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 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
Having patrolled the New User Creation log for a while, I've come up with a useful service that a Bot could perform, but not being a programmer, I'll throw it out here:
When a new user creates a problematic username, they often are given the {{uw-username}} warning, which gives them a discussion venue regarding possible changes. That template then places their user page into Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over. So far so good. If the username problem is not resolved, the account may be (and often is) blocked. Unfortunately the user page remains in the above category. Thus it makes it hard to sort through the category to address outstanding issues, as many of them were resolved with a {{usernameblock}}.
So the task for the bot, should you choose to accept it:
1. Parse
Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over
2. For each username listed, check to see if the username is indefinitely blocked
3. If so, remove the [[Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over]] from the userpage, thus removing it from the category, leaving only truly open issues in that Cat.
You'll be helping out new-user-patrollers, and as an added bonus, you'll get a pie! Arakunem Talk 19:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:Help desk (thanx to Tnxman307) :
Budelberger ( talk) 17:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC) ( ).
Coding... 01:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Could a bot be applied to put rail usage data in infoboxes at railway station articles in the UK?
Simply south (
talk) 12:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Is there any easy way to get a (partial) list of images used in en.Wikipedia that are hosted on Commons? I can't think of a way. There's certainly no way via the API, is there? – Quadell ( talk) 01:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
All of the links to Wikipedia:User Page Design Center need to be re-targeted to Wikipedia:User page design center (notice the difference in the capitalization), as the page was moved due to a capitalization mistake. See Wikipedia:User Page Design Center (redirect suppressed) and Pages that link to "Wikipedia:User Page Design Center". After the links are re-targeted, Wikipedia:User Page Design Center (the one with the incorrect capitalization) can be deleted per CSD G6. -- IRP ☎ 21:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible for a bot to go through Category:Film articles needing an infobox and draw up a list (to be checked manually) of any articles which transclude an infobox template? I can provide a list of specific infoboxes if need be, but a general check will be sufficient. Cheers! PC78 ( talk) 22:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
This might be too much to do, and might require a bug request. Essentially, a way for anyone get notified of an MfD/AfD of something on their Watchlist, even if they miss it via Watchlist, as an opt-in method. E.g., you tag a page for xfd on my 'list', I get a notification, even if I'm not the creator of the article. Exposing part of the watchlist may be impossible, but what about someone makes a basic bot that reads each new xfd, checks What Links Here on the article or page in question, and if it sees something like User:Rootology/xfdalert (predefined location, same for everyone) and then notifies the users in question? rootology ( C)( T) 16:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I need a bot to do the following:
I hope all that makes sense. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Just noting that this request is still being worked on, so should not be archived. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
BRFA filed Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 28. Sorry it took so long. Anomie ⚔ 16:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
This is mainly to help me with maintenance (essentially ensuring that nobody is including false values), and it isn't a big deal if it doesn't get done. I'd like a list of articles that have a reporting mark in {{ infobox rail}} or use {{ reporting mark}}, along with the value of the parameter (or both if they differ). (See CSX Transportation for an example of both, with reporting mark CSXT.) -- NE2 01:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to see about getting a bot to process all the articles in four categories: Category:Lists of ship commissionings, Category:Lists of ship decommissionings, Category:Lists of shipwrecks by year, and Category:Lists of ship launches. The number of articles in each category ranges from about 85 up to 125. The processing would be as follows:
{{shipeventsNNNN}}
with {{
Shipevents|XXXX}}
, where NNNN
is a year ending in 0
, like 1870
; and XXXX
is the specific year in the title of the page. Typically, the templates to be replaced appear in a "See also" section. Although most articles will have only one template of the {{shipeventsNNNN}}
style, year articles near the turn of a decade most often have two. If any article already has the template {{
shipevents}}
, skip it.
{{
shipevents1870}}
with {{
shipevents|1876}}
.{{
shipevents1870}}
and {{
shipevents1880}}
with {{
shipevents|1879}}
.[[Category:XXXX ships]]
with a pipe and a space (so the article will sort at the top of the category) like this: [[Category:XXXX ships| ]]
. As above, XXXX
is the specific year in the title of the article. If any article already has the template {{
shipevents}}
skip that task. If any article already has the XXXX ships
category, please add the pipe-and-space ("|
") sortkey
{{
shipevents1900}}
with {{
shipevents|1908}}
; add to [[
Category:1908 ships| ]]
(with a pipe-and-space sortkey)— Bellhalla ( talk) 05:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
shipevents1870}}
and {{
shipevents|1880}}
?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 20:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
shipevents1870}}
but leave {{
shipevents|1880}}
. Hope this helps. —
Bellhalla (
talk) 20:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Would it be possible to get a list of Files in Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons that:
{{
Information}}
template.{{
Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
and {{
Should be SVG}}
.Thanks in adavcen, Peachey88 ( Talk Page · Contribs) 00:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone please add the template {{ Coca-Cola brands}} to all articles in category:Coca-Cola brands? Thank you for your time, -- Jeremy ( blah blah) 01:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
The NATO Wikiproject has just been established (today), and we're looking for someone who would be so kind as to run a bot to tag NATO articles. We have a template Template:WikiProject NATO, and I believe it's properly set up to allow automatic stub tagging. It would be extremely helpful if all of the articles in Category:NATO and its subcategories could be tagged. Thanks so much! Cool3 ( talk) 21:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I have no idea whether or not this is feasible, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there. I'm interested in finding a bot that could do the following:
1. Search Category:Disambiguation pages and identify all members of that category meeting both of these criteria:
2. From the resulting set, eliminate any article that's a member of Category:Broadcast call sign disambiguation pages
3. Generate a report/subpage listing what's left
If this is possible, and assuming it's not a processor hog, I'd be interested in having this run on a regular basis — preferably monthly, but at least quarterly. Mlaffs ( talk) 17:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
The competitive sport content of Swimming has been moved to Swimming (sport), so there are now a large number of articles (guess ~6,000) which contain links to the wrong article.
For pages in the article namespace which currently link to Swimming that are categorised under Category:Swimmers or Category:Swimming competitions (and all subcategories), could a bot correct all these internal wikilinks to [[swimming (sport)|original link text]].
If a list of all articles edited in this way could also be produced, this will allow manual checking - it is felt that a manual check will be significantly less hassle than manually updating all the links.
Additional categories and articles in other namespaces may be added to the criteria post-bot after surveying the remaining pages which continue to link to Swimming.
Yboy83 ( talk) 15:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone please create a simple bot that can move date pages into the portal namespace? July 31, 2005, which is simply transcluded into July 2005, should be at Portal:Current events/2005 July 31. This is already correct for recent dates like Portal:Current events/2009 April 12. Articles in Category:Days in 2005 and Category:Days in 2003 still need to be moved. Thanks, Reywas92 Talk 20:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
I need a bot, which interconnects ISBNs to Google Books:
An archive search in this bot discussion gives a hint to a bot called "gbcite", created by Quandal
User:Quadell. But he is not in the active bot list?--
Manuel-aa5 (
talk) 09:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
url
parameter at all in that case. I don't see much point in adding a url
parameter for Google/Amazon/etc to existing citations, particularly since plain text such as "
ISBN
0-7407-4847-5" is automagically converted by the software into a link to
Special:BookSources (as it was here).
Anomie
⚔ 18:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)I am making this announcement in advance due to sensitivities about date manipulation bot runs.
{{
birth-year}}
and {{
birth-date}}
wishes to convert the obsolete birth-year template usage to use the more general birth-date template.
- J JMesserly ( talk) 04:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
{{birth-date||{{{2|}}}|dt={{{1}}}}}
. Is there any reason why it is problematic to leave it as it is? (I have no opinion either way, but there's no need to make 590 edits if it's not needed.) Also, will you be filing a new BRFA?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 18:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Add "|water-polo=yes" to all {{WP Swimming}} project banners in the categories (including all sub-categories):
with no exceptions. Please also tag category and template talk pages. All talk pages should already contain the project banner (as per recent bot request), though if any are found to be without, please add it. Yboy83 ( talk) 20:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
The BLP noticeboard requires editors adding a new section to link to the article their comment is about. It struck me that this presented an opportunity to the technically-minded to write a script to extract all wikilinks to the article namespace from section headings in the history of the noticeboard and present them as a list. We already have a BLP dynamic watchlist in the form of the "related changes" tab at Category:Living people, and a similar system could be used here for BLPs with a proven history of problems, which might be more valuable. The list could be at a subpage of WP:BLP, WP:WPBLP or WP:BLPN, and a bot could update it regularly to keep it relevant and comprehensive. It should not be difficult to code. Any thoughts, volunteers? Skomorokh 21:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Per the discussion at Template talk:Val#Header/footer vs. prefix/suffix, we're populating Category:Pages using val header or footer parameters with articles that need revising to use the new (more intuitive) parameter titles. The h and f parameters are being deprecated in favour of p and s. Can we have a bot make a one-time run (or optionally, monitor the category perpetually—we can discuss that) and do the following for each article in that category (i.e. not on pages in User:, Template: or the talk namespaces):
This and related modifications have been tested in userspace at User:TheFeds/template/sandbox1, and result in the expected behaviour. {{ Val}} has been modified, so we should be seeing the category grow now. TheFeds 21:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Interestingly enough, it looks like there's virtually nothing for a bot to do here...unless the category is going to take longer than a few hours to populate itself. The folks at Template talk:Val felt that we should arrange a bot in advance, but unless this category grows suddenly, it may not be necessary. Stand by: I'll advise if this category grows as expected. TheFeds 14:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
This request is withdrawn: it came as a surprise to the template maintainers that there was virtually no usage of those particular template parameters, and accordingly, nothing much for a bot to do. I'll fix this one by hand. TheFeds 06:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not really sure of how one would go at this, so I'm not going to make any suggestions for how to do it. But what needs to be done is to go through the history of pages like Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31, and find which version existed on October 31 2008/2007/2006/... (if there are multiple version on the same day, use the latest) and then check which articles were bolded (the "Selected anniversaries").
For example, the final revision of
Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31 for the year 2008 was
this. The selected anniversaries are
Halloween,
Samhain,
Reformation Day,
Martin Luther,
Leiden University Library,
Mount Rushmore,
Indira Gandhi, and
Singapore Airlines Flight 006. The bot would need to go on the talk page of these articles and tag them with {{
OnThisDay|October|31|2008|oldid=248747244}}
to produce:
On October 31, 2008, a fact from this article was selected for the main page's On this day... section. |
Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Yahoo have announced that they'll shortly be pulling the plug on GeoCities. At present WP has over 20000 references to pages on GeoCities. Either WP's going to have an awful lot of dead links or we need a bot to grab the references, put them through WebCite or similar, and replace the references on WP. Any thoughts? Any takers? Bazj ( talk) 15:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to make a bot guard pages that are in the stage of creating? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Betax ( talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
When an editor lists an image at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files, the instructions say to add {{ puic}} to the captions of everywhere the image is used. Some editor actually do this, and some don't. When an admin closes the discussion as "keep", he or she should presumably remove the puic notice from captions (although the instructions don't actually say to). Some admins, including me, sometimes forget to remove the notice. So you get articles with image captions that say "This content has an uncertain copyright status and is pending deletion. You can comment on its removal." even when it isn't true.
Could a bot run through Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Puic and remove the template from the captions of images that are not directly linked from WP:PUF or from any of the subpages listed in its holding cell? – Quadell ( talk) 03:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
xfd-closed
to determine if a discussion is closed or not.Could a bot tag all talk pages for Category:Aquatics and all sub-categories with Template:WikiProject Swimming.
Exceptions:
If also possible, could an automatic Stub assessment be made for any articles carrying a stub template.
Thanks in advance, Yboy83 ( talk) 09:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
class=
copied from other templates on the page?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 15:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)As proposed here, a bot could report users matching certain abuse filters directly to WP:AIV. The list of filters to check could be held in a bot subpage, so that admins can update it as needed. The filters would be those for severe abuse or against persistent vandals or sockpuppets, so that they can be detected and blocked rapidly. The report could include the abuse log details. Cenarium ( talk) 22:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Two rugby league competition (National League One and National League Two) were recently renamed (Championship and Championship 1) and following this the article (Rugby League National Leagues) that covered both National League One and National League Two was moved and then split into two articles ( Co-operative Championship and Championship One).
The upshot of this is that there are a number of articles that need fixing. I think the following replacements should do it.
The above to be replaced with [[Co-operative Championship]]
and
all to be replaced with [[Championship One]]
Thank you in advance. GordyB ( talk) 12:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Two rugby league competition (National League One and National League Two) were recently renamed (Championship and Championship 1) and following this the article (Rugby League National Leagues) that covered both National League One and National League Two was moved and then split into two articles ( Co-operative Championship and Championship One).
The upshot of this is that there are a number of articles that need fixing. I think the following replacements should do it.
The above to be replaced with [[Co-operative Championship]]
and
all to be replaced with [[Championship One]]
Thank you in advance. GordyB ( talk) 12:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not really sure of how one would go at this, so I'm not going to make any suggestions for how to do it. But what needs to be done is to go through the history of pages like Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31, and find which version existed on October 31 2008/2007/2006/... (if there are multiple version on the same day, use the latest) and then check which articles were bolded (the "Selected anniversaries").
For example, the final revision of
Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31 for the year 2008 was
this. The selected anniversaries are
Halloween,
Samhain,
Reformation Day,
Martin Luther,
Leiden University Library,
Mount Rushmore,
Indira Gandhi, and
Singapore Airlines Flight 006. The bot would need to go on the talk page of these articles and tag them with {{
OnThisDay|October|31|2008|oldid=248747244}}
to produce:
On October 31, 2008, a fact from this article was selected for the main page's On this day... section. |
Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I am requesting that this edit be made to all of the substituted instances of that template. -- IRP ☎ 20:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll try to summarize, see the discussion at WT:RFA#CSD_tagging if you want more details. Several new page patrollers asked to receive notifications if an article they tagged for speedy deletion was declined or deleted under a different criteria than the one they requested. Coupled with this is a request for an opt-in service to summarize patrollers' tagging outcomes. This task probably requires an adminbot. Wronkiew ( talk) 04:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've decided I would like to give this a try, and to that end have worked out a possible implementation. It would function as follows:
The bot follows the recent changes IRC feed. Edit summaries are scanned to find edits that add CSD tags. Any tagged page is tracked, with every revision's text including the revision where the tag was added being downloaded until the page is deleted or the tag removed. If the page is deleted, the fact that some revisions may not be successfully retrieved before the deletion occurs should be largely inconsequential; in the vast majority of cases the revision containing the original tagging should be successfully downloaded before the deletion occurs, and if the deletion is somehow sufficiently instantaneous as to beat the bot the criteria cited for the tagging is usually in the edit summary for the edit in which the tag was placed. In any case the bot only needs the criteria for the deletion and the criteria for the tagging, the intervening edits should be irrelevant. If the tag is removed, the page will continue to be followed for a reasonable period of time (10 minutes or so I would guess) to ensure the removal was not reverted or the page otherwise retagged. If the page is retagged, the criteria for the retagging is noted alongside the criteria for the original tagging. The bot will continue to follow the page through as many cycles of retagging/tag removal as occur until the page is deleted or the tag left off for greater than the previously mentioned reasonable period of time. If the page is deleted, the criteria cited by every editor who tagged it will be checked against the criteria cited by the deleting admin, and any mismatches will be noted on its list. If the tag is removed permanently, the bot will check whether or not the tag was replaced by a notability notice or by a prod tag as well as whether the article was altered significantly in size since the tagging, and will note that along with every editor who added a tag to the page on its list. (One exception is an A7 page being userfied, such a tagging would be presumed correct.) Once a day, the bot will dump its various lists to a different subpage for every editor (I'm thinking of just putting them in the bot's own userspace), and will then give every editor a friendly notice on their talk page with a link to their subpage, which will contain a list of every misplaced tag and the name of the user or admin who removed the tag the last time it was removed or deleted the page for a reason differing from the one they provided. I think once a day is a good compromise between being too spammy and providing feedback too far after the fact to be of much use.
I was thinking of possibly leaving editors who merely revert a tag's removal off of the list. I doubt most hugglers who revert a creator's or IP's removal of a speedy tag bother to check the validity of the tag, or for that matter read the page at all. Of course, that's not exactly ideal behavior, which is why I'm thinking of just warning them alongside everyone else anyway. I'd appreciate some opinions about this.
In addition to the standard service that will be provided to everyone who does not opt out, I was thinking of having two opt-in services: Firstly, one that additionally puts an alert on a user's talkpage every time a speedy is declined or a page is deleted for a different reason immediately after the event occurs, for people who don't mind spam and want the instant feedback. Second, one that adds to the user's subpage a table that will be maintained with speedy statistics (including correct speedies) on a longterm basis. Everyone else will only have the results from the previous day on their page.
Opting out of the bot's services will require adding your name to a list in the bot's userspace. If you have a nobots template on your talkpage, the bot will refrain from editing it and will place your name on the aforementioned list for you. (In that case it will never look at your talkpage again, to opt back in to it's service you would have to remove your name from its list manually in addition to removing the nobots template.)
You'll note that the above system as outlined assumes that editors will be noting CSD taggings in their edit summaries in some fashion. My reason for this is that the vast majority of taggings are done using one of various automated tools with easily machine readable edit summaries. Those who don't should be encouraged to note what they're doing in some fashion in their edit summaries anyway; I'm going to try to make the regex for that test as flexible as possible (any mention of speedy deletion, CSD, or a link to the CSD page will suffice, the page text will be loaded to confirm the presence of the speedy tag to eliminate any false positives anyway). I don't think it's worth the vast increase in consumed bandwidth checking the text of every edit for tag adding would require just to provide feedback to the minority of editors who don't provide proper edit summaries. It also requires that admins note the criteria for deletions in the deletion log, but it goes without saying that admins should be doing that.
Now, all of that only covers notifications. If you want a permanent, searchable database of everyone's CSD stats for the purposes of informing voters on RFA or somesuch (I believe that's what some people in the original thread were asking for) I could possibly have the bot generate one, but I haven't done something like that on this scale before, and I'm unsure of how much space I have for that sort of thing on my toolserver account. I'll have to look into this.
Of course, all of the above is subject to change. I'd appreciate any and all feedback anyone can think of before I do any actual coding.-- Dycedarg ж 04:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
← WP:Twinkle and most other tools will:
It may be easiest to tie in with the Abuse filter, rather than rely on edit summaries. It already has some filters that operate on csd tags. If it logged all edits that added or removed CSD tags, the bot could process that log. Much more reliable, and probably faster.— Kww( talk) 03:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I've thought more about how the bot should go about issuing notices. My current thought is this: Every three hours the bot will issue notices to everyone on its list who has not tagged a page for speedy deletion within the past twenty minutes. If only one or two instances were recorded, the bot will simply note them in its talk page notice and not create a subpage (assuming the second opt-in service outlined above is not requested by the editor in question), it will only create a subpage if there were three or more instances. This way editors will get relatively speedy feedback, they should only receive notices after they have finished their current session of CSD work (which will prevent them from getting multiple notices), the notices will not get overly long, and the creation of subpages will be kept to a minimum. Any thoughts on this new approach?-- Dycedarg ж 04:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand the point about needing to notify people if the article was deleted under a different reason than for which it was tagged. This doesn't necessarily mean that the tagger made a mistake and a bot shouldn't be implying they did. Articles can qualify under multiple criteria. -- JLaTondre ( talk) 21:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
In case people are curious about my progress, I am in the process of coding the bot. Once I've got it mostly written and am sure about my implementation, I'll be starting the BRFA discussion. I'll link to that from here once it's started. Also, I've decided to use regular scans of Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as a backup for when the the tagger doesn't use an edit summary the bot recognizes. It's less precise than I would like but it's the easiest way; in any case I don't think the increase in precision would be worth the overhead the abuse filter method would generate.-- Dycedarg ж 06:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
BRFA filed-- Dycedarg ж 04:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request is badly backlogged, and onerous to work on manually. There are certain category intersections for which the required crop size is uniform and thus amenable to automation: for example, non-free images that are in the category Category:Book covers tend to be for infobox use at a maximum of 250px wide. A manually-assisted bot could clear out all such requests very quickly I'd wager. Commons has a User:Crop_bot account which does similar things in enabling editors to use jpegtran and ImageMagick, and I'm sure the operator would be willing to have it adopted here. Comments? Suggestions? Skomorokh 20:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I want to create about 200 pages, one for each country, that are preloaded with basic text. The only difference between the pages would be the occurrence of the country name. Can I get a bot to do this?
I want a series of articles called "Environment of Foo" (where Foo is a country) in WP space. They will all contain the basic things such an article should have with the only difference being the country name. Once these articles are edited to, say, Start Class they can be migrated manually into article space. Obviously any articles that already exist in article space will not be needed.
Instead of articles being being created organically and anarchically I want to give a little bit of structure to the article creation process. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 10:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I am very opposed to this. There is absolutely no need to create about 200 stubs with zero information (if Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment/Environment of Foo#Template will be used. These articles should only be created on a case-by-case basis. Make them one at a time when you know they will be expanded. I know by experience that these articles will not be expanded unless your Wikiproject truly works on each one of them. Even the few that currently exist are in terrible condition.It does no good to just link to the country's articles for Flora, Fauna, Protected areas, and Environmental issues when this article itself will have nothing in it. And what will link to these articles? Will they be added to the county's main article or somewhere else? These are no reason to be looking for a sense of completeness to finish off the ones alreadey created. That sure isn't completeness to have a bunch of stubs that only link to other articles, and that infomation already exists in the articles it will link to. In many cases, it may be much more apprpriate to leave this information in the main country article than to make a new one. And one comment about the proposed template: Do not use
at the top of the article. Just wikilink it in the first sentence. Reywas92 Talk 21:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely concur with Reywas92. Autocreating sourceless stubs verges on disruptive editing, and certainly isn't a legitimate task for a bot.— Kww( talk) 22:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I retouched
File:Choco chip cookie.jpg and uploaded it as a PNG (also removed the white background) and I could use a bot help to replace all the old images superseded by the new one. Also, it seems that someone uploaded a bad version with the same PNG name to wikipedia so the file currently showing on wiki is far worse in quality than
the wikicommons file I uploaded. Would appreciate someone fixing this issue as well.
Warm regards,
Jaakobou
Chalk Talk 07:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Note: Image still needs all jpg uses replaced by the PNG file. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 15:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
A bot is requested to ensure that bad image tags ({{ badimage}}) on image talk pages are kept synchronised with MediaWiki:Bad image list. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I would like a bot that does the following. Runs periodically to find new articles on a given subject, specified by some string. Once the bot finds all the articles, saves the original link and sends a report to the user. Is that possible? The idea is to follow real-time the appearance of new articles on a given subject.
Perhaps the biggest WP:BLP problem is the addition of poorly sourced content to articles on living people. Now, while bots cannot tell a good source from a bad one, they should be able to detect when text is added without any references cited (i.e. no <ref> tags). I am wondering if a bot can monitor recent changes, in a manner similar to ClueBot ( talk · contribs), and when a chunk of text is added to an article in Category:Living people verify whether or not it included ref tags. As the risk of false positives is high (references may be added without ref tags, and added text could just be templates or metadata rather than contentious claims, for example), the bot would not make any edits to articles. Instead, unreferenced additions would then be reported (this is where it gets hazy), so that non-bot editors can check and see if they are inappropriate. The report could take the form of a dynamic feed or a continually updated list (though the latter might accrue archives of little use). The end result would be a less noisy and more refined version of Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Living_people. Is this something that could be useful? Skomorokh 02:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Similar to Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_20#WP:INDIA_Bot_Assisted_Assessment that was handled by User:Bot0612. Many articles are using Template:WikiProject College football, and are unassessed, but have an assessment in a different project. Could we do the same thing as the WP:India sweep? Make a run through all of Category:Unassessed college football articles, and for any page that has a "class=" rating for another project, assign the College football class to the highest rating in the other project(s)? We have a backlog of over 1000 unassessed articles that we're trying to clean, and I suspect this would take a sizeable bite out of the list. De Fault Ryan 21:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
/^Category:.* stubs$/i
, disambiguation pages by checking for
Category:All disambiguation pages, and redirects by checking for the "redirect" flag.
Anomie
⚔ 01:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
One last thing. Is it possible to also add |auto=yes
as well as the class rating for each article that the bot automatcially assesses? It would be nice to keep track of which ones were automatically flagged, for tracking and/or reassessment purposes. Thanks.
De
Fault
Ryan 18:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Done. Somewhere in the region of 485 edits made. [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 22:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Right now there are a massive backlog, massive enough that there are usually more articles created over time than there are enough devoted people to tagging them can handle and as a result the backlog just keeps growing. The task would be a lot simpler if we could have a bot go through and categorize articles that fall under the scope as low by default. Those that would be categorized this way would include: those with no importance tag, those with an importance tag, but nothing after it, those with an importance tag and improper importance listed (ie anything but low, mid, high or top) and all articles with the tag "list=yes". The latter would be per the wikiprojects importance level. Without this I do not believe we have enough staff for the number of articles to ever come close to completing the task. じん ない 06:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
dear friends : i wish to learn how to make a bot ....i'm basically a medico who was a computerscience engineering student , & presently a web site designer with basic knowledge in webdesigning ....& i serve here in wiki too ...so saw sme of te bot's working well in my area so me to wish to learn how to make one & how to make em work ....if someone wants to assist me i would appreciate it ....
regards
pearll's sun-- Doctor muthu's muthu wanna talk ? 08:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if I could have a bot that could help me with wikipedia. Like for example, if i make an edit that is spelled wrong, then the bot could correct it for me. Or if I need help I could just ask the bot? Get back at me on my talk page kaminski825 ( talk) 16:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
User:Nick deleted Category:Terrorists persuant to a recent CfD. The subcategories deleted as a result need (around 50-60) to be thusly emptied. Thank you. Sceptre ( talk) 22:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Per
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Images and Media#List of files comparison we would like a bot to go though
Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons and replace any file with both {{
Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
and {{
Should be SVG}}
with {{
Convert to SVG and copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
which is a single consolidated version of both those templates.
Peachey88 (
Talk Page ·
Contribs) 03:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
:Discussion is being held at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot 17. Peachey88 ( Talk Page · Contribs) 00:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I wonder whether a bot could be used to authorise the initiation/ termination of the tag that says that an article is about a person that has died recently, please? I have put my information about this at Wikipedia: Village Pump. The preceding unsigned comment was left by ACEOREVIVED ( talk · contribs) on 11:30, May 10, 2009.
I have 2 requests
1. add our banner {{ WikiProject Washington}} to all talk pages of all articles in the category Category:Washington (U.S. state) and all its sub categories
2. add our banner {{ WikiProject Washington}} and/or add |class=stub| to the banners off all articles within the category Category:Washington stubs and all its sub categories
EDIT: make sure it only gets stuff in the article talk namespace
-- Gold Man60 Talk 02:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I am looking for a bot to update the date
parameters in all the reference tags in the
U2 3D article from the
ISO 8601 format, to standard U.S. date notation, as per recommendation at {{
Citation}}. However, the accessdate
parameter should remain in ISO 8601 format, as per the same page. –
Dream out loud (
talk) 06:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed when I use search engines to find sources, very often my results are filled with sites that get their information word for word from Wikipedia. Is there a bot that checks our refs and ELs for such sites? If so, which one? If not, could one be made? Thanks! -- JBC3 ( talk) 03:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Would a bot please tag all articles in "
Category:Christian films" and "
Category:Catholic films" for the
Christian films task force, by adding |Christian-task-force=yes
to
Template:Film. See
here: (a) a user was planning to do it, but it appears will not be able to, and (b) skip the other sub-categories as we haven't fully defined our scope. Thank you.
American Eagle (
talk) 02:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Does this mean that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GoblinBot is no longer needed? – Quadell ( talk) 17:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Could {{ Vital}} be added to the talk pages of every article on this page which doesn't already have one, excluding nonexistant pages? I'd do it with AWB myself, but it seems kind of pointless to take up that much time when a bot could do it. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 01:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I've been dabbing the pages there since I saw this subject come up, and I fixed several... but I'm a bit concerned about the list at the moment. Several of the links don't point to what they're supposed to--for instance, Arabian was under "Horses", but of course that's not where the link goes. I changed it to Arabian horse, but I'm sure there are many more like it. And under chemistry there are alternate spellings for many elements, both listed. I think we need to go over them before the bot runs on this. I can do that this weekend. – Quadell ( talk) 21:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
(P.S. User:Splarka/dabfinder.js is your friend. – Quadell ( talk) 21:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
(Discussion migrated to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vital Articles#Proposed changes. – Quadell ( talk) 22:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC))
Apparently WP:WikiProject Russian history has been merged into WP:WikiProject Russia, so many pages contain both {{ WPRUSSIA}} and {{ WikiProject Russian history}}. Since {{ WikiProject Russian history}} was redirected to {{ WPRUSSIA}}, this ends up with two banenrs that are the same. Can a bot be tasked with removing the {{ WikiProject Russian History}} banner and if not there already, replacing it with the {{ WikiProject Russia}} banner?
76.66.202.139 ( talk) 08:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Change any instance in of id Software with idSoftware on any page with {{
WikiProject Video games}}
. Thanks,
MrKIA11 (
talk) 18:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Video games}}
are space-less, so to have conformity.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 12:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
|id Software=
to be replaced with |idSoftware=
, within {{
WikiProject Video games}}? Your original request sounded like you wanted instances of "id Software" replaced with "idSoftware" e.g. on articles. 「
ダイノ
ガイ
千?!」(
Dinoguy1000) 18:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Video games}}
, and I'm going to estimate that is quite a few articles.
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 11:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
{{{id Software|}}}
to the end of the template with the other old parameters, I can do the rest. I guess a bot is not the best answer for this situation.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 14:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
id Software
now use idSoftware
.
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 10:57, 15 May 2009 (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 20 | ← | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
Having patrolled the New User Creation log for a while, I've come up with a useful service that a Bot could perform, but not being a programmer, I'll throw it out here:
When a new user creates a problematic username, they often are given the {{uw-username}} warning, which gives them a discussion venue regarding possible changes. That template then places their user page into Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over. So far so good. If the username problem is not resolved, the account may be (and often is) blocked. Unfortunately the user page remains in the above category. Thus it makes it hard to sort through the category to address outstanding issues, as many of them were resolved with a {{usernameblock}}.
So the task for the bot, should you choose to accept it:
1. Parse
Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over
2. For each username listed, check to see if the username is indefinitely blocked
3. If so, remove the [[Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over]] from the userpage, thus removing it from the category, leaving only truly open issues in that Cat.
You'll be helping out new-user-patrollers, and as an added bonus, you'll get a pie! Arakunem Talk 19:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:Help desk (thanx to Tnxman307) :
Budelberger ( talk) 17:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC) ( ).
Coding... 01:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Could a bot be applied to put rail usage data in infoboxes at railway station articles in the UK?
Simply south (
talk) 12:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Is there any easy way to get a (partial) list of images used in en.Wikipedia that are hosted on Commons? I can't think of a way. There's certainly no way via the API, is there? – Quadell ( talk) 01:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
All of the links to Wikipedia:User Page Design Center need to be re-targeted to Wikipedia:User page design center (notice the difference in the capitalization), as the page was moved due to a capitalization mistake. See Wikipedia:User Page Design Center (redirect suppressed) and Pages that link to "Wikipedia:User Page Design Center". After the links are re-targeted, Wikipedia:User Page Design Center (the one with the incorrect capitalization) can be deleted per CSD G6. -- IRP ☎ 21:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible for a bot to go through Category:Film articles needing an infobox and draw up a list (to be checked manually) of any articles which transclude an infobox template? I can provide a list of specific infoboxes if need be, but a general check will be sufficient. Cheers! PC78 ( talk) 22:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
This might be too much to do, and might require a bug request. Essentially, a way for anyone get notified of an MfD/AfD of something on their Watchlist, even if they miss it via Watchlist, as an opt-in method. E.g., you tag a page for xfd on my 'list', I get a notification, even if I'm not the creator of the article. Exposing part of the watchlist may be impossible, but what about someone makes a basic bot that reads each new xfd, checks What Links Here on the article or page in question, and if it sees something like User:Rootology/xfdalert (predefined location, same for everyone) and then notifies the users in question? rootology ( C)( T) 16:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I need a bot to do the following:
I hope all that makes sense. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Just noting that this request is still being worked on, so should not be archived. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
BRFA filed Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 28. Sorry it took so long. Anomie ⚔ 16:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
This is mainly to help me with maintenance (essentially ensuring that nobody is including false values), and it isn't a big deal if it doesn't get done. I'd like a list of articles that have a reporting mark in {{ infobox rail}} or use {{ reporting mark}}, along with the value of the parameter (or both if they differ). (See CSX Transportation for an example of both, with reporting mark CSXT.) -- NE2 01:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to see about getting a bot to process all the articles in four categories: Category:Lists of ship commissionings, Category:Lists of ship decommissionings, Category:Lists of shipwrecks by year, and Category:Lists of ship launches. The number of articles in each category ranges from about 85 up to 125. The processing would be as follows:
{{shipeventsNNNN}}
with {{
Shipevents|XXXX}}
, where NNNN
is a year ending in 0
, like 1870
; and XXXX
is the specific year in the title of the page. Typically, the templates to be replaced appear in a "See also" section. Although most articles will have only one template of the {{shipeventsNNNN}}
style, year articles near the turn of a decade most often have two. If any article already has the template {{
shipevents}}
, skip it.
{{
shipevents1870}}
with {{
shipevents|1876}}
.{{
shipevents1870}}
and {{
shipevents1880}}
with {{
shipevents|1879}}
.[[Category:XXXX ships]]
with a pipe and a space (so the article will sort at the top of the category) like this: [[Category:XXXX ships| ]]
. As above, XXXX
is the specific year in the title of the article. If any article already has the template {{
shipevents}}
skip that task. If any article already has the XXXX ships
category, please add the pipe-and-space ("|
") sortkey
{{
shipevents1900}}
with {{
shipevents|1908}}
; add to [[
Category:1908 ships| ]]
(with a pipe-and-space sortkey)— Bellhalla ( talk) 05:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
shipevents1870}}
and {{
shipevents|1880}}
?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 20:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
{{
shipevents1870}}
but leave {{
shipevents|1880}}
. Hope this helps. —
Bellhalla (
talk) 20:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)Would it be possible to get a list of Files in Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons that:
{{
Information}}
template.{{
Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
and {{
Should be SVG}}
.Thanks in adavcen, Peachey88 ( Talk Page · Contribs) 00:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone please add the template {{ Coca-Cola brands}} to all articles in category:Coca-Cola brands? Thank you for your time, -- Jeremy ( blah blah) 01:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
The NATO Wikiproject has just been established (today), and we're looking for someone who would be so kind as to run a bot to tag NATO articles. We have a template Template:WikiProject NATO, and I believe it's properly set up to allow automatic stub tagging. It would be extremely helpful if all of the articles in Category:NATO and its subcategories could be tagged. Thanks so much! Cool3 ( talk) 21:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I have no idea whether or not this is feasible, but I thought I'd throw the idea out there. I'm interested in finding a bot that could do the following:
1. Search Category:Disambiguation pages and identify all members of that category meeting both of these criteria:
2. From the resulting set, eliminate any article that's a member of Category:Broadcast call sign disambiguation pages
3. Generate a report/subpage listing what's left
If this is possible, and assuming it's not a processor hog, I'd be interested in having this run on a regular basis — preferably monthly, but at least quarterly. Mlaffs ( talk) 17:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
The competitive sport content of Swimming has been moved to Swimming (sport), so there are now a large number of articles (guess ~6,000) which contain links to the wrong article.
For pages in the article namespace which currently link to Swimming that are categorised under Category:Swimmers or Category:Swimming competitions (and all subcategories), could a bot correct all these internal wikilinks to [[swimming (sport)|original link text]].
If a list of all articles edited in this way could also be produced, this will allow manual checking - it is felt that a manual check will be significantly less hassle than manually updating all the links.
Additional categories and articles in other namespaces may be added to the criteria post-bot after surveying the remaining pages which continue to link to Swimming.
Yboy83 ( talk) 15:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone please create a simple bot that can move date pages into the portal namespace? July 31, 2005, which is simply transcluded into July 2005, should be at Portal:Current events/2005 July 31. This is already correct for recent dates like Portal:Current events/2009 April 12. Articles in Category:Days in 2005 and Category:Days in 2003 still need to be moved. Thanks, Reywas92 Talk 20:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
I need a bot, which interconnects ISBNs to Google Books:
An archive search in this bot discussion gives a hint to a bot called "gbcite", created by Quandal
User:Quadell. But he is not in the active bot list?--
Manuel-aa5 (
talk) 09:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
url
parameter at all in that case. I don't see much point in adding a url
parameter for Google/Amazon/etc to existing citations, particularly since plain text such as "
ISBN
0-7407-4847-5" is automagically converted by the software into a link to
Special:BookSources (as it was here).
Anomie
⚔ 18:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)I am making this announcement in advance due to sensitivities about date manipulation bot runs.
{{
birth-year}}
and {{
birth-date}}
wishes to convert the obsolete birth-year template usage to use the more general birth-date template.
- J JMesserly ( talk) 04:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
{{birth-date||{{{2|}}}|dt={{{1}}}}}
. Is there any reason why it is problematic to leave it as it is? (I have no opinion either way, but there's no need to make 590 edits if it's not needed.) Also, will you be filing a new BRFA?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 18:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Add "|water-polo=yes" to all {{WP Swimming}} project banners in the categories (including all sub-categories):
with no exceptions. Please also tag category and template talk pages. All talk pages should already contain the project banner (as per recent bot request), though if any are found to be without, please add it. Yboy83 ( talk) 20:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
The BLP noticeboard requires editors adding a new section to link to the article their comment is about. It struck me that this presented an opportunity to the technically-minded to write a script to extract all wikilinks to the article namespace from section headings in the history of the noticeboard and present them as a list. We already have a BLP dynamic watchlist in the form of the "related changes" tab at Category:Living people, and a similar system could be used here for BLPs with a proven history of problems, which might be more valuable. The list could be at a subpage of WP:BLP, WP:WPBLP or WP:BLPN, and a bot could update it regularly to keep it relevant and comprehensive. It should not be difficult to code. Any thoughts, volunteers? Skomorokh 21:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Per the discussion at Template talk:Val#Header/footer vs. prefix/suffix, we're populating Category:Pages using val header or footer parameters with articles that need revising to use the new (more intuitive) parameter titles. The h and f parameters are being deprecated in favour of p and s. Can we have a bot make a one-time run (or optionally, monitor the category perpetually—we can discuss that) and do the following for each article in that category (i.e. not on pages in User:, Template: or the talk namespaces):
This and related modifications have been tested in userspace at User:TheFeds/template/sandbox1, and result in the expected behaviour. {{ Val}} has been modified, so we should be seeing the category grow now. TheFeds 21:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Interestingly enough, it looks like there's virtually nothing for a bot to do here...unless the category is going to take longer than a few hours to populate itself. The folks at Template talk:Val felt that we should arrange a bot in advance, but unless this category grows suddenly, it may not be necessary. Stand by: I'll advise if this category grows as expected. TheFeds 14:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
This request is withdrawn: it came as a surprise to the template maintainers that there was virtually no usage of those particular template parameters, and accordingly, nothing much for a bot to do. I'll fix this one by hand. TheFeds 06:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not really sure of how one would go at this, so I'm not going to make any suggestions for how to do it. But what needs to be done is to go through the history of pages like Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31, and find which version existed on October 31 2008/2007/2006/... (if there are multiple version on the same day, use the latest) and then check which articles were bolded (the "Selected anniversaries").
For example, the final revision of
Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31 for the year 2008 was
this. The selected anniversaries are
Halloween,
Samhain,
Reformation Day,
Martin Luther,
Leiden University Library,
Mount Rushmore,
Indira Gandhi, and
Singapore Airlines Flight 006. The bot would need to go on the talk page of these articles and tag them with {{
OnThisDay|October|31|2008|oldid=248747244}}
to produce:
On October 31, 2008, a fact from this article was selected for the main page's On this day... section. |
Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Yahoo have announced that they'll shortly be pulling the plug on GeoCities. At present WP has over 20000 references to pages on GeoCities. Either WP's going to have an awful lot of dead links or we need a bot to grab the references, put them through WebCite or similar, and replace the references on WP. Any thoughts? Any takers? Bazj ( talk) 15:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to make a bot guard pages that are in the stage of creating? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Betax ( talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
When an editor lists an image at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files, the instructions say to add {{ puic}} to the captions of everywhere the image is used. Some editor actually do this, and some don't. When an admin closes the discussion as "keep", he or she should presumably remove the puic notice from captions (although the instructions don't actually say to). Some admins, including me, sometimes forget to remove the notice. So you get articles with image captions that say "This content has an uncertain copyright status and is pending deletion. You can comment on its removal." even when it isn't true.
Could a bot run through Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Puic and remove the template from the captions of images that are not directly linked from WP:PUF or from any of the subpages listed in its holding cell? – Quadell ( talk) 03:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
xfd-closed
to determine if a discussion is closed or not.Could a bot tag all talk pages for Category:Aquatics and all sub-categories with Template:WikiProject Swimming.
Exceptions:
If also possible, could an automatic Stub assessment be made for any articles carrying a stub template.
Thanks in advance, Yboy83 ( talk) 09:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
class=
copied from other templates on the page?
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 15:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)As proposed here, a bot could report users matching certain abuse filters directly to WP:AIV. The list of filters to check could be held in a bot subpage, so that admins can update it as needed. The filters would be those for severe abuse or against persistent vandals or sockpuppets, so that they can be detected and blocked rapidly. The report could include the abuse log details. Cenarium ( talk) 22:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Two rugby league competition (National League One and National League Two) were recently renamed (Championship and Championship 1) and following this the article (Rugby League National Leagues) that covered both National League One and National League Two was moved and then split into two articles ( Co-operative Championship and Championship One).
The upshot of this is that there are a number of articles that need fixing. I think the following replacements should do it.
The above to be replaced with [[Co-operative Championship]]
and
all to be replaced with [[Championship One]]
Thank you in advance. GordyB ( talk) 12:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Two rugby league competition (National League One and National League Two) were recently renamed (Championship and Championship 1) and following this the article (Rugby League National Leagues) that covered both National League One and National League Two was moved and then split into two articles ( Co-operative Championship and Championship One).
The upshot of this is that there are a number of articles that need fixing. I think the following replacements should do it.
The above to be replaced with [[Co-operative Championship]]
and
all to be replaced with [[Championship One]]
Thank you in advance. GordyB ( talk) 12:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not really sure of how one would go at this, so I'm not going to make any suggestions for how to do it. But what needs to be done is to go through the history of pages like Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31, and find which version existed on October 31 2008/2007/2006/... (if there are multiple version on the same day, use the latest) and then check which articles were bolded (the "Selected anniversaries").
For example, the final revision of
Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/October 31 for the year 2008 was
this. The selected anniversaries are
Halloween,
Samhain,
Reformation Day,
Martin Luther,
Leiden University Library,
Mount Rushmore,
Indira Gandhi, and
Singapore Airlines Flight 006. The bot would need to go on the talk page of these articles and tag them with {{
OnThisDay|October|31|2008|oldid=248747244}}
to produce:
On October 31, 2008, a fact from this article was selected for the main page's On this day... section. |
Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I am requesting that this edit be made to all of the substituted instances of that template. -- IRP ☎ 20:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll try to summarize, see the discussion at WT:RFA#CSD_tagging if you want more details. Several new page patrollers asked to receive notifications if an article they tagged for speedy deletion was declined or deleted under a different criteria than the one they requested. Coupled with this is a request for an opt-in service to summarize patrollers' tagging outcomes. This task probably requires an adminbot. Wronkiew ( talk) 04:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've decided I would like to give this a try, and to that end have worked out a possible implementation. It would function as follows:
The bot follows the recent changes IRC feed. Edit summaries are scanned to find edits that add CSD tags. Any tagged page is tracked, with every revision's text including the revision where the tag was added being downloaded until the page is deleted or the tag removed. If the page is deleted, the fact that some revisions may not be successfully retrieved before the deletion occurs should be largely inconsequential; in the vast majority of cases the revision containing the original tagging should be successfully downloaded before the deletion occurs, and if the deletion is somehow sufficiently instantaneous as to beat the bot the criteria cited for the tagging is usually in the edit summary for the edit in which the tag was placed. In any case the bot only needs the criteria for the deletion and the criteria for the tagging, the intervening edits should be irrelevant. If the tag is removed, the page will continue to be followed for a reasonable period of time (10 minutes or so I would guess) to ensure the removal was not reverted or the page otherwise retagged. If the page is retagged, the criteria for the retagging is noted alongside the criteria for the original tagging. The bot will continue to follow the page through as many cycles of retagging/tag removal as occur until the page is deleted or the tag left off for greater than the previously mentioned reasonable period of time. If the page is deleted, the criteria cited by every editor who tagged it will be checked against the criteria cited by the deleting admin, and any mismatches will be noted on its list. If the tag is removed permanently, the bot will check whether or not the tag was replaced by a notability notice or by a prod tag as well as whether the article was altered significantly in size since the tagging, and will note that along with every editor who added a tag to the page on its list. (One exception is an A7 page being userfied, such a tagging would be presumed correct.) Once a day, the bot will dump its various lists to a different subpage for every editor (I'm thinking of just putting them in the bot's own userspace), and will then give every editor a friendly notice on their talk page with a link to their subpage, which will contain a list of every misplaced tag and the name of the user or admin who removed the tag the last time it was removed or deleted the page for a reason differing from the one they provided. I think once a day is a good compromise between being too spammy and providing feedback too far after the fact to be of much use.
I was thinking of possibly leaving editors who merely revert a tag's removal off of the list. I doubt most hugglers who revert a creator's or IP's removal of a speedy tag bother to check the validity of the tag, or for that matter read the page at all. Of course, that's not exactly ideal behavior, which is why I'm thinking of just warning them alongside everyone else anyway. I'd appreciate some opinions about this.
In addition to the standard service that will be provided to everyone who does not opt out, I was thinking of having two opt-in services: Firstly, one that additionally puts an alert on a user's talkpage every time a speedy is declined or a page is deleted for a different reason immediately after the event occurs, for people who don't mind spam and want the instant feedback. Second, one that adds to the user's subpage a table that will be maintained with speedy statistics (including correct speedies) on a longterm basis. Everyone else will only have the results from the previous day on their page.
Opting out of the bot's services will require adding your name to a list in the bot's userspace. If you have a nobots template on your talkpage, the bot will refrain from editing it and will place your name on the aforementioned list for you. (In that case it will never look at your talkpage again, to opt back in to it's service you would have to remove your name from its list manually in addition to removing the nobots template.)
You'll note that the above system as outlined assumes that editors will be noting CSD taggings in their edit summaries in some fashion. My reason for this is that the vast majority of taggings are done using one of various automated tools with easily machine readable edit summaries. Those who don't should be encouraged to note what they're doing in some fashion in their edit summaries anyway; I'm going to try to make the regex for that test as flexible as possible (any mention of speedy deletion, CSD, or a link to the CSD page will suffice, the page text will be loaded to confirm the presence of the speedy tag to eliminate any false positives anyway). I don't think it's worth the vast increase in consumed bandwidth checking the text of every edit for tag adding would require just to provide feedback to the minority of editors who don't provide proper edit summaries. It also requires that admins note the criteria for deletions in the deletion log, but it goes without saying that admins should be doing that.
Now, all of that only covers notifications. If you want a permanent, searchable database of everyone's CSD stats for the purposes of informing voters on RFA or somesuch (I believe that's what some people in the original thread were asking for) I could possibly have the bot generate one, but I haven't done something like that on this scale before, and I'm unsure of how much space I have for that sort of thing on my toolserver account. I'll have to look into this.
Of course, all of the above is subject to change. I'd appreciate any and all feedback anyone can think of before I do any actual coding.-- Dycedarg ж 04:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
← WP:Twinkle and most other tools will:
It may be easiest to tie in with the Abuse filter, rather than rely on edit summaries. It already has some filters that operate on csd tags. If it logged all edits that added or removed CSD tags, the bot could process that log. Much more reliable, and probably faster.— Kww( talk) 03:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I've thought more about how the bot should go about issuing notices. My current thought is this: Every three hours the bot will issue notices to everyone on its list who has not tagged a page for speedy deletion within the past twenty minutes. If only one or two instances were recorded, the bot will simply note them in its talk page notice and not create a subpage (assuming the second opt-in service outlined above is not requested by the editor in question), it will only create a subpage if there were three or more instances. This way editors will get relatively speedy feedback, they should only receive notices after they have finished their current session of CSD work (which will prevent them from getting multiple notices), the notices will not get overly long, and the creation of subpages will be kept to a minimum. Any thoughts on this new approach?-- Dycedarg ж 04:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand the point about needing to notify people if the article was deleted under a different reason than for which it was tagged. This doesn't necessarily mean that the tagger made a mistake and a bot shouldn't be implying they did. Articles can qualify under multiple criteria. -- JLaTondre ( talk) 21:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
In case people are curious about my progress, I am in the process of coding the bot. Once I've got it mostly written and am sure about my implementation, I'll be starting the BRFA discussion. I'll link to that from here once it's started. Also, I've decided to use regular scans of Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as a backup for when the the tagger doesn't use an edit summary the bot recognizes. It's less precise than I would like but it's the easiest way; in any case I don't think the increase in precision would be worth the overhead the abuse filter method would generate.-- Dycedarg ж 06:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
BRFA filed-- Dycedarg ж 04:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request is badly backlogged, and onerous to work on manually. There are certain category intersections for which the required crop size is uniform and thus amenable to automation: for example, non-free images that are in the category Category:Book covers tend to be for infobox use at a maximum of 250px wide. A manually-assisted bot could clear out all such requests very quickly I'd wager. Commons has a User:Crop_bot account which does similar things in enabling editors to use jpegtran and ImageMagick, and I'm sure the operator would be willing to have it adopted here. Comments? Suggestions? Skomorokh 20:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I want to create about 200 pages, one for each country, that are preloaded with basic text. The only difference between the pages would be the occurrence of the country name. Can I get a bot to do this?
I want a series of articles called "Environment of Foo" (where Foo is a country) in WP space. They will all contain the basic things such an article should have with the only difference being the country name. Once these articles are edited to, say, Start Class they can be migrated manually into article space. Obviously any articles that already exist in article space will not be needed.
Instead of articles being being created organically and anarchically I want to give a little bit of structure to the article creation process. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 10:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I am very opposed to this. There is absolutely no need to create about 200 stubs with zero information (if Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment/Environment of Foo#Template will be used. These articles should only be created on a case-by-case basis. Make them one at a time when you know they will be expanded. I know by experience that these articles will not be expanded unless your Wikiproject truly works on each one of them. Even the few that currently exist are in terrible condition.It does no good to just link to the country's articles for Flora, Fauna, Protected areas, and Environmental issues when this article itself will have nothing in it. And what will link to these articles? Will they be added to the county's main article or somewhere else? These are no reason to be looking for a sense of completeness to finish off the ones alreadey created. That sure isn't completeness to have a bunch of stubs that only link to other articles, and that infomation already exists in the articles it will link to. In many cases, it may be much more apprpriate to leave this information in the main country article than to make a new one. And one comment about the proposed template: Do not use
at the top of the article. Just wikilink it in the first sentence. Reywas92 Talk 21:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely concur with Reywas92. Autocreating sourceless stubs verges on disruptive editing, and certainly isn't a legitimate task for a bot.— Kww( talk) 22:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I retouched
File:Choco chip cookie.jpg and uploaded it as a PNG (also removed the white background) and I could use a bot help to replace all the old images superseded by the new one. Also, it seems that someone uploaded a bad version with the same PNG name to wikipedia so the file currently showing on wiki is far worse in quality than
the wikicommons file I uploaded. Would appreciate someone fixing this issue as well.
Warm regards,
Jaakobou
Chalk Talk 07:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Note: Image still needs all jpg uses replaced by the PNG file. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 15:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
A bot is requested to ensure that bad image tags ({{ badimage}}) on image talk pages are kept synchronised with MediaWiki:Bad image list. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I would like a bot that does the following. Runs periodically to find new articles on a given subject, specified by some string. Once the bot finds all the articles, saves the original link and sends a report to the user. Is that possible? The idea is to follow real-time the appearance of new articles on a given subject.
Perhaps the biggest WP:BLP problem is the addition of poorly sourced content to articles on living people. Now, while bots cannot tell a good source from a bad one, they should be able to detect when text is added without any references cited (i.e. no <ref> tags). I am wondering if a bot can monitor recent changes, in a manner similar to ClueBot ( talk · contribs), and when a chunk of text is added to an article in Category:Living people verify whether or not it included ref tags. As the risk of false positives is high (references may be added without ref tags, and added text could just be templates or metadata rather than contentious claims, for example), the bot would not make any edits to articles. Instead, unreferenced additions would then be reported (this is where it gets hazy), so that non-bot editors can check and see if they are inappropriate. The report could take the form of a dynamic feed or a continually updated list (though the latter might accrue archives of little use). The end result would be a less noisy and more refined version of Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Living_people. Is this something that could be useful? Skomorokh 02:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Similar to Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_20#WP:INDIA_Bot_Assisted_Assessment that was handled by User:Bot0612. Many articles are using Template:WikiProject College football, and are unassessed, but have an assessment in a different project. Could we do the same thing as the WP:India sweep? Make a run through all of Category:Unassessed college football articles, and for any page that has a "class=" rating for another project, assign the College football class to the highest rating in the other project(s)? We have a backlog of over 1000 unassessed articles that we're trying to clean, and I suspect this would take a sizeable bite out of the list. De Fault Ryan 21:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
/^Category:.* stubs$/i
, disambiguation pages by checking for
Category:All disambiguation pages, and redirects by checking for the "redirect" flag.
Anomie
⚔ 01:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
One last thing. Is it possible to also add |auto=yes
as well as the class rating for each article that the bot automatcially assesses? It would be nice to keep track of which ones were automatically flagged, for tracking and/or reassessment purposes. Thanks.
De
Fault
Ryan 18:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Done. Somewhere in the region of 485 edits made. [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 22:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Right now there are a massive backlog, massive enough that there are usually more articles created over time than there are enough devoted people to tagging them can handle and as a result the backlog just keeps growing. The task would be a lot simpler if we could have a bot go through and categorize articles that fall under the scope as low by default. Those that would be categorized this way would include: those with no importance tag, those with an importance tag, but nothing after it, those with an importance tag and improper importance listed (ie anything but low, mid, high or top) and all articles with the tag "list=yes". The latter would be per the wikiprojects importance level. Without this I do not believe we have enough staff for the number of articles to ever come close to completing the task. じん ない 06:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
dear friends : i wish to learn how to make a bot ....i'm basically a medico who was a computerscience engineering student , & presently a web site designer with basic knowledge in webdesigning ....& i serve here in wiki too ...so saw sme of te bot's working well in my area so me to wish to learn how to make one & how to make em work ....if someone wants to assist me i would appreciate it ....
regards
pearll's sun-- Doctor muthu's muthu wanna talk ? 08:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if I could have a bot that could help me with wikipedia. Like for example, if i make an edit that is spelled wrong, then the bot could correct it for me. Or if I need help I could just ask the bot? Get back at me on my talk page kaminski825 ( talk) 16:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
User:Nick deleted Category:Terrorists persuant to a recent CfD. The subcategories deleted as a result need (around 50-60) to be thusly emptied. Thank you. Sceptre ( talk) 22:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Per
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Images and Media#List of files comparison we would like a bot to go though
Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons and replace any file with both {{
Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
and {{
Should be SVG}}
with {{
Convert to SVG and copy to Wikimedia Commons}}
which is a single consolidated version of both those templates.
Peachey88 (
Talk Page ·
Contribs) 03:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
:Discussion is being held at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot 17. Peachey88 ( Talk Page · Contribs) 00:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I wonder whether a bot could be used to authorise the initiation/ termination of the tag that says that an article is about a person that has died recently, please? I have put my information about this at Wikipedia: Village Pump. The preceding unsigned comment was left by ACEOREVIVED ( talk · contribs) on 11:30, May 10, 2009.
I have 2 requests
1. add our banner {{ WikiProject Washington}} to all talk pages of all articles in the category Category:Washington (U.S. state) and all its sub categories
2. add our banner {{ WikiProject Washington}} and/or add |class=stub| to the banners off all articles within the category Category:Washington stubs and all its sub categories
EDIT: make sure it only gets stuff in the article talk namespace
-- Gold Man60 Talk 02:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I am looking for a bot to update the date
parameters in all the reference tags in the
U2 3D article from the
ISO 8601 format, to standard U.S. date notation, as per recommendation at {{
Citation}}. However, the accessdate
parameter should remain in ISO 8601 format, as per the same page. –
Dream out loud (
talk) 06:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed when I use search engines to find sources, very often my results are filled with sites that get their information word for word from Wikipedia. Is there a bot that checks our refs and ELs for such sites? If so, which one? If not, could one be made? Thanks! -- JBC3 ( talk) 03:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Would a bot please tag all articles in "
Category:Christian films" and "
Category:Catholic films" for the
Christian films task force, by adding |Christian-task-force=yes
to
Template:Film. See
here: (a) a user was planning to do it, but it appears will not be able to, and (b) skip the other sub-categories as we haven't fully defined our scope. Thank you.
American Eagle (
talk) 02:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Does this mean that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GoblinBot is no longer needed? – Quadell ( talk) 17:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Could {{ Vital}} be added to the talk pages of every article on this page which doesn't already have one, excluding nonexistant pages? I'd do it with AWB myself, but it seems kind of pointless to take up that much time when a bot could do it. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 01:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I've been dabbing the pages there since I saw this subject come up, and I fixed several... but I'm a bit concerned about the list at the moment. Several of the links don't point to what they're supposed to--for instance, Arabian was under "Horses", but of course that's not where the link goes. I changed it to Arabian horse, but I'm sure there are many more like it. And under chemistry there are alternate spellings for many elements, both listed. I think we need to go over them before the bot runs on this. I can do that this weekend. – Quadell ( talk) 21:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
(P.S. User:Splarka/dabfinder.js is your friend. – Quadell ( talk) 21:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
(Discussion migrated to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vital Articles#Proposed changes. – Quadell ( talk) 22:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC))
Apparently WP:WikiProject Russian history has been merged into WP:WikiProject Russia, so many pages contain both {{ WPRUSSIA}} and {{ WikiProject Russian history}}. Since {{ WikiProject Russian history}} was redirected to {{ WPRUSSIA}}, this ends up with two banenrs that are the same. Can a bot be tasked with removing the {{ WikiProject Russian History}} banner and if not there already, replacing it with the {{ WikiProject Russia}} banner?
76.66.202.139 ( talk) 08:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Change any instance in of id Software with idSoftware on any page with {{
WikiProject Video games}}
. Thanks,
MrKIA11 (
talk) 18:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Video games}}
are space-less, so to have conformity.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 12:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
|id Software=
to be replaced with |idSoftware=
, within {{
WikiProject Video games}}? Your original request sounded like you wanted instances of "id Software" replaced with "idSoftware" e.g. on articles. 「
ダイノ
ガイ
千?!」(
Dinoguy1000) 18:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject Video games}}
, and I'm going to estimate that is quite a few articles.
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 11:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
{{{id Software|}}}
to the end of the template with the other old parameters, I can do the rest. I guess a bot is not the best answer for this situation.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 14:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
id Software
now use idSoftware
.
[[Sam Korn]]
(smoddy) 10:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)