Talk:EMRP: Reports to Process

User Comments

SWEET!  Swiers 17:20, 5 July 2008 (BST)

25.96 MHz: *crash* *static* *silence* (2 hours and 16 minutes ago)

Helicopter crash, or just a transmitter on that frequency? GeraldThompson 02:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thought that may signal the end of EMR's, but they continued afterwards. A bit of flavour, because no one in-gamne can transmit on that channel -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 04:37 25 February 2009 (BST)

This is the third occurrence that's been reported to the wiki. The generic crash-static-silence signal on 25.96, that is. It was scary the second time, since a report came in and straight after that signal happened, as if the chopper had crashed or something. But yeah, it's probably people setting their transmitters to 25.96 and then they get destroyed. Actually, I've never tried. Can you set a transmitter to a military frequency, even if you then can't broadcast on it? --  RoosterDragon  13:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes you can, I was thinking this was merely an oversight, but judging from the timing I'm skeptical. _■^■ 22:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Anyone want to test it? _■^■ 04:31, 8 April 2009 (BST)

Is the bot broken? it hasn't been updating since mid February. I've been updating everything manually for the past week to try and catch things up.

-MidgetMe 04:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Funny Report

Posting for posterity :) 12:21, 11 July 2010 (BST) 25.96 MHz: "... leaving Mockridge Heights, counted thirty or so outside ... a few outside the My..." *static* "... Building ... a lot of buildings with lights on ... infrastructure looks intact ..." (27 seconds ago) --  RoosterDragon  17:38, 25 August 2010 (BST)

Clean up

Wouldn't it be beneficial to either delete or archive the old EMRs? Considering the length of the page.       13:32, 18 May 2011 (BST)

I'm not quite sure I understand how this page is set-up. I've spent a lot of time trying to understand the EMRP but the headings on this page are somewhat unclear. Could someone clarify please? There are 3 headings:Reports to Process Later; Reports to Process (which notes presently that "List processed on: 18:50, 3 June 2011 (BST) ); Recently Processed (which has a report from Feb 28) All of the more recent reports are under the first heading and I assume they've all been processed? Shouldn't they be moved to an archive? Also what is the difference between #1 and #2 and where exactly should we stick new reports?--Uroguy^TMZ 03:10, 4 June 2011 (BST)

They use a bot to process the reports it updates all the required fields and things on the suburb pages. I think it has been nonoperational for a good while and that's why they've been building up. When it processes reports it adds the heading "Recently processed" in to the point where it stopped(I deleted all but one of the reports under that heading unsure of what the bot needed to run correctly). From what I can tell the "Reports to Process" heading only denotes when the list was last processed and that when the list is processed completely it sits at the top of the page like it should but this is a special circumstance because the bot isn't done updating. Lastly the "Reports to Process Later" heading just lists the reports that need to be updated by the bot. Any other questions?       03:41, 4 June 2011 (BST)

Got it. Thanks for the breakdown. I'll just keep adding to the "Later" list in that case.--Uroguy^TMZ 04:01, 4 June 2011 (BST)

Just be sure to get the correct formatting. The "Show Preview" button is your best friend on this wiki. I don't use it enough hence my 2 or 3 edits in short succession I often do. :P:        04:06, 4 June 2011 (BST)

Good suggestion, I'll be sure to do that, especially with stuff that gets propagated to multiple other pages.--Uroguy^TMZ 04:15, 4 June 2011 (BST)

For clarification, I run the bot and was absent for ages, hence the buildup. The page itself is here so you can just dump in any EMRs you notice in one edit, and then let the bot do the archiving to the various talk pages.

Usually, you'll only have the "Reports To Process" and "Recently Processed" headers. The bot grabs the reports between these two headers (as you correctly note, this means you need the recently processed header in there, even if it's empty). When the bot is running on a frequent basis, the purpose of the "Recently Processed" header is so you can tell which EMRs were last posted, and avoid posting dupe reports.

Since I'm catching up, I've moved the bulk of reports to the "Reports To Process Later" header temporarily, so I can process the backlog in more manageable chunks. I just forgot to put up the friendly notice I usually put up to explain such things :P Once I'm caught up things will return to normal. --  RoosterDragon  07:11, 4 June 2011 (BST)

Alright I'll just keep clearing them off as the bot processes them until we get to reports from June. Although I'd propose all reports under the "Recently Processed" header be deleted once they are past a week old. That way the page length is kept short and there's enough past reports that dupes shouldn't get posted.       13:41, 4 June 2011 (BST)

Shutting down?

Since the bot hasn't been run since 2011, is it ok if I shut down this page? Meaning put a big header up saying the bot is shut down, link to instructions on how to update reports manually, and remove/clarify on pages linking to this that the bot no longer operates? If there are no objections, I may do this soon. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 21:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there any chance of getting the bot code from (I assume) the general or getting a replacement bot? This isn't the only thing that was formerly bot-handled and if it's just a matter of someone having the code and running the bot every so often surely someone could handle that. --_K 22:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea. Community, got anything on this one? Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 03:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Since no one commented, I'm going to close this page down as best I can sometime later tonight or tomorrow. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 00:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

There's bot software that's easy to use (light coding/built in scripts). I'd have to dig for the name but don't mind looking it up if anyone's interested. No idea if it's of use here but seemed an appropriate time to bring it up. ~ _{01:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)}

If you (or anyone else) would dig that up, that would be so awesome. There are a whole bunch of bots which haven't been run in ages (I'm looking at you, thegeneralbot) which would be super useful if they got restarted. Imagine the effect a run of the DR Timekeeper would have on the Danger Center map. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 04:07, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The one I'm thinking of is called AutoWikiBrowser. Technically, its a semi-automated bot. It can make lists and do search-and-replace type edits so I imagine it could be useful it some instances. There is an instruction manual in the provided link. Ignore the part about registering your username and such. That's in regards to the Wikipedia policy on using AWB. Refer to the manual for changing the destination wiki to UDWiki. I never got around to installing this and tinkering with it but it looked like it could be useful to the non-bot script writing lay person that wanted to run some automated tasks. ~ _{05:39, 12 March 2013 (UTC)}

Darn it, I'm a Mac user. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 16:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, because that never panned out and new users still occasionally post reports here expecting processing, I'm shutting down the page. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 14:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)