User talk:Citation bot/Archive 42
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Citation bot. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 35 | ← | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 |
I believe these changes are unwarranted
- Status
Not a bug- Reported by
- JudeFawley (talk) 03:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I think the bot has made these changes in error. If not, may I please know what is the reason behind them? Change
Cheers, JudeFawley (talk) 03:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
It
- removed a dead link that cannot be archived (watermark.silverchair.com)
- it marked an inactive DOI as inactive
- remomed a pointless
|via=ProQuest - Removed italics from a series, because series shouldn't be italicized
All of those changes are clearly warranted. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:52, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
- I was not referring to all those changes, only the first (sorry, I posted the wrong link - I thought I posted a diff, not the link to an article revision). That link is now dead, the bot is indeed right. (The doi though is still broken, so I just reinserted the doi broken date after your last edit).
- Sorry for my stupidity and hubris, I really am a terrible human being.
- Cheers, JudeFawley (talk) 13:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry to bother again, can you please look at the last change the bot made to the article? It deleted the inactive doi tag. But the doi is inactive. JudeFawley (talk) 22:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
- thank you for the report. I actually check every good to bad and bad to good DOI and then double check. This DOI is in the "kinda works" category. DX.doi.org works, and the url resolves to something valid. BUT, the the final valid URL is a publisher/journal landing page. I have added it to the list of "trust me bro, it's bad" DOIs for the bot. We have similar issues with sites that have non-404 "404" pages and journals that have disapeared and now are websites the set herbal viagra or offer slot machines. And yes, the checking every changed DOI is a thankless but time consuming task, but it does not involve humans, so no ever complains. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 23:24, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Add Category:CS1 errors: archive-url to one-click autorun list
Self explanatory. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:06, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, I've been maintaining this category with WaybackMedic and manual fixes - all the more help appreciated! What is one-click autorun? Is it something that could be documented at Category:CS1_errors:_archive-url#Bot ? thanks. -- GreenC 16:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- @GreenC: See the third box at the top of the page. I keep a list that can be CB-bot cleaned up at User:Headbomb/Sandbox. Dates/Invisible characters need a lot of manual love, and Bibcodes will always have like ~25 in the category because it lags in time. The others can usually be brought down to <5 with automatic cleanup and the rest done by hand. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Headbomb, OK. One of my bots expands archive.today shorform to longform every 15 days (around 1,000) and this creates entries in the category (50-100), because it exposes archive timestamp mismatch with the
|archive-date=which typically happens because of timezone mismatches eg. editor adds an archive-date based on local timezone not GMT. Thus you may see the category bloom in size every 15 days because of my bot. I try to get to it by the end of the day to fix those cases. Unfortunately due to the design I can't do both at the same time (fix the short form and fix the archive-date), they are separate programs. — GreenC 17:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Headbomb, OK. One of my bots expands archive.today shorform to longform every 15 days (around 1,000) and this creates entries in the category (50-100), because it exposes archive timestamp mismatch with the
- @GreenC: See the third box at the top of the page. I keep a list that can be CB-bot cleaned up at User:Headbomb/Sandbox. Dates/Invisible characters need a lot of manual love, and Bibcodes will always have like ~25 in the category because it lags in time. The others can usually be brought down to <5 with automatic cleanup and the rest done by hand. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, I've been maintaining this category with WaybackMedic and manual fixes - all the more help appreciated! What is one-click autorun? Is it something that could be documented at Category:CS1_errors:_archive-url#Bot ? thanks. -- GreenC 16:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Just for you!
|
Saint-level Patience |
| You work tirelessly and never complain. Though your work is little known or appreciated now, your true value will only be realized when something prevents you from doing your job. I hope that that doesn't happen any time soon! GrinningIodize (talk) 17:33, 8 July 2025 (UTC) |
- Seconded! Nemo 09:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Violating RfC consensus by screwing up all worldcat links
- Status
Fixed - I have already felt that the people who wanted better edit summaries were being overly particular, but those really helped this time.- Reported by
- PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- What happens
- It thinks cite web citations to bibliographic data are citations to books and replaces them with cite book links
- What should happen
- It leaves the cite web citations alone, as said in the RFC
- Relevant diffs/links
- When we did the WorldCat RfC I supported with the condition that the bot knew how to distinguish citations to WorldCat for their bibliographic data to book citations. It does not. Please stop it from doing this. [1]
- We can't proceed until
- Feedback from maintainers
This was my one request in the WorldCat RfC - that it does not make this extremely obvious error. The consensus was to keep WorldCat links when they are to bibliographic data, not the source book. The bot cannot tell these apart, when it was said in the RfC that it could. It does the extreme obvious error, against everyone's consensus in that RfC. It has done this on three pages I can see, please stop before it ruins more. if it can't distinguish this it should not be running this operation whatsoever. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Headbomb, any comment, since you were the person who suggested this and said the bot could tell them apart? PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- Still doing it [2]/ PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, a cite web with website=wordlcat should be left alone. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:00, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- That is now fixed. Code interaction within the bot that I did not expect. Sorry about that. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- revert done AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:04, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- revert done AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:04, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- That is now fixed. Code interaction within the bot that I did not expect. Sorry about that. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Another question
I am using the web, and how do I use this version of Citation bot? WikiHelper3906 (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- That is the only version. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Removed "URL-status"
Hi there - the Bot deleted two "url-status=live" tags from two Cite news templates without giving a reason (in this diff), while it was also adding a ProQuest "id=" tag. I've reinstated the "url-status" tags there, because both of the news articles are still live online. Is there any reason to remove those tags, or was it a mistake? Thank you, 101.98.24.129 (talk) 22:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- The edit was correct. See Category:CS1 maint: url-status.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Usage in a Userpage
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I am interested in using this bot (and the OA bot) on User:Snoteleks/bibliography. Is there any way I could activate these bots on that page? — Snoteleks (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Go to https://iabot.wmcloud.org/index.php?page=runbotsingle&action=analyzepage and login and make sure that the wiki is set to the english one. Then run it on your page. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Go to https://citations.toolforge.org/ and run it on your page. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Lastly do not do this at the same time. Let one finish, or else the second one will either fail or blow away the first ones work. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- I just can IABot and it did nothing. Odd. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Lastly do not do this at the same time. Let one finish, or else the second one will either fail or blow away the first ones work. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Go to https://citations.toolforge.org/ and run it on your page. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Added source
How do you fix the source link I have added my source to Denisovan page can you fix it. Wikipedian reader 1234567 (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
{{#invoke:cite|web|}} breaks when author added
- Status
- {{fixed}}
- Reported by
- Snowman304|talk 05:05, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- What happens
- {{#invoke:cite|web|}} without author or first/last becomes {{#invoke:cite|author1=foo|web|}}. This may not be exclusive to {{#invoke:cite|web|}}.
- What should happen
- It should become {{#invoke:cite|web|author1=foo|}}.
- Relevant diffs/links
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_alternative_rock_artists&diff=1302926998&oldid=1302456443
- We can't proceed until
- Feedback from maintainers