###Instruction: Multi-class classification, answer with one of the labels:['no_consensus', 'delete', 'keep', 'comment', 'merge', 'redirect'] : ###Input:  Q18053915: TAS2R45 (Q18053915) : protein-coding gene in the species Homo sapiens : ( delete | history | links | entity usage | logs ) Link to Wikipedia was deleted
-- DavidMar86hdf ( talk ) 16:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC) There has never been a link to Wikipedia. However this article was created by a bot, that now also emptied the article. Maybe @ Andrawaag : can shed some light on what the bot was doing here. Mbch331 ( talk ) 16:16, 26 June 2015 (UTC) Since there is no response, I left a request on the bots talk page to respond here. Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC) @ Mbch331 : The bot shouldn't have left this item empty. I have reverted the deletion. In the previous approach the bot emptied all the statements that needed to be updated, before actually updating them. I suspect that there was an issue with the communication with the bot just after the deletion, so it didn't get updated properly and the exception wasn't caught properly. Due to quite some similar issues, we decided to completely overhaul our bot and we are almost ready to run a test run. In the overhauled bot, the previous approach of first deleting then updating no longer exists. Andrawaag ( talk ) 10:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation. Then this request is Not done . Mbch331 ( talk ) 10:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)