Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 43

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 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 main page.

I'm looking for a bot that can replace a link for me. About 200 MBTA articles have this old link: http://members.aol.com/eddanamta/busfiles/contents.pdf while the file is now located at http://mysite.verizon.net/rtspcc/MBTARouteHistory.pdf . Would it be possible for a bot to seek out and replace the old links? Thanks; Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

AWB can do it. --Σ ^talk_contribs 18:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Summary: migrate Vorlage:Normdaten to Template:Authority_control

Details: Libraries have been doing what they call authority control and wikipedia calls disambiguation, for a very long time, and without the notability criteria (all the VIAF libraries are copyright libraries, they have a legal requirement to carry vanity press) they have much, much largely collections of personal names than wikipedia does. ~160000 biographies in the de wikipedia have the template containing the authors' bibliographic identifiers; there is a corresponding template in the en wikipedia which has about a hundredth of the number. The task is to migrate the missing ones across. See also information at Wikipedia:Authority control/talk and Personennamendatei. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I request for having a bot that filters out userspace drafts that was made by an inactive user and wasn't edited for a long time. It also looks in the deletion log for the mainspace (example "Example" was deleted by AfD. It got moved to userspace. It is stale. The bot recognizes it at the deletion log). After, it puts a template on it ({{Abandoned userspace draft|deleted=<yes/no>}}.

• Estimated articles affected: 500 to 1000.

~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 17:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I personally think this is a good idea but I think you estimate is a bit low. --Kumioko (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

How much do you think? ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 17:34, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Im not sure. I thnk it was User:MZMcbride that did a report a while back that looked at all the subpages on all the inactive acounts (no activity for 2 years I think) and there were something like 200, 000 pages. Obviously a lot are other things but it seems like a lot would be sandboxes and userspace drafts. The problem though is determining which ones are userspace drafts and which are something in use on the userpage (like JScripts, counters, other tools, etc). I don't think well ever be able to clean them all up but it seems reasonable that we should be able to establish some criteria that would help us identify some garbage that can be spring cleaned. --Kumioko (talk) 17:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Without js, or css files. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 18:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Why bother? Probably the vast majority aren't hurting anything, and deletion doesn't save space in any way. Anomie⚔ 18:09, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It eliminates crud that generates on some reports, adds to the mess of pages and subpages that we have to navigate through, many contain deprecated our outdated templates, links or categories that if implemented cause problems and force us to have to clean up the mess. Using my garage as an example, I have the same amount of space whether my garage is empty or whether its stacked floor to ceiling with boxes...but its a whole lot easier to find things when I can see the back wall!. --Kumioko (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, WP:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts will make use of them. The WikiProject makes them suitable for mainspace and/or finds a new person. Deletion is not the answer for an harmless draft. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 22:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't in any way saying to delete them, I said that the bot would know if the article was deleted and assosiate it with the userspace draft. Deletion does nothing because sysops can still see them from the archives. I know from another project. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 22:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Is there a bot that removes non-userspace categories from userspace (by converting [[Category into [[:Category)? That seems like a low-hanging fruit from problems that stale drafts cause. And what about just giving editors an annual reminder of subpages (non.css/.js) they haven't edited in the last 12 months? The notice can equally advertise {{db-user}} and WP:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts. Rd232 ^talk 22:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

User:AilurophobiaBot used to do this, but has not edited since 2008. It was done with AWB and regex. ^Avic_ennasis @ 01:03, 4 Av 5771 / 4 August 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Another part would be tagging or deleting "articles" which are only redirects. I have some other example in my userspace:

• User:Mabdul/progress which wouldn't be useable for move (nothing happens on this page, although I'm using that pages for improving others)
• User:Mabdul/quriks-old, a page which could be easily fixed by placing a static-link to Talk:Quirks-mode

Question: what happens to pages which are named similar? (sandbox?) mabdul 23:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, no. That could be another task. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 11:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I also thought of 6 months. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 12:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Would it be possible for a bot to tag scotland=yes to the above template within all articles within Category:Football in Scotland and subcategories. Is this something a bot could help with. Warburton1368 (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

There are a little under 3000 talk pages that would need this edit. I'll be doing them bit by bit. You could also use AWB to do this, as well. :-) ^Avic_ennasis @ 00:51, 4 Av 5771 / 4 August 2011 (UTC)

If both {{IPA}} and {{Infobox language}} are transcluded in an article, could the parameter "notice = ipa" be added to the infobox? (Last line before the template closes, if that's workable.) This had been the default behaviour of the template, but the large majority of notices served no purpose. Now we trigger the notice when the IPA is actually used in an article.

If 'notice' is already used, say for 'notice=Indic', then please used 'notice2=ipa'.

I asked one week ago if there would be any objections to making such a bot request,[Template_talk:Infobox_language#notices_now_opitional] and there have been none. — kwami (talk) 10:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! — kwami (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

This is  Done ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:31, 7 Av 5771 / 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Before bots were used that much we tried setting up a system of comparing the FAs across different interwikis at Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages (now redirected). A bot could do this job much better than we were able to back then. The idea is that FAs in other languages have gone through some level of review and should be of a good standard - they could therefore be good sources of content.

An example action would be that it goes through the French FA list and compares each article to the English equivalent. This is probably only relevant to a small number of other languages with the larger interwikis being most useful.

Possible output would be:

• Is it a vital article? (useful for seeing if it should be a priority)
• Does the article exist? (useful for identifying significantly researched topics that we don't at all)
• Is it an FA/GA on the English wiki? (useful to discount it from being a likely source of further info)
• What is the size difference (useful to see which articles are significantly different in size)

I know that this is quite a challenging request compared to simple edits, so any thoughts would be nice to hear. It would be nice if we could trial this with just one interwiki. violet/riga _^[talk] 21:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to sound silly, but that would also helps in AfD discussions. A few moments ago in the helpchannel of the IRC we got a problem of a advertising article we couldn't find ANY reliable reference, but the article was available on ~15 other wikis. mabdul 00:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

When a talk page thread gets archived (manually or by one of the bots in Category:Wikipedia archive bots) this breaks the wikilinks incoming to this section. Is it possible to create a bot that for example watches the archiving edits these archiving bots perform and automatically repairs these links? I think this would be very useful, if I want to follow an archived discussion that is scattered over multiple archives. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Add {{subst:npd}} to all images whose description contains vicrailstations.com and notify the uploaders - several have already been deleted for a bad OTRS ticket, the others (100+) just say "used with permission" but never give proof.

Thanks. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like Mattbuck has already tagged them?  Chzz  ►  15:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

We have bots that maintain the interwikis to the other Wikipedias, however as far as I can tell the links to Commons via {{commons category}} and like are unmaintained. The categories are moved about on Commons - to disambiguate, or to implement a standard naming scheme, for instance, but the inward links from WP are not typicaly updated by the Commons users. Therefore its probably in WPs best interests to create a bot with similar functionality to the interwiki bots for this task.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

This is easily done with pywikipedia - do you have anything to show consensus for such a task, though? ^Avic_ennasis @ 22:42, 8 Av 5771 / 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope (didn't think of that(!)) - is that a question for Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)? Good to know its feasible though.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

VP sounds like a good place to ask. If there is enough support, I'll submit a BFRA for it. ^Avic_ennasis @ 11:26, 9 Av 5771 / 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Support as a Commons person. Although it would bring grubby wikipedian mitts into contact with our lovely photos... hmm... -mattbuck (Talk) 10:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Support By all means! I've noticed this problem everywhere and thought a bot was already running, but was inactive. If this bot is made, it should also include the variants in the "see also" section of that template documentation. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 20:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, would any bot be retroactive or only for new moves? — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 20:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Comment I'm not sure how the interwikis bots work, but this task may be bit more complex (as category renames are not logged page moves). Sometimes commons:Template:Category redirect is left behind, sometimes a disambiguation category commons:Template:Disambig is put in its place. Interwikis on Commons point to Wikipedia articles, so looking for links to en on Commons should work identically to looking on other wikipedias. I'm not sure which en templates link to Commons aside the ones I mentioned.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Currently, the way the bot would work is:

1. Get a list of all pages that currently transclude {{commons category}}

2. Check the EnWp link to the Commons category for a match.

2a. If a match is found, do nothing and move on.

2b. If a category redirect is found on Commons, it will update the link on EnWp.

2c. If neither a category nor a redirect is found (or if a disambig category is found on Commons), it will scan all the interwiki links from the EnWp page, and see if a Commons category is found on another wiki. If one is found, it will update the link on EnWp to match.

2d. If no category link is found at all, it will remove the template. Striked as this is currently not working correctly. ^Avic_ennasis @ 04:42, 10 Av 5771 / 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, how will it handle it if the EnWp link point to a disambiguation on Commons - for example as is the case at Warwick? I'd also suggest it modifies the template so it uses {{commons category|<name of commons cat>|<enwp article title>}} as this looks best for things like the bizarre ship convention on Commons.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Added disambig to step 2c. :-) And the default behavior is to keep the current title. Example is shown below. ^Avic_ennasis @ 15:10, 10 Av 5771 / 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Commonscat template is already on Warwick
Found link for Warwick at [[simple:Warwick]] to Warwick, England.


>>> Warwick <<<
- {{Commons category}}
+ {{Commons category|Warwick, England|Warwick}}

Comment: Bot: Changing commonscat link from [[:Commons:Category:Warwick|Warwick]] to [[:Commons:Category:Warwick, England|Warwick, England]]
Do you want to accept these changes? ([y]es, [N]o, [a]lways, [q]uit)

How about listing all the instances without a cat nor redirect on a page for manual processing, separated by whether the linked cat has a deletion log entry on Commons? — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 14:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd be able to implement this, but I'll see what I can do. :-) ^Avic_ennasis @ 15:10, 10 Av 5771 / 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Note: by chance, there is a related discussion at Commons:Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Commons-Wikipedia Category Interlinking and Translation Project. Rd232 ^talk 15:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Note that on Commons, most renamed categories have the new destination name in the deletion edit summary. Many categories on Commons link back to en:Wikipedia articles. --Foroa (talk) 16:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

With the inactive admins proposal having passed, and the bit to allow bureaucrats the ability to desysop people due to get flipped soonish, I had an idea. A bot - with the bureaucrat bit - would make the entire process of desysopping inactive admins much easier and much more routine; there wouldn't be any issues associated with an inactive admin getting forgotten for some reason. With all the fuss that happens over adminbots, though, I can imagine this would be more contentious, though, so I wanted to run it by people before even doing anything with the idea. I see a couple options for this:

Obviously, Option 1 will likely be the most controversial, but also the most useful; Option 2 would be my preferred alternative if the community doesn't approve of the idea of a cratbot; Option 3 seems kinda silly given that we can do it locally now (soon) but is still something to consider. So... thoughts? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

• I can get behind any of the options, with preferences in numerical order. (Options two and three do not necessarily need to be operated by a bureaucrat as long as it is run by a user who we can trust to ensure that the emails are being properly sent.) –xeno^talk 17:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC) On further thought - and especially because of the 'depersonalization' aspect of an automated process "terminating" an administrator highlighted below - I prefer #2. #3 probably won't fly because Stewards will likely decline to perform non-emergency desysops once bugzilla:18390 is fulfilled. –xeno^talk 18:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Under option #1, I would suggest that the bot perform removal of administrative rights only on the last day of each month for consistency and easier oversight (this means that some administrators will remain inactive slightly longer than one year). –xeno^talk 17:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
    • That would be easiest, yes, especially if the bot were to run on the toolserver using cron. As for your first comment, I'd still prefer it were run by a crat just because of the task it's performing; Option 3 would have to be, as the meta requests are supposed to come from crats. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:25, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
      • This bot has to be run by a crat. Not that anybody would notice it, but the user will be able to approve and suspend everybody whom he wants... mabdul 19:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
        • Only option #1 could do that. I agree with Hersfold that it would be ideal for any of three options to be run by a bureaucrat (and an absolute requirement in #1), but I do not consider it an absolute necessity for #2 or #3. –xeno^talk 19:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The CratBot idea should email each inactive administrator and post to their respectful talkpages if the procedure has not already been done. As an aside, perhaps a bot that could "clean" out Category:Wikipedia administrators would in the meantime be less controversial and could more easily gain consensus from BAG members. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 22:48, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

"The CratBot idea should email each inactive administrator and post to their respectful talkpages if the procedure has not already been done." Unless I'm mistaken, that's stated to be done no matter which option is used. ^Avic_ennasis @ 23:59, 8 Av 5771 / 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems like an interesting exercise. --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 04:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

How about simply making a database reports of which admins have been emailed and are eligible for desysoping? This could make the process completely transparent and possibly provide a way of privately reconfirming using an emailed link. Also using JavaScript (specifically &withJS=) it would add a one click desysop button for bureaucrats. — Dispenser 14:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

There's no records of who's been emailed, so I don't think that it'd be possible to do things as you're describing. However, your plan does sound similar to Option 2, unless I'm missing something. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 14:40, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The difference is usability and maintainablity. Sortable tables are easier to deal with then a bot clogging up a notice board. And due to the size of the database reports are probably more maintainable. — Dispenser 15:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, if we go with Xeno's suggestion, it would only post to the noticeboard at most once a month. I'm still not completely sure I understand your point, though. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Question:Would email replies be monitored? If so, what email address would the bot send the email from? (Or, perhaps, what would be the reply-to address?) wikien-bureaucratslists.wikimedia.org? ^Avic_ennasis @ 15:15, 10 Av 5771 / 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Good question. I like the idea of the reply-to to be set to the 'crat mailing list. The outgoing email address used by the bot should be forwarded there as well. –xeno^talk 15:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Hm. I generally prefer my bots to have the email go to my inbox, but if this bot were operated by a crat, it shouldn't be an issue either way as long as said crat was on the mailing list (not all are). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• FYI, I've placed pointers to this thread at WP:BN, WP:AN, WT:RFA, and WP:VPR. –xeno^talk 16:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I should have done that. :-/ Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• Comment: While I think that identifying and notifying inactive admins using a bot is a good idea, I think the actual removal of tools should not happen by bot - there are too many things that could go wrong and frankly, even if a crat operated the bot, I do not feel comfortable in knowing that a bug in the bot's code could end up desysopping all admins. For those reasons, I'd support option #2 (since we passed the proposal to allow crats to remove the tools, there is no reason to use option #3), probably with the caveat that the bot posts once a week only. Giving those admins another 6 days (at most) is not against the spirit of the policy and it's simply easier if the bot didn't spam BN with every case separately. Regards SoWhy 16:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

  What he said. --Dweller (talk) 16:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

  I also agree with SoWhy on this. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 06:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

A lot of this looks, frankly, like a solution in search of a problem, or using cannon to swat mosquitoes. Why is it necessary to make sure that admins are desysopped at exactly one year of inactivity? What's the point of daily or weekly runs, other than to generate nuisance traffic at WP:BN? Building an elaborate infrastructure seems to be an exercise more about giving the bot-writer a hobby and less about resolving any genuine difficulty. Looking at Wikipedia:List of administrators/Inactive, I see a 'backlog' right now of roughly 20 admins with a year or more of inactivity, dribbling on to the list at the rate of a very small handful per month.

If there must be a bot, generate a report quarterly – or at most monthly, but that's definitely overkill – and send out notifications (talk page and email) in a batch. All of a batch's notifications, responses, and actions can be tracked together, reducing the chances that something will slip through the cracks, and it means that two out of three months of the year, crats won't be dealing with this stuff. Yes, it may mean that an inactive admin lingers on for as long as fifteen months—so what?

Finally, it should go without saying that there aren't enough desysoppings to warrant giving a bot the ability to do that automatically. If the bot screws up even once, it will probably generate more work to clean up than doing all the desysoppings manually ever would. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:24, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Definitely agree that the bot need only run once a month or quarter. But there is a lot of paperwork involved in the inactivity process, and it would help if the bot would at least do everything up until flipping the switch. –xeno^talk 16:39, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Once a month is plenty (once a quarter may be too long), and I also agree that a bot could do the notifications very easily. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 06:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it feels a little friendlier if a real person does the actual desysopping. Otherwise, it seems kind of like we're ignoring what the inactive admin has done in the past by leaving a bot to "clean up" after a year. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 16:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Nicely put. I wanted to add that as well but I couldn't find the right words. Regards SoWhy 16:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Total agreement. I like the idea of the bot doing all the legwork, but it'd still be up to an actual human to flip the bit. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I think this pretty much sums up my sentiment as well. I wouldn't want a bot to go haywire and accidentally de-sysop all of the admins. I feel it is much safer to have the bot simply alert the bureaucrats via a neatly compiled list so that they can do it manually. Topher385 (talk) 20:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• Liking option 2 the best. As stated above, it would be good to have the bot do the paperwork, and then have a crat flipping the switch. The bot could place a single post at WP:BN the last day of the month with the users that qualify for desysopping, and then the bot could also update that post marking those that are done, that way crats could see with a glance if a name was skipped for some reason - frankie (talk) 18:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• I prefer the 2nd option. In that case, I don't think it's necessary for a crat to be the operator. An additional requirement could be to make the bot open source, to instate a feeling of transparency. — Waterfox ^~talk~ 22:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

• I too prefer option #2. Coming in, I was a supporter of #1, and I remained a supporter after reading the objections about the bot desysopping everyone (really not likely), but Fetchcomms' comment did it for me — if I were gone for a while and came back to find that I wasn't an administrator anymore, I'd be much more comfortable talking with the person who did it instead of talking with a bot operator who only removes rights him/herself in emergencies or at user request. Nyttend (talk) 04:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Option #1 seems to not be finding much favour. Option #2 probably does not require too much community input, since the community already approved the actual process. Hersfold, were you planning on programming the bot? I'd say run with option #2 for now - and run it on the last day of each month. –xeno^talk 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I support option 1, but I agree that it doesn't have much general support at the moment. I also support option 2 and 3 equally. Running on the last day of each month seems like a good idea - I presume it will both send out notices for upcoming expiries, and file BN requests for those notified the previous month in the same run? TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 00:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I would also prefer option 2. I don't like the idea of bot desysoping inactive admins. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 12:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Aye, I agree, option 2 seems to be the preferred method. I can certainly program the bot, but I'm currently working on another (semi-related) project so it may be a little while before it comes out. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Is it possible to create a bot that would automatically notify me of a new file uploaded to Commons when its name starts with BSicon and the filetype is .svg? I'm trying to keep the Wikipedia:Route diagram template/Catalog of pictograms up-to-date, and sometimes it's like trying to catch the wind... Useddenim (talk) 03:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe it is possible to make bot that can update Wikipedia:Route diagram template/Catalog of pictograms? Bulwersator (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd prefer something that is a notifier, as oftentimes it is necessary to correct categorization and/or file naming, especially when contributed by new editors. Useddenim (talk) 11:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

(For an example of why manual review might be a good idea, see Commons:File talk:BSicon exvBHFl.svg. Useddenim (talk) 12:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC))

Do you have an account on Commons? — Bility (talk) 18:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes: Useddenim (talk). Useddenim (talk) 18:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, if you add this code to your Commons .js, it'll add a link in your toolbox (only when you're on your user page) to check the last 500 changes in the upload log. It makes an alert with the list of files in wikicode so you can copy/paste it somewhere and show preview for a list of links. It could write to one of your user pages if you wanted or a plain list or whatever. Just let me know.

importScript('User:Bility/filefinder.js');

— Bility (talk) 20:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

My toolbox? My whaa? (Pardon me for being a dimwit – I'm gonna need some hand-holding here...) Useddenim (talk) 20:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, when you log into Commons, there's a toolbox (on the left in monobook and vector). There will be a link added to the list called "BS icon check" when you copy the code above into your skin's javascript page. If you're on the vector skin (default), then it would be at User:Useddenim/vector.js. — Bility (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, cut 'n' paste done, but when I run the script, I just get the message "No new files." Um, 500 uploads equals about what length of time? (See, I was thinking along the lines scanning back through the list of filename=BSicon*.svg for the last seven days.) Useddenim (talk) 21:04, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Looking at this page, 500 uploads doesn't go back very far at all. I'll see what I can do about going back for seven days. — Bility (talk) 21:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, modified it to look back through seven days. I also excluded uploads to an existing file, so only newly uploaded files will be in the list. It takes a while to run, about a minute and half on my computer. — Bility (talk) 22:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I must still be doing something wrong, as I'm still getting the "No new files." message, even 'though I uploaded   (ugBS2l) – a brand-new file – this afternoon... Useddenim (talk) 00:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

You may need to clear your cache (press Ctrl+F5). It found your file when I just ran it. — Bility (talk) 00:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Tested, worked Bulwersator (talk) 05:46, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Browser incompatibilities (Safari Version 4.1.3 running under Mac OS X v 10.4.11). Worked fine (altho' a little slow) when I switched to Foxfire. Useddenim (talk) 11:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

While doing cleanup of user pages [1], I have noticed many user pages and user sub pages from 2006 and above that are vandalism, copyvios, promotional articles, or attack pages. I have got a lot of them deleted, but of course there is no way that I will try to delete them all. That would be an impossible task for any editor including editors with administrator tools. My proposal is for a bot that can detect certain words or sentences that are common in vandalism, attack pages, and promotional articles while also having the bot be able to determine whether a user page has a copyvio. I think that maybe there would need to be a separate bot to detect copyvios in user pages. It would be even more useful for the bots to also place those detected articles in categories for easy access to editors and especially admins. I have no idea if these two tasks are impossible, but I thought that I would see about it. Joe Chill (talk) 03:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

A copyvio bot to go through the userspace is not a bad idea. Copyvio bots exist and are generally pretty good at catching stuff (CorenSearchBot for example; I run EarwigBot personally). The problem is that the userspace is really, really big. While someone could write a bot to go through the userspace as userpages are created, going through old content would probably take a very long time, when you consider loads on your search engine's servers (assuming that is how your copyvio bot works). The other task, about searching for certain key words, has a lot of room for error – I'd recommend something that makes a list of potential "bad pages" in its own userspace instead of editing the pages to add categories. — The Earwig ^(talk) 03:47, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

If you were to be able to show, using such a list, that a high percentage of pages with specific words are, in fact, vandalism, attacks or spam - you may be able to find consensus to tag pages with those words; however, the burden of proof for this is on you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm doing this message on behalf of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones and WikiProject Wikipedia-Books. It would really help us if a bot would assist us in our efforts in creating and maintaining Wikipedia books similar to Book:2008 Atlantic hurricane season. The request is a bit long, but that is mostly because I detailed exactly what would be involved.

In general books follow a certain structure detailed here, but summarized below.

{{saved book
 |title=
 |subtitle=
 |cover-image=
 |cover-color=
 |text-color=
}}

== Title ==
=== Subtitle ===

;Chapter 1
:[[First article]]
:[[Article 2|Second article]]
:[[Third article]]

;Chapter 2
:[[Fourth article]]
:[[5th article|Fifth article]]
:[[Sixth article]]

[[Category:Wikipedia books on topic]]

Hurricane seasons are rather well-structured, so it's easy for a bot to create a well-structured book on them.

The {{saved book}} template should be filled as follows

{{saved book
 |title=YYYY Atlantic hurricane season
 |subtitle=
 |cover-image=<!--Image from infobox in the YYYY Atlantic hurricane season article -->
 |cover-color=
 |sort_as=Atlantic Hurricane Season, YYYY
}}

The beginning of the book proper should be

==YYYY Atlantic hurricane season==
;Overview
:[[YYYY Atlantic hurricane season]]
:[[YYYY Atlantic hurricane season statistics]]
:[[Timeline of the YYYY Atlantic hurricane season]]

If the articles don't exist, they should just be omitted. This covers the first half of the book, and no special logic should be required here.

Then comes the "core" of the book, the individual hurricanes in the season, along with their meteorological history. This is a bit trickier. The general structure is

;Individual hurricanes
:[[List of storms in the YYYY Atlantic hurricane season]]
:[[Hurricane A]]
:[[Meteorological history of Hurricane A]]
:[[Hurricane B]]
:[[Meteorological history of Hurricane B]]
...

As before, articles which don't exist should be omitted. These articles can be retrieved from several places, but the best would probably be the YYYY Atlantic hurricane season article itself and the {{YYYY Atlantic hurricane season buttons}} template. The hurricanes should be listed chronologically in the book, and it should be possible to determine the order based on either the article or the template.

For the finishing touches, the bot should fetch any additional article in Category:YYYY Atlantic Hurricane season (but not its subcategories) and place them in a "Miscellany" chapter. And then it should categorize the book in Category:Wikipedia books on Atlantic hurricane seasons and Category:YYYY Atlantic hurricane season.

;Miscellany
:[[Foobar 1]]
:[[Foobar 2]]
:[[Foobar 3]]

[[Category:Wikipedia books on Atlantic hurricane seasons]]
[[Category:YYYY Atlantic hurricane season|β]]

After this is done, the bot should tag the talk page of the book with

{{WikiProject Wikipedia-Books|class=Book}}
{{WikiProject Tropical cyclones|class=Book}}
{{WikiProject United States|class=book}}

as well as add {{Wikipedia-Books|YYYY Atlantic hurricane season}} to Category:YYYY Atlantic hurricane season.

Books on the Pacific seasons would follow the same logic, but with "Pacific" instead of "Atlantic". There are other hurricane seasons out there, but let's start with these as they are the simplest and best-structured. Hopefully I didn't overwhelm you too much with this request. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello all. I would like a bot to assist with the matching of our articles on Royal Navy warships to the data available at Wikipedia:GLAM/NMM. This would be valuable in helping that project, in particular because it would then make it very easy for the National Maritime Museum to make use of Wikipedia articles! I think the specification for what I would ideally like is as follows, though I'm not at all familiar with Wikimedia scripting so I may be talking nonsense.

1. Take a set of data which is essentially the same as the first three columns of the Wikitable here: Wikipedia:GLAM/NMM/Warship_Histories_Done/File_1 - this data could be supplied in CSV or Wikitable format.
2. Populate a Wikitable with that data and append;
   1. The closest article match for the vessel record in question, for instance by searching for articles name
      1. HMS Such-and-such (DATE)
      2. HMS Such-and-such (DATE SIMILAR)
      3. HMS Such-and-such
      4. English ship Such-and-Such
      5. and so on - there are more potential cases ee.g. (HMCS, HMAS, Scottish Ship, Such-and-such (Ship) )
   2. If a matching article is found, the article length and assessment class
   3. If a matching article is found, a flag to indicate the presence or absence of Template:WarshipHist
   4. If no article is found, a redlink.
3. Periodically update the Wikitable when;
   1. A new article is created fitting the matching criteria
   2. Template:WarshipHist is applied to an article already listed.

If you are able to assist, even if only in part, I would be extremely grateful. Regards, The Land (talk) 19:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

AFAIK there is no active bot with this task, bot on plwiki is quite useful and I think this idea may be useful also for enwiki. It is possible that on request bot operator will extend this task to enwiki. Bulwersator (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to have a bot created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanjamiesonkyser (talk • contribs)

Sorry, we're out of parts at the moment. Ask again in about six months. Cheers, — Bility (talk) 22:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Actually, you can have one. Just hop over to [2] or [3] and I'll see you in a few weeks. --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 01:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The following message was posted to our helpdesk [4]  Chzz  ►  05:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

---

Dear friends, during last weeks I was involved mainly in adding the German version of this template de:template:Normdaten to dozens of pages; adding the required parameters where required. Today, I activated the linking to WorldCat identities containing the works from / about authors. I never have seen trailing zeros as template parameters to the third part of parameter LCCN.
example: Abraham Lincoln#normdaten contains now the link http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-6779 Lincoln, Abraham 1809-1865
Works: 22,532 works in 36,882 publications in 66 languages and 1,323,107 library holdings
This information is very important for readers. They will find books in smaller languages.
The template did not work from the beginning. It was necessary to remove the leading zeros before the third subpart of parameter LCCN:
{{Normdaten|LCCN=n/79/006779}} changed to {{Normdaten|LCCN=n/79/6779}})

Bot support request: Please remove such leading zeros at all pages using template:Authority control. Thanks in advance!
user:Gangleri ‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 05:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I've had a look at this, and it seems that any usage of Template:Authority control (or the redir, Template:Normdaten) needs to be checked for leading zeros in the 3rd bit of the "LCCN" parameter, and - if there are leading zeros - they should be removed. I think. As that user did on the Abe Lincoln article, [5].

Should be easy enough with AWB-regex?  Chzz  ►  05:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done ^Avic_ennasis @ 07:58, 18 Av 5771 / 07:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Best regards user:Gangleri ‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 08:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to see a bot that follows wikilinks which link to specific sections and then adds something similar to what I did here.

==The schooner ''Allen Gardiner''<!--- Note: Articles link to this section, do not change the section heading without using {{anchor}}--->==

It would be even better if the bot could automatically create anchors, but I am not sure if either of these things are possible. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

This would be only useful if there is already a wikilink / redirect already linking to it. mabdul 12:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Thats why I stated that I would like it to follow a wikilink and place the notice. For example, the Bot notices the wikilink South American Mission Society#The schooner Allen Gardiner and follows the wikilink to place the notice. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Various bots have worked on this issue in the paste:

• User:Anchor Link Bot inserted a comment after the section header of the target page as you're asking. It racketing up nearly 10,000 edits before the operator disappeared in 2007.
• User:WildBot left talk page comments on the source page of which links were broken. When its operated disappear in 2010, it left us with about 6,000 pages still needing cleanup.

The big problem with both these bot is they place a much larger load on the server than what should is necessary. Instead of directly linking to page sections we pipe it through a redirects we can reduce server request by 50 and the payload even more (~100x decrease). This method has other advantages such as making it easier to change section names or spin off a section into its own article. I've written a broken redirect checker which is linked from WhatLinksHere. (BTW, could someone update MOS:SECTIONS to recommend piping through a redirect?) — Dispenser 20:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

One question. If I were to pipe through a redirect, I would see a section I want to link to, create a redirect to that section, and then link to the redirect? Ryan Vesey Review me! 22:24, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes. You could also look at What Links Here and click "Show redirects only". It could also be made easier by writing a user script to add a button next to the section [edit], which shows all the section redirects (code already exists in Dab solver). — Dispenser 23:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Wilbot was working AFTER a link broke. What about a bot doing something to prevent this BEFORE a link broke/will brake? mabdul 00:01, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I have a script which replaces section links with redirects. Human intervention is occupationally needed as the obvious redirect isn't point to the correct section.

We could scan the dumps, duplicate the pagelinks table with fragments, build a page fragments table, filter out the 20-60% that can be automated by a bot, and build broken redirect and recommended new section redirects table. Much code is already written, the hard part is finding someone willing create at least 140 redirects a week (for months on end). Until then it makes little sense squandering donated Toolserver resources doing this. No WP:I am bored yet. — Dispenser 17:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

:So where is the script? Is is already tested? mabdul 20:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• I think it would be far more desirable to add the comment on the next line after the section header, not within the section header. That is just ugly, and could make it much harder for future bots to correctly parse section headers. —SW— ^gossip 23:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

This is a simple request. It is to put a colon for the categories in an userspace draft and after, it notifies the user. ~~Ebe123~~ ^talk_Contribs 12:06, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Which option is better, putting in the colon or using the html comment tags to hide them? violet/riga _^[talk] 12:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments, I'd say. –Drilnoth (T/C) 17:28, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I would say colons because people then could see without putting &action=edit. ~~Ebe123~~ ^talk_Contribs 21:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Colons, as far as I remember correctly, the AFC helper (which many userspace drafts go through) is automatically changing the colon-version, but not removing the commented out versions... mabdul 21:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, after a short investigation I can say that the JavaScript User:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js (the AFC helper which is really usable for reviewing AFC submissions) definitely removes the colons in the categories after accepting a submission, but not checking if categories are commented out (and thus don't remove the comments). mabdul 10:47, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I have thought of the possibilities of a new bot, but I am unsure if it is possible. I would like to see a bot that would place talkback messages on the talk pages of users involved in a discussion. A {{talkback bot}} ({{tbb}}) template would need to be created. When that template gets placed directly behind a user's signature, the bot would place a talkback message on their user talk page linking to the section. Is it possible? Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Possible? Yes. Desirable? I don't know. That could get very annoying and would fill talk pages with not-very-useful templates that would remain there after their one-time use. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I would hope that this doesn't get used in a more common way than a normal talkback message would. The idea was initially created because many editors pose questions at WP:HD and don't appear to see the response. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I personally hate the talkback template, but provided there's a consensus for such and (more importantly) this worked as an opt-in thing where you had to request getting the talkback, it shouldn't be too problematic. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems that something like this was proposed before by Rich Farmbrough called Mirror threads (BRfA here), but the BRfA expired. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 00:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Why not also add a "whitelist" (opt-in preferences which every user has to "activate") and a blacklist (for the people who don't want talkbacks)? I like the idea for helppages like WP:HD or Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions. mabdul 10:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

We are still looking for a bot to automate some tasks for the US Collaboration of the month if anyone is interested. Noomos was working on one but he withdrew the request due to being busy in real life. Here is a link to the task he started Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Project Messenger Bot 2 if anyone is interested.

Basically the request would automate the notification of users and WikiProjects if an article is submitted.

1. It would generate a message if the article is submitted as a candidate
2. It would generate a message if the article is selected for the month
3. It would generate the message to the WikiProjects associated to the article submitted and to the members of the collaboration.
4. Noomos suggested that the bot run once per day which is fine with me.

If anyone is interested I can provide the messages that we would like to be sent. --Kumioko (talk) 20:15, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind looking into this. Shouldn't be too difficult to put together & operate. I will look into building it over the weekend; can you sort out the text you want somewhere? --Errant ^(chat!) 12:51, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Great thanks, if it helps Noomos posted his code in the link above. --Kumioko (talk) 12:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to have a bot go through the book namespace and see whether or not it has one of the related Wikipedia "book" templates, such as {{saved book}}, and then populate a new category created within Category:Wikipedia books (tracking and cleanup categories) with those books that do not contain such a template. An experienced user would be able to check pages in the new category for errors and fix them, if possible, or mark for deletion if they are unusable. I've seen a fair amount of crud that pops up there, when new users misplace their articles because they do not understand our namespace scheme. TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 12:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

It's a good idea. Having a list instead of a category would also work. User:Zetawoof might help with this. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:16, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Unless I miscounted something, there are only 22 pages in the Book namespace that do not have {{saved book}}. I've listed them below. :-) ^Avic_ennasis @ 07:16, 20 Av 5771 / 07:16, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. This is a re-request as I was seriously hoping to get a bot operator to do this and nearly 6 months has passed and nothing has been done. I was wondering if you could help me organize a bot to draw up lists of listed buildings in the UK from http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/. We are missing a massive amount of content and I think we should have at least lists like the lists of National Registry US places for the British equivalent.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hm sounds interesting.... Rich Farmbrough, 20:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC).

Reasonable idea, but the list should be restricted to Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings (about 9% of all listed buildings). These are generally going to be notable enough to sustain articles, although some smaller structures may not be. With Grade II listed buildings, notability is not inherent. Some structures may be notable enough to sustain an article, others will not be. Mjroots (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree with that, a good idea Dr Blofeld. Malleus Fatuorum 18:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

OK by me, but I'm not sure what I could contribute. Agree with Mjroots that it should be limited to Grades I and II*. For Grade II buildings, we can always argue notability, but not all such buildings merit a separate article IMO. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps for some of the places which have just a few Grade II listed buildings without much info on them it would be better for articles like Grade II listed buildings in Bournemouth or something.I think that alist of all listed buildings would be very useful as a reference point, even if many of the Grade II listed buildings ar enot notable noeugh for separate articles. I think tabled lists which intiially have location and geo coordinates would prove pretty valuable. What I'd suggest is that such tabled lists would eventually be developed to have a summary of the buildings, much like Hassocks has done with Brighton landmarks and that if there is enough info then create separate articles. So what I'm proposing is that we have a full lists of Graded buildings of all types just like Grade I listed buildings in Brighton and Hove, Grade II* listed buildings in Brighton and Hove and Grade II listed buildings in Brighton and Hove: A–B. I'd say quite a lot of Grade II listed buildings might deserve a brief summary even if not notable for a full article and would be very encyclopedic and comprehensive if it was to list them like this. So initially the bot would create the lists with name and coordinates and like the rest of wikipedia count on them being developed with information summaries over time. The problem though as said above is that some Grade II listed buildings are nothing more than small residential cottages... I suppose one could argue that being officially listed would make it notable enough for a brief mention in a list, even if many grade II listed buildings will never have enough info for a separate article.I think Hassocks work on Brighton buildings is the ideal of what we want for everywhere in the UK... I'd say for a starting point though we get a bot to list all Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings in the UK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:08, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

A very good idea, I think - it will help us figure out what we have and what we're missing. Support. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Some grade II listed building are things like cannons used as bollards, gravestones, telephone boxes etc, etc. Mjroots (talk) 22:04, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Well I've seen barns in the middle of Iowa with full articles, so what the heck eh!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm playing with code for this. Is the idea is to create a table-style list like this? Should it be at the county level or split like it is now, where some are at the county and some are at the locality? How much information to fetch? If someone could use this as an example to create the article(s), it'd give me an idea of what the bot should be doing. tedder (talk) 05:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd say that the lists are going to need to be at district council level. Those lists for Unitaritan Authorities may get long and need subdivision, but that bridge can be crossed later. Mjroots (talk) 06:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I apologize (apologise) for my Americanness, but district council is the level smaller than county, right? tedder (talk) 06:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes. In the case of West Sussex, my home county, for example, there are seven local authorities of various types (two boroughs and five districts). I will make more extensive comments on this proposal (which I fully support) in a few hours. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 09:01, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello again; here are my thoughts/comments, based on work I have already done with listed buildings of all grades:

• I recommend the use of Heritage Gateway (HG) rather than British Listed Buildings (BLB). HG is English Heritage's own definitive site for listed buildings; BLB merely mirrors the information from it and takes commercial advertising. A building's ID number, which would presumably be used by the proposed bot when it compiles its lists, is the same on both HG and BLB, but the format of HG URLs is more consistent: so, for example, www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=481395&resourceID=5 takes you to the Pelham Institute, while www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/en-481395-pelham-institute-brighton is the equivalent on BLB. Simply changing the six-digit number in the HG URL will work.
• Lists should certainly include Grades I and II*, per Mjroots; lists of Grade II-listed buildings, per Dr B, would be desirable as well (but would not need to have articles for many, or even any, of the structures listed therein). From the start, I took the view that Grade II structures can justifiably have at least a sentence written about them in a "Notes" column, even if the HG ref is the only published reference to it, so I agree with Dr B's comment that "I suppose one could argue that being officially listed would make it notable enough for a brief mention in a list, even if many grade II listed buildings will never have enough info for a separate article".
• Whether lists should be at county, local authority (district/borough) or even parish level, and which grades should be included, needs to be as flexible as possible because of the wildly differing lengths. To take some Sussex examples, Crawley has three Grade I buildings, 12 Grade II*s and 85 Grade IIs, so the best choice was to create a single list. Meanwhile, as mentioned by Dr B, I split Brighton and Hove into Grade I, Grade II* and ten Grade II lists (seven are under preparation) because there are more than 1,200 overall. Somewhere like Hastings, which has only one Grade I building but >500 Grade IIs, would be very awkward to split.
• As Dr B says, a useful starting point would be to grab the name, the coordinates or grid reference (coordinates can be worked out from that, and HG gives ten-digit grid refs which give a high degree of precision), the grade and the HG reference number, ideally formatted into a WP-suitable reference if possible.
• To Tedder: a table looking something like the Los Angeles example would be good. The format that has generally been used for British listed buildings is similar: the examples listed above, and others such as Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde, give an idea of the layout.

Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, the information at HG is much saner and it's basically the source. I like that. On the other hand, I can't see how to browse it. How do I see all buildings? I think I can semi-intelligently decide how large to make the tables (choose groupings at the parish/district/county levels). tedder (talk) 02:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

• Please proceed with caution, both databases contain lots of errors. this temple is actually in Hampton not Teddington. I suggest a bot would be inappropriate as the source is not sufficiently accurate. ϢereSpielChequers 22:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Comment/questions from across the pond I whole-heartedly support the idea of using a bot or some other programming approach plus editors making manual edits, to create usable lists of Listed buildings. Doing similarly in the U.S. for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-listed places has worked out well, in creating tables during 2009-2010 that are included in county- and city-organized NRHP lists indexed from List of RHPs. These list-articles have developed nicely, further, since. With a copy of the National Register's NRIS database, editor User:Elkman programmed a "table-generator" and made output available at an off-wiki website; I and other editors cut-and-pasted it over into the relevant Wikipedia pages. Would the process here work similarly? Is the English Heritage database downloadable, or could it be obtained and given to a programmer?

Also, the U.S. initiative also covered development of corresponding disambiguation pages. Editor Elkman generated a generator to draft text for disambiguation pages, where there were more than one NRHP-listed building having exactly the same name. I programmed a different version of such a generator, too. All of these results have been used to start or expand disambiguation pages covering NRHP listed places. Probably same should be done for Listed buildings, too. There are multiple buildings having exactly the same name, within the English Heritage database, correct? --doncram 20:13, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Active Wikipedia bots and Category:Inactive Wikipedia bots are not very useful, since they rarely are maintained and cleaned up. Could someone make a bot that check every bot's Category:All Wikipedia bots edit history, and appropriately categorizes them? A bot can be considered inactive if it didn't edit in the last month (or whatever BAG feel's a good cut-off). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

That's the bot operator's job, isn't it? To mark its controlled bot as inactive or active? --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 17:54, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I suppose, but the fact remains that when bot operators go missing, they don't really bother updating things. Hell even active bot owners often don't bother updating their old bots. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:58, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Ill generate a report in a sec. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 17:59, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

No, we bot-updated that category a while back. It's relatively accurate. I think we did six months? (I say we, I think it was originally a me-and-Richard0612 initiative, before he disappeared without a trace.) - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 18:01, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Well for example, 7SeriesBOT is listed as active and hasn't edited since last October. Or AmphBot which hasn't edited since May 2010. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting it doesn't need to be done again, only that there is a limit to how useless it is (I don't think the category is really that useful, but the userpage box is). - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 18:07, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Well all I know is that those categories should be kept as up-to-date as possible. It would definitely be very useful to me right now... Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. It's a fairly easy run, as I recall: I did it with AWB (although I probably assumed that inactive=>active was handled by the operator). - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 18:19, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Script running, Ill post the results when complete. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 18:20, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding 7SeriesBOT above, it is only supposed to delete G7 nominations, as can be seen from the bot's associated log. Activity can't solely be based on the last edit; it should also be based on log entries. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 00:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I have been repetitively performing this task, converting:

==foo==
 {{Foo and parameters}}  
Junk 
:more junk

To this:

==foo==   
Junk 
:more junk 
::my junk

These edits occur on userspace discussion pages with the {{foo}} template. It seems like a task that is easily searchable and executable to those with skills and prowess. Thanks Cliff (talk) 04:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

This can be done with some clever regex and WP:AWB. What (specifically) do you want done? I'm pretty good at hacking regex together. Tim1357 ^talk 04:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I have begun removing {{requested move}} templates from user drafts. See this one for example. I want to remove the template and append the following message with my signature.

Request Removed. Thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, creating new articles is beyond the scope of the Requested moves process. Please submit your request to Articles for Creation. You can do so by adding {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article. Feel free to contact me on my talk page with any questions. Happy editing. Cliff (talk) 04:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Cliff (talk) 04:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, great idea. I thought of this doing manually, but I wasn't really aware that such tasks should be done by the WP:RM-team. mabdul 13:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit summary should read "Request removed: Submit to AFC" or something similar. I'm also thinking that the comment added under my name, or the bot's name, should have a bolded statement to begin. I'll edit the above to reflect this. 19:42, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I see another problem: normally AFC submissions are at the talk-page area (because IPs are not allowed to create "non-talkpages). What happens then to the talkpage? It should be deleted, maybe saved somewhere temporarily and / or move to the talkpage of the user (after leaving a notice, similar to Pentan-Bot it does after he moved the pages when it is at the wrong place) mabdul 20:38, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

The bot we're discussing is not going to move pages. I'm not sure what you're saying. Cliff (talk) 14:28, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I think Mabdul refers to the fact, that AfC reviewers move submissions to the Wikipedia talk namespace. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 08:06, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes. Thanks Armbrust. I hadn't in mind that not everybody is aware of the AFC procedure. Te question/problem still remains: We have a userpage with a possible talkpage (maybe more content than the requested move-request) and an userpage with content: The userpage would be moved to the "Wikipedia talk"-area, but what happens to the original talkpage? mabdul 14:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

This bot should act only on pages in userspace. It would search for the {{Requested move}} tag in user talk space, usually on a subpage, and remove it, appending my message. It should ignore the template on user pages because those are incorrectly placed and will be handled differently. It has nothing to do with the AFC process, except to instruct users with drafts of new articles how to submit their creation. IP editors are not involved because they usually do not create article drafts in their userspace. If the article gets moved from userspace as part of the AFC I assume they move the attached talk page. There is no duplicate talk page because all talk has occurred in user talk. Does this address your concern? Cliff (talk) 18:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

"If the article gets moved from userspace as part of the AFC I assume they move the attached talk page." and how? That is "my" problem. submissions/drafts are placed at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pagename and thus there no room for an existing talkpage. mabdul 19:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll investigate how others have done this. Cliff (talk) 19:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, my assumption was incorrect. See this user talk page as an example. That page is left in its location while the article in question is moved to AFC. The user subpage is redirected to the AFC as you will see. Here is a page that has passed AFC. The editor who moved that article from AFC to mainspace did not move the user's old talk page. Here is a link to the old talk page, in userspace, where it still resides. I'm not sure if that's ideal, nor if that's what's supposed to happen. Cliff (talk) 19:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Template magic could be used here. If a RM template is in User/User talk space it can show the message that is desired about the AfC process. Rich Farmbrough, 18:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC).

So I propose: delete the talkpage if there is only the move request. for more content we need a more suitable possibility (like moving the Talkpage by the bot to the Wikipedia space and later revers (if this is possible)... mabdul 18:27, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I have some beta code ready-ish. Just to summarize, the edit will look for the {{requested move}} template in the user talk namespace. On each occurrence, it'll remove the template, and add the notice drafted by Cliff at the bottom of the page. Is this correct? — Kudu ^~I/O~ 02:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Usually that will be correct. the only problem I might see is if the ==Requested Move== section is not the only section on the page. In that instance the Notice belongs at the end of that section and not necessarily at the end of the page. Cliff (talk) 13:27, August 23, 2011

User:Josh Parris, had this very useful bot (User:WildBot) that would patrol for disambiguation links. How about we resuscitate the idea?

• When a link to an implicit disambiguation page is found, mark it with
  • Article{{disambiguation needed|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}<!--If the link to this disambiguation page is intentional, use [[Article (disambiguation)|Article]].-->

Basically, take the article, retrieve the bluelinks (or maybe just whatever matches [[Foobar]] (or [[Foobar|Barfoo]]), ignore those ending with (disambiguation) and cross-check them against Category:All disambiguation pages. If there's a match, there should be a ^{[disambiguation needed]} added. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

+----------+-------+
| Watchers | Pages |
+----------+-------+
| 0        |   520 |
| 1        |  1855 |
| 2-3      |  1742 |
| 4-7      |   656 |
| 8-15     |   469 |
| 16-31    |   443 |
| 32-63    |   344 |
| 64-127   |   237 |
| 128-245  |   100 |
| 261-505  |    20 |
| 515-867  |    10 |
+----------+-------+

(How many is this year?) WildBot has edited 37,429 individual pages, there are currently 11,892 talk page template remaining. This mean that ~31.8% of noticed were ignored, but it isn't like they're weren't watched. Light-emitting diode, Spice Girls, Texas, Vampire are among those not fixed after a year and have over 300 watchers.

However, lets just explore the idea a bit. So lets say we're doing this for new users recruitment. We create a new template (we can't use {{dn}} as it for human use) and we link to Dab solver with an graphical edit intro instead a wordy instructional page. The template also needs to stand out to attract enough attention. Then we'd need to keep attention of our new editor possibly by suggesting other pages or by welcoming them the next day. — Dispenser 21:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

WildBot left the messages on the talk pages, which isn't really the most highly-visible pages (if you missed the notice in your watch list the first time (if you were away that day, or if you screen out bot edits), then you're very likely to never notice the talk page notice). These would be in-article notices/templates and would have a much bigger chance of being picked up. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:52, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

BTW, apparently Dispenser has as script for this, but he needs someone with TS access to run it. I would, but I don't have TS access. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

The thread title says it all. Could a bot that patrols and tags new pages ever exist? --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 07:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Template:Uncategorized ([6]) etc? Bulwersator (talk) 07:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

That diff has been deleted. I was thinking of something like that, but also tag A1s, G10s and G2s for speedy deletion. It would help reduce the workload on the new page patrollers. --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 00:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was copyvio. I added deleteproof diff Bulwersator (talk) 08:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, something like that, but it could also tag pages for CSD under A1, G10 and G2. It could be a ClueBot for new pages. --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 22:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I wrote a bot designed to assess the quality of random pages and then publish a list of pages that could be improved. Right now, it trolls through pages and checks if the first sentence has [is, was, will, were, refers...] in the first sentence (as all pages should). It turns out that this is usually (but not always) a good way of finding articles that could use some help. The bot posts articles here.

My questions to you:

• What do you think of the potential of such a bot?

• Can you think of any rules other than having a definition in the first sentence?

Thanks! --PointBot (talk) 16:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Bot accounts should be separate from their operators. Please create or use a main account rather than a bot account to engage in discussion.

Can you reprogram the bot so it posts its suggestions in a batch, rather than making many individual edits one after another? –xeno^talk 20:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I'll use this account and implement a edit buffer. Do you have any other suggestions? --PointGuy (talk) 22:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. I proposed to merge three different Doctor Who-related lists into one at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who#Revisiting merging the creature/alien lists. While the proposal is still active, I wondered if such a task could be performed by a bot at all, since merging them manually is probably a huge task. Does anyone have an idea if and how this can be done? Regards SoWhy 10:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I've just closed a couple of merge requests from 2008 and 2009. I'm not a bot coder, but it seems to me that it would be reasonable and not to difficult for a bot to check Category:Articles to be merged, close still-open merge requests more than X months old, and remove the related templates in the affected articles. Then again, perhaps it is a messy enough task that it is inappropriate for a bot. It does look like a problem in search of a solution, though. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Great idea for a bot. A extra category would be Category:Merge mismatches for when there is a merge tag in only one of a pair of articles. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd strongly oppose having a bot just close things out. Perhaps a more appropriate task might be to identify the user who placed the tag and drop them a line on their Talk page suggesting that they chase up the merger. I know I've placed merge tags on low-traffic articles and seen no discussion one way or the other for months afterwards; if you're going to be unilateral in such cases then probably a positive decision to merge is better, but it's not really a decision for a bot to make. Le Deluge (talk) 22:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering if there was a bot already running or a bot that could be modified to update the Tasks template. I have created the To do lists for several US related projects so that all the 38 projects that are supported by WikiProject United States (and I am sure this would be useful for other projects as well) have the template. It would be great if the updating of this template could be automated in some way.

I am not recommending that every article for the project be displayed that fits the criteria but maybe 2 or 3 could be displayed andn the bot could check periodically if the problem had been fixed on that article and if so replace it with another. --Kumioko (talk) 22:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I am a bit confused. Could you perhaps add an intermediate template instead, such as {{WikiProject United States/Todo}}, and then embed that template and update it instead? If so, manual updating wouldn't be that difficult. Or perhaps I am misunderstanding the situation. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Well in some cases I could, and I know that not everything could be automated but it seems like a bot could populate several of the parameters without them all having to be done manually. --Kumioko (talk) 15:05, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Could you give a specific example of what type of edit you want it to accomplish? --Odie5533 (talk) 20:04, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I request the help of a bot for the following tasks:

• Add the parameter |kickboxing=yes to the banner {{WikiProject Martial arts}} in all articles within Category:Kickboxing people and its subcategories that already have the banner.
• Add the banner {{WikiProject Martial arts}} with the parameter |kickboxing=yes to all articles within Category:Kickboxing people and its subcategories that do not have the banner
• Add the parameter |kickboxing=yes to the banner {{WikiProject Martial arts}} in all articles within Category:Kickboxing and its subcategories that already have the banner.
• Add the banner {{WikiProject Martial arts}} with the parameter |kickboxing=yes to all articles within Category:Kickboxing and its subcategories that do not have the banner.

Jfgslo (talk) 16:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done ^Avic_ennasis @ 11:32, 8 Elul 5771 / 11:32, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi all - I'm copying this across from VP (proposals) where I originally made the suggestion - the part in italics is the bit which was at VP (pr). Grutness...wha? 01:35, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to propose the creation of an extra cleanup category, to be populated by a bot which simply scans all articles looking for mismatched square brackets, curly brackets, and parentheses. There's no real reason why any article should have a mismatch in any of these things, and it usually indicates a faulty link, template addition, or punctuation. It should theoretically be possible to sort articles within the maintenance category under C (curly bracket), S (square bracket) or P (parenthesis). I suspect it would be a useful addition to the other cleanup resources around WP... Grutness...wha? 01:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)z

It would need a list of pages where a single pair of those is deliberate, like bracket or emoticon. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:24, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Mmmm, true - though it seems unlikely there'd be a huge number of them. More to the point, if all articles with a mismatch were simply put into a category for human editors to check, it would be very simple to add a commented-out matching SB/CB/P to those which should have it so that it's not reported again - either that or add those articles to a list to remove from the bot's next sweep as they're discovered. It wouldn't really be much difficulty to do either of those things. Grutness...wha? 10:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

In general, articles in potential need of cleanup make very bad bot tasks or very bad categories. If you want a list of articles with potential mismatch, it is much better to compile one from database downloads. I believe WP:CHECKWIKI is already doing this however. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Seemed like a good idea at the time :) Grutness...wha? 06:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Yobot/AWB fixes most of them. We need help to improve the logic. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

This request initially was made on the Geobox talk page and moved here.
Is there a way that a bot could be programmed to update some map parameter values for articles in Ontario, Canada using the template {{Geobox}}? I have changed the background graphic used in the {{Geobox locator Ontario}} template, which is called by Geobox when the appropriate map_locator parameter value is present, to the file Canada Ontario location map 2.svg (which has an inset map of Ontario in Canada, I thought nicer than the old graphic without the insert), and would like to update the corresponding Geobox map parameter value to the new file name. (Aside: more on how these parameters work at Template:Geobox/legend#Maps.) The condition to be programmed would be:
FOR articles using template Geobox

IF map_locator = Ontario

IF (map ≠ Canada Ontario location map 2.svg)

SET map = Canada Ontario location map 2.svg

Hope this makes sense. --papageno (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

How many articles approximately would be matched by this criteria? — Kudu ^~I/O~ 23:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I have no exact idea, but I imagine it is on the order of a few hundred articles? --papageno (talk) 02:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be more "future-proof" to just change the {{Geobox}} template on all articles which match this criteria to something like {{Geobox Ontario}}, which will call {{Geobox}} with the appropriate defaults? — Kudu ^~I/O~ 17:44, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The replacement could also be built into {{Geobox}}. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 17:47, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

 Doing... — Kudu ^~I/O~ 20:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/KuduBot. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 00:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking of future-proofing. I think that the situation is already adequately future-proofed without having to resort to the creation of a Geobox Ontario. Both the {{Geobox locator Ontario}} and the {{Location map Canada Ontario}} use the same "Canada Ontario location map 2.svg" image, and their documentation indicates such (OK, I will admit, I have just updated the documentation for the latter). The Geobox legend page sends users to the Category:Geobox locator where the Geobox locator Ontario can be found. It is not guaranteed, but it is 99% certain.--papageno (talk) 00:50, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

The Wasteland Survival Guide wiki would like to request for a bot to fix spelling errors, welcome new members, help fix vandalism, and just provide general maintenance for the wiki. If there are any questions please contact me under the wikia user name Ramallah. Thank you --75.139.57.106 (talk) 00:32, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

This is the place to request bots for operation on the English Wikipedia, not for other wikis wherever they might be. Anomie⚔ 00:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

 Request withdrawn by the requesting editor.

I request that a bot be created that automatically adds shortcuts to AfD discussion. These shortcuts should have the form {{shortcut|WP:AFD/<Articlename>}} As an example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hex-a-Hop should contain the shortcut {{shortcut|WP:AFD/Hex-a-Hop}}. The rationale for this is that when I enter WP:AFD/Hex-a-hop into the search box, I am not taken to that AfD and I have to enter the full name of the nomination to arrive there. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sidenote: This request is made primarily for convenience purposes. I don't know whether editorial convenience really is a good rationale to divert bot developer efforts to this, but apart from that I believe it to be mostly uncontroversial. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 09:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I highly doubt that adding these to closed discussion is necessary, it will only trigger everyone's watchlists. For open discussion, this should go into the AfD preload/creation template instead if there is consensus. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:15, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

It could perhaps be included into Template:Afd2. However that should probably be brought up at that templates talk page or at WP:VPR. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I don't know if these would really be all that handy. If you want to get there without typing that much, you could just search Hex-a-Hop and click the AfD discussion link at the top of the page. (Not to mention that some editors use WP:AFD while some use WP:AfD, so you'd need two redirects to every page.)

It's also likely that anyone interested in an AfD discussion will already have it watchlisted (or have already edited it, and so can get there from their contribs as well.) That said, I'm not opposed to it at all, if the community deems it useful. If they don't support it as a bot task, I'm sure nobody would mind if you created them individually for yourself to use (provided you weren't creating hundreds at a time.) ^Avic_ennasis @ 10:28, 12 Elul 5771 / 10:28, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok I have changed my mind. What convinces me that this is probably unnecessary is the fact that a previous AfD discussion is much less likely to be linked to than for example a policy or guideline, so this "convenience" is not really needed. Therefore I hereby withdraw this request. There are obviously more important tasks for bot developers to focus on. Thanks for your time. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:50, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I'm an admin fron gl.wikipedia and we would like to ask for help. Recently, I have updated all the templates related to coordinates ({{coord}}) at gl.wp but this has caused several errors due to the different format. I would like to know if there is any code to make these changes example 1, example 2, and example 3 using a bot. Just post the code below (if any) and we will make the task. Thank you very much! --Toliño (talk) 11:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

This could be done fairly easily with AWB and some clever regex. Are you familiar with it? To contact me individually, please write on my talk page or email me. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 23:30, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

 Doing... Pending approval on gl.wikipedia. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 17:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Could anyone make a bot that put all album articles whose info box has the cover field left blank into a category, making it easier to locate said pages, and upload covers?Jasper420 19:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Can't you easily do it with via the infobox template? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Ditto. Add code like the following to the end of {{Infobox album}}:

{{#if:{{{Cover|}}}||[[Category:Articles lacking a cover]]}}

{{#ifeq:{{{Cover}}}|???|[[Category:Articles lacking a cover]]|}}

--RA (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

It sounds like you're suggesting manually adding it to the pages lacking a cover. Thats not what I mean. I mean for a bot to locate all the pages without a cover, so it doesn't have to be done manually.Jasper420 21:08, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

If you add the code to Template:Infobox album, then every page that uses the infobox that doesn't have a cover will be added to the category automatically. —Akrabbim^talk 21:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

...I still don't get it..Jasper420 21:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Single edit on Template:Infobox album will add this code to all pages with this infobox Bulwersator (talk) 07:38, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

See Help:Template. The infobox you see on most album articles is a version of Template:Infobox album. —Akrabbim^talk 11:32, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Jasper, do you have consensus to add all of these pages to these categories? If you get that first (on Template talk:Infobox album and the appropriate WikiProjects) then what is being suggested here is the simpliest (and probably best) way of doing it. Once you have consensus, use {{edit protected}} on Template talk:Infobox album to request the change suggested above be made.

The upshot of doing so will be that anytime and anywhere the template is used without the cover parameter being set, that page will be added to the category. --RA (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I would like to request a bot be created to move all hatnotes in all articles to the very top of the articles per the Manuel of Style found here and reiterated here. I am constantly seeing and having to manually fix hatnotes placed below the infoboxes or below maintenance tags. Based on my anecdotal observations, I can only assume this MoS error easily occurs in literally thousands of articles. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

 Question: Does AWB do this? — Kudu ^~I/O~ 20:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

 Question: Maybe check to see whether any of the maintenance tag-adding tools are the culprits? Stuartyeates (talk) 21:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't know anything about AWB, but using the random article link after looking at only a few dozen random articles I came up with 2 examples to illustrate what I'm talking about. In Świdnik County the hatnote is placed below the infobox, when it is supposed to be placed before the infobox so it stretches the entire length of the article instead of being squeezed by the infobox. In DJO (music), the hatnote has been placed below 1 of the 3 maintenance tags at the top of the page, when the hatnote should be at the very top before all 3 tags. Looking at the history, it does appear that a bot was responsible for placing the tag before the hatnote, but I'm sure human editors sometimes make the same mistake. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

AWB's genfixes includes logic to move hatnotes to the top of pages. Rjwilmsi 17:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. I had a request but it has been archived without reply, so I'm trying again. Please see here. Regards SoWhy 22:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I made an exploratory stab at this last night. Should be doable. Will work at it again tonight. Remind me if I forget. --RA (talk) 08:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done Using Luasóg. Script as follows:

var my_bot = new Luasog("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php");
var creaturesArray = [];
var pages = ["List of Doctor Who creatures and aliens",
            "List of Torchwood creatures and aliens",
            "List of The Sarah Jane Adventures creatures and aliens"];

function swap(items, firstIndex, secondIndex){
  var temp = items[firstIndex];
  items[firstIndex] = items[secondIndex];
  items[secondIndex] = temp;
}

function bubbleSort(items){
  for (var i=0; i < items.length; i++){
    for (var j=0; j < items.length-i-1; j++){
      if (items[j] > items[j+1]){
        swap(items, j, j+1);
      }
    }
  }
  
  return items;
}

var callback = function(success, result){
  if (!success) { error(result.info); }
  else { 
    var strArray = result.content.replace(/\={4}/g, "===");
    strArray = strArray.replace(/\={3} /g, "\n===");
    strArray = strArray.replace(/ \={3}/g, "===\n");
    strArray = strArray.split(/\n=/g);
    if (creaturesArray === null) {
      kill("IT WAS NULL");
    }
    for (var i=0; i<strArray.length; i++){
      if (strArray[i].substr(0,2) == "==") {
        creaturesArray.push("="+strArray[i]);
      }
    }
  }
  
  if (pages.length > 0) {
    trace("Getting next...");
    my_bot.get({page:pages.pop()}, callback);
  } else {
    trace("Sorting...");
    bubbleSort(creaturesArray);
    for (var j=0; j<creaturesArray.length; j++){
      trace(creaturesArray[j]);
      stop();
    }
  }
};


trace("Getting...");
my_bot.get({page:pages.pop()}, callback);

--RA (talk) 21:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm requesting a bot that will create the daily maintenance subcategories for Category:Wikipedia files missing permission, which are in the naming format of, for example, Category:Wikipedia files missing permission as of 10 September 2011, and they are created just by substituting {{subst:Files missing permission subcategory starter}}. This seemed like a good task for DumbBOT, but a request by Fastily for this functionality has remained unanswered on the operator's page for almost a month. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 21:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/KuduBot 2. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 21:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Kudu! Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:50, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Is there a bot (or could there be a bot) that puts lists in alphabetical order? Going a step further, could such a bot change lists from one type of alphabetical order to a different type of alphabetical order? The problem I'm trying to solve is that List of humorists is currently in alphabetical order by first name, and it really should be in alphabetical order by last name. I could do this manually, but it would take a while and it seems like a perfect task for a bot. Thanks, BMRR (talk) 21:53, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

The following code in Luasóg will return the wikicode I think you want. I have not tested it very much. Change "List of humorists" to any other article title to do the same:

var my_bot = new Luasog("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php");var callback = function(success, result){
  if (!success) { error(result.info); }
  else { 

    var contentArray = result.content.split("\n");
    var listArray = new Array();
    var output = "";
    var colCount = 0;
    
    for (var i=0; i<contentArray.length; i++){
      if (contentArray[i].substr(0,1) == "*"){
        listArray.push(contentArray[i]);
      } else if (contentArray[i] != "{{col-break}}") {
        if (listArray.length > 0){
          var sortedListArray = bubbleSort(listArray);
          
          for (var j=0; j<sortedListArray.length; j++){
            if (colCount > 0 && j%Math.ceil(sortedListArray.length/colCount) == 0)
              output += "{{col-break}}\n";
            output += sortedListArray[j] + "\n";
          }
          
          if (colCount > 0) output += "{{col-break}}\n";
          listArray = new Array();
          colCount = 0;
        }
        
        output += contentArray[i] + "\n";
      } else {
        colCount++;
      }
    }
    
   trace(output);
  }
  
  stop();
};

my_bot.get({page:"List of humorists"}, callback);

function swap(items, firstIndex, secondIndex){
    var temp = items[firstIndex];
    items[firstIndex] = items[secondIndex];
    items[secondIndex] = temp;
}

function bubbleSort(items){
    var len = items.length,
        i, j, stop;

    for (var i=0; i < items.length; i++){
        for (var j=0; j < items.length-i-1; j++){
            var res1 = items[j].match(/\w*(?=(]|\s\(|,))/)[0];
            var res2 = items[j+1].match(/\w*(?=(]|\s\(|,))/)[0]
            if (res1 > res2){
                swap(items, j, j+1);
            }
        }
    }

    return items;
}

--RA (talk) 21:08, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done Updated List of humorists. --RA (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! –BMRR (talk) 00:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

A year ago I applied and got approved to run Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 20 which would replace superscripted text with normal text per WP:ORDINAL. I had written a script but it took a lot of time since the task was approved and I never really completely run it. Unfortunately I don't have the script anymore. Is anyone interested to write a script and run this task? I would like that my bot does less at the moment. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• FYI, I have the following regex lines in my dates script, but it only removes ordinals within date strings. It can't hope to compete speedwise with a bot:

([0-2]?\d|30|31)<sup>(?:th|st|nd|rd|)<\/sup>(?:\sof\s?)?\s(Jan(?:uary|\.|)|Feb(?:ruary|\.|)|Mar(?:ch|\.|)|Apr(?:il|\.|)|May\.?|Jun(?:e|\.|)|Jul(?:y|\.|)|Aug(?:ust|\.|)|Sep(?:tember|\.|t\.|)|Oct(?:ober|\.|)|Nov(?:ember|\.|)|Dec(?:ember|\.|))([^\w\d])

(Jan(?:uary|\.|)|Feb(?:ruary|\.|)|Mar(?:ch|\.|)|Apr(?:il|\.|)|May\.?|Jun(?:e|\.|)|Jul(?:y|\.|)|Aug(?:ust|\.|)|Sep(?:tember|\.|t\.|)|Oct(?:ober|\.|)|Nov(?:ember|\.|)|Dec(?:ember|\.|))\s(?:the\s)?([0-2]?\d|30|31)<sup>(?:th|st|nd|rd)<\/sup>([^\]\|\w\d][^\d])

I can write some similar lines for my formatting script to normalise the other ordinals... --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 04:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Perfect. Could you perform a database scan to mass fix this, please? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:37, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

• It's here and currently being attacked. As you see there are some 14,000 of them, I could use some help. The list has been split up into 16 sub-sections, and it would be great if some of you out there could take some of them. To potential volunteers, best to sign your name at the top of the section you are attacking (I will do that next time before I start a batch). Thanks. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I would like to request that a bot be used to remove the templates Template:Letter-NumberCombination and Template:LetterCombination from all pages in Category:Disambiguation where they are currently used; this will probably constitute removing virtually all of the templates' ~1700 and ~300 respective transclusions. These templates were placed in contradiction to the Manual of Style, and the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages is for the templates to be removed from those pages (since two TFD proposals to simply delete them entirely have failed), rather than for the MOS to be amended.

From reviewing other requests here, it appears that similar requests are commonly referred to use AWB instead, but given the massive number of pages to edit, I was hoping it'd be a simple thing to fully automate the task. Thanks for your consideration. Theoldsparkle (talk) 21:14, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

The TFD failed, so now you want a fait accompli? And where is this "consensus" you speak of? I see a short section with only two other people commenting, which is nothing compared to the TFD. Anomie⚔ 22:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

After checking out the "consensus" mentioned above it doesn't really seem like a consensus to me. I personally find this template occassionally helpful if used and I think the opinions of the TFD result mirror that. --Kumioko (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I know this may look a bit odd or underhanded, but it's sincerely not intended to be such. To try to explain further: The template is likely to be removed from disambiguation pages regardless of the outcome of this request, because its use there does not comply with the MOS. The template was created and placed on thousands of disambiguation pages without any consultation (before or after its placement) with any of the disambiguation-related talk pages. In the TFD discussion, several of the users who voted to keep the template made a distinction between keeping it and continuing its use on all disambiguation pages; I believe that, combined with the users who voted to delete it entirely, there is thus a consensus to remove it from disambiguation pages (and nothing at any of the disambiguation-related talk pages contradicts this impression). I do not see the TFD outcome as superseding the MOS guidelines, and despite several references in the TFD discussion to the fact that the MOS does not allow this template on disambiguation pages, no one that I'm aware of has proposed amending the MOS. The template continues to exist, and if people wish to use it in ways that comply with the purpose and spirit of Wikipedia guidelines, they can do so.

This does not appear to me to be the proper forum to discuss whether the template should be used on disambiguation pages; I'd refer you to the MOS talk page linked above if you'd like to discuss that. I posted this request in the hope that a large and inconvenient task could be performed by automated means, and, of course, anyone is free to decline to assist for any reason they choose. Thank you. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

By the way, since I originally posted the request, more users have posted support for this task at the MOS talk page. I don't know what would satisfy anyone's definition of a consensus, but perhaps it's been met or will be met soon. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

The template was added contrary to the MOS and needs to be removed from disambiguation pages. It is welcome to be kept and properly used on article pages, if any proper use of it can be found on article pages, as mentioned throughout the TfD. The discussion on the Wikipedia talk page reflects that discussion. No fait accompli here, although certainly I believe the TfD was closed with the incorrect conclusion. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedia, I was wondering if you could make me a question answering bot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saijc11 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Watson (computer) →Σ _{^talkcontribs} 00:10, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Please clarify the request. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 13:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, is there a bot that regularly checks and sorts Wikitables by specified criteria? Specifically, I'd like some help sorting List of Tecmo Koei games (even a one-time run would be great) It occurs to me that most tables are sorting by one field (usually name or date), and a bot that tidies those up based on a tag might be a helpful thing. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 09:01, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Is this a bad idea? ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 08:11, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

The table you mention is already a sortable table. Though it is hard to see what benefit there would be from sorting it - most of the fields in the table are blank, and there are no obvious criteria that someone would want to sort by.

What exactly do you want to do?--Toddy1 (talk) 08:25, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd like a bot process that would go through other language wiki and iterate a category and look at each article and create a list where the article did not have an equivalent English (en) article interwikied on it. This could be worked out from languages (based on working from an english category such as Category:Turtles). I'm especially interested to find those articles in nl/pl/es/de/fr/it wiki' that are not in the English wiki. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 15:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

There is this: Wikipedia:Dump_reports/Missing_articles. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I can't see how that is relevant. How would you select a category? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Anyone up to doing this? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 12:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

See WP:WikiProject Intertranswiki. We began creating a directory, see Albanian for instance. Granted we need a bot coder to ransack all of the language wikipedias and generate such lists. But the chances of actually getting somebody to fulfill a request here are very slim.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

"Granted we need a bot coder to ransack all of the language wikipedias and generate such lists." - Hence this request! Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

To generate the lists, it might be more efficient to do it from the toolserver. Anomie⚔ 13:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Is that an offer? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Alas, I have no access to the toolserver. You might try asking User:Δ, or going through Category:Wikipedians with Toolserver accounts. Anomie⚔ 01:07, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Have found out this is possible with WP:AWB. There is a language setting in options->preferences. Then you can find article with category (recursive depth) make list and then regex skip if article contains (en:). Results going up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Turtles/Interlanguage#Articles_in_other_languages_but_not_on_English_Wikipedia. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes indeed, but the French (or was it the Dutch) did not generate the category list for me. I have drafted a bot and will file a BRFA later (Femto Bot 7). Rich Farmbrough, 13:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC).

French wiki requires an authorised bot to use AWB. The foreign categories can be found in Category:Turtles, but I manually entered them. de:Kategorie:Schildkröten, es:Categoría:Testudines, fr:Catégorie:Testudines, it:Categoria:Cheloni, nl:Categorie:Schildpad, pl:Kategoria:Żółwie. For the recursive depth I went 4 deep. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject China/NNU Class Project could do with a bot checking all articles tagged in Category:WikiProject China/NNU liaison/Articles and dumping the WP:China class and importance rating on a subpage. see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/NNU Class Project#Request This could be possibly a daily task while the university project is running. Agathoclea (talk) 10:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I request a bot to populate Category:Redirects from Unicode characters. The category is meant for all redirects whose titles are Unicode characters, so the bot would have to do the following tasks.

1. For each page in Category:Redirects from Unicode characters, check if it belongs there. If it doesn't, delete the erroneous {{R from Unicode}}, [[Category:Redirects from Unicode characters]], or {{This is a redirect|from Unicode}}.
2. For each redirect, if the title is exactly one character long (in the Unicode sense), add {{R from Unicode}} (if not present).

Note that this is not a request to create new redirects, just to categorize the existing pages. 155.33.149.25 (talk) 03:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Should redirects like ɪ̵ count as one or two? Technically it's the two characters LATIN SMALL LETTER IOTA and COMBINING SHORT STROKE OVERLAY, but it is intended to display as one glyph. Also, do redirects like Wikipedia:© count, or not because of the namespace? Anomie⚔ 04:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Since glyphs are not characters, ɪ̵ is two characters long (in the Unicode sense, which is the sense relevant here). I think Wikipedia:☃ and Template:元, for example, count; the bot would strip the namespace before checking the length. I don't think the bot should do any talk namespaces, but anything else is fine, unless there is a style guide that restricts it to fewer namespaces. 155.33.149.25 (talk) 13:24, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Has there been any discussion that shows consensus for this definition over the other? Anomie⚔ 15:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

No, there hasn't, although most (not all) of the pages in the category now use that definition. Where is a good place to discuss it? (I got an account; this is still me.) Gorobay (talk) 17:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm mostly interested in the question of whether ɪ̵ should be included in the category or not. Which also brings up the question of U+00E9 (1 character, é) vs U+0065 U+0301 (2 characters, é), although MediaWiki does a good job of normalizing these sort of characters. Anomie⚔ 03:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

To keep things simple and unambiguous, I think that we should use Unicode's third definition of character. By that definition, ɪ̵ has 2 characters and is therefore ineligible for this category. U+00E9 has 1 and U+0065 U+0301 has 2. However, because MediaWiki normalizes them both to U+00E9, the issue would never come up. Gorobay (talk) 14:28, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

OTOH, there is the definition of "abstract character" on that same page, which is defined in "Section 3.4" such that a single abstract character may consist of multiple code points. It could be unambiguously defined, too: one character plus zero or more Combining characters. Anomie⚔ 15:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, that's true. In that case, the question is which definition is most useful. I don't think it matters much either way, so long as it is made clear which definition of character the category uses. Gorobay (talk) 16:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I decided to start a discussion at WT:Categorizing redirects#Category:Redirects from Unicode characters to seek more input on this question. Anomie⚔ 17:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I just wanted to add a couple more possibilities to this list. There seems to be a lot of existing redirects not tagged and that might also be useful. For example:

1. If the redirect contains a Unicode character but isn't already tagged with the applicable template add the template.
2. If the redirect is a typo redirect Unted States ~~> United States for example, then add the applicable R template
3. If the redirect is a forign language (such as Arabic or Asian charachters or such characters not used in the English language)

I realize that there is no way for the bot to know for sure every case but it seems like we should be able to account for a very large number of them. --Kumioko (talk) 18:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

1. If this is added, the bot would have to respect the differences between {{R to ASCII}}, {{R from diacritics}}, and to know when neither is appropriate.
2. How would you know which are mispellings, which are dialectal variants, and which are inflections?
3. I have made a relevant proposal, for what it's worth. Gorobay (talk) 22:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

This is a discussion cross-post.

Please see: Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#Discontinuing all my bots. hare j 23:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

End of cross-post.

I want a bot please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.129.25 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You will have to be more specific. Note that this is the place for requesting that someone run a task for you on the English Wikipedia; it is not the place to request bots for other websites or purposes, and you're unlikely to have much luck if you're asking for someone to write a bot for you which you would then run. Anomie⚔ 16:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

ust go to http://php.net or http://python.org and we'll check on your progress in two weeks time. →Στc. 08:19, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering if it would be possible to develop a bot or some other way of having a sportspersons stats updated from thier page at the relevant sporting associations database.

For example, can a MLB players infobox statistics be lionked to their statistics on www.mlb.com so that they do not need to be editied on a regular basis.Kreiny (talk) 04:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Note that this is often against these websites' terms of use. For example, mlb.com's terms say that (among many other things) you may not "use automated scripts to collect information from or otherwise interact with this Website or the other MLBAM Properties". Anomie⚔ 11:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

• The Article Rescue Squadron goes to any article up for deletion which someone tags asking for help. We then look through Google news archive, and other sources, to see if the article can be saved. When a lot of things are tagged, its hard to get through all of them in time. Having the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_tagged_for_deletion_and_rescue list the date which the AFD closes, would be rather helpful, we able to get to those that need help the fastest first. Can someone make a bot please that reads in the date something was nominated, or which a extension was posted, and then add 7 days to that, and post the result next to items on the list? Dream Focus 18:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Somebody should make a bot that tracks identified vandals, and people who edit similarly to known sockpuppets and update people with thier activities. A good example would be Grawp and his various puppets, who, with this bot could have been easily defeated.School district 43 Coquitlam^{Learn with us!} 18:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

We already have bots that watch 4chan threads, and report them at (Redacted). →Στc. 23:30, 30 September 2011 (UTC)