This is a page for requesting work to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to simply put ideas for bots. If you need a piece of software written for a specific article you may get a faster response time at the computer help desk. You might also check Wikipedia:Bots/Status to see if the bot you are looking for already exists, in which case you can contact the operator directly on their talkpage.
If you have a question about one particular bot, it should be directed to the bot owner's talk page or to the Bot Owners' Noticeboard. If a bot is acting improperly, a note about that should be posted to the owner's talk page, to the Administrators' Noticeboard. A link to such a posting may be posted at the Bot Owners' Noticeboard.
If you are a bot operator and you complete a request, note what you did, and archive it. {{BOTREQ}} can be used to give common responses, and to make it easier to see at-a-glance what the response is.
There are a number of common requests which are regularly denied, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the wikipedia community. Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots for a list of such requests, and ensure that your idea is not among them.
If you are requesting that a bot be used to add a WikiProject banner to the talkpages of all articles in a particular category or its subcategories, please be very careful to check the category tree for any unwanted subcategories. You might not expect Category:World War II to be a subcategory of Category:Thailand, but it actually is, and a bot will find it! It is usually safer to give a complete list of categories that should be worked through individually, rather than one category to be analysed recursively. Compare a successful request with a similar one that made a mess.
A difficult request?
Ok, I have what I think is a difficult request, and I would like to know if it is possible to do. Here's my problem, I have a list of 676 American football players located at here. These players have played at least one game for the Green Bay Packers, thus meeting WP:ATHLETE. One of WP:PACKERS goals is to create a page for every player who has played for the Packers. As there are 676 articles needed, this is a daunting challenge, as WP:PACKERS wants to create well-sourced and properly written stubs. I have a basic template I use to make these pages, found here. I get the information about each player from the following 3 reliable sources, [1], [2], and [3]. Now here in lies the request. I was wondering if a bot could be coded to read the html(?) in these 3 sources for each player, create a page for the player using the template, and fill in as much information into the page as possible. Then the bot would create the page into my user space, such as User:Gonzo fan2007/"PLAYERS NAME". The bot could create like 20 pages a day for about a month, and each day I could review the articles created by the bot in my user space, fix any mistakes or add any needed info, and then move the article into the main space. So I was wondering if this is possible. If it is, it is of course not an urgent request, and I would of course be willing to help out in any non-technical way or even run the bot if needed. If this is possible, would anyone be willing to code such a bot? Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 00:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Does anyone want to address my questions? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is very much possible. A quick analysis of the sites that you provided show that few simple POSTs and GETs can retrieve the HTML of the page required. With some analysis of the HTML, the required information can be extracted.
- It should also be noted that I am only providing the response to your question, and my expertise, whether it is possible or not. I have never developed a bot before and I am fairly new to Wikipedia itself. Aly89 (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Naw its, cool. I am just glad that it is possible. Thanks for the response. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 05:10, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 Doing... Indepth talks with User talk:Gonzo_fan2007 currently going on. My first bot. Please be patient while I write all the code to parse the different sites and also write the code to create new pages on Wikipedia. Given this is my first bot, there exists the probability that I might not be able to do this. Aly89 (talk) 02:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Chiming in here. I do not think that a bot should be creating 676 articles that do not meet Wikipedia:Notability at the time of the bot posting. Merely playing in at least one game for the Green Bay Packers does not necessarily mean that there is sufficient reliable source material to maintain a stand-alone biography article in the encyclopedia. Wikipedia:Notability specifically requires significant coverage (more than trivial but may be less than exclusive), a judgement call that should not and, as far as I am aware, cannot be made by a bot. Also, a biography article is not merely a listing of football statistics that also has a few sentences. A biography is a narrative text study unique to each person that focuses on the recording and relating of all the events another person's life. Further, per Wikipedia:NOT#STATS, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. I do not see how a bot can do this. As issues to consider: (1) there should be evidence that the three web sites are reliable sources such as may be had at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard before the bot gets going, and (2) Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Sources states "Self-published books, zines, websites, webforums, and blogs should never be used as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article (see below)." -- Suntag ☼ 15:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- That sounds like an argument that should be had at WT:Notability (people) and/or Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:compromise, not here. Anomie⚔ 20:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- While I agree with Suntag that creating these stubs in mainspace would be unacceptable, I endorse the proposal to create them in userspace and move them to the mainspace if and when they become viable articles. Happy‑melon 20:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- @Suntag No offense, but did you actually read the request? This is not rhetorical, I would actually like an answer. The bot is going to "create" the articles in my user space with a basic template of the basic information needed for these players. I would then add the necessary info and expand them to suitable stubs (which have 3 sources, which is a hell of a lot better than about 1000000 articles here). User:Aly89 has even built in a feature where I can control how many are placed in my user space each day, which will allow me to keep up on it. You keep on citing notability, yet WP:ATHLETE clearly states any player who has played in a top-level professional sport (especially the frickin NFL) is notable. There is no judgment call needed, because they all played. If pro-football-reference.com, databasefootball.com, and packers.com aren't reliable sources, then I have no clue what is. Wikipedia:NOT#STATS also clearly states that an article should not be an indiscriminate list of stats (to cite "Long and sprawling lists of statistics", which this is clearly not). Also, WP:BLP only applies if there is controversial material. Merely stating the teams the players has played for, the years, etc. is not controversial. Lastly, articles are created as stubs, biographies are not required to be a certain level of depth before being created. And I would like to point out, that the quality of these stubs will be much higher than most, will be properly categorized, and will be tagged with the proper WikiProjects. I seriously don't know what more you want. I can assure you these articles will be created, it is just a question of whether it will take me 6 months to by hand, or 1 month with some basic help from a bot. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- @Anomie I really don't see where there needs to be an argument or debate on anything. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ask Suntag, I was just pointing out that there are better places for arguing whether WP:ATHLETE is "acceptable" or not. I personally don't care. Anomie⚔ 23:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I misinterpreted your comment. Yes, if one were to discuss that there are much better forums. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 07:24, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- @Happy-melon Yes, of course they will all be placed in my user space. As I have pointed out in many places, for this request, the bot will only edit my user space, its own user space, or the user space of its owner. It will never touch the mainspace while doing edits for this request. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Again, it will never edit the main space for this request. We are not creating articles, we are creating templates for me to create an article. For the few articles I have created using this method by hand, I have found that it is very repetitive to get the basic information from these websites and have to do all the work of creating the page. It will be much easier by going to an already created page with the basic info, and then expand the article into a proper stub. If anyone has any ideas to improve the technique used, I am all ears! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Gonzo_fan2007, I appologize for missing the "Then the bot would create the page into my user space," portion of your post. Had I read more carefully, I would have not posted my comment. Sorry for the confusion. -- Suntag ☼ 04:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's all good. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 04:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I request that all articles in these categories have their talk pages tagged with this banner, {{WikiProject Baseball|cubs=yes}}, retaining existing assessments if any.
Please note, some pages might contain the banner {{Baseball-WikiProject}} which is a redirect to {{WikiProject Baseball}}.
Thanks. —Borgardetalk 08:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
{{BOTREQ}} : TinucherianBot working on this task for you -- Tinu Cherian - 11:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC) I will be out of station for more than a week. If somebody wants to pick up this task before I am back, kindly do. Thanks -- Tinu Cherian - 08:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- I am afraid, this task request was archived before it was completed. I am ready to task up this task if not done already. -- Tinu Cherian - 08:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think you started it but never completed it. No-one took it up while you were away. If you could still do it I'd appreciate it. —Borgardetalk 12:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Doing... : TinucherianBot -- Tinu Cherian - 06:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 Y Done Around 1535 articles were tagged for WP:CUBS -- Tinu Cherian - 06:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Deprecated coordinates templates redux
Further to the above request, the templates:
have been deprecated for some time. Please can someone replace all remaining instances with {{coord}}. Thank you.
 BRFA filed Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Legobot 5 LegoKontribsTalkM 03:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
RFA notice post
Hi, as discussed at WP:BN I am restarting my RfA and need to notify all the participants that a new one is opening. So basically, could a bot please post {{subst:User:Foxy Loxy/RfA notice|~~~~~}} to the talk pages of all the users who commented/votes/etc at my RfA (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Foxy Loxy)? Thanks. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 02:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- This is being done by GlassCobra manually. Giggy (talk) 09:54, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Has been done by GlassCobra manually. Caulde 15:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Transcluded templates into AfDs
While categorizing AfD templates in Category:Articles for deletion templates, I came across Template:Rebecca (or User:Undream) AfDs, a user template being used to transclude information into three AfD. A problem with using a template for this purpose is that changing the template modifies an archived AfD debate without any change to the AfD debate history. There may be others and I am hoping that a bot can help find them. Also, I am looking for all AfD templates so that I can tag them with Category:Articles for deletion templates. I think a bot can do both of these thing. If you look at the bottom of Log, you will see that the transclusions are broken down into those that begin with "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion" and those that don't. Could you have a bot go through each subpage of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log and post a list to User:Suntag/AfD transclusions of all transclusions into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log that do not begin with "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion". I should be able to manually take it from there. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 15:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Regarding Template:Rebecca (or User:Undream) AfDs, I'd suggest nominating it on TfD for substing and deletion. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
-
- I subst-and-deleted it - there's really no need for such bureaucracy. Happy‑melon 21:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Anyway, I just ran a toolserver query for you. Results at User:Suntag/AfD transclusions as requested. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- …and a more refined version of the query at User:Suntag/AfD transclusions#Pages transcluded only to AfD subpages. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, Ilmari! -- Suntag ☼ 13:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Per this request, please have a bot change each {{Prod-tip}} and {{PRODcomment}} to read {{subst:Prod-tip}} and {{subst:PRODcomment}} for each transclusion in an AfD discussion page. Use an edit summary such as "Substituted a transcluded template meant to have its text fixed." Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 21:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Birmingham, England
There are over 300 links to Birmingham, England, which is a redirect to Birmingham. Could someone please change them to
[[Birmingham]], [[England]]
unless they are followed by the sting "England" in, say, the next 20 characters, in which case change to
[[Birmingham]]
Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- A better set of replacement rules might be
- "
[[Birmingham, England]]" → "[[Birmingham]], [[England]]"
- "
[[Birmingham, England|Birmingham]]" → "[[Birmingham]]"
- "
[[Birmingham, England|" → "[[Birmingham|"
- That is, simply bypass the redirect if the link is piped (and simplify where appropriate), otherwise append a link to England to preserve the rendering. And of course this should be done with AWB or some other semiautomated tool, not as a fully automated bot run. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Doing... semi-auto LegoKontribsTalkM 04:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- On hold until the next dump. (3 days) LegoKontribsTalkM 02:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Potential MfD archive pages
I'm looking to provide a complete archive for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates that began in 2005 or before 2005. The names of the MfD debates varied some what. Please have a bot generated a list of pages created in or before 2005 having "Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages" and "Wikipedia:Miscell" in them and post the list to User:Suntag/Potential MfD archive pages. If you are aware of any other MfD names, feel free to add those to the list. I'll then manually go through the list. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 17:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Image clean up idea
I've been looking through Category:User-created public domain images (and a bit in Category:Public domain images) and was wondering how viable a request for a bot run through especially the user-created category, to check for which are unused, would be. I nominated a bunch of orphaned unused personal photos for deletion today, and that was just the tip of the iceberg. I was thinking extra categories like Category:Unused User-created public domain images uploaded in May 2007 could be added to speed up cleaning and general queue reduction there, and to make finding the relative trash easier. How feasible could this be? Carnildo suggested I post here, as it would be better with a database query from Toolserver. rootology (C)(T) 06:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Query output. Have fun with that. ;) BJTalk 07:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- ~$ wc -l orphaned_pd.txt
- 58355 orphaned_pd.txt
 Thanks, I got myself a big project... rootology (C)(T) 07:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- ...and so will the inclusionists if you start nominating these en masse. I just went through your "bunch" and found half a dozen potentially encyclopedic images among them. A dull and thankless job, either way. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- And I've saved a bunch already, myself, in the past couple days, and moved just as many to Commons that weren't in use but were still good. The list had to get cleaned, though, if its that big and has been neglected so much. :( I'll bang them into IFD as I find them, and the end result will hopefully be reasonable length backlogs and "found" images. rootology (C)(T) 05:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
mass move request
Could we move the subpages of List of asteroids and Meanings of asteroid names, which are listed at Category:Lists of asteroids by number and "Category:Meanings of asteroid names", to List of minor planets and Meanings of minor-planet names? This would also involve redirecting the cross-linking at the bottom of each list.
The reason for the move is that these are not asteroids, but all bodies assigned a minor-planet number, a mixture of asteroids and tens of thousands of other minor planets—Pluto, for example. "Minor planet" is the technical term used by the International Astronomical Union. There is no accepted definition of "asteroid". kwami (talk) 07:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- So far all responses on the talk page have supported the move. I would assume there's a move bot already out there. If need be, I can always do the redirects with AWB. kwami (talk) 00:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- You don't need a bot to do this, an admin can move all the subpages of a page by checking the "move subpages" box on the move form --Chris 04:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- There is only a check box for "Move all subpages of talk page, if applicable". I assumed that wouldn't have the same effect on the main page—am I wrong? kwami (talk) 06:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I've tried it, and it only moves the talk pages. Moreover, it only moves the first hundred, so either way I'd need a bot. kwami (talk) 06:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Interesting, when I try to move a userpage it shows "Move all subpages, if applicable", but with an article it only shows "Move all subpages of talk page, if applicable". I'll file a brfa --Chris 06:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I assume that's because user pages and talk pages commonly have subpages, but they're discouraged in the main article space. These articles are unusual in that regard—in fact, they're the only place I can remember seeing articles with subpages. kwami (talk) 06:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Articles can not have subpages. As far as the software is concerned, Foo and Foo/bar are completely unrelated except that they start with the same 3 letters. Otherwise OS/2 would be s aubpage of OS and AC/DC would be a subpage of AC. Mr.Z-man 06:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Okay, but the same is true of talk subpages, isn't it? kwami (talk) 06:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- No, talk subpages keep their association. For example Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ is a subpage of Talk:Barack Obama. That said, Talk:OS/2 is in fact a subpage of Talk:OS. ~ User:Ameliorate! (with the !) (talk) 15:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Ah, yes, I do remember something about that.
- Is there a bot to move all articles A/X to C/X then? kwami (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I've been following the vote; and I have a flagged bot. It's not set to do page moves; but that's an easy task (there's an own script for that task in the standar pywikipedia library) if I'm allowed to do the moves without applying for permission first. I'm not too familiar with the bot policies on the English Wikipedia. --Harald Khan Ճ 20:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think you might have missed my comment above, I've already filled a brfa for this task --Chris 02:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
-
- Ah, I'm not familiar with these abbrevations. Very welll. :-) --Harald Khan Ճ 09:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, all. With that done, I can fix the links with AWB. kwami (talk) 02:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
If we have a bot do this, could it also break up the Meanings of... pages along the model of the List of asteroidsminor planets? You can see the difference I'm talking about by comparing Meanings of asteroid names (2501-3000) and Meanings of asteroid names (3001-3500). Manually breaking up the rather large monolithic Meanings of... pages is a pain. Urhixidur (talk) 16:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and Meanings of minor-planet names should be Meanings of minor planet names, as the hyphenated form is highly unusual. Urhixidur (talk) 16:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
genre remover bot
somone needs to create a genre remover bot that will go through musical group articles and either remove or place in between <!-- -->tags the genre, as the feild is no longer used. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 01:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- This is generally considered a Bad Idea. BJTalk 01:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Why? The Genre field is no longer in use after the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music#Time_to_remove_genre_section_on_info_box.3F. So there's genres that are not being used in the article that are just wasting there taking up space in the article. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 01:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 Coding..., unless BJ gives a good reason why not to do it. Anomie⚔ 01:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Um... a bot to remove hidden content? Surely there's a very good reason to do this? I'm not seeing one. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- If done at all, this should first go to WP:BRFA. There are a number of questions that I have (and I imagine others have as well). For example, what is the scope of this (how many pages)? Is the decision to remove the parameter final (or definitive)? [I ask because editing thousands of pages only to have consensus change in a week is a very, very bad situation.] Is there going to be replacement parameter? If so, has that been decided on (so that the bot can edit once instead of twice)? [I ask because I see discussion of replacing the {{{genre}}} parameter with a {{{style}}} parameter.] --MZMcBride (talk) 02:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's the same situation as Template:Female adult bio's "orientation" parameter, as far as it goes. No idea about any discussion to replace it with a "style" parameter, I don't see mention of it on the page linked from the request. Anomie⚔ 03:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) Admittedly, I only skimmed. But I see it mentioned several times here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Less stringent proposal by Rodhullandemu. Regardless, if there are any other major changes that need to be made (massive date-delinking or parameter renaming, etc.), it would be much, much better to do it in one pass rather than in several. And I'm still unclear on the scope, etc. (I should also note that simply because we've done this sort of thing previously doesn't necessarily mean we should do it again. Templates exist so that we don't have to update every page when changes are made.) Though, of course, all of this can be discussed at a WP:BRFA. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- I see there discussion of style sections in the article, justified because a section can go into greater detail than a line in an infobox, but nothing about a style parameter. I do agree that there is no need for it to run immediately, I'm not planning on even filing the BRFA until the discussion at WikiProject Music settles back down.
- The justification for the removal is to avoid confusing new editors with a field that doesn't show up. The scope is removing one parameter from all uses of whichever templates are affected (looks like {{Infobox Musical artist}} and {{Infobox Album}}; I don't know what fraction of those templates actually uses the parameter). In the original proposal, there seems to be no replacement or renaming of parameters; we'll see what comes out of the new discussion, although my guess is either "keep" or "revert" rather than any (botable) middle ground. I'm not interested in date delinking, BTW: for one, I don't particularly agree with the pointiness of the situation (although I really don't care that much about the actual removal), and for two it probably needs human judgment to regularize date formats at the same time. Anomie⚔ 11:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- You may want to tell User:Lightbot about that human judgment thing. Its been working with date formats for a few months. Mr.Z-man 16:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- According to Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 3, Lightbot only delinks solitary years and linked dates that will not autoformat. Also, I see Lightbot has not made any edits for the past 3 days, without any actual explanation but following a few complaints about delinking solitary years. Anomie⚔ 17:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 Deferred I've been watching Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Time to remove genre section on info box?; a number of users have shown up to challenge the consensus to remove the parameter (and not in a nice way in some cases), and it doesn't look like it's going to settle down any time soon. If a new consensus is reached in that discussion that still wants this done, feel free to re-request it then. Anomie⚔ 21:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
No matter what the outcome of the discussion over whether or not the parameter should be passed, I'm not seeing any valid reason to go round removing it from pages. That's just burning bridges. Happy‑melon 22:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
SSP bot
I've noticed recently, some cases where the users listed don't exist or there aren't any user listed anyway. Could it be possible that a bot could archive these or possibly notify the reporting user of the problem? It'd help a lot. Thanks. Caulde 16:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- E runs the bot that archives the page, I'll ask him if it possible to add this functionality to the bot --Chris 01:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Caulde 18:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
DFB Cups
Could someone please make redirects from:
1953 DFB Cup Final → DFB Cup 1952-53#Final through to 2007 DFB Cup Final → DFB Cup 2006-07#Final
Thanks. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 08:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Doing... LegoKontribsTalkM 06:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Y Done LegoKontribsTalkM 18:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks - but I'm not sure that it's worked entirely - many of them link to DFB Cup 1952-53 rather than their respective years. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 08:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Extending bot use to other Wiki
I understand that one of the uses of "Eubot" (there are probably others) is to create redirects for articles having diacritics in the title. I.e. the bot creates a new article having the title without diacritics and includes the appropriate redirect.
This function could be useful in other wiki, especially in the simple:wiki which uses english albeit in a simplified form. Is there any way the bot could be transfered to simple:wiki? Afil (talk) 20:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- You will need to contact the bot operator Eugene van der Pijll, he should be able to help you. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 22:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Tagging a hierachy of categories
Hey there. Anyone with enough AWB-fu to tag Category:People by race or ethnicity and all its descendents according to the suggestion at the deletion discussion? — Coren (talk) 20:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Would this be appropriate to add? §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yep. The point being, of course, to make sure nobody misses the discussion which has the objective of deleting every one of those categories. Thanks. — Coren (talk) 20:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Doing... I'm on it. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- On hold. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 21:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Is there any visible consensus for deletion ? Let the Parent category discussion be closed before the Mass CFDing -- Tinu Cherian - 08:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have just censured Coren for not making sure the procedural requirements of the mass/umbrella CfD was being fulfilled. Several discussion participants have also pointed out that the discussion is invalid for this reason. I now realize that Coren is hardly to be blamed as his request is being stonewalled (or a more AGF compliable term which may be appropriate) placing the entire nomination in a Catch-22 loop. __meco (talk) 16:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Having talked with Coren, I can't get a complete list of categories to tag with AWB. The server has kicked me off over a dozen times now; and I'm out of ideas. I've tried everything in my power, there's just so many of them. If someone can compile a list I can tag them all right quick. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 20:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
DAB: Masters of Rock (album)
I moved Masters of Rock (album) to Masters of Rock (Pink Floyd album) because Masters of Rock is a series of albums, and the Pink Floyd album is just one volume. There is also a Masters of Rock DAB page. Masters of Rock (album) is now a redirect to the renamed page. There are approx. 200 references to Masters of Rock (album) which should be changed to point to the Pink Floyd album page, and when that is done, Masters of Rock (album) should be changed to redirect to Masters of Rock (the disambiguation page, which shows other albums with the same title, among other things). --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Unlinking from an inexistent user subpage
We've got tedious work to be done here. I suggest to specify one among currently existing bots to replace all 1021 occurences of {{User:Nichalp/sg}} with [[User:Nichalp|<font color="#0082B8">=Nichalp</font>]] [[User talk:Nichalp|<font color="#0082B8">«Talk»=</font>]]. Alexius08 (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Got it. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 15:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Y Done --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 16:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- 89 pages still show as transclusions. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 16:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
'Under construction' templates
I am mentioning this here because 'under construction' templates are an impediment to multi-article editing. I think bots are/were involved in purging articles of stale templates. If, like me, you would like to make 'under construction' templates more efficient, please comment on the proposal.
People put 'under construction' on a page to say that they are actively working on articles. But then the templates seem to hang around on the article for hours, days, and weeks. It is sometimes difficult to get them removed because people say 'I haven't finished yet, I just have to get round to it'. Sometimes people even revert removal of the template.
A reasonable proposal (I think) is to merge the templates into one. The one template would have a fixed expiry time visible in read mode. If it expires, the editor would be able to refresh it but would have to take positive action to refresh it. The current fire-and-forget design would be gone. The expiry time would be consistent with real tappity-tap editing where fingers are pounding the keyboard e.g. 15 minutes to an hour.
For more details, debate, and voting, see: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 October 13. Lightmouse (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- 15 minutes to an hour would be hard to track, although setting up a daily category that is bot cleaned every 24 hours would be rather simple. MBisanz talk 16:51, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I am just suggesting a value based on the exceptional human editing task of freezing out other edits on the basis of one person doing 'active editing'. Once that period has gone, the article is unfrozen and back to normal. Other editors can then continue as normal and/or remove the template by hand. How automated tools are programmed is another matter. As you suggest, 24 hours would be more suitable for a bot. Lightmouse (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
disambiguator (rugby player) to become (rugby union)
Interested in having a bot move the disambiguators (rugby player) to become (rugby union), as per WP:RU. Don't really know how to formally request, or see if it is feasible.Londo06 14:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- Can you look here to see if I got the right pages? LegoKontribsTalkM 05:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Film infobox links
Hello there! WikiProject Films has recently had a discussion about the use of external links parameters in the film infobox, and consensus is to deprecate them. Now, turning the parameters off is no big deal, but would it be possible to have a bot take the parameter info from the individual pages and create the appropriate external links (via Template:Imdb title and Template:Amg movie)? Furthermore, is it possible to do so without redundant links, should the links already exist in the EL section? Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 17:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
|
