Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 24

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard. The result of the discussion was Request Expired.

Qwerfjkl (bot) 24

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

Operator: Qwerfjkl (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 20:04, Wednesday, October 4, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Pywikibot

Function overview: Resolve conflicting class values where it is an article/non-article conflict

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Template talk:WikiProject banner shell#Moving ahead with project-independent quality ratings

Edit period(s): one time run, with more if necessary

Estimated number of pages affected: <1000

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: For the purposes of this, an article is anything in mainspace that's not a redirect or dab page. The bot will run on Category:Articles with conflicting quality ratings. If the page is not an article page, the bot will remove any classes with values 'fa', 'a', 'ga', 'b', 'c', 'start', 'stub', 'fl', 'list' If the page is an article it will remove any classes with values 'file', 'image', 'img', 'draft', 'category', 'cat', 'categ', 'disambig', 'diamb', 'disambiguation', 'dab', 'redirect', 'redir', 'red', 'template', 'temp', 'templ', 'tpl', 'project'

Here's what the edits would look like: Special:Diff/1178602607, Special:Diff/1178602456.

Discussion

@Qwerfjkl: first diff is not working — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Just to confirm this task will be useful, and is very similar to the already approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 21 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

{{BAG assistance needed}} — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:39, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. Looks pretty straightforward. I'd suggest setting this up as a monthly cron rather than just a one-time run. – SD0001 (talk) 03:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm away from my computer right now so I'll do this in a day or two. — Qwerfjkltalk 08:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@SD0001, Trial complete. See these edits. There were a few bugs in how the bot recognised WikiProjects, so I fixed the code and ran a few extra edits. (The earlier edits may miss out a few wikiprojects in their edits because of this.) — Qwerfjkltalk 18:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

All the edits I checked were on redirects, and the task for this is already approved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, that's because of the error I was talking about. The previous task missed these pages because of the bug in the code, and it seems the majority of the conflicting class errors are due to redirects. The scope of this task also covers redirects. If necessary, though, I can redo this and skip redirects? — Qwerfjkltalk 08:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

So we don't actually need additional approval to run this task because it is already covered by task 21? In which case, please run the task! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, no, rather this task covers the scope of task 21 and more cases. — Qwerfjkltalk 15:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

All the edits I checked were covered by task 21, so why not run those and then we can see how many are left? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, sorry, what do you mean by run those? — Qwerfjkltalk 16:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The ones covered by task 21, i.e. the redirects — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, sure, that was my plan. I've started the code running, but it has to make quite a few API calls to ensure it matches all the redirects. It should start editing in about half an hour. — Qwerfjkltalk 16:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, ah, I see the problem. Task 21 only covers cases where the class=redirect; this covers cases where the class calue is anything. — Qwerfjkltalk 16:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I think we already confirmed that several lines above? In any case I will leave you to work on these as soon as convenient. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────────┘
@MSGJ, sorry, I'm not sure I quite understand. The edits from the trial were not in scope of task 21 because it affected redirects where the class parameter value wasn't redirect. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

As I have said multiple times, I think the edits in the trial are exactly in scope with task 21. Of course the class value wasn't "redirect", otherwise there would be no conflict. I feel we are going round in circles here, so I will leave this discussion and allow you to work on these as soon as convenient. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, sorry about that, I think I misunderstood what task 21 was. Anyway, I've run the task, it fixed around 800 pages. — Qwerfjkltalk 15:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@SD0001, in light of the above conversation I've redone the trial on non-redirects (see these edits). I doubt there will be very many pages left (i.e. >500) because the bot made it up to F in the category. — Qwerfjkltalk 19:42, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Just to note, the bot did not remove the start-class in this edit — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:25, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

You missed "album" in this edit — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

@MSGJ, okay, I've looked at these. The first one is because it's from an old version of the code (works now). The second problem was because the template matching was case sensitive; I've fixed it now. — Qwerfjkltalk 09:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Just to note that this has taken a long time to get approved and probably is not needed anymore. We have changed the logic so it is impossible to rate a non-article with an article quality rating. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

MSGJ, I might as well run it for minor cleanup. Unless you think it would be cosmetic now? — Qwerfjkltalk 10:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

It was mentioned to me that Cewbot 12 is basically running the same task, but with extra features. Do you see any reason that both tasks should be running concurrently? Primefac (talk) 14:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that's task 26 not 24. This task is not actually needed anymore, as noted above. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Whoops. Shifted there. Primefac (talk) 18:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Request Expired. Task no longer needed. Primefac (talk) 18:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard.