User talk:Rukhabot/2012

July 2012

Interwiki error

You are creating wrong interwiki links concerning apostrophes. Please fix them.

• Interwiki link duplications: [1]
• Interwiki links in a redirect: [2]

— TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comments.

Regarding the "duplications": The problem is that the entry already contained bad interwiki links. The bot adds the correct ones, and leaves the incorrect ones alone. This isn't ideal — ideally it would remove the previously-existing bad links — but I think it's fine for now. (I'll write a separate bot-task later to deal with bad interwiki-links.)

Regarding the redirects: This is intended behavior; it was discussed at the Grease pit, and other editors agreed with me that although such interwikis are not very useful/important, there's no reason not to have them. Could you explain why you consider them to be wrong?

Thanks again,

—Ruakh_TALK 11:43, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Last night I ran a task to fix all pre-existing bad interwikis: [3][4][5]. —Rukhabot 14:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Interwikis to redirects can be useful and educating. What is an incorrect/alternative spelling in one language can be a correct spelling in another or a different opinion may exist on the same language and word. Thanks for addressing interwikis, I was getting worried about them. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 00:29, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Interwikis for redirects are potentially useful for reading up on how other Wiktionaries deal with entries that we have as redirects. For example, I could overwrite a redirect with 'real' content and double check that content against another language that I can understand sufficiently well. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

interwiki order

Why Rukhabot doesn't add interwikis in alphabetical order? Example: [6]. Maro 18:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

It attempts to add them in alphabetical order by language code, as documented at Wiktionary:Links#Interwiki links and m:Interwiki sorting order (in that MediaWiki:Interwiki config-sorting order does not exist). If the existing interwiki-links are not in that order, then this can go awry. (In the diff that you link to, the bot put mg before pl; cy and eu before fi; and ta at the end.)

If you're interested in the order of interwiki-links, you may wish to participate in a current discussion of that subject, at Wiktionary:Grease pit/2012/August#Order of interwikis.

—Ruakh_TALK 18:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The existing interwiki links were in the correct order. Interwicket (and other bots) has been adding interwikis in the order by language name. Your bot has added them in a chaotic order. Maro 21:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I still don't know what "the correct order" is. As soon as one is determined — at Wiktionary:Grease pit/2012/August#Order of interwikis. — I'll modify my bot to use it.—Ruakh_TALK 21:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

September 2012

Confirmed translations changed into unconfirmed ones

There is an inconsistency between this bot and the automated method to enter translations. When you add new "assisted" translations, they are denoted with 't' only; for example, burocracia f. However, this bot replaces it by 't-'; for example, burocracia f.--Adelpine (talk) 01:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

That is, in fact, the intended behavior. Perhaps you could explain why you expected something different? —Ruakh_TALK 02:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

By the way, if it helps clarify anything . . . the header of this section is "Confirmed translations changed into unconfirmed ones", but then you ask about a change from {{t}} (which doesn't indicate whether the foreign-language wikt has an entry) to {{t-}} (which specifically indicates that the foreign-language wikt does not have an entry). I'm not sure what you mean by "confirmed" and "unconfirmed", but those aren't the terms I'd use. I think you must be misunderstanding something, but I can't tell what. —Ruakh_TALK 03:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I had missunderstood the meaning of t+ and t-. Excuse me.--Adelpine (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2012

rite of passage

• I've noticed that the rite of passage is dinged up a bit - after an edit from the bot, it seems, because going one step back in history restores normal looks to the page. Cheers, --CopperKettle (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Nope, that has nothing to do with me or my bot; see Wiktionary:Grease pit/2012/October#Uh, help?. The reason that historical versions look O.K. is that they're not cached, so you see them with the correct current versions of all templates. Anyway, I've made a null-edit to that page to force it to have the current versions, and it's O.K. now. But, thank you. If you see any more like this, just null-edit them. —Ruakh_TALK 14:25, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

December 2012

tempête

Can you add zh:tempête in Wiktionnaire please ? Fête (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

No, I don't edit Wiktionnaire (or any site other than en.wikt). —Rukhabot 22:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Entry “belief”

There is an ongoing discussion regarding the belief entry's primary definition. Please don't roll back edits while that discussion is unresolved. 150.101.214.82 22:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I didn't. I'm a bot; I don't do that sort of thing. It's SemperBlotto (talk • contribs) who performed that rollback. (His edit-summary mentioned me only because the previous edit — the one he was rolling back to — was mine.) —Rukhabot 23:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)