This is an archive of past discussions. 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 talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
A lot of images get tagged with {{ Di-no fair use rationale}} (aka {{ nrd}}). The tagger usually notifies the uploader of the tagging, which is good. However, the template specifically asks the tagger to "Add following to the image captions: {{ deletable image-caption}}". Many taggers do not do this. A quick, random check of the first page of Category:Images with no fair use rationale indicates that many such images are not so tagged. This leaves only one interested person, in most cases, aware of the tagging, instead of anyone watching the articles on which the image is included. In most cases, the rationale is obvious -- organization logos on the organization's article, for example -- and article contributors would be happy to add it, especially to avoid the trouble of having the image deleted. Without the {{ deletable image-caption}} tag, though, such article contributors will likely be completely unaware of the tagging until the image is deleted.
What I would propose is a bot that could add the {{ deletable image-caption}} tag to the captions of any images tagged with {{ Di-no fair use rationale}}. This would notify article contributors without overburdening our intrepid and dedicated fair-use rationale patrollers.
Powers T 14:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Salutations, I use to translate many articles from Wikipedia in English to Wikipedia in Portuguese; however, I perceive that the Portuguese version link is not added in the English version's Interwiki list. So, my question is: how often do the Interwiki bots function? Can I request for an Interwiki bot to add the Portuguese version to several articles? How do these bots do this? Thank you in advance, Sanscrit1234 22:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry if this has been asked here before, but User:Dragons flight's bot has stopped functioning b/c of user absence, and I was wondering if there was interest in creating a new bot with the same functions, such as AfD summaries (I think RfA stuff is taken care of right now). ~ Eliz 81 (C) 05:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
i've found im incresingly coming by pages that have references (as in <ref></ref>) but no {{reference}}, i was wonderin if theres any way to have a bot built to add in the reference template for pages that dont have one but do have references... if that makes sense, Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 23:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
if there is no real difference, then why dont we just use {{reference}} and let who ever doesnt like it to work out the difference??? Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 03:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
All I got after 24hrs of checking:
Looking for a more experienced botmaster to pawn this one off on... -- SXT4 04:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
==References== {{reflist}}
at the bottom of the article unless
"[[Category:*" where the * is a wild card, then add it just above the first "[[Category:*".
Every article should have a reference section, if there are no reference present it will encourage editors to add the references if there unposted references it will post them.
Jeepday ( talk) 12:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, after a major rewrite, the bot's done running. 4,310 articles identified as broken. The list is here. However, I don't think I'm up to making a bot to fix them, and, that's an awful lot to do by hand.... Anybody up for it? :) (Plain txt file available upon request) -- SQL( Query Me!) 07:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
There are various "list of related topics" articles, such as the articles in Category:Lists of topics by country, which are used as watch lists to track all article changes for a specific topic. For example, you can track the Indonesia related changes using this link: Special:Recentchangeslinked/List of Indonesia-related topics. There are two problems with maintaining these lists which a bot could provide assistance with:
Until now I've been doing these tasks manually, but its a huge amount of effort to do so even just for the List of Indonesia-related topics page. ( Caniago 11:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC))
There are many links to Somepage that exists#But some anchor that doesn't. A bot should be made... Jidanni 03:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Currently, in order to rename images to comply with WP:IUP#Image titles and file names, a user must download the image, re-upload the image under the new name, and replace all usages in articles. What I am suggesting is that the template {{ ifr}} be modified to include a parameter for a suggested new name for the image, and that a bot then work the images in Category:Images for renaming to upload the image under the new file name and replace all instances of its usage in articles. The old image would then be tagged with {{ db-redundantimage}}.
There would probably need to be some warning functionality to be used if the suggested new image name was already in use (or the bot could add an extra character to the image name, or something similar).
Much of the code could probably be recycled from User:PNG crusade bot, which performs an extremely similar function in converting images to PNG format. Videmus Omnia Talk 23:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone make a bot to help in WP:MOTD, especially moving mottos in In Review to Awaiting desicions?-- Sunny910910 ( talk| Contributions) Neither will alone, nor strength alone 00:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I've never used a bot before & hope I word this correctly. Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset has just been set up & it would be great if Template:Somerset could be added to the talk pages of all articles in Category:Somerset and all of its sub categories. Is this the sort of thing a bot could do? If you need any further info please let me know— Rod talk 16:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC) .
Is there a bot available to take on the task to provide a count of articles within the following categories for WikiProject Australia?
Information on the article count should then be presented to a table with clickable wikilinks to the category. Any takers? -- Longhair\ talk 10:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I know that this has been brought up before, but I don't think any bot or process can currently do this: would it be possible for a bot (or something else) to check protected pages and generate a list of all of the pages that have protection tags that shouldn't, and generate a list of all the pages that should have a protection tag that don't? Hopefully, this would include all pages, including templates. Thoughts? -- MZMcBride 03:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I have created a British Army portal. Unfortunately, all the pages associated to the British Army (every page included within Category:British Army) need the following box added to every page: {{Portal|British Army|Flag of the British Army.svg|65}}. The box needs to go under the See Also section, or similiar as not every page has a 'See Also' section (unless you made the bot create that section). If anyone can create a bot that could do this task for me, I would appreciate it. I am the only Co-Ordinator, so there is no need for discussion on whether the portal's community would like it to happen and I have finished creating the portal, so it is ready to be shown to the public en masse. Jhfireboy Talk 22:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Selketbot is MIA. Can someone please make a replacement and put it on 24/7/365 toolserv, because I, other users and other administrators are tired of tagging SchoolIPs. Thanks. M. (er) 08:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
This is a request for a tool to automatically create a database and table-almanac using data from infoboxes and comparison tables on Wikipedia articles. It would probably have three components:
This database would make it quick and easy (at least for someone who knows the query language) to answer such queries as "What alternative metal bands, active in or after 2002, are based in Ontario?" and "What open-source text editors run on the Mac and support UTF-8?" It would be the start of a print reference book, a great aid to library reference desks, and a way to search for just about anything. (Note that it may require type polymorphism and may-or-may-not-be-foreign-keys, so SQL may not work for it.) Neon Merlin 20:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
All articles on this page need to be moved to the correct capitalisation (eg O Goshi to O goshi, and internal links fixing to match. A bot to take care of this would be awesome. Neil ム 10:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I can't program a Wikipedia bot, but I want a very good bot that's occasionally updated to prevent bugs and do more stuff to help Wikipedia. I want a bot called LegendBot. Thank you,-- The source of the cosmos... 21:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC) HELLO?!?-- The source of the cosmos... 00:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Anything to help Wikipedia! Oh, and make sure to identify the version of the bot. Okay?-- The source of the cosmos... 22:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
But, the bot does everything to help Wikipedia, no exceptions.-- The source of the cosmos... 01:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Stopping vandals, Fixing articles, that sort of thing, but like a city, it must be built from one subject to another.-- The source of the cosmos... 02:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
For a couple weeks, this set of aircraft categories has been requested to change. The change is clearly approvable, but it's complicated to implement. It involves searching templates like [[Template:civil aircraft by nationality]] and switching U.S. for United States, or PRC for People's Republic of China.
And all of the subcategories of those categories, of course. Can anyone's bot do that?-- Mike Selinker 15:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like there to be a redirect and template bot. I would like it to be called MacBot. -- MacMad ( talk · contribs) 16:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I just manually added in a bunch of headers in the format:
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|?}}
:{{la|Article title}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Article title|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Date#{{anchorencode:Article title}}|View log]])</noinclude>
for AfDs in which they were missing. I've done this often, but perhaps a bot could automatically add them in. Also could a bot automatically close AfD debates for articles that get CSDed? This could expand upon the work that DumbBOT already does. ~ Eliz 81 (C) 20:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
{{ Extra chronology}} has been deprecated for {{ Extra chronology 2}}. I'm not sure what the exact difference between the two is, but I discovered that the latter fixed the problem with an unwanted line break in The Sweet Escape (song) article ( diff). It'd be helpful to have a bot go through and replace the deprecated template so that it can eventually be deleted or redirected. 17Drew 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
How to? HELP ME, please :) -- WonYong ( talk • contribs • count) 00:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
We need someone to write and maintain a bot that will police the use of the controversial Template:Unreferenced.
This template, currently on over 10,000 articles (Maybe it's 100,000; I don't know; I clicked "next 500" until I tired of it), says, "This article does not cite any references or sources." The problem is that this is almost always untrue, and the tag has therefore lost credibility. There is steadfast opposition to changing this statement to say "sufficient" instead of "any"; some other editors enjoy pointing out that there are other template tags such as Template:Refimprove that complain about references without complaining that the article has no references, as "Unreferenced" does; and that the "Unreferenced" tag is needed, despite the widespread inaccuracy of its use (past and ongoing).
It occurred to me that a bot could be written that would fix this problem. It would run through each article that is tagged with Template:Unreferenced, and if there are any single-bracket links in the article at all, the bot would assume it's a reference, and change the template to Template:Refimprove. The run would occur every few days, ideally, and subsequent runs after the first one would involve far fewer tags, since I expect 80% of the thousands of Unreference tags to be converted in that first pass.
This would strengthen the integrity of Template:Unreferenced. Any volunteers?
Thanks - Tempshill 23:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
For clarification, this was sent from WP:VP/T to WP:BOTREQ, however if discussion needs to occur for this proposal, the proper "Pump" is WP:VPR. Oh, acronyms.... Cheers. -- MZMcBride 19:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC) I can get my bot to do it, but I'd need consensus first. And perhaps 2 external links instead of one. ^ demon [omg plz] 17:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I just did a random check of some of User:^demonBot2's most recent changes looks great :) Can you set it up to run periodically (maybe weekly)? Jeepday ( talk) 22:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
It's a great idea and I fully support it. Go demonBot2! SilkTork * SilkyTalk 23:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Teething problems: The bot is not differentiating between a tag placed in an article, and a tag placed in a section, as here: Kidbrooke. The section has no references at all, but the tag reads that it needs "additional". SilkTork * SilkyTalk 23:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Will this be started up again? The original suggestion here was unsure of the size of the category, for everyone's information it is listed at 83,256 at WP:WATCH. I don't know how this bot works but if it could go through Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 and Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2006 first, that would be most helpful. -- BirgitteSB 22:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
A bot should be created to sift through Special:Unusedimages. There are many images there, some likely without copyright information, some orphaned copyright, many copyleft. I'd imagine this could be sifted in three waves, finding and tagging images without copyright information, then when those are deleted or attributed, finding and tagging those tagged as copyrighted as {{ orfud}}, and finding and tagging images with an appropriate copyleft tag to be transwikied to commons. Then, it would be a simple matter to have a bot move the copyleft images over. Doing this will make local management of images easier, as the remaining backlog at Special:Unusedimages will be manageable by a single admin on any given day, making finding prohibited, forgotten, or cv images a lot easier, and as it is, commons is the repository of potentially unused copyleft media, not us. Thoughts? -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
See this thread - anyone think they could do this? Dihydrogen Monoxide ( H2O) 01:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Starting with List of asteroids/1–100, check the interwiki links and match the pages going up by hundreds. Right now, there's only the ast (Asturian), an (Aragonian), ca (Catalan), eu (Basque) and ru (Russian) pages (als is out of sync, hr has just the one page):
One should be careful of keeping the interwiki links within the ending <noinclude> block. Ideally, th ebot should create the interwikis both ways (ca seems to have all the links to en in place already). Other projects (such as fr, pl, etc.) use a different page step, and will therefore be linked to a different set of en pages. Urhixidur 18:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
The video game project has a special template Template:VGrationale that substs the Template:Non-free use rationale template to help mark images used in articles. However, with the change of the template and the recent push for getting non-free images up to snuff through Betacommandbot and apparently others, the FUR templates generated by VGrationale lack the new Article= field and thus these images are being tagged as #10c violations. I've fixed VGrationale so that new instances of it are fine, and I think there's a possible issue with BCB not looking into the headers, but regardless, there's still a manual job of adding the article name to apparently 100s of images that have already been tagged.
Or, is it really a manual job? VGrationale adds a h2-type header as: "Fair Use rationale for use on [[Page Link]]", followed immediately by the FUR, when the subst is done.
So, the question becomes:
I'm thinking this is more on the "insane" side of a requests, but one never knows...-- Masem 15:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
At least one (anonymous) editor of New Orleans has developed a habit of inserting contradictory (POV) text between a fact and its citation. This has the obvious effect of changing the meaning of the article and appears to come from the reference when it does not.
Example:
Hurricanes also pose a severe threat to the area, and the city is particularly vulnerable because of its low elevation. According to a recent report by The Weather Channel, the city is the most vulnerable in the country when it comes to hurricanes. [1]
Becomes something like this:
Hurricanes also pose a severe threat to the area, and the city is particularly vulnerable because of its low elevation. According to a recent report by The Weather Channel, the city is the most vulnerable in the country when it comes to hurricanes. The Army Corps of Engineers is going to build more levees so that future disasters will not occur. [2]
Except, of course, that the reference number is still 1.
I wouldn't have the foggiest idea about writing or running a bot, but looking for new text immediately preceding a reference should not be hard. It could draw attention to a lot of misinformation. Thanks, Sagredo 20:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I actually only saw one occur, when it was done to a change I made, but picked up on other places in the article where edits were fit in in this way. Again because the text no longer fit the reference. But any edit stuck in in that way is likely to separate the fact from its reference and be unintentionally damaging. Perhaps the answer is not a bot, but something in the software, that asks the editor "did you mean to place this text between the previous text and the reference? requires them click on a button. Then if "yes" is clicked that change should be carefully checked. Maybe this should be done for all editors, because the potential for harm is so great. I'll read the section on vandalism. Sagredo 04:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162195813
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162196274
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162195813
Three vandalisms to population numbers.
Sagredo 08:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Moving the citation back occurred to me, too. It should work even when the new text was an addition to a sentence, although the citation would end up in the middle of a sentence. I think in case of the NOLA article, there's a definite intention to insert POV without being obviously vandalism. My feeling is that some have done so much of it to have become quite good at it. Sagredo 01:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
So you think it would be more work that it would be worth? Sagredo 02:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I've got an idea for a very simple, very narrow-purpose bot, I was thinking of writing myself for fun -- so this is not really a bot request, but I couldn't find another good place to bounce ideas off people to see if this even makes sense.
The page for Love constantly gets vandalism of the form "Randy loves Amy," etc. A very high percentage of it neatly fits the pattern "<Surname>/I loves/LOVES/love/LOVE <Surname>/you". So I was thinking maybe having a bot that would check for edits only on Love that fit that specific pattern and revert them.
I know, it's only marginally useful, but this would almost be more a learning exercise for me than anything else. I am just trying to think of any way in which it would be destructive... I dunno, is this a dumb idea? -- Jaysweet 15:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to make a bot that looks through a users contribs back one month, and determines if a user has made any contributions to an article that is classified as an Artemis Fowl article. This is so that we ( Coordinators) can make sure that the Active/Inactive section is constantly updated. This is because it is a pretty menial task that is long and boring. Can I get some feed back on this? Your Grace Lord Sir Dreamy of Buckland tm 12:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Ever used Interiot's wannabe kate edit counter? It will be something like that. -- Chris G 13:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Not so much on Wikipedia, but on other Wikis on the internet I have noticed a lot of spam on inappropriate material. I propose to create a bot that scans past New Pages and Edits for key words such as "Free Gold" or "Live Sex" and rolls back the page to a earlier edit where the spam is no longer present; some new pages get past extension filters I'm sure, so having a bot to search them out would make things a lot easier.. This would lessen the amount of work that admins on Wikipedia and other wikis would have to do in order to erase past spam in the database.
I know that there are some extensions that do this for posts being posted such as "SpamBlacklist" but I have not seen one that will scan Past pages for this inappropriate content.
If this bot does well, I would like to openly share the coding so that it can be implemented on other websites using the Wikimedia setup to host their own Wikis.
I have limited programming knowledge, and wouldn't know where to start. Even still, I am willing to contribute what I can for this project.
I look forward to everyone's input on this.
GusJustGus1 20:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
is this possible? It seems to happen a fair bit. For instance - the "Category:Suspected Wikipedia Sockpuppets of Bob": cats like that are populated, but redlinked. Is it possible? -- Anonymous Dissident Talk 09:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
And of course the bot won't recreate deleted cats. -- Chris G 11:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be fine for creation of maintenance templates because they are nearly all the same but get updated created monthly or wever. :: maelgwn - talk 11:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Category:Fellows_of_the_American_Academy_of_Arts_and_Sciences is extremely underpopulated despite there being 4000 members in the Academy. Can we add some of these members to this category using a bot? -- Yuyudevil 02:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to create a bot to go through articles using the Template:French commune and removing some formatting that was imported from the French wiki? i.e. would it be possible to create a bot to do an edit like this one. An image and caption have been placed in the parameter for the name of the town. There are optional parameters for these now. The template is currently used in upwards of 2000 articles and would be tedious to go through so many articles. It needs to be done so that the name of the town be made more promiment and to standardise the format of the template infobox. -- Bob 15:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Could a bot help clean up the backlog at Category:Non-free images lacking article backlink? This requires simply adding a parameter. The best may be a double verification, first by the article the images is used in and then see if there is a link to that article in the rationale. See Image:3dlemmi screen003.jpg, where both 3D Lemmings is both listed on the page and is the page where the image is used. Then since they match, the bot would just need to add "Article = 3D Lemmings" as a parameter. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 21:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What if the bot added "|Article =" to the template. This would make it easier to clean up this category. 129.177.156.248 14:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Meanwhile, I've written a user script to help with this: see User:Ilmari Karonen/nfurbacklink.js. Since the script requires user confirmation, I've made it quite a bit simpler than the suggestions above; it simply suggests an automatic fix if the image has one rationale tag, no backlink and one entry in the "File links" section. — Ilmari Karonen ( talk) 01:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like a bot to help me deliver WikiProject Universities newsletters, which will occur on a monthly basis. I'm not sure if I should make my own bot (as I don't know how the software works with that) or request for someone else to create it. The bot would serve a similar purpose as Grafikbot. The newsletters can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/Outreach. Anything else I need to do just let me know! Thanks -- Noetic Sage 19:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I've never done this sort of thing before, so someone tell me if I have a good idea or not. Basically, what I envision is a bot crawling through Category:Chemical compounds looking for pages without images. If the bot finds a page without a typical image extension (jpg, png, etc.) or a page with a link to a non-existent picture, it goes to the associated talk page and slaps {{Chemical drawing needed}} on it. This also adds it to Category:Chemistry pages needing pictures so someone can go make the needed images. Of course, the bot will be smart enough not to tag an article that's already tagged. Input? shoy 23:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
\[\[[Ii]mage:.*?\]\]
instead of searching for an image extension. In case you have access to the toolserver you could simply select all pages in this category without imagelinks. --
Erwin85 09:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
What Erwin85 saying is that instead of the bot checking if its an image by its extension, the bot will check if the page has [[Image:SomeNameHere|PossiblySomethingHere|AndHere]] on it and as for the toolsever take a read here. I think that's it anything I missed? -- Chris G 02:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
As a substitute to regex searching, you could also access the information in a more accessible form here (using formats such as JSON, XML, YAML, WDDX, or serialized PHP). You can also use a generator to check if an image is missing; unfortunately, images on Commons are marked as missing, but this can be checked with a query like this to Common's API. Gracenotes T § 23:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
(undent) Pretty much every higher-level programming language either has native support for XML or has a well-supported XML parser library available. — madman bum and angel 06:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
It is possible to get a bot to (at least partially) tidy up biographical sort keys so special characters and accented characters are replaced, and punctuation (except hyphens) removed, and all words in the sort key start with a capital letter? Have a look at Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Ordering names in a category. It says the following:
"(1) Punctuation, such as apostrophes and colons (but not hyphens) should be removed, and accented letters and ligatures should be replaced by their unaccented or separated counterparts. (2) The first letter of each word should be in upper case, and all subsequent letters should be in lower case, regardless of the correct spelling of the name. Thus, Lena D'Água sorts as [[Category:Portuguese female singers|Dagua, Lena]]. Without these last alterations, all punctuation marks and internal capital letters would be sorted before A, and all accented characters and ligatures would sort after Z." (my emphasis)
What the bot should do is look for sort keys in category tags, plus any DEFAULTSORT sort keys, and remove punctuation such as ' and : (removing ' entirely and replacing : with a space, I think), and replaced an accented 'e' with an unaccented 'e', and so on. It should also run the end result through a program that makes the start of every word a capital letter, and removes capitals that appear within the words. Thus le Guin becomes Le Guin, and McCallum becomes Mccallum. If this is not done, the results is what is seen here, with lots of stuff appearing at the end of the category listing. This example uses the listas parameter, which is a talk page sort key, but this applies to all sort keys wherever they are used. So, is this possible? It would require a very long list of accented and other special characters to look for. The removal of apostrophes and suchlike should be easier, and the capitalisation issue should be really easy. Can this be done? Carcharoth 13:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to raise this issue again, or if no-one here has any further advice, to ask where to go next. See here for the previous discussion. What I'd ultimately like to see is something like Category:Default sort key missing for biographical articles (probably on the talk page), so they can be worked on. At the moment, there is Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, but that only works from a talk page template parameter (specifically, listas in {{ WPBiography}}) and doesn't truly reflect DEFAULTSORT usage (it would only reflect the usage if the two values were synchronised on all pages). Ultimately, it all comes down to this simple question:
"Which biographical articles lack DEFAULTSORT"?
Surely a simple question like that can't be that difficult? :-) Carcharoth 04:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
The response over there was to suggest I post a request here. I'd also like the bot to cross-reference the list of category with Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, which refers to a talk page sort key parameter. This is closely tied to the function that was developed under Polbot 3 ( Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Polbot 3). That was probably too ambitious, so I'm trying to break up the task into manageable chunks. Ideally, I'd like to replace Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, with Category:Default sort key missing (not that they are the same at the moment - I mean deprecate listas after synchronising the two systems). Failing that, I'd like to see the DEFAULTSORT and listas sort keys synchronised by a bot. Carcharoth 13:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
At WP:TfD, we occasionally get templates that have a lot of calls on various articles, which need to either be modified to call a different template (so that the first can be deleted), substituted or simply removed. Other, more complicated things can also be needed infrequently. To date, this has been done by User:^demonBot2; however, he's currently too busy.
Is there anyone here that's willing to take up this task? The jobs could easily be done using WP:AWB, and information on exactly what needs doing in each case would be provided in the request.
An example: Template:Link GA ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) needs all template calls removing so that the template can be deleted. Another example: Template:Hqfl logo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) needs converting to Template:Non-free logo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs), but the text describing the source needs to be put either in the "source" field of an info template, or adding onto the end of the image description text.
Thanks in advance. Mike Peel 20:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I have a small problem. I have to change hundreds of piped links, and I'm hoping a bot could save me a lot of work. I have to change every piped link that currently contains User:Lincalinca (i.e. [[User:Lincalinca|Foo...]]) to another piped link (i.e. [[Correct link|Foo...]]). I've done this change manually to show what I'm trying to accomplish ( see here). Any suggestions on how to change this in as little effort as possible are most welcome. If anyone's up for the task, I'll be glad to share the details. Thanks! - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 01:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I recently updated a disambiguation page ( Aaron (name)) by looking at Category:Living people, which is fairly well sorted. I am wondering whether a trial "suggested disambiguations" bot could be run over this category to generate suggestions for disambiguation pages. I'm not sure, but I think Polbot does something similar, but I don't know how it does it. Anyway, what the bot would do is scan the category and find articles that were sorted using the same "first part" of the sort key. This would generally be the surname. ie. it would find articles sorted "Lane, Gary" and "Lane, Percy" and suggest they be added to either Lane (name) or Lane (surname). This won't be complete disambiguation, as it won't cover dead people. That will hopefully be possible if a supercategory is created to contain all people articles. Of course, people would still be needed to annotate the dab pages, unless infobox information could be used to do that... I'm throwing this idea out here to see if people think it sounds feasible and worth the effort of finding people who could make this work? Carcharoth 13:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Status Update: I have it properly querying a category and parsing names to determine first, middle, last (as appropriate). It will also find the duplicates. Next, I need to implement the matches against potential disambig pages. I've had less time that I thought, so it'll take me a bit longer. -- JLaTondre 23:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Currently, our Wikipedia:Guide to deletion states:
It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion.
and lists several bullets and paragraphs of details that the nominator need to carry out. From my experience, depending on where you draw the border between "main" and non-main contributions, this can take more than an hour for a medium sized article. A bot could do that in fractions of a second. The bot would simply notify every non-bot who did non-minor edits. (Criteria could be refined in a later version.)
Currently, the distinction between "main" and non-main depends on each nominator's goodwill. This means, that particularly the nicest editors end up spending the most time with menial tasks. I don't think that's fair. More importantly, we are creating an unnecessary gray area: Nomination is nomination, it should be reported regardless of the character of the nominator. If anything, then we want better, not worse reporting of nominations by uncivil nominators. — Sebastian 07:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Many vandalism events involve two or more sequential edits with sample text, inane comments, or vandalism, which the authors immediately try to delete. Usually the articles are left in the same condition as when they began. Often the same editors continue doing this to various articles, consuming resources and RC Patrollers. I invite a bot to detect such test edits and provide on the User Talk page one of the usual how to edit and use the sandbox messages (perhaps also an appropriate Welcome if the user Talk page was empty). ( SEWilco 18:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC))
At Category:Australian rugby league biography stubs (and presumably other categories of rugby league articles), there are a lot of players that are sorted by first name. I'm not sure if there's a bot that does DEFAULTSORT, but if there is, that would be much appreciated. Damanmundine1 ( Talk) 01:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Discussion moved to: Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Convert_.28_and_.29_to_parentheses. Lightmouse 13:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I've gotten sysop access on Wikia:Digimon, which will allow WP:DIGI to do a full transwiki without having to keep the articles on Wikipedia's side for the page histories (via export/import). I've done a few very basic things with pywikipedia ( User:NedBot), mostly because there's nothing like AWB for Mac OS X. I was planning on manually using Special:Export and Special:Import to move some articles, but the process is time consuming, and exporting only works for 100 versions at a time. I'd also like to move the images over, which I did see is a script for pywikipedia bot, but I'm having a hard time understanding even getting the bot to work on another wiki.
I'm very lost at this point, but I do tend to catch on quickly. Ideally I'd like to be able to run the bot/script/whatever so we don't have to keep bothering other people in the future, and because importing requires sysop access. But even if it's just with the images, any help at this point would be greatly appreciated, and would likely make future transwiki projects far more attractive options. -- Ned Scott 04:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The spam blacklist/whitelist pages are getting incredibly backlogged, and it would be nice if a bot was capable of archiving completed requests marked with {{ Done}} or {{ Notdone}}. Thanks, ^ demon [omg plz] 20:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I have been looking over at wrestlers information here on Wikipedia and somehow the birthdates are not cited. Plus other information of the wrestlers have also been not cited as well. I am not sure if there is one, but if there is one, that would be taking care of. LindsieandLance 01:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
A bot that could see the difference in articles. Check whether the added statements are plagiarized (by searching Google), If a match is found, check whether attribution is proper. We could eliminate a lot of copyright violations and plagiarisms if this bot is done. i don't know whether such a bot exists. But if it does, please let me know.. I've got some more suggestions... Mugunth 18:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I could revive the suggestion to check RC, but that would make my load on WP (and on Yahoo!) an order of magnitude greater than it currently is. — Coren (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Like other wikiprojects, WikiProject Ireland uses the assessment process to track articles within its scope, but many articles and categories are currently untagged. As a result they don't show up in the statistics on the WP:IRL Assessment page, and are missing from the project's monitoring categories.
Please could a bot run through the talk pages of these articles and categories add the {{ WikiProject Ireland}} tags as set out below (unless already present)? (I have been started the job with AWB, but decided that life is too short to manually click the save button on a squillion articles)
It would be most useful if the template could be added with the parameters included, but left blank so that editors don't have to type them when filling in the field, as follows:
{{WikiProject Ireland |small= |nested= |class= |importance= |attention= |peer-review= |old-peer-review= |image-needed= |needs-infobox= }}
However, it would be great if categories could be set with the class parameter set as
class= Category
, since all categories are assigned this to class. (For article talk pages, all parameters should be left blank)
There are a few other points:
Is this feasible? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I've moved {{ Architecture}} to {{ WikiProject Architecture}} (+ template arguments) in line with common naming conventions. It also opens up the floor to a navbox at the former title. Unfortunately, I found out that I can no longer do fully automated edits with AWB. Is there a bot that is approved to do a search-replace in about 8000 articles? - Mgm| (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to request a bot to scrutinize Anon deletions of sections. I lurk with VandalFighter; and I can easily discern (based on characters removed) where an Anon has come in and removed significant (or even all) text from a section from a stable article. They may even do this multiple times to the same article, in effect deleting the article piecemeal. Perhaps the bot could also be more aggressive in reverting deletions from articles over a certain age (like a 1 or 2 years old), which are more likely to be decent articles and are unlikely to need sections removed. - Roy Boy 800 16:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking of a bot that will not go by length of unused topics, but will archive when a talk page reaches a certain amount. This is for slowly-growing user talk pages. For example, the bot will notify anyone with a long talk page with a template, then on a requests page there can be discussions and the bot op can set it to archive certain pages. I do not know any coding languages except HTML, with is really, really, really, really useless. But I just need a source code and make a bot of my own, but basically I can modify any coding language when simple errors come, but I can't make an archiving bot like this from scratch. -- Coaster geekperson 04 00:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
What are some thoughts on a bot that...
WODUP (?) 22:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Fixes malfunctioning bots and blocks malicious bots. -- Gp75motorsports 13:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Two thoughts: 1) A bot fixing another bot? Don't think that's going to happen! 2) Blocking malicious bots - Would it be possible for a bot to watch other bot activity and after X number of edits, simply check it against the approved flagged bot list? If it's not on the list, it would stop the questionable bot and put a message at the Bot owners' noticeboard or the Administrator intervention against vandalism? Not sure if User:HBC AIV helperbot4 catches these or not... Don't really know if there would be a huge need for this, as the steps in place for turning off an approved bot that's misbehaving work quite well. SkierRMH 00:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The process for renaming images is obscenely time-consuming and tedious. Needless to say, the backlog is comparably heinous. I imagine this would need to be semiautomated, as a bot cannot find an appropriate name for an image. But, I thought this could be handled with a template on that page with a new name. Say {{rename this image|Raggedy Ann and Andy}}. Then the bot could detect the new image name, create a new page for the image with that name and then tag the original image page with a speedy deletion tag. If the suggested name were already in use, the bot could add "(1)" to the image name and procede (a al File Upload Bot Magnus Manske). It would be much easier for editors to tag images with a name template than do the whole darn thing.-- Esprit15d 16:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Per several request and comments Im working on writing a image re-naming bot, I am going to make it like WP:MTC, the bot will re-upload the image and then replace the image with the new name. What I would like is help creating a new set of templates specifically for the bot to use.
{{Image move|Image:test.jpg}}
or just {{Image move|test.jpg}}
).
Ρх₥α 00:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This template is odd, since, according to Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons, anyone can move an image to Commons. I've done it many times, and I am not on the list (since I don't use that bot) and I'm not yet an admin (although it seems that will change soon). Should we talk about this matter more?-- Esprit15d 20:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The already existing {{ Db-redundantimage}} should work for template number 5.-- Esprit15d 20:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
About a month and a half ago the London Gazette changed its website ( http://gazettes-online.co.uk) (this change also affects the Edinburgh Gazette and Belfast Gazette) meaning that all references to it that actually linked direct to a pdf copy of the relevant gazette on the website (created prior to this change) are now broken. Links to search results pages are similarly broken. An example of an old style link is as follows:
The most important parameters in this are:
The equivalent "new" url (in its minimal form) would be:
where:
The main problem is that we lose the specific page being referred to, this is becuase the new url scheme uses the absolute page number, this numberings starts at 1 for the first page of the first issue each gazette of a new year. The old scheme simply numbers each page within an issue (starting with 0). Appending &page=<old page number> to the new url doesn't seem to break anything, but doesn't take you to the right page either - it would however preserve this information for our readers.
The nature of this conversion naturally suggests a bot process, assuming we can easily identify the pagess containing broken links. I've tried using special:linksearch to identify pages linking tothe Gazette website, but this seems to be returning only a fraction of the actual pages, try searching Wikipedia for either "London Gazette" or "gazettes-online" to see what I mean.
Also, User:DavidCane has created {{ LondonGazette}}, if references to the Gazettes consistently used this, ongoing maintenance should be easier, since any future changes to the urls could probably be fixed simply by a template change, and it would in any case be easier to identify affected pages by checking transclusions of the template. However, at the moment this also requires the date the Gazette was issued and the (absolute) page number of the first page being referred to, which are generally not easy to identify. If these were not mandatory, a bot could also be sued to turn the broken urls into templated references. If such a bot logged its changes, then this data could be manually inserted at our leisure by working through the logs.
It would also be necessary to update references which link to search results pages e.g.
maps to
It seems the search engine has also been updated, so different results are returned, so it is not worth trying to preserve the parameter indicating which results page we were on. Anyoje any thoughts on how best to proceed? David Underdown 17:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
A good bot would be one that marks all of our Trivia sections with the "Trivia section discouraged" template (not sure which that is). There are too many Trivia sections on WP right now, and it could be a good awareness campaign. Or is it too active/aggressive? If so, why even have the template? Nate Berkopec 02:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
So I got the idea when I fixed a tag for SockPuppet stuff, and i got the idea that makes tags for sockpuppet sockpuppet stuff (I think it's sockpuppetry). It will be called SockPuppetBot and its for SockPuppet socpuppetstuff. (Maybe I have typos) -- MyMii 22:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Unsure if this is a normal type request, or if this is something bots do I'd just like to ask the experts: The article Nil by Mouth (film) repeatedly gets hit by a very specific type of vandalism from a vide variety of IP addresses, rarely the same twice, but a very distinct MO. I am hoping there is something that can be done about this in the automatic sense. This particular vandalism consists of adding an "s" to the word Nil, sometimes just one occurrence, some times every one. To no end this person is amused by inserting the name Nils into this article, so I wonder, is there a way and possibility to have a bot add to its patrol to revert such edits? MURGH disc. 03:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I would like a bot, that checks contribs, and for WP:FOWL, or any other WikiProjects, moves a user to the inactive part of a list of participants, and vice versa. It will check for contribs towards a WikiProject like here. Dreamy § 23:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a request for a bot to be used by Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon. The idea is for a bot to look at all of the nominations in discussion areas such as XFD and FAC. It will then check the talk pages of the nominated article's (or whatever it is that was nominated) talk page for {{ Pokeproject}}. If the template exists then the bot will proceed to add a notice to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Noticeboard informing members of the WikiProject about the discussion. Fun Pika 17:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to request a bot writer to work with the Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop on a suggested change to Peer Review. There has been quite a bit of talk at the workshop about possible changes to PR and the current plan is to implement categorization on it. Because the page is currently manually archived, this would require a bot -- the manual process is already tedious and would become unmanageable without automation if categorization were introduced. We'd also like to change the page to list only links, rather than the whole existing review. Here's a mock-up of how the peer review page might look: Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop/Peer Review mockup.
We are hopeful that this is the first step in a reinvigoration of Peer Review. If this works, we hope to come up with more ideas to help improve not only peer review but other content review processes. However, this first step is in some ways the most important: peer review is a key part of Wikipedia, and it's not working as well as it could. We believe organizing the page will really help participation, and we'd like to work with someone who would be interested in continuing to participate and who can help us improve our ideas and make them implementable.
If you're interested, post a note either here or at the workshop page, and we can talk about implementation details. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 19:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please fetch all the cards transcluded in Minor Arcana, upload them to the Commons and then nominate the originals for deletion? The Commons doesn't currently have any images of these cards. Neon Merlin 01:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Commons admins theoretically are supposed to check instances of all images they delete on all projects--for which they have a marvelously reliable tool--but much of the time they don't (there aren't many of them and they're overworked, in their defense). So could we have a bot that watches the Commons deletion log, checks to see whether the deleted images are in use on article pages here (article pages only, please! no need to remove red links from people's user pages since they'd probably rather see them and thus be alerted to the deletion), and then either removes them or makes a list so that a human could easily do so? Thanks. Chick Bowen 02:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to program a bot to automatically update the RfA !vote count? — Cronholm 144 20:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this, but I thought I'd give it a try. :) Anyway, I don't know if a new bot needs to be created or an old one can do it, but I've recently been working on the article Vampire in order to get it to Featured Status. It's quite long, so I started to look as to how I could cut down on space. I found that a number of the references had extra spaces in them that needn't be there (For example, <ref name = example>{{cite journal |last = Jones|first = B. |title = Bob's world of examples|journal = Journal| issue = 1(17)| date = 1998|url = blah blah blah|accessdate=2002-03-28 }}</ref> - Note all the extra spaces in the reference between the '|' and the '='?. This reference can be turned into <ref name=example>{{cite journal|last=Jones|first=B.|title=Bob's world of examples|journal=Journal|issue=1(17)|date=1998|url=blah blah blah|accessdate=2002-03-28}}</ref>) I went through by hand and managed to get rid of around 500 bytes of used space just by deleting the extra spaces. Not a lot in the scale of the vampire article, but I was thinking, on the scale of wikipedia it could be massive! So I was wondering, could a bot be programmed to delete any extra spaces in the references on wikipedia. I think it would save tonnes of space, considering that every article with references is bound to have a few extra spaces in them. I don't think anyone's cared before as it's pretty small getting rid of a couple of hundred bytes on a given article; but together the amount sabed would be much more important. Get back to me on my talk page, here or somewhere else. Cheers, :) Spawn Man 00:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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 talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
A lot of images get tagged with {{ Di-no fair use rationale}} (aka {{ nrd}}). The tagger usually notifies the uploader of the tagging, which is good. However, the template specifically asks the tagger to "Add following to the image captions: {{ deletable image-caption}}". Many taggers do not do this. A quick, random check of the first page of Category:Images with no fair use rationale indicates that many such images are not so tagged. This leaves only one interested person, in most cases, aware of the tagging, instead of anyone watching the articles on which the image is included. In most cases, the rationale is obvious -- organization logos on the organization's article, for example -- and article contributors would be happy to add it, especially to avoid the trouble of having the image deleted. Without the {{ deletable image-caption}} tag, though, such article contributors will likely be completely unaware of the tagging until the image is deleted.
What I would propose is a bot that could add the {{ deletable image-caption}} tag to the captions of any images tagged with {{ Di-no fair use rationale}}. This would notify article contributors without overburdening our intrepid and dedicated fair-use rationale patrollers.
Powers T 14:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Salutations, I use to translate many articles from Wikipedia in English to Wikipedia in Portuguese; however, I perceive that the Portuguese version link is not added in the English version's Interwiki list. So, my question is: how often do the Interwiki bots function? Can I request for an Interwiki bot to add the Portuguese version to several articles? How do these bots do this? Thank you in advance, Sanscrit1234 22:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry if this has been asked here before, but User:Dragons flight's bot has stopped functioning b/c of user absence, and I was wondering if there was interest in creating a new bot with the same functions, such as AfD summaries (I think RfA stuff is taken care of right now). ~ Eliz 81 (C) 05:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
i've found im incresingly coming by pages that have references (as in <ref></ref>) but no {{reference}}, i was wonderin if theres any way to have a bot built to add in the reference template for pages that dont have one but do have references... if that makes sense, Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 23:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
if there is no real difference, then why dont we just use {{reference}} and let who ever doesnt like it to work out the difference??? Ancientanubis, talk Editor Review 03:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
All I got after 24hrs of checking:
Looking for a more experienced botmaster to pawn this one off on... -- SXT4 04:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
==References== {{reflist}}
at the bottom of the article unless
"[[Category:*" where the * is a wild card, then add it just above the first "[[Category:*".
Every article should have a reference section, if there are no reference present it will encourage editors to add the references if there unposted references it will post them.
Jeepday ( talk) 12:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, after a major rewrite, the bot's done running. 4,310 articles identified as broken. The list is here. However, I don't think I'm up to making a bot to fix them, and, that's an awful lot to do by hand.... Anybody up for it? :) (Plain txt file available upon request) -- SQL( Query Me!) 07:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
There are various "list of related topics" articles, such as the articles in Category:Lists of topics by country, which are used as watch lists to track all article changes for a specific topic. For example, you can track the Indonesia related changes using this link: Special:Recentchangeslinked/List of Indonesia-related topics. There are two problems with maintaining these lists which a bot could provide assistance with:
Until now I've been doing these tasks manually, but its a huge amount of effort to do so even just for the List of Indonesia-related topics page. ( Caniago 11:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC))
There are many links to Somepage that exists#But some anchor that doesn't. A bot should be made... Jidanni 03:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Currently, in order to rename images to comply with WP:IUP#Image titles and file names, a user must download the image, re-upload the image under the new name, and replace all usages in articles. What I am suggesting is that the template {{ ifr}} be modified to include a parameter for a suggested new name for the image, and that a bot then work the images in Category:Images for renaming to upload the image under the new file name and replace all instances of its usage in articles. The old image would then be tagged with {{ db-redundantimage}}.
There would probably need to be some warning functionality to be used if the suggested new image name was already in use (or the bot could add an extra character to the image name, or something similar).
Much of the code could probably be recycled from User:PNG crusade bot, which performs an extremely similar function in converting images to PNG format. Videmus Omnia Talk 23:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Can someone make a bot to help in WP:MOTD, especially moving mottos in In Review to Awaiting desicions?-- Sunny910910 ( talk| Contributions) Neither will alone, nor strength alone 00:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I've never used a bot before & hope I word this correctly. Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset has just been set up & it would be great if Template:Somerset could be added to the talk pages of all articles in Category:Somerset and all of its sub categories. Is this the sort of thing a bot could do? If you need any further info please let me know— Rod talk 16:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC) .
Is there a bot available to take on the task to provide a count of articles within the following categories for WikiProject Australia?
Information on the article count should then be presented to a table with clickable wikilinks to the category. Any takers? -- Longhair\ talk 10:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I know that this has been brought up before, but I don't think any bot or process can currently do this: would it be possible for a bot (or something else) to check protected pages and generate a list of all of the pages that have protection tags that shouldn't, and generate a list of all the pages that should have a protection tag that don't? Hopefully, this would include all pages, including templates. Thoughts? -- MZMcBride 03:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I have created a British Army portal. Unfortunately, all the pages associated to the British Army (every page included within Category:British Army) need the following box added to every page: {{Portal|British Army|Flag of the British Army.svg|65}}. The box needs to go under the See Also section, or similiar as not every page has a 'See Also' section (unless you made the bot create that section). If anyone can create a bot that could do this task for me, I would appreciate it. I am the only Co-Ordinator, so there is no need for discussion on whether the portal's community would like it to happen and I have finished creating the portal, so it is ready to be shown to the public en masse. Jhfireboy Talk 22:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Selketbot is MIA. Can someone please make a replacement and put it on 24/7/365 toolserv, because I, other users and other administrators are tired of tagging SchoolIPs. Thanks. M. (er) 08:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
This is a request for a tool to automatically create a database and table-almanac using data from infoboxes and comparison tables on Wikipedia articles. It would probably have three components:
This database would make it quick and easy (at least for someone who knows the query language) to answer such queries as "What alternative metal bands, active in or after 2002, are based in Ontario?" and "What open-source text editors run on the Mac and support UTF-8?" It would be the start of a print reference book, a great aid to library reference desks, and a way to search for just about anything. (Note that it may require type polymorphism and may-or-may-not-be-foreign-keys, so SQL may not work for it.) Neon Merlin 20:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
All articles on this page need to be moved to the correct capitalisation (eg O Goshi to O goshi, and internal links fixing to match. A bot to take care of this would be awesome. Neil ム 10:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I can't program a Wikipedia bot, but I want a very good bot that's occasionally updated to prevent bugs and do more stuff to help Wikipedia. I want a bot called LegendBot. Thank you,-- The source of the cosmos... 21:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC) HELLO?!?-- The source of the cosmos... 00:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Anything to help Wikipedia! Oh, and make sure to identify the version of the bot. Okay?-- The source of the cosmos... 22:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
But, the bot does everything to help Wikipedia, no exceptions.-- The source of the cosmos... 01:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Stopping vandals, Fixing articles, that sort of thing, but like a city, it must be built from one subject to another.-- The source of the cosmos... 02:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
For a couple weeks, this set of aircraft categories has been requested to change. The change is clearly approvable, but it's complicated to implement. It involves searching templates like [[Template:civil aircraft by nationality]] and switching U.S. for United States, or PRC for People's Republic of China.
And all of the subcategories of those categories, of course. Can anyone's bot do that?-- Mike Selinker 15:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like there to be a redirect and template bot. I would like it to be called MacBot. -- MacMad ( talk · contribs) 16:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I just manually added in a bunch of headers in the format:
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|?}}
:{{la|Article title}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Article title|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Date#{{anchorencode:Article title}}|View log]])</noinclude>
for AfDs in which they were missing. I've done this often, but perhaps a bot could automatically add them in. Also could a bot automatically close AfD debates for articles that get CSDed? This could expand upon the work that DumbBOT already does. ~ Eliz 81 (C) 20:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
{{ Extra chronology}} has been deprecated for {{ Extra chronology 2}}. I'm not sure what the exact difference between the two is, but I discovered that the latter fixed the problem with an unwanted line break in The Sweet Escape (song) article ( diff). It'd be helpful to have a bot go through and replace the deprecated template so that it can eventually be deleted or redirected. 17Drew 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
How to? HELP ME, please :) -- WonYong ( talk • contribs • count) 00:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
We need someone to write and maintain a bot that will police the use of the controversial Template:Unreferenced.
This template, currently on over 10,000 articles (Maybe it's 100,000; I don't know; I clicked "next 500" until I tired of it), says, "This article does not cite any references or sources." The problem is that this is almost always untrue, and the tag has therefore lost credibility. There is steadfast opposition to changing this statement to say "sufficient" instead of "any"; some other editors enjoy pointing out that there are other template tags such as Template:Refimprove that complain about references without complaining that the article has no references, as "Unreferenced" does; and that the "Unreferenced" tag is needed, despite the widespread inaccuracy of its use (past and ongoing).
It occurred to me that a bot could be written that would fix this problem. It would run through each article that is tagged with Template:Unreferenced, and if there are any single-bracket links in the article at all, the bot would assume it's a reference, and change the template to Template:Refimprove. The run would occur every few days, ideally, and subsequent runs after the first one would involve far fewer tags, since I expect 80% of the thousands of Unreference tags to be converted in that first pass.
This would strengthen the integrity of Template:Unreferenced. Any volunteers?
Thanks - Tempshill 23:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
For clarification, this was sent from WP:VP/T to WP:BOTREQ, however if discussion needs to occur for this proposal, the proper "Pump" is WP:VPR. Oh, acronyms.... Cheers. -- MZMcBride 19:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC) I can get my bot to do it, but I'd need consensus first. And perhaps 2 external links instead of one. ^ demon [omg plz] 17:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I just did a random check of some of User:^demonBot2's most recent changes looks great :) Can you set it up to run periodically (maybe weekly)? Jeepday ( talk) 22:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
It's a great idea and I fully support it. Go demonBot2! SilkTork * SilkyTalk 23:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Teething problems: The bot is not differentiating between a tag placed in an article, and a tag placed in a section, as here: Kidbrooke. The section has no references at all, but the tag reads that it needs "additional". SilkTork * SilkyTalk 23:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Will this be started up again? The original suggestion here was unsure of the size of the category, for everyone's information it is listed at 83,256 at WP:WATCH. I don't know how this bot works but if it could go through Category:Articles lacking sources from June 2006 and Category:Articles lacking sources from July 2006 first, that would be most helpful. -- BirgitteSB 22:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
A bot should be created to sift through Special:Unusedimages. There are many images there, some likely without copyright information, some orphaned copyright, many copyleft. I'd imagine this could be sifted in three waves, finding and tagging images without copyright information, then when those are deleted or attributed, finding and tagging those tagged as copyrighted as {{ orfud}}, and finding and tagging images with an appropriate copyleft tag to be transwikied to commons. Then, it would be a simple matter to have a bot move the copyleft images over. Doing this will make local management of images easier, as the remaining backlog at Special:Unusedimages will be manageable by a single admin on any given day, making finding prohibited, forgotten, or cv images a lot easier, and as it is, commons is the repository of potentially unused copyleft media, not us. Thoughts? -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 10:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
See this thread - anyone think they could do this? Dihydrogen Monoxide ( H2O) 01:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Starting with List of asteroids/1–100, check the interwiki links and match the pages going up by hundreds. Right now, there's only the ast (Asturian), an (Aragonian), ca (Catalan), eu (Basque) and ru (Russian) pages (als is out of sync, hr has just the one page):
One should be careful of keeping the interwiki links within the ending <noinclude> block. Ideally, th ebot should create the interwikis both ways (ca seems to have all the links to en in place already). Other projects (such as fr, pl, etc.) use a different page step, and will therefore be linked to a different set of en pages. Urhixidur 18:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
The video game project has a special template Template:VGrationale that substs the Template:Non-free use rationale template to help mark images used in articles. However, with the change of the template and the recent push for getting non-free images up to snuff through Betacommandbot and apparently others, the FUR templates generated by VGrationale lack the new Article= field and thus these images are being tagged as #10c violations. I've fixed VGrationale so that new instances of it are fine, and I think there's a possible issue with BCB not looking into the headers, but regardless, there's still a manual job of adding the article name to apparently 100s of images that have already been tagged.
Or, is it really a manual job? VGrationale adds a h2-type header as: "Fair Use rationale for use on [[Page Link]]", followed immediately by the FUR, when the subst is done.
So, the question becomes:
I'm thinking this is more on the "insane" side of a requests, but one never knows...-- Masem 15:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
At least one (anonymous) editor of New Orleans has developed a habit of inserting contradictory (POV) text between a fact and its citation. This has the obvious effect of changing the meaning of the article and appears to come from the reference when it does not.
Example:
Hurricanes also pose a severe threat to the area, and the city is particularly vulnerable because of its low elevation. According to a recent report by The Weather Channel, the city is the most vulnerable in the country when it comes to hurricanes. [1]
Becomes something like this:
Hurricanes also pose a severe threat to the area, and the city is particularly vulnerable because of its low elevation. According to a recent report by The Weather Channel, the city is the most vulnerable in the country when it comes to hurricanes. The Army Corps of Engineers is going to build more levees so that future disasters will not occur. [2]
Except, of course, that the reference number is still 1.
I wouldn't have the foggiest idea about writing or running a bot, but looking for new text immediately preceding a reference should not be hard. It could draw attention to a lot of misinformation. Thanks, Sagredo 20:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I actually only saw one occur, when it was done to a change I made, but picked up on other places in the article where edits were fit in in this way. Again because the text no longer fit the reference. But any edit stuck in in that way is likely to separate the fact from its reference and be unintentionally damaging. Perhaps the answer is not a bot, but something in the software, that asks the editor "did you mean to place this text between the previous text and the reference? requires them click on a button. Then if "yes" is clicked that change should be carefully checked. Maybe this should be done for all editors, because the potential for harm is so great. I'll read the section on vandalism. Sagredo 04:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162195813
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162196274
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=New_Orleans%2C_Louisiana&diff=prev&oldid=162195813
Three vandalisms to population numbers.
Sagredo 08:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Moving the citation back occurred to me, too. It should work even when the new text was an addition to a sentence, although the citation would end up in the middle of a sentence. I think in case of the NOLA article, there's a definite intention to insert POV without being obviously vandalism. My feeling is that some have done so much of it to have become quite good at it. Sagredo 01:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
So you think it would be more work that it would be worth? Sagredo 02:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I've got an idea for a very simple, very narrow-purpose bot, I was thinking of writing myself for fun -- so this is not really a bot request, but I couldn't find another good place to bounce ideas off people to see if this even makes sense.
The page for Love constantly gets vandalism of the form "Randy loves Amy," etc. A very high percentage of it neatly fits the pattern "<Surname>/I loves/LOVES/love/LOVE <Surname>/you". So I was thinking maybe having a bot that would check for edits only on Love that fit that specific pattern and revert them.
I know, it's only marginally useful, but this would almost be more a learning exercise for me than anything else. I am just trying to think of any way in which it would be destructive... I dunno, is this a dumb idea? -- Jaysweet 15:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to make a bot that looks through a users contribs back one month, and determines if a user has made any contributions to an article that is classified as an Artemis Fowl article. This is so that we ( Coordinators) can make sure that the Active/Inactive section is constantly updated. This is because it is a pretty menial task that is long and boring. Can I get some feed back on this? Your Grace Lord Sir Dreamy of Buckland tm 12:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Ever used Interiot's wannabe kate edit counter? It will be something like that. -- Chris G 13:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Not so much on Wikipedia, but on other Wikis on the internet I have noticed a lot of spam on inappropriate material. I propose to create a bot that scans past New Pages and Edits for key words such as "Free Gold" or "Live Sex" and rolls back the page to a earlier edit where the spam is no longer present; some new pages get past extension filters I'm sure, so having a bot to search them out would make things a lot easier.. This would lessen the amount of work that admins on Wikipedia and other wikis would have to do in order to erase past spam in the database.
I know that there are some extensions that do this for posts being posted such as "SpamBlacklist" but I have not seen one that will scan Past pages for this inappropriate content.
If this bot does well, I would like to openly share the coding so that it can be implemented on other websites using the Wikimedia setup to host their own Wikis.
I have limited programming knowledge, and wouldn't know where to start. Even still, I am willing to contribute what I can for this project.
I look forward to everyone's input on this.
GusJustGus1 20:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
is this possible? It seems to happen a fair bit. For instance - the "Category:Suspected Wikipedia Sockpuppets of Bob": cats like that are populated, but redlinked. Is it possible? -- Anonymous Dissident Talk 09:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
And of course the bot won't recreate deleted cats. -- Chris G 11:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be fine for creation of maintenance templates because they are nearly all the same but get updated created monthly or wever. :: maelgwn - talk 11:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Category:Fellows_of_the_American_Academy_of_Arts_and_Sciences is extremely underpopulated despite there being 4000 members in the Academy. Can we add some of these members to this category using a bot? -- Yuyudevil 02:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to create a bot to go through articles using the Template:French commune and removing some formatting that was imported from the French wiki? i.e. would it be possible to create a bot to do an edit like this one. An image and caption have been placed in the parameter for the name of the town. There are optional parameters for these now. The template is currently used in upwards of 2000 articles and would be tedious to go through so many articles. It needs to be done so that the name of the town be made more promiment and to standardise the format of the template infobox. -- Bob 15:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Could a bot help clean up the backlog at Category:Non-free images lacking article backlink? This requires simply adding a parameter. The best may be a double verification, first by the article the images is used in and then see if there is a link to that article in the rationale. See Image:3dlemmi screen003.jpg, where both 3D Lemmings is both listed on the page and is the page where the image is used. Then since they match, the bot would just need to add "Article = 3D Lemmings" as a parameter. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 21:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
What if the bot added "|Article =" to the template. This would make it easier to clean up this category. 129.177.156.248 14:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Meanwhile, I've written a user script to help with this: see User:Ilmari Karonen/nfurbacklink.js. Since the script requires user confirmation, I've made it quite a bit simpler than the suggestions above; it simply suggests an automatic fix if the image has one rationale tag, no backlink and one entry in the "File links" section. — Ilmari Karonen ( talk) 01:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like a bot to help me deliver WikiProject Universities newsletters, which will occur on a monthly basis. I'm not sure if I should make my own bot (as I don't know how the software works with that) or request for someone else to create it. The bot would serve a similar purpose as Grafikbot. The newsletters can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/Outreach. Anything else I need to do just let me know! Thanks -- Noetic Sage 19:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I've never done this sort of thing before, so someone tell me if I have a good idea or not. Basically, what I envision is a bot crawling through Category:Chemical compounds looking for pages without images. If the bot finds a page without a typical image extension (jpg, png, etc.) or a page with a link to a non-existent picture, it goes to the associated talk page and slaps {{Chemical drawing needed}} on it. This also adds it to Category:Chemistry pages needing pictures so someone can go make the needed images. Of course, the bot will be smart enough not to tag an article that's already tagged. Input? shoy 23:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
\[\[[Ii]mage:.*?\]\]
instead of searching for an image extension. In case you have access to the toolserver you could simply select all pages in this category without imagelinks. --
Erwin85 09:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
What Erwin85 saying is that instead of the bot checking if its an image by its extension, the bot will check if the page has [[Image:SomeNameHere|PossiblySomethingHere|AndHere]] on it and as for the toolsever take a read here. I think that's it anything I missed? -- Chris G 02:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
As a substitute to regex searching, you could also access the information in a more accessible form here (using formats such as JSON, XML, YAML, WDDX, or serialized PHP). You can also use a generator to check if an image is missing; unfortunately, images on Commons are marked as missing, but this can be checked with a query like this to Common's API. Gracenotes T § 23:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
(undent) Pretty much every higher-level programming language either has native support for XML or has a well-supported XML parser library available. — madman bum and angel 06:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
It is possible to get a bot to (at least partially) tidy up biographical sort keys so special characters and accented characters are replaced, and punctuation (except hyphens) removed, and all words in the sort key start with a capital letter? Have a look at Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Ordering names in a category. It says the following:
"(1) Punctuation, such as apostrophes and colons (but not hyphens) should be removed, and accented letters and ligatures should be replaced by their unaccented or separated counterparts. (2) The first letter of each word should be in upper case, and all subsequent letters should be in lower case, regardless of the correct spelling of the name. Thus, Lena D'Água sorts as [[Category:Portuguese female singers|Dagua, Lena]]. Without these last alterations, all punctuation marks and internal capital letters would be sorted before A, and all accented characters and ligatures would sort after Z." (my emphasis)
What the bot should do is look for sort keys in category tags, plus any DEFAULTSORT sort keys, and remove punctuation such as ' and : (removing ' entirely and replacing : with a space, I think), and replaced an accented 'e' with an unaccented 'e', and so on. It should also run the end result through a program that makes the start of every word a capital letter, and removes capitals that appear within the words. Thus le Guin becomes Le Guin, and McCallum becomes Mccallum. If this is not done, the results is what is seen here, with lots of stuff appearing at the end of the category listing. This example uses the listas parameter, which is a talk page sort key, but this applies to all sort keys wherever they are used. So, is this possible? It would require a very long list of accented and other special characters to look for. The removal of apostrophes and suchlike should be easier, and the capitalisation issue should be really easy. Can this be done? Carcharoth 13:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to raise this issue again, or if no-one here has any further advice, to ask where to go next. See here for the previous discussion. What I'd ultimately like to see is something like Category:Default sort key missing for biographical articles (probably on the talk page), so they can be worked on. At the moment, there is Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, but that only works from a talk page template parameter (specifically, listas in {{ WPBiography}}) and doesn't truly reflect DEFAULTSORT usage (it would only reflect the usage if the two values were synchronised on all pages). Ultimately, it all comes down to this simple question:
"Which biographical articles lack DEFAULTSORT"?
Surely a simple question like that can't be that difficult? :-) Carcharoth 04:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
The response over there was to suggest I post a request here. I'd also like the bot to cross-reference the list of category with Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, which refers to a talk page sort key parameter. This is closely tied to the function that was developed under Polbot 3 ( Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Polbot 3). That was probably too ambitious, so I'm trying to break up the task into manageable chunks. Ideally, I'd like to replace Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, with Category:Default sort key missing (not that they are the same at the moment - I mean deprecate listas after synchronising the two systems). Failing that, I'd like to see the DEFAULTSORT and listas sort keys synchronised by a bot. Carcharoth 13:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
At WP:TfD, we occasionally get templates that have a lot of calls on various articles, which need to either be modified to call a different template (so that the first can be deleted), substituted or simply removed. Other, more complicated things can also be needed infrequently. To date, this has been done by User:^demonBot2; however, he's currently too busy.
Is there anyone here that's willing to take up this task? The jobs could easily be done using WP:AWB, and information on exactly what needs doing in each case would be provided in the request.
An example: Template:Link GA ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) needs all template calls removing so that the template can be deleted. Another example: Template:Hqfl logo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) needs converting to Template:Non-free logo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs), but the text describing the source needs to be put either in the "source" field of an info template, or adding onto the end of the image description text.
Thanks in advance. Mike Peel 20:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I have a small problem. I have to change hundreds of piped links, and I'm hoping a bot could save me a lot of work. I have to change every piped link that currently contains User:Lincalinca (i.e. [[User:Lincalinca|Foo...]]) to another piped link (i.e. [[Correct link|Foo...]]). I've done this change manually to show what I'm trying to accomplish ( see here). Any suggestions on how to change this in as little effort as possible are most welcome. If anyone's up for the task, I'll be glad to share the details. Thanks! - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 01:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I recently updated a disambiguation page ( Aaron (name)) by looking at Category:Living people, which is fairly well sorted. I am wondering whether a trial "suggested disambiguations" bot could be run over this category to generate suggestions for disambiguation pages. I'm not sure, but I think Polbot does something similar, but I don't know how it does it. Anyway, what the bot would do is scan the category and find articles that were sorted using the same "first part" of the sort key. This would generally be the surname. ie. it would find articles sorted "Lane, Gary" and "Lane, Percy" and suggest they be added to either Lane (name) or Lane (surname). This won't be complete disambiguation, as it won't cover dead people. That will hopefully be possible if a supercategory is created to contain all people articles. Of course, people would still be needed to annotate the dab pages, unless infobox information could be used to do that... I'm throwing this idea out here to see if people think it sounds feasible and worth the effort of finding people who could make this work? Carcharoth 13:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Status Update: I have it properly querying a category and parsing names to determine first, middle, last (as appropriate). It will also find the duplicates. Next, I need to implement the matches against potential disambig pages. I've had less time that I thought, so it'll take me a bit longer. -- JLaTondre 23:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Currently, our Wikipedia:Guide to deletion states:
It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion.
and lists several bullets and paragraphs of details that the nominator need to carry out. From my experience, depending on where you draw the border between "main" and non-main contributions, this can take more than an hour for a medium sized article. A bot could do that in fractions of a second. The bot would simply notify every non-bot who did non-minor edits. (Criteria could be refined in a later version.)
Currently, the distinction between "main" and non-main depends on each nominator's goodwill. This means, that particularly the nicest editors end up spending the most time with menial tasks. I don't think that's fair. More importantly, we are creating an unnecessary gray area: Nomination is nomination, it should be reported regardless of the character of the nominator. If anything, then we want better, not worse reporting of nominations by uncivil nominators. — Sebastian 07:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Many vandalism events involve two or more sequential edits with sample text, inane comments, or vandalism, which the authors immediately try to delete. Usually the articles are left in the same condition as when they began. Often the same editors continue doing this to various articles, consuming resources and RC Patrollers. I invite a bot to detect such test edits and provide on the User Talk page one of the usual how to edit and use the sandbox messages (perhaps also an appropriate Welcome if the user Talk page was empty). ( SEWilco 18:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC))
At Category:Australian rugby league biography stubs (and presumably other categories of rugby league articles), there are a lot of players that are sorted by first name. I'm not sure if there's a bot that does DEFAULTSORT, but if there is, that would be much appreciated. Damanmundine1 ( Talk) 01:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Discussion moved to: Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Convert_.28_and_.29_to_parentheses. Lightmouse 13:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I've gotten sysop access on Wikia:Digimon, which will allow WP:DIGI to do a full transwiki without having to keep the articles on Wikipedia's side for the page histories (via export/import). I've done a few very basic things with pywikipedia ( User:NedBot), mostly because there's nothing like AWB for Mac OS X. I was planning on manually using Special:Export and Special:Import to move some articles, but the process is time consuming, and exporting only works for 100 versions at a time. I'd also like to move the images over, which I did see is a script for pywikipedia bot, but I'm having a hard time understanding even getting the bot to work on another wiki.
I'm very lost at this point, but I do tend to catch on quickly. Ideally I'd like to be able to run the bot/script/whatever so we don't have to keep bothering other people in the future, and because importing requires sysop access. But even if it's just with the images, any help at this point would be greatly appreciated, and would likely make future transwiki projects far more attractive options. -- Ned Scott 04:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The spam blacklist/whitelist pages are getting incredibly backlogged, and it would be nice if a bot was capable of archiving completed requests marked with {{ Done}} or {{ Notdone}}. Thanks, ^ demon [omg plz] 20:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I have been looking over at wrestlers information here on Wikipedia and somehow the birthdates are not cited. Plus other information of the wrestlers have also been not cited as well. I am not sure if there is one, but if there is one, that would be taking care of. LindsieandLance 01:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
A bot that could see the difference in articles. Check whether the added statements are plagiarized (by searching Google), If a match is found, check whether attribution is proper. We could eliminate a lot of copyright violations and plagiarisms if this bot is done. i don't know whether such a bot exists. But if it does, please let me know.. I've got some more suggestions... Mugunth 18:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I could revive the suggestion to check RC, but that would make my load on WP (and on Yahoo!) an order of magnitude greater than it currently is. — Coren (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Like other wikiprojects, WikiProject Ireland uses the assessment process to track articles within its scope, but many articles and categories are currently untagged. As a result they don't show up in the statistics on the WP:IRL Assessment page, and are missing from the project's monitoring categories.
Please could a bot run through the talk pages of these articles and categories add the {{ WikiProject Ireland}} tags as set out below (unless already present)? (I have been started the job with AWB, but decided that life is too short to manually click the save button on a squillion articles)
It would be most useful if the template could be added with the parameters included, but left blank so that editors don't have to type them when filling in the field, as follows:
{{WikiProject Ireland |small= |nested= |class= |importance= |attention= |peer-review= |old-peer-review= |image-needed= |needs-infobox= }}
However, it would be great if categories could be set with the class parameter set as
class= Category
, since all categories are assigned this to class. (For article talk pages, all parameters should be left blank)
There are a few other points:
Is this feasible? -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 15:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I've moved {{ Architecture}} to {{ WikiProject Architecture}} (+ template arguments) in line with common naming conventions. It also opens up the floor to a navbox at the former title. Unfortunately, I found out that I can no longer do fully automated edits with AWB. Is there a bot that is approved to do a search-replace in about 8000 articles? - Mgm| (talk) 18:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to request a bot to scrutinize Anon deletions of sections. I lurk with VandalFighter; and I can easily discern (based on characters removed) where an Anon has come in and removed significant (or even all) text from a section from a stable article. They may even do this multiple times to the same article, in effect deleting the article piecemeal. Perhaps the bot could also be more aggressive in reverting deletions from articles over a certain age (like a 1 or 2 years old), which are more likely to be decent articles and are unlikely to need sections removed. - Roy Boy 800 16:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking of a bot that will not go by length of unused topics, but will archive when a talk page reaches a certain amount. This is for slowly-growing user talk pages. For example, the bot will notify anyone with a long talk page with a template, then on a requests page there can be discussions and the bot op can set it to archive certain pages. I do not know any coding languages except HTML, with is really, really, really, really useless. But I just need a source code and make a bot of my own, but basically I can modify any coding language when simple errors come, but I can't make an archiving bot like this from scratch. -- Coaster geekperson 04 00:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
What are some thoughts on a bot that...
WODUP (?) 22:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Fixes malfunctioning bots and blocks malicious bots. -- Gp75motorsports 13:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Two thoughts: 1) A bot fixing another bot? Don't think that's going to happen! 2) Blocking malicious bots - Would it be possible for a bot to watch other bot activity and after X number of edits, simply check it against the approved flagged bot list? If it's not on the list, it would stop the questionable bot and put a message at the Bot owners' noticeboard or the Administrator intervention against vandalism? Not sure if User:HBC AIV helperbot4 catches these or not... Don't really know if there would be a huge need for this, as the steps in place for turning off an approved bot that's misbehaving work quite well. SkierRMH 00:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The process for renaming images is obscenely time-consuming and tedious. Needless to say, the backlog is comparably heinous. I imagine this would need to be semiautomated, as a bot cannot find an appropriate name for an image. But, I thought this could be handled with a template on that page with a new name. Say {{rename this image|Raggedy Ann and Andy}}. Then the bot could detect the new image name, create a new page for the image with that name and then tag the original image page with a speedy deletion tag. If the suggested name were already in use, the bot could add "(1)" to the image name and procede (a al File Upload Bot Magnus Manske). It would be much easier for editors to tag images with a name template than do the whole darn thing.-- Esprit15d 16:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Per several request and comments Im working on writing a image re-naming bot, I am going to make it like WP:MTC, the bot will re-upload the image and then replace the image with the new name. What I would like is help creating a new set of templates specifically for the bot to use.
{{Image move|Image:test.jpg}}
or just {{Image move|test.jpg}}
).
Ρх₥α 00:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This template is odd, since, according to Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons, anyone can move an image to Commons. I've done it many times, and I am not on the list (since I don't use that bot) and I'm not yet an admin (although it seems that will change soon). Should we talk about this matter more?-- Esprit15d 20:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The already existing {{ Db-redundantimage}} should work for template number 5.-- Esprit15d 20:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
About a month and a half ago the London Gazette changed its website ( http://gazettes-online.co.uk) (this change also affects the Edinburgh Gazette and Belfast Gazette) meaning that all references to it that actually linked direct to a pdf copy of the relevant gazette on the website (created prior to this change) are now broken. Links to search results pages are similarly broken. An example of an old style link is as follows:
The most important parameters in this are:
The equivalent "new" url (in its minimal form) would be:
where:
The main problem is that we lose the specific page being referred to, this is becuase the new url scheme uses the absolute page number, this numberings starts at 1 for the first page of the first issue each gazette of a new year. The old scheme simply numbers each page within an issue (starting with 0). Appending &page=<old page number> to the new url doesn't seem to break anything, but doesn't take you to the right page either - it would however preserve this information for our readers.
The nature of this conversion naturally suggests a bot process, assuming we can easily identify the pagess containing broken links. I've tried using special:linksearch to identify pages linking tothe Gazette website, but this seems to be returning only a fraction of the actual pages, try searching Wikipedia for either "London Gazette" or "gazettes-online" to see what I mean.
Also, User:DavidCane has created {{ LondonGazette}}, if references to the Gazettes consistently used this, ongoing maintenance should be easier, since any future changes to the urls could probably be fixed simply by a template change, and it would in any case be easier to identify affected pages by checking transclusions of the template. However, at the moment this also requires the date the Gazette was issued and the (absolute) page number of the first page being referred to, which are generally not easy to identify. If these were not mandatory, a bot could also be sued to turn the broken urls into templated references. If such a bot logged its changes, then this data could be manually inserted at our leisure by working through the logs.
It would also be necessary to update references which link to search results pages e.g.
maps to
It seems the search engine has also been updated, so different results are returned, so it is not worth trying to preserve the parameter indicating which results page we were on. Anyoje any thoughts on how best to proceed? David Underdown 17:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
A good bot would be one that marks all of our Trivia sections with the "Trivia section discouraged" template (not sure which that is). There are too many Trivia sections on WP right now, and it could be a good awareness campaign. Or is it too active/aggressive? If so, why even have the template? Nate Berkopec 02:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
So I got the idea when I fixed a tag for SockPuppet stuff, and i got the idea that makes tags for sockpuppet sockpuppet stuff (I think it's sockpuppetry). It will be called SockPuppetBot and its for SockPuppet socpuppetstuff. (Maybe I have typos) -- MyMii 22:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Unsure if this is a normal type request, or if this is something bots do I'd just like to ask the experts: The article Nil by Mouth (film) repeatedly gets hit by a very specific type of vandalism from a vide variety of IP addresses, rarely the same twice, but a very distinct MO. I am hoping there is something that can be done about this in the automatic sense. This particular vandalism consists of adding an "s" to the word Nil, sometimes just one occurrence, some times every one. To no end this person is amused by inserting the name Nils into this article, so I wonder, is there a way and possibility to have a bot add to its patrol to revert such edits? MURGH disc. 03:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I would like a bot, that checks contribs, and for WP:FOWL, or any other WikiProjects, moves a user to the inactive part of a list of participants, and vice versa. It will check for contribs towards a WikiProject like here. Dreamy § 23:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a request for a bot to be used by Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon. The idea is for a bot to look at all of the nominations in discussion areas such as XFD and FAC. It will then check the talk pages of the nominated article's (or whatever it is that was nominated) talk page for {{ Pokeproject}}. If the template exists then the bot will proceed to add a notice to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Noticeboard informing members of the WikiProject about the discussion. Fun Pika 17:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to request a bot writer to work with the Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop on a suggested change to Peer Review. There has been quite a bit of talk at the workshop about possible changes to PR and the current plan is to implement categorization on it. Because the page is currently manually archived, this would require a bot -- the manual process is already tedious and would become unmanageable without automation if categorization were introduced. We'd also like to change the page to list only links, rather than the whole existing review. Here's a mock-up of how the peer review page might look: Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop/Peer Review mockup.
We are hopeful that this is the first step in a reinvigoration of Peer Review. If this works, we hope to come up with more ideas to help improve not only peer review but other content review processes. However, this first step is in some ways the most important: peer review is a key part of Wikipedia, and it's not working as well as it could. We believe organizing the page will really help participation, and we'd like to work with someone who would be interested in continuing to participate and who can help us improve our ideas and make them implementable.
If you're interested, post a note either here or at the workshop page, and we can talk about implementation details. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 19:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please fetch all the cards transcluded in Minor Arcana, upload them to the Commons and then nominate the originals for deletion? The Commons doesn't currently have any images of these cards. Neon Merlin 01:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Commons admins theoretically are supposed to check instances of all images they delete on all projects--for which they have a marvelously reliable tool--but much of the time they don't (there aren't many of them and they're overworked, in their defense). So could we have a bot that watches the Commons deletion log, checks to see whether the deleted images are in use on article pages here (article pages only, please! no need to remove red links from people's user pages since they'd probably rather see them and thus be alerted to the deletion), and then either removes them or makes a list so that a human could easily do so? Thanks. Chick Bowen 02:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to program a bot to automatically update the RfA !vote count? — Cronholm 144 20:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this, but I thought I'd give it a try. :) Anyway, I don't know if a new bot needs to be created or an old one can do it, but I've recently been working on the article Vampire in order to get it to Featured Status. It's quite long, so I started to look as to how I could cut down on space. I found that a number of the references had extra spaces in them that needn't be there (For example, <ref name = example>{{cite journal |last = Jones|first = B. |title = Bob's world of examples|journal = Journal| issue = 1(17)| date = 1998|url = blah blah blah|accessdate=2002-03-28 }}</ref> - Note all the extra spaces in the reference between the '|' and the '='?. This reference can be turned into <ref name=example>{{cite journal|last=Jones|first=B.|title=Bob's world of examples|journal=Journal|issue=1(17)|date=1998|url=blah blah blah|accessdate=2002-03-28}}</ref>) I went through by hand and managed to get rid of around 500 bytes of used space just by deleting the extra spaces. Not a lot in the scale of the vampire article, but I was thinking, on the scale of wikipedia it could be massive! So I was wondering, could a bot be programmed to delete any extra spaces in the references on wikipedia. I think it would save tonnes of space, considering that every article with references is bound to have a few extra spaces in them. I don't think anyone's cared before as it's pretty small getting rid of a couple of hundred bytes on a given article; but together the amount sabed would be much more important. Get back to me on my talk page, here or somewhere else. Cheers, :) Spawn Man 00:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)