Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 84

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 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 main page.

Archive 80

←

Archive 82

Removing citation needed tags with references

There seems to be no automated process to remove {{citation needed}} tags which are occasionally left on an article after a reference is added to the same statement; a recent example of this instance is [1]. I don't know how to gauge the frequency of this problem, as the search tool parses the regex incorrectly, but it is obvious that the citation needed tag should be removed after a reference is added. A draft regex for the operation is given below; I'm not sure yet how to handle {{citation needed span}} wrappers containing references.

Regex	Replacement text
`</ref>\{\{([Cc]itation needed\|[Cc]n)( \\|.?)?\}\}`	`</ref>`
`\{\{([Cc]itation needed\|[Cc]n)( \\|.?)?\}\}<ref(.*?)>`	`<ref$3>`
`\{\{([Cc]itation needed\|[Cc]n) span\\|([^<\\|]+)(\\|.?)?\}\}<ref(.?)>`	`$2<ref$4>`

–LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 20:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

EDIT: Added case matching –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03,
1. Over 2500
2. Over 10,000
3. Over 90
(These are all minimums and may be significantly lower than the actual number, due to the RegEx timing out.) Qwerfjkl talk 21:19, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

For the citation needed span wrapping the ref, \{\{([Cc]itation needed|[Cc]n) span ?\|([^\}]+\<ref[^\}]+)\}\} → $1? ― Qwerfjkl talk 21:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

You would actually have to use $2 in this case, since $1 matches the first set of parentheses, namely the template name. This is acceptable if the final statement is referenced, although I'm not sure how to handle cases where a cn span tag has a in the middle and ends with unreferenced text. Do you think this regex would work acceptably as well? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:45, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I just noticed that when I was testing this (the ref tag matches should also extend until the end of the ref, so as to ignore cite templates). ― Qwerfjkl talk 21:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, this should try to avoid CONTEXTBOT issues ― Qwerfjkl talk 21:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I can live with that. So no further cases are needed? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 22:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

It's probably better to handle more complex cases manually (the regex I wrote had 6 matches). I doubt any other cases will be very common. I might file a BRFA for this, but currently I'm busy with the above task (maybe), Qwerfjkl (bot) 10, and Qwerfjkl (bot) 8. Still, given the time BRFAs take I'll probably be done with those before it finishes (or at least BRFA 10). ― Qwerfjkl talk 22:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Careful with \{\{Template.*?\}\} type regexes. I've found that they over-match and have subtle false positives. I prefer the following pattern: \{\{Template[^\}]*\}\}. Ditto for ref tags. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, you may find /\{\{(([^\{\}]|\{[^\{]|\}[^\}]|\{\{(([^\{\}]|\{[^\{|\}[^\}])*)\}\})*)\}\}/ somewhat safer as it also catches {{tq|LOOK! } A SINGLE CURLY BRACKET!}} and {{x|{{xy}}}} correctly. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

This sounds like it would not pass WP:CONTEXTBOT. It is not at all clear why having a {{citation needed}} tag and a <ref> tag always implies that citation is not still needed for some or all content or that the reference added actually supports the material in question. A silly counterexample: Sky is blue.{{citation needed}}<ref>Note: On Earth only.</ref> You would likely need to show a low false positive rate for this task first. — HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK 10:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

If a cn tag is followed by a source, CN is never the right template to have. Either ^{[better source needed]} or ^{[failed verification]}. I'd rather that these were maintenance tagged and followed up by a human. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

This seems much better suited for an AWB task than a bot. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

I might try this, if I get around to it. ― Qwerfjkl talk 06:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Bot to preserve categories about to be deleted

See WP:VPPR#Preserve at Wikidata?. As I said there, there doesn't have to be any bureaucracy for this one - just jump in and start coding. It's a nice self-contained task for beginner bot operators or anyone who wants to get into bots, as well. Enterprisey (talk!) 07:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Enterprisey! This caught my eye. To clarify, this is for a bot that generates a list in userspace/on Toolforge of the categories, not directly editing Wikidata, correct? 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 05:13, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@EpicPupper, right. I suppose we'd have to ask the Wikidata people for permission for a bot there. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:38, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@Enterprisey, I might try this (unarchiving thread). ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:20, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Enterprisey, @BD2412, @Sdkb, I haven't completely finished this, but I've given it a start at User:Qwerfjkl/preservedCategories. Is there any clerking of the subpages the bot should do? ― Qwerfjkl talk 18:25, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Some thoughts. If a category is empty, it likely does not need to be preserved in any sense. If it is populated, I think it would be useful to have a note of how many pages were in the category. BD2412 T 18:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@BD2412, where do you think I should note the number of pages in the category - the main page, or its subpages? The latter is fairly easy, but the former would require the bot to maintain the list of subpages, instead of a magic word. I could probably do both. The categories are currently drawn from Category:All categories for discussion - are there any other categories I should check? ― Qwerfjkl talk 19:14, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I would put the number on the main page. It will give an immediate sense of which categories only had one or two links in them at the time of deletion. BD2412 T 19:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

It just broke on Category:CS1: long volume value, so probably should limit the pages. ― Qwerfjkl talk 19:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I would oppose doing this; it is pointless and redundant at best and negates any consensus established at the CfD discussion at worst. Wikipedia:Soft deletion (failed proposal) for articles failed, so its backdoor equivalent for categories should fail as well. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll reiterate my view that the best way to preserve the information is to import it to Wikidata, not to create a bunch of subcategories here. In addition to Pppery's concerns, any editor who might benefit from it in the future is far likelier to come across it there than in a userspace subpage jungle. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb, the point of creating pages here is so the contents of the category is preserved, and that users can export it to Wikidata, even after the category is deleted, when the information might otherwise have been lost. ― Qwerfjkl talk 19:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I would add that there are certain categories of information that are not readily available from Wikidata, or which would not be parsed at Wikidata, which may still be suitable for listing or discussion in a Wikipedia article. To the extent that editors have hand-curated collections of this information, it should be maintained somewhere in case this utility can be exploited. As it stands, if an article is deleted, there is an article history that can be reviewed. If a category is depopulated, that information is dead. BD2412 T 03:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I should probably restrict it to mainspace - userspace categories probably aren't worth preserving. In addition, I could only preserve categories with a minimum of X pages/subcategories/total. I could also delete (tag for G7) any preserved categories that still exist after the discussion closes. What do you think, @BD2412, @Sdkb? ― Qwerfjkl talk 15:25, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, no userspace categories, and I would think that categories that only ever had one or two pages would also not need to be preserved. BD2412 T 16:23, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

If anyone's interested, the code's currently at https://public.paws.wmcloud.org/User:Qwerfjkl_(bot)/PreserveCategories.ipynb ― Qwerfjkl talk 17:09, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Automatic archival of Twinkle-generated logs

I had the idea of automatically archiving Twinkle-generated logs for deletion nominations (XfD, PROD, CSD), which can become very long for users who frequently initiate deletion processes, so that only the more recent months appear in the main log. My XfD log was over 160 KB until I set up my own archival system using ClueBot III (talk · contribs), and we can use that as a template. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03, This should be decided by the users themselves. If you want, you can suggest they do this on their talk page? ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with Q; we already have multiple archiving bots, and users are welcome to choose which, if any, they wish to use. Primefac (talk) 07:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Minor cleanup of WikiProject Women in Red mass message

The most recent mass message sent to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List contains a syntax error, specifically missing closing bold formatting on this line:

* New: '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/231|LGBTQ+ women]]  '''|''' [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/232|Greenland and the Faroes]] '''|''' [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/233|Women in music]]

That line should read:

* New: '''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/231|LGBTQ+ women]]  '''|''' [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/232|Greenland and the Faroes]] '''|''' [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/233|Women in music]]'''

Messages were apparently delivered to about 1,200 user talk pages listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/A-F, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/G-N, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/O-Z.

If there is a bot operator who could tidy this up, that would be helpful. Note that this may be viewed by some as a cosmetic edit, but the problem is a WP:Linter error that will need to be cleaned up at some point, so it will be better if a bot does it. Pinging the message sender, Megalibrarygirl, as an FYI; no action is needed from the message sender. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Doing... User:MalnadachBot/Task 12 covers this. Will do this within a couple of days. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 17:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Whoever codes this, make sure to include a test for if the issue had already been fixed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Done ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 14:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Removing anonblock and similar templates from IP talk pages where the IP is not currently blocked

I know this might sound crazy, but I've been thinking of a bot task where a bot would check for IPs that are not currently blocked with templates such as Template:Anonblock and Template:School block on their talk pages and then remove them. This is because it might confuse an IP user to be told that their IP is blocked even though they're not blocked, and the template is in present tense (ex. "your school, library, or educational institution's IP address is blocked") and it would be weird for that to be on an IP which is not currently blocked wizzito | say hello! 23:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

See also {{Rangeblock}}, which uses the wording "has been blocked", which is ambiguous as to whether the block has ended. Certes (talk) 00:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Doing... 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 21:52, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Oops, this fell into my black hole of tasks. Looking into it again. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 00:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the black hole of user talk pages. I'm not here to discourage any attempts to look into this, but I just want to make a couple of observations. The schoolblock template has a namespace check - when shown for a blocked edit it is typically current tense, but when shown on user talk pages it uses 'may be'. The anonblock template also uses 'may be', but at all times. In most cases anon users will never visit their talk page anyway, but these templates do serve the purpose of providing generally good standing advice for good faith school users - they probably should create an account while they can. One should probably check for range blocks, and these templates are sometimes used as a block notification just like any other block message. I can give an example showing both these latter issues: User talk:168.169.188.9. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:59, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Bot to maintain lists of Wikipedians by good article/featured article views

As much as we preach against it, climbing up the ranking in a list remains a strong motivator for many Wikipedians. WP:WBGAN and WP:WBFAN list out Wikipedians by their number of good articles or featured articles, but I think it might be a better measure of impact (albeit still an imperfect one) to instead list out Wikipedians by the cumulative annual views of all their GAs or FAs. Would anyone be interested in coding a bot to maintain such lists? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

When users are making FA for reasons other than improving Wikipedia it can create trouble. Over at WP:MOSTARTICLES, the top 100 were scrambled to derail certain users who were using their standings for off-wiki benefit. Imagine the press runs a story linking to the list, unscrupulous users create bots to drive up page hit counts in order to gain personal fame and notoriety, to compete, or for egotistical reasons. -- GreenC 00:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I think we need to strike a balance. If our goal was to never present any information that could ever be gamed, we wouldn't have WBGAN/WBFAN, nor would we even allow things like Barnstars. Is it possible someone would abuse the system by creating pageview bots as you theorize? Sure, but it doesn't seem super likely to me, whereas the value of these lists to push editors toward improving articles that need it more seems much more plausible. Looking at it another way, we already have lists that measure impact poorly and are extremely easily gamed (e.g. by churning out boilerplate typhoon FAs)—what I'm seeking here is to create lists that are marginally better. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Wouldn't it encourage low-effort FA creation, since cumulative views would increase when you have a large number of FA. Alt idea: measure the rate of change in views from before FA to post-FA. For example average views in the 5-year period before FA vs. average views post FA. This has the benefit of being neutral to minor topics that don't normally attract many views anyway, since it's measuring ratio not absolute count. That way obscure topic areas (Carolingian Empire) are not listed lower than high traffic topics (TV series), even though the former may have had a greater impact on page views percentage wise. GreenC 04:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

The current WBFAN page is what encourages low-effort FA creation; this could only improve on that. On view change, there's nothing intrinsically about making an article an FA that increases its views. What can increase its views is linking to it more elsewhere, and while I've come across some egregiously underlinked FAs, I've also come across some FA authors who want to link to their page from everywhere, whether warranted or not. So if you're worried about perverse incentives, I think the alt idea is the one to fear.

And on prioritizing high-traffic topics, yes, that's the point. We're writing an encyclopedia for readers, so we should want to focus more on the articles they actually read. Not exclusively—plenty of VAs aren't super popular—but weighting only by viewcount is better than not weighting at all. The Bus Uncle and Earth just plainly aren't equally important, and a page that counts them both as one star isn't measuring impact well.

I hope that helps clarify why I'd like to see these lists. If you're not convinced, though, that's genuinely fine—they're just lists in project space, so you'll be free to ignore them in favor of other pages that you prefer. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

In terms of implementation, for the GA side, the hardest part is mapping articles to nominators (which involves some tricky digging through diffs and munging wikitext). This is already implemented by User:SDZeroBot, the bot that populates WP:WBGAN. So the easiest route would be to ideally reuse their code for that purpose, or even see if the maintainer is willing to implement it using their existing code. The additional work of fetching pageview totals for each page is quite simple using the Mediawiki Pageviews API. One thing to keep in mind is that the distribution of pageviews has a very heavy tail, so even if a user has nominated many GAs or FAs, their total pageviews will probably be dominated by their one or two most popular articles. (For example, I've started around 60 articles. The most popular of those articles - Cow Tools - gets about as many pageviews as all the others combined.) Colin M (talk) 18:14, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughts, Colin! @SD0001, one simple way to do this might be to just add a "total annual views" column to the table your bot already produces at WBGAN. Would something like that be easy to code, and if so, would it be of interest? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:31, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it's better to put it on a separate page. I'm afraid I don't have the time though, but as mentioned below it should be pretty straightforward to do for a different bot operator if the existing article->nominator database is used. – SD0001 (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@SD0001, just curious, why do you think it'd be better on a separate page? Thinking about it, having it on the same page people are already visiting might be best. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

No need to reuse the code (that would be quite involved!) – SDZeroBot maintains the public s54328__goodarticles_p database on toolforge (table name: nominators2) containing the article–nominator mapping, which is updated in real-time. Then to update WBGAN everyday, it simply queries this table. This has been running for more than a year now and has been quite stable. – SD0001 (talk) 20:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Replace usbk template family with yy

Moved from User talk:Novem Linguae § Suggestion

There are some differences between the Template:Usbk associated templates and the Template:Yy associated templates. The differences are explained at Template:Yy. I designed the Yy series to add flexibility and functionality.

The simplest conversion involves the following:

Replace all usbktop with yytop.
Replace all usbk with yy.
Replace all usbkbottom with yyend.

Since the Yy series has greater complexity than the Usbk series, this simple replacement may cause very long pages to overflow. In that case the page may need to be broken into two pages. Check the page for any errors before proceeding to the next page. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Yours aye, Buaidh talk e-mail 23:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Would still be great to get the answers to my original 4 questions (diff? how many pages affected? is it a cosmetic edit? does it have consensus?), or at least a diff. Hard to proceed without this information. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Template:Usbk is found on 1,859 pages and Template:Yy is found on 10,290 pages. It is a functional change rather than a cosmetic change. It is a consensus only by greater use. See me if you have any more questions. Yours aye, Buaidh talk e-mail 03:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Here's a DIFF. Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football/UEFA/Germany oldid=1084671230 and Wikipedia:Userboxes/Sports/Football/UEFA/Germany. Buaidh talk e-mail 03:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think I'm going to be busy for about a month or so. In the interest of not holding this up, moving it to WP:BOTREQ. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

P.S. This may need a WP:TFD to establish consensus for merging. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@Buaidh, I'm up for this. It should be doable with a few regexps, though I'd prefer if stronger consensus could be found, as Novem Linguae says above ― Qwerfjkl talk 06:19, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

We could just replace Usbk with Yy as deemed appropriate. As the author of Yy my intention was not to replace Usbk wholesale, but only where additional functionality was needed. Usbk is more compact than Yy and can be used where breaking a page in two is not warranted. Yy is prettier than Usbk, but that alone is not justification for replacing Usbk. Yours aye, Buaidh talk e-mail 21:06, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

This looks like a request to merge the usbk templates into the yy templates. That discussion should happen at TFD, unless I am misunderstanding the request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:16, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Null edit all pages transcluding {{=}}

Although {{=}} is now a magic word, many pages are still listed as transcluding the template in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:=. A bot should null edit all those pages to get the transclusion count at https://templatecount.toolforge.org/index.php?lang=en&namespace=10&name=%3D#bottom all the way down to zero. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:41, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Why? Does it cause a problem that needs a solution? PrimeHunter (talk) 02:10, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it could be handled by just making a dummy edit to Template:= but is there a good reason to use server resources on rebuilding 250,000 pages and their link tables? PrimeHunter (talk) 02:22, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree with PrimeHunter. This is precisely what the job queue is for, there's no urgency for this to get done AFAIK. Legoktm (talk) 03:53, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, this is not urgent. The job queue can deal with it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:10, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

It looks like someone is doing it anyway, because the count is at 181,000 and falling fast. Changes to MediaWiki code can result in updates that take months to take effect; see T157670. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's so. The Job Queue's been a lot more responsive these last few months. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Transclusion count is at 0 now. Going to archive this. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:51, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Request for template error

Hello. There is a problem in pages using template:DukeOrtho. The first letter should be written in lowercase, not the uppercase. example Can anybody fix this by bot? LR0725 (talk) 07:26, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

There are only 63 transclusions of this template, so it will be best to do this manually. That being said, I have added some functionality for both ease of viewing and typing so that the changes might not be necessary. Primefac (talk) 07:32, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. LR0725 (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

That's wrong. This should start with an uppercase when used like that. This ought to fix it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I felt like I was missing something but I was focussing more on the link than the output. Primefac (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac:, yeah I got confused too initially. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Substitute messages

Unfortunately, did not achieve consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Substitute int: messages. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello!

Please substitute these int: messages. They belong on Commons, on English Wikipedia only English is needed :).Jonteemil (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Hey there. Happy to do it, but would like some confirmation that this is appropriate. That way in my BRFA I can prove that this has consensus. Want me to post about it on WP:VPT? –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Sure, you you can post it there.Jonteemil (talk) 11:33, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bot request to popular year lists by country

Category:Year lists by country has some entries without many things listed on them. Some of those have categories that show a lot of things that could be moved to those list though. Check the year in the category, post the article linked there to the proper list article. If only one link per year exist, then list them by decade instead. For instance I noticed Category:2015 in Brunei had things that weren't in the article 2015 in Brunei so added them. There could be red links in the main article of List of years in Brunei which have things listed in a category that has the name of that year and the name of the country. Dream Focus 16:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Might have some WP:CONTEXTBOT issues, if I'm understanding this right :) 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 08:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Bot to help with GAR closures

Closing a GAR discussion is quite a bit of faff, so I hope on of the ~~magicians~~ technical editors could help us out. A bot would have to do the following:

remove the {{GAR/link}} from the article talk page
update the {{article history}}, or change the {{GA}} template into article history it when not yet present, like this diff
remove the GA status from WikiProjects banners if delisted
remove the good article template from the article if delisted
remove the good article from the list of good articles if delisted
archive the discussion (if a community assessment). The current archive is found at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Archive 67. As a bonus, the bot could make a new archive whenever the previous one is full. This is now done manually (see Wikipedia talk:Good article reassessment/Maintenance)

I think the FACBot is already doing something very similar for featured articles. For a community assessment, this bot could be triggered when the discussion is closed (and {{GAR/current}} on the reassessment page is changed to {{GAR/result}}). For individual assessments the most logical trigger would be the removal of the {{GAR/link}} from the article talk page. In that case, the bot would start from #2. Pinging @Aircorn, who is doing a lot of this maintenance. Femke (talk) 07:27, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Howdy. NovemBot 1 does something similar for good topic promotions and featured topic promotions. I could reuse its code for turning {{GA}} into {{Article history}}. Can you provide a link to 1 recent individual assessment closure and 1 recent community assessment closure for me to review? Also, are you open to having a limited list of people who can summon the bot for security reasons, or does it need to be summonable by anyone? –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant!

A link to a and example for an individual delisting and a community reassessment closure. Individual reassessments are done by quite a large group of people, so I think it would be preferable to have it summonable by anyone. (Community reassessment closures are done by a smaller group). Femke (talk) 16:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good. Next time you close a couple of these, can you just say "approved for delisting" and ping me and leave the checklist to me so I can practice a bit? Once I'm comfortable with the procedure then I'll start writing some code. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:10, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Femke seems to have covered everything so I will just add that this would be really useful. Aircorn (talk) 08:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I just closed two discussions: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/WIN Television/1 and Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/American popular music/1. Let me know if you'd like more practice / whether I should open an individual reassessment (so that it can be closed in a week if no-one responds). Femke (talk) 16:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Done. 1, 2, work instruction I created. Please check those and let me know if everything looks good. If so, I'll begin writing a bot. I'll probably do the community process first. If we did a whitelist, how many people would we need to put on it? A whitelist would help with security concerns at the BRFA. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Everything looks good :).

I went back 2 years in the archives, and found around 20 people closing discussions; half of those only closed one discussion. So initially 20 people on a whitelist? Femke (talk) 16:08, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I might end up doing the permissions check by having a summoning template ping the bot, then the bot can check for extended confirmed via who pings it. Looking like I'll be busy IRL for a couple of weeks. It's on my todo list. Feel free to follow up every once in awhile to keep me on track. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

EC should cover basically everybody who would be interested in closing community GARS, so that should work. I hope this bot can be one of the puzzle pieces that make a new GA sweep initiative feasible (probably only of highly-visible articles, as there are just too many GAs). If an initiative like that were to become popular, it may attract one or two non-EC editors. Femke (talk) 16:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

How is it going? I assume it would be good to hold off on closing reviews once an BRFA is launched, so that we have enough test cases? Femke (talk) 18:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey there. I'm going to be busy with my real world job for a couple weeks. Probably best to manually close your GARs. Once I get some time I can probably code most of this in a day, borrowing a lot of code from my other bot. Maybe ping me around June 7. Sorry for the delay. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Good news. My real life job is calming down, I will probably be able to work on the bot this week. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:13, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

@Femkemilene. Alright, gonna start working on this one. Do you want it to be a bot (summoned with a template) or a user script? This one requires editing around 4 pages at one time (low quantity of edits), so it may make sense to do it as a user script. Open to either though. Let me know. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

User script would make sense here too, and I assume would be faster for you to write given you've just made one for the other side of the coin. Really great you're doing this :). Femke (talk) 17:11, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello Femkemilene. Quick status report, I'm about halfway done writing this. Code. Feel free to start saving up GARs for me to close. Couple questions. 1) Do you want this included in GANReviewTool, or as a separate user script? 2) Do you want this to apply a colored {{Atop}} like in this diff? –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

1) yes, that would be easiest, so people don't need to isntall two scripts 2) Yes, please, that looks tidier. Amazing tool, the GANReviewTool, thanks for working on it! Femke (talk) 11:00, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

@Femkemilene. All done. I've turned the tool on for everyone. Visit any GAR page and there will be [Keep] and [Delist] buttons next to the level 2 headings now, simply click those to activate the tool. You can report any bugs or feature requests at User talk:Novem Linguae/Scripts/GANReviewTool. I also have a log page at User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/GANReviewTool/GARLog that I watchlisted and that I will use to proactively detect bugs. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:40, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

GAN bot

Moved to Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests § GAN review user script

Removing user warnings tested at WP:SANDBOX

User warnings are not allowed on the user sandbox because new users could be afraid they did something wrong or got banned. These could be removed by a bot. It could detect for the text of a substituted template: for example, if it saw the following or similar:

Hello, I'm Interstatefive. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks.

it would revert. After the bot reverts 3 warnings by the same user in 10 minutes it could send a message to the user stating to go to WP:UWSB to test user warnings. interstatefive (talk) - just another roadgeek 17:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I successfully implemented this feature as a bot, but I decided to make a minor change. Instead of leaving a message on the talk page of any user who posts 3 warnings to the sandbox in 10 minutes, I made it so that a warning is posted to the user's talk page if they add a warning to the sandbox at all. This reduces confusion on the side of the editor adding the warnings, and is easier to program. You can see my tests in the edit logs of User:CapsuleBot/sandbox and User talk:Capsulecap. As the bot is not implemented yet I will have to add it to Toolforge in addition to approving its task. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Substitute inappropriate uses of PH wikidata in article text.

The 2013 wikidata RFC closed with an extremely strong consensus that it is not appropriate to use wikidata in article text on the English wikipedia. A few editors (notably @Exec8: and @HueMan1:), who were presumably unaware of this, have been performing edits where they have been replacing random words in the first paragraph of various Philippine city articles with wikidata templates, typical diffs [2] [3]. Such edits are contrary to the outcome of the RFC and make what should be plain text unnecessarily difficult to edit. I am therefore requesting a one time bot run which will substitute any inappropriate uses of the {{PH wikidata}} template, i.e. those found in article text, rather than infoboxes. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

This task can be done with AWB, not? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

There are ~1800 pages transcluding {{PH wikidata}}, which is in the realm of bot numbers, but I would somewhat agree that this is probably context-dependent enough to merit at least a cursory pass-through with AWB to see how many pages actually need editing (as I suspect the majority of the transclusions will be only found in the infoboxes). Primefac (talk) 15:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

It appears that some {{PH wikidata}} templates should be removed, while others should be replaced (maybe substituted?) GoingBatty (talk) 16:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

If someone feels this would be better suited to WP:AWBREQ I have no objection to someone moving it.

@GoingBatty The usages of {{PH wikidata}} in infoboxes are OK from a policy standpoint and should be kept, the usages in the body of articles should be substituted so that the article maintains the same text but in non-wikidata template form. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 16:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

In this edit, it seemed more appropriate to delete the template than to substitute it. GoingBatty (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Agreed that deletion was proper there, though in the version of the article prior to that edit the template didn't produce any output, so substitution and deletion would have been functionally the same thing (we would have just ended up with duplicate spaces, which are stripped by the parser). How that template ended up there is a mystery, I assume someone must have copied and pasted some text from one of the wikidataified articles. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I did a quick test with WP:AWB. Using Wiki search (text) -> hastemplate:"PH wikidata" [4] as the search, and find/replace {{PH wikidata|name}} -> {{subst:PH wikidata|name}} (and of course the other common parameters) works just fine if we want to indiscriminately replace all of these. If we want to skip infoboxes, this task becomes harder and may require a bot. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae, I started coding a regex for this, something like (?<! *\|.*)\{\{PH wikidata → {{subst:PH wikidata. (For the list I just used What transcludes here.) Qwerfjkl talk 20:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────┘
Actually, with some more thorough testing (?<!\n *\|.+)\{\{PH wikidata works better. ― Qwerfjkl talk 13:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Bot to remove or log redirects from a User or User talk page to Main Page

FYI: I've also started a related discussion at WP:VPT#User/User_talk_redirects_to_Main_Page

Recently ran into an editor who decided to be clever and redirect their User page and User talk page to Main Page. Unlike most pages which give an indicator when you've arrived via a redirect that you can click on to get back to the source page, apparently this does not generate such an indicator. With that scenario in mind, a bot that monitors edits to User and User talk pages (not subpages, just the main ones that would conceivably be linked from the MediaWiki UI for contacting a user) for attempts to redirect to Main Page (I'm not aware of any other page that suppresses the redirect indicator, if such a page exists, redirects for those pages would also make sense). What the bot does upon finding such an edit really depends on how much consensus you think we need for it: could log it to a specific bot subpage that interested editors/admins could watchlist and address as they happen, or, if it wouldn't be deemed too controversial, the bot could simply remove the redirect (and perhaps still log it somewhere) and leave a note on their talk page as to why it was undone. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Does this query suffice? 0xDeadbeef 02:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

That works, unless someone else took care of some others there was still Patrol_Officer who had their user page redirected to Main Page (which I fixed). The bot part of the request was more the automating a log page (for notifications of when such a redirect is created) or the automatic reversal (if such a system needs consensus, I can work on a discussion for that). If it's too much trouble, I guess I can just periodically check that query, but for people trying to be annoying in-the-moment the redirect existing at all would make contacting editors annoying (I briefly considered going to WP:VPT because it wasn't immediately clear to me what was going on when I tried to visit that users page/talk page). —Locke Cole • t • c 02:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@Locke Cole, I think it'd be fairly easy to write a pywikibot script for this. I can write some code, but I'm not sure how to run it on toolforge (presumably it would run indefinitely). ― Qwerfjkl talk 13:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

presumably it would run indefinitely Or at least until a software change in MediaWiki can happen to make such an edit impossible to save. I'm not familiar with the APIs available, but presumably if there were a way to hook into recent changes and filter by namespace to User/User talk, you could look for a redirect to Main Page being created (it might be worth looking into whether any other pages exhibit this suppression of (Redirected from ...) and prohibiting those too) and go from there fairly easily. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thankfully, redirects to special pages don't work. What other bad targets could there be? Certes (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Not knowing how Main Page suppresses the "(Redirected from ...)" (I'm assuming through CSS/JS), I'm not certain if there are other pages that behave similarly that could be abused. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

contentSub is hidden for Main Page and no other pages with code in MediaWiki:Vector.css and MediaWiki:Monobook.css. contentSub contains other things than "Redirected from" and was probably hidden due to other things. If we wanted to, I think we could add CSS to display "Redirected from" while still hiding the other things. If we display "Redirected from" then it will be displayed for redirects from all namespaces. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

At least that should mean it's just Main Page that has this potential for abuse? I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that Main Page had a legitimate reason for suppressing the "(Redirected from ...)" message. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Deferred An editor at the VPT discussion recommended using the edit filter system to stop this type of edit. @Qwerfjkl: I'd wait before writing any code, I'm assuming the filter will happen, so thank you for your help. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 18:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Request to remove usages of deleted Infobox television parameter

|first_run= has been removed from Template:Infobox television after this discussion. There are ~13k pages at Category:Pages using infobox television with unknown parameters with the parameter. Would really help if someone with a bot could remove all instances of these. Thank you! Gonnym (talk) 05:27, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

BRFA filed –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Quick note that Primefac is taking over this one. Feel free to contact Primefac if any issues. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:11, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Film categories

A few weeks ago per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 79#Should "films by country" categories remain all-inclusive?, WikiProject Film reached a consensus to deprecate its former practice of deeming the base "[Country] films" categories to be "all-inclusive" (i.e. directly including all films from that country even if they were already otherwise subcategorized for genre or other characteristics.) However, some of the involved categories literally have thousands of articles, and there are nearly 200 country categories cross-referenced with a few dozen genre categories to deal with — so needless to say, we'd prefer to get as much of it as possible done by bot instead of editors having to manually go through over 100,000 films one at a time.

The important complications here are that there may be some films lurking in the base "Country films" categories which have not been fully subcategorized by genre at all yet, and some country-genre intersections may still be missing entirely — so the request would be for a bot to go through the Country-Genre intersection categories (e.g. Category:American documentary films, Category:British drama films, Category:Canadian short films, etc.) to remove "Country films" from films that are already subcategorized, but the bot should not be turned loose directly on "Country films" categories themselves, so that any unsubcategorized stragglers don't get stranded from the tree. Human editors can look after whatever cleanup is still necessary after a bot's done the grunt work, but we'd prefer to automate as much of the grunt work as possible first. Bearcat (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: Category:Films by country contains all the Country/Genre intersection subcats:

Films by country by genre‎
Films by genre by country‎
Films by studio by country‎
Films by topic by country‎
Films by country and year‎
3D films by country‎
Black-and-white films by country‎
Direct-to-video films by country‎
English-language films by country‎
Feminist films by country‎
Independent films by country‎
Lost films by country‎
Multilingual films by country‎
Rediscovered films by country‎
Short films by country‎
Silent films by country‎
Television films by country‎
Films based on actual events by country‎
Lists of films by country of production
Film series by country
Crossover films by country
― Qwerfjkl talk 16:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat: If this just involves replacing /\[\[[Cc]ategory:(...) films\]\]\n?/gi (with nothing) then I could do it. ― Qwerfjkl talk 22:32, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't really understand what that code syntax means, could you summarize it for the technologically inept? Bearcat (talk) 14:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat, remove[[Category:[country] films]] from the relevant pages. ― Qwerfjkl talk 18:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Ahhhh, okay. If that would work, then go for it. Bearcat (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat,

BRFA filed. ― Qwerfjkl talk 09:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bearcat, this is nearing completion. I just though id.mention.I'm tracking progress at User:Qwerfjkl/sandbox/24. ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the update. I've manually cleaned out a few of the smaller categories with only a couple of dozen films total (but also Canada, since that's the one I generally work with the most and would have been doing the post-bot straggler cleanup on it anyway), but of course it was the categories with thousands of articles to deal with that led to the bot request, so the update is much appreciated. I have also noticed the occasional burst of people adding Category:Canadian films back to some Canadian films again, but that's easy to control since it's only one or two films at a time. Thanks again. Bearcat (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Remove WikiProject categories from articles

This query shows articles with WikiProject categories. This bot request is to remove the WikiProject categories from the articles, and add the WikiProject to the article's talk page if it's not already there. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Looking at it, while there are obvious errors like Category:WikiProject Women artists, there are also a bunch of categories like Category:WikiProject Australian Roads articles with a junction list using templates or Category:WikiProject Color articles needing infobox sources. It doesn't sound like something that could be easily automated. With only 600 pages, it's probably easier to generate a regular report. — HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK 15:47, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hellknowz The latter two categories you mentioned are created by a template, and are not directly added to the article. I would hope a bot could just focus on those categories directly added to the article. GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

@Hellknowz Scrap that. Once I excluded those two categories from the query, I saw there are very few articles left. I can handle them manually. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Bot to update population counts for cities, counties, and states

After 2020, the US Census released a new population count for the United States. Many cities have their own Wikipedia articles that have sections which goes into detail about their pop. counts. Though, many articles about them that many still haven't been updated, even 2 years after the 2020 Census. I believe it is not humanly possible to update all the articles with old data, even if you did, it would likely be almost time for the 2030 Census counts. I propose a bot that would update information in likely three sections in each article which needs updating. first is the top introduction which usually say "as of the 2010 Census, the population was X." Second would be the Infobox which usually has a section that talks about population. third would be the historical population box which is usually very neglected by editors. The bot would update each section to the current Census counts, fill in gaps in the historical population section (I would bet some articles don't even have 2010 counts), and possibly update yearly estimates carried about by the Census. This website seems to have all the information that would be needed for the bot to run, an example https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/swaincountynorthcarolina. I would like opinions about this idea and see if anyone is willing to help create a bot as I do not know a lot of coding. Thank you for your time! DiscoA340 (talk) 21:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

~120 matches found for textual instances of 2010 census data; the population fields in {{Infobox settlement}} could be examined, and I'm not sure what the "population box" describes. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 21:37, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

It's usually in demographics and it lists all the Census counts in the past and present. Here is an example of one in the article "New Hanover County, North Carolina" to the right. New Hanover County, North Carolina#Demographics. An example of a usual introduction that includes Census population counts is the article Jacksonville, North Carolina in the second sentence at the start. The wording can vary from article to article for that one. Sorry for not being more specific, if you have any more questions, feel free to contact me. DiscoA340 (talk) 00:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Here is the template for {{US Census population}}. DiscoA340 (talk) 00:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Pages using US Census population needing update currently contains 14,000 articles. If you can get a few people together and process 100 articles per day, you'll be done in less than six months. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

If it's just raw numbers that need updating, chuck it all into a module and update it all at once. Primefac (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

What Primefac says. Alternatively, there is WikiData. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

There is also Wikicommons Tabular which is my favorite because it's uncontroversial (unlike Wikidata) and universal (unlike a local module). It doesn't fit every application but would be a good fit for this, I think. -- GreenC 18:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Removing expired community sanctions and unblock conditions from WP:EDR

I noticed that temporary sanctions tend to linger on Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. Entries can be automatically removed if the rightmost column contains only a date which has passed; dates in the tables are always in yyyy-mm-dd format. This will apply to all subpages of EDR, including archives, except that permission from Arbcom will be needed to auto-handle the Arbcom-imposed sanction lists. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 12:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

There is Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/TheSandBot 9, but seems inactive given the history of the page containing expired restrictions. [5] 0xDeadbeef 13:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to the operator, it might just be stuck. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac, 0xDeadbeef, and LaundryPizza03: Run just now. Thanks for the ping. Looking to automate this one... --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 00:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Kenya stubs

Many of the stubs in the categories Category:Kenya geography stubs, and its six subcategories, are unsourced (some existences unverifiable) with no evidence of notability (WP:GEOLAND etc.). These should be uncontroversially (consensus exists through previous AFD) redirected to their 'parent' article. For example, Gatanga, Kenya sits within Category:Central Province, Kenya geography stubs, and should redirect to Central Province, Kenya. Is there a bot with the ability to do this with relative ease? MIDI (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

If an article is redirected, will the target have any mention of the topic of the redirected article? If not, then that's not a helpful redirect, if yes, then that merely passes the buck with the sourcing as the mention will need to be sourced. Are these places really not notable? Gatanga, for example, appears to be the name of a large(ish) administrative unit. – Uanfala (talk) 22:44, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

This is a better AWBTASKS request, since there will need to be human oversight and likely manual editing. Primefac (talk) 08:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

You're prolly right, and that's something I can do myself (to fix what I've caused!). I'll move over to WP:AWBTASKS. MIDI (talk) 11:57, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Relink moved page

Sorted. Primefac (talk) 13:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

All these links need to be changed from Loring Park to Loring Park, Minneapolis CTF83! 18:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Go to WP:AWBTASKS, not here. Primefac (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Some links seem to refer to the park rather than the neighbourhood, and should probably not be changed. Certes (talk) 20:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I was going to go back and fix those. It would be easier to fix it that way. CTF83! 01:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

I've worked through the links and changed 18 from the park to the neighbourhood. The majority of links seem to refer to the park and I've left them alone. In fact, I'm having second thoughts about some of my changes, such as this. I don't see anything here for a bot to do. Certes (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bot to generate a list of instances of longstanding blocks of hidden text

Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Lots and lots and lots of hidden text, there are articles where some issue has led an editor to hide a block of text in the article (perhaps pending discussion of whether it is overly detailed or supported by sources or the like, or perhaps for technical reasons). Some examples include this edit, which hid a citation that apparently was not working at the time, and thereafter remained in the wikitext for nine years, and this edit, which put an entire paragraph in hidden text, where it remained for five years.

This is obviously bad editing, given that putting content into hidden text (particularly without indicating this in an edit summary or on the talk page) merely ends up polluting the Wikitext without resolving the asserted issue.

What is needed is a bot to suss out instances of relatively large blocks of longstanding hidden text and create a project-space list indicating:

The article involved;
Date when the text was hidden;
Content of the hidden text (probably with "nowiki" tags)

As noted in the Village Pump discussion, there are some relatively short bits of hidden text that routinely go into certain templates to indicate what shoudl go there. I think a safe cutoff would be 50 characters, with any block of text longer than that being listed. Note that we do want to capture deleted images that have been hidden, but it is probably best to list those separately. BD2412 T 18:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Could possibly use an AWB offline database scan and a regex for this one. //gs I don't have time to do it myself, but just wanted to throw the idea out there. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

What we need is to list these pages, or put these issues on its discussion page and give a category? Kanashimi (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the first thing is to get a sense of the scope of the problem. How many articles have hidden text longer than a short note? How many have passages of hidden text that have just been sitting there for years and years? I would start with a project page listing instances, and sortable by date, size of the text block (or of the largest text block, for pages with multiple blocks of hidden text), and perhaps with the identity of the editor who added the hidden text or added the tags to hide existing text. This may be a task best handled by dropping talk page notes reminding editors that they hid some text some number of years ago, and it needs to be resolved. BD2412 T 22:40, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

As I wrote in the village pump thread, I don't see any need to do anything about those html comments. However, if a report does eventually get generated, it should use a much higher cut-off than 50 characters: html comments about content (rather than template parameters) are typically hundreds of characters long. – Uanfala (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Hidden text of medium length is more likely to be wrong if unterminated. The minimum length should probably depend on which of  comes next after the HTML comment starts. The former usually indicates an error. Certes (talk) 22:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

There needs to be some way of marking hidden text as not a problem, e.g. the lead of Patrick Stewart starts '''Sir Patrick Stewart''' {{post-nominals|country=GBR|size=100%|OBE}} and has done since he was made a Knight Bachelor in 2010 because there was an issue with well-meaning but mistaken editors changing OBE to KBE. That is inside a template and exactly 50 characters so I don't know whether it would be caught by this, but there will be other articles with similar notes.

Also remember to exclude the output of {{long comment}} (which is always substituted). Thryduulf (talk) 19:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Update parameter names when template Template:Internet Archive film is used in articles

Background

When the template {{Internet Archive film}} was created, the parameter for specifying the title of a film was called "name", and many articles (e.g. this) use this syntax: {{Internet Archive film | id= ID | name= TITLE }} Since this edit in the template, the expected parameter is "title" instead of "name", and the expected syntax is {{Internet Archive film | id= ID | title= TITLE }} Any use of the parameter "name" is ignored, making the name of the link default to the article title for any use of the old syntax.

The bot request is to

go through all articles in the article space using the template {{Internet Archive film}} (currently 2424 articles) and change any parameter in the template in the article from "name" to "title".
go through all articles in the article space using the template {{Internet Archive short film}} (currently 875 articles) and change any parameter in the template in the article from "name" to "title".

After that, the template {{Internet Archive short film}} must be updated to conform to the syntax of {{Internet Archive film}}. You are welcome to do it, otherwise, ping me and I'll do it. --Bensin (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Would it be easier to edit the template to accept both parameters? –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Done, because this is an easy fix. Primefac (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

A simple search-replace could be easier via AWB see WP:AWBREQ. -- GreenC 03:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

True, or just add in the |name= parameter as a valid alt, as I have just done. Primefac (talk) 17:00, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: Thank you! I updated the {{Internet Archive short film}} here. --Bensin (talk) 14:56, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Add Reflist-talk to talk pages with references.

Many users add references to discussions on talk pages, and they all clump together on the bottom of the talk page if the editor doesn't known about the {{Reflist-talk}}. It seems to be a fairly simple task. I have checked the other bots, and there is SteveBot, which adds {{reflist}} to the bottom of articles. AdrianHObradors (talk) 18:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit: Seems I broke the table up there putting a link to the template on the title, sorry! Removed, hope that fixes it AdrianHObradors (talk) 19:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

User:GreenC bot/Job 8 does it every 6 months. Last was March. (p.s. not as simple as seems!) -- GreenC 18:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that is a good bot, @GreenC! Thanks for making it. And why such a long period if I might ask? A monthly execution (or even more) would seem reasonable.

I have to ask though, when it says checking all talk pages, does it mean all talk pages? Or just the ones edited since the last time it executed? --AdrianHObradors (talk) 18:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I think this thread answers both questions: Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_82#reflist_talk. -- GreenC 18:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see. So, if I understand correctly, even if the bot was executed daily and only had to edit a few talk pages, it would still require millions of API calls? And just saw the other edit, I'm sure it isn't as simple as it appears hahaha. Glad still you made it :) AdrianHObradors (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

This would be useful, but I'm not sure that it's a common enough problem to require such an expensive bot. I occasionally come across discussion pages, which are often in Wikipedia space rather than technically talk pages, where it causes some confusion if there is no {{Reflist-talk}}, but such action is needed much more quickly than the interval on which this bot could reasonably be expected to run unless anyone can come up with a much more efficient way for it to do its stuff. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Only pages altered since the last run need be checked. If the bot runs more often, it will have fewer pages to check each time. Can it obtain a list of recently updated talk pages efficiently, e.g. through SQL via page.page_latest? If so, then running the bot frequently might not use much more resource than doing a major run every six months. Certes (talk) 21:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Asked at Wikipedia:Request_a_query#List_of_pages_by_last_update -- GreenC 16:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

User:Certes came up with a SQL query that is pretty interesting as it allows for not only mainspace but all spaces, in a reasonable query, that runs in about a minute ie. show all talk pages modified since X date. This can be fed to the bot so it has a smaller footprint to process. It's about 180k pages per month in mainspace, which is a lot less than 6.5 million. It would be more depending which spaces are included, probably Wikipedia:, Template:, .. can't say how soon I'll get to it, will require structural changes, but is certainly the way to go. -- GreenC 03:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────┘
GreenC, That sounds interesting! I am a bit busy right now, but in about a month I will have more free time and would be willing to help. Don't have much experience writing bots, but shell and SQL is something I am familiar with. And maybe I am getting too excited, but, if it takes a minute to run... 180k pages per month is 250 pages per hour. Bot could maybe even be run hourly? That would be so great. AdrianHObradors (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

If a way can be found to run the bot hourly, or even daily, then I would be all for it. But please include Wikipedia (not only Wikipedia talk) space as that is where I most often see it being needed. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Or, thinking about this a bit more, would it be difficult or expensive for a display of references to be included by the core software before any new level 2 heading on a discussion page, as already happens at the end of articles in main space when <references /> is not present? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:41, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi GreenC, how is this coming along? As I said, I have now more free time, so let me know if there is anything I can help out with! Cheers! AdrianHObradors (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Update mayors on enwiki based on dewiki

I noticed that enwiki is frequently outdated for Austrian mayors. A few examples:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altach

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_(Vorarlberg) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus,_Vorarlberg

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koblach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koblach

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiningen_(Vorarlberg) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiningen,_Austria

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satteins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satteins

Would it be possible to create a bot that extracts the "Bürgermeister" value on dewiki, compares it to the "Mayor" one on enwiki and updates the latter when they are different? The rationale is that articles like these are typically updated more frequently in their original language than the English counterpart. I don't have any bot/programming experience, but I'd try to help in any form that I can, provided a bot like this is even possible/permitted. Christian Steyphen (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

A bot report should be fine, but edits should be made manually. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

This might be better done with Wikidata. ― Qwerfjkl talk 13:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

On Wikidata, an item would need to exist for the mayor in order to set the value of d:Property:P6 (Head of Government) on the municipality. Just moving the name across as a character string, manually or via a report is going to be simpler. William Avery (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

IMO, it isn't simpler to have a specific bot reporting inconsistencies in infobox fields. A person has to check it.
And contrary to what one might believe (myself included before I read it), Wikidata's policy on an item's existence is really lax. Even if a mayer doesn't have a page on our wikis, it can satisfy criteria #2 from Wikidata:Notability: It refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available references.
It is easier to have the wikis point to the property in their infoboxes, create an item for the mayor if not exists, and edit the statement on the municipalities to have the change reflected on all wikis. 0xDeadbeef 16:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Replace all occurrences of a Commons image with a new Commons image

I am active in the SVG project, converting raster graphics into scalable vector graphics (mainly coat of arms). The new images have a better quality but I always need to replace all occurrences of the old image in all articles, templates and in all language wikis by hand which sometimes takes longer than creating the new .svg image. Is there a bot or an opportunity to create a little helper which takes the old image from Commons as an Input and replaces it on all sites in all MediaWiki occurrences (Wikipedia (all languages), Wikidata,...) with a new image path? This can also be helpful if companies, products, non-profits or brands change/update there logos - same procedure. Maxwxyz (talk) 16:49, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Maxwxyz, You might be looking for WP:AWB and WP:AWBTASKS. 0xDeadbeef 16:54, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Although I don't think this would work out for all the wikis? AWB would only apply to enwiki.. 0xDeadbeef 16:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

@0xDeadbeef, AWB can run on any wiki. ― Qwerfjkl talk 08:41, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Qwerfjkl, Is the AWB list of approved users centralized? 0xDeadbeef 08:45, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@0xDeadbeef, I have no idea, though I don't think so. ― Qwerfjkl talk 10:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

It is not. Primefac (talk) 12:39, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, and that is what I originally meant when I said "would only apply to enwiki" 0xDeadbeef 12:41, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@Maxwxyz: This actually already exists: commons:User:CommonsDelinker/commands replaces files across all wikis. However, it will refuse to replace non-SVGs with SVGs "to avoid World War III", per the instructions. I don't know if it would be possible to change this rule; it's about 15 years old, so it's possible the attitude toward SVGs has changed since then. However, the obstacle is social, not technical. Vahurzpu (talk) 04:52, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Bot to add a Talkback template at an IP talk page after they get responses at Help forums

I'd like to request a bot that would add a {{Talkback}} template at an IP talk page in response to a formatted request left at a Help forum like WP:Tea house, WP:Help desk, or WP:Reference desk by an experienced user responding to an IP's question.

Use case

At various help forums, experienced volunteer editors drop by to answer user questions, a good proportion of whom are anonymous users. Pings won't work with an IP user, so a {{talkback}} template is needed. A quick scan of those help venues and following the IP talk links (or noticing that they are red) shows that most responders don't bother adding the {{tb}}; it's just a bit too tedious. So, the IP never gets notified, and may never see the response(s) from the helpful editor(s) who responded to their question.

Possible UX

I think it could work in different ways, but what I envision is this: let's say I am responding to an IP question at the Tea house. (See here for a real example.) Somewhere in my response to the IP question, I'd add this to my message:

{{IP needs talkback |IPuser |PAGENAME |SECTION |MYuserID }} (or maybe just use REVISIONUSERID and drop last param)

This would trigger the bot that a talkback message is needed for this IP's talk page.

Possible design

As to how it would work, maybe the template could add the page to subpages of tracking category Category:IP needs talkback somehow encoding the info needed for the bot. Maybe via subpages like */IPuser/PAGENAME/SECTION or something? Anyway, the bot would pick up the info needed, and then add this at the IPuser talk page:

== You have feedback at PAGENAME ==
{{talkback|PAGENAME|SECTION|ts=MYuserID ~~~~~}}

thus notifying IPuser of the discussion that has reponses, and where to find it. I think there may be other ways to do it, but this was the first thing that came to mind, probably because I'm familiar with tracking categories with subcategories generated by templates. As a template writer, I could contribute to that part of the task, if adopted.

Benefits

It would be relatively easy for Help forum responders to add a template at the same time as their response, and I think they would start doing it, and more IPs would be notified and find out the answers to their questions.

Possible issues

Duplicate tb messages – one possible issue might be avoiding the placement of duplicate talkback templates at an IP user page. If they get several friendly responses at the Tea house in a short amount of time, we don't want to overload their Talk page with duplicate {{talkback}} templates about the same discussion. (I don't think we have to worry too much about, "What about if a friendly responder adds a new comment a month later?" because with proper archiving, the section will be gone by then.) Seems like the subcategory idea should facilitate dealing with this issue.
Limit scope – at first blush, this could work for responses at article Talk pages, or even third party user talk pages. But I don't know if that might overload the bot, so maybe restrict it to WP Project space, so, WP:Tea house, WP:Reference desk, WP:Help desk, and the like? At least at first, while we see how it works, what the load might be, and so on?

Alternatives

Perhaps a more ambitious bot wouldn't need any kind of trigger at all, but could scan a configurable list of Help forums, looking for questions placed by anon users that have responses, and directly place the talkback at the IP talk page, if there wasn't one there already. Not sure if that's too difficult to be practical.

Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Support, but we have {{teahouse talkback}} for Teahouse talkbacks and could use that instead.

For the issue of duplicate messages, we could do what Huggle does - it aborts if there's a recent edit to the talk page. We could have a human look at these in edge cases.
Limit scope: Yea, I think those three should be the only ones it operates on.

Here's how I'm seeing it go:

Thread is opened at Teahouse, Help desk, or Reference desk
Let's say, just to challenge the bot, the person opening the thread didn't sign and SineBot (or perhaps someone else) signed it
The bot sees the recent change. (Here's where it would be difficult - determining if the edit was a reply or {{fyi}} or {{unsigned}} or something that isn't an answer).
...the size of the change is small, so it aborts. (This is something I made up. Disregard if this is a stupid idea.)
An actual person responds.
The size is larger (than what? I think 250+ should be good. We can change it later if needed).
The bot sees a recent edit to the asker's talk page and aborts.
Or...
The bot construes this as a reply and posts a message.

This is a good idea, but I'd like to see more reminders on those pages for people who answer to leave {{talkback}}s themselves, because it's been long stated that using a bot to welcome is impersonal. I feel the same would happen to "Hi, welcome! There has been a reply to your question, please visit it." when a bot posts it - it feels kinda impersonal.

Overall, nice idea, @Mathglot. Thanks for this. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 05:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry if that was awfully long, but there was kinda a lot to say about it. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 05:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I wonder if HD and Refdesk have their own talkbacks as well. Mathglot (talk) 05:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Overall, this shouldn't be too hard to do - I wrote a PHP program once which downloaded the list of recent changes every 30 seconds and analyzed them but didn't do anything to them and it was really simple. Maybe we do that but track which users answered questions, and then save them somewhere to the bot operator's computer's hard disk? weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 06:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

That sounds like the initial stirrings of a statistics collector for the Help forums; who asks, who answers, how often, etc.; upon which data tables and graphs could be based later. Maybe that's bot task #2? Mathglot (talk) 06:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Listed at: WT:Help desk, WT:Reference desk, WT:Teahouse. Mathglot (talk) 05:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Additional hybrid alternative possibility: we do add the template to the response, but no categorization happens; the template contains a token or unique string or something (maybe just its own name) that attracts the bot's scanner, and all the information required by the bot to place a {{tb}} is right there. Mathglot (talk) 05:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

I wrote a script (User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/talkback) for sending talkbacks, a fork of one by Writ Keeper for Teahouse Talkbacks. ― Qwerfjkl talk 06:46, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Potentially dumb question, but don't we already have a bot that leaves "your question was archived" notes for Teahouse posts? Isn't this basically the same thing with a slightly larger scope? Primefac (talk) 08:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac, I think is for when a user replies to a post, rather.than when it is archived. ― Qwerfjkl talk 09:24, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

If the bot that currently handles archiving of Teahouse posts already has some of the framework required and could be modified to handle this as an additional task, that would be a win. Mathglot (talk) 16:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Jtmorgan who might be interested in this discussion. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Replace Template:Infobox ice hockey team redirects

The following templates redirect to {{Infobox ice hockey team}}:

{{Pro hockey team}} (600 transclusions)
{{Infobox Pro hockey team}} (706 transclusions)
{{Infobox hockey team}} (1191 transclusions)

Nearly 90% of the transclusions to {{Infobox ice hockey team}} are indirect, so was hoping someone could automate a bot to update the pages using these templates to eliminate the indirect template calls. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

We generally don't run bots solely to bypass redirects per WP:COSMETICBOT * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Even if these indirect transclusions were the result of a merge? I'm not really familiar with this corner of WP so just asking. –Aidan721 (talk) 12:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Correct. During a merge, if an infobox can be redirected instead of entirely replaced, this is preferably because it saves (what some feel are) "pointless edits". For example, by not replacing {{Infobox Pro hockey team}} when the merge was complete, the 706 pages that transclude it did not need to be edited at all. As mentioned elsewhere in this discussion, editing the page purely to remove the template redirect is pointless and goes against our rules on cosmetic editing. Primefac (talk) 10:36, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

This is pretty much WP:NOTBROKEN stuff. 00:04, 20 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Headbomb (talk • contribs)

(link will display the full calendar)

A lot of our calendar-year articles contain the line "(link will display the full calendar)". (Random pick: start at 786 and go up from there.) This, of course, looks ridiculous in print. I've started to replace this with {{Unprintworthy inline|(link will display the full calendar)}} but it's going to take months to do so. Having a bot do it would seem a better idea... but does that run foul of the "no cosmetic changes" anti-bot rule? This is my first brush with Bot Requests, so please be gentle! — Trey Maturin has spoken 16:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's cosmetic if it affects the printed version. However, I wonder if we should talk with WP:WikiProject Years about removing the text altogether. I can't think of anywhere else in Wikipedia that we accompany a wikilink with instructions on when to click it. Certes (talk) 20:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Agree with Certes. Seems like an unnecessary note. Primefac (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Click here to find out more. Certes (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe it would be best to seek consensus to remove this message altogether. I have started a proposal to remove the ~1.58K instances of this via a bot, and notified WikiProject Years. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 21:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Archived without much interest except for people not wanting it removed unless and until a replacement is found. Which brings us full circle: needing a bot to replace plaintext

(link will display the full calendar)

with

{{Unprintworthy inline|(link will display the full calendar)}}

while we wait for other action. — Trey Maturin has spoken 18:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be an AWB task instead? 0xDeadbeef 07:09, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I’m not altogether sure what AWB is, which provides a very good reason why I shouldn’t go anywhere near it! — Trey Maturin has spoken 22:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser a tool to make the same edit over and over again to a list of pages. It is used for semi-automated editing. Anyway I think the person above is suggesting you make a post at WP:AWBREQ. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:00, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah ha! Thanks for the pointer, Novem. I’ll get on to AWBREQ in the morning. — Trey Maturin has spoken 23:09, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Use template:url in calls to infobox bibliographic database

Greetings. Template:Infobox bibliographic database instructs users to wrap URLs in {{url}}. Unfortunately, most instantiations use bare URLs: search, another search. Template:url assists browsers such as Chrome in breaking a long URL thus preventing the infobox width from growing too large (example). Could a bot help in fixing this issue, please? Thank you! (Edit: background discussion: Template_talk:URL#Long_URL_in_infobox.) fgnievinski (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fgnievinski, this could probably be implemented in the Infobox e.g.

{{#if:{{str find|{{{website}}}|{{((}}url}}|{{{website}}}|{{url|{{{website}}}}}}}

(untested)
However, it'd probably be easier to do it with a bot.
― Qwerfjkl talk 15:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Yeah, we've contemplated that possibility, but right now there's mixed usage of the infobox, and the url template wouldn't tolerate being input to itself. Hence, the bot request stands. fgnievinski (talk) 16:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fgnievinski, would it be better to change existing uses to using {{Url}} or not? It would probably be easier for editors just to add a url, and let the Infobox wrap it in {{Url}}. Either way, I could probably do this. It doesn't need a BRFA, because <500 pages will be affected. ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Yes, please insert a call to {{url}} if you can, thanks. Just notice there are two fields expecting URL: "web" ("websites") and "titles". fgnievinski (talk) 23:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I've discussed previously the possibility of modifying the infobox to wrap bare URLs automatically, but I was told most infoboxes expect callers to manually call template:url (see discussion). fgnievinski (talk) 23:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fgnievinski, where exactly? ― Qwerfjkl talk 06:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Here: "Infoboxes with displayed website parameters generally require the caller to add { {URL}} for improved formatting." fgnievinski (talk) 23:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Would it be better to file the present request at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks, instead? fgnievinski (talk) 00:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Fgnievinski,

Done. ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Thank you very much! fgnievinski (talk) 23:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Checking file exif

Is it possible to run through files that are in both Category:Self-published work and Category:All free media for the "Author" e.g. or "Copyright holder" e.g. tag in the file's EXIF? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

On enwiki or commons? Can you give an example page with one of these tags? Technical details for bot folks: looks like exif data is stored in the SQL field `img_metadata` as PHP serialized data. So an algorithm might be to run an SQL query to get the list of files and the serialized blob, then foreach the blob and unserialize it and check the data. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: Locally. "Author" example 1 or "Copyright holder" example 2 --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Ad. If possible, do create a list at User:Minorax/files using # [[:FILENAME]]. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I made quarry:query/66466 but stopped at deserializing the blob. 0xDeadbeef 12:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I made a quarry query too. Link. Having some issues with exporting it though, possible corruption. I'll play around with it and see what I get. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Minorax.

Done. The first 1500 are at User:Minorax/files. Let me know if you need me to tweak anything, do another run, or if I need to grab more than 1500. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: Thanks for the help. Possible to rerun and skip those where the "Author" or "Copyright holder" is labelled with "Picasa" example 3 or when they're labelled with "Copyright DATE" example 4 & example 5? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Minorax. Done. Let me know if additional tweaks are needed. P.S. Link to my code in case anyone is curious. Was a fun little project. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Great work! I'm seeing some images where their author string is very similar to the uploader's name. Would it benefit from being sorted by the similarity between uploader's username and author string? 0xDeadbeef 05:08, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Novem Linguae Sorry for the late reply, would you mind running it again to have more than 1500 files and in the mean time, skip uploads by Orange Suede Sofa, Centpacrr and Locke Cole? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 17:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Minorax.

Done. Feel free to ask for more tweaks. I imagine patterns will jump out at you as you go through these. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:14, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

RFA Count Updater

In short, a new bot to update User:Amalthea/RfX/RfA count; the prior bot is no longer running. There is a module running, but it has caused some technical issues in the past (Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_197#Loading_Watchlist_very_slow. Running twice an hour would be sufficient. — xaosflux ^Talk 09:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks straightforward. I can write a bot to do this. Do you want to downgrade the protection at User:Amalthea/RfX/RfA count, or give User:NovemBot templateeditor, or have it write to a page in my userspace? I assume no BRFA needed, since we're just writing to userspace a couple times a month? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:13, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Alright, the code is written and tested and ready to go. Just need an answer to my question above about the template editor protection. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Since the bot does not edit in the template space (nor does it appear to edit user-space pages that might be template-protected) I have given the bot TPE. Primefac (talk) 11:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that Primefac. Now that I dug around, I see why the page should probably stay at TE protection... the counts trigger a watchlist notification. I'm hesitant to do an actual test since many people would be notified, so I will skip that for now and I'll just keep an eye on it the next time we have an RFA. I see there is also a User:Amalthea/RfX/RfB count page... I will probably expand the bot to cover this too if there's no objections. I'm having trouble logging into Toolforge to set up the cron job that will run the bot every half hour, but I should have this solved soon. Stay tuned. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Done. I got the cronjob working, and I added RFB too. Should be all set for now. Please reach out with any bug reports or feature requests. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae thank you! — xaosflux ^Talk 14:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

First RFA is tested. Bot worked great. Happened to catch it 2 minutes after it was added :) I may change the bot's cadence to 15 minutes. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Potentially dumb question, but is there a reason it needs to refresh that quickly? Even at twice an hour, the longest lag will be half an hour, which for a 168-hour discussion seems like a trivial period. Primefac (talk) 10:22, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Fair. Never mind then. Thanks for the input. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Bot request for Wikipedia:WikiProject Lethwei

Hi, I'm not sure which bot I need to be requesting, but I would like I would like to request alerts for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Lethwei#Article Alerts about Lethwei related articles if possible.

The same things as the kickboxing task force, see here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial arts/Kickboxing task force#Article Alerts

Thank you! Lethweimaster (talk) 20:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lethweimaster, see Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscribing for how to set this up. This does.not need a new bot. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I want to Santali Mass message deliverer Bot

Please discussion this matter.I want to bot on Santali Wikipedia because Don't have a bot on Santali Wikipediaᱵᱤᱨᱢᱚᱞ (talk) ᱵᱤᱨᱢᱚᱞ (talk) 02:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

pinging MusikAnimal. Maybe they know correct venue for this request. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:08, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

mw:Extension:MassMessage is installed on sat.wikipedia.org, and it appears to already be in use there: w:sat:Special:Contribs/MediaWiki message delivery. Admins can send messages at w:sat:Special:MassMessage. — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

pinging ᱵᱤᱨᱢᱚᱞ. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Replacing link to a broken archive

Moved to Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests

– * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Unicode 14 to unicode 15 in code charts

Please substitute "unicode 14" in "unicode 15" 5.91.185.198 (talk) 11:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Not appropriate. This is probably best done case-by-case rather than by a bot. Sungodtemple (talk) 02:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Bot supporting revised technical move request process

Background: A discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Why_not_just_abolish_RMT? found some consensus for a revised implementation of the technical move request process. The idea is that instead of requesting uncontroversial moves at a centralized page, editors would post the request at the talk page of the article to be moved, similar to edit requests. The benefits would include better visibility to page watchers, smoother conversion of contested requests into full RM discussions, intuitiveness for new editors by reducing the diversity of procedural stuff to learn, and archiving.

As part of this idea, it was suggested that a bot-maintained page similar to User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable (in addition to a category) would be useful for watchers and people looking to perform the moves.

Basic features would be a table of the pages to be moved, the desired destinations, and the time of the request. Also desirable would be an indicator of whether performing the move would require an admin, or if lesser permissions would suffice (usually page mover). Whether a technical move needs an admin is currently listed manually, so automatic detection is not exactly a requirement for the bot, but nice to have. Automatic detection would just be checking for protection, basically (see the help page).

Would you be interested in implementing this? Or alternatively, you can also comment at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Why_not_just_abolish_RMT? if you agree/disagree this is a good idea in the first place. Adumbrativus (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey there. First off, make sure to get consensus. After you have consensus, you'd probably want to create a talk page template that places the page in a tracking category, and have WT:TWINKLE modified, and after all that is done, then you'd want to look into a bot. Since AnomieBot does something similar, that bot's operator would be a good place to start. Pinging Anomie. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I think there already is a consensus. It's at the discussion I linked, which is at the appropriate forum. Although I'm not sure what level of consensus bot approvers would consider necessary. It doesn't strike me as contentious such that an RfC or formal closure is mandated. Or is it that there needs to be an advance consensus not only for the high-level design and requirements but also for the detailed implementation? Separately: Can you clarify how Twinkle relates to this? I didn't think Twinkle has (or needs to have) integration with this, but I don't use Twinkle that much, so maybe I'm just not aware. I agree about other work obviously needing to be done, such as setting up a template and category. Adumbrativus (talk) 07:14, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Let's slow down a touch. Twinkle is about step 5, and we're still in the planning phases.

Your link above does show consensus, but it's between a half-dozen people and the page is edited by over 200 people a month. That being said, I think it's a good precursor to an RFC which would formally get consensus to shut down a rather busy page. That, however, is not something that this board necessarily deals with

As far as the bot side of thing goes, planning now probably would be a good idea; I don't know if it makes more sense to have User:RMCD bot or User:AnomieBOT take care of the tables and lists, obviously the former is designed for RMs but the latter has the infrastructure for edit-request templates and the like. Couldn't hurt to ask both operators their opinions on how easily it will be to implement and whether they can/want to do it.

I think it might be a good idea to flesh out one or two specific ideas for how to change from an WP:RMTR-style page to an edit-request style talk before you file the RFC, but I would definitely say that's something that needs to be done before a bot can be tasked. Primefac (talk) 07:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, we'd definitely need an RfC for eventually retiring RMT at some point in the future, but what I think can be done at this stage is set up the edit request templates, then list that option at WP:RM and then tweak the system messages that display in a failed attempt to move (MediaWiki:Movenotallowed and the like) so that they provisionally point to the new process. I imagine we can use both the old and new ones for a time to see how things go. Uanfala (talk) 12:02, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I could have AnomieBOT handle a process like this easily enough, although it'd take some new code to handle having two pages and checking move protection versus the existing code that has to deal with only one page and edit protection. The main concern I'd have with regard to consensus is that I'd rather not write a bunch of code only to have people reverse course. Anomie ⚔ 12:20, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed automated test for G14

During the cleanup of the Iran geostubs by User:Carlossuarez46, I have noticed many disambiguation pages, such as Chah-e Qorban, link only to pages that are likely to be deleted imminently. I recently tagged Chah-e Pahn for speedy deletion per G14 because the only remaining entry is Chah-e Pahn, Bushehr (itself also at PROD).

Based on the contents of these disambiguation pages, I can propose an automated test for possible G14 candidates:

There is a disambiguation or set-index tag on the page, and at most one blue link outside of a template.

The reasoning, based on the observations of the Iran geostub templates, is that any necessary disambiguation page will have at least two valid bluelinks, and there no good reason why an entry in a disambiguation page should be placed inside of a template. (The {{dab}} template itself, and several templates in dab pages such as {{lang-fa}} in the Iran geostub dabs, contain bluelinks which are irrelevant to the entries.) "See also" is not included, as any WP:PTM judgment requires a human reviewer. As such, there may be false negatives noticeable by a human (e.g. if the sole entry has two bluelinks), but there should be no false positives on properly formed dab pages.

The other condition, redirects ending in "(disambiguation)" which do not go to dab pages, is also straightforward to automate.

In this case, the bot procedure would be to place a G14 tag on pages which pass the aforementioned test. It should not delete these pages immediately, since the title may occasionally be a plausible redirect, and malformed dab pages may produce a false positive. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:22, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I would think that in almost every case such a dab page would be appropriately converted to a redirect, rather than proposed for speedy deletion; it may also be that the single target page should be moved to the undisambiguated title. A bot could perhaps usefully tag these pages with a maintenance category ("Dab pages to consider converting to redirects"?), but as single-blue-link dab pages they do the encyclopedia no harm beyond giving some readers one extra click en route to the article they need. PamD 05:21, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
I am surprised that "many" dabs link only to one article. They usually get tagged and cleaned up per WP:ONEOTHER. If that target article does gets deleted then the dab can be deleted per G14 part 2 disambiguation pages that disambiguate zero extant Wikipedia pages, but there is no rush to do this while the article's fate is still uncertain. Otherwise, as Pam points out, If a disambiguation page links to only one article and does not end in (disambiguation), it should be changed to a redirect, not deleted. Again, it would be sensible to wait for the article to be deleted or saved before bothering to do this. The short interval when the target article's future is in doubt is the one time when we can't sensibly delete or edit the dab, either manually or automatically. Something useful may come out of this idea but the details don't yet have the consensus needed to become a bot request. Certes (talk) 10:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
It could be useful for a bot to generate a report of such dabs (so that interested editors can browse through it for stuff to do), but I don't think any automated speedy tagging would be appropriate. First, because these pages don't meet WP:G14 (this version [6] of Chah-e Pahn, for example, isn't eligible for speedy deletion because it disambiguates more than zero articles and its title doesn't end in "(disambiguation)"). Second, because cases like that require judgement and you can't rely on the deleting admins to do that (G14 tends to be considered among the "easy" CSDs, and so often attracts admins who don't have the time to look closer). Looking closer is necessary because a dab may have zero or no wikilinks to extant articles for a variety of reasons, for example because 1) it had been vandalised; 2) the link was removed as an automated XFDcloser action after an AfD, but the topic is dicussed within another article and so a properly redone dab entry would be approporiate (AfD closers almost never bother to fix those); 3) the linked article was deleted, but its deletion is about to get overturned at DRV; 4) the linked article was draftified, but its draftification will eventually be reversed; 5) the link is inside an {{interlanguage link}} template. Uanfala (talk) 11:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey that actually sounds better than my idea. Deletion tagging is probably too controversial. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Is this proposal inspired by geographical lists? We do have a disappointing number of pages which essentially say "List-um-all is the name of the following 94 places in Ruritania, each having a single-digit population, no mentions in reliable sources and a 0% chance of getting an article." Some of those have been tagged with {{geodis}} or similar, despite the fact that they are not a navigation aid because there are no destination articles to navigate to. They should probably be handled (and, if appropriate, deleted) as list articles rather than dabs. Certes (talk) 23:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Add Full citations needed notice to ~250K articles with (quasi-)bare incomplete refs

Around 250K articles—at least!—have refs that aren't "bare", strictly speaking, but could use with some expanding. There's a template for that, of course, but it's barely used. — Guarapiranga ☎ 00:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

And the Category:Articles with incomplete citations is vastly underpopulated too. — Guarapiranga ☎ 01:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The sheer variety of these 'bare' links mean it's nearly impossible to write a bot to tackle them all. It might be possible to write a bot to handle a subset of those however. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Can't bots run regex searches? But, yeah, subsets are better than nothing. In fact, every filtered set is almost surely a subset of a more complete set that includes the filer's false negatives (including my linked regex above). — Guarapiranga ☎ 00:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Nice regex! Devising regex recipes is a big start. I'd like to see books that follow certain standard formats so they can be converted to {{cite book}}. I'd write a bot picking off low hanging fruit of well formatted free-form cites if you wanted to help with the regex. There are various Citation#Styles and each style probably has variations. Some will be more common than others don't need them all. -- GreenC 05:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I can help with regex. But, at this stage, I was just looking to tag the articles, not do anything with the cites themselves. Once the articles are tagged, then, yeah, we should run the bots on them (automatically or semi-automatically). When targetting single articles, I particularly like running BrandonXLF's ReferenceExpander first, for a fast an easy expansion of bare and incomplete cites. Then I run REFILL, which is particularly good at merging duplicate refs, and lastly I run the slower and more thorough Citation bot, for the fine tuning of templates and parameters. If you want to build another bot, perhaps specialised on books, I'd say: more, merrier. — Guarapiranga ☎ 10:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

For cite book I don't think tagging would be required just discovery, a list of articles, and a regex to find them in the article so the bot can parse and convert them. With a regex I can search the dump to generate a list. CyrusSearch ("insource:") maxes out at 10,000 results, it will show total available but can't retrieve past 10,000 so need to use the dump to get all results. -- GreenC 16:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

TemplateStyles for plainrowheaders

Hello,

Looking for a bot op who can hit about ~120k pages so that plainrowheaders can be TemplateStyled (see MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do#description and specific section MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do#Plainrowheaders).

I'd be looking for the basic version of this change. I'd do it myself but I think with that many pages and the fact I don't have a separate machine or anything like that to keep running, that it would take a while for me to do it.

There are a couple functions:

Remove plainrowheaders from table start lines ({| class="wikitable plainrowheaders" and similar) where scope="row" (or similar) doesn't appear on the page. That's something approximately equal to these 36k pages.
1. More complex version: Remove plainrowheaders from table start lines where scope="row" also does not appear in the table of interest. I have no idea how to get a scope for this task.
2. There's probably also a version of this which is remove plainrowheaders when it appears in a table without wikitable in the same class declaration, or outside a table class declaration entirely but inside a table still (not a template, which may have a valid use for naming the class in its instantiation). Another "I have no idea how many of these cases there are".
Transform something along the lines of {| class="wikitable plainrowheaders" to
```
{{plain row headers}}
{| class="wikitable plainrowheaders"
```
1. Less the pages removed by part 1, that should look something like these 130k pages (so ~95k pages).

I am currently considering changing the class name in the TemplateStyles before doing this to plain-row-headers which will more cleanly delineate the name and which will make it much more fullproof to track removals should someone create {{plainrowheaders}} as a redirect later (even with the "don't do this" note in the template documentation).

Such a bot would not edit in other namespaces (yet, perhaps as an extension to the task with a very specific scope of pages), and it would only touch this "limited" set of pages. Any others would also be for a later extension.

Questions/concerns welcome. Izno (talk) 03:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't mind taking a look at this. I will set up some test cases in the userspace of User:William Avery Bot and get a script working on them. I habitually run bots from a toolserver account, (mostly under d:User:William Avery Bot) so large numbers of pages won't be a problem. William Avery (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Coding... Committing here

@Izno: Do these these changes match what you had in mind? William Avery (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@William Avery, yes, those match the main gist. (Awesome that you added the other two requests!) I think I'm pretty settled on changing the class name to plain-row-headers also since that prevents future users from doing unfortunate things. A couple more adjustments then:

Can you include a change from plainrowheaders to plain-row-headers?
Separate to that, I have a personal preference for the lowercase first letter for a template like this i.e. {{plain row headers}} and not {{Plain row headers}}. Not a requirement for me.

The number of pages that will (potentially) be impacted was included since I know that to be part of the BRFA form.

Thanks! Izno (talk) 01:38, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

👍 William Avery (talk) 16:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Izno: I had a look at MediaWiki:Common.css and {{Plain row headers}}, and it seems that 'scope="rowgroup"' should trigger the same processing as 'scope="row"', namely adding the template. Is that correct? William Avery (talk) 16:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, and probably the same for the other direction, though I don't anticipate any articles having rowgroup scopes but no row scopes. Izno (talk) 17:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I see what you mean. William Avery (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I am doing some simulated runs at the moment. I have come across the construction !scope="row"{{single chart|Canadatopsingles|1|chartid=4125a|refname="RPMTop100"}} in which the lack of a pipe in the page markup (it is supplied by the following template) has caused me to fall back to using a regexp to detect the scope. It will clearly be better to treat a table as using the plainrowheaders if there us any doubt. I guess the real solution would be to expand the templates in the table markup. William Avery (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

It will clearly be better to treat a table as using the plainrowheaders if there us any doubt. Yes, this is true, but I'm not sure it's necessary. The regex is trivial (scope\s*=\s*"?\s*row(:?group)?\s*"? I think, though you could even just stop after seeing row so scope\s*=\s*"?\s*row), so long as you can bound what you're searching to the table's scope. IDK if that's doable with pywikibot or if it's giving you something significantly more structured. Izno (talk) 01:35, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Looking a little closer I have realised that there are templates that emit a whole table row, and the call above would normally use the rowheader parameter. i.e. {{single chart|Canadatopsingles|1|chartid=4125a|rowheader=true|refname="RPMTop100"}}. I initially wondered if you were expecting to put calls to {{Plain row headers}} inside such row-emitting templates, but in any case, the "plain-row-headers" class will need to be in the table's class attribute, so I need to know about what's going on in the template. As the code stands I try the following in succession:

Use mwparserfromhell to look at the class attribute on the table header elements. This is naive, but there are a ton of such simple tables about.
Use a regex to look for the "scope=row". It usually indicates a rather problematic unparsable state if the first method didn't detect it. e.g. the editor should have used a "rowheader=true" parameter in the following template instead. I output a warning message for these, and I might fix them in a separate exercise.
Use regex to look for a row-emitting template by name within the table markup. Currently I use "\{\{\s*([Ee]pisode[ _]list|[Ss]ingle[ _]chart)\s*\|". More of these templates emerge when step 4 succeeds.
If the table body looks like it contains templates (I don't parse it, just look for '{{'), I carry out subst'ing of the templates in the table markup, and parse the resultant markup as at step one.

It's a little daunting, but I'm quite pleased with the results, running it in simulation mode over a few hundred articles. I also discovered https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T177270. William Avery (talk) 19:06, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@William Avery, I knew this was going to get sticky.

A distinct objective is that we only add {{plain row headers}} to "plain tables" in the main space i.e. those that start with {|. I think the inverse operation, removal, should act only on the same "plain tables". Cases of {{episode list}} which also use {| should be few and far between given the use instructions (namely that headers should be inside {{Episode table}}), but I suppose it's possible they exist. Most other table row templates work similarly with a matching table heading template. The reason why is to eventually add either {{plain row headers}} or {{plain row headers/styles.css}} directly to the header template and save including it where it isn't needed in the direct wikitext.

I have no issue with starting the BRFA soon given the above is taken into account. Izno (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

My approach should ensure that nothing gets broken, but tables like the one at Beverly Hills, 90210 § Specials are out there. If tables are created with a template rather than a "{|" tag, I am ignoring them, as required. William Avery (talk) 21:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Yup, as I said, a long tail (there might be value to logging the pages and the specific template found so that someone can clean those up but that doesn't seem particularly critical?). Let's BRFA! Izno (talk) 22:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

BRFA filed 😁 William Avery (talk) 18:21, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Adding WikiProject Music genres template to 1.6k genre articles

The task is to add missing {{WikiProject Music/Music genres task force}} template to talk pages to a set of articles, built after wikidata. The set of articles itself based on wikidata query of item that have an English article + instance of = music genre (Q188451) / song type (Q107356781) / type of musical work/composition (Q107487333) / audio content genre (Q108676140). It's a pretty neat selection here (relatively), as I've been working through these items for a few years now, trying to keep them in order, exporting infobox values, correcting scheme, making division between forms/genres/types, etc.

So here's a full list of genres/types on enwiki: https://w.wiki/5JZi
minus articles with existing template per Category:WikiProject Music genres articles: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=22302423
and here's the resulting list (non-automated, but manually drafted based on list 1 minus list 2) for a bot consisted of 1671 articles: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=22490279 (upd. 20.07)

It would be nice if new templates could adopt the quality/class parameters of other project templates, but if anything other bots with related tasks are likely to do this after.

I would appreciate if it would be possible to do such a task. The next step I'm planning is to add a parameter about the missing infoboxes for selected articles with p31 = music genre (minus some specific articles). Solidest (talk) 09:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest, seems reasonable, but why is Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force/Assessment tag as {{historical}}? ― Qwerfjkl talk 11:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

No idea. Maybe because the distinct project was reworked into a subproject of Music? Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force itself, however, remains active and uses the assessment division. Perhaps the historical tag means that the Assessment page itself has not been updated for a long time and needs cleaning. Solidest (talk) 11:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Kleinzach put that tag. Perhaps they can help us figure it out :) Solidest (talk) 11:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Are you referring to a tag I added 11 years ago? Or is it something elese? Klein zach 14:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah. I've already cleaned it up, leaving the standard instructions and auto-updated log and removed that history tag. Solidest (talk) 13:02, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I could probably do this (though {{WikiProject banner}} makes this tricky). I'll give it a few days to see if anyone raises any objections (also, I currently have two BRFAs). ― Qwerfjkl talk 22:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest and Qwerfjkl: I could do give this a go if you like, as I already have a similar task to add {{WikiProject Disambiguation}}. I'd submit a general BRFA to add any WikiProject banner using rules similar to User:Yobot#WikiProject tagging. The bot could leverage the AWB module User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects to standardize existing WikiProjects to make it easier to apply {{WikiProject banner shell}} in the same edit. GoingBatty (talk) 12:54, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, sure, that'd probably be easier. ― Qwerfjkl talk 13:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest - Could you please add a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force to notify them of this request? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. Btw, I also added the clarification that list 3 is non-automated, unlike lists 1 and 2. Perhaps it should be rebuilt by the time the work starts. Solidest (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest Agreed. When I click on https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=22302469 and then click the "Do It!" button, I see the number or results reduced to 1,670. GoingBatty (talk) 17:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

The manual list is simply saved in the "Manual list" box (equal to the difference between list 1 and list 2), as I haven't found how to demonstrate it better here and I haven't figured out how to automate it either :) And the reduction by 1 happens because when you press button "Latin R&B" becomes "Latin R&&B". This must be a PetScan bug. Solidest (talk) 17:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl @GoingBatty, any news on this request? It's been 1month + 1week and I don't think anyone else will comment here. Here's the most recent version of the list (without the names with & which caused the bug noticed above): https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=22536092 . Solidest (talk) 09:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
@Solidest - Sorry, this slipped my mind. BRFA filed. GoingBatty (talk) 19:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
@Solidest - BRFA approved, so now my bot is Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
@GoingBatty, thank you! As far as I see the works are done. I've also manually added banners to 75 missing articles and it seems that it's complete now. Solidest (talk) 15:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
@Solidest: Agree that this request is Y Done. GoingBatty (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Needs-infobox parameter

The next step I wanted to do with these banners is to add the |needs-infobox=yes parameter to the appropriate articles, which would place them in Category:Music genre articles without infoboxes. The list is ready, and I've compiled it this way:

Took the list of items on WD with instance = music genre / song type + ones that have English Wikipedia articles.
Excluded some articles manually, such as those that cover music in countries, music by time period, some musical forms and types of compositions. I did not excluded music scenes as some of the infobox parameters filled in would be appropriate for such articles (such as Cultural origin aka Time + Place and Stylistic origins).
Removed those that already have {{Infobox music genre}}.
This produces a list of 1,723 articles where the infobox should be added: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=22746641

Overall, the selection is looks good and I think 95% of the things on the list are worth having an infobox. While the rest are 5% can be debatable and those who find it unnecessary can remove this parameter later.

So this work also needs bot actions or at least the auto-mode rights for AWB. Is it possible to do this as part of the same BRFA or will it require a new one?

P.S. There are still about 100 articles with banners where the parameter should be set manually, as they are designed slightly differently on wikidata. I'll probably do that as well if the core set gets approved and processed. Solidest (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest, This will probably require a new BRFA, as it's out of the scope of the last one (I think). @GoingBatty? — Qwerfjkl talk 06:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@Solidest & @Qwerfjkl: Agreed. GoingBatty (talk) 21:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

cloudfront.net

Example cite from Carowinds:

"Carowinds Park Map 2017" (PDF). d3knbu6191stae.cloudfront.net.

Contains |url=https://d3knbu6191stae.cloudfront.net/binaries/content/assets/ca-en-us/blogs/2017carowindsparkmap.pdf |work=d3knbu6191stae.cloudfront.net

cloudfront.net is Amazon AWS hosting ie. Amazon CloudFront. The work is not CloudFront which is merely a backend "cloud" hosting company where the PDF is stored.

Each CloudFront customer has an ID. In this case d3knbu6191stae maps to either the parent company Cedar Fair (https://www.cedarfair.com/ ) or the amusement park Carowinds (https://www.carowinds.com ) - probably the later. Another example is d1wqtxts1xzle7 which maps to academia.edu although in that case the work will be a journal title and the cite should have |via=Academia.edu

An enterprising bot coder could extract all the cloudfront.net IDs and create a map of what the actual work is, somehow. This map could be used by various tools to maintain citations such as User:Citation bot, User:BrownHairedGirl, Reflinks, WP:WAYBACKMEDIC, etc.. GreenC 21:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I have published a query for Count of external links to cloudfront.net by subdomain on Quarry. Not sure I will do more about it, unless somebody has a specific requirement. These are my comments on the four most cited subdomains. William Avery (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Subdomain	~# links	Comment
d25d2506sfb94s	2090	YouGov poll results. I can detect no domain with a meaningful name that uses these files.
dt9guucc6nuua	1142	IAAF athletics results. Appear to also be published under media.aws.iaaf.org, which would be a reasonable change to make to citations, but that's only an initial impression and needs checking. See https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/67369
d1wqtxts1xzle7	636	From the way they are cited, These are academic documents. Currently firewalled.
d2o2figo6ddd0g	511	A variety of US college athletics results, apparently from diverse sources.

Bot to maintain a list of recent AFDs by new page patrollers

Requested at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Discussion (Marking AFDd pages as reviewed). New page patrollers would like a way to see recent AFDs created by new page patrollers. I'm thinking a bot that updates a log page somewhere (maybe in the bot's userspace, or a subpage of WP:DELSORT). NPPs create a lot of AFDs, so this page would need a way to keep its size reasonable. I'd suggest having the bot count how many entries are on the page, and once it's above a certain number (50? 100? 200?), remove the oldest one every time it adds a new one. For algorithm, maybe have the bot run on a cron job every (1 hour, 6 hours, 12 hours?), run an SQL query to see recent AFD pages created by NPPs, and go from there. Would do myself but I'm a little busy this month. Thanks in advance. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Take note that not all AfDs by new page patrollers are NPP-related; I'm a new page patroller and have probably filed more AfDs of old articles than of new ones. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Description seems rather over-complicated. @Novem Linguae wouldn't it be enough to have a cronjob that daily queries the db to list the AfDs created by NPPs in the last 7 days? With {{database report}} this can be done now without writing any bot code. This query does the needful - quarry:query/68609. The last AND filters out "old" articles which Pppery mentions. – SD0001 (talk) 19:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Nice. @MPGuy2824, you're familiar with {{database report}}. Any interest in setting this up? –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Done Available at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reports#AfD created by NPPs in the past week. I think Atsme was looking for this. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:17, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Typo in section name

You know what to do :) Emptywords (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Moved to WP:AWBREQ

Edit History Problem

Closing, OS has repeatedly informed them that what they ask cannot be done. Primefac (talk) 09:01, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can an ADMIN advise if there's a bot for edit history cleanup and if so who to contact to request it process a pages history as I am not admin and got blocked twice for trying to do it manually.

Not getting anywhere with oversight or privacy who just revdel everything.

Personal information and copyright infringement have been deleted from the article and the edits rev deleted which is basically the entire history going back to the page creation in 2002, apart from all the vandalism.

The article is a good article (it is now anyway), a biography of a living person, but the edit history has lost its context and is a total mess. There were a few copyright issues and some of the earlier references no longer exist, actual dates of birth, and the real name of a family member were also revdeleted.

I would like to restore the edit history which has been almost entirely revdeleted. over 1000 edits since 2002 and some harmless, and not so harmless vandalism not revdeleted.

The only way to do so would be to remove copyright infringing statements, and dates of birth from every revdeleted page of the edit history, maybe after 6 months of inactivity, allowing the edits to be restored, either deleting or archiving the original for admin eyes only. The vandalism could then be dealt with using revdelete as intended.

Can anyone point me in the right direction its undermining the page to the point a deletion discussion is inevitable which is really not necessary. 86.142.231.35 (talk) 16:05, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

86.142.231.35, previous revisions cannot be modified. As far as I know, there is no way to do what you're describing. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Apologies if I have been misunderstood or unintentionally offended anyone but my "American" is lousy, if you know what I mean.

add translation bot to the list.

86.142.231.35 (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Which article are you talking about? Without that, I can only speak in generalities: counter Qwerfjkl there likely is a way of doing this by using upload import, but it will in practice almost certainly not be done and has nothing to do with bots. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Replacing WikiProject Public Art talk page templates

Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Public Art § Conversion into task force, WikiProject Public Art is being converted into a task force of WikiProject Visual arts, and its London task force is becoming a public art task force of WikiProject London. Accordingly, {{WikiProject Visual arts}} and {{WikiProject London}} have both been given public_art parameters.

I'm requesting a bot to replace instances of {{WikiProject Public Art}} (and also the redirect {{WikiProject Public art}} with different capitalisation) with instances of {{WikiProject Visual arts}} containing public_art=yes – except for instances of the WPPA template containing the London parameter, which the bot would need to change to instances of {{WikiProject London}} containing public_art=yes. Ham II (talk) 09:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I feel like there already exists a bot to do this. Primefac (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I think there's been a few that are done as need be, DatBot 1 and 5 did this (originally with AWB but later Python after it led to a myriad of issues), but I'm afraid I've lost the code. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 22:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Maintenance bot to tag duplicate requests at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion

We have a recurring issue at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion (WP:RFU) where an editor, once denied (or perhaps feeling ignored), will file a new request later on the same page. It was suggested to me that other request pages (particlarly WP:RFPP) have bot maintainers that flag duplicate requests. Something like that would also be helpful at WP:RFU. Cheers! BD2412 T 20:44, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding r to category

I manually added this template to a redirect page today, but I'm surprised that it wasn't already added by a bot. Is there a bot that can be programmed to do this? Jarble (talk) 21:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Is there already a robot doing this task? Kanashimi (talk) 01:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

I could do this, if no one else is already doing it. I think AWB can automatically tag some redirects with GENFIX. — Qwerfjkl talk 06:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

I could do it in AWS but I don't know how to get a list of redirects. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 02:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Here's a query of every redirect to a category that doesn't contain {{R to category}}. This can be used by a bot or an AWB user to tag these. Enjoy. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll make a BRFA later today. — Qwerfjkl talk 06:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl, Novem Linguae, and Dr vulpes: This bot could also add templates like {{r to portal namespace}}, {{r to talk page}}, and {{r to section}}. Jarble (talk) 16:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

+1 –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

BRFA filed. — Qwerfjkl talk 19:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

A bot named littleted

This bot is a anti-vandal bot, designed to:

revert vandalism
lock pages if there is mass editing
removes mean comments from pages of the deceased.Teddythedev (talk) 15:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Teddythedev, Not a good task for a bot. It is hard to tell if mass editing is good or bad, and what mean comments are. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
  well at least it can be programmed to revert vandalism? Teddythedev (talk) 16:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
  @Teddythedev, see User:ClueBot NG. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:02, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
  any idea's for what it should do? Teddythedev (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
If you don't have a clear goal with a bot, you shouldn't try to create one. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Once again we seem to have someone starting from the wrong place. The thought process should be to see something that needs improving, and then to decide what the best way to improve it would be, which may be via a bot or may be some other way. It shouldn't be to decide that you want to write a bot and then to look for something for it to do. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@Teddythedev, sure: update WP:MOSTREFS. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:18, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
good idea! Teddythedev (talk) 14:59, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
reminds me about that one youtube link i placed, not the best reference

my bot could do that for me. Teddythedev (talk) 15:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello? Teddythedev (talk) 20:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
@Teddythedev: yes? —usernamekiran (talk) 20:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
i was talking about the idea of a reference bot named littleted, and i was wondering if someone could create it. Teddythedev (talk) 12:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
This isn't a place to hire someone. Credit should go to people who came up with the idea of the bot as well as person who implemented the bot. If you have no idea about what a bot task should be and are not looking for ideas for you to create a bot on, then this isn't an appropriate discussion space for you. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:55, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

BernsteinBot has retired

BernsteinBot has been retired. Unlike Tom Brady, it will not be returning to active service. Some of us really rely on its database reports, in my case, it's nightly report of Empty Categories. I'm not sure how complicated it would be for an existing bot to take over some of its duties. I'm hoping that there can be a smooth transition. Thank you, bot experts. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm working on setting up a new bot account. We do need more maintainers though, it won't survive if it's just me. Legoktm (talk) 01:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Legoktm: what kind of co-op are you looking for? —usernamekiran (talk) 07:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran, @0xDeadbeef: everything :) So, triaging and responding to feedback on WT:DBR (and elsewhere), evaluating feasibility of new reports, fixing some of the old/broken ones, updating existing reports when there are schema changes and uh, whatever else is needed. Even just doing some of those would be great. Legoktm (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

I would also like to help as I am pretty familiar with Rust. 0xDeadbeef→∞ 09:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Bot for page expansion

A lot of pages for local things in Wikipedia are longer then the English version.

For example take the page for Autopista AP-2 vs the Spanish version, Autopista Zaragoza-Medeteranio. The Spanish version is quite a bit longer and more detailed.

My proposal is that when a page has a larger class in another language then Englsh, then the template {{Expand x|y|z}} is added to the English page. For example, a influential Spanish city like Sevile has a star in Spanish (Español) but not English (Inglés), which is some way shorter.

The bot will check any page in any language and compare the size to English. If English is bigger or within 100 bytes, then the template is not added. If the English article is shorter AND has a lower rating, the expand class is added, with x being the language, y being the foreign title, and z being the date.

This bot could really help with article expansion and making English Wikipedia more detailed, but I must mention this could be a COI violation as I am considering a freelance translation job and "50 articles translated into English from a Spanish encyclopaedia to help benefit the global community" does seem like a nice thing to add to my (currently almost-empty) CV.

My suggested plan of development goes like this to help ease creation:

Detection of pages which meet above criteria and addition to a bot-specific category split by language pair
Addition of template to pages of the category
Automatic Machine Translation
Expansion to other large wikis
Expansion to other small wikis

_{56independent/notacoworcat}^Talk 16:47, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I think one hangup you will find is that ratings are WikiProject-generated and are not standardised - what one project might consider to be a B-class article may only be C-class to another, and between languages there is even a large discrepancy - some projects have few if any standards, while others (en, de, to name two) are much higher. A long article with a "high rating" on a different wiki that has lower referencing standards, for instance, could potentially mean a lot of wasted effort if none of that extra length is actually supported by references. Primefac (talk) 07:27, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Managable with different criteria. We could use an equation mixing page length with number of citation to get the "citation density". Longer pages then English with a matchingly high or equal citation density then English could be the criteria instead.

This also helps filter out languages which tend to be longer (otherwise an Ithkuil wikipedia, despite being less ambiguous and probably more serious, would be called worse then Toki Pona Wikipedia) 56independent (talk) 11:33, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Citation bots for List of inorganic compounds?

Most of the chemicals on there can be found on Pubchem, and since pubchem uses a fairly consistent naming scheme for their pages, maybe a bot could be made to go through and cite?

I'm not entirely sure how bots work, or if citation bots are allowed, or if this is at all possible, but if this could work, it would save a lot of effort citing it. It's not a very important page, though.

If anyone makes this, thanks! Balnibarbarian (talk) 21:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Do the entries in this list-article actually need these cites? The article seems like just a navgational aid, organized list of links to existing articles. All those articles presumably have {{Chembox}} and that infobox has a slot for a PubChem link. Seems like PubChem merely verifies that the chemical has the formula, which the target articles do as well, or else is just a cherry-picked one of many possible database links (CAS, ChemSpider, etc.). DMacks (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that citations were needed for list entries. Balnibarbarian (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Create TLA redirects to TLA disambiguation pages

In many cases, uppercase three-letter acronyms ("TLAs") are disambiguation pages, and the lowercase form is always a good redirect. See ABC and abc, for example. Could a bot help create more lowercase redirects? Two sets of pages in projectspace have links to every possible TLA combination, both uppercase and lowercase. See Wikipedia:TLAs from EAA to HZZ for example, and {{Wikipedia TLAs}} for all links. The bot could use these pages in this process:

Open a nonexistent lowercase TLA
Check if the uppercase TLA exists
If uppercase exists, check to see that the page code contains a disambiguation template
If uppercase contains a disambiguation template, create lowercase as a redirect to uppercase
If uppercase is a redirect to uppercase (disambiguation), which contains a disambiguation template, create lowercase as a redirect there

When the TLA is an article (e.g. BBC) or a redirect to an article (e.g. AVV) or a redirect to a differently titled disambiguation page (e.g. ARM), the situation is more complicated, so the bot should not create lowercase redirects for those titles. 120.21.41.202 (talk) 21:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

~~This might be better as an AWB task. Primefac (talk) 11:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)~~ Larger than I realised. Primefac (talk) 12:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Do we really need these redirects? Typing Aeb in most places automatically takes me to AEB. If we do, 5338 out of 17576 possibilities (A-Z only) are redlinks (list). There are also a further 18 cases (list) where the TLA redirects to a dab with a different name. Certes (talk) 12:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

There are also 9577 four-letter dabs such as AAAD, 324 five-letter dabs such as AACAP, 29 six-letter dabs such as ADERRA, five seven-letter dabs such as AFCYBER, and this week's winner: NAVCOMMSTA. I'm not sure that having three letters makes the dab special. Certes (talk) 14:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Block notices about coloured backgrounds

When administrators place block notices on user talk pages, they mostly come with a coloured background but I have noticed the colour has gone for notices earlier than a certain date. I think that is because <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> does not work and should be changed to <div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px"> to restore the original display of the messages posted at the time of when they were announced. See [7] for the disappeared colour background, [8] which features the coloured background and User:Iggy the Swan/sandbox for the different results where I know what to do. Thanks - Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Previously MediaWiki_talk:Common.css/Archive_18#Removing_user-block, where it was decided this wasn't worth fixing. I added it to my common.css when that happened, and suggest you do the same rather than request a bot run of this scale. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

^ Izno (talk) 01:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hand-made Template:Infobox awards list

I started this discussion about how there seem to be about 600 hand-done versions of this template onwiki. See background at that page. I have no idea what kinds of sharp edges there might be to this, or how much regularity there is for the issue, but I can't imagine that a bot will do worse to convert these than doing all 600 by hand. Izno (talk) 01:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Remove useless possibly empty category

{{tracking category}} now automatically embeds {{possibly empty category}}. If a bot could go through all pages with both {{tracking category}} (and its redirects) and {{possibly empty category}} (and its redirects) directly on them, and remove {{possibly empty category}} (and its redirects), like so. that would be peachy. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Looks like around 1500 pages from my roguh search. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MalnadachBot 14. Gonnym (talk) 11:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Move almost 2000 GA subpages to match their talk pages

User:Mike Christie/GA subpages that should be moved is a list of GA subpages and the page they should be moved to. The target page was found by going to the talk page that is the parent of the GA subpage, and following the redirect. There's a discussion of this here. Is there a bot that can do these moves? A redirect should be left behind in every case. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:25, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

mw:Manual:Pywikibot/movepages.py might be the easiest way to do this. – SD0001 (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Christie,

BRFA filed. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:54, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Will watch that page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Merging OTD templates to AH

I do this sort of edit over and over again. It does not seem complicated to code. It would involve finding talk pages with OTD templates, checking whether {{Article history}} already exists (it doesn't always), fixing the inconsistent date and oldid format, and appending the OTD info to the end of the articlehistory.

Separately, once/if that is done, perhaps Anomie could be enticed to change the way Anomiebot handles dates and oldids, as it is inconsistent with the broader application of all items in Articlehistory. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

In the same vein, the GARcloser does not roll in existing DYK templates to AH, so similar could be done with the same bot to find and merge DYK templates when AH already exists. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:18, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia, if no one else takes this, I'll do it, after I finish #Bot to Automate Subtitles Template (which probably won't require a BRFA). — Qwerfjkl talk 21:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! @Novem Linguae, Anomie, SD0001, Mike Christie, and Hawkeye7: others with {{Article history}} involvement. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Doing... 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Awesome. 0xDeadbeef after your test run, might you ping me for feedback? I was involved in the original set up of Article history so have more knowledge about it than my usual level of Tecno-Dummification. You might also look into whether you can do the same for Template:ITN talk with the same bot-- same deal there, lots of stragglers not rolled in to article history. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:24, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I will ping you when I file the BRFA, and I will look into the ITN one as well. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

BRFA filed 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Send a message to everyone in WikiProject Michigan/Detroit

Hey everyone! I am looking to organize a Michigan-based Wikipedia event, perhaps around 3 days, where we could all meet around a certain theme or themes. Let me know what you think? I am mostly active within the cultural and music-based worlds of Wikipedia, so that is my expertise. This is the first time I am trying to organize something like this so please if anyone has any advice or would like to help me I am all ears. I am posting this notice on the Ann Arbor and Michigan pages as well. JohnDVandevert (talk) 03:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I think you are looking for WP:MMS, not a bot. Also, not a great idea to post your personal details here (which I have removed). Primefac (talk) 12:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Bot to Automate Subtitles Template

Currently, there are over 8,000 audio sample files uploaded to Wikipedia, which mostly includes song snippets: Category:Wikipedia non-free audio samples. Of those audio samples, many of them contain subtitles. Just for now, I'll use this page as an example: File:Green Day - Holiday.ogg

If you click on the "TimedText" tab, you will come to this webpage: TimedText:Green Day - Holiday.ogg.en.srt, which includes the subtitles created by a community member. And to monitor which audio files contain one of these samples, a subtitles template is placed on the file's page, which will add that file to this category: Category:Wikipedia files with subtitles. It also helps people like me who help add subtitles quickly check to see if they already exist for that file.

However, not every file with subtitles contains this template, which stifles the template's usefulness quite a lot. Fortunately, adding this template seems like in a one-time run-through seems like it can be automated quite easily:

(1) Check if the page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TimedText:[file name].en.srt exists

(2) If the page returns "There are currently no subtitles in English for this video, you can edit this page to add them," then the bot should move on to the next file

(3) Otherwise, the bot should go back to the file page, create a new line at the top (typically above the "Summary" section), and insert the Subtitles template with en as the first parameter and [file name].en.srt as the second

I'm not too good with coding though, and I'm not sure how, and if, such an operation can be done. If anyone could lend me a hand with this, that would be much appreciated :) -- Leafy46 (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Leafy46, I can do do this, but I'm quite busy right now. I'll try to get round to it. — Qwerfjkl talk 07:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Take your time, there's no rush. Leafy46 (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Leafy46, please ping me if I haven't started this in a week. — Qwerfjkl talk 22:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Leafy46, okay, I've started on this. Should I also add other languages, as the seem to been in the title (e.g. TimedText:"Soy lo que soy".ogg.es.srt is in Spanish, es)? — Qwerfjkl talk 17:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I usually add subtitles to songs in English, so I hadn't really considered other languages. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, that would be great! Thank you :) Leafy46 (talk) 00:53, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Doing. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

@Leafy46,

Done— Qwerfjkl talk 14:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl Looks good from what I'm seeing so far, thank you so much! I really appreciate it. Leafy46 (talk) 16:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Change parameters of template

Would it be feasible to make about 500 changes of the following type?

From {{Lighthouse identifiers | qid2=Q123455 | qid3=Q23456}}
To {{Authority control | additional=Q123455,Q23456}}

I started using separate parameters for these and now I realise that a comma-separated list is more user-friendly. Parameters from qid2 up to qid5 are possible. Note that Template:Lighthouse identifiers is a redirect to Template:Authority control so we are bypassing a redirect at the same time. Thanks for any help. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:55, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, I could do this (after I get round to making a list of the pages needed for #Automation of law task force tagging under WPNZ banner), there shouldn't be too much change to the code. Do you have a list of pages? — Qwerfjkl talk 21:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. It would be all transclusions of Template:Lighthouse identifiers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, great. I'll try and complete both of these tomorrow, or Friday failing that. — Qwerfjkl talk 22:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I've started using using mwparserfromhell which makes these tasks way easier. — Qwerfjkl talk 22:02, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, I've written the code for this. I'll run it as soon as I finish the task above (so as not to exacerbate any errors). — Qwerfjkl talk 18:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Doing— Qwerfjkl talk 20:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I am online now, so if you would like to make 10 edits and I will check to make sure it is correct? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Too late I see. Anyway all looking good

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ,

Done. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:57, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for your dedication and efficiency — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Automation of law task force tagging under WPNZ banner

Hello, after a (very) brief discussion on WT:NZLAW, I'm just requesting if someone is able to automate an edit that goes through all of the talk pages of article's in the categories below (and their subcategories) to edit their Template:WikiProject New Zealand banner to add the law = yes parameter. An example of a correctly tagged law task-force page is Make It 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General. In doing this, there may be duplicates across the categories (and/or their subcategories), also a few of these articles will also already have the law = yes parameter set. So you may also have to account for this (ideally this would include tagging articles without the WPNZ banner with that banner and the law parameters, so we don't miss any).

This is to help mark all of articles that are relevant to the law task-force (WP:NZLAW) which is in the process of establishment and getting started after a (far longer) conversation on WT:NZ.

Category:Statutes of New Zealand, Category:Supreme Court of New Zealand cases, Category:Court of Appeal of New Zealand cases, Category:High Court of New Zealand cases, Category:District Court of New Zealand judges, Category:High Court of New Zealand judges, Category:Court of Appeal of New Zealand judges, and Category:Supreme Court of New Zealand judges.

Thank you all, I appreciate it. Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 08:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

If the bot adds law-importance= then the article will be added to Category:Unknown-importance New Zealand law articles which will allow project members to go through and assign importance to these entries.-gadfium 08:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gadfium, so you suggest adding law = yes and law-importance =?
I suppose I'll do this as well if I do the one above (though this may need an actual BRFA). — Qwerfjkl talk 09:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I would say so, yes. Mostly as it would be far more useful if we could go and sift through to assess importance. Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 09:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Doing— Qwerfjkl talk 17:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Carolina2k22,

Done. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it! Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 15:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject bot

Could someone please send a bot through Category:Unknown-importance medicine articles and mark every article that is also in Category:WikiProject Biography articles (or any subcat, or that otherwise gives you any reason at all to suspect that the article is primarily about a person) with |importance=Low|society=yes for me? This would probably involve several hundred edits.

Most articles that get tagged with {{WPMED}} are people or organizations (e.g., hospitals, medical schools, health charities, businesses) that we just don't care about. All of these should be tagged as |importance=Low|society=yes . The biographies are just the ones I'm sure that a bot could find. If you have ideas about how to find the rest, I'd love to hear them.

Also, if you happen to have an mw:ORES-aware bot, then I'd love to have it tag all the stubs as |class=Stub as well. I have checked enough (thousands of) ORES scores for stubs to know that it is extremely reliable for that rating, and we do see a lot of stubs. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing, a simple intersection search gives 666 results. It looks like ORES has an article topic feature, mw:ORES/Articletopic, that can predict if an article is a biography. — Qwerfjkl talk 05:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

...and it can be used in a search.
I'd be happy to do this, but it might be suitable for a semi-automated run, as there are only 666 edits or so. — Qwerfjkl talk 05:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

about how to find the rest ORES might work similarly for these as well. — Qwerfjkl talk 05:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I've reviewed the entire list of 666 results, and taken a side trip to learn about the tradition of double-barrelled surnames in Britain. All of these look like prime candidates for exactly what I'd like to have done. I would be happy to have you use whatever method you believe is best suited.

BTW, it's unlikely, but if you should get any complaints, please ping me. It can be disappointing to discover that some group thinks your favorite subject is "low importance", and the correct parameter is (unfortunately) |importance=. We never did convert it to |priority (good idea, but maybe not worth flooding the watchlists, and the template does not treat them as exact aliases). WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll be able to do this in around a week. If anyone else can do it earlier, they're welcome to. I'm currently away from my computer, so it'd be hard to complete this, sorry! — Qwerfjkl talk 21:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing,

Done. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:41, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

PressReader.com titles

I was pointed here from the Village pump as a good place to ask.

Currently we have 409 articles using "PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions" as the title of a reference rather than the actual title of the article being referenced. Is there any tool that can convert the title or a BOT created to perform this task? As an example [9] that I have done manually. Keith D (talk) 09:53, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

|website=www.pressreader.com should be changed to |via=pressreader.com also. The titles are not in the HTML which makes getting titles via bot very hard. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 01:28, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

This is being cleaned by a bot right now. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Mark Catholic News Service links added before 30 December 2022 as dead and add archive

Moved to WP:URLREQ

– * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

translation

looking for a translation bot for work on the luganda Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.75.189.46 (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

His/Her Majesty

Create template {{HM}} that can hold "His Majesty" or "Her Majesty" depending on the sex/gender of the monarch of the United Kingdom.
Create a bot to replace instances of "His Majesty" and "Her Majesty" with this template.

79.185.136.221 (talk) 19:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a good suggestion for the ideas lab, and I can see a few uses such as His Majesty's Coastguard, but those words often occur in a phrase such as "Her Majesty the Queen" or "His Majesty King Charles" which needs amending anyway. There are also plenty of uses such as Her Majesty's Theatre which don't change when the monarch changes, not to mention many references to other monarchs around the world. Her Majesty served us for 70 years, and it may well be another 70 years until the UK next has a queen. Certes (talk) 21:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

This has been discussed several times, and rejected as pointless – a case of shutting the barn door after the horse has fled. It will remain "His Majesty" until at least the current king, his older son, and his eldest grandson have died, and even longer if the grandson's first child is male. If we assume something on the order of a typical lifespan for each, then we won't need to make this change for at least another seventy years or so. Please come back and suggest this when the heir apparent is a woman. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Even then, if it's proposed for other countries for instance, or someone wants a bot to find current instances of 'Her Majesty' I still think this is a bad idea. Historical references should stay as they are, some organisations may not be renamed immediately (or ever), and unless we have a source that something has been renamed automatically, we should use the old one. JeffUK 00:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Finding instances of "Her Majesty" would be a useful task. The small sample I checked have all been updated diligently where appropriate but we may have missed a few which still need fixing. However, that doesn't need a bot: a simple search will do fine. Certes (talk) 11:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Bot to update WP:MOSTREFS

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Wikipedia:Articles with the most references updates are done manually and majority of entries are severely outdated. It would be great if a bot could regularly handle the updates. Sanglahi86 (talk) 23:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

My bot can do the job. Teddythedev (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

will update you when the bot is created. Teddythedev (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sanglahi86: Hi. I think Community Tech bot might be able to do that. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
@Sanglahi86: Hi. Did you post the request anywhere else? I think I might be able to create a script for that purpose. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran: Hello. I haven't posted the request anywhere else since I thought this was the best place to do so. It would be great if you could create the script/bot. I am not familiar with such technical stuff. Regards. –Sanglahi86 (talk) 13:28, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@Sanglahi86: Hello. I inquired so that I could update there as well that I am working on this. It will take around a week before I post the official bot request though. I will contact you soon. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Coding... Almost done, but needs some finalising work. —usernamekiran (talk) 09:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry to bug you, but it has been almost a month now, so I thought of asking about the status of the bot being coded. Thanks. Sanglahi86 (talk) 19:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sanglahi86: Hi. The code is ready, and accurate. I tested it on small categories, but I want to optimise it further. Because of the lack of time, I think it will take around 4-5 days more to finalise the code/filing the official request for bot. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Y Done Involved projects/editors notified. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Area codes 910 and 472

I don't know if this is the right place to request this but here goes. In 2022, the 910 area code gained a concurrent code of 472. Could a bot do a one time edit to add this new code to the |area_code= parameter in Template:Infobox settlement for each settlement article within the region. Thanks and have a good day! DiscoA340 (talk) 22:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340: Hi there! How do you suggest making the list of each settlement article within the region? GoingBatty (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty I was thinking like how other area codes are portrayed in the infobox. Like in the article Wake Forest, North Carolina, it's in an area with two codes, so it's linked as 919, 984. So for the 910/472 area code, a bot could add ", 472" to the same link to make the link in the parameter look like "910, 472". Since it only affected one area code, I think it could be simple for a bot to find all the articles needing updating but I'm not an expert on this. Thank you and have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 18:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340, @GoingBatty, insource:/\| *area_code *= *910/ gives 11 pages. — Qwerfjkl talk 18:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Thank you!

@DiscoA340: Updated these 11 pages manually. GoingBatty (talk) 18:36, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @GoingBatty and @Qwerfjkl, have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 19:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340, @Qwerfjkl: insource:/\| *area_codes? *= *\[\[ *Area code 910/ gives us another 203 articles. GoingBatty (talk) 19:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

I think that is what most articles have, sorry for the miscommunication. DiscoA340 (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340:

Doing... with AWB. GoingBatty (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340:

Done! Any more to update? GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty I think that's it, thank you for your help! DiscoA340 (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Multiple requests

I am request a bot to:

Remove/revert blank responses at Help:Introduction/feedback and the other feedback pages (though i question the usefulness of these pages altogether, looking at the responses).
Automatically comment on WP:RFPP/E when the respective talk page is protected or redirects to a talk page (for example, if someone requests an edit to Wikipedia:Contents WP:Contact us/Licensing, the bot should comment that the talk page is protected).
Comment at AIV, AIV/TB2, UAA, and UAA/BOT when the reported account is globally locked.

137a (talk • edits) 18:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Multiple requests related to noticeboards

taken from archive, got no responses last time

Here are some possible tasks for a bot:

Remove/revert blank responses at Help:Introduction/feedback and the other feedback pages (though i question the usefulness of these pages altogether, looking at the responses).
Automatically comment on WP:RFPP/E when the respective talk page is protected or redirects to a talk page (for example, if someone requests an edit to Wikipedia:Contents WP:Contact us/Licensing, the bot should comment that the talk page is protected).
Comment at AIV, AIV/TB2, UAA, and UAA/BOT when the reported account is globally locked.

137a (talk • edits) 18:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Restart the Missing Redirects Project

The code is avaliable here, though it may not work. The code is mostly written in PHP. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:12, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Grape Cultivar Capitalization

I've noticed that there are widespread problems with compliance to MOS:BIOCAPS for grape cultivars and wine varietals. For instance, the MOS requires "Pinor Noir" to always be capitalized, but it is frequently written "Pinot noir" in Wikipedia. It would be helpful if someone could create a bot to properly capitalize grape varietal names per MOS. This would require taking something like List of grape varieties and checking that the names there don't conflict with non-grape terms. QuintinK (talk) 15:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

WP WikiProject Weather track maps

WP:WPWX is in need of a bot that can rewrite track map images using the new colors that were approved in a recent RfC. The bot would have to be able to utilize the track maker found here. These images are generated using input code that is run through the track maker software. Noah^Talk 19:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I raised issues regarding this task in a previous discussion (see here). I feel that this request is too vague and lacks context, so I'll restate it here for visibility.

Changing the old track maps would be in violation of c:COM:OVERWRITE unless there's prior cross-wiki support from all wikis which use those maps and from Wikimedia Commons to get the bot task approved. The RfC only took place on this wiki, and the local English Wikipedia-only consensus cannot be applied across all other wikis which use these maps. Thus, the only realistic option given existing consensus is to upload local versions of every track map (and subsequently upload a wiki-local version of every newly-uploaded track for the foreseeable future). In such case, over 5,574 new images will need to be uploaded—1,846 of which require secondary verification (to verify accuracy or to resolve missing data), and 592 of which needing reconstruction by other weather editors (due to missing or unavailable data). This doesn't count future track maps, of course. Chlod (say hi!) 02:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Chlod: How about we upload new images to commons and let other wikis choose whether or not they want to switch given that some of the other wikis do follow us? We leave the existing maps as they are. Noah^Talk 02:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hurricane Noah: That would not solve the issue of having to upload two versions to Commons, making the thousands of edits locally to switch to the new versions, and it would be out of the remit of English Wikipedia bot requests. Chlod (say hi!) 02:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

If we get a request on commons for a bot as stated below, we could upload both versions there from here on out and simply change the maps here with a bot once an accessible version has been uploaded to replace the one here. Noah^Talk 02:39, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

It is fine to make derivatives on Commons if the bot gets approved for creation there. That is indeed out of scope here but that is in the realm of both social and technical feasibility.

I don't see an issue with making a couple thousand edits to update maps locally, if the images are actually expected to be preferred here. Either way, the images will be free, and we do not want to host free images here for any of several good reasons. Izno (talk) 02:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

They at least need to be changed at the local level considering the color scheme was approved via RfC. Noah^Talk 02:28, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I put in a request on commons for the images that don't require any additional work or verification prior to an upload. Noah^Talk 02:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hurricane Noah, could you detail the exact changes required for this task? What sorts of replacements should be made with the track maker? Thanks! EpicPupper (talk) 00:42, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the track maker part of this would need to take place on commons (request there is linked in my comment right above yours), however, the new images would have the adjusted color scheme which is shown below. The data is the same data used in the existing track maps (data can be found on each image page; there are databases containing the data) and these new maps would simply be new files. Commons:Category:Tropical cyclone track maps with track data as input code contains all the images that would be able to be redone via bot. The new images would need to placed within that category as well as Commons:Category:Tropical cyclone track maps with the 2023 scale.

Category	Old Scheme	New Scheme
Tropical Depression/Disturbance
Tropical Storm
Category 1
Category 2
Category 3
Category 4
Category 5

The on-wiki portion would involve changing all the existing file names within articles to match the files names of new track maps. Noah^Talk 01:09, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@EpicPupper:

Template:Br list

Can a bot please replace all instances of {{br list}} with {{br entries}}? I'm looking to have this redirect deleted as the target of both redirects, {{br separated entries}}, is designed for use in infoboxes to replace the use of <br /> in a delimited collection of entries; so, therefore, it is not a list template. Much obliged, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Neveselbert: Hello. Technically, I can create a bot task for that, but I think this task needs a wider discussion/conensus. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi usernamekiran, I requested that {{br list}} be moved to {{br entries}} which was reviewed and fulfilled by an admin (UtherSRG), so I think this should be relatively uncontroversial. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Neveselbert: yes, I had already seen that :-) I'm not opposed to replace the entries, but renaming/moving a template and replacing entries in mainspace are different things. If any editor agrees here to replace them, I will do it

also, I think Template:Br list is causing a double redirect. But I'm sleep deprived, and sleepy right now, so I may be getting confused about it (I'm on mobile). —usernamekiran (talk) 21:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like WP:COSMETICBOT. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

yeah, that too. Actually that was the reason why I was hesitant to do it, but I wasn't able to pinpoint the reason. I really should sleep now. Did you see the redirects? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed the 2x redir issue. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

There are two cases here that make it so that sometimes line breaks are applicable rather than an HTML list, which is what I believe you are differentiating on, so WP:CONTEXTBOT is applicable:

The list should really be a {{unbulleted list}}.
The list should really be a {{br separated entries}}, such as in an address.

If there is merit to work of this nature, it's to separate the two uses, but that cannot be done by a bot. AWB could perhaps do it reasonably quickly if the use of the names are skewed toward a certain use.

As for removal of template redirects, sometimes you can get away with it if the uses are few enough in number, but otherwise you may be dragged to WP:RFD, where I have not had general success with requesting deletion on semantic lines recently....

See also a recent discussion I had with @Hike395 at User talk:Izno/Archive 9#A neglected kind of list. Izno (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Or adding the plainlist class to the relevant fields of the infobox and not needing templates like {{unbulleted list}}. Gonnym (talk) 23:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I think it would be great to have a bot go through infobox parameters and convert {{br list}} to {{plainlist}} and {{enum}} to {{hlist}}. It would have to be done per infobox type, however, because there may be some parameters which really are expecting a multiline entry (as opposed to an actual list).

Per Gonnym: I also putting {{plainlist}} or {{hlist}} into the infobox itself, for uniformity. I believe this requires numbered parameters? That has proven to be controversial, because some editors don't like how numbered parameters make TemplateData very long. — hike395 (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

No. See infoboxes like Template:Infobox TV episode e.g. line 24 (which I had to support in Module:Infobox when I moved plainlist to TemplateStyles). Izno (talk) 20:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Accelerated Mobile Pages link eradicator needed

There was a fairly clear consensus in the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 202#Accelerated Mobile Pages links that "amp" links are a bad thing, and should be done away with. Can a bot be written that tests links to insure that a version with the ".amp" or ",amp" or "/amp" component removed will work, and if so, remove that component? BD2412 T 23:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Good idea, but I think it would need a per-site rule list, e.g. amp.example.com/(.*) → example.com/$1, because each site is free to choose its own URL semantics. It's even possible that some sites can't be unpicked (raw page at /raw/87293410.html; AMP at /amp/1934872.html) or don't work without AMP at all. Certes (talk) 12:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Coding... I can probably work on this; AmputatorBot offers an API for conversion of URLs, and a simple insource search returns many applicable results that can be further filtered with some regex. EpicPupper (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

BRFA filed. EpicPupper (talk) 06:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Fix links to Aus honours site

I started making these changes, but there is too many for non-bot edits. In addition, in the citations, it might be worth removing the link to the Internet archive and removing the parameter with the status of a dead link.

Starting point:

basic search with category (there is more without the category filter).
Search pattern: ([^/])http:\/\/(?:www\.)?itsanhonour\.gov\.au\/honours\/\w+\/.+?aus_award_id=([0-9]+)[&\w=]+
Replacement code: $1https://honours.pmc.gov.au/honours/awards/$2

Nux (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Nux, try WP:URLREQ. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

OK, sorry, missed that. Moved. Nux (talk) 20:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Sifting

Hello. Can someone go through Category:All free media and find files only used in userspace but doesn't have {{Userspace file}} or {{Esoteric file}}. Place the results at User:Minorax/upf using * [[:FILENAME.EXT]] --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

I can look into this after 18ish hours from now. Seems doable. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Minorax: I've had a go using Quarry. If it's close to what you need but not quite there, you can edit the query and click the Update link top right. I excluded images which are not used at all: they are debatably "only used in userspace" but probably not what you wanted. Certes (talk) 20:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy link: quarry:query/72229 –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; I should have mentioned that I used Quarry just for testing. The finished SQL query is in User:Minorax/upf, wrapped in a {{Database report}} ready for SDZeroBot to run. Certes (talk) 21:12, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Possible to run the query again? Removing uploads of Jonathunder and those tagged with {{Keep local}}. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I've removed "Keep local" files and files linked only from User:Jonathunder. (Checking who uploaded the images is possible but might slow the query dramatically.) I'm afraid it didn't eliminate much. Certes (talk) 14:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. :) --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Stub assessments with ORES

Hello, magic makers:

I would like a bot that assesses/rates articles as being stubs. This could be a one-time, large run, or perhaps after it's happened once, you'd like to do a smaller clean-up run once every 4–12 months. See more information and ➤links to potentially helpful code at User talk:The Earwig#WPMED.

Wikipedia:Content assessment#Statistics says that we have more than 420,000 articles that are tagged as being with the scope of one or more WikiProjects but don't have any quality assessment. It's likely that 50–60% of these are obvious stubs. The mw:ORES ratings for stubs are very reliable (some false negatives – which wouldn't be touched under this proposal – but no false positives). If we could get a bot to mark already tagged but unassessed articles as |class=Stub, this could save editors thousands of hours. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:06, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea. I have a user script that applies stub templates, and my experience with that is that some Wikipedians think stubs should only be for very tiny articles, and will revert you if you stub something borderline. I also think that if an article talk page is set to |class=stub, there's an expectation that a very specific stub template (e.g. {{Primate-stub}}, {{US-politician-stub}}, {{Tennis-stub}}, etc.) be added to the main article. Overcoming these two issues, and getting the necessary consensus, could be challenging.

Notified: Wikipedia talk:Stub. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Stub gives multiple rules of thumb, including ≤10 sentences, ~250 words, and ≤1,500 characters. Any of these is generally considered valid. ORES is more conservative than all of these. It regularly rates 8-sentence stubs and 200-word articles as being Start-class. However, that's okay, because I propose using it only for tagging things it believes are Stubs.

I have never seen any expectation that assessing an article for a WikiProject means you have to edit the article at all, even to add any sort of stub template. I've never received any similar complaint, and I've manually assessed more than 10,000 articles over the years. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing, I don't see any code at that discussion. Also, I would suggest getting clearer consensus for this first. — Qwerfjkl talk 07:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

In the link to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Earwig&oldid=760282026#Could_your_bot_tag_some_articles_for_me.3F. The code is in the collapsed box. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:41, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@The Earwig: We are already doing this at WP:MILHIST for all articles tagged as belonging to the project. Articles without an assessment are checked by the MilHistBot and rated Stub, Start, C or B using our five-point assessment system + ORES. Those rated B are sent for human re-checking. We also ran the Bot against all the project's articles marked as stubs, and reassessed them. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: I am willing to run the Bot against articles belonging to other projects on request. I can tell you that the Bot run did save our project a lot of work. New MilHist articles arrive at a rate of about 100 per day; most are stubs or starts but about 2% are rated B class. Every month the coordinators check them from a list submitted by the Bot on the coordinators' talk page. Nobody cares much about the articles with the lower ratings. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Might be worth waiting until project-individual class assessments are used. — Qwerfjkl talk 19:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

I'd like this done for all WikiProjects, not just one at a time and only for the groups that are big enough and organized enough to make a request. There have never been any WikiProjects that object to have obvious stubs rated as being stubs instead of not being rated by anyone.

As I have said before, once you get past Stub-class, things get complicated. Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways has a very unusual definition of the minimum for Start-class, and things that might be C-class by other group's standards could still linger as stubs for them. But we don't need to worry about those complications if we assess only obvious stubs. If we assess only obvious stubs, then everyone will agree that their group's ratings have been correctly applied in the instances that we're applying them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:47, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense, but you'd probably still need to get a wider consensus somewhere. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Galobtter, whose consent are you interested in? We had bots rating articles ~15 years ago, so it's a traditional bot activity. Bot-assisted assessment predates the 2008 creation of Template:WPBannerMeta, and the |auto= parameter to mark assessments made by bots was in the original design of that template. I don't mind seeking the approval of anyone you want, but I'm not sure whom you think might object, and getting approval from the "wrong" people won't forestall any problems that you foresee. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:52, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing I don't have any particular objections; if ORES is as conservative in tagging stubs as you mention, there probably won't be any issues. (I was thinking some sort of discussion at WP:VPR just to make sure there are no objections, although yeah I guess you are right that unless you message every WikiProject someone might always object.) Galobtter (pingó mió) 03:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Unassessed articles contains articles that have been tagged with a project but have not been assessed. I'm not sure how you find articles that don't have talk pages yet. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

If you want to do that, then Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Articles without Wikiprojects has a script. But I don't think that is a good step to take right now. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

So you are only considering articles already tagged with a project but not yet given a class, and then only classing the ones ORES considers to be stubs? There are only about 2,000 articles currently in Category:Unassessed articles. I would estimate that about 240 of them would be stubs, based on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment#Statistics, where 12% of our articles are stubs. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:41, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Statistics says there are 407K unassessed articles right now. I assume (but I could be wrong) that it can't see anything that isn't tagged by some project. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

A Massviews Analysis gives 20,000 articles in Category:Unassessed articles. So I will start with them as a pilot. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Ping me if you want me to review the results. I'm willing to help. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Fix date format errors in templates and use of non-latin numbers in template parameters

I have beem advised to report when i requested to replace templates or values if they contain non english numerals. I am using wpcleaner to fix checkwiki errors. To my surprise, many kannada wikipedia content creators diligently added cs1/2 templates for references. With Cite button you can create references, but there is a catch. You need to manually enter all parameters. Alas, very few read them. All kind of syntax errors are unintentionally created. The issue is with "cite button" of visual editor and lack of reftoolbar on source editing. Interface admin responded positively for my demand of upgrade of them. Future date format errors might disappear. Now, the use of kannada numerals can be discouraged. Now, what happens to old errors. I request to create a bot for all indo-aryan and dravidian language wikipedias or wikis which use basic cite button which automatically [1] fixes date format either by replacing whole template data or comment it out. [2] comment out if non latin digits are used in templates. These are the 2 primary issues found by me on kannada wikipedia. రుద్రుడు (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not ve and reftoolbar get citation support, the current version of the kn:ಮಾಡ್ಯೂಲ್:Citation/CS1/Configuration is where local kn.wiki editors can adapt the cs1|2 suite to suit their language. MediaWiki knows most month names for the various wikis so editors at kn.wiki can set local_date_names_from_mediawiki to true (already done at line 575). What has not been done at kn.wiki is local digit definition. That is accomplished by replacing the indexes in the ['local_digits'] table (line 598) with the appropriate Kannada digits (as strings). Try that before committing to a bot.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk so most of the issue is resolved. Thank you for pointers. Hello @~aanzx can you please look into this. రుద్రుడు (talk) 16:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

I previously asked questions about same issue

Is Editor Anoop Rao the same as Editor ~aanzx? I answered the two posts linked above but Editor Anoop Rao (the original poster in those two discussions) failed to participate so I expect that nothing was ever done to update the live modules from the sandboxen that I tweaked.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

It was my old account, I think i was not an admin at that time, sobi couldn't edit some templates that were protected , or forgot all this time. ~aanzx ^✉_© 02:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia infobox backlog - articles needing infoboxes

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} I'm wondering if there's a possibility to create list(s) of articles tagged with "infobox needed" while including "{{Infobox..." in the article? So the unnecessary tags can be removed. Myself mostly interested in 1. Football 2. Sports 3. Bios. -Pelmeen10 (talk) 22:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10, all of this can be done with the search (including by topic). I don't have time to do this right now, I'll try later. — Qwerfjkl talk 22:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I could submit a BRFA to do this with AWB if you like. Is that OK with you? GoingBatty (talk) 03:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, go ahead. — Qwerfjkl talk 08:31, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10 & @Qwerfjkl:

BRFA filed. GoingBatty (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, namely this page: “Category:School articles without infoboxes” with almost 5,000 entries needs review. Perhaps a bot that can check the main article page for an infobox, and if so, make the necessary adjustments to the talk page. I undid two manually and a bot master can check my contributions for an example. Twillisjr (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I should start calling myself "bot master". — Qwerfjkl talk 16:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

If you write bots using computer programming, and they function, I see no problem referring to you as a botmaster. Twillisjr (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

@Twillisjr, like this?

— Qwerfjkl talk 19:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

@Twillisjr: I have asked for the Bot Approval Group to review my bot request. GoingBatty (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10 and Twillisjr::

Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 02:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10 and Twillisjr::

Done! I will run the bot task periodically. GoingBatty (talk) 13:20, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

4,373 entries on the Category

School articles without infoboxes page, did anything change?

Twillisjr (talk) 16:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Twillisjr: Looks like the bot updated 314 school article talk pages from this edit to Talk:Ahantaman Girls Senior High School to this edit to Talk:Zhongshan High School of Northeast.

If you find any talk pages where the bot should have made an update but did not, please let me know.

I just added Category:School articles without infoboxes to Category:Wikipedia infobox backlog for future runs of the bot. GoingBatty (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

@Twillisjr: I ran the bot again just for Category:School articles without infoboxes and updated two more pages. GoingBatty (talk) 14:16, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

GoingBatty Looks good! Thanks for your efforts! Twillisjr (talk) 14:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Remove hyphens from "antisemitism" and "antisemite"

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Wikipedia's Antisemitism article includes a reference to the correct (non-hyphenated) spelling of the word (footnote [a]), but other articles use the non-standard hyphen (e.g., this one).

This is not simply a cosmetic or even grammatical change, it has to do with the actual meaning of the term (see here and here).

In addition to the most widely used and adopted definition of antisemitism, from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), cited in the Wikipedia article, here are some other references to the importance of NO hyphen in the term, from experts and leaders in the field:

ADL
Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt, now the U.S. State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism
The Associated Press

Nevet Basker (talk) 20:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Special:Search/insource:"anti-semitism" and Special:Search/insource:"anti-semite". — Qwerfjkl talk 20:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Is this really a suitable task for a bot? It's likely an easier task for human eyes (like through WP:AWB), as there are cases like "confirmed anti-Semite" in the Adolf Hitler article, which if a direct quote shouldn't be changed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:16, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski, yes, those cases might need {{sic}} or {{not a typo}} instead. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

But "anti-semitism" is not a typo or an error; those templates are for marking actual typos or words that could be mistaken for errors. The lead of the article says also spelled anti-semitism or anti-Semitism. We generally do not do site-wide spelling enforcement on valid word variants unless there is an English Wikipedia guideline saying how a word with multiple variants should be spelled. This would typically be set via a tedious and energy-wasting RFC. Consistency within articles and topic areas is fine, but nobody should go around changing one variant to another. The OP should drop this particular stick. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

This is a WP:CONTEXTBOT and would not be accepted at BRFA. Izno (talk) 21:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. GoingBatty (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Removal of Unused Fields in Templates

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Hello Wikipedians,

I have seen a lot of unused fields in various templates from all over Wikipedia. Can there be a bot to remove the unused fields in templates?

This is but a suggestion and I am not sure whether it is necessary or not. But anyway, thank you. I'm Here to Help You (talk) 08:06, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

This is kind of a WP:PERENNIAL request. No, this will not be accepted. Izno (talk) 08:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Apart from unused params normally being harmless which makes this a WP:COSMETICBOT situation, there are some templates where a parameter behaves differently when present but blank compared to when it is completely absent, and so the presence of a blank parameter may be intentional. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:47, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Unused, no. Deprecated or invalid parameters, yes. However, those are two completely different things. Primefac (talk) 14:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. GoingBatty (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Bot for MOS:CAPTIONS

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Good afternoon. Is it possible to create a bot for MOS:CAPTIONS? I have corrected many pages by applying this rule, but with almost 7 million pages it's literally impossible to do them all, so I make this proposal. JackkBrown (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@JackkBrown: Hi there! Which portion(s) of MOS:CAPTIONS would be appropriate for a bot? Removing a caption in a biography article's infobox if it is the same as the article title? GoingBatty (talk) 14:48, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: no, if it's possible, the removal of the full stop at the end of the caption if the sentence within the caption in question is not complete, and the addition of the full stop at the end of the caption if the sentence within the caption in question is a complete sentence; I don't know whether this difference can be taught to a bot. JackkBrown (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Fixing WP:CAPFRAG in this way seems too much like a WP:CONTEXTBOT to be feasible to me. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@JackkBrown: Hi. Like Mr. Lee said, it will be a context bot. But that part comes after the bot is created. Like you said, creating/teaching the bot what a meaningful sentence is would be a hassle. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Lee. This sounds like a WP:CONTEXTBOT. It is unlikely we could teach a bot to do this with a good accuracy rate, so this probably isn't a good bot task. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. GoingBatty (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Template:USRD topic adjustment

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} I recently redid the {{USRD}} banner and now there are about 4000 pages (mostly redirects) tagged that have an invalid state. I've done quite a few with JWB, but it's tedious.

\|state=(NY|FL)-CRTF becomes |state=$1|type=CR

Some pages may already have the |type=CR, but I don't suspect it will be many. –Fredddie ™ 01:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Fredddie:

BRFA filed. GoingBatty (talk) 05:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Fredddie: Bot trial complete - awaiting approval. GoingBatty (talk) 19:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Fredddie:

Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@Fredddie

Done! If you see any that I've missed, please let me know. GoingBatty (talk) 12:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I really appreciate it. –Fredddie ™ 12:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Bot for unpiping unnecessary piped links

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Hi all,

Following 1234qwer1234qwer4 suggestion, I'd like to request a bot for unpiping unnecessarily piped links (i.e.: [[xyz|xyz]]). As per WP:NOPIPE, these pipes, besides unnecessary, can create problems, because it's very easy to edit the text without editing the link. The bot command should be conservative, i.e., unpipe only exact matches, because there are a few cases where what looks like unnecessary piping is actually useful.

Thanks in advance. Cheers. Rkieferbaum (talk) 18:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@Rkieferbaum: While it would be possible to do, it could be challenging to convince the Bot Approvals Group that this would not run afoul of WP:COSMETICBOT. GoingBatty (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Not quite what you asked for, but WPCleaner can do this in a semi-automated way (example) if someone points it at the right pages. Certes (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:AWB also does this as part of standard fixes. Izno (talk) 19:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@Izno and Certes: I've been using both for a while, but 1234qwer1234qwer4 argues, with a good point, that there's no need to flood recent changes with that (I'm paraphrasing). @GoingBatty: though technically it is "cosmetic" in that it doesn't change the end product of the page, it prevents inadvertent changes in text with no change in link when changing the link would be warrant. So it enhances usability, particularly for newer users. Rkieferbaum (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Recent changes are a flood with or without effort on the part of some individual using AWB. We also have negative filter for tags (i.e. NOT AWB or NOT specific filter hit) now so someone actually interested in attempting to interpret the flood can just remove all AWB editors from it. I also agree this is fundamentally cosmetic (unfortunately), so you would need to demonstrate consensus for it as a bot task. Izno (talk) 19:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@Rkieferbaum: I could file a BRFA for this, if you point me to a discussion where there is consensus for this to be done as a bot task. GoingBatty (talk) 21:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I make such changes in AWB, but only when I'm changing the page for another reason. Typically I'll fix a typo like [[chief|cheif]], giving an intermediate result of [[chief|chief]] which never reaches the servers, then tidy the resulting link to [[chief]] before saving. As a whole, that edit isn't cosmetic, since it affects the displayed text. Certes (talk) 23:30, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Not sure if this qualifies? Rkieferbaum (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@Rkieferbaum: Thanks for providing a link to that conversation. I look forward to reading the responses from others. GoingBatty (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Just for those interested, CWC#64 indicates there are ~7k pages with this issue. I don't know if that affects any of the above discussion. Primefac (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Is it really an "issue"? The links are not in canonical form, we'd not introduce them deliberately and AWB is probably right to remove them when it's being pointed at the page to make other edits, but they're arguably similar to NOTBROKEN. Certes (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

According to WCW it's an "error" so choose your terminology; my statement was made to provide more information, not necessarily as a vote in one direction or the other. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

@Certes: though it isn't an issue per se, it makes an error like [[1984|1985]] much, much easier to happen (and this one is sometimes really hard to find). That's why I've been fixing it. Rkieferbaum (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I have put the CW list at the top of my list for common comma-spacing fixes (which, though minor, are not cosmetic since they are visible to the reader); I would expect this would capture a percentage of them. BD2412 T 18:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

this is totally cosmetic thing. It is not an error, not even an issue (on technical levels). The terminology at CCW should be updated accordingly. Unlike self redirect, this is not confusing for inexperienced editors either. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:59, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there is a whole category of typo with a piped link where either the linked article or (more usually) the displayed text is wrong. I think it's due to a tool such as Visual Editor presenting the editor with possible links and (quite reasonably) allowing them to pick one inconsistent with the manually entered display text. Fixing those is clearly more than cosmetic, whichever half was wrong. In general, it's not something WPCleaner or any other tool can distinguish from a correct and helpful piped link. Special cases could be detected, such as where the displayed text is a {{R from misspelling}} leading to the linked article. Even then, I don't think fixing them is a bot job, as we sometimes deliberately misspell words in direct quotations whilst linking to what the quoted party clearly meant. Certes (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. GoingBatty (talk) 19:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Request for a bot to clear out Category:Track listings that use the collapsed parameter

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Hello. I was wondering if there was a bot that could clear out Category:Track listings that use the collapsed parameter. Per Template:Track listing, there was agreement to remove the |collapsed= parameter in 2014. There's currently over 13,000 usages. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Coding... I will ask for more details for BRFA in 7-8 ish hours from now. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
BRFA filed —usernamekiran (talk) 04:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Just for future reference, I have a bot that is approved for this sort of task. Primefac (talk) 13:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
@Primefac: I remembered that as soon as EpicPupper asked for the source code. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Doing... —usernamekiran (talk) 07:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Y Done @MrLinkinPark333: —usernamekiran (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Awesome! Thank you for working on it :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

A generalized bot of KolbertBot or Bender The Bot

I would like to have a bot that does the following: 1. "http://www." or "https://" turn into "https://www." or "https://" for all URLs in every pages. 2. "https://" is the most favourable URL outcome, second would be "https://www." or "https://", so that "http://www." at last. 161.81.115.230 (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

161.81.115.230, not all sites are HTTPS. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:54, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Moving to WP:URLREQ.

161.81.115.230 (talk) 11:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Moved.

161.81.115.230 (talk) 11:45, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Can we have an AIV feed a bot posts on IRC?

I used to have one but then the toolserver changed and somehow an account isn't easy to come by, now... (asked elsewhere before, maybe here will be more relevant...) ~Lofty abyss 05:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lofty abyss, do you have the code for it? — Qwerfjkl talk 08:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, I don't quite remember which specifically I used years ago, but on searching there seems to be several possibilities: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:IRC_RC_Bot https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:MediaWiki-Recent_Changes-IRCBot https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/MediaWiki_Administrator%27s_Handbook/Countervandalism_IRC_Bots

It's also, generally, what the cvn bots do already there, except this would need to be a more specific page that is watched. ~Lofty abyss 18:28, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Doing... I can take a stab at this. EpicPupper (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Any luck? ~Lofty abyss 16:41, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

@Lofty abyss and EpicPupper: I am not sure what exactly is the task for bot, could you please clarify on that? Maybe I can create a bot for it. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran this task would be to post revisions to the WP:AIV page on an IRC channel (likely one of the cvn ones). I currently am about 80% done on it! EpicPupper (talk) 15:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

yay! —usernamekiran (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Bot to fix order of text and citations in tables

There are tons of instances like Zu Feng#Film (last column, for the year 2008) where someone has put a citation in a cell in the table directly before rather than after the cited text (usually with no space after the citation). In the cited article, this is done correctly in later cells in the same column. These should be found and holisitically reversed, and I think this is a job for a bot. I am specifically looking at instances where the reference is the first piece of content of the cell itself, so they should be easy to find. BD2412 T 14:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@BD2412: I think I can create a code for the changes you described above. But I don't know how to setup a job which would edit in real time (like MusikBOT at PERM, or DumbBOT removing protection templates from unprotected pages). All of my tasks so far run at predefined intervals through CronJobs from toolforge. I will have to look into that. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not looking for a repeating task, just a one-time sweep to address years of this issue building up. If a few protected pages are skipped, so be it. BD2412 T 15:08, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran, I presume you would set up a continuous job that monitors the recent changes feed. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@BD2412: I did a database search for (\|\| *)(\<ref.*?\<\/ref\>) *(\w+)(\n\|-) and found 36 examples. GoingBatty (talk) 15:25, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I feel like I have seen more than that myself just while searching recent ref tag errors, but if there's a short list I ca go through it manually. BD2412 T 15:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@BD2412: Here's the list:

Extended content

Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. BD2412 T 19:16, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Minor bug in Lowercase sigmabot III

This is likely not the right place, but I have no idea where else to report it since the bot operator hasn't edited in a year.

I posted a short bug description on Jayron32's talk page here. To summarize: multiple discussions were closed with a single {{hat}}, and sigmabot misplaced the hat when archiving. This is a minor corner case, not worth an "emergency stop", but worth fixing if possible.

If it can't be fixed, we might want to make note of it in Template:Hidden archive top/doc to recommend not hatting multiple discussions at once? DFlhb (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

This will occur for any construct (HTML, wikitext, template) that is opened in one section and closed in another. It is not exclusive to T:Hat. Archiving scripts will also exhibit this behavior. The solution is: don't do that. Documenting it at T:Hat is accordingly not appropriate as it's a behavior of the bot. Izno (talk) 07:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Thought about it some more and I agree on both points. DFlhb (talk) 16:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Fort Bragg renaming

As of today, Fort Bragg has been renamed to Fort Liberty. There seems to be a lot of pages with the old name in them, which could mean some pages would be missed if they were all updated manually. If someone could use AWB or a bot to update the name on these pages, I would greatly appreciative it. Thank you for your time and have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 01:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Is it that easy? Often old names for institutions are kept in later sources, when used in the context of the old time period, with maybe with the new name in parenthesis.-- GreenC 03:56, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

@DiscoA340:

Not a good task for a bot. See the WP:CONTEXTBOT issue GreenC mentioned. GoingBatty (talk) 18:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Does seem a good one for WP:AWBREQ. Izno (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Izno Thanks for pointing me to the right request location. DiscoA340 (talk) 23:35, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Bot to notify users when they add CS1 errors

Hi everyone! The page Help:CS1 errors#Most common errors shows a few categories that are quite large. I am requesting a bot operator to write a bot that delivers user talk page messages similar to JaGa's DPL bot whenever a registered editor adds an article to one of the most common CS1 error categories. The bot could use the watchlist to see which user added which article to which category, and then add a new section on the user's talk page detailing what the error means and how to fix it, with text similar to what is posted at Help:CS1 errors. Per the conversation at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 87#Bot to notify users when they add CS1 errors, ReferenceBot used to do this many years ago. Legoktm has archived the code, and A930913 has declared all their code on Labs as CC-BY-SA. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, looks like feedwatchlist is the API module needed, as there doesn't seem to be a relatedchahnges one. — Qwerfjkl talk 12:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, I've been looking at doing this with wikitech:Event Platform/EventStreams; I'll see if I have any luck. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm wary about this... The citation templates are not always trivial to use - as seen in the vast amount of documentation that comes with them. If a lot of errors are being made by, say, new users, I'd be wary about bots bugging them to fix minutae that will require them to scour documentation and/or ping people for help, vs the patrollers just fixing the errors as probably currently happens. At worst it deters editing, at best it takes up more time on the part of potentially multiple editors vs what happens presently. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:31, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@ProcrastinatingReader, it wouldn't be too hard to include how to fix the problem. — Qwerfjkl talk 12:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@ProcrastinatingReader: There are many categories of CS1 errors that patrollers such as myself can keep up with, and I agree that sending notification for those is not worthwhile. However, for those categories with 24k-54k pages, something else needs to be done. I hope that posting on user talk pages - with the appropriate portion of the documentation - will teach people what they did incorrectly and encourage them to fix their own mistakes. GoingBatty (talk) 17:23, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I think that ReferenceBot did a pretty good job of notifying people in a reasonable way. Editors who understood the message were often grateful for the notice, just as I am when I receive a message that I have inadvertently added a disambiguation link to an article. Many of those editors were able to go back and fix their mistakes. Editors who didn't understand the message were likely to just leave it alone or never see it, which is fine; we can't expect everyone to understand all of this technical stuff perfectly.

Of note: you can see by the postings at User talk:A930913 that some editors wanted to ask questions about the notifications that they received, so there will need to be a few editors willing to field those editors' questions or fix the errors that those editors ask about. And of course there was often some gibberish posted there as well, so the bot operator and page watchers will need to be able to tolerate that level of noise. Huon and I found that talk page a useful place to spend some time, FWIW. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah. Yeah, I guess if it's done reasonably, including a quote of the relevant documentation to help fix the problem without actually needing to read the docs, then it could work. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Thanks for the additional background. I would be happy to be a bot talk page watcher. GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, can you provide some templated messages for each of the categories? — Qwerfjkl talk 17:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Could you please provide an example of a "templated message"? If so, I could then copy text from the appropriate sections of Help:CS1 errors and adapt them for "templated messages". Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, I'm planning on the bot posting messages similarly to ReferenceBot. I just need a default message for each category, explaining how to fix the problem. Something paraphrased from Help:CS1 errors would be great. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

E.g. for the no title given error (bare URL): "Please fix this by adding a descriptive title to |title=." — Qwerfjkl talk 20:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: By copying and tweaking the pages for ReferenceBot and User:A930913, I created the following pages (which will need to be tested):

However, I think I'm still missing the section called by User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform/middle where the details of each error come from and the suggestions to fix the text. Maybe A930913 can provide a suggestion. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:10, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, these look great! For /middle, I can pass on the error type (i.e. category), and a {{#switch}} statement could provide some guidance.
To test this out, I'll have the bot run and just add the messages to a sandbox instead of the user talk page. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:52, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, I've made a testing page at User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/CS1 errors. Note that the bot will deliver one message per edit (and page), but that edit may introduce multiple errors. — Qwerfjkl talk 18:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm coming late to this thread, and it's been a heck of a long time since I helped set up ReferenceBot, but this discussion and this discussion may possibly be useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────────┘
@Jonesey95, I'd prefer to have the messages on enwiki, so it's easier to make any modifications necessary (some level of page protection is probably necessary). — Qwerfjkl talk 18:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I can see the tweaks you made to the files and the improving results on User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/CS1 errors. Is it possible to add more info in the user talk message to guide users on how to fix the errors? It looks like the bot posts the user talk message about a minute after the error is made. Could the time be increased (maybe 15 minutes) to allow the user time to notice and fix the error on their own? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, it would be better if the messages were part of the template. I was thinking that the bot can pass in the category as a parameter, and the template uses a {{#switch:}} statement to prove a corresponding help message.
I'll see what I can do about waiting after the edit. — Qwerfjkl talk 22:19, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The bot should now wait around 15 minutes, and will only post the message if the page is still in an error category. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:08, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, so could you look at adding some helpful messages to User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform/middle? The bot will pass in a {{{cat}}} parameter, which a switch statement can use to provide the info. I'll probably use |cat=Category:CS1 errors: bare URLCategory:CS1 errors: missing title when both are present, as those don't need separate error messages. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Yes, but I'm not sure about the format. Could you please change "Category:Example" to "Category:Example1" and add "Text1", and then add Example2/Text2, Example3/Text3, and Example4/Text4? I'll then replace that with the real category names and helpful text. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty,

BRFA filed. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:59, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, I think I've got this running. Please ping me if the bot doesn't make any talk page posts within the next day. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:10, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Seems to be working, though for some reason it didn't give appropriate guidance on fixing the error. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Thanks! Marking this as

Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: Marking this as

Done since noticed are being posted as expected. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC)