won't be using the lang template at TFA any more, and I don't recall that I've ever needed a different template for the first link. - Dank (push to talk) 17:51, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It was also at phab:T148636. For the moment, I just added some code to post a message here if today's or tomorrow's template are empty so things can be manually fixed before they break other stuff. Anomie⚔ 21:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

A good idea, thanks. Bencherlite^Talk (using his alt account Bencherheavy) 14:35, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Something really bad happened here? [1]. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

It's also not doing what the edit summary states. It's not substituting, it's renaming. I see over 200 articles. Template says there were 1,600. Primefac was doing the merging of the two templates, maybe he knows what's going on. Bgwhite (talk) 07:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I keep fixing... -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Bgwhite, technically it was substituting, because {{lang-zh}} was a wrapper for {{zh}}. I'm flummoxed, though; I was modifying the code to make it a wrapper, missed the added cats, and then added it to the autosubst. I caught the issue, fixed it, reverted all of the bot's edits, and then everything seems to have gone well. I have absolutely no idea how another 200 instances of the bad code could have crept in. My sincere apologies for giving you a coronary Magioladitis. If there are any still kicking about, I'll fix 'em. Primefac (talk) 15:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC) I've fixed all of the remnants. Primefac (talk) 15:55, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

The current tenants of this mall do not include Mark's Wearhouse. They moved out to another location in May 2016. 50.100.126.219 (talk) 16:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Can u please ban this user, he's keeps vandalizing the Shadow the Hedgehog, David Humphrey and Jason Griffith articles and keeps removing sourced/correct information from the articles, he is also being very abusive with his edits and keeps posting threatening messages in his edit summaries. Please do something about him, he needs to be stopped. 174.192.9.105 (talk) 02:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

This is the user talk page for AnomieBOT, an automated process that does certain specific repetitive tasks so humans don't have to. It cannot respond to your query.

Further, it appears that you are being disruptive there. The source you are attempting to use, http://info.sonicretro.org, appears to be a wiki and therefore is very unlikely to be a reliable source, as has been stated in the edit summaries reverting your edits. Why don't you try actually discussing the issue with that editor, instead of continuing your behavior which is going to get your IPs blocked for edit warring? Anomie⚔ 11:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi thank you for deleting that page Talk:Hitachi small. You seems to be very helpful and also i hope no one creates that page because I originally put two months but i decided to split 12 archives for each year. One to answer me, talk to me by going To my talkpage. Thanks for your cooperation!TrenSpark (talk) 09:27, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Good job for giving a good bot for not giving a lot of vandalism and as well thanks for deleting that page. Because i just requested to deleted that page. You are so kind. TrenSpark (talk) 09:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

about list of turkic dynasties and countries it is good allready. you only want that the page lose value and if you not like it do it better! Joohnny braavoo1 (talk) 21:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thank you for your diligence Eurocus47 (talk) 03:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I've stopped the TemplateSubster task because the bot has been adding Talk: to the to: parameter when converting {{Split to}} templates to the {{Split article}} format. See here for an example. Also the edit summaries don't explain what it's doing - it took me a while to work it out!  —SMALLJIM  09:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

The edit summary describe exactly what the bot is doing: it is substituting the template. It's not doing any sort of conversion. It's likely this change that's causing trouble, although the version previous to that only worked right on articles and article talk pages. Chances are it should be using {{SUBJECTPAGENAME}} instead, but I'll leave it to people who actually know what's going on there to figure that out. Anomie⚔ 11:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, let's ping User:Primefac and User:JJMC89 to this discussion, since they're likely the "people who actually know what's going on there". Anomie⚔ 11:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I see you've restarted it – I don't think that's a good idea since it's clearly making errors (e.g. Talk:Riding horse) that will need to be corrected: why create more?  —SMALLJIM  11:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, it looks like the bot was caching that the template was still in the category even though it was removed. I'll add some checks for that. Anomie⚔ 12:51, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Wasn't me. Everything was working fine when I went to bed last night at 03:30 (both templates had nearly-identical coding and everything was working as it should). Not sure why JJMC89 changed the code, though clearly they saw something I missed. I guess I'll get on that... Primefac (talk) 14:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I suspect that JJMC89 changed the code after bad edits like this. But subsequent edits, like this, are plainly wrong, especially when considered alongside the other half of the pair; and I hope that somebody (perhaps the person who decided that this previously-harmless template should always be substed) is going to clear up this mess. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I have corrected the template to use {{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}. {{PAGENAME}} only worked for article talk pages, and {{FULLPAGENAME}} was incorrect. Since this is my screw-up I will go through and fix them after work. — JJMC89 (T·C) 15:03, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I didn't think there were any non-article usage of the splits, but I guess I missed 'em. Thanks for catching that JJMC89. I'm already halfway through my AWB search so I can keep going. Primefac (talk) 15:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Redrose64, I'm not sure what the issue is with the Reading railway station pair, except maybe that one of the |diff= needs to be changed into a |from_oldid=. With almost 2k transclusions between the two templates, there were bound to be some cases where the order of which-went-where (i.e. to/from) was going to be incorrect. I figured people like you (who clearly have an interest) would be the ones to eventually straighten them out. At the moment, though, I don't see an issue with the order of "X split to Y" (which was always my main concern). Primefac (talk) 15:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

@Primefac: Compare the actual bot edit with your claim of "not a bad bot edit...". The result is different, and the parameter names have nothing to do with it. When I added that template almost seven years ago, it was bang-on correct: nobody altered it, or even complained, until today. I don't see why it should now be changed. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:58, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough regarding the "Talk:" bit added in there. I was referring to the other half of your reverts wherein you did undo a valid edit. As for changing the template, that was decided back in April. It's just taken a while to sort everything out. I have gone through and fixed all of the improper additions of "Talk", so everything should be squared away. Primefac (talk) 19:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

FYI, the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation/Unidentified locations was only split from the talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation, not the article itself. That was why there were redlinks, and that's why I reversed the edit made by the bot. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 19:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

DanTD, I'm slightly turned around by your statement, but you are welcome to edit the {{split article}} template on the page so that it accurately reflects the split that occurred. Primefac (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Your bot recongnized that the template left behind by this single-edit IP was the result of vandalism, but it should have simply reverted that edit rather than attempting to fix it. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

It didn't detect any vandalism, actually, nor does it try to. It recognized that "August 1961" was an invalid date and updated it to the current date instead. Anomie⚔ 21:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Probably nothing to be done about this one, but FYI. In this edit the bot tried to rescue an orphaned ref by replacing

<ref name="edu02"/>

with

<ref name="edu02">{{cite web}}</ref>

This was wrong. The old ref was intended, but was not correct since "edu02" had not been defined anywhere. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

You're right, nothing to do here. The bot can't know that the content someone had put in for "edu02" previously was bogus. Anomie⚔ 23:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks so much for catching orphaned references that I miss after a revision. You always seem to be there, catching what I miss, like.... in the Timeline of Salem, Massachusetts....It's very much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.99.150.28 (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

... Does the bot have a mobile phone? -- John of Reading (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Nope. It also has a password that's long and random. Anomie⚔ 22:47, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, how do I make a note of the following link from the reference list that it is an outdated link and shows an error message? http://www.universal-music.co.jp/u-pop/artist/mya/mya_disco/uicy6335/

Also, I am not able to find any reputable sources anywhere on the web that could confirm that these tracks "Girls Like That" and "Telephone Games" are listed for the Japanese edition of Mya's Fear of Flying (album) .

I had went to Discogs.com and the Japanese releases only show 18 tracks currently with no mention of any bonus tracks. See links below. https://www.discogs.com/Mya-Fear-Of-Flying/release/4810127] https://www.discogs.com/Mya-Fear-Of-Flying/release/6733506

The only links I could find just confirm that the tracks in question "Girls Like That" and "Telephone Games" were not intended to be on any releases of the album.

http://www.ew.com/article/2000/04/25/mya-battles-her-record-label-over-her-new-album https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO2XHdC_fWc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMojQUm96s4 Lucy2006 (talk) 01:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lucy2006: AnomieBOT is a bot, an automated tool that carries out repetitive and mundane tasks to maintain the 60,568,824 pages of the English Wikipedia. It does not add references, and cannot offer advice. Please try the help desk. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

This is some of the mess I've seen today. There's been at least 3,000 edits to replace PDF links today, so the error count will be higher. Bgwhite (talk) 06:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Correction: Someone screwed up a template when instructing the bot to substitute it. You want to talk to Primefac, complaining here is unlikely to do any good. Anomie⚔ 12:09, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Just when you think you've got everything sorted... this is apparently the one case which I did not foresee coming, in which they put the URL inside of quotes, so the rules I set up to avoid nested templates actually caused the entire url to be repeated. This particular substitution seems to be throwing CS1 errors, so I'll go through those logs and try to fix as many as I can. Thank you for the notice Bgwhite. I can't say this will happen again (there is always going to be some odd situation that I don't foresee), but I will make sure to do as extensive of testing as possible before I auosubst a template in the future. Primefac (talk) 12:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

And Anomie, I apologize for the hassle you've been getting lately re: the substitutions. I don't know if there's some way to put "contact Primefac if this subst is messing up" but I'll do my best to make sure that isn't necessary. Primefac (talk) 12:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Should be all fixed. For the record, it was about a 2% failure rate, with half of them legitimate issues and the other half people not using the template properly in the first place. Primefac (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Primefac Thank you for fixing things up. It's not fun when outliers crop it. Been there, done that way too many times.

Anomie Others besides Primefac has had problems with substituting. I reported a problem with Andy Mabbett's AnomieBOT edits. Unless it says in the edit summary that this is user "X's" edit, this is the place where problems should be reported. Also reporting problems is not complaining. Bgwhite (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Aye, it's the main reason I watch this page when I've put in an autosubst. Primefac (talk) 23:45, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Bgwhite On the other hand, you've been here before so you should know that "Bot screwed up again" isn't a helpful report. Look at the history of User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to see who 'approved' the substing of whatever template is in question. Report it here if you want, but ping the right user to the discussion. Anomie⚔ 14:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi! It's me Teerta Prasad, I am 5 days older to Wikipedia. Bt I can not edit the page of Pooja Gandhi. Please let me know the reason. Please make it easy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teertaprasad (talk • contribs) 10:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Teertaprasad, this is not the proper venue to ask this question. Please try the Help desk or the Teahouse. Primefac (talk) 12:36, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me, could you please revert the article back to your revision, because an anonymous user vandalized the table!! Zhyboo (talk) 23:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Zhyboo: AnomieBOT is not a human editor. It is a computer program (a bot), so it cannot assist you. You can revert the edits in question yourself. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Anomie, I'm noticing that there are a few autosubst templates on the force list that aren't being run through the bot, but the TemplateSubster is running as normal. Did the code change to avoid wrappers? Primefac (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

AnomieBOT substitutes the specific templates listed in Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, and redirects to those templates. It has never substituted templates that wrap a template that is being substituted. So, for example, it won't substitute Template:Infobox World Aquatics Championships United States for being a wrapper around Template:Infobox World Aquatics Championships country, you'd have to put the former template itself in the category for AnomieBOT to do its thing. Anomie⚔ 17:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Very odd, because that's what it did for the {{Infobox Country Asian Games}} wrappers when they were substituted and deleted. Primefac (talk) 18:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

An example of this happening. {{Infobox Asian Games Philippines}} was a wrapper for {{Infobox Country Asian Games}}, which in turn was a wrapper for {{Infobox country at games}} Primefac (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Never mind. I actually put the subst only on the wrapper pages themselves. Primefac (talk) 01:17, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

The CFDClerk bot that automatically updates CfD discussions awaiting closure no longer counts the number of open discussions correctly when multiple discussions are closed together as happened in October 27. Is it possible to update the bot? It happens very infrequently that multiple discussions are closed together, but it's not a one-time-issue. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

The bot can't really tell whether you intended to close multiple sections or if you just forgot the closing template at the end of one. The usual solution in a case like this would be to move the individual discussions to level-5 sections under one level-4, like this. Anomie⚔ 13:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

• Sounds like a workable solution, thx for your reply. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Noted for future reference. Thanks very much for your help. – Fayenatic London 19:44, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Did you really mean to [create a page] for a non-existent user? SpinningSpark 02:18, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

The bot was updated in April 2016 to no longer create en-dash redirects in userspace. Anomie⚔ 14:27, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Help! A section in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 December 16 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{cfd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 23:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Fayenatic london, you might want to check the closes to make sure I restructured them correctly. I think it was the nesting that broke things. Primefac (talk) 00:53, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Primefac thanks for reverting me; I knew that one was liable to go wrong. The bot is still counting the empty section at the top as an unclosed CFD,[2] so I guess I'll have to close that separately. – Fayenatic London 11:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london and Primefac: The bot expects each 4th-, 5th-, and 6th-level section will be closed, and when a section is closed it expects that that closure covers all subsections. So the closure as of Special:PermaLink/756792001 was correct, except for the fact that the 4th-level parent section was being seen as an unclosed discussion. The attempted fix at Special:Diff/756793229/prev confused the bot because it made it expect the one closure would cover all three subsections. Special:Diff/756882787/prev didn't work either, because it still thought the closure was going to cover all the subsections. What we really needed was a way to tell the bot that the 4th-level heading there is never going to be closed. For the moment I've accomplished that by having it look for <!-- CFDClerk: This section heading isn't a discussion --> at the top of the section, but I'm hoping someone will suggest something better than that. Anomie⚔ 15:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Anomie. I've noted both methods at WP:CFDAI. – Fayenatic London 15:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. Can you please add an image to the article I've created? I'm facing problems as I don't know how to add a picture to it with a reliable source. The pictures I'm adding are being removed due to copyright issues (I was not aware of that before). So can you please add a picture to my article Lovers? If you can, so please add the film poster. Thanks. :) SBson1357 (talk) 10:22, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is a computer program that performs simple edits that would be tedious for a human to perform. It does not have the ability to see pictures, much less to judge whether a picture is appropriate for any particular article. Your best bet would be to discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Anomie⚔ 15:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

AnomieBOT made this edit which caused a duplicate ref tag definition. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

At the time AnomieBOT made that edit, {{PSGC detail|nscb}} was not generating the reference. It looks like it was broken by this edit and later fixed by this edit. Anomie⚔ 16:47, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

AnomieBot has made another duplicate refdef with this edit. I reverted it. -- Mikeblas (talk) 16:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

... That is one crazy, fragile transclusion setup going on there. Anyway, it looks like what's confusing the bot there is a known shortcoming of API action=expandtemplates where it returns broken wikitext for {{#tag:ref| ....<ref>...</ref>.. }}, causing the bot to miss seeing the first full ref inside the #tag:ref. I added some code that should detect that situation and have the bot skip the page. Anomie⚔ 02:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I saw that you tagged Wallflower for notability and tried merging it along with Tanks of Zen with Diva and renaming that article My Sister's Machine discography. However, I reverted all those edits because at first glance it looked messy. Still, would you mind taking a look at what I tried to do there when you have a moment? I'll accept whatever outcome is deemed appropriate with Wallflower and Tanks of Zen but I hope the information about those projects can somehow be retained. Thanks.--Shaneymike (talk) 02:07, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Shaneymike: The bot did not tag Wallflower with {{notability}} or attempt any merge. Emeraude tagged the article with {{notability}}. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@JJMC89: Yes I see that now. I left a message on Emeraude's talk page. Thank you.--Shaneymike (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

	A medalha de corrector
	thanks for help at Ondigui Adams' page, my friend! See you. Dantas 18:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi AnomieBot, have you actually clicked on the references? The actors cv reference doesn't display his age. The Herald Sun reference again also doesn't display Sachin Joab's DOB. Those references explain other details such as the actors place of birth being Melbourne and so on but there is no mention of his actual date of birth. Where does 20th November 1978 come from? There isn't a single online article that validates Sachin Joab's age let alone the references used on Wikipedia. Shouldn't this fabricated DOB displayed on his Wikipedia page be removed until his correct DOB can be verified by a reliable source. RD 18:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReachDaniel (talk • contribs)

ReachDaniel, AnomieBOT is not a human editor, it is a bot that does automated tasks. When you edited Sachin Joab you removed a named reference (<ref name="Date of birth">), but did not remove all of the uses of the named reference. The bot's purpose is to re-add the relevant reference information to the remaining reference tags, and nothing more. Primefac (talk) 19:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, thank you for explaining that. You mentioned that when I removed Sachin Joab's named reference (<ref name="Date of birth">), I did not remove all of the uses of the named reference. If I want to remove all the references to Sachin Joab's DOB because there is no actual mention of his DOB in the references how do I go about doing it?

I would appreciate you letting me know. Thank you. RD 19:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReachDaniel (talk • contribs)

ReachDaniel, a named reference is one used multiple times. If you wanted to remove all uses of one reference you would remove all of the instances of <ref name="Date of birth" />. However, the discussion on the talk page leads me to believe that there is proper referencing for his date of birth. I highly suggest you continue the discussion on the talk page rather than continually remove potentially accurate information. Primefac (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you once again for letting me know your thoughts. You mentioned that the talk page leads you to believe that there 'is' proper referencing for Sachin Joab's date of birth but how? The very references which are being used to verify the actors DOB don't even mention his DOB? If you click on the references you will understand what I mean. RD 19:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReachDaniel (talk • contribs)

ReachDaniel, that may very well be the case. I did not actually check the references given; I only saw the discussion taking place. My point was more that the discussion about his date of birth should be held on the talk page, not here. Primefac (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Please do not use my signature in edits like these. I have never unblocked any of those users, and using my name to give that impression is a violation of WP:SIGFORGE, and persistently doing so is a blockable offence. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Redrose64, that's not the bot's fault. {{unblocked}} is an autosubst template, and the way the bot substs is it takes the last user to edit and inserts their signature. The original template use was incorrect (they should have used {{unblock request}}), and when you undid the edit AnomieBOT thought you had added the template. It's not forging your signature, it's simply doing what it was programmed to do. I'll go through and revert the edits and change the usage to the proper template. Primefac (talk) 13:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

That being said, I'm wondering if I can't modify the template to make it autosubst only if a reason is given... Primefac (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2017 (UTC) bad idea. If they use the wrong template they'll just stay blocked. Looks like the autosubst issues were due to old transclusions; future instances shouldn't be an issue. Primefac (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

More specifically, it looks through the article's history one revision at a time to try to identify who added the template. In the case of this edit by the bot it was St. Michael's School of Padada in this edit, while in the case of this edit by the bot that was you, Redrose64, in this edit. It does this because allowing the bot's own signature to be placed in the substituted of the template would be extremely useless since the bot is not a human and cannot watch for potential replies.

Unfortunately it would be difficult to make the bot smart enough to catch the various kinds of reverts people might make. Considering the rarity of this situation (a template that auto-signs combined with an editor who needs to clean up bad substitutions and who does so by simply reverting without taking into account the auto-signing nature of the template) it seems unlikely to be worth the development effort and code complexity. Anomie⚔ 16:44, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't a problem before yesterday, when AnomieBOT suddenly started making bad substitutions on pages that had not been edited for years, and in most cases, not been touched by me at all. See for example the revision history of User talk:St. Michael's School of Padada. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Due to this edit by User:BU Rob13, which was unfortunately done while there was a non-<noinclude>ed TFD notice on the template. And, as already pointed out, your complaint comes after you undid the bot's initial edit. Anomie⚔ 00:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Whoops, hadn't foreseen that issue. The issue will not persist into the future as the bot will only substitute new transclusions. This was a result of editors misusing the template in the first place. The documentation always said it was substitute only. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 00:16, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

You put a citation template on National symbols of New Zealand. I brought some citations. Do you thing it's enough?

Please notify me when you answer please. Steve92341 (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@Steve92341: you should ask Hazhk, who added the maintaince tag. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 20:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your bot is malfunctioning - it created Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from December 2017 last month, and after another administrator deleted it, it again re-created the category this month. Care to take a look? Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 04:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

The bot is not malfunctioning. The edit summary says "Creating monthly dated maintenance category for non-empty month", which indicates that the bot created the category because it saw that there was at least one page in it at the time the bot checked. Looking at recent changes, that was probably App.net which was accidentally added to the category at 2017-01-13T01:51:21Z and removed at 2017-01-13T01:52:44Z; it just so happens that AnomieBOT checked the category at 2017-01-13T01:51:41Z (it checks once every two hours). For future reference, keep in mind that there may be various delays both in between a page edit and the categorylinks database table being updated and in between AnomieBOT's checking of a category and it actually making the edit to create it. Anomie⚔ 19:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Is the bot task to replace {{multicol}} with {{Col-begin}} {{col-break}} also supposed to be replacing {{multicol-break}} and {{multicol-end}} at the same time? If so then it isn't example this edit It's not making any difference to the rendering to the reader but no the markup is a mish-mash or {{col-X}} and {{multicol-X}} formats which seems far from ideal if it's not going to be remedied soon. Nthep (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

That replacement is using the generic template substitution task, which currently runs per template needing substitution. It does have all three templates on the list to be processed. I should probably look at changing the code so when people use it for this sort of TFD again in the future it makes a one edit for all the templates instead of one edit per template. If someone wants to stop the substituting they could remove the templates from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, although I'm not sure when I'll get that chance to make the change to the bot. Anomie⚔ 00:43, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I noticed that happening last week when a string of similar templates caused the bot to edit the page nine times (once for each transclusion). Didn't notice until everything was finished, and forgot about it. In this instance I'm not sure stopping halfway is a good idea, for confusion purposes mainly, since {{col-begin}}/{{multicol-break}}/{{multicol-end}} isn't exactly obvious or clear. Primefac (talk) 02:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Hopefully I'll get a chance to rework the code soon, I just can't promise any timeframe right now. Anomie⚔ 05:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Nthep (talk) 10:17, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

FYI, the code is now updated (example). Anomie⚔ 01:32, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Seeing AnomieBOT making cosmetic only changes caused my eyebrows to raise slightly. I'm not sure substituting Template:Multicol-end is a worthwhile edit when we could just leave a template redirect in place. I know this is not your doing because it was Primefac who edited User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force but this seems somehow not what the TemplateSubster was designed for. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Martin, since this is a three-part template it isn't technically a one-to-one replacement that could just be dealt with by a redirect. {{multicol}} is equivalent to {{col-begin}} + {{col-break}}, so the former had to be replaced with the latter. While the multicol break/end templates are straight-up wrappers of their col counterparts, I think you would agree that {{col-begin}} followed by {{multicol-break}}/{{multicol-end}} could be extremely confusing to some users.

As to the proper use of the template subster - I have been informed on at least two occasions that this was the proper method for substituting wrappers to perform a replacement. Primefac (talk) 17:12, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Community consensus sometimes determines that certain templates should always be substituted. This might be an ongoing thing, such as for message templates, or it might be a prelude to deletion after a discussion at TFD. This consensus is indicated by the placing of the template into Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted. If there's a question as to whether consensus exists to substitute any particular template, it would be appropriate to bring it up with the person who asserted that consensus rather than coming here to complain about "cosmetic only changes". If you want to discuss the general definition of "cosmetic only changes", BTW, there's discussion currently open (but not getting much feedback) on Wikipedia talk:Bot policy. Anomie⚔ 18:05, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

I saw that the bot automatically created e.g. Category:Categories for discussion from January 2017 and now I've created a new template, {{Rename section}}, that adds an article to Category:Wikipedia articles with sections named inappropriately from January 2017 etc.

Also is there anything else I should do for that template / its maintenance categeories?

--Fixuture (talk) 17:41, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Instructions are at Wikipedia:Creating a dated maintenance category. If the category is set up according to those instructions, AnomieBOT will automatically start creating it. Anomie⚔ 19:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@Anomie: Alright, thanks! The only thing that didn't work so far was having the page added to Category:All articles with sections named inappropriately. It's really strange: it previously added the article to Category:All Wikipedia articles with sections named inappropriately before I change the all's parameter's value. --Fixuture (talk) 20:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@Anomie: Also could you please add Category:Wikipedia In the news Candidates archives when archiving these discussion pages please? --Fixuture (talk) 21:21, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Considering that category seems to have been unused since 2010, is there any discussion showing that ITN regulars actually care about it anymore? Anomie⚔ 23:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi AnomieBOT! Thanks for correcting one of the references; I was trying to work out how to do it but couldn't. Would you be able to tell me how you fixed it? Thanks! ✌️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fox Tanawa-Bamba (talk • contribs) 04:22, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

The source code for that task is at User:AnomieBOT/source/tasks/OrphanReferenceFixer.pm. In this case, the bot looked through the article's history until it found the reference in a previous revision. Anomie⚔ 20:14, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Great! Thanks! ✌️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fox Tanawa-Bamba (talk • contribs) 20:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, you claim that theantitzemach.blogspot.com is not a good source

well i see that another wikipedia page used this blog for their source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzchok_Sorotzkin

so i used this blog as well here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Freier — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaimgreen (talk • contribs) 05:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Chaimgreen, first off, you're at the wrong talk page. AnomieBOT is not a human editor. You'll want to talk to JesseRafe about this: I suggest using Talk:Rachel Freier. Second, blogs are unreliable sources. Please see WP:RS for more information. Primefac (talk) 12:58, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

In Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Discussions_awaiting_closure, the bot has 'forgotten' to add 12 January to the list. This is very unexpectedly, didn't happen before. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

It looks like some sort of Tool Labs issue has taken out some of AnomieBOT's tasks, including CFDClerk. I'll restart them in a few minutes, after I do some quick investigation. Anomie⚔ 13:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Looks like it was due to mailarchive:labs-l/2017-January/004865.html. Restarted. Anomie⚔ 13:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBot maintains Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion#Old_discussions. For the first time in a long time, there is no backlog. However, AnomieBot has left the adminbacklog notice. Is the notice maintained by AnomieBot as the notice says? Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 15:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT currently defines a backlog as "any old discussions that aren't closed." If you close that last January 12 discussion (before January 13 moves up), AnomieBOT will remove the notice. If a discussion at WT:FFD defines a different backlog threshold (e.g. by count of unclosed discussions and/or date of the oldest unclosed discussion), I can change the bot code to match. Anomie⚔ 20:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, today I connected and I have seen that without reading the page of "discussion / talk" you have decided to delete the wiki that I did to the singer Yago roche, Why? The page was reviewed by JudgeRM and he left a note saying that "it was all correct" after another bot sent it to remove it is possible that you restore the page? I do not understand if a librarian decides that the page is correct another la bora without reason. I leave the message that you have put: 04:19, 11 January 2017 AnomieBOT III (talk | contribs) deleted page Yago roche (G8: Broken redirect to Yago Roche. If this bot is malfunctioning, please report it at User:AnomieBOT III/shutoff/BrokenRedirectDeleter)

Thanks for all. --ShayminCat (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is not a human editor, and thus cannot respond. ShayminCat, it was actually Shirt58 that deleted Yago Roche on 10 January. AnomieBOT simply deleted a redirect to that deleted page. You should ask Shirt about the deletion. Primefac (talk) 02:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

For the first time since the creation of the broken redirect deletion bot 3 years ago, AnomieBOT III has deleted many thousands of broken redirects. Most of them were caused by moves of biographical articles created by Sander.v.Ginkel by MusikBot. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:46, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

... and? Anomie⚔ 03:05, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: this edit, it appears the bot didn't recognise the {{IUCN}} template used within the ref tags, triggering a false positive alert for an orphaned reference. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:17, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Paul 012, <ref name="iucn" /> didn't exist when this edit was made, which is why the error was thrown. A subsequent edit by the same editor fixed the issue. Primefac (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. It seems I failed to look between those diffs. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Why has almost the whole Canada men's national volleyball team roster been deleted? I believe the bot is broken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theo649 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Theo649, two things. First, AnomieBOT is not a human editor. Second, as near as I can tell AnomieBOT has never interacted with the pages of which you speak.

As far as the actual deletions go, the pages have been moved to the Draft space after a long discussion about the serial contributions of a particular user. The discussion decided to move every page created by them to the Draft space, where they can be properly vetted, improved, or deleted. As of this particular moment, none of the pages have been deleted. See User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Guidelines for the cleanup process. Primefac (talk) 22:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I would like to get the African Confederation of Sports of Roller Skating restored to my sandbox. Trackinfo (talk) 03:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

This is the talk page of an automated bot account, not a human. Trackinfo, the place you want to request this is User talk:Premeditated Chaos (the admin who deleted the actual article). The page you link to was actually a redirect; the deleted page was Federation of African Roller Sports. Primefac (talk) 03:07, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Had AnomieBOT waited 15 minutes instead of 12, I would have completed the old afd multi.  Instead, I edit conflicted. 

Besides being a little hasty, the problem is that AnomieBOT got the edit wrong, as there had been two AfDs, not just the one.  Since there was a name change during the 2nd AfD, this could be a code problem.  FYI, Unscintillating (talk) 18:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

There's only so much a bot can do to detect things like renames, particularly when there's no indication in the logs of the new title that there was a move. The way the bot currently works: for new pages with deletion log entries, looks for AFDs linked in the deletion summaries and for AFD pages existing for the title of the article. If you have suggestions for additional heuristics the bot could use that would be very unlikely to have false positives feel free to suggest them, but complaints about getting an edit conflict aren't particularly helpful. Anomie⚔ 21:26, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

You edited SM City regarding "SM Zamboanga" when there are factual references for the changes, as seen on the page of Mindpro Citimall. Hope this clears up any confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daxdigital (talk • contribs) 19:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Daxdigital, AnomieBOT is not a human editor, and hasn't even edited the page in question since the beginning of January. Are you sure you're not looking for Oripaypaykim? Primefac (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Will check. Thanks! :D --Daxdigital (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks so much for catching orphaned references that I miss after a revision. You always seem to be there, catching what I miss, like this edit. It's very much appreciated! CaroleHenson (talk) 03:41, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks, dearest AnomieBOT, for always dating my maintenance tags as I always forget to do myself. It is very much appreciated. MB298 (talk) 01:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello-

The page Raymond F Schinazi was deleted by this bot. It states: 21:39, 3 January 2017 AnomieBOT III (talk | contribs) deleted page Raymond Schinazi (G8: Broken redirect to Raymond F. Schinazi. If this bot is malfunctioning, please report it at User:AnomieBOT III/shutoff/BrokenRedirectDeleter)

This is not correct as the page was working and functional last month.

This page needs to be reinstated please.

170.140.104.2 (talk) 21:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The bot did its job, as redirects to deleted pages are deleted as well. The page in question (Raymond Schinazi) was a redirect to Raymond F. Schinazi, which was deleted by JzG. You should discuss the page deletion at User talk:JzG. Primefac (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Please restore the link at Margaret Nyairera. An idiotic move to draft space caused the break. This is a redirect to an Olympic medalist and has no business being deleted. I am going to restore the article it links to. Trackinfo (talk) 07:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

@Trackinfo: AnomieBOT is a bot and cannot respond to your request. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

This should be monitored by the BOT owner to make sure damage done by the BOT is fixed. I am contacting the owner directly.Trackinfo (talk) 07:53, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Restored. Also restored Margaret Nyairera Wambui. BTW, your request was made a bit early, you requested the redirect be undeleted at 07:18 UTC but the target was not restored to the proper title until 07:40. If I had happened to see your request during that 22 minutes, I'd have told you to come back when you were done.

I do monitor the page, but I'm human and am not online 24 hours per day. Occasionally I go entire days without looking at Wikipedia (the horror!). Next time you might want to try a little WP:AGF, and if you want faster turnaround time you might try WP:UNDELETE which likely has more watchers. Anomie⚔ 13:29, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

My apologies to Anomie. The extended conversation and my perceived impatience is based on the comment by JJMC89 above. The BOT action is a problem caused by an automated reaction to a stupid move by another editor. Trackinfo (talk) 17:06, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

What's the deal with this? Finding, apparently, a ref name with no corresponding ref body, you replaced it with a link that has nothing to do with the material being ref'd... how is that helpful. Herostratus (talk) 16:25, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Often the same-named reference in a linked article is relevant. Unfortunately it does fail sometimes when people use generic ref names based on the publisher. Anomie⚔ 20:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Mmnh, OK. Herostratus (talk) 06:49, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anomie

The bot did[3] to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 6.

It correctly identified a formatting error (by me), but instead of inserting the missing line break, it deleted the whole section. I have now restored the missing section[4] ... but is there any way to persuade the bot to handle such errors more mildly? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:40, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting it, should be fixed now. What happened is that the regular expression for stripping comments when trying to fix the header was getting confused and swallowing the whole section in between two comments. Anomie⚔ 02:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

This edit corrected <ref name-BBCSanta/> by deleting it, when the correct fix is to not hit one key to the left when typing the "=" in there. That may be more sophisticated than the bot can manage, but I thought I'd mention it. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 07:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

	Police Bot barnstar
	Interesting and tedious work. Thanks. Manasick (talk) 14:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you only a bot? Good work on the rescue. I don't even know how I did that, unless I was trying to move the ref. Thanks.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey, I have added a photo to show the decay of Holmleigh Parade in Tuffley also can the citation template be removed as it's been there since April 2015 and there are no references as I can see to show it.D Eaketts (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is a computer program that performs certain edits, not a human. You would likely want to try asking your question on the talk page of the article, or look through the article's history to find the human editor who originally added the tag. Anomie⚔ 18:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

The AnomieBOT created the citation see here:-https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tuffley&diff=prev&oldid=654904584D Eaketts (talk) 19:43, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Look closer. AnomieBOT only added |date=April 2015 to tags that were already existing in the article. Check previous revisions to find who added the tags in the first place. Anomie⚔ 13:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Ah my mistake will move the question to relevant Wikipedian.D Eaketts (talk) 11:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

A couple days ago, there was an edit request made to the semi-protected page Template:Coor URL. AnomieBOT logged the entry on the semi-protected edit request page as expected, but labeled the page fully protected. The protection was downgraded in 2013. Is this a known issue? — Train2104 (t • c) 14:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Train2104: I think that it's because the request used {{editprotected}}, which is a redirect to {{edit fully-protected}}, instead of using {{edit semi-protected}} or one of its redirects. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

It's because the API is saying it's both semiprotected and fully protected.[5] Anomie⚔ 00:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

A redirect to Caroline Clark was deleted because Caroline Clark was moved to draft space for a couple of days. Since Caroline Clark is back in mainspace now, please undelete. pbp 05:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Just as a thought, if you know where a redirect used to point, you're welcome to recreate it yourself. Primefac (talk) 13:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to Tropical house, especially if it involves living persons. We know you're a bot, but bear in mind that we have the right to delete libelious material when it has been identified, including citations. XfDWatcher (talk) 21:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

XfDWatcher, maybe instead of assuming that this bot is somehow maliciously adding content to a page, you should consider why it's doing so. There was a reference (<ref name=GQ />) that was orphaned in a previous revision. AnomieBOT was only trying to add it back in. It will continue doing so unless you actually remove the dead reference tag. Primefac (talk) 21:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, okay. I will do so. However I removed it because it was violating WP:LIBEL but this bot restored the libelious citation. XfDWatcher (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

I just informed you of why the bot performed the actions it did, and rather than fix the issue yourself you add another warning template? Please, make sure to read someone's comments before handing out more pointless warnings. Primefac (talk) 21:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Hello AnomieBOT, can you blocked this user, 113.210.108.178 (talk)? Fandi89 (talk) 09:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@Fandi89: Please see the box displayed at the top when you were posting here, i.e. "AnomieBOT is not a human editor." Moreover, AnomieBOT is not an administrator, and so does not have the power to block. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:08, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I am having some problems with editing as I am getting into edit disputes, and I need get some information, can you please help me?

Davidgoodheart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidgoodheart (talk • contribs) 02:18, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Davidgoodheart, AnomieBOT is not a human editor. Edit disputes are normally handled on the talk page of the article in question, or at WP:DRVWP:DRN. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your input, can you please tell me how make an edit dispute?

Davidgoodheart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidgoodheart (talk • contribs) 00:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Davidgoodheart, I just realized I gave the wrong link above. If discussions on the talk page of the article don't fix the situation, then you can either ask for a Third Opinion or take it to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. In the future, if you have any questions not directly related to AnomieBOT, please post on your own talk page, and use {{help me}}. Primefac (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

You created a redirect from the talkpage of a template/doc to the talkpage of the template itself, which seemed like a good idea. I did the same for another template I made later today (Template talk:LibraryThing work/doc), but you deleted it because the talk page for the template didn't yet exist (it had no reason to). I've since made a blank talk page and reinstated the redirect.

Might I propose a change in logic? Maybe don't delete redirects that are from a template/doc talkpage to the same template's talkpage, even if it's empty. I agree with your implicit view that they're a good idea and I don't think the template's talkpage being empty changes that. Mortee (talk) 23:41, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@Mortee: Redlink redirects are speedy-deletable under WP:CSD#G8. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:04, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

@Redrose64: I understand, but in this sort of case, aren't they useful as a preventative measure? As the bot's comment on making the first redirect pointed out, having a redirect from the doc page's talkpage is useful to avoid decentralized discussion. Whether the template's talk page has itself had any discussion on it yet or not doesn't seem all that relevant. Of course, now I know that they'll get auto-deleted I can make empty talk pages for future templates I write. Mortee (talk) 00:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Mortee, a template doesn't have to have a talk page. Some of the more esoteric templates have been on Wikipedia for years and have no talk page. In that vein, there is no need to create a blank talk page just so that you can avoid the hypothetically obscure situation where someone decides to go the /doc talk as their first choice. Primefac (talk) 00:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Primefac, sure, I suppose that's also true. In this case my first template got one early because it went through AfC, and the redirect that AnomieBOT added as a result of that struck me as a good idea so I was a bit disappointed to see it revert me when I tried to follow its lead with my second one. Mortee (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, it's actually two different tasks involved here. It's TemplateTalkRedirectCreator that creates redirects for certain template subpages, while BrokenRedirectDeleter deletes redirects to nonexistent pages. Since the latter cleans up Special:BrokenRedirects, it'd probably not be a good idea for it to start ignoring doc pages so the former could create broken redirects. At the same time, I'd want to see consensus (e.g. at WP:VPR) before having the former start creating tons of empty talk pages to be the targets of redirects. Anomie⚔ 15:35, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I was thinking of a more specific exception (I may be misunderstanding your first point), so that BrokenRedirectDeleter would ignore redlink redirects from Template talk:whatever/doc to Template talk:whatever specifically (not from doc pages to anywhere else). Anyway, just a suggestion. As Primefac points out, it's an edge case. Mortee (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT III deleted 66 broken redirects to List of supporting A Series of Unfortunate Events characters. They should all be undeleted and retargeted to List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters. If the target is a section, only edit the part between "#REDIRECT [[" and "#". Their talk pages should also be undeleted. The redlink is caused by the following move:

• 18:12, 26 February 2017 Black Kite (talk | contribs) moved page List of supporting A Series of Unfortunate Events characters to List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters over a redirect without leaving a redirect

GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:41, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

This kind of sounds like an issue that Black Kite should take care of, since a redirect should have stayed at least until the old links could be sorted. For reference, the deleted redirects are here. Primefac (talk) 01:57, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Black Kite should have taken care of the redirects before moving without leaving a redirect behind. But I'll look at making AnomieBOT smarter about handling this situation. Anomie⚔ 12:50, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

BRFA filed Anomie⚔ 14:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, my bad - I'm not sure why I didn't leave the redirect there. I've reinstated it. Black Kite (talk) 00:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

So frustrating that this bot "interrupted" an hour-long edit to correct something that my edit would have corrected!--Trilotat (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Um... darn? Maybe you should save your work more frequently. Primefac (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Clearly not your fault. I shouldn't have vented unfairly in your bot's direction.--Trilotat (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Just for your information, the bot didn't mark an edit request as completed (take it off the ESp list) when using the {{edit semi-protected|ans=yes}} template but did only after I changed it to {{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}. — IVORK _Discuss 01:20, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

More likely is that you just ran into a bit of job queue lag. Anomie⚔ 01:31, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

No problem, just it either took ~50 minutes from ans=yes else 2 minutes after I changed it to answered=yes. I'll make a mock one to test. — IVORK _Discuss 02:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to delete Military cementery number 398 - Bieńczyce a second time, and salt it. That was creating a bogus entry at Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings.

The correct form is Military cemetery number 398 - Bieńczyce. If the bot wants to create that one, it can knock itself out. wbm1058 (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you should also delete Military cementery number 398 – Bieńczyce then, or move it to Military cemetery number 398 – Bieńczyce? Anomie⚔ 23:02, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

You would think, but checking Talk:Military cementery number 398 – Bieńczyce, I found:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 13#Military cementery number 398 – Bieńczyce: no consensus to delete a redirect from implausible typo (as it may not be totally implausible)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military cementery number 398 – Bieńczyce: merge to List of cemeteries in Poland (though this "cemetery" is just a single grave, apparently)

So your process that creates redirects from hyphens "because titles with en-dashes are hard to type" could check the page for a {{R from misspelling}} template, and not create the redirect if found

Or if it does create the redirect, do not specify that the incorrect spelling is correct, by linking to the incorrect spelling:

Change {{Redirect shell|{{R from modification|1={{-r|Military cementery number 398 – Bieńczyce}}}}}}

to simply {{Redirect shell|{{R from modification}} }}

or {{Redirect shell|{{R from modification}} {{R from misspelling|Military cemetery number 398 – Bieńczyce}} }} – wbm1058 (talk) 16:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Except then the {{R from modification}} wouldn't be correctly indicating what it's a modification of. If the typo isn't "implausible" according to RfD, then why shouldn't the non-endash version exist? Anomie⚔ 21:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, then: {{Redirect shell|{{R from modification|1={{-r|Military cemetery number 398 – Bieńczyce}}}}}} – just fix the spelling – that syntax, though, is so obtuse that even I don't understand exactly what it means, much less your average editor – wbm1058 (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I restored Military cementery number 398 - Bieńczyce, and fixed it so it shouldn't turn up at Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings. Generally though, modifications are only intended for correctly spelled titles. wbm1058 (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The bot is re-inserting an auto-generated reference name styling where one is not appropriate in the above article. The entry and the reference have been manually checked by humans since and therefore the styling is not now required. This is a list of unconnected deceased persons, therefore the references need to be separated, unlike in a one-page standard article. Each time the redundant coding is removed by hand, the bot returns and re-inserts it. Please take a look at this and tell me where I might be wrong in this instance? Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 12:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

What you did wrong in this edit was that you removed the name from one copy of the reference, leaving a dangling <ref name=autogenerated1/> elsewhere in the article that caused a big red error. The bot restored the text to that dangling reference, it didn't reinsert the name where you removed it.

Personally, I don't see any point for the reference list on that article to contain multiple copies of the exact same reference just because the reference mentions multiple people. Are you trying to use the number of references as a count of the number of people who died or something strange like that? Anomie⚔ 13:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. Previously User:AnomieBOT did a overall nice job in replacing the template:Literatur (like here. I noticed that the bot seemed to be bored of this task in recent times as nothing happend e. g. to the article N,N,N′,N′-Tetramethylformamidinium chloride? --Minihaa (talk) 21:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Looks like I introduced a bug when I recently improved the script, that made it only process the first template in the category. Should be fixed now. Anomie⚔ 03:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like it works. Thanks a lot! --Minihaa (talk)

How do I enable the AutoAssessor for articles related to WP:ID? HaEr48 (talk) 07:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

See the "Before requesting a WikiProjectTagger run" box at the top of this talk page. Anomie⚔ 12:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

At Talk:Vern_Poythress, I marked an edit request by a COI editor as "declined", with an explanation. User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable has been updated since, but the request is still on the list. What did I do wrong? Does the 'bot not like a long explanation in the template's third field, perhaps? John Nagle (talk) 07:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Nagle: (tps) The {{Request edit}} template at the top of the request was still active. I've added "|D" to it so that the page is no longer in the category that the bot monitors. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't usually work on edit requests, but there was a request on WP:COIN's talk page for more effort on reducing the backlog. John Nagle (talk) 07:54, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anomie. The task to detect/remove/report broken redirects has not taken place for a couple of days. I wonder if you could look into this when you have time? Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:19, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, there's some discussion on phab:T163001. I think it was database corruption causing the DB to misbehave when accessing the bot's table, but to be safe I'm waiting until the DBA confirms it's ok to restart it. Anomie⚔ 14:58, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

It was not corruption- The process generated by this tool was crashing the database server shared by most of the bots, so it had to be disabled. It is not blocked on the DBA, the process can continue as soon as the operator makes sure it doesn't take 40GB of memory per query and uses an appropiate (crash-safe) storage format for his data. --jynus (talk) 08:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

@Jynus: As far as I've been able to tell the 40GB query was because the table got corrupted somehow such that a simple SELECT on the table would cause the DB to consume more and more memory until it crashed. You've yet to give me any information that indicates differently. I already made the change for the crash-safe format (which is oddly not the default, although I hear it will be in the future) a few minutes after I saw your request for that four days ago. Anomie⚔ 12:51, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I randomly checked on {{Single-purpose account}} the other day and noticed that it still has a few thousand transclusions, mostly in the AFD space. Thinking it might be an issue with {{spa}}, I added the subst only tags to it as well, but the numbers don't seem to have changed (and spa isn't on the autosubst list). Glitch, or does the bot not travel into the WP space? Primefac (talk) 01:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

The bot does subst in WP space. Two possibilities:

• I see that for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Law Practice Today doesn't list a transclusion of {{Single-purpose account}} like it should at [6]. Probably a job queue update got missed at some point. Using API action=purge on {{spa}} with forcerecursivelinkupdate may fix that, I'll do that and we'll see what happens.
• A Tool Labs database synchronization issue, i.e. something that could be reported at phab:T150767.

Anomie⚔ 22:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I have some examples of intentionally broken redirects in my userspace (to demonstrate that they do not work, as this comes up in discussion every so often). One was converted to a soft redirect by someone patrolling the Broken redirects report AnomieBOT III produces, and let me know when I undid the good-faith change that it would continue to show up in your report and people would continue to try and fix it. So, if possible I'd like to exclude all the pages in my userspace starting "R to" from appearing in this report. I don't know if this requires action at your end or mine (and if the latter, what) though. Thanks. Thryduulf (talk) 18:56, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

The bot intentionally doesn't do anything to redirects in userspace so as to not interfere with test pages. If someone is overzealously trying to clean up the list, they should probably use a little more common sense and not interfere with peoples' legitimate test cases. Anomie⚔ 22:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, that matches my thoughts on most such reports, but apparently an empty list is more important to some... Thryduulf (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! JostGudelius (talk) 16:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is replacing redirects with {{redr}} with the more appropriate {{redirect category shell}} but it is doing so with an edit summary like this, which is inaccurate (it is not subst-ing the template, it is replacing it). Can this be corrected? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Ivanvector, {{this is a redirect}} is a wrapper for {{redirect category shell}}, and the only good way to convert the former to the latter is to substitute them (and thus the edit summary is technically correct). I'm sure it's mentioned in other places on this talk page (because this happens every time I create a subst-only wrapper), but there's no way to distinguish between "substituting to replace a template" and "substituting to hard-code the text in the template onto the page". Primefac (talk) 14:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: I see what you're saying, but two things. One, the instructions for {{this is a redirect}} say both "this template should always be substituted" (emphasis added) and below that, "this template should not be substituted" (emphasis in original): that should be fixed. Second, why not just "replacing deprecated template"? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:38, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Good point re the confusing subst/not subst. I've fixed that. However, the bot only pays attention to pages in the Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted. Maybe there should be a secondary/similar category that templates being replaced (i.e. substed wrappers) should be placed into, but at the moment there is no way to tell the difference in intentions between (for example) {{Db-bio-notice}} and {{this is a redirect}}. Primefac (talk) 14:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

The bot really is substing the template. In this case, the substitution happens to result in an invocation of a different template. Anomie⚔ 15:23, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

BTW, if that confuses you then you probably shouldn't see what happens if you do {{subst:citation needed}}. ;) Anomie⚔ 15:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I've done that a couple times before. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear AnomieBOT.

I've finally been alerted by your requests and have added sources to the page of Patrick M. Seymour, with plans to do the same with the other pages that I created. Please reconsider deleting this web page. If there is anything else I can do then please let me know.

Thanks for your time, Traptor12 (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear Anomie,

just wanted to thank you for adding the tag to the page of Trijang Chocktrul. Until now this page has insistently been used to post discrediting remarks on that living person.

In a recent (new) scheme trying to discredit him, even a change of his birth date was attempted. Fortunately, you administrators prevented that.

VictoriaGrayson insistently posts a citation from Bultrini, a book that is a report of Bultrini's own travels and interviews, but lacks serious investigation of a delicate matter. It is therefore a questionable source, as you correctly indicate by placing the template message.

I have been trying to find unbiased publications on Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche - so far there is not much available. Once I manage to gather truly reliable sources, I will make an attempt to post proper information on him.

thank you! --Sarva100 (talk) 07:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I needed to recreate Firepro Systems Private Limited (India) after your bot deleted it. — Dispenser 11:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Looks like it exists to me... Primefac (talk) 11:46, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Err, good for you? The bot deleted it because the target, Firepro Systems, no longer existed. Timeline:

• 2016-08-12 12:27:31 (UTC): Davey2010 moved Firepro Systems to Firepro Systems (India).
• 2016-08-12 12:29:28 (UTC): Davey2010 replaced the resulting redirect with {{db-g7}}.
• 2016-08-12 23:45:14 (UTC): RHaworth deleted Firepro Systems, causing the redirect Firepro Systems Private Limited (India) to be broken.
• 2016-08-13 14:09:24 (UTC): AnomieBOT deleted the broken redirect at Firepro Systems Private Limited (India).
• 2017-05-15 10:57:04 (UTC): Dispenser recreated Firepro Systems Private Limited (India), targeting Firepro Systems (India) rather than Firepro Systems.

The time it spent as a redirect wasn't enough for double-redirect-fixing bots to fix them, and I guess neither human user involved checked for incoming redirects. G7 should probably have been declined in the first place per the "For redirects created as a result of a page move" clause. Anomie⚔ 12:16, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I've been racking my brain for the last 15-20 minutes and typing all sorts of guesses .... In short I have absolutely no idea why it was G7'd?, I can only assume there was a valid reason at the time however I can't for the life of me think what that reason was, Something tells me it was something related to disambiguation but that's obviously a wild guess...., Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 13:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea either. With the move reason given, redirecting Firepro Systems to the existing dab at FirePro Systems would have made much more sense. Anomie⚔ 20:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

5 articles linked to Firepro Systems Private Limited (India), including the disambiguation page I was working on. — Dispenser 15:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 100 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 09:55, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Jc86035, just checking - why is this on the autosubst list? Primefac (talk) 12:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: I was testing whether AnomieBOT would substitute each transclusion (it does) or keep trying to substitute the same page (it doesn't), since the template substituted returns a copy of itself. There's an issue with hidden comments in the template title breaking the substitution, although that's separate. I'll remove it from the category for now. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 13:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Primefac (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APerfectlyIrrational&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=781294364&oldid=781294283 Kekballer (talk) 10:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

It's the same output that the template gives before substing. Compare Special:PermaLink/781294283#Warning on editing and Special:PermaLink/781294364#Warning on editing. Anomie⚔ 11:50, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your service, bot.--SamHolt6 04:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

What is the reason for this edit? This changed an invocation of {{ill}} to {{Interlanguage link multi}}. Neither of these are in Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, and Template:Interlanguage link does not indicate that {{ill}} is deprecated. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Verbcatcher, seven months ago {{ill}} was in that category. See this archive and the related TFD. Primefac (talk) 18:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Primefac, thanks, I hadn't noticed that this was an old edit. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

The bot's edits to redirect pages substituting Redr such as Wikipedia:Prose, Wikipedia:Merge, and Wikipedia:BUILD cause braces to be visible at the bottom. I have fixed the latter two, but I think the rest should be fixed as well. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

GeoffreyT2000, I fixed that particular error in the code shortly after discovering it. I thought I found all of the pages where it messed up but apparently I need to re-search for those missing braces. Primefac (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

GeoffreyT2000, do you have a list of such pages? I'm not finding any leftover instances of this occurring. Primefac (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Please don't subst on template doc pages, as here: the doc page is supposed to illustrate what the template will produce when used correctly, not what it would have produced at some past moment. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Redrose64, that's a talk page, not a /doc. Primefac (talk) 23:54, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Also, see User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster#What to do if AnomieBOT substs a template it shouldn't?. TL;DR: add |nosubst= or |demo= to the invocation that shouldn't be substed. The latter might also be useful for the template to recognize to avoid the demo instances adding categories. Anomie⚔ 13:43, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

See change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dragon_2&type=revision&diff=783027522&oldid=783024841 Before bot change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dragon_2&oldid=783024841 after bot change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dragon_2&oldid=783027522 — Preceding unsigned comment added by C-randles (talk • contribs) 19:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Someone tried update after tag and this suffered same fate. I have now tried inserting |nosubst= to see if that helps. Tag disappearing is not good, as the effect could easily be missed. So I think bot should not replace date=May 2017 with 2017|5 in these tags if this causes the tag to disappear.crandles (talk) 11:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

You're using the template incorrectly. {{update needed}} and {{update after}} are the same template. It does not accept a |date=. When the bot fixed that, the specified date took effect and so it will activate "on the first day following the specified month", i.e. tomorrow. Anomie⚔ 11:51, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

This edit was not a fix. OK, I left a > off the end of the reference, but the entry is dependent on both references, which is why I undid the edit and made the necessary correction. Mjroots (talk) 06:07, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 100 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 14:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Matt Fitzpatrick, why are these all being marked for autosubst? Primefac (talk) 14:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I replied on Primefac's talk page, I should have replied here. Short version: people usually substituted the opening and closing templates. Sometimes, someone transcluded one template and substituted the other. Pages containing such a mismatch break if I change the HTML tags in the templates. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough. Just make sure they get added to the force list. Primefac (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

On second thought, I'd like to try manual substitution first, and limit it only to any mismatched pairs. With any luck, it might be a small enough job. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 20:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

This edit (2012) draws a silly conclusion.

{{one source|date=February 2012}}
{{no footnotes|date=February 2012}}

-- PBS (talk) 15:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@PBS: None of your questions are relevant to this bot: please examine the edit that you have linked. AnomieBOT merely dated two tags that were added in the previous edit by Klemen Kocjancic (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:24, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) PBS, I'm not really sure if you're trying to be funny here, and thus I'm not really sure the point of this post. If you were making a joke, feel free to ignore the rest of this. The bot dates maintenance tags. It doesn't check to see if those tags are accurate. Anomie isn't sitting behind a desk clicking "save" every time the bot makes an edit (that's kind of the point of a bot).

Also, your diff is from five years ago, which seems incredibly arbitrary to dig up for no reason other than to make a rather odd post on this talk page. Primefac (talk) 15:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

My mistake, and for that I apologise, and I have struck the text through. However it is no joke and it was not dug up for arbitrary reasons, I arrived at the page Charles Collé because the template {{Bouillet}} had no article parameter -- there is little point telling a reader that some text was copied in to a Wikipedia article from somewhere in a book over 2000 pages long, but Wikipedia is not going to tell them which volume or page number it comes from, so I was editing the page to fix that. -- PBS (talk) 15:56, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 100 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 11:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging Jc86035, who removed it from the force list. Primefac (talk) 20:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: I forgot to purge the template page after removing the category from the documentation. Should be fine; I only added it to the list as a test. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 04:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Cool. Primefac (talk) 11:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

If possible, I'd like to have AnomieBOT add |date= with the month and year to the {{Cleanup image captions}} maintenance tag, including {{cuic}} and {{Cleanup caps}} whenever either tag is used with the date missing. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Given that {{cleanup image captions}} uses {{ambox}}, the bot should be adding date parameters if none are given. Primefac (talk) 11:50, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Creating a dated maintenance category to properly set up your maintenance category and related templates so the bot will process them. It doesn't automatically process every {{ambox}}-using template.

BTW, {{Cleanup caps}} seems like it should redirect to {{capitalization}} rather than {{Cleanup image captions}}. Anomie⚔ 11:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I will do as you said. I agree that the shortcut was ambiguous and have moved it to {{Clean caption}}. Best regards--John Cline (talk) 03:36, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, in an effort to remove the banner about COI on top of the article Tse Wen Chang, I've added disclosure statements in the article's talk page as well as my user page User:Eli Toake. I thought this was enough to clear the COI banner, and so I removed it, but the bot put it back. Is there something else I should do? Thanks in advance for the help. Eli Toake (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot did not put it back. It was put back by Doc James in the previous edit, the bot merely added |date=June 2017. You should discuss it with Doc James on the article's talk page. Anomie⚔ 17:06, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Got it, thank you. Eli Toake (talk) 05:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I asked for a peer review of Amnesia (Chumbawamba song), and this bot archived the peer review request page before anyone responded to my request. Help? -Anotheronewiki (talk) 11:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The peer review process instructions say that a review request that has been unanswered for more than a month should be archived. Anomie⚔ 11:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. On the Talk page, it says that there is a peer review that's archived, even though there isn't a peer review. Is there a different template to place on the talk page if the peer review went unanswered, or should the template say there's a peer review archived regardless of whether or not there actually is? (Sorry; this is my first peer review). Thanks! -Anotheronewiki (talk) 12:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

No separate template that I know of. You'd probably get a better discussion at WT:Peer review. Anomie⚔ 23:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I could not find the operator of the bot in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AAlertBot 2 in order to notify them of the {{Operator assistance needed}} on that BRFA. I look for '''Operator:''' with a wikilink to the User or User talk namespace on the same line. Please fix it! Thanks. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 03:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'm not sure what the best fix is, but here are pings for the users that the bot failed to notify: Hellknowz and Headbomb. -- John of Reading (talk) 04:29, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot doesn't really handle more than one operator, it's so uncommon that there's no standard for how to format it in the BRFA. Anomie⚔ 11:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Not really a big deal, both Hellknowz and myself are watching that page, and he replied already. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Bollywood 1000 Crore Club, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about newsbytesapp.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

• Bollywood 1000 Crore Club revision 786605881:
  • Rescued "newsbytes" from rev 786365527
    Removed in revision 786605881 by Jevansen (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "removed [[WP:SPAM|spam link]]" (removed 573/28859 bytes, 2%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 16:00, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

• I removed the spamlinks on that page when doing a general cleanup after today's newsbytes-spammer (Special:Contributions/182.77.104.129). - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 17:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I would like to request on behalf of WikiProject Thailand that importance parameters be added to the project banner ({{WikiProject Thailand}} or redirects) according to this list. (And also auto-stub assessing at the same time, if it's feasible.) All the articles on that page should currently be unknown-importance, but please skip conflicts if any are encountered. The project has been notified here with no objections in a week. Thank you. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I'd prefer that one or two members of that project actually approve of your ratings. In the past, WP:SILENCE has sometimes been problematic when it comes to mass wikiproject tagging. Anomie⚔ 18:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

(Bump.) Another editor has since voiced support for the task. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to have a look at it soon, although I'm not sure when exactly I'll get time. Anomie⚔ 14:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Bumping as a reminder. No rush, though. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

I understand that Anomie may be too busy to work on this. Do any of the talk page stalkers have suggestions for another operator who might be able to help? --Paul_012 (talk) 04:54, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry. :( Anomie⚔ 12:18, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

This edit shows the bot making an edit to add a date to a template when its date was removed/malformed in such a way that it "bled" into the infobox template. I don't know how the bot works or if it could be coded in such a way that it might not make an edit in a case like that, but it felt worth bringing up. - Purplewowies (talk) 05:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot does avoid fixing a date when the invalid value it's replacing is too long, but that one came in under the limit. Anomie⚔ 12:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

As a minor note, the {{infobox line itself was removed, so technically the bot didn't actually break/bleed into the IB template. Primefac (talk) 15:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I wrote the sentence badly; I was trying to say the vandal did the breakage (and I guess in a technical sense the infobox template wasn't even on the article when the bot made the edit but *shrug*). I can see what Anomie said about how the bot treated the parameter, though, so... it's all good, I guess? - Purplewowies (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	3 Million edits! Thanks for cleaning up after me, AB. d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 18:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot is struggling on this page as there is a missing reference and a duplicate reference error. I fix the dupe and it reverts it. I would fix the other reference but the point is actually hard to verify. Haakonsson (talk) 18:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Apparently MediaWiki considers <ref name=" foo"> and <ref name="foo"> as equivalent. I've updated AnomieBOT to match. Anomie⚔ 02:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

In Template talk:Citation needed#Any reason to prohibit use of specific date? I've criticized a bot edit. Your comment there would be welcomed. JamesMLane t c 23:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Please, sir, could you explain why is this page incomplete? You mentioned first and second round don't have contents. What contents exactly? There are tables where I will be adding teams once entry list and draw are completed. Cheers. DinamoZagreb (talk) 22:21, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is a computer program (a bot) that makes repetitive edits that would be extremely tedious for a human to do manually. It merely added |date=June 2017 to a maintenance tag that a human editor added in the previous edits (check the article's history). You'll want to contact that human editor instead. Anomie⚔ 11:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

ClueBot NG edits show up as non bot edits. User:Anomie can we set this bot so that the same occurs?

When AnomieBOT makes edits like this[7], it hides vandalism from peoples watchlists. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

While what really needs to happen is that someone needs to fix phab:T11790, I can have the bot not flag OrphanReferenceFixer edits. Anomie⚔ 12:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Agree, thanks for adjusting :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:46, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 07:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello AnomieBOT, sushn345wiki here. In my article, Meta-diethynylbenzene dianion, I will soon be adding the pictures. Sushn345wiki (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

pretty purrrish

Ningishidza (talk) 05:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Clever. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 12:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, this is 182.130.237.126. About the reference error you talked about, I have fixed it in my latest edit. Thanks for your message on my talk page. 182.130.237.126 (talk) 09:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi AnomieBOT, I noted that you suggested that the page March 2017 Parachinar suicide bombing (which I created) be merged with 2017 Parachinar bombing. If we see on the March bombing article, there is no lengthy material and it should be merged but if we do so, we'll have to add (s) against title of 2017 Parachinar bombing, so it'll become bombings. And its good to merge too stubs to have a good length article. I hope you'll agree with me. Thanks. Amirk94391 (talk) 09:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is a computer program that makes certain edits that it would be tedious for humans to do manually. One of these is adding |date= to various maintenance templates. If you look at AnomieBOT's edit, you'll see that that is all it did. The merger was suggested by another user in the previous edit. Anomie⚔ 11:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

To prevent large white space on monthly deletion review log pages such as Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 August, the bot should create the pages with every "ifexist" except the bottom most one having "<!--" at the end, and except the top most one, having "-->" at the beginning. GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 16:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

When I previewed such a thing as a test, it appears that it makes the daily section headers not generate sections once the daily pages are created. Anomie⚔ 22:09, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Where is the Zlin 242 plane? You have a picture of that plane in your article of Croatian Air Force and Air Defense and you do not know what we have in Croatia from a plane ... PC-9 "Electronic Warfare plane" lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.250.247 (talk) 10:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is not a human editor. It is a computer program (a bot) that makes repetitive edits that would be extremely tedious for a human to do manually. Anomie⚔ 11:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anomie, thanks for your bot, it is doing a great job!

I was wondering if the bot could do besides the template Literatur also the template patent (into template:Cite patent)? By now I have to do it by hand, quite tedious. Probably I am not the only one with this problem. Minihaa (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Dear Anomie, I checked and added all citations I have found to make the article on The Château de Montsoreau more encyclopedic. Is it all right for you? All my best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Philippe49730, AnomieBOT is an automated bot account, which means that it had nothing to do with placing the {{unreferenced}} tag on the page; it merely fixed some of the formatting. I suggest going to the the article's talk page to further discuss potentially removing the maintenance template. Primefac (talk) 14:19, 16 August 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

For some reason 19 August has not automatically been added to this list. I think it's the first time this happens. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:17, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

• Problem solved (apparently), thanks for intervening. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:35, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Add Star Suvarna, Star Gold Select channel logo Cuty Pie Sweetu (talk) 09:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Cuty Pie Sweetu, this is an automated bot account, and cannot reply. If you wish to have an image added to Wikipedia, please see Requested pictures. Primefac (talk) 13:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I want to translate your article about technology from English to Persian. I ask you to give me this permission. Mohammad Ahmadi (talk) 18:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I was not aware that I needed to add a date. Now I do. Thanks for the fix. Regards, (I know you are a bot, but nonetheless) Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 19:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Few days ago, redirect Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija (1963-1974) was deleted after decision was reached here: Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 18, but soon after deletion it was recreated again by this bot, because of "-" between years, I guess. Sorabino (talk) 13:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorabino, I'm guessing the close of "delete all except 63-74" was meant to include both the dash and emdash versions. It would be silly (and contrary to the point of this bot, as you've discovered) to keep one but not the other. Primefac (talk) 16:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sorabino: It seems that Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija (1963–1974) was kept only because of significant history? In that case, it would probably work to rename that redirect to something else so AnomieBOT doesn't think it needs to create a parallel redirect. Anomie⚔ 16:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you are right about that, I proposed something like that during original discussion, but we never reached that point. There is a simple solution, to redirect it to the simple and most approximate title Kosovo and Metohija (1945-1968). Sorabino (talk) 16:51, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Could you explain why such a large chunk of the Teacher's College article was cut out from "Relationship with Columbia University's" section? Most of it was well cited and provided encyclopedic value. Pebblefire (talk) 01:16, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

The bot didn't remove anything, but merely restored some references that were removed. Pebblefire, this is an issue to discuss with Drmies on the talk page. I see you've already started a discussion, so really all that's left is to let them know, either by posting on their talk page or by pinging them (use {{u|Drmies}} in a signed comment). re-ping. Primefac (talk) 12:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Hello Anomia :) i have some questions? why do you ask so many [citation needed] about Tamil serials? and so many references written in Tamil languages. what can i do? and i watch Full Episodes and written about that? So how can need [citation needed]? what can i do? and i watch Full Tamil Serial Episode and written about that? So how can need [citation needed] ?

• Example: http://www.screen4screen.com/tamilcinemanews/nandhini-sun-tv-serial/ this article written about Tamil Serial, Who directed it Writer, Singer, Actors and more.........

• before the unreliable source? can you Please watch this Episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IxZKjlPVlA&list=PLKrQXcb2YJU0UX9rGv9dZRSaGD-6LxEES&index=26 --Thilakshan (talk) 17:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Thilakshan, AnomieBOT is just an automated account that fixes pages. For example, it adds a |date= parameter to maintenance templates. If you want to ask a particular user, you'll need to look through the page history to see who added it to the page, and discuss it on their talk page. The other (and better) option is to use the articles' talk page to start a general discussion. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 18:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)