• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

124 submissions , 105 unreviewed
3,647 questions , 1,242 unanswered
4,638 answers , 19,680 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
437 active unimported users
More ...

Bug in the Import SE-Question plugin?

+ 0 like - 1 dislike

I just tried to import this wrongly closed question from Physics SE into the category Q&A/Mathematics


But I obtained this error message. Not sure it this link works, so here is what it says

user: Emilio Pisanty
collsision with PO email: a075a2ea7bcc6c71e6dfd70f2823c6b8
users hash: a075a2ea7bcc6c71e6dfd70f2823c6b8
string(4) "1026" credentials: here
we have accountid: 1370104
accountid of unknown user: 1370104

user: Jerry Schirmer
collsision with PO email: e66178404d2a028e5bd5e068cd1b8815
users hash: e66178404d2a028e5bd5e068cd1b8815
string(4) "1095" credentials: here
we have accountid: 333303
accountid of unknown user: 333303

user: Dilaton
collsision with PO email: dilaton@physicsoverflow.org
users hash: 691df337efb4b783e64a6e024d32516c
string(4) "1434" credentials: here
we have accountid: 528229
accountid of unknown user: 528229

user: Stan Liou
collsision with PO email: 15b638e9ecbd3883cec2755362c57474
users hash: 15b638e9ecbd3883cec2755362c57474
string(4) "1195" credentials: here
we have accountid: 528075
accountid of unknown user: 528075

user: BMS
collsision with PO email: 6f448914e823fe0603f1518cc22f6e9e
users hash: 6f448914e823fe0603f1518cc22f6e9e
string(4) "1614" credentials: here
we have accountid: 1939318
accountid of unknown user: 1939318

user: user31748
collsision with PO email: ca055db7709bc4f5be81d6abf47a5441
users hash: ca055db7709bc4f5be81d6abf47a5441
string(4) "1615" credentials: here
we have accountid: 3495568
accountid of unknown user: 3495568

user: Iota
collsision with PO email: 25ce3ce2b013e8fa49e517055cb73770
users hash: 25ce3ce2b013e8fa49e517055cb73770
string(4) "1616" credentials: here
we have accountid: 2895414
accountid of unknown user: 2895414

asked Mar 27, 2014 in Bug by Dilaton (4,245 points) [ revision history ]
retagged May 23, 2014 by dimension10
Most voted comments show all comments

I see that the question is imported after all ...
Do these error messages somehow replace the creation of new users, if the emails to not match with the emails of already existing users?

Sorry, the bug was me :-(  I did not switch off my debug output. The import should be correct and not affected by this output. Have switched off now.

@polarkernel Actually I had noticed this before and thought that this was a feature not a bug. I liked it because it told me when existing users were recreated. 

@Dilaton He has already re-enabled it.  Check your e-mail.  

I don't think the question should be hidden, even if you think it is stupid. It is useful for future super-administrators.   

Oops, sorry for not explaining! I downvoted because I think that we should keep the debug output there.   

Most recent comments show all comments

I have hidden it because I thought my question was stupid after reading the comments ...

Do you think we should ask Polarkernal to leave the output coming as a feature to see the new users that get created? I did not think about it that way, but it may help in finding users that should potentially get merged for example...?

Now that I know what is up with this, I would be ok with keeping it too ;-)

I am interested in the reason for the downvote: is this because the question is stupid, or because of disagreement with my importing the question (without suggestion it on the Request for import votes thread) ?

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights