Operator: Josh Parris ( talk · contribs)
Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic
Programming language(s): Python
Source code available: https://svn.toolserver.org/svnroot/josh/WildBot/book_checker.py
Function overview: Note a book's problematic links on the talk page
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests#Book-problem bot
Edit period(s): Continuous, with periodic sweeps for related changes that affect books.
Estimated number of pages affected: The current standing of the world:
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Standard in pywikipedia
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details: Books in Category:Wikipedia books (community books) and Category:Wikipedia books (user books) are checked for duplicated entries (including those due to redirects), redirects, linking to disambiguation pages and redlinks. Redirects in the book are followed to the target article. A note will be placed on the book's talk page if any problems are found.
The notes will look something like:
![]() | When printed this book has duplicated articles in it: This box was placed by WildBot, a bot designed to keep it up to date and then remove it when the links are fixed. If WildBot is malfunctioning, please leave a message. |
![]() |
This bot will be tightly coupled to the toolserver, utilizing SQL queries for most of its data-access.
I don't see any problems with this task, and no one has voiced any opposition, so Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. —
The
Earwig
@
22:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
Trial complete.
The remaining trial edits are here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20100220092400&target=WildBot&limit=28 they represent a hand-picked list of community books with multiple problems (dabs and redirects, plus 5 with redlinks); the hand-picking took a while, but I did discover a problem with my original queries for disambiguation pages in books (revised figures above). Headbomb: I haven't finished the handful of tweaks needed for broader run; I won't be doing that full run until the tweaks are finished (shouldn't take long). When that happens I can easily reprocess all pages currently tagged with the template in case those changes affect any of them. Some of the pages in the trial run now have pretty large templates on them.
Josh Parris
09:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
|rev=
and |time=
correctly (the first version of the template used |rev=http://...
), as well as reduce the verbosity of lines such as "
Ballades (Chopin) is present more than once, possibly because of redirects." to something like "
Ballades (Chopin)", since the template already mentions that this is possibly due to redirects.
Headbomb {
ταλκ
κοντριβς –
WP Physics}
04:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
I noticed that WildBot just removed all the notices with the summary "all problems fixed", even on books where the problem weren't fixed. What gives? Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC) reply
Also, could you amass all the links to the source codes (there's more than [3] i'm sure)? This way it would be easy for other bot-coders to retrieve everything they need and adapt this bot for the other Wikipedias / other wikis ? Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 14:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC) reply
|wildbot=yes
? This way users who download books know that the book might not be in tip-top shape. (It doesn't do anything yet, but I'll add this functionality to {{
saved book}} soon).
Headbomb {
ταλκ
κοντριβς –
WP Physics}
11:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
←Hm. As long as the main part of the bot is the same, it should be fine, but because I want to make sure the changes will work properly, Approved for trial (5–10 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. —
The Earwig
(talk)
16:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
Operator: Josh Parris ( talk · contribs)
Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic
Programming language(s): Python
Source code available: https://svn.toolserver.org/svnroot/josh/WildBot/book_checker.py
Function overview: Note a book's problematic links on the talk page
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests#Book-problem bot
Edit period(s): Continuous, with periodic sweeps for related changes that affect books.
Estimated number of pages affected: The current standing of the world:
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Standard in pywikipedia
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details: Books in Category:Wikipedia books (community books) and Category:Wikipedia books (user books) are checked for duplicated entries (including those due to redirects), redirects, linking to disambiguation pages and redlinks. Redirects in the book are followed to the target article. A note will be placed on the book's talk page if any problems are found.
The notes will look something like:
![]() | When printed this book has duplicated articles in it: This box was placed by WildBot, a bot designed to keep it up to date and then remove it when the links are fixed. If WildBot is malfunctioning, please leave a message. |
![]() |
This bot will be tightly coupled to the toolserver, utilizing SQL queries for most of its data-access.
I don't see any problems with this task, and no one has voiced any opposition, so Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. —
The
Earwig
@
22:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
Trial complete.
The remaining trial edits are here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20100220092400&target=WildBot&limit=28 they represent a hand-picked list of community books with multiple problems (dabs and redirects, plus 5 with redlinks); the hand-picking took a while, but I did discover a problem with my original queries for disambiguation pages in books (revised figures above). Headbomb: I haven't finished the handful of tweaks needed for broader run; I won't be doing that full run until the tweaks are finished (shouldn't take long). When that happens I can easily reprocess all pages currently tagged with the template in case those changes affect any of them. Some of the pages in the trial run now have pretty large templates on them.
Josh Parris
09:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
|rev=
and |time=
correctly (the first version of the template used |rev=http://...
), as well as reduce the verbosity of lines such as "
Ballades (Chopin) is present more than once, possibly because of redirects." to something like "
Ballades (Chopin)", since the template already mentions that this is possibly due to redirects.
Headbomb {
ταλκ
κοντριβς –
WP Physics}
04:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
I noticed that WildBot just removed all the notices with the summary "all problems fixed", even on books where the problem weren't fixed. What gives? Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC) reply
Also, could you amass all the links to the source codes (there's more than [3] i'm sure)? This way it would be easy for other bot-coders to retrieve everything they need and adapt this bot for the other Wikipedias / other wikis ? Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 14:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC) reply
|wildbot=yes
? This way users who download books know that the book might not be in tip-top shape. (It doesn't do anything yet, but I'll add this functionality to {{
saved book}} soon).
Headbomb {
ταλκ
κοντριβς –
WP Physics}
11:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
reply
←Hm. As long as the main part of the bot is the same, it should be fine, but because I want to make sure the changes will work properly, Approved for trial (5–10 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. —
The Earwig
(talk)
16:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
reply