User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2008/May

'Comments on the Article 'Facts about Mohamed El Naschei'

Hey writer of the above article, I just want others to know that you combine ignorance with poor use of the English language to attack one of the World's, and certainly the Eastern Worls' premier scientists. Mohamed El Naschie was traind as a Civil Engineer, with an emphasis on structural mechanics. He achieved international fame, as well as fortune, in a short period of time during which individuals like your good self would have probably spent cooking up lies about others. Once he resolved a number of critical issues in mechanics, his inqisitive mind led him to start reading in physics. How many researchers made the transition from structural engineering to pure physics, and achieved international recognition of their work in both within 20 years? ONLY Mohamed El Naschie. That he does not have ANY degree in physics is indeed his Miracle, not a point to be ashemd of. I was sitting next to the late Ilya Prigogine, Professor at the University of Brussels, I think, and a Nobel Loreate (1977), when Mohamed El Naschie was giving a lecture, using the black board and a piece of chalk. I MYSELF, WITH MY OWN EARS, heard him say "If this is proven completely, this is a Nobel Prize'. Enough said about your slander! An YES, Mohamed El Naschie was honored in China like very very few are, and a whole conference, to which I was invited but could not go, was held in his honor and named after him. What is the standing of the Conference Chair is really not an important issue, but for people like you. Finally, why does El Naschei publish in his own journal? Simple, if I had a shop selling cars, and I was the best car manufacturer in the world, why bless other shops with my cars? I would place my cars in my shop. Mohamed's work is simply brilliant, so he promotes his Journal, as if it needs promotion, by publishing his work in his Journal.

Good luck with your anger management course.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:ClueBot Commons. 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.

I think ClueBot does a great job of detecting vadalism. My only concern is perhaps ClueBot is being a little too nice to the point of seeming naiive. If you look at this user's talk page, ClueBot welcomes the user (even though they have been editing for while now) before giving he/she a message that seems a little too nice for the ammount of vandalism that this user has done. I have found a few other instances similar to this but I can't remember where at the moment. If I find them, I will add them. What does everyone else think and is there anything that can be done about it? yettie0711 (talk) 12:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I have ClueBot III commented out at the moment at WT:Layout, because it archived everything today after I installed it, including sections that were edited just today, when age was set to 480 (20 days). Can you guys have a look? We reverted the archiving on WT:Layout, although the archived copy is in WT:Layout/Archives/2008. Thanks. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 01:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC) P.S. More information: it only copied less than half the page to the archives, stopping in the middle of the line "was deliberately listed after ==External links==", and then it deleted the entire page. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 01:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Facts about Mohamed El Naschie

Please My Sir, check all the following information. This article i just to show the facts not anything else.

This article is just trial to show the fact of Mohamed El Naschie by scientific proof. Really we have been disappointed very much when we saw many journals like Almasry Alyom, Almesryoon, El Ahram, El Akhbar and many big Egyptian journals are speaking about him that he is the best physicist after Newton and Einstein. we asked ourselves why they are making this without any kind of confirmation about the fact that he is nothing in High energy Physics, and his papers are nothing in High energy Physics. Now, the members of the parliament of IKHWAN Muslims are asking why Mohamed El Naschie has not selected in the council of Technology of Egypt. We want to prove our words with a scientific proof which could convince a professional man. so could you please read the following letter. We hope if you could please interest in that matter, because really we have deep fears that we will see a day in which Mr Mohamed El Naschie become responsible man in the science in Egypt , and really Egypt don't deserve that at all.

1- First, El Naschie is publishing his papares in only one journal, and he is editor of this journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals and he never published in Physics Review, Nuclear Physics, or and good known journal

2- he is publishing a a paper each day approximately, and this has not happened in the history of the science

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=695481042&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=d5457d3e1f5800b0262ce5487b278733

and of course all of them are published in his journal

3-if we want to see his citation, we will find great surprise that no scientist take him as refrence at all and this is illustrated in the greatest data base of High energy Physics of SLAC, Stanford

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=a+El+Naschie,+M+S

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=FIND+A+EL+NASCHIE%2C+M+S&FORMAT=wwwcitesummary&SEQUENCE=

4- He has been selected as the chief of Nanotechnology project in Egypt, and the funny thing he published only one paper in popular science about nanotechnology

Nanotechnology for the developing world Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Volume 30, Issue 4, November 2006, Pages 769-773

5- he alwayes saying that he was working at Cambridge University, but he didnot mention that at his website

http://www.el-naschie.net/

but when we search about his name and his affiliation at arxiv, we will see scandal. His papers which carried the affiliation of Cambridge University has been withdrawn because Prof Michel Green ( Chief of DAMPT at Cambridge University) complained to ARXIV that Mr El Naschie didnot have at any time the Cambridge University. You could look at the following sites.

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0004152 http://arxiv.org/find/hep-th/1/au:+Naschie_M/0/1/0/all/0/1

6- Mr El Naschie alwayes saying that he awarded great prize in China, and he is nominee for Nobel Prize, and the funny thing the editor Ji-Huan He is not professional in High energy Physics and his journal has very bad reputation in china

http://www.ijnsns.com/conf.html

and this could be confirmed from the following website, the most repectable place of theoretical physics in China

Institute of Theoretical Physics Chinese Academy of Sciences

http://www.itp.ac.cn/eng/

As we already mentioned, the all the media in Egypt is saying the he is Nobel prize nominee , the problems of the research will be solved by his blessing hands and now he become the chief of nanotechnology project although he don't know any thing about this science. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faragali (talk • contribs) 13:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. Yuck Flu By Road (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

if not please stop because interestingly i am not vandalising i am telling the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demon.fish (talk • contribs) 11:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

This comment was made back in April on Cobi's talk page, but no response, so I'll place it here instead, where others might see it:

Hello, Cobi. First off, I'm feeling better about what's happened a month ago. Secondly, I was wondering about something. ClueBot has a heuristic enabled called "massdelete," where the bot reverts an edit where a large portion of text was removed. What would happen if an IP user, or a user who recently created an account, removed text over 10,000 characters that was copyvio, or wasn't sourced, or was replicated from other text many times? This doesn't count page blanking, where all of it is removed. Can the heuristic be fixed, or not? Just wondering, thanks! SchfiftyThree 21:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well, ClueBot is undergoing a core-engine rewrite, so all these problems should be fixed after the rewritten bot goes live. For now, someone would have to revert ClueBot or redo the edit (ClueBot doesn't revert to itself). Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 21:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I see CBII is currently cleaning the sandbox as well. I cannot find a BRFA for it, and it is also doing the task wrong. Could you tell me what's going on? Soxred93 (u t) 13:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

It was a test edit when I was writing the code for this BRFA. I also reverted it, as I realized it did it wrong. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 09:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

hello clue. the name of ciefl has been changed to eflu. can you make the title of ciefl into eflu? also remove the redirect page of ciefl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.230.66 (talk) 09:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I posted a == Bug report for ClueBot III == several days ago, and it archived without an answer. Giving it another shot, because style guidelines editors really need ClueBot III's link-moving functionality.

I have ClueBot III commented out at the moment at WT:Layout, because it archived everything today after I installed it, including sections that were edited just today, when age was set to 480 (20 days). Can you guys have a look? We reverted the archiving on WT:Layout, although the archived copy is in WT:Layout/Archives/2008. Thanks. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 01:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC) P.S. More information: it only copied less than half the page to the archives, stopping in the middle of the line "was deliberately listed after ==External links==", and then it deleted the entire page. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 11:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it :) Thanks for letting me know about the problem.  :) -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 14:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Does Cluebot monitor its own talk page? If so, it should replace this message with 'not notable content' 86.163.86.45 (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Clearly it does not 193.120.116.179 (talk) 21:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Does ClueBot III offer a feature like MiszaBot III's minthreadsleft? It would be helpful if it had some of those advanced options. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 00:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I added a feature ... not sure if it works, yet, but ... minkeepthreads should do the same as minthreadsleft. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 04:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

KINDLY REMOVE any and all references to Chuckjav relative to vandalism at the Centerville (Ohio) High School Wikipedia Page; Chuckjav has nothing to do with ongoing incidents of vandalism at the site. School personnel has involved local law enforcement; a Centerville Police Officer contacted Chuckjav at his place of employment. Resolve your issues, or Chuckjav will seek legal remedies of his own: (cur) (last) 17:42, 7 May 2008 ClueBot (Talk | contribs) m (20,409 bytes) (Reverting possible vandalism by 74.218.208.98 to version by Chuckjav. False positive? Report it. Thanks, User:ClueBot. (362053) (Bot)) (undo) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuckjav (talk • contribs) 10:45, 9 May 2008

I nor my bot have ever accused you of vandalizing anything. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 13:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Right you are, please pardon the tone and (mis)direction of my wrath; it should be directed toward whom ever wrongly put Chuckjav and the vandalism together. Seems to me, it should be easy to determine who IS NOT the responsible party. Most definitely seemed peculiar (perhaps illegal) for a local law enforcement official to make unsolicited/unwarranted contact with Chuckjav - particularly at his place of employment.

See User talk:69.14.79.142. I revert, but then cluebot gives a warning for the vandalising edit that I revert, see here. (Italics for emphasis) Why? Spencer^T♦C 14:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Weird ... must have edit conflicted with you and something weird happened. ClueBot uses rollback, and if rollback says it is successful, ClueBot warns, otherwise, it doesn't. -- Cobi^(t|c|b)

That's pretty weird. Spencer^T♦C 18:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I was trying to make an edit and I was using another article as a reference and I accidently pasted that article in it's place. It was an honest mistake.

However, I wonder if you can help me. I'm about to make the case that this article should be deleted. That's what I was trying to do, but I screwed it up. I'm going to make my case that it should be deleted on the talk page. Could you add the deletion tag because I don't know how to do it. annoynmous 13:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I wasn't really sure where to put this, but figured you'd get the message to wherever it needs to go. I've come across two examples recently (here and here where anonymous IPs have been so eager to leave their little mark on Wikipedia that they've deleted everything after a certain point, including the cats and interwikis. I can't help feeling that there's the basis for some kind of heuristic here - it has a major effect on the article and is obviously not being picked up at the moment - in fact Alaibot has been coming along a few weeks later and tagging them as uncategorised, and I found them because I was looking for Italian towns that "should" have been in certain categories and weren't. You could perhaps look for an anon editor removing all the cats and interwikis in one go? It also seems to happen accidentally - here is an example of an apparently good-faith anon editor not noticing that he'd deleted the last 5kb of the 53kb Milan article by accident. I'm quite happy to be told that this is a stoopid idea, but I figured I'd throw it your way in case you can do something with it.... FlagSteward (talk) 20:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a suggestion that might reduce certain false positives by ClueBot when it detects vandalism. I don't know PHP, so I am not sure whether this is already implemented.

Looking at ClueBot's source, I see that the addition of obscenities reduces the calculated value of an edit. However, it seems to be a lot more likely to mistakenly revert on articles with one of these words in the title. Perhaps it would improve the bot to reduce the impact of words already in the title, or to simply not take them into account at all? Basically, words in the title could be a whitelist for offensive language on that page.

For example, an edit containing the word "damn" is much less likely to be vandalism if it's on the article damnation, so it wouldn't make sense to give an edit -5 for adding it to that page. Is this a good idea, or would it cause problems that I'm not aware of? Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 23:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I notice that the bot leaves warnings, especially to IP vandals, that rarely escalate. I saw one case where individuals left a level 1 warning after several instances of vandalism. I was wondering if there was a way for the bot to escalate warnings (up to final warning), so that the next case of vandalism will lead to a block. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 14:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

208.125.114.245 (talk · contribs) is the individual that prompted my leaving this comment.OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 14:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I recently encountered a vandalism caught be your bot ([1]), well done; however, both edits before the reverted edit were also clear and blatant vandal strikes. Would it be possible to add a "search" back option to the bot. In other words, if vandalism is found, check the edit before the vandalism, and revert that too (etc until last good version is found). Anyway, just an idea; in general the bot is doing very well. Cheers Arnoutf (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind taking a look at the last five revisions done on 12 May by 86.154.178.231 ? The changes do not bring anything new or noteworthy to the article; in fact they contradict what is already there & look to me as possible vandalism. Frania W. (talk) 01:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to say "Hi" and "A robot with clue, what a concept". Convergence Dude (talk) 08:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I own you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.64.152.128 (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

No you don't. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 00:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The bot described an edit as making a minor change with obscenities. The edit in question was yet another boring X IS GAY vandalism. While I'm more than happy for these to be reverted in the current manner (especially given their lamentable frequency), I think it's rather impolitic to describe "gay" as an obscenity. Feel free to ignore me if I'm being over-sensitive. Pseudomonas_(talk) 12:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, there is a huge list of words that vandals commonly used, all grouped together under the name "obscenities", mainly because most of them are. ClueBot defines a minor change is any change where the number or characters changed is less than 200 (removed or added). So, if a minor change contains words in the obscenities group, then it says that the user was making a minor change with obscenities. The current ClueBot is sort of in a feature freeze right now, pending the start of the new ClueBot which will catch more vandalism, be more accurate, and overall be much better at its job. With the new ClueBot, there will not be an obscenities list any more, so no need to worry about this. However, we do need lots of diffs of good edits and vandalism to train the new ClueBot engine with. If you would like to help, please check out this page. Thanks. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 13:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, machine-learning based ClueBot! I would like to help; I'll see what I can do. Pseudomonas_(talk) 19:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I resent your censoring of my "obscenities" and was wondering for their reason...

oh and by the way, I WILL own you for this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.29.207 (talk) 22:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

On a page that I recently tagged for speedy deletion, the author of the page, Yanking13, made two edits before being reverted by ClueBot, as "making a minor change with obsceneties." Should ClueBot revert edits from a user on one of their own articles? Just wondering. SchfiftyThree 00:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

My edits to Of Montreal are not vandalism. I removed unsourced information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.3.120.30 (talk) 22:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Someone vandalized your talk page, removed it because i guess you dont detect vandalism on your own page :P Imightjustfail 17:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Scenerio:
Step 1: Vandal deletes a section of text.
Step 2: Vandal in a second edit adds trash talk detected by cluebot.
Step 3. Clubot reverts step 2, leaving deletion.

Since it appears that Cluebot has corrected something the change of state of the article may not be closely inspected by human reviewers.

Text can remain missing for months until an original editor inspects (if ever).

Suggest reverting all sequential edits by identified IP address, rather than only the offending one.

- Leonard G. (talk) 02:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

On User:ClueBot, under heading "Open proxy scanning", the bot claims to check ports:

HTTP: 80 8080 3128 6588 81 8000 8001 8081 808 6660 6661 6662 6663 6664 6665 6666 6667 6668 6669 1337 31337 1338 31338 7000
SOCKS4: 1080 3128 4914 6826 7198 7366 9036 29992 38884 18844 17771 31121 6660 6661 6662 6663 6664 6665 6666 6667 6668 6669 1337 31337 1338 31338 7000
SOCKS5: 1080 3128 4438 5104 5113 5262 5634 6552 6561 7464 7810 8130 8148 8520 8814 9100 9186 9447 9578 6660 6661 6662 6663 6664 6665 6666 6667 6668 6669 1337 31337 1338 31338 7000
ROUTER: 23
WINGATE: 23
HTTPPOST: 80 81 808 6588 4480 8000 8001 8080 8081 6660 6661 6662 6663 6664 6665 6666 6667 6668 6669 1337 31337 1338 31338 7000

What I'm curious about is the "ROUTER: 23" line with ROUTER linking to Cisco's wiki page. Is it checking for Cisco router's with enabled telnet servers or is there actually some sort of obscure proxy protocol that can run on that port that Cisco developed that I've never heard of?

Thanks,
ND (talk) 07:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The "router" protocol is basically cisco telnet with the default password ... allowing you to proxy through the cisco interface (with the telnet command on cisco routers). Technically, connect, write "cisco\r\n" for the password, then write "telnet IP PORT\r\nopen IP PORT\r\n", then write "GET ..." (HTTP headers). -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 07:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In regards to your message, I never edited anything with someone called Flute O.o. --124.180.80.20 (talk) 23:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Why is ClueBot reverting edits to the sandbox as vandalism?[2] Some were inappropriate, or went against the community, but others were perfectly legitimate. Even then, inappropriate edits in the sandboxes can not be called vandalism. 209.244.43.112 (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hrm ... someone added the sandbox to the list of articles that ClueBot should watch carefully. I'll remove it. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 17:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

ClueBot continued the reverting in the main sandbox, but seems to have stopped now. 209.244.43.112 (talk) 05:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Your reversion of 24.192.139.173's edit in Metal Gear Solid was incorrect. That IP was removing a large bulk of vandalism, even though you didn't catch the original vandalism, you caught the removal act. --haha169 (talk) 01:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I mostly edit Uncyclopedia - I was wondering whether the maker of ClueBot or somebody would be able to easly make a kind or varient of Cluebot for our Wiki?--MM (Talk to Me) 18:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I accidentally blanked a page and it was cleaned right up before I could say, "Whoa". Nice going, ClueBot! 71.224.164.116 (talk) 07:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I blanked a page by accident and my screw-up was undone right quick. good job. StoneCold89 (talk) 07:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

How does something like this happen? Was somebody just faster than the bot? Just curious—I've never seen anything like this. Unschool (talk) 01:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It's running Nmap 4.11, but the most current version is 4.62. You might want to upgrade it. And another thing, a lot of people looking at WP:OP get confused when ClueBot IV returns "No proxy found" when it's obviously Tor. Perhaps have it check a Tor checker like the Krimpet one and return "Tor exit node found" if the check returns positive? Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 02:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the archive link would be placed in the archive box, but I had to mannually add the link on the Talk:Progressive rock page after it was archived. What's going on? --Kraftlos (talk) 21:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi ClueBot. You were correct in reverting various vandalism by the above user who is based at the University of Toronto. I had to reverse it again today. Please keep an eye on this vandal (who apparently has connections to Finnish Wikipedia vandals as well). Am looking up the faculty and computer supervisor for this user. Thanks again.... --Conservapedian-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.59.96 (talk) 12:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I am going to take the liberty of changing one of your warnings, on somebody's user talk page, from level1 to level2. Hope you don't mind. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Questions about User:Crispy1989/Dataset/Constructive: first, is it acceptable for me to add one or two of my own edits as examples? second, would it be useful if I were to do so even if they have already been reported as false positives? (Please reply on my talk page.) 69.140.152.55 (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I would like to use this bot on an other wiki to help with vandalism. Is it OK if you taught me how to make him (differently, so that way i in a way own it) so that he may be used? You can teach me by helping me on the IRC server irc.gnug.org on the channel #zeldawiki. Thanks!! --Seablue254 (talk) 20:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

On the page Space Shuttle, it was reported that somebody was apparently vandalising the page. The mistake was not, at all, vandalism or spam or any mistake. It was just adding information about the BFS, or Backup Flight Systems, which are crucial in case the space shuttle has a computer failure. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this edit. Ssmercedes18 (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure of which edit you speak. Please provide the diff if you have not already done so.

69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

ClueBot didn't roll the page back far enough. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Get a life man, or a gf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.89.79 (talk) 04:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I was just wantingsomeone to talk to, please send me a message.Punky8 (talk) 10:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

CAN YOU TELL ME WHY DID YOU REVERT THE CHANGES IN THIS ARTICLE!! I ADDED REFERENCES TO THE ARTICLE!! PLEASE EXPLAIN A) HOW IS THAT VANDALISM AND B) HOW IS ADDING A REFERENCE CONSIDERED unhelpful!!81.159.190.244 (talk) 20:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Calvin 1998 -- he problem is that the report page has an error!! So, I can't report it there...81.159.190.244 (talk) 22:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll tell Cobi. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 22:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right, there seems to be a problem with the false positive reporting page. I've reported it to the administrator of the bot and I'm sure they will have it fixed soon. Just sit tight and don't worry about it. -- BlastOButter42 ^See Hear _Speak 22:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)