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 1 | Archive 2 |
Wikipedia emits many thousands of hCalendar microformats, mostly though infoboxes (see Category:Templates generating hCalendars), making the dates and other details of events machine readable and reusable. We have done so since around 2007. WikiProject Microformats has more information. They are parsed, among others, by Yahoo! and Google.
However, many of our hCalendar microformats do not include a valid date parameter, because the infobox does not use the {{ Start date}} sub-template.
I have a long-standing bot-request to apply this sub-template to relevant infoboxes, as seen in this example edit for a year, and this one for a full date. Additional details, lists of affected infobox templates, and some exclusions are at User:Pigsonthewing/to-do#Date conversions.
There are already
over 85,700 transclusions of {{
Start date}} (up from 54,500 this time last year); there is
no opposition when such changes are made manually; the vast majority - indeed probably all - of the templates in question stipulate the use of {{Start date}}
in their documentation, again with no controversy; as does
Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats; and
new or
expanded instances of such templates, created by many editors, routinely include it without drama. {{Start date}}
was
unsuccessfully nominated for deletion in August 2009 and the result was a speedy keep.
There have been at least three bots approved to carry out this task, but for a variety of reasons this has not yet been done. Despite this, some other editors have suggested that further demonstration of consensus is needed. No cogent reasons for not deploying the proposed changes have been given. A date sub-template must be used; there is currently no alternative method of emitting valid microformat-compatible dates from these templates.
There is prior discussion at:
Note that the proposed changes will not add a single microformat to Wikipedia; they will simply complete those which we already emit, but which lack the required date parameter. No visible changes will be made to any article.
May we now proceed with this simple, necessary, long-overdue and non-disruptive task? Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
{{Start-date|14 August 1997, 20:49:00|timezone=yes}} UTCso things are human as well as machine readable. Secretlondon ( talk) 21:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
I recently came across approximately 2,000 biographical stubs of 2012 Summer Olympic athletes, most of them "referenced" with a link to the home page given above. The editor who created these unreferenced biographies asked, rather than having me send them toward deletion, if I'd look into a bot to try and match them up with that site's Olympic athlete bios, something I was happy to try and do. Unfortunately, the site appears to be resisting my attempts to interact with it automatically, as is its right, no doubt. The following PERL/LWP::UserAgent code snippet gets an access denied:
$u = ' http://www.london2012.com/search/index.htmx?q=Maja+Jager'; my $ua = LWP::UserAgent->new; $ua->agent('Mozilla/9.876 (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686, en; rv:2.0) Gecko/25250101 Netscape/5.432b1 (C-MindSpring)'); my $response = $ua->get($u);
Any workarounds? Thanks in advance, -- j⚛e decker talk 00:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
[User-Agent] => Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0 [Accept] => text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 [Accept-Language] => en-us,en;q=0.5 [Accept-Encoding] => gzip, deflate [Connection] => keep-alive
I would like to request that the template name of Template:2008 Mediacorp Channel 8 be changed to 2007. It is clearly 2007 not 2008. 5:00 21 September 2012 (UTC)
As someone who tries to fulfill requests that are on this page, I'm not very happy with the direction this page is going in. Lately we've had extremely long discussions about whether a task should be done by a bot, and now we're even having a RfC on the page. I tried to remove the RfC, but I was reverted.
I've always seen this page as a simple way to find a bot operator once consensus for a task has already been determined (or if its uncontroversial, etc). If it hasn't, they should be sent to the appropriate village pump (or other forum) and obtain consensus, and then come back here. We even have a fancy template that tells users that!
By having an uncluttered page its much easier to quickly navigate through the various requests and figure out which ones still need a bot op, rather than scrolling through blocks of text, and have no clue on what to do.
Opinions? Legoktm ( talk) 14:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I think we should have a perennial requests subpage similar to the one at the Village Pump which has a load of things we always say no to which never work, so people who come up with the idea don't need to waste their time. Nice big link to it at the top, we won't have to keep giving them the same spiel of why we're not letting a bot do the task. Especially the welcome new users one. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (chatter) @ 20:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe someone here can answer these questions there Wikipedia_talk:User_scripts#Two_questions. — Cirt ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I had my bot put together a status page like the one they have for BRFA. It's located at User:APersonBot/BOTREQ status. Any opinions? I was thinking we could either put it at the top of BOTREQ, put it in a collapsed box at the top of BOTREQ, or make a userscript (for botops) that inserts it at the top of BOTREQ whenever they visit. Enterprisey ( talk!) (formerly APerson) 02:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC) Pinging a few editors that comment frequently: Anomie, BU Rob13, Σ, Omni Flames. Enterprisey ( talk!) (formerly APerson) 02:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I just suggested at WP:VPT#GA reviews that we should have a page to WP:Request a query based on the success of the similarly named page at Wikidata... and so now we have. Just wanted to let the kinds of persons who follow the page here know about it, in case someone comes along for a read-only type request. -- Izno ( talk) 17:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The instructions don't make clear to visitors what happens after a request is placed. Do all requests get denied or taken forward or do some linger here for months, or do requests that don't find favour with a bot programmer get automatically denied? Would be worth clarifying. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 10:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Is there an equivalent of this page for requesting scripts/tools? If not, I think it would be a really good idea. One of the benefits of this page is that ideas are all logged in a searchable history. It's also better than never having those requests articulated for lack of forum. czar 17:05, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
A request I put in just got archived by bot without action or a reply. A previous thread on this talk page led me to believe that requests generally linger until someone takes them up. Nobody has declared my request to be infeasible and it was nowhere near the top of the list. So what can be done to progress this? Spinning Spark 15:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
The |archivenow=
parameter in the archiving configuration template is useless as it is not taken in cosideration by any bot. It's not a valid parameter of {{
User:MiszaBot/config}} and is ignored by Lowercase sigmabot III . Also it is ignored by ClueBot III as this bot parses values of that parameter only inside of its own config template ({{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}}).
XXN, 19:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Why are we suppressing the TOC here exactly? Any objections to restoring the TOC? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
I've tried something. It's live, so you can check. Not sure I like it though. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 02:09, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Yeah I did. It was live for like, 15 minutes lol. As for how subsections would be organized, sometimes like
# | Title | Replies | Last editor | Date/Time | Last botop editor | Date/Time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Speedy AFC decline bot | 9 | Enterprisey | 2017-05-30, 21:48 | Enterprisey | 2017-05-30, 21:48 |
2 | Convert Template:This is a redirect to Template:Redirect category shell | 36 | MRD2014 | 2017-05-31, 23:30 | Anomie | 2017-04-16, 13:55 |
3 | "de-amazon" bot | 32 | Primefac | 2017-04-27, 11:58 | Primefac | 2017-04-27, 11:58 |
3.1 | Arbitrary break | |||||
4 | FA by length bot | 7 | XXN | 2017-07-07, 16:49 | None | — |
This has two big advantages 1) You can re-sort the table in the original order after you sorted it in other ways 2) you get links to sub-sections when they exist. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:14, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
FYI, I've requested semi-protection; see diff. -- Izno ( talk) 13:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Anomie, BU Rob13, Cyberpower678, HighInBC, MBisanz, MusikAnimal, Slakr, SQL, The Earwig, Xaosflux, Addshore, Hellknowz, Jarry1250, Kingpin13, MaxSem, and Maxim:
I updated the language in the Bot Request header. Pinging all active and semi-active BAG members for feedback. In particular, do we want to keep the computing ref desk mention there? It seems really odd. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:43, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Template:BOTREQ has been nominated for substitution. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. {{3x|p}}ery ( talk) 03:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I added an archive bot to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lead Improvement Team but the list of archives is not visible. Could you please fix the issue for us? Thanks! Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Could someone add a "Status" column in the bot overview table? Thanks! (and please don't take too long to respond; I don't want this archived) The 2nd Red Guy ( talk) 15:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
{{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}}
template (found in the lead section of a discussion page) has a parameter |archivenow=<!-- <nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved,{{Resolved,{{done,{{Done,{{DONE,{{already done,{{Already done,{{not done,{{Not done,{{close,{{Close,{{nd,{{xXxX</nowiki> -->
{{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
, {{
resolved}}
, {{
Resolved}}
,{{
done}}
etc. (case-sensitive) - will archive the thread that contains that template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 21:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)Is there a bot or tool that can replace the phrase Kingdom of Hawaii to Hawaiian Kingdom across Wikipedia without having to edit each page and switch it over? This is just a logistical inquiry before a request for consensus for such a change. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 21:01, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
pls remove ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
A recent removal from this page (in favor of WP:URLREQ) kind of illuminates a missing link to that page, and in general to some listing of bots currently operating or users with continued familiarity with a specific kind of bot-able issue, but whom do so on some ad hoc basis. Is URLREQ the only kind of page for that, or should we have something we can point users to in the description of this requests page? -- Izno ( talk) 18:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm unfamiliar with bots, and I don't know what's practical, so I'd like some feedback before I make this request.
Among moth articles, and I suspect many others, there are sometimes template links to Wikispecies and Wikimedia Commons but there's nothing at the target location in the sister project. I'd love to see a bot which could go through and check these and remove the deceptive templates.
Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Going to leave this here on the talk page, since it's obviously tangential. It seems like I often come across problems with bots on Commons that occur due to the very small number of people maintaining bots there, who either get burned out or go inactive. The most recent one is VICbot, which does essential maintenance for the Value Image Candidates process. The operator has long been inactive, so there are long-standing smaller issues with the bot that have gone unfixed, and now it has stopped working. Earlier this year the person running Picture of the Year announced they would no longer be running it. FPCbot and QICbot occasionally have issues ( Eatcha stepped up to take care of those if I recall correctly, but it would be a bad idea to rely on one person for everything). There's also been discussion about reworking the monthly photo challenge system (see the current system in action here, done manually, I think).
All of this is to say, if you, dear bot operator, are feeling bored and looking for new projects, let's talk on Commons. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok so I've read over the page, and re-read a bit of bot policy (hadn't done that in awhile).
So my question is this: are there any bots currently approved to help with tagging pages for a group nom XFD, and how would one go about requesting such? (I tried to a find a list of bot approvals, but outside of going to each bots' userpage, I didn't find anything besides a few examples.) Thanks much. - jc37 11:38, 9 April 2021 (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 1 | Archive 2 |
Wikipedia emits many thousands of hCalendar microformats, mostly though infoboxes (see Category:Templates generating hCalendars), making the dates and other details of events machine readable and reusable. We have done so since around 2007. WikiProject Microformats has more information. They are parsed, among others, by Yahoo! and Google.
However, many of our hCalendar microformats do not include a valid date parameter, because the infobox does not use the {{ Start date}} sub-template.
I have a long-standing bot-request to apply this sub-template to relevant infoboxes, as seen in this example edit for a year, and this one for a full date. Additional details, lists of affected infobox templates, and some exclusions are at User:Pigsonthewing/to-do#Date conversions.
There are already
over 85,700 transclusions of {{
Start date}} (up from 54,500 this time last year); there is
no opposition when such changes are made manually; the vast majority - indeed probably all - of the templates in question stipulate the use of {{Start date}}
in their documentation, again with no controversy; as does
Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats; and
new or
expanded instances of such templates, created by many editors, routinely include it without drama. {{Start date}}
was
unsuccessfully nominated for deletion in August 2009 and the result was a speedy keep.
There have been at least three bots approved to carry out this task, but for a variety of reasons this has not yet been done. Despite this, some other editors have suggested that further demonstration of consensus is needed. No cogent reasons for not deploying the proposed changes have been given. A date sub-template must be used; there is currently no alternative method of emitting valid microformat-compatible dates from these templates.
There is prior discussion at:
Note that the proposed changes will not add a single microformat to Wikipedia; they will simply complete those which we already emit, but which lack the required date parameter. No visible changes will be made to any article.
May we now proceed with this simple, necessary, long-overdue and non-disruptive task? Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
{{Start-date|14 August 1997, 20:49:00|timezone=yes}} UTCso things are human as well as machine readable. Secretlondon ( talk) 21:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
I recently came across approximately 2,000 biographical stubs of 2012 Summer Olympic athletes, most of them "referenced" with a link to the home page given above. The editor who created these unreferenced biographies asked, rather than having me send them toward deletion, if I'd look into a bot to try and match them up with that site's Olympic athlete bios, something I was happy to try and do. Unfortunately, the site appears to be resisting my attempts to interact with it automatically, as is its right, no doubt. The following PERL/LWP::UserAgent code snippet gets an access denied:
$u = ' http://www.london2012.com/search/index.htmx?q=Maja+Jager'; my $ua = LWP::UserAgent->new; $ua->agent('Mozilla/9.876 (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686, en; rv:2.0) Gecko/25250101 Netscape/5.432b1 (C-MindSpring)'); my $response = $ua->get($u);
Any workarounds? Thanks in advance, -- j⚛e decker talk 00:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
[User-Agent] => Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0 [Accept] => text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 [Accept-Language] => en-us,en;q=0.5 [Accept-Encoding] => gzip, deflate [Connection] => keep-alive
I would like to request that the template name of Template:2008 Mediacorp Channel 8 be changed to 2007. It is clearly 2007 not 2008. 5:00 21 September 2012 (UTC)
As someone who tries to fulfill requests that are on this page, I'm not very happy with the direction this page is going in. Lately we've had extremely long discussions about whether a task should be done by a bot, and now we're even having a RfC on the page. I tried to remove the RfC, but I was reverted.
I've always seen this page as a simple way to find a bot operator once consensus for a task has already been determined (or if its uncontroversial, etc). If it hasn't, they should be sent to the appropriate village pump (or other forum) and obtain consensus, and then come back here. We even have a fancy template that tells users that!
By having an uncluttered page its much easier to quickly navigate through the various requests and figure out which ones still need a bot op, rather than scrolling through blocks of text, and have no clue on what to do.
Opinions? Legoktm ( talk) 14:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I think we should have a perennial requests subpage similar to the one at the Village Pump which has a load of things we always say no to which never work, so people who come up with the idea don't need to waste their time. Nice big link to it at the top, we won't have to keep giving them the same spiel of why we're not letting a bot do the task. Especially the welcome new users one. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (chatter) @ 20:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
Maybe someone here can answer these questions there Wikipedia_talk:User_scripts#Two_questions. — Cirt ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I had my bot put together a status page like the one they have for BRFA. It's located at User:APersonBot/BOTREQ status. Any opinions? I was thinking we could either put it at the top of BOTREQ, put it in a collapsed box at the top of BOTREQ, or make a userscript (for botops) that inserts it at the top of BOTREQ whenever they visit. Enterprisey ( talk!) (formerly APerson) 02:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC) Pinging a few editors that comment frequently: Anomie, BU Rob13, Σ, Omni Flames. Enterprisey ( talk!) (formerly APerson) 02:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I just suggested at WP:VPT#GA reviews that we should have a page to WP:Request a query based on the success of the similarly named page at Wikidata... and so now we have. Just wanted to let the kinds of persons who follow the page here know about it, in case someone comes along for a read-only type request. -- Izno ( talk) 17:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The instructions don't make clear to visitors what happens after a request is placed. Do all requests get denied or taken forward or do some linger here for months, or do requests that don't find favour with a bot programmer get automatically denied? Would be worth clarifying. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 10:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Is there an equivalent of this page for requesting scripts/tools? If not, I think it would be a really good idea. One of the benefits of this page is that ideas are all logged in a searchable history. It's also better than never having those requests articulated for lack of forum. czar 17:05, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
A request I put in just got archived by bot without action or a reply. A previous thread on this talk page led me to believe that requests generally linger until someone takes them up. Nobody has declared my request to be infeasible and it was nowhere near the top of the list. So what can be done to progress this? Spinning Spark 15:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
The |archivenow=
parameter in the archiving configuration template is useless as it is not taken in cosideration by any bot. It's not a valid parameter of {{
User:MiszaBot/config}} and is ignored by Lowercase sigmabot III . Also it is ignored by ClueBot III as this bot parses values of that parameter only inside of its own config template ({{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}}).
XXN, 19:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Why are we suppressing the TOC here exactly? Any objections to restoring the TOC? Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 19:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
I've tried something. It's live, so you can check. Not sure I like it though. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 02:09, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Yeah I did. It was live for like, 15 minutes lol. As for how subsections would be organized, sometimes like
# | Title | Replies | Last editor | Date/Time | Last botop editor | Date/Time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Speedy AFC decline bot | 9 | Enterprisey | 2017-05-30, 21:48 | Enterprisey | 2017-05-30, 21:48 |
2 | Convert Template:This is a redirect to Template:Redirect category shell | 36 | MRD2014 | 2017-05-31, 23:30 | Anomie | 2017-04-16, 13:55 |
3 | "de-amazon" bot | 32 | Primefac | 2017-04-27, 11:58 | Primefac | 2017-04-27, 11:58 |
3.1 | Arbitrary break | |||||
4 | FA by length bot | 7 | XXN | 2017-07-07, 16:49 | None | — |
This has two big advantages 1) You can re-sort the table in the original order after you sorted it in other ways 2) you get links to sub-sections when they exist. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:14, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
FYI, I've requested semi-protection; see diff. -- Izno ( talk) 13:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Anomie, BU Rob13, Cyberpower678, HighInBC, MBisanz, MusikAnimal, Slakr, SQL, The Earwig, Xaosflux, Addshore, Hellknowz, Jarry1250, Kingpin13, MaxSem, and Maxim:
I updated the language in the Bot Request header. Pinging all active and semi-active BAG members for feedback. In particular, do we want to keep the computing ref desk mention there? It seems really odd. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:43, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Template:BOTREQ has been nominated for substitution. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. {{3x|p}}ery ( talk) 03:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I added an archive bot to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lead Improvement Team but the list of archives is not visible. Could you please fix the issue for us? Thanks! Zigzig20s ( talk) 08:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Could someone add a "Status" column in the bot overview table? Thanks! (and please don't take too long to respond; I don't want this archived) The 2nd Red Guy ( talk) 15:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
{{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis}}
template (found in the lead section of a discussion page) has a parameter |archivenow=<!-- <nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved,{{Resolved,{{done,{{Done,{{DONE,{{already done,{{Already done,{{not done,{{Not done,{{close,{{Close,{{nd,{{xXxX</nowiki> -->
{{
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
, {{
resolved}}
, {{
Resolved}}
,{{
done}}
etc. (case-sensitive) - will archive the thread that contains that template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 21:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)Is there a bot or tool that can replace the phrase Kingdom of Hawaii to Hawaiian Kingdom across Wikipedia without having to edit each page and switch it over? This is just a logistical inquiry before a request for consensus for such a change. KAVEBEAR ( talk) 21:01, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
pls remove ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
A recent removal from this page (in favor of WP:URLREQ) kind of illuminates a missing link to that page, and in general to some listing of bots currently operating or users with continued familiarity with a specific kind of bot-able issue, but whom do so on some ad hoc basis. Is URLREQ the only kind of page for that, or should we have something we can point users to in the description of this requests page? -- Izno ( talk) 18:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm unfamiliar with bots, and I don't know what's practical, so I'd like some feedback before I make this request.
Among moth articles, and I suspect many others, there are sometimes template links to Wikispecies and Wikimedia Commons but there's nothing at the target location in the sister project. I'd love to see a bot which could go through and check these and remove the deceptive templates.
Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨ 22:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Going to leave this here on the talk page, since it's obviously tangential. It seems like I often come across problems with bots on Commons that occur due to the very small number of people maintaining bots there, who either get burned out or go inactive. The most recent one is VICbot, which does essential maintenance for the Value Image Candidates process. The operator has long been inactive, so there are long-standing smaller issues with the bot that have gone unfixed, and now it has stopped working. Earlier this year the person running Picture of the Year announced they would no longer be running it. FPCbot and QICbot occasionally have issues ( Eatcha stepped up to take care of those if I recall correctly, but it would be a bad idea to rely on one person for everything). There's also been discussion about reworking the monthly photo challenge system (see the current system in action here, done manually, I think).
All of this is to say, if you, dear bot operator, are feeling bored and looking for new projects, let's talk on Commons. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok so I've read over the page, and re-read a bit of bot policy (hadn't done that in awhile).
So my question is this: are there any bots currently approved to help with tagging pages for a group nom XFD, and how would one go about requesting such? (I tried to a find a list of bot approvals, but outside of going to each bots' userpage, I didn't find anything besides a few examples.) Thanks much. - jc37 11:38, 9 April 2021 (UTC)