Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 50

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Bot requests. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 45

←

Archive 48

Archive 49

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

→

Archive 55

At WT:STiki#Warning for registered users only the idea came up of having a bot to remove old warnings from IP talk pages. The rationale being that:

1. Admins generally consider warnings older than about 2 weeks to be stale
2. If the IP is shared, a new user could come across the messages and be put off
3. If people are interested they can look at the history of the IP user talk page.

Obviously there is an issue about the specifics of how the bot should work so I would like to discuss that here, if this is the appropriate venue.

As a starting point for discussion, I would like to suggest that we should first do a bot that deals with the cases most obviously in need of such a bot. For example:

Once this is up and running we can look at more complicated cases like when there are other messages on the talk page, and more contentious issues like should we removes warnings sooner.

Yaris678 (talk) 12:21, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes I like it! Something I've been hoping to do at some point, but not necessarily had the coding skills to achieve on my own. A good example is User talk:203.166.99.252, which used to be a School IP a few years ago, but has now been recycled as a general business IP that may be used in the future, which I moved all the warnings off to a talk page archive (my preference to blanking talk pages). A new IP user would not be scared off then by all the warnings on "their" talk page. A group to get involved in this conversation would be WikiProject user warnings. --Breno ^talk 13:16, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Instead on blanking the page I think the stale warnings should be archived. Dan653 (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I guess you could... although you could argue that it would be better not to, per WP:DENY.

What advantage do you see from archiving the warnings?

Would you archive all messages, or just warnings? I can see potential problems either way... but I guess that just archiving warnings would be preferable.

Would you have the standard {{Archives}} template at the top of the IPs talk page?

Yaris678 (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

"No talk page activity in the last 3 months" - Only 3 months? As an AC I find it helpful to see the full (if not most) of the IP's history on their talk page. I suggest 6 months at minimum. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley _talk 05:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

That was just a number I put out there for discussion. Happy for it to be longer. What period would you recommend? 8 months?

Hmmm... maybe a longer period like 8 months would also deal with any concerns over a need for archiving. You should be able to get an idea of the long history of an IP by looking at a small number of versions in the history.

Yaris678 (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, it might be useful to consider user activity. Should warnings be archived(/deleted) based on the number of months from the date of the warning? Or should we also check to see if the IP user has been inactive for a set time before taking action, too? --Breno ^talk 11:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think benefits of removing IP userpage messages outweighs the problems. Firstly, if people want to see previous messages they go to the talk page. Browsing page's history is more trouble (not to mention messages don't get all archived at the same time). Scripts (like TW) that open IP talk page for editing/message delivery will show the previous messages clearly and I doubt I would bother browsing history. Adding "welcome to Wikipedia" instead of higher level messages every time seems pointless if it is clear the IP has no intention to do so right now. Secondly, I often see IPs that come about to vandalise less frequent than that, like once a year, especially if their edit is unclear. This is when previous messages are most useful, so I can asses what they have done in the long-time past. I don't know if "Admins generally consider warnings older than about 2 weeks to be stale" is what really happens, but I would definitely pay attention to the long-term activity of an IP. Finally, this will trigger all the watchlists of those who watchlisted the IP (for those that don't hide bot edits). The cases where this is truly useful (like the school->business example or new genuine user) are not something a bot can detect anyway. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

It just means you (as someone reverting vandalism) need to make a small change. Rather than looking at the IP's talk page, look at the talk page history. If there are lots of entries saying "User warning for unconstructive editing" then it speaks for itself. In contrast, at the moment, new users, who don't know much about Wikipedia, are just being left confused.

I think the watchlist thing is something of a red herring. Lots of things come up on watchlists all the time. People are quite capable of filtering out what they are interested in. If this was something that was going to dominate watchlists I might agree... but actually it will be a small minority of lines.

Yaris678 (talk) 13:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

One of the options mentioned above is to archive, rather than delete. IP users can blank their talk page anyway, so an admin should be be checking things like page history and contributions when deciding on a block. Another good option than delete/archive is suggested below by Callanecc, to collapse. --Breno ^talk 11:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

If it's possible I'd much rather that the bot collapse warnings which are more than x months (whatever is decided - I'd suggest 6 or more) old. That way it's still easy to check on the IP's history and new user's don't see a huge bunch of warnings as soon as they look at their talk page. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

There is no precedent for removing or archiving IP talk pages. Please collapse them instead. Elizium23 (talk) 14:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

What happens to customised warnings and messages? What about regular discussions that are obviously stale? Just archive them. Osiris (talk) 02:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Just a note, there has been extensive discussion about this before and a pilot was launched to do exactly this. Rich Farmbrough, 15:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC).
  
• @Rich, Do you have a link to the pilot? Yaris678 (talk) 07:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
  • No I'm afraid not. It was someone from WMF running it, as part of new user outreach. I believe the BRFA was declined, withdrawn or expired in the end and there is no archived list of these, sadly. I expect a BAG member or a bot regular will remember the name of the bot or owner. Rich Farmbrough, 13:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC).
    
    • User:SharedIPArchiveBot operated by Petrb (talk · contribs) Elizium23 (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

A small number of the pages in Category:Articles with missing files have an ext link as a file page name, i.e File:http://SomeRandomLink.com. Can these be fixed with a bot? Ta. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

There are 121 114 74 58 left, the list is at User:Rich_Farmbrough/temp1000. Some of them are Wikipedia URLS so may be convertible into valid file names. Rich Farmbrough, 02:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC).

Basically it is not bottable. Rich Farmbrough, 13:54, 14 September 2012 (UTC).

All done. Rich Farmbrough, 05:26, 15 September 2012 (UTC).

Could someone make a bot that will edit navboxes that link to disambiguated redirects to point to the correct title? I do not mean any redirect, simply redirects that have the same article title with different disambiguation, like Neverwinter Nights (AOL game) which is a redirect to Neverwinter Nights (MMORPG), or Lost Girl (TV series) which redirects to Lost Girl, as these sorts of edits would be uncontroversial. This would only be necessary for navboxes, as redirects make them harder to navigate (they don't create the black link to show you where you currently are). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

How many of these are there? Rich Farmbrough, 01:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC).

Eh, probably not enough to justify this. Now that I think about it, it probably isn't as common project-wide as it is with video games, so I'm seeing a disproportionate amount (for some reason WP:VG editors love changing disambiguators). Thanks for replying, and nevermind. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 00:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I've just finished uploading in Wikimedia Commons de audio files with the 306 names of the 308 portuguese municipalities (two of them have the same name. Now, I would like that they could be "available" on the pages, editing this part "(Portuguese pronunciation: [ɐˈβɾɐ̃tɨʃ])" that would become (Portuguese pronunciation: [ɐˈβɾɐ̃tɨʃ] ^ⓘ) by adding the ogg file link, in this example on Abrantes Municipality's page. I think this "Template : IPA-pt" exists in all of them. I think a bot or a semibot would do this a lot faster!!! Another way would be by changing the "Geobox" but I think that it would more dangerous. Thank you. FilipeFalcão (talk) 21:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

videosurf.com now is part of a bing videos search results that get concatenated into a gallery of images. To me it would seem that this is not encyclopaedic, and that the links should all be neutralised as being in contravention of Wikipedia:External links — billinghurst sDrewth 13:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Seeing how Category:Userboxes is a container category, it should only contain subcategories. As such, I'd like to request that a bot be made to move all pages from Category:Userboxes into Category:Unsorted userboxes. I don't think it would be a recurring task, as userboxes aren't created that often, but I'll leave that to the bot creator's judgement. ❤ Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 14:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I guess I could do the ~3,390 templates as a one-off task.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  02:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I'll make the BRFA tomorrow.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't really object, I just think that removing the "container" tag from the category would be much quicker and simpler. If anyone actually cares about categorisation of userboxes, then the better solution is to actually sort the userboxes into their sub-categories and a new "Miscellaneous userboxes" sub-category. Rich Farmbrough, 15:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC).

That's something to consider. However, if we considered doing the same for all container categories, we'd end up with none, and subcats would be used less. Let's see what others have to say.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:18, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

It seems like you objection is against container categories in general. In order for us to do what you say, I think, to stay consistent, we'd have to abolish container categories in general, which would probably be worthy of an RfC in WP:CD. Also, we already have a "Miscellaneous userboxes" sub-category: the above-mentioned Category:Unsorted userboxes. "Unsorted" is better than "miscellaneous", as "unsorted" implies that pages should only be there temporarily, and are to be sorted, while "miscellaneous" encourages people to just put everything in there and never sort them. Discourse analysis. ❤ Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 14:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking that this may be too much trouble, but I figured that I would request it. Would it be possible to detect foreign text in an article and tag it with the appropriate template? To make it easier for the bot creator, you could possibly just implement tagging for the more common foreign languages. ❤ Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 14:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

There are about 2,500 talk pages with substituted Oldafdfull. Could someone make a list of all of them and, if possible fix them? Example 1, Example 2. The number is an estimate based on wikisearch on Talk pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

My bot has approval for substituting templates...does that apply to de-substituting too? Meh. Doing.... LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 00:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Haven't started yet, but I found a bunch more broken ones too like [1]. This is going to require a larger than expected cleanup. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 03:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Magioladitis, would you be able to generate the 2.5k page list for me? My script is ready, but I'm only able to find ~18 pages with the standard api search (of which I fixed them all). Thanks, LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 06:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

It turns it's not only Oldafdfull. Example 3. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

To et the list search for class="messagebox standard-talk" in talk pages. Let me see if I can make AWB to make this list for us. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

A list can be found in here. It needs some polishing which I didn't do. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Still doing... I've done a bunch so far, but a bug was raised on my talkpage which I'm currently fixing. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Almost all templates linked from Template:Football in North America templates have categories and the navbox in the template's code. We need to fix this and move categories/navbox to a documentation page. This requires two steps:

• Step 1
• Step 2 -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I am fighting a loosing battle at Category:Articles with missing files. There are at least a couple of bots that remove deleted image links from pages but it seems that they are a little lazy. An example I came across is File:ClaremontDesign.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). It was deleted in August and it is used on a number of different pages. How do we make sure the bots do their job properly? I don't want to sack them because they can be quite hard-working... -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of removing missing files unless there were deleted. If someone by mistake changes a filename and create a redlink the bot will come and completely remove the file. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I think, on balance, they should be removed. Some are obviously wrong, eg an ext link, or no file extention, or good faith bad edits, but I think a lot of it may be deletion or renaming over at Commons. Removal, rather than commenting out is better, IMHO, since it removes "code clutter", and a comment on a page may not lead to a new image being put up. Finally, in some case an image is not really needed. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:27, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

• I support the deletion suggestion. There's currently a backlog of about 8000 articles with redlinked files. It's vanishingly unlikely that'll ever be zeroed by hand; and it would be a waste of good editor resource if it were. If anything, the removal will do good by providing an edit summary alerting watchers to the demise of a file. (Deletion on commons would not be on their radar unles they've visited the article since deletion). No information is lost; should anyone want the old filename, it's in the history. And we lose what is otherwise a redlink entirely useless to and confusing for the non-editing readers. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Just came across this example: File:Assia Abdullah.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). It was deleted over at Commons since it lacked licensing info. Is this a common thing maybe. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker operates locally on wikis based on deletion of files at Commons, similarly it will move files locally where it is told of the move/rename of an image at Commons. With regard to the removals, yes it is a common thing when the hosting requirements of Commons is not met, that said, Commons admins should consider whether the file should be moved to a local wiki as part of the removal from Commons, and template exist to help the bots do that process, see Commons:Template:Fair use delete, and if an admin deletes something that can be hsoted legitimately with fair use, then prod them at Commons to undelete and to label with this template. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Do you know why CommonsDelinker forgot to remove this file from Caterpillar 797F? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:49, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Is a bot able to detect and revert any bad faith or good faith bad edits to image links where the result becomes a redlinked image? Examp\es: [2], [3], [4]. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Check Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Combine_multiple_common_categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I request an AWB bot to change {{WikiProject Guyana|class=stub|importance=low}} to {{WikiProject South America|class=stub|importance=low|Guyana=yes|Guyana-importance=low}} , or better yet, the same change, but carry class= and importance= parameter values for Guyana templates to the equivalent South America templates.--DThomsen8 (talk) 19:23, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

 Doing... Magioladitis (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done Magioladitis (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

This is not you're normal typo bot request!

Is there a bot that will correct the spelling of of a link to a redirect tagged with {{R from misspelling}}. (I thought I read that User:WildBot did that, but it looks like I was wrong.) If not would this be a good task for a bot. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Coding... →Σσς. 07:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

While you're at it, maybe you could also make the bot fix links that have an accidentally have an "Editing" at the bigging of them. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 09:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

False positives could be a problem with that idea, but if the bot stuck to fixing "Editing [namespace]" (e..g. Editing User:Example) then that shouden't be much of a ploblem. Maybe the bot could also move pages to remove the "Editing". Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 10:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Note I raised and had declined for lack of consensus a similar task for endash/diacritics redirects at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RjwilmsiBot 8. Rjwilmsi 17:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixing typos/misspellings doesn't seam cosmetic to me. Still, maybe this typo/misspelling bot could those Dash/diacritic fixes, if it were making a typo/misspelling fix on the page anyway. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 18:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

A few things I thought of: it's probably a good idea to avoid any misspellings around {{sic}} (or similar). Also, what should the bot do with Category:Printworthy redirects? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 16:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Why should the bot do anything with Printworthy redirects? wp:Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok that's what I wasn't sure about, since those links are still tagged with {{R from misspelling}}, but have a valid usage as they are. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 17:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I recently added the quality assessment scale to {{WikiProject Oz}}. Could someone please run a bot to automatically assess the articles in the project? Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Do you have any preferences on how conflicts should be resolved? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 16:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I finished a run through of all pages which did not have conflicts. Let me know how the bot should handle conflicts (it uses this process) and I can finish up the rest. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 02:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm the best person to give an opinion on this, since I am not really a member of {{WikiProject Oz}}. I stumbled across these articles while cleaning up stub-class articles in {{WikiProject Fictional characters}}. But since I initiated the quality assessment, I am interested in following though. I appreciate the run through that you have already done, and as for the articles that had conflicts, I think that the liberal approach is probably the best way to go. In the meantime, I have been manually double checking the articles that were automatically assessed, so one way or the other they will eventually all be assessed for quality. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done Log can be seen at User:Legobot/Tagger/WikiProject Oz. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:35, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate the quick response to my recent request for auto assessment in {{WikiProject Oz}}. While it would be a much larger job, I wonder if the same could be done for {{WikiProject Film}}? There are currently over 3000 articles in Category:Unassessed film articles. I intend to eventually go through them manually, but any help cleaning them up beforehand would be appreciated. Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 19:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I can do that too. I'm assuming you want a "liberal" assessment for these too? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 19:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Personally, the liberal assessment works best for me, since I tend to double check things anyway. Any work that the bot can do beforehand, makes it easier for me. Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 12:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I created a Category:Automatically assessed film articles, but apparently there is already a Category:Automatically tagged or assessed film articles. Please let me know which category the articles will show up in. Fortdj33 (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

It will show up in Category:Automatically tagged or assessed film articles which is what {{WikiProject Film}} currently has set. I will start the run later today. Thanks, LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 16:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

It would be appreciated if {{has-NFUR}} could be removed from pages with a {{Non-free audio sample}} license tag, I did ask at AWB but they said given the huge number of transclusions, a bot was better suited to the task.

This request is made because of a a TFD, and the non-free license template concerned has already been migrated to the approach suggested by the TFD.

Thanks Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Per the TFD, should the parameter |file has rationale=yes be added as well? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 23:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Some of the images tagged don't seem to have extensive rationales, so they might need manual review, so it's just tag removal.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Just for clarification, any file tagged with both {{has-NFUR}} and {{Non-free audio sample}} should have {{has-NFUR}} removed and no more changes? If so, I could request approval for this.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  06:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Hazard-SJ, I already have some code written for it, I was just planning on combining it with the task below. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 06:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

And I assume #Appending_params is to finish off per the TfD? (I can do the removal, not the addition.)  Hazard-SJ  ✈  06:40, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was planning on doing both at the same time, it would be easy for my bot to check both conditions. So I'll mark this as Coding... for now. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 07:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 08:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

"They suggest Wikipedia editors ... build tools that aid in identifying and supporting desirable newcomers." -- Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-09-24/Recent research

How about, say, watching new editor's article contributions and saying something nice on the talk pages of new editors who have made two edits with <ref> tags in them, for example? —Cupco 15:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Would this be different than other welcome bots covered in Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots? GoingBatty (talk) 00:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I am not suggesting welcoming all editors, just leaving a non-welcome message note of encouragement only for new editors who use <ref> twice. (I strongly suspect that any new editor who has figured out how to use <ref> will have also figured out how to find the help pages and policy overviews, so they hardly need a welcome template message anyway.) I am going to take the initiative on this and try to make a script that merely lists such users for human editors to contact as they see fit, see how that goes, and then decide how to proceed from there. —Cupco 01:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

For each item in:

[toolserver.org/~magnus/catscan_rewrite.php?categories=Non-free+images+for+NFUR+review&ns%5B0%5D=1&ns%5B6%5D=1&templates_any=Non-free+use+rationale%0D%0ANon-free+image+rationale&smaller=500&ext_image_data=1&doit=1 this CATSCAN quey] insert

|image has rationale=yes<nowiki> before the closing <nowiki>}}

This task is best suited to a bot as mindless repetitive text insertion.

Limited to file size 500 on the CATSCAN for performance reasons..

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:01, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you must mean insert |image has rationale=yes before the closing "}}" —Cupco 01:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I just ran that query with a smaller limit (5) and got 0 results. url used: toolserver.org/~magnus/catscan_rewrite.php?categories=Non-free+images+for+NFUR+review&ns[0]=1&ns[6]=1&templates_any=Non-free+use+rationale%0D%0ANon-free+image+rationale&smaller=5&ext_image_data=1&doit=1%20this%20CATSCAN LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I think Sfan00 IMG meant:

For each item in: this CATSCAN query insert |image has rationale=yes before the closing }}

GoingBatty (talk) 01:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, it makes sense now. Coding... this one too. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 07:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 08:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Related to this is the need to orphan {{has-NFUR}} which I mention above :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Question: rather than excluding it to the two templates listed in the catscan query, shouldn't it include all templates in Category:Non-free use rationale templates? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 21:25, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

It should. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Could a bot create redirects for the Mandatory Palestine year articles (listed at Template:Mandatory Palestine year nav) from "Year in Palestine" and "Year in Israel", e.g. 1936 in Israel, 1936 in Palestine? Also on the articles talk pages, could a bot add {{WikiProject Palestine}} and {{WikiProject Israel}}? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Question: Does the Israel redirects only get the WP Israel tag and the Palestine redirects get the WP Palestine tag? Or do both types of redirects get both tags?

I can do this in a few days if there are no objections. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 02:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I meant add the tags to the articles, not the redirects. I don't see the point in adding the tags to the redirects. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Both WP Palestine and WP Israel use the extended-class system which includes redirects. I'm not sure if they want them tagged or not though, probably best to ask on their respective talk pages. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 02:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

If the WikiProjects want to tag the redirects, I don't object. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Redirect creation is  Done. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 18:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Also, could a bot add {{Asia topic|[year] in}} to the Palestine year lists? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 06:33, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I listed the following categories at WP:CFD/W for implementation for speedy renaming proposed at WP:CFD/S

• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Technology to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of technology
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Society to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of society
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Science to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of science
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of History to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of history
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Arts to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of arts

However, in each case the category is populated by use of {{Image requested}} (or its many aliases), and for various reasons that template doesn't alter the capitalisation of its parameters.

So all the pages in these categories need to have the parameter changed to lower case, as follows;

• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Technology {{Image requested|Technology}} --> {{Image requested|technology}}
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Society {{Image requested|Society}} --> {{Image requested|society}}
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Science {{Image requested|Science}} --> {{Image requested|history}}
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of History {{Image requested|History}} --> {{Image requested|technology}}
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Arts {{Image requested|Arts}} --> {{Image requested|arts}}

I would do it myself in AWB, but I can't get AWB to work on this Windows 7 machine :(

So any help would be muchly appreciated. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

While not a long term solution, why not use the {{lc: }} parser function? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 20:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Can't do that without breaking instances of such uses as {{Image requested|United States}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense, Doing... LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

 Done LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 03:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

At the moment, there are over 173,000 articles tagged with {{orphan}}. I have an idea to reduce the number, but not the technical expertise to pull it off: For each article tagged as an orphan, visit each of the wikilinked articles. If any of those articles contain the exact name of the orphaned article, turn it into a wikilink to the article. If the orphaned article now has more than 2 incoming links, remove the {{orphan}} tag.

Example: An article about a television character tagged with {{orphan}} contains 10 wikilinks to the episodes in which the character appears. In five of those episode articles, it mentions the character's name. Create a link from each episode article to the character article, and remove {{orphan}} from the character article.

Don't know how many false positives this would create, so maybe creating a list first before creating an automated bot? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

IIRC, AWB will remove the {{orphan}} tag if it has more than 2 incoming links. Though it may be worth having a bot go through all the currently tagged articles to see if it can remove the backlog. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 03:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

My BattyBot is doing that now, but there are plenty more articles that need more incoming links. GoingBatty (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

It's much slower than a automated solution, but something like tools:~dispenser/view/Dab_solver would make it much easier to add links and de-orphan articles. It would also get rid of the risk of false positives. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 03:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Manually updating current hurricane stats for a hurricane info box/current storm information, like on this one, can be tedious and possibly inaccurate. Is there a way for a bot to do this? It would somehow have to use the NHC advisory info to replace the current data. Is this even possible?

–– Anonymouse321 (talk) 17:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I think that is possible for a bot to do this, and its relatively simple for routine updates. I'm a bit busy with other tasks right now, but if no one takes it up within a week, poke me and I can do it. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 17:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. –– Anonymouse321 (talk) 19:27, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Add "Category:X in in Israel" and "Category:X in the Palestinian territories" to "Category:X in Palestine". (Palestine, in this context, refers to the whole Israel/Palestine region, not specifically the West Bank and Gaza strip, per Category:Palestine.) Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello,
In the articles of Hindu temple architecture, Jaga mohan is some times written Jagamohan or Jagamohana.

Is there a bot to replace Jaga mohan, jaga mohan, Jagamohan, jagamohan, Jagamohana, jagamohana by Jaga mohan ?

Is my request a regular one ? If yes, I have some other ones. --Tangopaso (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The first sentence in the Jaga mohan article indicates that Jagamohan or Jagamohana are valid alternate spellings. The article also uses the lowercase "jaga mohan". Would you be able to clean up the Jaga mohan article first? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It is true that Jagamohan, Jagamohana, Jaga mohan and Jaga mohana are valid alternate spellings. So should it be possible to replace Jaga mohan by [[Jaga mohan]] , jaga mohan by [[Jaga mohan]], Jagamohan by [[Jaga mohan|Jagamohan]], jagamohan by [[Jaga mohan|jagamohan]], Jagamohana by [[Jaga mohan|Jagamohana]], jagamohana by [[Jaga mohan|jagamohana]] . It is to have more internal links. --Tangopaso (talk) 06:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried Find link? GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

As far as I undestand, Find link finds article that uses Jagamohan or Jagamohana. But it does not make replaces with the [[ ]] for the links. Or if it does, I did not understand how, can you explain please. --Tangopaso (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to request that a bot be made to add a class=list parameter to all transclusions of the following templates (excluding ones with a class=fl parameter): {{WikiProject Lists}} , {{WikiProject Discographies}} , {{WikiProject Bibliographies}} & {{WikiProject Outlines}}

Basically, the bot would automate what I did here. ❤ Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 20:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

What's the point of doing that? Just have the template make everything not FL be a List-class. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 20:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

According to {{WikiProject Lists/class}}, it says the only classes allowed are FL, List or Stub, so why would you want to overwrite all stub assessments? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Could we get a list of all local file pages and file talk pages that link to other language Wikipedia projects (an example, though I've come across dozens over the years)? These are unlikely to be anything other than an image copied from that wiki, and these images have a unique set of problems, most often including broken history. Instead of moving these images to Commons, I'd like to go through them and move the original image to Commons, so the ENWP copies can be deleted. Thanks! ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 00:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I know that at dewp, that there is a list of files tagged as "copy to commons" which are also available at enwp. When I transfered some files of that list, I tagged the files at both projects. (So either as NowCommons or "no license", etc.) This list would help to cleanup rubbish at multiple projects at one time check! mabdul 06:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I found the list: de:Kategorie:Datei:Identisch_mit_Kopie_in_anderem_Projekt:

"Files should only be categorized to this category by using the template Vorlage:Datei identisch – this is usually automatically done by a bot."

So maybe a code copy and modification is enough! mabdul 06:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I am plan to remove some of the automatic categorization of {{Infobox animanga}} and it's sub-templates. As such, I will need a bot to hard cat Category:Manga series and Category:Anime series. Both of these categorizes have close to 2,000 articles each and would be too much for a simple AWB run. —Farix (t | c) 10:07, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Add Category:Anime OVAs to the request as well. There were more articles that would need hard cat here than previously thought. —Farix (t | c) 10:21, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Basically you want a bot to run through the existing categories and hard-code them in so when it is removed from the template they still are in the right category? I can do that pretty easily, can you give me a list of all the existing categories and I can start hard-coding them.

Also have their been any discussions about changing the infobox? It seems like a major change to how the templates work. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 19:52, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is what I am requesting. The categories that the template is auto-categorizing are:

• Category:Anime series
• Category:Anime OVAs
• Category:Manga series
• Category:Japanese television dramas
• Category:Direct-to-video films
• Category:Japanese films
• Category:Television commercials
• Category:Music videos

The discussion was over a year ago so that the templates will comply with WP:TEMPLATECAT, but no one got around to it. —Farix (t | c) 01:08, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Doing... LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Stopped for now, Nihonjoe suggested a few improvements upon the task on Legobot's talk page, which I've copied here. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 07:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

---

Why is your bot doing this? This category is redundant (or a parent category) to those already on the category. Please stop this and reverse all the additions of this category. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:06, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I have temporarily halted the bot for now, the reason it started doing so was because of a request on Wikipedia:BOTR#Hard_categorization_of_anime_and_manga_articles. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 06:07, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. I'm not sure how complicated it would be, but could it sort them into the subcategories by decade based on the existing year categories (such as Category:1984 anime)? That would be more effective than filling the parent category. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:10, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying. Shouldn't all animes be in Category:Anime series? Should the year be used for sorting? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 06:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

---

I don't think all animes should be in Category:Anime series. Per Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing pages, "[E]ach categorized page should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C." GoingBatty (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. That's why I was saying they should be placed into the decade categories rather than all dumped into one category. Having 2000 articles in one category is not very helpful. If the decade categories get too full, they can then be sorted into categories by individual year. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that the year cats don't make distinctions between the four main media formats of anime (tv series, OVAs, ONAs, and until recently, films). They are not an exact replacement for Anime series, Anime OVAs, Anime ONAs, and Anime films. That's kind of like say that all blue objects are a subset of round objects when you have some blue square objects, when in fact, you have an mathematical intersection between the "by media" cats and the "by year" cats. That is why the "by year" cats were added in addition to the "by media" cats. So unless you are talking about creating a set of "by year by media" cats, the line quoted by GoingBatty wouldn't apply because we are dealing with apples and oranges. —Farix (t | c) 10:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Well then we can categorize them in Category:2012 anime films, Category:2012 OVAs (or Category:2012 original video animation, though I prefer the shorter category name), and Category:2012 anime television series. Since ONAs are pretty much an OVA released on the net, unless there are enough for a separate category, I think they should be grouped with the OVA categories. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Farix! I would classify a blue square object in Category:Blue objects and Category:Square objects, and not in Category:Objects. I'm not well versed in anime, but I suggest you categorize articles in the most specific "by media" cats and "by year" cats. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 17:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

So you are in agreement that the articles should be in both Category:Anime series (a by media category) and Category:2012 anime (a by year category). That is until WP:ANIME decided to create a Category:2012 anime series (by year and media category). —Farix (t | c) 19:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better for the articles to be in a more specific media category (such as Category:2010s anime series) as well as Category:2012 anime (a by year category)? GoingBatty (talk) 22:58, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so. It's all a matter of preference. But that is outside the scope of this discussion. —Farix (t | c) 01:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think its out of the scope of this discussion per se. Though it might be wiser to have this discussion at a more anime centric forum like WT:ANIME where a consensus can be established on what to do for categorization overall, then come back here with a bot request that can be implemented.

As for the edits the bot already made, technically they aren't affecting the article since they are already categorized by the template, so I think it would be a waste for me to hit the rollback button a few hundred times to undo everything. I can have the bot automatically do that whenever it goes ahead and implements whatever is decided. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

In fact as far as CanScan goes, its best not to have the article any deeper than what they are. —Farix (t | c) 01:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The new Catscan rewrite can both search recursively and use a template, so I don't think that's a reason not to categorize per guideline. (Ideally, constraints by a tool should never constrain the editing process, but we don't live in an ideal world.) LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The problem with the year subcategories are that they don't make a distinction between television series, OVAs and films. There is no Category:2012 anime series (for television series), Category:2012 anime OVAs (for direct-to-video releases), or Category:2012 anime ONAs (for net animations). but they all get lumped into Category:2012 anime. Also, I don't recall a discussion of replacing the main category in favor of the year subcategories—instead of in addition to—unless it occurred during the last year when I was inactive. But the only way to properly sort articles would be to use the template as a temporary method to sort the articles into those cats, then do a run through each category to add the category directly into the article if it is not already there. But we can do that later after the main categories are dealt with. —Farix (t | c) 11:20, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

• Related to the bot task: this edit placed the category after the stub templates, which is contrary to WP:FOOTERS - it should have gone with the six existing categories. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Hm. I think this is related to the fact that en.wp uses a non-standard sort order (at least compared to all the other wikis). I think Max modified a script to do this so I'll ask him what he did for future runs. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:46, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

The ISP btinternet has announced that it is closing its webspace for customers on 31 October 2012.[5] There are over 1500 links to btinternet.com and over 2000 links to btinternet.co.uk and I would guess that many of these will be references rather than external links. Presumably these will all become dead links when the webspace is closed, unless there is some sort of automated archive with the links being replaced.--Rumping (talk) 06:20, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lowercase sigmabot III. I doubt that it will be operational by then, so we might need another solution in the time being. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 06:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

First thing to do is warn as many people as possible via WP:PUMP etc - X201 (talk) 12:50, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This group of sites should be in the crawl for Internet Archive, as I dropped them a note specifcally about this Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

A large number of these are on football club articles, such as Aberdare Athletic F.C. where there is a reference to http://www.fchd.btinternet.co.uk/ABERDARA.HTM - the same page is also located in the External links section using http://www.fchd.info/ABERDARA.HTM. May be we could just go through switching from one to the other. Keith D (talk) 18:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, new recreate Portal:Trucks include to template portal Trucks to based the liste of toolserver ; 895 page for trucks. Thank you FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 16:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Could you clarify the request a little please? Are you requesting that the new trucks portal be added tot he 895 pages or are am I misunderstanding? Kumioko (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me, english no my principal language, j'aimerais qu'un opérateur de bot rajoute le bandeau du portail camion sur les articles du tableau d'évaluation ; User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Trucks. Sorry. FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 17:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh ok so as I understand it you want Portal:Trucks to appear in the banner that is used on the Trucks project articles. I think I understand now. That doesn't require a bot. Let me tweak the code for that template. Give me just a few minutes. Kumioko (talk) 18:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I modified Template:WikiProject Trucks to include a link to Portal:Trucks. I think this is what you are asking for. If not please let me know. Kumioko (talk) 18:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour, voici un exemple ; sur Truck. FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

English - Ok got it now thanks. This could be a bot task or if the Bot approvers don't mind it could also be an AWB task since its a pretty straightforward request and only deals with less than 1000 articles. I'll let someone else decide on that one which way it should go. Either way though its on the Project banner.

French - Ok got it maintenant grâce. Ce pourrait être une tâche bot ou si les approbateurs Bot ne me dérange pas il pourrait aussi être une tâche AWB depuis sa une demande assez simple et ne porte que sur moins de 1000 articles. Je vais laisser quelqu'un d'autre décider que l'un de quelle manière il doit aller. De toute façon même si son projet sur ​​la bannière. (I hope I didn't butcher that too bad my French isn't very good). Kumioko (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The articles in Category:Lists of Tamil films by year are all lists, but are currently named "Tamil films of YYYY". They should be renamed to "Lists of Tamil films of YYYY". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Has there been an WP:RM for this? I have approval to do so, provided an RM/discussion has occurred. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 21:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I didn't think it was in any way controversial, so I assumed that an RM was un-needed. But may quantity dictates greater caution.

I have since spotted several hundredly misnamed lists of films, so I'll do an RM for them all. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

2nd try: Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_48#Removing_flag_templates_from_infoboxes

There have been no objections since this was proposed, and the box documentation changed, in April. I went through and did this with AWB. However, I didn't know how to capture all possible ways of encoding flags, so I'm sure I missed some.

The details of the request: Remove any flag icons from the fields "state"/"states" and "region". They are acceptable under "nation" and "minority". If they appear anywhere else, perhaps they could be flagged for human attention? — kwami (talk) 03:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

So go through {{Infobox language}} and remove any usage of {{flag}}, {{flagcountry}}, {{flagicon}} IFF they are within |state=, |states=, or |region= ? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 03:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I have. But there are dozens if not hundreds of other templates which cause flags to display. I've come across some of them accidentally, but I don't know how to even look for them all. — kwami (talk) 02:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Maybe everything in Category:Flag template system? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 02:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I no longer have the AWB script to check, but yes, that looks like it might be it. I would assume there's already a bot from when flag icons were purged from other boxs a few months back. — kwami (talk) 04:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible for a bot to :

• flag up generic base links to sites such as Google.com, bing.com etc?
• identify images sourced solely to Google Images (which is an intermediate image search engine)?
• identify links/references which refer to a google cache pags as opposed to a proper archive.org/webcitation archive?
• identify dead links which exist in a suitable form at archive.org? ( Some human intervention might be required)
• identify articles containing vendor specific geo-coding (such as directly to Bing Maps, Google Maps etc.)

• identify links (and mark relevant articles in a suitable way) that link to works on Google Books?

(This is so that in time the links can be converted to full citations, and because of differing copyright jurisdictions not all Google Books link are valid outside the US)

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Statues_in_Dublin&diff=prev&oldid=517997061

Would it be possible to have a bot which does this link stripping automatically?

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:52, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Only if the link doesn't get broken in the process. www.jamesjoyce.ie/listing.asp/id=4 won't work in any circumstances, whilst http://www.jamesjoyce.ie/listing.asp/id=4 is a dead link. The correctly-formed link is http://www.jamesjoyce.ie/listing.asp?id=4 --Redrose64 (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It's because of conversion slips like that, that a bot to do the stripping would be useful Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

According to the article on GoogleKnol , it was closed down by Google in October 2012.

Would it be posisble for a bot to migrate the links to Waybacks?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinkSearch&target=knol.google.com

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Could a bot create redirects for "X of the Palestinian territories" to "X of the Palestinian National Authority" please. this is partly because of Template_talk:Asia_topic#Palestinian_territories, but this should be done regardless of what is done with the template. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Also create redirects for "in the Palestinian territories" to "in the Palestinian National Authority" as well as any other appropriate patterns I've missed. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 17:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Looking into... Theopolisme 23:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I generated a list of ~46 pages using the terms you gave. However, in theory, should this bot create redirects for all pages that have "the Palestinian territories" in the title (replacing it with "the Palestinian National Authority")? Theopolisme 23:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand the question. What do you mean by replace "the Palestinian territories" with "the Palestinian National Authority"? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

It would probably be a good idea to do the reverse too and create PNA to PT redirects. We wouldn't want any duplicate articles created. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 03:54, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

What I meant was, do you want the bot to just create redirects just for pages with "in (or of) Palestinian territories" (and vice versa), or would you like it to also create redirects for any page that includes the phrase "the Palestinian territories" or "the Palestinian National Authority"? Does that make sense? Theopolisme 04:34, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I think I understand. The first one. I'm only talking about titles here, not the content of articles. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Alright, now I'm the one guilty of a typo. I meant *titles* for the above. :) What I meant to say was, any page whose title includes the phrase "the Palestinian territories" or "the Palestinian National Authority", replace that part of the title with the other (i.e. territories with PNA) and create a new redirect. In any case, this doesn't affect too many pages at all, so, if that's all you need, I can just do it manually. Theopolisme 19:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

That's what I meant. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

One other thing, it would probably be a good idea to create redirects from "Palestine" to "the Palestinian territories" and "the Palestinian National Authority" (but not visa-versa). Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:36, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I've got some pressing off-wiki things to deal with in the immediate future, so if someone else wants to swoop in and help with this, I won't argue -- otherwise, give me a day or so. Thanks, Theopolisme 00:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

• I have written the code, but what steps have you taken (Emmette Hernandez Coleman) to reach consensus on this? Thine Antique Pen (talk) 17:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Thine. Emmette, have you posted something on the WikiProject talk page that outlines specifically what you want to/shall do? Theopolisme 23:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
• As for Pal -> PT and PNA, this is just standard procedure. The point of the bot is to create any that may have been missed. As for PT <-> PNA, why would that be controversial? If someone look up "List of lakes in the Palestinian National Authority" hes clearly looking for "List of lakes in the Palestinian territories". Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:38, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• See WP:ARBPIA and WP:ARBPIA2, hence, I suggest you get consensus before I will consider filing this bot request. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I've make a post about this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine#Redirects but I doubt there will be a response. WikiProject Palestine seams pretty inactive. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I've made a note at WikiProject Redirect to see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine#Redirects, that should make it much more likely we'll get a response. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I strongly suggest that you expand the area where you are trying to get consensus on this, possibly even as far as WT:ISRAEL as that was also being discussed in WP:ARBPIA. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I posted the question below to Village pump (technical) and Village pump (miscellaneous) and no one's answering except by suggesting I post the question here. Can anyone here suggest anything?

How would I get a list of discussion pages of WikiProjects (so I'm talking about pages called "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Whatever") ranked by the frequency with which they are edited---in effect the most active WikiProjects listed first? Michael Hardy (talk) 18:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I hate to pointing you somewhere else, but WT:DBR is what you're looking for. Legoktm (talk) 00:44, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I would like to see the Expand by language Wikipedia templates moved to the reference section. They are too imposing when added to the top of the article. See Dokka Umarov as an example of two of them in use. I cannot think of any policy or guidelines that would prevent this from being done. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

While there is no specific guideline/policy against doing this, I think you should still first raise it on WP:VPR since it is a major change. If a consensus is established there, a bot can then begin moving them. Legoktm (talk) 19:55, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I will do that although I don't see it as a major change. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 23:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I would like to request bot notification of editors who participated in WP:RFC/AAT of an RFC following up to it, WP:RFC/AAMC. The list of relevant editors is at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage/Notification worksheet (best viewed as source). The text I'm requesting for the notification is:

==Followup RFC to [[WP:RFC/AAT]] now in community feedback phase==

Hello. As a participant in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles, you may wish to register an opinion on its followup RFC, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage, which is now in its community feedback phase. Please note that WP:RFC/AAMC is not simply a repeat of WP:RFC/AAT, and is attempting to achieve better results by asking a more narrowly-focused, policy-based question of the community. Assumptions based on the previous RFC should be discarded before participation, particularly the assumption that Wikipedia has or inherently needs to have articles covering generalized perspective on each side of abortion advocacy, and that what we are trying to do is come up with labels for that. Thanks! ~~~~

Appreciate any assistance. :) Thanks! —chaos5023 (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I recommend you use User:EdwardsBot. I've formatted your list so it will be compatible with the bot. Legoktm (talk) 19:39, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, requesting access. Thanks! —chaos5023 (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

{{ODNBsub}} was edited a few months ago (not by me) to put brackets around the text that it generates, to make it consistent with {{subscription required}} - it now looks like this: (subscription or UK public library membership required). It has frequently been used in the past in citation templates such as {{cite web}} as |format={{ODNBsub}}, and as "format=" itself generates brackets, it looks messy. The template should now be between the closing double brackets of the cite template and the </ref> closing the reference.

I would be very grateful if some kind bot operator could go through the whatlinkshere for {{ODNBsub}} and replace

<ref>{{cite ... |format={{ODNBsub}} |...}}</ref>

with

<ref>{{cite ... |...}} {{ODNBsub}} </ref>

As I fear that many of the examples of this former usage are mine, I would be particularly grateful to be saved this task! Thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 10:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I want a script to add a specific text automatically on new users' pages, can anyone help me? --AhMedRMaaty (talk) 06:16, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

There are plenty of scripts already out there that could do that, but why do you want to do that? The community usually denies welcome bots. Legoktm (talk) 06:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I often see citations to WP in the references section. These should be removed. I have regexes in my script, but think it may be useful if a bot was tasked to systematically remove these strings:

<ref>https?:\/\/[\w]{2}\.wikipedia\.org\/wiki\/[^\s\]<]*<\/ref>
<ref>\[https?:\/\/[\w]{2}\.wikipedia\.org\/wiki\/[^\s\]]*[ ][\w\d][^\]]*\]<\/ref>

and perhaps a regex to remove all those that are within citation templates too, while we are at it? ;-) -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 01:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree with removing them, but I think it's valuable to ensure there's a wikilink to the referenced article in the text. GoingBatty (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I assumed that would have been the case in most instances, but it's true that it's not a given. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 02:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

If these are in fact translation templates, they probably should be maintained in some form, because they give attribution as required by CC-BY-SA. It probably requires a human editor's judgment to see whether the attribution is already done elsewhere (e.g. talk page banner or edit summary) before any removal. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Most of the ones I have seen are links to English WP articles, I only genericised it for good measure. But should we be citing other language WP projects? They would still fail WP:RS. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 02:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. We have a template (Template:Canadian election result) that we use to make tables for election results. It currently includes the jurisdiction and party name in one parameter, so |CA Conservative| is for the Conservative Party of Canada and |ON NDP| is for the Ontario New Democratic Party. There are also some where jurisdiction is assumed, like |BQ| and |CAQ| for Quebec-based parties (those two are federal and provincial, respectively). We want to put jurisdiction in its own parameter and make it mandatory, eg: |CA|Conservative|, |ON|NDP|, |CA|BQ|, and |QC|CAQ|. We will do this via Template:CANelec. In all of the allowed party names that contain two letters followed by a space, the two letters are the jurisdiction, so could your bot please replace all instances of

{{Canadian election result|(\a)(\a) (\a)

with

{{CANelec|$1$2|$3

After that, there will still be several articles where the old template is used because of the parties that don't use jurisdiction. We can manually change those ourselves, but it would be helpful if your bot could change some of the more common ones:

#	Change	To
1	{{Canadian election result|Wildrose	{{CANelec|AB|Wildrose
2	{{Canadian election result|BQ	{{CANelec|CA|BQ
3	{{Canadian election result|Christian Heritage	{{CANelec|CA|Christian Heritage
4	{{Canadian election result|Commonwealth of Canada	{{CANelec|CA|Commonwealth of Canada
5	{{Canadian election result|Laurier Liberals	{{CANelec|CA|Laurier Liberals
6	{{Canadian election result|National Government	{{CANelec|CA|National Government
7	{{Canadian election result|Progressive Canadian	{{CANelec|CA|Progressive Canadian
8	{{Canadian election result|Unionist	{{CANelec|CA|Unionist
9	{{Canadian election result|ADQ	{{CANelec|QC|ADQ
10	{{Canadian election result|CAQ	{{CANelec|QC|CAQ
11	{{Canadian election result|PQ	{{CANelec|QC|PQ
12	{{Canadian election result|Québec solidaire	{{CANelec|QC|Québec solidaire
13	{{Canadian election result|Saskatchewan	{{CANelec|SK|Saskatchewan
14	{{Canadian election result|Independent	{{CANelec|XX|Independent

Thank you! —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I actually tackled a lot of this on Saturday, and will finish off some of the rest of it soon. I did leave some behind as I was unsure of how some of them would go, but most everything has been fixed. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I normally do these kind of edits with AWB, but this series was so long and doesn't really have anything that needs to be checked by a human, so it seemed good job to leave to a bot. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:15, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

If the changes in the table are too much, I can do those myself. If a bot could just make the basic change above the table, that wolud be a big help. If I need to make any changes to the request, let me know. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:39, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I made the changes myself. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Are there any bots that can convert a url of an article on Wikipedia to a wikilink? For example: this → this

Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't see it in WP:GENFIXES, it seems like that would be a good use for it. Legoktm (talk) 05:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Searching around, I just happened to find FrescoBot (task 2 in particular). –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the bot is still doing that task too. Legoktm (talk) 06:13, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Interesting... I think I'll go do some more research about FrescoBot; thanks again for your help, Legoktm! BTW, it might still be a good feature for AWB. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Frescobot is doing this task. AWB can't do it for reason unexplained. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Please, replace galllery with gallery (and Galllery too). Thx.--Tomas62 (talk) 09:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

If you want a spell checking bot, see WP:FDB. However AWB's typo-fixer might be what you're looking for. They have a seperate request board at WP:AWB/TA. Legoktm (talk) 09:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank for advice!--Tomas62 (talk) 14:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

It's simple. Over at the requested articles place, there are many articles listed that have been created already. Which is good, but they should not be listed. If someone can employ his task to removing all the blue listings, I will give him and his bot both a beautiful barnstar. Legolover26 (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I already try to do that manually anyway. I'm not sure if a bot could tell whether or not it was created, or just a redirect that still needs to be listed. This task seems full of potential false-positives. Rcsprinter (speak) @ 10:33, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Well you could do a simple if page.exists() and not page.isRedirectPage() to ensure it's a full-fledged article. Is there anything else that should be checked? Otherwise it seems like a pretty simple task to code. Legoktm (talk) 10:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Articles which are listed as blue links should get a talk page template as noted at the backlog drive page shere. Moreover should the entries sorted alphabetical. Regards, mabdul 13:08, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Coding... I will try and implement the talk page tag, however the alphabetical sorting is a bit too complex since there is no standard on how the pages are formatted yet. Legoktm (talk) 13:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed. Legoktm (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Request: Execute a null edit on all articles in Category:Pages with incomplete DOI references

Rationale: When an editor adds {{cite doi}} to an article, the article is automatically added to Category:Pages with incomplete DOI references. When the User:Citation bot subsequently creates the appropriate template, the article is not removed from the category until the next edit occurs. A null edit of all pages would help clear out the category of such pages, thus simplifying the job of manually addressing other DOI errors.

Suggested frequency: Perhaps this bot could run once daily.

Thanks --Illia Connell (talk) 22:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I did a quick test, and managed to drop it from 46 to 21 (and I didn't even finish the category). I'll schedule it to run every day around 1:30 UTC, but if another time is better I can change it. Legoktm (talk) 22:46, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Great! Thanks Illia Connell (talk) 22:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

You may want to review Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Joe's Null Bot for details and conditions for this sort of thing. Namely, there's a more efficient way to do it than null editing, and if they ever fix the bug then the task should be stopped. Anomie⚔ 04:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a purge with the special special forcelinkupdate option, which is supported by te API, works fine, the relevant line in my code reads:

     my $apires = $mw->api( {action => 'purge', titles => $thistitle, forcelinkupdate => 1} );

if that's of any help. Perhaps some day this will be fixed, I have an alert on the appropriate bugzilla entry.--j⚛e decker^talk 05:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Anomie and Joe. I don't see anything in Pywikibot that lets me purge the page so I'll write a patch for it. Legoktm (talk) 06:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

In trunk there is a purgeCache function.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to request that a bot be made which can add all of the possible combinations of redirects for article titles that have accents in them. So, for instance, for the article László Endre the bot would create the redirects "Laszló Endre", "Lászlo Endre", and "Laszlo Endre". This would save a lot of time and effort for editors. Thank you.Hoops gza (talk) 20:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

That would be a lot of redirects to be created. When I type "Laszlo Endre" into the search box, "László Endre" shows up in the dropdown menu. Is there a reason that isn't adequate? Legoktm (talk) 21:23, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

That's not at all adequate. Not everyone searches Wikipedia via the serchbox, and even if they did they'd still need to jump though the hoop of clicking the dropdown link instead of just pressing enter. There should definitely be Laszlo Endre to László Endre type redirects. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hm. I see what you mean. I also found out that both {{R from title without diacritics}} and Category:Redirects from titles without diacritics exist. Legoktm (talk) 21:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, those exist, but that only covers the one redirect (the one with no diacritics or accents whatsoever).Hoops gza (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it is wisest to only auto-create non-diacritic redirects.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

There was no response to my initial request - have I defeated the minds of Wikipedia's finest bot operators, or does nobody think it's a sufficient challenge/problem?! Bencherlite^Talk 21:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Original request:

{{ODNBsub}} was edited a few months ago (not by me) to put brackets around the text that it generates, to make it consistent with {{subscription required}} - it now looks like this: (subscription or UK public library membership required). It has frequently been used in the past in citation templates such as {{cite web}} as |format={{ODNBsub}}, and as "format=" itself generates brackets, it looks messy. The template should now be between the closing double brackets of the cite template and the </ref> closing the reference.

I would be very grateful if some kind bot operator could go through the whatlinkshere for {{ODNBsub}} and replace

<ref>{{cite ... |format={{ODNBsub}} |...}}</ref>

with

<ref>{{cite ... |...}} {{ODNBsub}} </ref>

As I fear that many of the examples of this former usage are mine, I would be particularly grateful to be saved this task! Thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 10:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I saw your request, I was just too busy to take it on at that time. A few questions before I start coding: a) Can anything else be in the |format= parameter? b) How many pages do you estimate need to be fixed? this shows 1969 transclusions. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Nothing else needs to go in the |format= <--OOH, thanks for showing me {{para}}! Hopefully not too many to fix, after all: I checked a dozen or so pages at random, some (mainly the better-quality articles) had it fixed already, only a few had a problem. In fact, 929 of that 1969 use it via {{ODNBweb}} in a way that has been fixed, so there's only about 1,000 direct instances, and hopefully no more than a few hundred that will need fixing. Fortunately the few that I found weren't pages that I had written, so I'm not the only culprit! Thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 21:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry let me clarify, is there any chance that something besides {{ODNBsub}} will be in |format=? If so, is it possible multiple templates will be there? Legoktm (talk) 21:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I can't think that anything else would be there, and haven't ever seen anything such as |format={{ODNBsub}}, something else; sometimes you get things like |format=PDF but that doesn't apply for the ODNB, which is just a plain ol' webpage. Bencherlite^Talk 21:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok sounds good. Final question: Should the format parameter be eliminated? or just left empty? Or does it not matter? Legoktm (talk) 08:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed. I went ahead and assumed that you want to get rid of |format=, if that's not the case I can just adjust the code. Legoktm (talk) 09:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Y Done I think. It only made 13 more edits (log) which doesn't match the original expectation of "a few hundred", so I'm running it again, but I do think all of them are fixed. Legoktm (talk) 11:24, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Excellent - obviously either more people had fixed them already, or were using them properly in the first place, than I estimated from my small sample. Many thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 11:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Could a bot remove {{Portal|Wikipedia}} from the pages it's used on per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia#.7B.7BPortal.7CWikipedia.7D.7D. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Here's a list of pages it's used on. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Will do with AWB, today or tomorrow. Rcsprinter (talk) @ 17:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

 Done Maybe some were already done, but I just completed removing from articles manually.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:10, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh, alright then. Rcsprinter (chat) @ 20:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there any chance a bot could please run through all articles in Category:Amusement parks (and its subcategories) to see if they have an infobox. For those that don't have infoboxes, it would be great if a list could be compiled at Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Need infoboxes or a similar location. Is this possible? Kind regards Themeparkgc  Talk  03:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Doing.... Ran it once, forgot to exclude files. Running again. I did notice that there are a few redirects that are categorized in some subcats that probably shouldn't be. Legoktm (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Y Done. Limited to the first 500 results for now, I can re-run it if you want more results. Legoktm (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for running through but it seems some articles with infoboxes have been included, namely those with {{Infobox attraction}} (e.g. #71, 72, 74, 78, 79, 80 etc). There also appear to be a lot of duplicate articles (where the article has appeared in multiple categories in the whole tree). Would there be any chance you could please re-run the bot with these modifications? Themeparkgc  Talk  00:28, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Re-ran and both issues should be fixed now. Legoktm (talk) 15:37, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for running it. Again, it seems it is still including articles with {{Infobox attraction}} for some reason. Examples of ones with infoboxes are Action Theater, Boo Blasters on Boo Hill, Dinosaurs Alive! (attraction), Scooby-Doo's Haunted Mansion, WindSeeker, Xtreme Skyflyer (taken from a 10 article sample starting at #68). Maybe a smaller category, such as Category:Canada's Wonderland, could be used to work out why this is happening. Kind regards Themeparkgc  Talk  00:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I have generated a list at User:Hazard-SJ/Sandbox (feel free to copy it over). I filtered out lists (via excluding page titles that start with "List of", because I don't expect infoboxes to be needed on lists. Like Legoktm, I generated 500 pages.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. The list looks good. Thanks Legoktm for your work over the past few days also. Themeparkgc  Talk  01:17, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  01:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Please search and replace these templates:

• {{wikitravel}} → {{wikivoyage}}
• {{wikitravelpar}} → {{wikivoyage}}

Total is a little over three thousand affected pages. Wikivoyage (voy:) is now a WMF project, Wikitravel is a fork of the same project owned by a for-profit (Internet Brands) which is currently suing various individual WMF volunteers per [6]. K7L (talk) 21:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, (that we should avoid linking to wikitravel, and link to our own project, wikivoyage), shouldn't this be going through a TfD? Legoktm (talk) 21:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, indeed this needs an TfD! mabdul 21:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

TfD and RfD have been created. K7L (talk) 21:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

When I list a file at WP:NFCR for review, the file should be tagged with {{Non-free review}}. I also often tag articles with {{NFCC issue note}}. Is it possible to have a bot do the file and article taggings? The file tagging should be trivial, as there are no parameters to be passed to the template. The article template might need to be modified to be usable by a bot. Please let me know whether that is possible and if so what would need to be changed in the article template. This would make the work of NFCC enforcers a bit easier. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:17, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I should perhaps mention that there also was a discussion (well only between me and one other user) to automate NFCC 10c enforcement. I guess a bot for 10c enforcement should have a wider prior consensus (for example at WP:VPR). If it would be better to first reach a consensus on this and then implement both functionalities in one bot, then please let me know. In that case I could propose the 10c enforcement bot at the Village pump first, as that seems like a task that should be backed up by a clear community consensus. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

If someone does go forward with this NFCC 10c idea, do research the problems such bots have had in the past. Among other things, keep in mind that 10c doesn't actually require links, and that rationales may not have been updated when an article was moved so "enforcing" 10c by removing the image in these cases will cause backlash. Anomie⚔ 15:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, it seems like a good idea to carefully specify the exact functionality expected from that bot in my userspace first. If that is done, then a discussion at VPR can take place and then a request be made here depending on the outcome of the discussion. Thanks. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 16:07, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I think bot that deletes explicit articles should be made, as that would be extremely useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmartyPantsKid (talk • contribs) 21:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. because bots can't exercise judgement. At least not yet... Legoktm (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Could someone please add a task to a maintaince bot to fix talkspace subpages that are left without their parent pages? I'm pretty sure admins have the ability to move all subpages, but non-admins do not, and many times editors forget to look for talk page archives (as I did when I moved this article). Ideally the bot would wait a specified amount of time, a week or whatever, to make sure the page move is mildly stable. This should happen with any move that is in the main Talk: space, as archives or side-discussion pages may not always be named "Archive". ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 19:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

• Coding... Thine Antique Pen (talk) 12:08, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Awesome, thanks! ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 00:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
    • BRFA filed Thine Antique Pen (talk) 09:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Other than JL-Bot (cf. User:JL-Bot/Project content), are there any bots that can generate (and then periodically update) a listing of articles in an assessment category? (By "assessment category", I mean something like Category:A-Class military history articles; note that the actual items present in the category are the talk pages rather than the articles themselves.) Kirill ^[talk] 13:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Legobot was approved for something close enough to that, so I can do it for you. If you tell me where to put it and any specific format you want, I can generate it pretty quickly. Is there a specific use of that page though aside from just being a listing? Tim1357's watchlist tool can use categories as well to show recent changes. Legoktm (talk) 13:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The page would only be a listing; my intent here is to (partially) automate the maintenance of the MILHIST project showcase. Ideally, the bot would dump the contents of five assessment categories onto five separate subpages of the showcase:

• Category:FA-Class military history articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/FA
• Category:FL-Class military history articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/FL
• Category:A-Class military history articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/A
• Category:AL-Class military history articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/AL
• Category:GA-Class military history articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/GA

The format doesn't matter all that much, since this is just meant for casual browsing; to save space, a simple multi-column list (such as the one currently on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Showcase/FL) might be a good layout.

Would this be something Legobot could do? Kirill ^[talk] 02:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

For what its worth this is another example of a task that was done by one of Rich F's bots' Femtobot. It and several similar requests have been made by several individuals by several different projects with few interested replies and even fewer useful tools. Oddly enough a prime example of how Wikipedia is suffering from Rich's ban. Kumioko (talk) 03:53, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Coding... I'll get this done by the end of the week. Legoktm (talk) 17:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

There should be a bot that searches for dead-end pages, stubs, explict pages, and non-credible pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmartyPantsKid (talk • contribs) 21:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

There are already bots that tag dead-end pages, and stub sorting is done by humans for the most part. Legoktm (talk) 01:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Stub tagging could be done by a bot, but it's probably a bad idea - firstly, we would need a clear bot-understandable definition of a "stub", and secondly, we would need some reasonable way for it to identify the correct stub tag - we don't neeed a bot tagging dozens of pages with the {{stub}} tag.

Explicit pages and non-credible pages, I believe, are completely impossible4 for a bot to handle. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to clear the backlog at Category:Articles with missing files (feels like a loosing battle sometimes). There are a few tasks that bots could help out with:

• When an editor adds a redlinked image to an article and then uses that link to upload an image the article will then remain in Category:Articles with missing files until an edit is done to it. Apparently http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=purge&forcelinkupdate&titles=XXXXX can be used to clear it from the category and a bot could be used to do it. At present there are a large number of album covers being added (see the "B" section in the category in particular) and they are cluttering up the category. This makes it hard to see which articles are in genuine need of being checked.
• Noobs sometimes add images incorrectly of the form File:http://pathname.ext and File:C:\pathname.ext to articles. These are a clear-cut edit that a bot could sort out.

Help! -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll run the mass-purge right now, and for bad image links, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ImageRemovalBot 2 is currently in trial. Legoktm (talk) 22:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! That has cleared it up nicely. I would like to see that formalised and run fairly regularly to keep on top of things. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I think the AnomieBot's TagDater module should be expanded to date {{Non-free reduced}} tags. Articles which are not properly dated are already sorted into Category:Rescaled fairuse files with invalid timestamp, so if the bot (or another bot) just looks at that category it could run through the pages and add the dates to the templates. Templates without dates are in the form {{Non-free reduced}} and templates with proper dates are in the form {{Non-free reduced|16 November 2012}}. Thank you for hearing my request. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Many instances of {{Infobox officeholder}} have inline HTML (<small>, <br />)in the |honorific-prefix=, |name= and |honorific-suffix= parameters.

As discussed at Formatting of name & honorifcs, we've made improvements to the infobox, so this is no longer necessary. We need a bot to remove it, please.

If, at the same time, the BOT could move any honorifics from the |name= parameter to the more specific parameters, that would be helpful, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

As I understand the discussion, it would involve removing all the small tags and br tags from those 3 parameters above, which is relatively simple. As for moving the honorific to another parameter, that gets more tricky. Is there an established list of prefixes/suffixes? Legoktm (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

More easily, if something is in the small tag before the name can go to the prefix and everythig which is inside the small tag after the name can go to the suffix. Or separation can be done based on the br tag: Before the first br tag put to prefix and remove small tag, after the second br tag put to suffix and remove small tag. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Can anyone help, with part if not all of this, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:31, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I asked Legoktm to help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes sorry I'm a bit behind on bot requests due to IRL stuff. This is on my list of things to do, but if someone can get to it before me, go for it. Legoktm (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dt7607 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

 Done Wikipedia has now been bureaucratized. The bureaucracy has been expanded to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

If you could explain your request a bit clearer, please... Rcsprinter (babble) @ 17:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

There are currently more than 2600 links to {{wikitravel}} and a few hundred to {{wikitravelpar}} which need to be replaced with a link to the corresponding Wikimedia project, Wikivoyage: {{wikivoyage-inline}}

• Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 50#Replace wikitravel.2C wikitravelpar templates with WMF sibling project wikivoyage
• Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 November 10#Template:Wikitravel

TfD has already been closed yesterday as "delete after replacement"; mere redirection of the deprecated templates is not an option due to trademark issues (this is a company which is already suing our volunteers, WMF has countersued[7][8]) but there are too many of these for manual replacement (as was already done on fr: and simple:) to be viable on en: K7L (talk) 15:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Doing... Legoktm (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Hazard was planning on doing this with Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Hazard-Bot 15, so I'll let him do it. Legoktm (talk) 17:40, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

There are around 800 articles containing a cite template with a parameter author=Associated Press or AP or Reuters or UPI or United Press International (sometimes wikilinked, sometimes not). These should all be agency=agency-name. In some cases, this would also require changing the template type from cite web to cite news, and in some cases also removal of an associated authorlink=agency-name parameter. Is this a possible task for a bot? Colonies Chris (talk) 15:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

It depends on what you mean by 'some cases'. If there's a well-definable rule—for example, if the url starts with http://news.com/ then the template should be {{cite web}}—then it's possible. If it requires human judgement, such as looking at the website and deciding if it qualifies as news, then it's not. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 20:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I've never yet found a case of this type where it wasn't legitimate to just change 'cite web' to 'cite news'. If the information source is a news agency, then 'cite news' is always going to be correct. I suspect the background is that occasionally an editor using the 'cite web' template has tried to supply an 'agency', discovered that the template won't accept that parameter and then tried to get around the restriction by misusing the 'author' parameter, instead of realising that they should be using 'cite news' instead. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't already have a framework to do this, and I don't have the time to write one right now, so if someone else wants to work on this project they're welcome to do so. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 08:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Additional note: including other news agencies Xinhua, Canadian Press and Agence France-Presse, the number of articles concerned is about 1000. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Any chance that some of these were caused by indiscriminate use of 'webreflinks' and the like to convert bare links to references? K7L (talk) 19:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Could a bot remove the {{RFD}} from those redirects and add the following to the redirects talk pages: Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 11:29, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

{{oldrfd | date = 2012 November 2 | action = delete | result = keep | page = 2012 November 2#Template:UCIProTour-teams }}

 Done  Hazard-SJ  ✈  06:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there an existing bot that I can ask to help tidy up a page move I just made, to avoid redirects in articles? --Dweller (talk) 11:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I doubt it would have even been approved, because it's not like those links are broken.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  21:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Well there are legitimate uses to do that. (See the exceptions section of WP:R2D). Legoktm (talk) 23:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

There is no official bot approved to do that, but AWB can be used to do it reasonably quickly. You can post a request at WP:AWB/Tasks. Legoktm (talk) 23:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Doing this on a large scale with AWB would be a violation of the AWB rules of use; see WP:AWB#Rules of use number 4 in particular. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

No, if there is a consensus to do a specific change. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Unless we're talking about links to a disambig page, which I don't believe we are, the sort of consensus you are talking about would be a BRFA. Otherwise, someone who does this with AWB might have their AWB access removed for violating that AWB rules. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Well it would help if we knew what page it was, and based on Dweller's move log, I'm guessing it's Jewish holidays (move discussion). Legoktm (talk) 00:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

(ec)I think we need to know what the page is and the changes being needed but if a consensus were gained in an approved venue such as Village pump or AFD then there shouldn't be a problem. The bag would certainly want to review that the changes are made correctly but they would hardly have the authority to override a consensus, unless I am misunderstanding and you are saying that BAG has powers that allow them to overrule a community consensus decision. Which I do not think you are. Wow me and Legoktm are thinking similar thoughts. Kumioko (talk) 00:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I thought it was Jewish holiday → Jewish holidays. Neither page is a disambig page, just a normal redirect left behind after a page is renamed. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes. We could have bot like these the same way we have bots to create redirects. AWB can't be used to create a page move bot. Moving pages can't be done automatically with AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:31, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

A bot to eliminate all redirects?  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I was looking for a bot to change all the Jewish holiday links to Jewish holidays. --Dweller (talk) 12:44, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming. One reason that we can't automatically just change the link is that it depends on the text around it. For example the sentence "Yom Kippur is a Jewish Holiday" can't change to "Yom Kippur is a Jewish Holidays". The only thing a mindless bot could do in an automated way is pipe all of the links, making them look like [[Jewish holidays|Jewish holiday]]. But that's not really much of an improvement: it does not have any significant effect on the page loading time, it does not make the article easier to read, and it doesn't make the article easier to edit. This all gets back to motto that redirects are "not broken". — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there anyone here willing to take over (the functions of) User:RMCD bot? The source code has approval but the bot is down and the bot-operator absent. DrKiernan (talk) 13:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Based on a quick scan of the source code, it should be very easy to integrate into the existing WolfBot framework. I'll look into doing this shortly. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. DrKiernan (talk) 23:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed — Wolfgang42 (talk) 08:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The other bot is back. Apparently its operator went on vacation and the antivirus broke. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 14:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The content and titling of some of our fair use rationale templates has got out of sync and I'm attempting to rationalize the situation. It's explained in detail here, but the short version is that there are about 5,000 uses of the redirect {{Non-free media rationale}} that need to be replaced with their target name {{Non-free use rationale}}. This should be achievable in a single bot run. Anyone up for helping out? Many thanks. — Hex (❝?!❞) 12:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

• I've started working on a bot to do this. Expect a BRFA by the beginning of the week. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 05:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
• One concern: What if someone doesn't know and/or forgets that the template has been changed, and accidentally uses {{Non-free media rationale}} instead? Unless you can be sure that nobody will ever use the template again (a difficult proposition with 17,875,399 users), it's probably a good idea not to change the template to something entirely different. If you'd like, I can analyze who's been using the template and when they put it on the page, so you can determine whether it's being used anymore. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 05:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I ran an analysis last night, and it looks like people are still using the old template. It's only an average of two per month, but that's still enough to cause confusion if you change the template. Some statistics:

EDIT: I had a lot of data and some analysis here, but it turned out to be completely bogus. My code was analyzing the data for the revision before the one in which the template was added. My apologies and I'll re-analyze the data shortly. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 02:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

This means that if you change the meaning of this template you're likely to get users accidentally using the wrong one. Admittedly, there wouldn't be very many, but it would still cause confusion. My suggestion, if you still want to go through with the change, would be to:

1. Change all of the usages of the template
2. Make sure all of the documentation has been updated (including mentions of the template elsewhere besides the official documentation!)
3. Wait a few months to make sure nobody is still using the template.

Let me know if you still want to go through with the rename. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Wolfgang, thanks very much for stepping up to this one. Your concern is a good one that hadn't occurred to me, and you've addressed it excellently. I concur with your suggestions in full. We should go ahead with your suggested plan of action; I've notified ShakespeareFan00. I'll do a check after a month to see for any more people using the redirect, and let them know too, and again at the two-month mark; by which point I would think it safe to update the redirect. Sound good? — Hex (❝?!❞) 12:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed — Wolfgang42 (talk) 21:01, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Another thought also occurred to me: changing this template will break old page history. If somebody looks at an old version of a page that has {{Non-free media rationale}} it won't display the right template. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 12:58, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I think that's an egg we have to break for this omelette. Broken/changed templates in historic versions of articles is a known problem; unless MediaWiki gets changed to date-match transclusions in article history (I wish!) then there's not much we can do. I think historic versions of file metadata are probably fairly rarely viewed, though, so it shouldn't really prove to be a problem; and certainly people should only expect to find accurate licensing data on the newest version of a file, anyway. — Hex (❝?!❞) 13:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

As mentioned in my edit above, the analysis I had was completely off base. I reused some code that was already working, but didn't refactor a variable properly. I redid the analysis after I fixed the bug, and it seems that it's not nearly as clear-cut as I thought it was. ShakespeareFan00 has absolutely nothing to do with this template. Instead, it's a smattering of people who use it occasionally. My suggestion above still stands, but you may find that you need to wait longer than two months. My apologies for any confusion I caused. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 16:43, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Rather fortunate you mentioned this to me - see also User:Legoktm/AWB/TR Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:02, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

That is lucky. I've dropped Legoktm a line. — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I just removed the template from the list, so Legobot should be fine. Legoktm (talk) 00:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Doing... — Wolfgang42 (talk) 08:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Y Done — Wolfgang42 (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! That's great. — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I am entering a bot request for for replacing {{BPN}} with {{Authority control}}. See the discussion here: Template talk:Authority control#TSURL and BPN. Apparently I have made 360 of these links, which is a lot to fix by hand. I would like to see all of the BPN numbers in the Authority control template. Thanks, and if any more info is necessary, pls let me know! Jane (talk) 11:55, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• I'm doing something very similar above. Once I do that and make sure it works, I'll tweak my code so it can be used for your task as well. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I just noticed from the talk page of Authority control that they are concerned about the name of the template though, so you may want to wait until that discussion is cleared up. It also looks like some more mergers may be done (I don't know the details though). Jane (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

BRFA filed I asked on Template talk:Authority control, and they don't plan to change the name of the template. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 22:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

ok great. I just got a request for deletion, but the bot needs to run first of course. Jane (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Moving category X-gu to Category:X District per WP:CFD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 2. Sawol (talk) 06:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

• Category:Districts of Seoul

This should simply be listed at WP:CFD/W so Cydebot can take care of it. Legoktm (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I initially found and changed a few Wikipedia pages where the units for oil volume are (usually converted from barrels) listed in km^3. The proper SI and conventional unit in commerce is m^3, usually with engineering exponents. Wikipedia has proper conversion functions, eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Convert/Goilbbl but, I searched and found over 14 000 pages that have the improper km^3 units. Is it possible for you wiki folk to automate the change process?

thanks! Baden 197.159.156.208 (talk) 15:35, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 Question: Where did you do that search?  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:33, 1 December 2012 (UTC)