Operator: Basilicofresco ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 23:00, Thursday May 5, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): Python
Source code available: Standard pywikipedia
Function overview: it separates footnotes from external links creating a new "References" section where necessary.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): not necessary, already defined in Wikipedia:External links#Important points to remember and Wikipedia:Inline citations#References/Notes section
Edit period(s): montly or less
Estimated number of pages affected: 1400
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details: if footnotes tags (eg. <references/>
) or templates (eg. {{
reflist}}) are found within the "External links" section and a "Reference" section does not exist, then a new "Reference" section is created and these tags are moved there. Example:
[1].
Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz talk 02:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC) reply
In addition to "Notes", do you have a list of other section names and mark-up "things" that will make the bot ignore the page. For example, section names containing any of the words, "References" as in "References for material"; "Notes" as in "Notes and footnotes"; "Bibliography", etc. Or <references> tags while {{ reflist}} itself is used for content notes or similar but not named "References" per se, etc. Since you have an estimated page number, have you looked through it for other possible positives? I can only speculate here, but there are pages with some very weird referencing/section naming. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 10:44, 13 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Approved for extended trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Sure, go ahead. Do post a perma-link to contribs for easier review, please, as your bot is running other tasks too. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 08:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC) reply
{{ OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Any updates on the trial? No hurry if you're still working on it. MBisanz talk 23:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Operator: Basilicofresco ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 23:00, Thursday May 5, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): Python
Source code available: Standard pywikipedia
Function overview: it separates footnotes from external links creating a new "References" section where necessary.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): not necessary, already defined in Wikipedia:External links#Important points to remember and Wikipedia:Inline citations#References/Notes section
Edit period(s): montly or less
Estimated number of pages affected: 1400
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details: if footnotes tags (eg. <references/>
) or templates (eg. {{
reflist}}) are found within the "External links" section and a "Reference" section does not exist, then a new "Reference" section is created and these tags are moved there. Example:
[1].
Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz talk 02:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC) reply
In addition to "Notes", do you have a list of other section names and mark-up "things" that will make the bot ignore the page. For example, section names containing any of the words, "References" as in "References for material"; "Notes" as in "Notes and footnotes"; "Bibliography", etc. Or <references> tags while {{ reflist}} itself is used for content notes or similar but not named "References" per se, etc. Since you have an estimated page number, have you looked through it for other possible positives? I can only speculate here, but there are pages with some very weird referencing/section naming. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 10:44, 13 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Approved for extended trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Sure, go ahead. Do post a perma-link to contribs for easier review, please, as your bot is running other tasks too. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 08:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC) reply
{{ OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Any updates on the trial? No hurry if you're still working on it. MBisanz talk 23:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC) reply