Operator: H3llkn0wz ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 10:46, Thursday June 9, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): C#
Source code available: No
Function overview: While doing
task 4 remove invalid |publisher=
, |work=
, |format=
and partially fix |title=
referencing Wayback (and Webcite when implemented)
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/H3llBot 4
Edit period(s): Manually run
Estimated number of pages affected: Unsure, not that many
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details:
Basically, I found that editors in addition to using archive.org for main |url=
, also sometimes treat other fields as if the citation is to Wayback. That is only fine for material made/published by Wayback (hence this is done only with task 4). But when an archive url is used and is then bot-moved to proper field, I found that I need to clean up too many pages.
So: When
moving archive url from |url=
to |archiveurl=
, also:
|publisher=
, |work=
or change |title=
field that contains a reference to Wayback archive in a form similar to "Wayback" "xxxx (Wayback)", "Wayback: xxxx" or "xxxx – Wayback", where "xxxx" is some text and "Wayback" matches a RegEx of reference to Wayback archive
|title=
field only do such edits if a partial title will remain|format=
field that contains "archive" or "wayback"Example cases. Will be expanded if/when I find new cases.
Approved for trial (50). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Task is both reasonable and desirable. A 50 edit trial should bring up any kinks in the code. Then we'll see if it's ready for glory. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Trial complete. Any diff with "Removed incorrect Wayback usage from citation field" is under this task. All bugs/parsing fails so far were reverted and fixed. I'm going to keep an eye on most of the edits, as I expect to run into some more cases I hadn't anticipated. But so far it looks good. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 09:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC) reply
{{ OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Any updates? MBisanz talk 14:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Trusted botop, uncontroversial task Approved. -- Chris 11:32, 24 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Operator: H3llkn0wz ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 10:46, Thursday June 9, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): C#
Source code available: No
Function overview: While doing
task 4 remove invalid |publisher=
, |work=
, |format=
and partially fix |title=
referencing Wayback (and Webcite when implemented)
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/H3llBot 4
Edit period(s): Manually run
Estimated number of pages affected: Unsure, not that many
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details:
Basically, I found that editors in addition to using archive.org for main |url=
, also sometimes treat other fields as if the citation is to Wayback. That is only fine for material made/published by Wayback (hence this is done only with task 4). But when an archive url is used and is then bot-moved to proper field, I found that I need to clean up too many pages.
So: When
moving archive url from |url=
to |archiveurl=
, also:
|publisher=
, |work=
or change |title=
field that contains a reference to Wayback archive in a form similar to "Wayback" "xxxx (Wayback)", "Wayback: xxxx" or "xxxx – Wayback", where "xxxx" is some text and "Wayback" matches a RegEx of reference to Wayback archive
|title=
field only do such edits if a partial title will remain|format=
field that contains "archive" or "wayback"Example cases. Will be expanded if/when I find new cases.
Approved for trial (50). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Task is both reasonable and desirable. A 50 edit trial should bring up any kinks in the code. Then we'll see if it's ready for glory. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Trial complete. Any diff with "Removed incorrect Wayback usage from citation field" is under this task. All bugs/parsing fails so far were reverted and fixed. I'm going to keep an eye on most of the edits, as I expect to run into some more cases I hadn't anticipated. But so far it looks good. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 09:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC) reply
{{ OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Any updates? MBisanz talk 14:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Trusted botop, uncontroversial task Approved. -- Chris 11:32, 24 July 2011 (UTC) reply