Wikipedia:Bot requests: Difference between revisions
→Future of outlines: touch up |
→File substitution: new section |
||
Line 1,295: | Line 1,295: | ||
I look forward to your observations, concerns, ideas, and advice. ''[[User talk:The Transhumanist|The Transhumanist]]'' 08:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC) |
I look forward to your observations, concerns, ideas, and advice. ''[[User talk:The Transhumanist|The Transhumanist]]'' 08:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC) |
||
== File substitution == |
|||
Please could someone substitutes the wrong [[:File:Coccarda Italia.svg]] with the correct [[:File:Coccarda Coppa Italia.svg]]. See [https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bot/Richieste#Coccarda_Coppa_Italia here]. Thanks --<small>[[User:Archenzo|Arch]]</small>[[User_talk:Archenzo|Enzo]] 09:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:04, 26 October 2017
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared. |
Commonly Requested Bots |
This is a page for requesting tasks to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to put ideas for uncontroversial bot tasks, to get early feedback on ideas for bot tasks (controversial or not), and to seek bot operators for bot tasks. Consensus-building discussions requiring large community input (such as request for comments) should normally be held at WP:VPPROP or other relevant pages (such as a WikiProject's talk page).
You can check the "Commonly Requested Bots" box above to see if a suitable bot already exists for the task you have in mind. If you have a question about a particular bot, contact the bot operator directly via their talk page or the bot's talk page. If a bot is acting improperly, follow the guidance outlined in WP:BOTISSUE. For broader issues and general discussion about bots, see the bot noticeboard.
Before making a request, please see the list of frequently denied bots, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. If you are requesting that a template (such as a WikiProject banner) is added to all pages in a particular category, please be careful to check the category tree for any unwanted subcategories. It is best to give a complete list of categories that should be worked through individually, rather than one category to be analyzed recursively (see example difference).
- Alternatives to bot requests
- WP:AWBREQ, for simple tasks that involve a handful of articles and/or only needs to be done once (e.g. adding a category to a few articles).
- WP:URLREQ, for tasks involving changing or updating URLs to prevent link rot (specialized bots deal with this).
- WP:USURPREQ, for reporting a domain be usurped eg.
|url-status=usurped
- WP:SQLREQ, for tasks which might be solved with an SQL query (e.g. compiling a list of articles according to certain criteria).
- WP:TEMPREQ, to request a new template written in wiki code or Lua.
- WP:SCRIPTREQ, to request a new user script. Many useful scripts already exist, see Wikipedia:User scripts/List.
- WP:CITEBOTREQ, to request a new feature for WP:Citation bot, a user-initiated bot that fixes citations.
Note to bot operators: The {{BOTREQ}} template can be used to give common responses, and make it easier to keep track of the task's current status. If you complete a request, note that you did with {{BOTREQ|done}}
, and archive the request after a few days (WP:1CA is useful here).
Legend |
---|
|
|
|
|
|
Manual settings |
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first. |
Bot-related archives |
---|
Convert protocol relative URLs to http/https
All protocol relative links on Wikipedia should be converted to either http or https. As of June 2015, Wikipedia is 100% HTTPS only and because protocol relative links are relative to where they are hosted it will always render as HTTPS. This means any underlying website that doesn't support HTTPS will break. For example:
- [1] (//americanbilliardclub.com/about/history/)
..the http version of this link works. The article American rotation shows it in action, the first three footnotes are broken because they use a protocol relative link to a HTTP only website. But Wikipedia is rendering the link as HTTPS.
More info at WP:PRURL and Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Protocol_relative_URLs. It's probably 10s of thousands of links broken. -- GreenC 21:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- This should only be done if the existing link is proven to be broken, and where forcing it to http: conclusively fixes it. Otherwise, if the link is not dead under either protocol, it is WP:COSMETICBOT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well let's ask, what happens if you keep them? It creates a point of failure. If the remote site stops supporting HTTPS then the link immediately breaks. There is no guarantee a bot will return years later and recheck. WP:COSMETICBOT is fine but it shouldn't prevent from removing a protocol that causes indefinite maintenance problems and MediaWiki no longer really supports. By removing it also discourages editors from further usage, which is good. -- GreenC 22:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- That reasoning makes no sense. If a bot converts the link to https and the remote site stops supporting HTTPS, then the link immediately breaks then too. Anomie⚔ 00:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Different reasoning. IABot forces HTTPS on all PR URLs since Wikipedia does too, when it analyzes the URL. It's erroneously seeing some URLs as dead as a consequence since they don't support SSL. The proposal is to convert all non-functioning PR URLs to HTTP when HTTPS doesn't work.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 02:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Cyberpower678: The proposal, as specified above by Green Cardamom (talk · contribs) is not to convert all non-functioning PR URLs to HTTP when HTTPS doesn't work, but to convert all PR URLs to either http or https. No exceptions were given, not even those that are presently functioning. This seems to be on the grounds that some are broken. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Do I want to get rid of PR URLs? I personally think we should because they confuse editors, confuse other bots, ugly and non-standard etc they're an unnecessary complication. If we don't want to get rid of them (all), we still need to the fix broken HTTP links either way. -- GreenC 14:35, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Cyberpower678: The proposal, as specified above by Green Cardamom (talk · contribs) is not to convert all non-functioning PR URLs to HTTP when HTTPS doesn't work, but to convert all PR URLs to either http or https. No exceptions were given, not even those that are presently functioning. This seems to be on the grounds that some are broken. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Different reasoning. IABot forces HTTPS on all PR URLs since Wikipedia does too, when it analyzes the URL. It's erroneously seeing some URLs as dead as a consequence since they don't support SSL. The proposal is to convert all non-functioning PR URLs to HTTP when HTTPS doesn't work.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 02:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- That reasoning makes no sense. If a bot converts the link to https and the remote site stops supporting HTTPS, then the link immediately breaks then too. Anomie⚔ 00:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well let's ask, what happens if you keep them? It creates a point of failure. If the remote site stops supporting HTTPS then the link immediately breaks. There is no guarantee a bot will return years later and recheck. WP:COSMETICBOT is fine but it shouldn't prevent from removing a protocol that causes indefinite maintenance problems and MediaWiki no longer really supports. By removing it also discourages editors from further usage, which is good. -- GreenC 22:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- As someone who's been strongly involved with URL maintenance over the last 2 years, I think this bot should be run on Wikipedia, and should enforce protocols. It's pushing WP:COSMETICBOT but if the link ends up being broken because only HTTP works, then that will create other issues. The task can be restricted to only converting those not functional with HTTPS, but my first choice is to convert all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberpower678 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Opining as a bot op: I personally don't think this can be read as having community consensus because it's going to create a lot of revisions for which there is no appreciable difference. Yes it would be nice if wikipedia was smart enough to figure out if the relative URL is accessable only via HTTP or can be accessed via https, but the link is clicked in the user's browser and therefore the user doesn't know that the content may be accessable via HTTPS or HTTP. Ideally, users entering relative URLS could be reminded via a bot that it's better to be explicit with what protocol needs to be used to get to the content. The counter is we could set a bot to hunt down all the relative URLS and put a maintanance tag/category in the reference block so that a human set of eyes can evaluate if the content is exclusively available via one route or if the content is the same on both paths.
TLDR: This request explicitly bumps against COSMETICBOT, needs further consensus, and there might be a way to have "maintenance" resolve the issue. Hasteur (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Those are all good ideas but too much for me to take on right now. Agree there is no community consensus about changing relative HTTPS links; However existing relative HTTP cases broken in June 2015 should be fixed asap. A bot should be able to do it as any broken-link job without specific community consensus (beyond a BRFA). Broken links should be fixed. That's something I can probably do, unless someone else wants to (I have lots of other work..). Note this fix would not interfere with any larger plans to deal with relative links. -- GreenC 15:26, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
- Bump. -- GreenC 17:13, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Strong support: This is definitely not COSMETICBOT; these URL errors directly interfere with exercise of WP:Verifiability. They also cause editwarring and article damage; various times I've had to revert people – including some long-experienced editors – removing "dead links" and inserting
{{citation needed}}
tags, when all that was required was adding the characters "http:". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 21:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC) - Bump thread expire -- GreenC 04:16, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Bare Twitter URL bot
Would a bot that turns bare Twitter references into formatted Template:Cite tweet citations be feasible? The four basic parameters of user, number, date, and title should be easily machine-readable, and even though a bot wouldn't be able to interpret the optional parameters, the result would still be better than a bare URL. Madg2011 (talk) 23:03, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Madg2011: Should be doable with the Twitter API. I'll look into it later on. Mdann52 (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Madg2011: Coding... --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Madg2011:@Mdann52: BRFA filed --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:28, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Madg2011: Coding... --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Scrape some data from WP:WBFAN
I have been collecting statistical data on WP:FAC for over a year now; see this thread for details. It would be a big help for certain kinds of reporting if I could convert a historical revision of WP:WBFAN into a simple list of editor/count pairs. Any format of output would be fine; table, comma separated list -- anything predictable. I just need to convert the names with wrapped star lists into names with numbers of stars, along with the date of the revision.
Ideally this would be something I could run at will, but if someone runs this and sends me a file with the results that would work too.
The benefit to Wikipedia is that we are trying to make it easier for first-time nominators to succeed at FAC, but we can't know if we're succeeding without information about who had WBFAN stars and when they got them. Thanks for any help with this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:37, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Dealing with Mdann52 (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- This is done; Mdann52 has sent me the results. Thank you very much! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Unicode subscript/superscript bot
This is a longstanding thing that annoys me, so here's a BOTREQ for it. Unicode subscripts and superscripts#Superscripts and subscripts block contains a list of the affected characters.
The request two distinct tasks:
A) Page moves:
- Find unicode super/subscript in titles, and move it to the non-unicode version (e.g. Foo²bar, move it to Foo2bar)
- Add the appropriate displaytitle key to the new page (e.g.
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Foo<sup>2</sup>bar}}
)
B) Page cleanup
- Find unicode super/subscript in titles, and replace them with the non-unicode version (e.g.
²
→<sup>2</sup>
) - Avoid pages in Category:Unicode and Category:Typefaces, as well as their subcategories.
Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- What support in guideline/policy is there for using the non-Unicode version? --Izno (talk) 19:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well we have Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Mathematics#Superscripts_and_subscripts and also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts (which failed because the information was elsewhere / didn't need its own page, not because it was disputed). There is also MOS:UNITSYMBOLS (down in the table). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would guess a significant portion of those articles using superscript Unicode blocks have nothing to do with mathematics, so I would be uncomfortable with this bot request for that reason (WP:CONTEXTBOT)--most of the links you've provided are specifically for styling in STEM topics. --Izno (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- A) should be problem free. For B) I'm a bit worried about WP:CONTEXTBOT as well, but from my own recollection, I can't recall any example that doesn't get filtered by avoiding the above-mentioned categories. A trial would find out if this is actually an issue. I could also do a database scan + a small manual run to see if there actually is an issue. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- My point is that moving articles not about STEM according to a STEM MOS is probably not going to fly. So no, A is not problem free. --Izno (talk) 20:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- This isn't a STEM standard and isn't STEM specific. It just happens that most instances will be STEM-related, so that's where the guidance is. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics#Superscripts and subscripts is STEM-topic specific and its associated page that you linked to isn't a guideline. I would object to a bot moving any page below which is unrelated to STEM, since the guidance is specifically located on a MOS for STEM topics. (I would not be against a bot/semi-automatic process nominating the page for a move via WP:Move requests.) Additionally, the categories need to go to WP:CFD regardless. I don't see any value to moving templates unless their page titles are incomprehensible (ever, not specific to this scenario). --Izno (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- MOS:UNITSYMBOLS and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts aren't STEM-specific, and I've shown below that this is done outside of STEM-fields as well. Cats/Templates could easily be excluded from this though. Still, probably best to had this debate on the WP:VPR to get outside eyes. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:19, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics#Superscripts and subscripts is STEM-topic specific and its associated page that you linked to isn't a guideline. I would object to a bot moving any page below which is unrelated to STEM, since the guidance is specifically located on a MOS for STEM topics. (I would not be against a bot/semi-automatic process nominating the page for a move via WP:Move requests.) Additionally, the categories need to go to WP:CFD regardless. I don't see any value to moving templates unless their page titles are incomprehensible (ever, not specific to this scenario). --Izno (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- This isn't a STEM standard and isn't STEM specific. It just happens that most instances will be STEM-related, so that's where the guidance is. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- My point is that moving articles not about STEM according to a STEM MOS is probably not going to fly. So no, A is not problem free. --Izno (talk) 20:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- A) should be problem free. For B) I'm a bit worried about WP:CONTEXTBOT as well, but from my own recollection, I can't recall any example that doesn't get filtered by avoiding the above-mentioned categories. A trial would find out if this is actually an issue. I could also do a database scan + a small manual run to see if there actually is an issue. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:27, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would guess a significant portion of those articles using superscript Unicode blocks have nothing to do with mathematics, so I would be uncomfortable with this bot request for that reason (WP:CONTEXTBOT)--most of the links you've provided are specifically for styling in STEM topics. --Izno (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well we have Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Mathematics#Superscripts_and_subscripts and also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts (which failed because the information was elsewhere / didn't need its own page, not because it was disputed). There is also MOS:UNITSYMBOLS (down in the table). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
A case-by-case approach might work best though. For page moved, with superscripts (filtering User/Wikipedia space), we get
I don't see any reason why any of those shouldn't render like we do with Vitamin B6, Golem100, Omega1 Scorpii, 12e Régiment blindé du Canada, Aice5, or Tommy heavenly6 discography. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. This cannot be done by a bot and requires human judgement. In cases where "squared" or "cubed" is the actual meaning, these should be left as-is. Same goes for any case where changing the position changes the meaning. The superscripting should not be used when it's just some marketing stylization. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 21:06, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Administrator "you messed up" notifications
Just in the last few days, I've twice messed up when blocking users: I left the block template and forgot to levy a block. This caused confusion in one circumstance, and in the other, another admin levied a longer block because it looked like the person had already come off an earlier shorter block.
What if we had a bot that would notify admins who added a block template without blocking the user? I'm envisioning the bot finding new substitutions of all block templates, checking to see whether the user really is blocked, and leaving a "you messed up" message (comparable to what BracketBot did) to remind the admin to go back and fix the situation. Sometimes one admin will block and another will leave the message; that's fine, so the bot shouldn't pay attention to who actually levied the block. And bonus points if the bot finds that a non-admin left the template on a non-blocked user's talk page; the bot could leave a note quoting the {{uw-block}} documentation: Only administrators can block users; adding a block template does not constitute a block. See RFAA to request that a user be blocked. Finally, since actually doing the blocking is quick and simple, we don't need the bot to wait a long time; sometimes you need to compose a long and thoughtful message explaining the block, but you don't need to do that when using Special:Block. Nyttend (talk) 01:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds more like a job for a EF, warning editors who add a block template to an unblocked user's talk page, of the same kind as trying to save an edit without an edit summary. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 03:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- An edit filter is an interesting idea. Especially when I am blocking for a reason that is better described in writing than with a template, I tend to write my block reason before actually clicking the block button; it's so that I won't get yelled at for blocking someone without a reason (or worse yet, the wrong or incomplete reason, which appears punishable by desysopping nowadays). I suspect, though, that it would be a pretty complex filter that uses a lot of resources, so we should be able to answer how frequently this happens, and whether it is worth the impact on all editing in the project to have this filter. (People forget how impactful these filters are; just try opening a page on a slow connection and you'll see it...) Risker (talk) 04:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- An edit filter is almost certainly not possible because editors may save block templates before actually blocking. Some existing tools may do the same. ~ Rob13Talk 20:31, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- Fair point, though it would almost surely be useful to have an edit filter to forbid non-admins from placing a template on a non-blocked user's page. (The original concern still stands, but if that EF is implemented, the "you screwed up" bot will need only look at administrators' edits). TigraanClick here to contact me 16:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Adding links from Google Scholar
I've been manually adding lots of links to references in articles like this one. Does Wikipedia have any bots that can automate this process using Google Scholar or something similar? Jarble (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Try WP:OABOT. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: OABot only works with articles that use citation templates. Does Wikipedia have any tools that can automatically format references using these templates? Jarble (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Automatically, no. But you can enable refToolbar / citation expander in your preferences, and that can help converting links to proper references. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: If there isn't a tool that can automatically format citations, we could easily create one using a citation parser. Jarble (talk) 13:36, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- Automatically, no. But you can enable refToolbar / citation expander in your preferences, and that can help converting links to proper references. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: OABot only works with articles that use citation templates. Does Wikipedia have any tools that can automatically format references using these templates? Jarble (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Bot to check deadlinks in Featured material
Re this conversation, User:InternetArchiveBot does a great job scanning our 5,000,000 articles for deadlinks and fixing them, but it moves very slowly. The FA Coordinators agree that it would be useful to keep Featured material patrolled much more regularly. We could do this by manually dumping a list of article names into the tool, but that's not rigorous and a working 'Featureddeadlink bot' could presumably quite happily also patrol FLs, other FT articles and even GAs. So perhaps the request is a bot that will initially patrol the FAs only, with a view to expanding the remit to other quality material once it's proved itself. That level of detail I can leave to your expertise. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:44, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would advise against an entirely new bot to do this. IABot has a high level of complexity and is very advanced to account for a slew of problems archive bots encounter when making runs. If anything, a bot can be made to regularly submit bot jobs to IABot, which will have IABot regularly patrol FAs, GAs, and other desired list of articles. Besides IABot maintains a large central DB of URLs on every wiki it runs on, so this method would be a lot easier. If anyone wants to write a bot to have IABot regularly scan requested articles, please ping me. I can help get the bot set up to interface with IABot.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 09:49, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Dweller and GreenC: ^ GreenC's bot already communicates with IABot.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 09:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- I like your idea of a bot to feed IABot. Recreating the wheel is a bad idea and it makes the task a lot simpler. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:01, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Anyone that is interested in setting this bot up, the documentation for interfacing with IABot is m:InternetArchiveBot/API and the particular function you want to call is action=submitbotjob. If you need any help, just ping me. I would still recommend get the task approved first.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 10:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- I like your idea of a bot to feed IABot. Recreating the wheel is a bad idea and it makes the task a lot simpler. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:01, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- BRFA filed -- GreenC 13:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Keeping track of cross-space moves....
In conjunction with the discussion raised at this discussion, it will be probably helpful for the community to get an idea about the numbers and keep a track of the articles that are draftified from main-space--in a friendly format.SoWhy has written a SQL query for the purpose.I seek for the development of a bot that will maintain a list of articles which are draftified along with necessary info such as the time of draftification, draftifying editor, article creator, last edit date etc. in a tabular format and that the table will be updated in a regular period of time.Thanks!Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 11:49, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- The query Godric mentions only counts article moves where the creation of the redirect was suppressed (
AND log.log_params RLIKE 'noredir";s:1'
). A bot should probably also find pages moved with a redirect where the redirect was later deleted as WP:R2. Also maybe list prior AFDs or MFDs for the article/draft. Regards SoWhy 12:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC)- Strike that, I just noticed a flaw in the query. The query actually finds both because I missed a part of the comment. I fixed it to only show those where the redirect was suppressed and this one should find those where the redirect was created. Regards SoWhy 07:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Second SoWhy.@SoWhy:--As prior AfDs do you mean articles which are once deleted as a consequence of an AfD and then draftified on re-creation?Otherwise, I don't think anybody would draftify an article which has been a voyager to a Afd/Declined Prod.Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 12:09, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Draftifying can be the result of an AFD, so listing prior AFDs makes sense. I suppose the bot can also check the XFD and display the result, like my AFD close analyzer but probably not all results correctly. Regards SoWhy 12:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- P. H. Barnes is a page created in main space that survived Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/P. H. Barnes in 2016. A few days ago it was included in a potential bulk AWB move to draft space[2] but, after being advised on IRC that bulk moves might be controversial, the editor backtracked[3] and the whole matter is under consultation at WP:AN#Poorly references sports biographies. Thincat (talk) 13:53, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- I now see from the edit summaries that a move to userspace was contemplated (the consultation is unclear) but it does show that experienced editors, in good faith, can consider that moves of AFD-surviving articles can be appropriate. Also see Sir Edward Antrobus, 8th Baronet which is under consideration in the same way, having existed for nine years with many "real" editors. So numbers of editors and lifetime of article are also relevant statistics in a table. I suspect if the moves are done without removing categories then a bot will fill the omission so pages may enter draft space with no edits (except bot or maintenance) in the last six months. Thincat (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric, SoWhy, and Thincat: I've drafted an example report below.
Please let me know if you have any comments on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:11, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
- @JJMC89:--Can't we have clickable editor names and the move diff. linked-to in the move-summary field.Overall, it'a great job! Thanks!:)Winged Blades Godric 03:45, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Winged Blades of Godric: I've added links for users. I could link the move log, but I'm not going to try to parse the history for a diff. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- This looks great! I am going to be away for a bit so here are some quick comments. The bulk draftification I alluded to above took place on 31 August 2017,[4] causing chaos for the cricket wikiproject. A useful cautionary tale. To spot such erroneous actions date of page creation, number of editors and quality/importance of article are relevant – as well as one surviving AFD a Good article was included (the latter self-reverted). Possibly such indicators of "quality" could be flagged in the present AFD field. Number of links can be an issue when pages are moved on the basis of fewer claimed links than actually exist. An emphasised indication could be given when both source and target have both been deleted (draft space pages not edited recently manually are vulnerable to speedy deletion whereas in main space being "abandoned" may well not be a problem. Thincat (talk) 04:48, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Thincat: I've added creation and number of editors. I can add GA/FA/FL, but it will require parsing the page for the template (e.g. {{Good article}}), which I was hoping to avoid. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I can see that indicators of importance are problematic. Creation date and number of editors form a proxy of sorts. Are you including moves between main and user space as well as between main and draft? On the face if it they are both relevant. Why not give this a spin and tweaks could be made based on experience? Could lists be kept separately for each day so it is possible to review what has been going on? Thincat (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- See draftification reports as a starting point. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I can see that indicators of importance are problematic. Creation date and number of editors form a proxy of sorts. Are you including moves between main and user space as well as between main and draft? On the face if it they are both relevant. Why not give this a spin and tweaks could be made based on experience? Could lists be kept separately for each day so it is possible to review what has been going on? Thincat (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Thincat: I've added creation and number of editors. I can add GA/FA/FL, but it will require parsing the page for the template (e.g. {{Good article}}), which I was hoping to avoid. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @JJMC89:--Can't we have clickable editor names and the move diff. linked-to in the move-summary field.Overall, it'a great job! Thanks!:)Winged Blades Godric 03:45, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Fixing broken links to the New York Observer
I have been tagging lots of broken links to the New York Observer, but most of the tags that I added have been removed. Since the Internet Archive Bot is unable to repair these links, is there another way that we can update them? Jarble (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- If there is a standard issue with all of these links that a computer could fix - and does not need human discretion to do so (WP:CONTEXTBOT) it may be possible. Without knowing detail about the issue and the fix I can't say. With some more details I would happily look at getting these done. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 13:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Null bot on everything that transcludes Infobox journal
If someone could do that, that would be much appreciated. We've recently added some redirect detection/creation logic to the template, and it would be nice to know which articles are in need of review. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Doing... — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:39, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- JJMC89 (talk · contribs) Have you started? Because if you have, it doesn't seem to be working. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: I made a typo when trying to start the job, so I've restarted it correctly now. — JJMC89 (T·C) 15:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Why write a bot when we already have Joe's Null Bot (talk · contribs)? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't write anything. I'm using Pywikibot's touch.py. — JJMC89 (T·C) 15:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! Category:Articles with missing ISO 4 redirects is definitely populating now! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:37, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't write anything. I'm using Pywikibot's touch.py. — JJMC89 (T·C) 15:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- JJMC89 (talk · contribs) Have you started? Because if you have, it doesn't seem to be working. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
@JJMC89:: The infobox template has been massively updated with automated search functionality. If you could run the bot again, this time only on Category:Articles with missing ISO 4 redirects, that would be super helpful! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:58, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Doing... — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
A bot for creating articles for ISO standards
I have noticed that there are a lot of ISO standards that do not have an article on Wikipedia. Considering the fact that there are a lot of ISO standards (by my estimate, over 21000 of them in English alone, some that have possibly been updated), of which (rough estimate) maybe 10% - 20% have an article, the number of ISO standards could potentially warrant some automated help. Since I couldn't find a concerted effort to document ISO standards in Wikipedia, I thought it'd be useful to debate whether it would be desirable and feasible to use a bot to increase Wikipedia's coverage of the ISO standards.
Should Wikipedia cover ISO standards extensively? Well-known ISO standards like the ISO 9000 and 27000 families obviously meet notability standards, but lesser-known standards might not. In my opinion, considering the fact that the ISO's work constitutes global standards, there is a case to be made, and there is most certainly precedent for jobs like this.
Since I don't have any previous experience with writing Wikipedia bots, I thought I'd chime in here first. Would this be something that would be useful for Wikipedia, and would it be feasible to create valuable articles or article stubs this way? There is information available from the [website] in a structured form that could go some way towards creating articles, and each standard publishes some metadata about the standard and usually has a description (see for instance 1, 2, 3.
I don't know of any project that is already working towards incorporating information about international standards, or ISO standards specifically, into Wikipedia, nor a bot that works in a related field. If this might be useful, I might very well be interested in writing a bot that either writes stubs or automatic articles on ISO standards, prepares drafts, keeps metadata about ISO standards up-to-date, or something along those lines. I'd gladly hear some feedback. Nietvoordekat (talk) 11:09, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nietvoordekat, while I admit to only having a general knowledge of this subject, I suspect that such an undertaking would fall afoul of guidelines similar to WP:NASTCRIT (i.e. "this isn't notable enough for it's own article"). WP:AST generally goes by "if it exists, but isn't notable, redirect". However, if we were to create a redirect for every ISO code, we'd end up with 100 000 pages total. Even if we went by what was on the list of ISO codes we're still looking at about 2500 new redirects. Doable, yes. Necessary? Maybe.
- For a creation of this sort of size/scale, I think getting community input would be worthwhile, if only to see if there is a want/need for this sort of mass creation.
- If there is, feel free to ping me and I'll be happy to put in a BRFA. Primefac (talk) 13:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
ISO 4 redirect creation bot
To help clear up the backlog in Category:Articles with missing ISO 4 redirects, if a bot could
- Parse every article containing {{Infobox journal}}, retrieve
|abbreviation=J. Foo.
Some articles will contain multiple infoboxes. - If J. Foo. exists and is tagged with {{R from ISO 4}}
- Create J Foo with
#REDIRECT[[Article containing Infobox journal]] {{R from ISO 4}}
- If J Foo already exists, make sure it is tagged with {{R from ISO 4}}, and remove any other {{R from ...}} templates present (like {{R from abbreviation}}/{{R from acronym}}).
- Null edit the original article containing the infobox with
|abbreviation=J. Foo.
Thanks! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Mdann52 bot 13 Mdann52 (talk) 10:37, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
simple string substitution in external URLs
A very useful news site in a specialised field (The Week in Chess) has changed domains at least twice, meaning there are (at a guess) hundreds of refs or external links to change. They would all change in a regular way (i.e. simple string replacement, or at worst regular expression replacement). There has got to be an already existing bot to do this. Can someone point me in the right direction? Adpete (talk) 12:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- It might be better to make a template for these links so that if the web site or link format changes, you only have to change the template in one place to fix all of the links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you have any more details eg. old url and new url examples and the changes between them, I can have a look at doing this. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 15:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
It's pretty simple. Every URL beginning with "http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic" needs to instead begin with "http://theweekinchess.com/html/twic". Note these are not the complete URLs, but anything after that is unchanged. e.g. at Baadur Jobava, reference 2 needs to change from http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic646.html#6 to http://theweekinchess.com/html/twic646.html#6 . I'm happy to run it if given some pointers. But if you want to run it, thanks, that'd be great. I'd be curious to hear how many URLs get changed, if you do.
And to Jonesey95, yes a template could be a good idea too, though enforcing compliance can be difficult, so I'd prefer to do the bot in the first instance. Adpete (talk) 23:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Adpete, I think the best way forward would be to create a {{cite web}} wrapper (maybe {{cite WiC}} or {{cite The Week in Chess}}?) that links to the website. After this is done, a bot could go through and replace all extant uses with the template. Thoughts? Primefac (talk) 12:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ran the numbers; looks like 422 pages with the
twic/twic
in the URL that need changing. Definitely something a bot would be good for. The other 100ish point to different places. Primefac (talk) 12:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)- Thanks for listing those links! If we're going to make a wrapper, I think it should be {{cite TWIC}}, because The Week in Chess uses the all-capital acronym TWIC. The main downside to the template is enforcing compliance but I guess it'll be ok. First let me see if I can find all or most of those 100 "other" links, because that might affect the format of the bot and/or template. Adpete (talk) 23:12, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Broken links to aolnews.com
Wikipedia has hundreds of articles that cite AOL News, but all of the links to this site are now broken. I tried using IABot, but it could not find archived URLs for these references. Is there another bot that can add archive URLs for all of these links? Jarble (talk) 17:12, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- Are they broken in the sense of permanent dead, or fixable by changing to a different URL at aolnews? -- GreenC 17:42, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- @GreenC: As far as I know, all links to aolnews.com are now redirected to the front page of aol.com. It may be possible to recover the original articles from the Internet Archive, but IABot is apparently unable to do this. Jarble (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- Reported here. There might be a way to solve this checking with Cyberpower678. -- GreenC 21:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Jarble, IABot is currently rescuing aolnews.com where it can or leaving a dead link tag. If you see any it missed let me know. Should be done in an hour or so. -- GreenC 14:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Social Security Death Index (SSDI)
Articles about deceased U.S. persons often cite the Social Security Death Index, which lies behind a paywall at ancestry.com. An example may be found at George Luz. I have no idea of the total count. The SSDI is also available at familysearch.org for free. The version at Family Search does not display the social security number; the version at ancestry once did but, according to our page no longer does. Converting from ancestry to family search will, I think, require a little human effort and judgment. I don't know if that raises a WP:SYNTHESIS flag. Is it possible to search for uses of the SSDI at ancestry and put them into a list or, preferably, a hidden (Wikipedia:?) category so they can be changed to the Family Search version?--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:53, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Special:LinkSearch/http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/? Or perhaps Special:LinkSearch/http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi if there are legitimate links to the base page at ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com. Anomie⚔ 02:38, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
- That should do it, thanks. Call the request closed.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 21:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Asessment banner replacement
I am making this request on behalf of WikiProject Finance and WikiProject Investment. The two projects are merging so there are two things that a bot is needed for:
- Replace all
{{WikiProject Investment}}
banners on talk pages of articles that were only assessed by the Investment project with the{{WikiProject Finance}}
banner. - Remove the WikiProject Investment banner from pages that were already assessed by WikiProject Finance.
It would help immensely! Cheers. WikiEditCrunch (talk) 17:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
- The former category has about 500 pages and the latter category has about 1k pages. --Izno (talk) 18:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
- Which are quite a lot of pages.It would take too long to do it by hand so to speak.
- Coding... --Kanashimi (talk) 09:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @WikiEditCrunch: For Talk:Financial endowment, it is OK to remove {{WikiProject Investment}}. But I find that some pages with different class or importance, for example, Talk:Prediction market. How about them? --Kanashimi (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Yeah I would just replace those too.Worst case I will look over them later on.Thanks and Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @WikiEditCrunch: OK. I will generate a report (User:Cewbot/log/20170828) for these cases. Please tell me if you have any idea of the report, and then I will continue doing the task. However, I think there may needs more discussion for these cases... --Kanashimi (talk) 08:55, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Yeah I would just replace those too.Worst case I will look over them later on.Thanks and Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: The report looks good.Ill see if I can bring up those cases sometime soon. Thanks and Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 17:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @WikiEditCrunch: Well, I have do 100 edits. Please confirm they are OK and you will check the conflicts, so I will complete the task. --Kanashimi (talk) 23:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: The report looks good.Ill see if I can bring up those cases sometime soon. Thanks and Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 17:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: They look good (OK)! Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Doing... --Kanashimi (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done --Kanashimi (talk) 01:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: They look good (OK)! Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Thanks! Cheers. WikiEditCrunch (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
A BOT ready to help.
HelpBOT responds to help citations with advice, and welcomes new editors to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lookis (talk • contribs) 04:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Lookis: Not a good task for a bot. per context bot and see a list of frequently denied bots. Dat GuyTalkContribs 15:56, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Infobox image cleanup
Is it possible to add such cleanup tasks to one f the existing bots or create a bot for such cleanups? These fill up the maintenance cat of unknown parameters unnecessarily. Even GA level articles has such issues. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 13:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
SoccerbaseBot
I am requesting a bot to change code like this:
{{cite web
| title = Games played by Jack Cork in 2014/2015
| url = http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=45288&season_id=144
| publisher = Soccerbase
| accessdate = 31 January 2015}}
to this:
{{soccerbase season|45288|2014|accessdate= 31 January 2015}}
which makes the job done faster than doing it manually and it does not introduces errors in later seasons when providing reference to new seasons. Iggy (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
- How about
{{cite news |title=Games played by Wayne Rooney in 2002/2003 |url=http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=30921&season_id=132 |publisher=Soccerbase.com |date=6 April 2011 |accessdate=6 April 2011 }}
at Wayne Rooney,[http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=13501&season_id=129 "Games played by Thierry Henry in 1999–2000"]
at Thierry Henry and other articles similar to these? --Kanashimi (talk) 11:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)- It sounds algorithmically-easy enough to change all links coming from
{{cite news}}
,{{cite web}}
and the like by matching the URL. (The only question is whether the formula to go from season year to season ID at Template:soccerbase season can really be trusted when doing the reverse conversion.) Out-of-template references are of course another matter. TigraanClick here to contact me 15:58, 18 September 2017 (UTC)- This may become a long term task... --Kanashimi (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Coding... I will start from {{cite news}}, {{cite web}} and then others. --Kanashimi (talk) 10:46, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Struway2: Please give some advice, thank you. For example, for the case of
{{cite web |title=Richard Cresswell |url=http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=8959 |work=Soccerbase |publisher=Centurycomm |accessdate=12 September 2015}}
at York City F.C.. Are there a better solution? Is using Template:soccerbase or something this a good idea? (Template:Soccerbase is not in a citation format still.) --Kanashimi (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2017 (UTC)- The first I knew of this task request was when I undid your change at the template page, and was pinged to come here. Template:Soccerbase season is specifically for citing stats for individual seasons formatted as a cite web. Template:Soccerbase was designed to generate an external link to the front page of a player's details at the Soccerbase.com website. Probably if citations like the Cresswell link at York City F.C., which is citing that front page, were to be template-ised, it would be best done by adding functionality to Template:Soccerbase. Has there been any consultation at WT:FOOTBALL at all on this? I haven't seen any. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:53, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. @Iggy the Swan and Tigraan: I am sorry that I do not know very much about soccer. Do we need to create a new template for the cases lack of season? --Kanashimi (talk) 13:59, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- I know nothing about soccer, and only looked at the question from a programmer's point of view: from a look at the URL and the template, it is fairly clear that the season-id/year correspondence is not so trivial, and the formula should be checked. But yeah, if this is not an uncontroversial task, you should get approval of the Wikiproject or whoever else in charge before asking for a bot. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. @Iggy the Swan and Tigraan: I am sorry that I do not know very much about soccer. Do we need to create a new template for the cases lack of season? --Kanashimi (talk) 13:59, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- The first I knew of this task request was when I undid your change at the template page, and was pinged to come here. Template:Soccerbase season is specifically for citing stats for individual seasons formatted as a cite web. Template:Soccerbase was designed to generate an external link to the front page of a player's details at the Soccerbase.com website. Probably if citations like the Cresswell link at York City F.C., which is citing that front page, were to be template-ised, it would be best done by adding functionality to Template:Soccerbase. Has there been any consultation at WT:FOOTBALL at all on this? I haven't seen any. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:53, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- It sounds algorithmically-easy enough to change all links coming from
- Doing... I will only deal with these cases with season_id. --Kanashimi (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done Please read the task report. --Kanashimi (talk) 05:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Of those I've checked, the straightforward ones are OK. Obviously the requester didn't explain enough of the details, like what to do with the output
|name=
parameter, or with the exceptions (season_id=146, mostly), and I didn't realise there had been no communication: sorry about that. Mostly, you left the season_id=146 ones unchanged, which was OK, but another time, it might be worth asking rather than guessing. There's one edit I found, here, which is a bit of a mess: I've fixed it manually. Thank you for your work. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:50, 22 September 2017 (UTC)- Thank you for your checking! Please let me know if there are still errors need to be fixed. --Kanashimi (talk) 10:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Struway2 posted to me about this 146 issue saying, as above on this thread, that these have been left alone - I have manually changed some of the false ID's from this:
{{cite web | title = Games played by Lee Tomlin in 2016/2017 | url = http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=41944&season_id=146 | publisher = Soccerbase | accessdate = 31 January 2015}}
to this
{{soccerbase season|41944|2016|accessdate= 31 January 2015}}
- Struway2 posted to me about this 146 issue saying, as above on this thread, that these have been left alone - I have manually changed some of the false ID's from this:
- Thank you for your checking! Please let me know if there are still errors need to be fixed. --Kanashimi (talk) 10:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Of those I've checked, the straightforward ones are OK. Obviously the requester didn't explain enough of the details, like what to do with the output
to a certain number of articles and found out there are still around 200+ articles to be done. I probably should have mentioned that at the first post on this thread,Iggy (talk) 14:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Can anyone replace the text "Alabama" with the name of the relevant state in these drafts?
I've been drafting a series of lists of Paleozoic life by state and I used the Alabama page as a template to set them the others up. Could someone replace the text "Alabama" with the state named in the title of the following articles? Abyssal (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Doing... -- John of Reading (talk) 16:59, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Thanks, John! Super fast work! Abyssal (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done, I hope. I used AWB to replace "Alabama" with
{{subst:str right|{{subst:PAGENAME}}|30}}
, and that picked the state name out of the name of each draft. You'll see I had to fix up the pages with disambiguation suffixes. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)- @John of Reading:Hey John, could I ask you for another favor? This one's even easier. Could you remove the following templates from the same articles as before? Abyssal (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done, I hope. I used AWB to replace "Alabama" with
- @John of Reading:Thanks, John! Super fast work! Abyssal (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- {{col-begin|width=100%}}
- {{col-1-of-4}}
- {{col-2-of-4}}
- {{col-3-of-4}}
- {{col-4-of-4}}
- {{col-end}}
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading: Hey, John. Do you think you could do what you did with the state names for the following articles I have hidden here? Abyssal (talk) 14:19, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 14:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, John. You deserve a barnstar! Abyssal (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Hey, John. Could you remove those same column templates from the "List of the Mesozoic life of..." articles and also remove the "==Mesozoic==" secition heading from the same? Abyssal (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Hey, John. Could you remove those same column templates from the "List of the Mesozoic life of..." articles and also remove the "==Mesozoic==" secition heading from the same? Abyssal (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, John. You deserve a barnstar! Abyssal (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 14:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:My hero! Is there anyway you can scan the Mesozoic lists for lines of code that includes the phrase "sp." and delete those entire lines? They represent species that couldn't be identified, so their presence is redundant clutter in the articles. Abyssal (talk) 19:24, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 20:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading: Hey John, I have a more complicated request this time. I'm not sure if it's possible, but here goes. Could you replace "* †[[A" (and "* †[[B", "* †[[C", "* †[[D"...) in the "List of the Mesozoic life of..." articles with the following block of code (please copy it from inside the edit screen it doesn't come out formatted right here on the page itself):
- @Abyssal: Done -- John of Reading (talk) 20:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
==A== <!-- Please hide unwanted images in comments like this one so that they may be easily restored later if we change our minds and the image is wanted again --> [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:PSM V53 D224 The great cretaceus ocean.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[Animal]]''.]] [[File:Acteon tornatilis 2.png|thumb|right|A living ''[[Acteon ]]''.]] [[File:Bonefish.png|thumb|right|Illustration of a living ''[[Albula]]'', or bonefish.]] [[File:Ancilla ventricosa 001.jpg|thumb|right|Modern shell of ''[[Ancilla (gastropod)|Ancilla]]''.]] [[File:Appalachiosaurus montgomeriensis.jpg|thumb|right|Life restoration of ''[[Appalachiosaurus ]]''.]] {{Compact ToC}} * †''[[A
- with the letter in the section heading and the "* †[[A" being changed once for each letter of the alphabet? Thanks. If this isn't possible I understand but setting up all the section heading in all 50 articles looks daunting. If we could automate it it would speed up the production of the articles immensely. Thanks for all the help you've given me so far. These articles are turning out great. Abyssal (talk) 16:40, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Please check what I've done to Draft:List of the Mesozoic life of Georgia (U.S. state). I've guessed that I should remove the original "List" subheading, is that right? -- John of Reading (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Yes. The changes made to Georgia look perfect. Thank you so much. Abyssal (talk) 17:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done? -- John of Reading (talk) 18:19, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done. :) Abyssal (talk) 18:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done? -- John of Reading (talk) 18:19, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Yes. The changes made to Georgia look perfect. Thank you so much. Abyssal (talk) 17:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Please check what I've done to Draft:List of the Mesozoic life of Georgia (U.S. state). I've guessed that I should remove the original "List" subheading, is that right? -- John of Reading (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- with the letter in the section heading and the "* †[[A" being changed once for each letter of the alphabet? Thanks. If this isn't possible I understand but setting up all the section heading in all 50 articles looks daunting. If we could automate it it would speed up the production of the articles immensely. Thanks for all the help you've given me so far. These articles are turning out great. Abyssal (talk) 16:40, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
@John of Reading: Hey, John, do you think you could do me a few more favors? Could you run that bot to remove lines of code containing "sp." from the following commented-out list of articles just like you did on September 20th? Then could you scan these articles for the phrases " – o" and " – t" and replace them with " @ o" and " @ t" before removing every "–" from the articles and then replacing the "@"s with the "–" again? Then could you run that operation from September 21st where you replaced the first instance of each capital letter in the format "* †[[A" with a block of code, but with this new smaller block of code listed below:
==A== <!-- Please hide unwanted images in comments like this one so that they may be easily restored later if we change our minds and the image is wanted again --> {{Compact ToC}} * †''[[A
Abyssal (talk) 14:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: I've had a go at these. (1) I noticed several entries marked "spp." and one marked "p." Should those be removed? (2) I think the lists for South Carolina and Washington are too short to need A-Z subheadings. I hope that doesn't complicate the collection of the illustrations for these articles. (3) There's too much data at Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Ohio#Z. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Yes, you can remove "spp." and "p.". SC and WA, can be skipped, I'll just move those lists to sections of the respective list of prehistoric life overall for each state. Any idea what went wrong with Ohio? Why does it have a whole alphabetical list under the Z section? Abyssal (talk) 01:15, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: (1) Done (3) I've now checked that "Ohio" had two copies of the same data, and have removed one. I guess you just typed Ctrl-V twice by mistake. And, (4), I'll be away from tomorrow, back Thursday. :-) John of Reading (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for all your help! Abyssal (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: (1) Done (3) I've now checked that "Ohio" had two copies of the same data, and have removed one. I guess you just typed Ctrl-V twice by mistake. And, (4), I'll be away from tomorrow, back Thursday. :-) John of Reading (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @John of Reading:Yes, you can remove "spp." and "p.". SC and WA, can be skipped, I'll just move those lists to sections of the respective list of prehistoric life overall for each state. Any idea what went wrong with Ohio? Why does it have a whole alphabetical list under the Z section? Abyssal (talk) 01:15, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Request to replace pushpin_map with map_type
This is a huge task and seem nearly impossible to do manually. This will enable in effective template maintenance and easier consolidation. I have been trying to cleanup Category:Pages using infobox Hindu temple with unknown parameters since quite some time and the task seems never ending process. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- It looks like there are about 500 (up to no more than 900) affected pages in the category. Someone with AWB access may be able to get this done pretty quickly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
- Its not merely about the cat I referred to. There's a wider intiative going on at Wikipedia:Maps in infoboxes, one of whose objective is what I have stated above. You yourself are a part of it. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Capankajsmilyo: Can you tell me explicitly what you need changed and on what templates? Do you just need to replace pushpin_map with map_type on every instance of
{{Infobox Hindu temple}}
? Is there more? — nihlus kryik (talk) 21:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Capankajsmilyo: Can you tell me explicitly what you need changed and on what templates? Do you just need to replace pushpin_map with map_type on every instance of
- Its not merely about the cat I referred to. There's a wider intiative going on at Wikipedia:Maps in infoboxes, one of whose objective is what I have stated above. You yourself are a part of it. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Can anyone scan a list of articles and put every picture used in those articles into another article?
This is related to my previous request, but was so different that I thought I'd make a new heading for it. I'm a making a series of ~50 articles listing the prehistoric animals that once inhabited each US state. I was wondering if someone could rig a bot to search the articles linked to in the list for all the images and copy them into the article under the list heading in the format "[[File:Alethopteris PAMuseum.jpg|thumb|right|Fossil of ''[[articletitlegenusname]]''.]]". Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama is a good example of what I'm going for, I had originally tried to do this manually. Article list hidden in a comment here. Abyssal (talk) 19:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Collapsed List
|
---|
|
I have do a little trying on Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama, but I don't know if this is what you want. Please tell me what do you feel and what can I improve the tool, thank you. --Kanashimi (talk) 08:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
By the way, here is the source code: 20170922.scan link targets in page.js on GitHub --Kanashimi (talk) 09:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for helping, I was afraid this request was going unnoticed. The trial run is kind of like what I was going for, but I noticed a few problems. The big one is that the scan included the links in the article's lead section, so it added a bunch of images of Alabama from the state's main article that didn't have anything to do with prehistoric life. I just want the pictures from the links under the main list section. Also, the scan didn't pick up the images from the taxoboxes in those articles. Also, many of the images are left aligned. Is there anyway you could tweak the code so that it only includes images from the articles in the list itself, includes images from taxoboxes, and makes sure they're all right-aligned? Abyssal (talk) 15:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Coding... Sure. I will try. --Kanashimi (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. Abyssal (talk) 15:48, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: I have do a little more tasting. By the way, it seems the link to Archimedes is a mistake? --Kanashimi (talk) 00:59, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Sorry I haven't been on despite your efforts to assist this project, I was working long weekend shifts. Anyway, it seems like the scan isn't picking up on all the pictures from the articles and the images aren't displayed in the same order as the articles they come from are listed. The Archimedes thing isn't a big deal. There's a common prehistoric bryozoan with that name. Maybe I'll try to disambiguate all the links to it before we do the final run. Until then we need to make sure we're picking up all the images and ordering them correctly. Abyssal (talk) 03:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: For the images lacked, may you give some examples, so we can quickly find out what is going wrong. And for the problem of image order, I think it is because I won't add the images already existing in the article. Perhaps I should add all images whether it exists or not? --Kanashimi (talk) 08:37, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Here's an example of an image that didn't make it into the article: File:Caninia torquia coral KGS.jpg. No need to repetitively add images, there were some images already in the article, so that may be what threw it off. Abyssal (talk) 12:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: I find some bugs to improve and fixed them. Please check again. --Kanashimi (talk) 14:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Could you try running it again? I think when you reverted you re-added some of the extraneous original images and those may have affected the results. Abyssal (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done --Kanashimi (talk) 14:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Hmm. There's still problems with the bot not putting images in alphabetical order. It seems to be getting images from Archimedes, then Kullervo, and some taxa starting with L and then later starts going all over the place. Abyssal (talk) 14:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Yes, I find this problem and trying to fix it. Please tell me how about the result now, thank you. --Kanashimi (talk) 10:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Big improvement, but I notice that it the scan isn't picking up on the images in the Diplichnites article. Abyssal (talk) 12:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done --Kanashimi (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: If there are still somewhere needing improved, please let me know, thank you.--Kanashimi (talk) 09:56, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry I haven't been in touch. I'll get back with you tonight ~ 9:00 PM eastern. Abyssal (talk) 11:19, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Hey, Kanashimi. Sorry to keep you waiting. I found that I actually hadn't finished all the lists in that article series and needed to spend a few days getting them ready for you. I haven't seen any actual problems with the images, so we're almost ready to go. The only change I'd ask to make is if your bot could sort the images under the headings of the first letter in the name of the article they were taken from, so the pictures from the articles starting with A go under the "A" section but before the mini table of contents, the images from articles starting with B under the B section and so on. After that we can run the whole batch. Abyssal (talk) 01:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done Please help me to fix the grammatical errors in the source code (20170922.scan link targets in page.js on GitHub), thank you. --Kanashimi (talk) 08:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:I'm honestly not qualified to examine code. Can we just give it a test run? Abyssal (talk) 01:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Thank you. My codes running on Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama. I just wonder how to fix the grammatical errors in the source code... --Kanashimi (talk) 02:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Could you be more specific about what grammatical errors you're concerned about? Abyssal (talk) 02:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Mainly the comments and the messages in the codes. For example, are "the initial version and trial run" right? And may you tell me how about the last run of Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama? Are there still something needing to fix? --Kanashimi (talk) 03:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:I didn't see any errors in the code and it performed its function well on Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama. I don't see anything stopping us from running it now. :) Abyssal (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Mainly the comments and the messages in the codes. For example, are "the initial version and trial run" right? And may you tell me how about the last run of Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama? Are there still something needing to fix? --Kanashimi (talk) 03:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Could you be more specific about what grammatical errors you're concerned about? Abyssal (talk) 02:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Thank you. My codes running on Draft:List of the Paleozoic life of Alabama. I just wonder how to fix the grammatical errors in the source code... --Kanashimi (talk) 02:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:I'm honestly not qualified to examine code. Can we just give it a test run? Abyssal (talk) 01:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done Please help me to fix the grammatical errors in the source code (20170922.scan link targets in page.js on GitHub), thank you. --Kanashimi (talk) 08:06, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Hey, Kanashimi. Sorry to keep you waiting. I found that I actually hadn't finished all the lists in that article series and needed to spend a few days getting them ready for you. I haven't seen any actual problems with the images, so we're almost ready to go. The only change I'd ask to make is if your bot could sort the images under the headings of the first letter in the name of the article they were taken from, so the pictures from the articles starting with A go under the "A" section but before the mini table of contents, the images from articles starting with B under the B section and so on. After that we can run the whole batch. Abyssal (talk) 01:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry I haven't been in touch. I'll get back with you tonight ~ 9:00 PM eastern. Abyssal (talk) 11:19, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Big improvement, but I notice that it the scan isn't picking up on the images in the Diplichnites article. Abyssal (talk) 12:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Yes, I find this problem and trying to fix it. Please tell me how about the result now, thank you. --Kanashimi (talk) 10:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Hmm. There's still problems with the bot not putting images in alphabetical order. It seems to be getting images from Archimedes, then Kullervo, and some taxa starting with L and then later starts going all over the place. Abyssal (talk) 14:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Done --Kanashimi (talk) 14:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Could you try running it again? I think when you reverted you re-added some of the extraneous original images and those may have affected the results. Abyssal (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: I find some bugs to improve and fixed them. Please check again. --Kanashimi (talk) 14:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Here's an example of an image that didn't make it into the article: File:Caninia torquia coral KGS.jpg. No need to repetitively add images, there were some images already in the article, so that may be what threw it off. Abyssal (talk) 12:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: For the images lacked, may you give some examples, so we can quickly find out what is going wrong. And for the problem of image order, I think it is because I won't add the images already existing in the article. Perhaps I should add all images whether it exists or not? --Kanashimi (talk) 08:37, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi:Sorry I haven't been on despite your efforts to assist this project, I was working long weekend shifts. Anyway, it seems like the scan isn't picking up on all the pictures from the articles and the images aren't displayed in the same order as the articles they come from are listed. The Archimedes thing isn't a big deal. There's a common prehistoric bryozoan with that name. Maybe I'll try to disambiguate all the links to it before we do the final run. Until then we need to make sure we're picking up all the images and ordering them correctly. Abyssal (talk) 03:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Coding... Sure. I will try. --Kanashimi (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Please let me know any time when you are ready. --Kanashimi (talk) 11:51, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ready when you are, Kana-chan! Abyssal (talk) 02:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Sorry! to make you wait so long. I am doing the task and please let me know how about the result. --Kanashimi (talk) 01:31, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kanashimi: Thank you! Worked perfectly. Abyssal (talk) 02:11, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: Sorry! to make you wait so long. I am doing the task and please let me know how about the result. --Kanashimi (talk) 01:31, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Save and save links Sports Reference
The site closes in the near future, it is necessary to save links in the web archive. Is it possible to collect all the links from our articles to this site on one page for the convenience of archiving? Many were included through Template: SportsReference. In general, it would be necessary to archive all the athletes' profiles from there, regardless of whether we have articles. Who has what to offer? It would be good to do this in Wikipedia in all languages. JukoFF (talk) 13:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- It's already archived on the Wayback Machine. At least it should be.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:55, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Reference suggest
Can a bot or tool be coded which has the capability to suggest references for article, or maybe statement? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 09:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- If you mean an automated process whose input is a chunk of text (article or sentence) and whose output is a list of URLs of relevance, it will be way beyond the capacities of any volunteer bot-coder, and possibly of the WMF servers computational power or storage. It would probably be feasible to feed the text to a given search engine and reformat the result to have a list of URLs but I am guessing you expected something more. TigraanClick here to contact me 11:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- There's a whole set of {{Find sources}} type of templates which already exist, and could be a useful reply to the first half of the request (without replying to the "suggest statements" part of the request, which doesn't seem like much of a good idea either). --Francis Schonken (talk) 13:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Authority control template
A Wikidata query informs us that there (are at the time of writing) 1,556 people with an article on English Wikipedia, and an ORCID iD in Wikidata, However, Category:Wikipedia articles with ORCID identifiers has only 1,421 embers.
This means that 135 - a considerable percentage - of the people found by the Wikidata query do not have the {{Authority control}} template at the foot of their article.
The same is no doubt true for other authority control identifiers, such as VIAF.
We need a bot, please, to add the template to those articles, and perhaps more.
If the template is added to an article, and no relevant identifier is found, it does not display - so it can safely be added to all biographical articles (if this might fall foul of COSMETICBOT, then it could be added as part of other tasks, such as general fixes done by AWB.
Can anyone kindly oblige? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Incidentally, the same applies in several other Wikipedias, for example Spanish, should anyone feel inclined to help in those also. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Change the name of sub catogories of Members of the Parliament of England
The categories under Category:Members of the Parliament of England (pre-1707) by parliament were created before July 2016 when RfC on date ranges was closed. That RfC changed how the MOS:DATERANGE is specified.
Currently the names that contain a date-range are in the format ccyy–yy (unless the century is different) rather than the range style now recommended by MOS:DATERANGE ccyy–ccyy. So I am requesting a bot job to run through all the subcategories and sub-subcategories changing the name of the subcategories and sub-subcategories to ccyy–ccyy and the corresponding category names in articles that are within such categories.
For example the subcategory Category:16th-century English MPs contains a subcategory Category:English MPs 1512–14. To be MOS:DATERANGE compliment it ought to be renamed Category:English MPs 1512–1514.
-- PBS (talk) 10:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_September_23#Redate.2Frename_all_subcategories_and_sub-subcategories_that_contain_a_date_range_per_MOS:DATERANGE -- PBS (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Convert amp pages to full pages
If someone is editing on mobile, there's a chance the link they wish to cite will be an amp page. Requesting a bot to identify these pages and convert them to the full version. Example: amp full.Terrorist96 (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Terrorist96:
I was going to see how to do this at the very least, however, so far I have been unable to find out how to get the references through the API and the only way I have found is disabled (this for anyone interested).I will keep looking as this has piqued my interest. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:06, 22 October 2017 (UTC)- I appear to have found a different way to do it that has worked in private tests (on own installation of MediaWiki), however, do you have a ballpark figure as to how many pages this would potentially affect Terrorist96? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @TheSandDoctor: Probably somewhere in the mid tens to low hundreds. Something to make it more difficult though is that different sites have different URL syntax for the amp pages. Do a Google search on your mobile and click any results you see that have a lightning bolt next to them to see. Thanks!Terrorist96 (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- That was something that I initially had an issue with, however, I was able to resolve by just removing the first part of the URL for example, with https://www.google.ca /amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2017/9/19/16333344/apple-ios-11-iphone-ipad-download-available-now, I was able to get it to work by simply removing the www.google.ca/amp/s/ part as most of the sites I have tested with (aside from The Verge) do not contain the "/platform/amp" bit (in the case of The Verge, once the google.ca/amp/s/ bit is removed, the website cleans itself up on mobile once you click the link).
- A bot like this would have to cycle through all of the articles in Wikipedia however, wouldn't it Terrorist96? (Bot would be looking for "google.XX(.XX)" followed by "/amp/s/", and only editing when it found it). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- I forgot about URLs that begin with google.xx. If you open an amp search result on mobile in a new tab, it won't have the google.xx prefix. Compare: https://www.google DOT com/amp/www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2017/10/23/chipotle-is-giving-away-free-burritos-for-year.amp.html and http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2017/10/23/chipotle-is-giving-away-free-burritos-for-year.amp.html. Going to either of these links on mobile will work and will remain as the amp page. Going to the first URLs using a desktop/laptop will redirect to the full version but the second version will remain as amp. More examples of the variations: https://www.topgear.com/car-news/supercars/mclaren-mso-r-two-supercar-special?amp https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/early-lead/wp/2017/10/23/kyrie-irvings-25000-fine-for-insulting-a-heckler-hurts-worse-he-gave-away-his-tell/ (have to remove the entire "amphtml/" from the URL to convert it). And there are a lot more.
- @TheSandDoctor: Probably somewhere in the mid tens to low hundreds. Something to make it more difficult though is that different sites have different URL syntax for the amp pages. Do a Google search on your mobile and click any results you see that have a lightning bolt next to them to see. Thanks!Terrorist96 (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- I appear to have found a different way to do it that has worked in private tests (on own installation of MediaWiki), however, do you have a ballpark figure as to how many pages this would potentially affect Terrorist96? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Also, when I tried saving my post, I got this warning about the google.com/amp url (so it seems that Wiki already prevents you from posting a google.com/amp/ link, which is why I modified it above):
Your edit was not saved because it contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia's blacklist.
Blacklisting indicates past problems with the link, so any requests should clearly demonstrate how inclusion would benefit Wikipedia. |
The following link has triggered a protection filter:google.com/amp/ Either that exact link, or a portion of it (typically the root domain name) is currently blocked. Solutions:
- If the url used is a url shortener/redirect, please use the full url in its place, for example, use youtube.com rather than youtu.be,
- If the url is a google url, please look to use the (full) original source, not the google shortcut or its alternative.
- Look to find an alternative url that is considered authoritative.
Terrorist96 (talk) 18:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Category:Storyboard artists and Category:American storyboard artists redundancy
There is a great deal of redundancy between the parent Category:Storyboard artists and the child Category:American storyboard artists. Per WP:SUPERCAT "an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. In other words, a page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category." Could someone create a bot to remove the redundancy? Thanks! Mtminchi08 (talk) 08:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
BBC Genome in citations
Citations to BBC Genome should be amended thus, as the Genome is merely a front end to scans of The Radio Times. Metadata can be fetched using Citoid (or the Zotero translator for Genome, which Citoid uses). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
AWB to fix WP:TEMPLATECAT template
{{National Heroes of Indonesia}} currently includes a transcluded category, Category:National Heroes of Indonesia. Can someone with AWB run over the pages linked in that template to add the category and then remove the category from the template? (Besides the book link.) --Izno (talk) 21:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @JJMC89: Can you take care of Template:CCPLeaders as well? --Izno (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done Izno. Please ignore the link error in the edit summaries. :) Nihlus 14:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @JJMC89: Can you take care of Template:CCPLeaders as well? --Izno (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Auto notification?
I'd like to be notified by bot every time someone joins the WikiProject JavaScript. Is there a bot that can do this? The Transhumanist 06:02, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Why don't you just watchlist the membership list? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- A non-bot way to do that would be to move the participants into a subpage. Have that subpage in a category which you track by rss feed. Agathoclea (talk) 20:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Reducing Lint errors in Misnested tag with different rendering in HTML5 and HTML4
To reduce lint errors in Lint errors: Misnested tag with different rendering in HTML5 and HTML4, would someone be able to do a bot run that would do the following search and replaces:
- [[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]] with [[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]
- [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]] with [[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]
Maybe even cyberpower678 might be able to get Cyberbot II to do it? -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I don't have time to code up a bot for that right now. If someone with AWB experience would like to do, I would be grateful. Pinging Magioladitis—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:52, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- There are *two* unclosed tags in the signature. One is the sup tag that User:WOSlinker has identified above. But, there is also an unclosed span tag in the talk page link in the signature. That should be closed as well. Could someone fix the bot's signature (which should be a simpler task for Cyberpower678?) besides fixing all pages that already have the old signature? SSastry (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note that the html5-misnesting category is a false positive (I am fixing my code that triggers this). But, it will just shift the linter issue to a lower priority category (missing-end-tag) that doesn't affect tidy replacement. This doesn't reduce the usefulness of fixing them, just lowers the urgency a bit. SSastry (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- There are *two* unclosed tags in the signature. One is the sup tag that User:WOSlinker has identified above. But, there is also an unclosed span tag in the talk page link in the signature. That should be closed as well. Could someone fix the bot's signature (which should be a simpler task for Cyberpower678?) besides fixing all pages that already have the old signature? SSastry (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- The signature has long been fixed.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Doing... – Nihlus (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done – Nihlus (talk) 21:58, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Thanks. However, there still seems to be some cyberbot links to update. When I try this search here are a few records returned. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, AWB has an issue with processing pages with certain unicode characters. I decided not to alter anything further given the response at my talk page and bot noticeboard. Ssastry agreed. Nihlus 13:16, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Thanks. However, there still seems to be some cyberbot links to update. When I try this search here are a few records returned. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Remove links from user talk pages to domain squatter
My shared DDNS domain was lost to a domain squatter. I would like the mass removal of links left by DPL bot on User talk pages. In short remove " (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)" from edits like [5]. — Dispenser 17:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Does User:JaGa give permission, to edit his talk page posts? He hasn't logged in since April. -- GreenC 12:48, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Him, User:R'n'B, and myself control the bot. These links are boon for the domain squatter and are worthless once they're fixed. — Dispenser 14:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
List of pages in namespace 0-15 that contain the string "dispenser.homenet.org":
Collapsed List
|
---|
|
- If someone (User:Dispenser ?) could look at namespace 0 and 8-13 that would be good. I can start on a script for namespace 3. -- GreenC 15:45, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- 0, 10, 12 done — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:57, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- The script is done writing for NS3. example edit. It will leave an edit summary, like for 8 changes: 8 dispenser.homenet.org URLs deleted due to domain hijacking by squatters (discussion) .. don't believe it needs bot approval since it's talk page and approved by the editor. -- GreenC 16:42, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Looks good. There's also a
http://
variant. For the historical record, while Wikipedia has methods of discourging link spammming (nofollow), many of our mirrors aren't so cautious. — Dispenser 17:43, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Looks good. There's also a
- If someone (User:Dispenser ?) could look at namespace 0 and 8-13 that would be good. I can start on a script for namespace 3. -- GreenC 15:45, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @GreenC: please link to the discussion with Special:Permalink, in about a week all the links in your bot's edit summaries are going to be broken and won't point to this discussion once it's been archived.
- Is there no replacement URL in the meantime? Legoktm (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- 1000 pages done and will wait to finished the rest for feedback. Permalink added. Dispenser didn't specify a replacement for NS3 rather removal. Some were replaced in the smaller NS's. I haven't looked at the others yet. -- GreenC 20:01, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment The bot edited my User talk and pointed me to this discussion. Denying cybersquatters is a good cause so I guess the bot's actions are alright. --Lenticel (talk) 02:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment - I wasn't happy having content removed from my talk archives. Reverted the bot & replaced homenet.org with info.tm which fixed the problem without loss of function. Cabayi (talk) 09:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Also note that Dispenser's request was for User talk pages, not all namespaces. The removal of links from help pages may be particularly ummm... unhelpful. Cabayi (talk) 09:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Just realised, other namespaces are being done manually with replacement, not bot removal. My bad. Cabayi (talk) 09:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)- Now sure why Dispenser wanted to remove vs replace. [6] -- GreenC 15:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- @GreenC: The links were convenience links, useless after a month. I don't know if dispenser.info.tm will be permanent and tools.wmflabs.org has been yanked away from me too. In the end, its less and easier maintenance not having these links in the first place. — Dispenser 16:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Dispenser - Fine by me. I've completed the checked above including the majority of NS3 (some remaining nobots, locked pages, non-DPL posts). The rest are too random to remove by bot which were added by users themselves. It could replace with a different URL, like to tools, but it hasn't been established as a bot job, probably would need a botrequest. -- GreenC 18:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- @GreenC: The links were convenience links, useless after a month. I don't know if dispenser.info.tm will be permanent and tools.wmflabs.org has been yanked away from me too. In the end, its less and easier maintenance not having these links in the first place. — Dispenser 16:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Now sure why Dispenser wanted to remove vs replace. [6] -- GreenC 15:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Questions - What exactly happened to cause you to lose control of the domain? Is there anything preventing you from seizing it back? If so, what? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 18:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Can someone remove all images from this article series?
Can someone use a bot to remove all of the images from the commented-out list of articles here? Abyssal (talk) 12:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Collapsed List
|
---|
|
- Hope you don't mind, I turned it into a collapsed list to save everyone having to press edit to see what was in the list. - X201 (talk) 13:03, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Abyssal: To clarify, you want every image removed from the articles above? Nihlus 14:35, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Yes, please! Abyssal (talk) 14:36, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done Abyssal Nihlus 15:01, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Nihlus:! Abyssal (talk) 15:17, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done Abyssal Nihlus 15:01, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Yes, please! Abyssal (talk) 14:36, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Template:Infobox television episode updates
Made some edits to the parameters of {{Infobox television episode}}, code in Template:Infobox television episode/sandbox, test cases in Template:Infobox television episode/testcases. Requesting a bot after no objection at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Template:Infobox television episode updates. Updates to template have already been performed; current usages of the template will not be affected by this update.
- Current usage of parameter:
|episode_list = [[Game of Thrones (season 7)|''Game of Thrones'' (season 7)]]<br>[[List of Game of Thrones episodes|List of ''Game of Thrones'' episodes]]
- Updated usage of parameter:
|season_list = Game of Thrones (season 7) |episode_list = List of Game of Thrones episodes
A bot would just need one set of regex to make these changes.
- Find:
\|\s*episode_list\s*=\s*\[\[([^\|\]]*).*<br[^>]*>\[\[([^\|\]]*).*
- Replace with:
| season_list = $1\n| episode_list = $2
Cheers. -- AlexTW 06:26, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- This should be fairly straight forward. I am just double checking the page list since the tools don't match the database. I will file a BRFA once I have it. Nihlus 06:31, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- BRFA filed. Nihlus 07:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done AlexTheWhovian, let me know if any were missed. Nihlus 19:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: Thank you! And will do. -- AlexTW 01:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Linefeed "hunter-killer"
It's been argued that linefeed (LF) characters in the wiki source "create many ... issues" including "both rendering [and] accessibility issues" (Help talk:Citation Style 1#Pointless whitespace error). Someone's set up the citation templates to throw red error messages that try to force editors to find and remove LFs in the template input. This is extremely undesirable, an abuse of the citation templates to try to arm-twist people into doing technical work they're often not competent to do (the average editor doesn't even know what a linefeed is), and interfering with a basic all-editors responsibility to cite sources.
This is obviously bot work, and since it's fixing legit accessibility and rendering problems, it's not WP:COSMETICBOT. I would suggest
- A one-time job to hunt down the extant cases, and replace them with carriage returns (CR) if alone, or strip them from a CR/LF pair.
- A daily (or hourly, or weekly, or whatever) maintenance job to find new cases and do the same.
Frankly, it's weird that MediaWiki doesn't already deal with this as part of its routine parsing upon page save. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 21:26, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- SMcCandlish is wrong that flagging the errors in CS1 templates is undesirable, but he's right that bots can be leveraged here. Citation parameters should all be free of linefeeds. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- That borders on a straw man; I did not suggest that flagging errors in CS1 templates is undesirable. I said that flagging this particular cleanup task in a CS1 template is. See also proof by assertion. I've given policy and common-sense-based reasons why doing that is wrong, and all you've got is "nuh-uh, no it's not". This isn't a playground. And I'm trying to get you what want in a much more effective way than trying to press-gang people into trivial geeky gnoming when they're trying to do actual encyclopedia work. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 14:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Why are CR desirable when LF are apparently not? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Frankly, this proposal makes no sense whatsoever. The LF character is added to the wikitext whenever you hit ↵ Enter. It's not invisible except in the way space is invisible and it doesn't cause problems. The suggestion to replace it with CR is literally impossible, since MediaWiki converts CRLF sequences and lone CR characters into LF when saving.
- There might be some sense to a more specific proposal to remove newlines from certain contexts (e.g. certain parameters in certain templates). But that would need a clear proposal as to which contexts those are, as well as sufficient analysis to establish that it's not WP:CONTEXTBOT. Anomie⚔ 16:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Here's an example of where this causes an issue
- Smith, J. (1999). "[[The way
things are]]". {{cite journal}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(help); Cite journal requires |journal=
(help); line feed character in |title=
at position 10 (help)
I'll admit, I was under the impression that
- Smith, J. (1999). "The way things are". Retrieved 2012-09-23.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help); line feed character in|title=
at position 8 (help)
would equally be broken, but apparently those are not. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- I wonder if this will be the same with the new parsing model. Anyway the bug as demonstrated above is eminently bottable. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC).
List of most thanked Wikipedians
We have lots of lists of Wikipedians, accounts who have made the most edits, created the most new articles, deleted the most pages and handed out the most blocks. Why not have a list of Wikipedians who have received the most thanks? ϢereSpielChequers 13:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- If this is done, the actual number should remain private. It might list the top 10 in no particular order with no numbers. Otherwise it creates a score system which will become gamed and loose its innocence and appeal, becoming a little grasping. "I'll help you, BTW a thank you is always appreciated". Top score thank you barnstars follow. Ugh. Leave me out. -- GreenC 14:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- OK so an opt out system would be needed as applies at WP:EDITS. Could we use the same opt out list or would this need a new one? ϢereSpielChequers 16:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Could be framed like WP:100, WP:200, WP:300... Great, you made the list of editors thanked 100 or more times! Where you rank within that list is not so important. Actually asking someone to thank you might be frowned upon, especially if such requests were frequently made by the same editor. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- A variant could be how many people have now thanked you "congratulations you have now been thanked by 20 different fellow Wikipedians" ϢereSpielChequers 06:56, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- Technical info: Data provided via mw:Extension:Thanks. You could even write a bot that sent thanks for edits meeting specified criteria via the API for sending thanks. Queried via mw:API:Logevents. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Every scriptkiddy with 10 minutes of spare time could write a script that ensures his account ends up at #1. Bad idea. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 18:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- You all may find this of use: User:Faebot/thanks CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Database reports/Thanks usage --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 17:12, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
OfficialChartsBot
I would like to request this following task to point chart references to the correct weeks instead of pointing them to the incorrect page showing the up to date chart. For example, scope="row"{{singlechart|UK|2|artist=Calvin Harris|song=Feel So Close|date=2011-09-03}} points us to the most recent chart but changing it to scope="row"{{singlechart|UK|2|artist=Calvin Harris|song=Feel So Close|date=20110903}}, it directs us to the relevant week as to when the song made it's highest entry when it got there the first time.
Hence the bot will do this: {{singlechart|UK|peak|artist=artistname|song=name of song|date=yyyy-mm-dd}} → {{singlechart|UK|peak|artist=artistname|song=name of song|date=yyyymmdd}}, which removes the dashes in the date parameter. That way every music singles page which has this type of code will then have the correct links on citations. Also, the same problem also exists in the Scottish charts. Iggy (talk) 16:14, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Iggy the Swan: Couldn't the template reformat the date parameter before building it into the URL? This would save having to edit each article. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- Not a good task for a bot.: @Iggy the Swan and John of Reading: It can. Within the template, you would just need to wrap
{{{date}}}
with{{digits}}
as appropriate. It will strip anything that's not a digit for those instances. @Iggy the Swan: I can make the request for you, but exactly which links need to be formatted like this? Please provide full links. Thanks. Nihlus 01:33, 6 October 2017 (UTC)- Sorry, I'm afraid I have to pass it on because I do not know how this can be solved unless someone else has a better understanding than me. Iggy (talk) 06:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Iggy the Swan: I was saying I know how to solve it, I just need to know which chart URLs use the YYYMMDD format. Nihlus 10:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- You mean something like this: http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-chart/20131103/7501/ (UK) and http://www.officialcharts.com/charts/scottish-singles-chart/20100912/41/ (Scottish charts)? They have the format yyyymmdd which I have found. Iggy (talk) 12:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Iggy the Swan: I was saying I know how to solve it, I just need to know which chart URLs use the YYYMMDD format. Nihlus 10:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm afraid I have to pass it on because I do not know how this can be solved unless someone else has a better understanding than me. Iggy (talk) 06:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Not a good task for a bot.: @Iggy the Swan and John of Reading: It can. Within the template, you would just need to wrap
Auto listing previous CFD discussions
Per WT:CFD#Auto_listing_previous_discussions there is a desire to have previous CFDs listed at discussions for repeat nominations. A bot should be able to do this, by looking at the category talk pages, or looking through old revisions of the category pages. - Evad37 [talk] 06:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Perhaps we may give a link to the AfD/CfD discussions in the talk page, so when someone want to delete a page, he/she can read previous discussions via the talk page? And it's easy to find previous discussions by the method. Even for the case of Category:Undrafted National Basketball Association players, WhatLinksHere may give a good guess. --Kanashimi (talk) 06:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Remove double colons from subpages of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team
A vast majority of the lint errors for double-leading-colons in links (which are no longer rendered as correct links) are from bot-created pages that are subpages of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. I wanted to propose a bot that would fix these errors to unclog the lint error list so we can identify other sources of such errors. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:32, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- Actually there are comparatively few pages, at least on the first few pages of the list, they are merely repeated. I have fixed a bunch of them, will revisit. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC).
- Done All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 09:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks. As a side note, the WP 1.0 errors seem to stem from the bot predating the creation of the Draft namespace, so it doesn't know what to call it. As a result, an article that was supposed to be :Draft:Example ends up as ::Example instead. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:43, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. As a side note, the WP 1.0 errors seem to stem from the bot predating the creation of the Draft namespace, so it doesn't know what to call it. As a result, an article that was supposed to be :Draft:Example ends up as ::Example instead. --Ahecht (TALK
- Done All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 09:59, 11 October 2017 (UTC).
To me, it looks like the vast majority of the errors (at least in the first few pages) are in talk page signatures of "::User:RHaworth", which could probably be fixed by a bot or a patient AWB editor. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- They are, and I am fixing them - they are mostly templated warnings to long-gone editors. There are a few other sigs that are similar, and are easy fixes. Most of the rest is also easy fixes. Interestingly the number has been going up as well as down, so it might be useful to get this category cleared. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:12, 11 October 2017 (UTC).
- The category is likely growing as more and more old pages are reparsed. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)- Most of this is Done - will be interesting to see if the numbers creep up. I will try to work through the remaining pages, excluding user talk pages, where people are getting unhappy, mostly on the behalf of others. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC).
- Nice work. It looks like we are back to needing someone to run an approved bot to clean up the rest of them. Any takers? – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the rest of the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team log errors semi-manually with AWB, but WP 1.0 bot has not been updated to recognize the Draft namespace (none of the maintainers are still active on Wikipedia) so a bot is likely needed to catch and fix new errors as they occur. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC)- I can have my bot clean up the rest once it is done with its current task. Nihlus 15:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the rest of the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team log errors semi-manually with AWB, but WP 1.0 bot has not been updated to recognize the Draft namespace (none of the maintainers are still active on Wikipedia) so a bot is likely needed to catch and fix new errors as they occur. --Ahecht (TALK
- Nice work. It looks like we are back to needing someone to run an approved bot to clean up the rest of them. Any takers? – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- Most of this is Done - will be interesting to see if the numbers creep up. I will try to work through the remaining pages, excluding user talk pages, where people are getting unhappy, mostly on the behalf of others. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:18, 12 October 2017 (UTC).
- The category is likely growing as more and more old pages are reparsed. --Ahecht (TALK
- They are, and I am fixing them - they are mostly templated warnings to long-gone editors. There are a few other sigs that are similar, and are easy fixes. Most of the rest is also easy fixes. Interestingly the number has been going up as well as down, so it might be useful to get this category cleared. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:12, 11 October 2017 (UTC).
Portal: Current Event origin bot is not working
Move ~1700 pages per WP:JR/SR
The discussion is here: Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#Comma before Jr. and Sr., and the list of ~1678 pages is here: User:Certes/JrSr/titles. A redirect may or may not exist at the destination page for up to 103, depending on how long it takes the CSD G6 backlog to clear. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 22:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Substitution of music infobox templates
I no longer have the time to maintain my bot's task 1, and it has been more difficult than I expected, partially due to AWB quirks and a lack of helpful documentation. So, I would like someone else to help substitute the following templates, removing integer parameters in those which are named "Infobox", and removing hidden comments in the first line of the templates. If more than one of these is on a page then all should be substituted in the same edit. The bot does not really need to do anything else since most of the cleanup is handled by the substitution through Module:Unsubst-infobox (although if you want you can additionally replace |length={{Duration|m=mm|s=ss}}
with |length=mm:ss
and stuff like that).
- {{Infobox single}} (returns {{Infobox song}} when substituted)
- {{Infobox song}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Infobox album}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Singles}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Extra chronology}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Extra album cover}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Extra track listing}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{External music video}} (returns itself when substituted)
- {{Extra music sample}} (returns {{Audio sample}} when substituted)
- {{Audiosample}} (returns {{Audio sample}} when substituted)
- {{Audio sample}} (returns itself when substituted)
Furthermore, pages in these categories should not have the templates substituted due to errors which need to be fixed manually for various reasons. I would have done the substitutions sooner by using User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster but it would substitute all of the transclusions, and at a very slow rate (since AnomieBOT does a lot of other things and never runs tasks in parallel). The table nesting errors are probably bot-fixable but I couldn't do it with AWB and I can't write in Python.
- Category:Audio sample to be checked (1)
- Category:Music infoboxes with Module:String errors (3)
- Category:Music infoboxes with malformed table placement (1)
I believe these would not count as cosmetic changes, since some of these are per the result of TfD discussions which closed with a consensus to merge, and because pages in these templates with deprecated parameters are automatically included in a tracking category and would be removed from the category upon substitution. About 200,000 pages would be affected. Jc86035 (talk) 07:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Jc86035: I should be able to assist with these. Do you have your bot configuration for these tasks that you can send to me? I'll still need to file a BRFA, but would like to make sure it is manageable for me as well. Nihlus 08:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: My bot task so far has solely focused on removing articles from the error categories and not actually substituting the templates or making other fixes, although I can send my AWB configuration to you if it helps. Jc86035 (talk) 08:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Jc86035: Sure. Although, I am not sure how to exclude pages in certain categories as I've never attempted that, if it's even possible. And are you going to be running your bot still for the tasks mentioned in the BRFA you filed? Nihlus 08:18, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: My bot task so far has solely focused on removing articles from the error categories and not actually substituting the templates or making other fixes, although I can send my AWB configuration to you if it helps. Jc86035 (talk) 08:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
@Nihlus: No, I don't think so. I don't think I have the time to do it and an experienced pywiki user could do the fixes much faster than I could.
Most of these fixes, for the Module:String errors, would probably involve changing the parameter name from |Last/Next single/album=
to |prev/next_title=
to bypass the Module:String fixes if there's no date in the parameter and the title doesn't contain any slashes (and removing the italics, bold, quote marks (only if paired at start/end or the title is enclosed in a link – see AWB configuration for how irritating these are)), and wait three to twenty years for the Wikidata-compatible infoboxes to come around for the dates to be added. (Note that |Last single=
and similar can also occasionally be |last_single=
.) There are also
other problems
|
---|
|
There are also other probably-automatable fixes which do not remove pages from the error categories:
other problems
|
---|
|
Naturally, I did not get around to any of these, and none of these are in the AWB configuration. Pretty much all of the AWB configuration is adding <br />
and fixing italics, quote marks, brackets, etc..
This discussion (and some others on Ojorojo's talk page) may help. Jc86035 (talk) 09:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
The page list is probably too long for AWB to do on its own (I think it sets its own limit at 25,000), so I would collate all of the pages transcluding the templates into a text document, remove duplicate lines with BBEdit or another similarly featured text editor (leaving one of each group of duplicates), then do the same for the pages in the error categories, then stick both lists into the same text document and remove duplicate lines (leaving none of the duplicate lines). Jc86035 (talk) 09:19, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Migrate from deprecated WikiProject Caribbean country task forces
Reposting...
Four of the task forces for WikiProject Caribbean have graduated to full-fledged WikiProjects with their own banner templates, and the task force parameters have been deprecated: {{WikiProject Cuba}}, {{WikiProject Grenada}}, {{WikiProject Haiti}}, and {{WikiProject Trinidad and Tobago}}. We need a bot to go through the existing transclusions of {{WikiProject Caribbean}} and perform the following changes:
- If none of the four task forces above are assigned, leave the {{WikiProject Caribbean}} template as it is.
- If any of the four task forces above are assigned, remove the relevant task force parameters and add the relevant WikiProject banners. If there are no other task force parameters remaining after 1 or more have been migrated, remove the {{WikiProject Caribbean}} template.
Please also migrate the task-force importance parameters if they exist, for example |cuba-importance=
. If there isn't a task-force importance parameter, just leave the importance blank. The |class=
, |category=
, |listas=
, and |small=
parameters should be copied from {{WikiProject Caribbean}} template if they exist. Kaldari (talk) 20:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
- You start off with "reposting", so please provide links to the previous discussions. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:25, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kaldari: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: There was nothing substantive discussed in the previous posting. Kaldari (talk) 07:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kaldari: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
BG19bot
The bot BG19bot was very helpful but has not been working for more than 6 months. And the bots "owner" has not been on Wikipedia since August. is there a way to start it up again, or a similar bot can be created?. BabbaQ (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Userscripts, and the future of outlines
Since this pertains to (semi) automation, I thought you might like a heads up about what I've been working on...
I'm in the process of building scripts for viewing outlines and for outline development. So that other programmers can follow along with how the source code works, I've provided extensive notes on the scripts' talk pages.
So far, there is:
- User:The Transhumanist/OutlineViewAnnotationToggler.js – this one provides a menu item to turn annotations on/off, so you can view lists bare when you want to (without annotations). When done, it will work on (the embedded lists of) all pages, not just outlines. Currently it is limited to outlines only, for development and testing purposes. It supports hotkey activation/deactivation of annotations, but that feature currently lacks an accurate viewport location reset for retaining the location on screen that the user was looking at. The program also needs an indicator that tells the user it is still on. Otherwise, you might wonder why a bare list has annotations in edit mode, when you go in to add some. :) Though it is functional as is. Check it out. After installing it, look at Outline of cell biology, and press ⇧ Shift+Alt+a. And again.
- User:The Transhumanist/RedlinksRemover.js – strips out entries in outlines that are nothing but a redlink. It removes them right out of the tree structure. But only end nodes (i.e., not parent nodes, which we need to keep). It delinks redlinks that have non-redlink offspring, or that have or are embedded in an annotation. It does not yet recognize entries that lack a bullet (it treats those as embedded). And of course, saving must be done manually by the user.
It is my objective to build a set of scripts that fully automate the process of creating outlines. This end goal is a long way off (AI-complete?). In the meantime, I hope to increase editor productivity as much as I can. Fifty percent automation would double an editor's productivity. I think I could reach 80% automation (a five-fold increase in productivity) within a couple years. Comments and suggestions are welcome.
There's more:
- User:The Transhumanist/StripSearchInWikicode.js – another script, which strips WP search results down to a bare list of links, and inserts wikilink formatting for ease of insertion of those links into lists. This is useful for gathering links for outlines. I'd like this script to sort its results. So, if you know how, or know someone who knows how, please let me know. A more immediate problem is that the output is interlaced with CR/LFs. I can't figure out how to get rid of them. Stripping them out in WikEd via regex is a tedious extra step. It would be nice to track them down and remove them with the script.
I look forward to your observations, concerns, ideas, and advice. The Transhumanist 08:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
File substitution
Please could someone substitutes the wrong File:Coccarda Italia.svg with the correct File:Coccarda Coppa Italia.svg. See here. Thanks --ArchEnzo 09:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)