Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 87

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.

Archive 80

←

Archive 85

Archive 86

Archive 87

Archive 88

Bot Request to Add Vezina Trophy Winners Navbox to Relevant Player Pages

Moot

I would like to request a bot to automatically add the {{Vezina Trophy Winners}} template to all player pages that are currently listed in the Category:Vezina Trophy winners.

The template is already created and can be found at: Template:Vezina Trophy Winners.

Details:

1. The bot should check all pages within Category:Vezina Trophy winners.

2. For each page, if the {{Vezina Trophy Winners}} template is not already present, the bot should add it to the bottom of the page.

3. The template should be placed in the Navboxes section (before any categories or external links) on each player’s page.

Rationale:

This will ensure consistency and streamline the process of displaying the relevant information across all Vezina Trophy winners’ pages without having to manually add the template to each page. This will also make it easier to update the navbox in the future without needing to edit each individual page.

Please let me know if more information or clarification is needed. Thank you! 108.51.96.36 (talk) 23:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose this request as per consensus at WP:NHL not to have such navboxes. Please consider discussing at the WikiProject. Flibirigit (talk) 00:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Just noting that the template has been deleted. Primefac (talk) 12:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

altering certain tags on protected pages?

I recently read a comment from someone regarding them seeing the {{expand}} tag in an article, and wanting to go ahead and work on the section, only to discover that it was protected and they could not do so. Their feeling, which is understandable, is that it was discouraging to reply to a request for help, only to find that their help was not welcome. There is of course usually a lock icon on the page but not everyone knows to look for that or what it means.

I note that User:MusikBot II removes templates from pages where protection has just expired, and is an adminbot and can therefore also edit protected pages. I'm curious if it seems feasible/wise to have it (or some other bot) make some sort of modification to the expand template, and perhaps other similar templates, to reflect the current protection level and suggest using the talk page to propose edits? And of course it would undo those edits upon the expiration of protection. (as always with the caveat that I know nothing about bot coding) Pinging @MusikAnimal: as bot maintainer, but any and all feedback is of course welcome. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

@Just Step Sideways: Another way would be to have the {{expand}} tag automatically detect the protection level (which I know is possible, but I wouldn't know how to implement it) and alter its message. Rusty 🐈 22:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, altering the template would be better; templates like {{rcat shell}} already have this functionality using magic words. I'll paste the relevant code below if someone wants to sandbox something. Obviously it will be different to make it inline but the general gist of using the #switch will be the same. For example, a #switch in {{Expand section}} could change the text from "You can help by adding to it" to "You can make an edit request to improve it". Primefac (talk) 10:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

{{if IP}}, {{if autoconfirmed}}, and {{if extended confirmed}} should also be useful here. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

PROTECTIONLEVEL code

{{#switch: {{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}
   |sysop={{pp-protected|small=yes}}{{R fully-protected|embed=yes}}
   |templateeditor={{pp-protected|small=yes}}{{R template protected|embed=yes}}
   |extendedconfirmed={{pp-protected|small=yes}}{{R extended-protected|embed=yes}}
   |autoconfirmed={{pp-protected|small=yes}}{{R semi-protected|embed=yes}}
   | <!--Not protected, or only semi-move-protected-->
}}

I agree automating this without the bot is preferable. The bot can and does add protection templates to pages like this, but I believe it didn't here because this template was protected long before the bot was introduced. — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

This is why I ask instead of actually trying to do these things. I'm a bit nervous about editing templates that are in use on thousands of pages, that's really not my thing, but if this could be implemented that would be awesome. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 21:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
We could do something like this (see code), which only covers the cases of semi and extended protection, but that would probably work well enough for articles. Rusty 🐈 13:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
JSS, I'm happy to code something up, if you have one or two templates that would be "best" to add this functionality to I can see about implementing it; just noting there are a dozen or so similar templates which may need to be updated, so I'd rather do a trial on the more widely-used ones to see how well it works. Primefac (talk) 15:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
{{Expand section}} and {{Missing information}} seem like good candidates. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Done, I ended up creating {{Protected page maintenance message}} to allow for easier coding across multiple pages; feel free to tweak things as I was just throwing stuff together quick before I head out for a bit. Primefac (talk) 14:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Replace merged WikiProject template with parent project + parameter

WikiProject Reference works has been merged as a task force of WikiProject books. The referencework= parameter has been added to the Template:WikiProject Books banner template to indicate if it applies to the task force, so now all usages of the former Template:WikiProject Reference works need to be replaced with the books template with the task force parameter. When something similar was done with a previous project, it was done by bot (though I forgot what bot), could this be done again? Or is there another efficient way to do this? Also, there will be some duplicates, since some are tagged with both. The books project doesn't use importance and many articles tagged with ref works don't have it so the importance parameter on the old banner should be discarded not transferred. Thanks! PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I can help with this. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Same; my bot is set up to handle these, and I thought it was TheSandBot that actually had a specific task for this but maybe it was actually Kiranbot... Looks like ~1500 pages where it will need to be folded into the Books banner, after which it can just be converted into a wrapper and autosubst by AnomieBOT. Primefac (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Please feel free to handle this. As there wasn't a response in a reasonable time, I thought I should step in to help. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

@Primefac Your bot did the job perfectly, thank you! Sorry for the annoyance, but could you do the same with another merged-into-task force project? WP:TERROR was mostly inactive, and the very few active editors reached a consensus to merge, see this discussion. {{WikiProject Terrorism}} should be folded into the

{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography}} banner (I added the task force and importance parameters to the crime banner). WP:TERROR has importance parameters, but the attention= and infobox= parameters were never maintained and most of the articles tagged with them have had their issues addressed so those can probably be discarded as the crime banner doesn't have them. I promise this is the last one hahaha. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll put it on my list. Primefac (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Done. Primefac (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

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.

←

Request for WP:SCRIPTREQ

Would like to attain WP:SCRIPTREQ bot's buildup code. StefanSurrealsSummon (talk) 18:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Not related to a bot task request. You should reach out to the operator of the bot. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

LLM summary for laypersons to talk pages of overly technical articles?

Today I was baffled by an article in Category:Wikipedia articles that are too technical which I was easily able to figure out after pasting the pertinent paragraphs into ChatGPT and asking it to explain it to me in layman's terms. So, that got me thinking, and looking through the category by popularity there are some pretty important articles getting a lot of views per day in there. So I thought, what about a bot which uses an LLM to create a layperson's summary of the article or tagged section, and posts it to the talk page for human editors to consider adding?

I think I can write it, I just want others' opinions and to find out if someone is trying or has already tried something like this yet. Mesopub (talk) 09:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Considering past discussions of LLMs, and WP:LLMTALK, I doubt the community would go for this. If you really want to try, WP:Village pump (proposals) or WP:Village pump (idea lab) would be better places to seek consensus for the idea. Anomie ⚔ 14:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't think WP:LLMTALK necessarily applies here: that's about using chatbots to participate in discussions, which is utterly pointless and disruptive. The idea here seems to be using an LLM on a talkpage for a totally different purpose it's much more suited to. That said, I also doubt people will get on board with this.

Mesopub, having a quick look at your list, I think your target category Category:All articles that are too technical (3,415) is not a great choice: I see articles towards the top like Conor McGregor, Jackson 5, Malaysia, and Miami-Dade County, Florida. All of these are members of the target category due to transclusion {{technical inline}}, which produces ^[jargon].

All of these would easily be fixed by a simple rewording or explanation of a single term: none of the examples would benefit from an LLM summary.

I don't necessarily think the basic idea is terrible, which I've bolded for emphasis. We do have a lot of articles that are written at a level most appropriate to grad students or professionals in a niche scientific field. Of course, any LLM summary of these articles would have to be sanity-checked by a human who actually understands the article, to ensure the LLM summarises it without introducing errors.

For that reason I think that if you're convinced of the utility of this process, you should start very slow, select a small number of articles in different fields, post the LLM summaries with proper attribution in your userspace, and notify appropriate WikiProjects to see if anyone is interested in double checking them, or working to incorporate more accessible wording into the summarised articles. If no one has any interest, there's no realistic future for this. Folly Mox (talk) 15:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Isn't the current consensus that we cannot allow AI-written text because of questionable copyright status? Primefac (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no ban AFAIK, just that editors need to be careful and check the LLM didn't spit out copyrighted text back at them (or closely paraphrased, etc.). I think this is less of a risk with the proposed use case, which is taking existing Wikipedia text and cutting it down.

I agree with Folly Mox mostly, if you think this is going to be useful, try it on a very small scale and see how it goes. Legoktm (talk) 19:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what formal consensus looks like on the LLM copyright issue. Wikipedia:Large language models § Copyright violations is pretty scant, and of course it's not policy. m:Wikilegal/Copyright Analysis of ChatGPT concludes in part with all possibilities remain open, as key cases about AI and copyright remain unresolved. The heftiest discussion I was able to find lazily is Wikipedia talk:Large language models/Archive 1 § Copyrights (January 2023); there is also this essay. Folly Mox (talk) 20:54, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I kinda wonder how reliable LLMs are at simplifying content without making it misleading/wrong in the process. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

They aren't. Even setting aside the resources they waste and the exploitative labor on which they rely, they're just not suited for the purpose. Asking editors with subject-matter expertise to "sanity check" their output is just a further demand on the time and energy of volunteers who are already stretched too thin. XOR'easter (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Some examples: User:JPxG/LLM_demonstration#Plot_summary_condensation_(The_Seminar) and Wikipedia:Using_neural_network_language_models_on_Wikipedia/Transcripts#New York City. Legoktm (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if you don't know the subject material, then you're not in a position to judge whether ChatGPT did a good job or not. XOR'easter (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. Would be a WP:CONTEXTBOT, and definitely subject to hallucinations. At the very least requires community consensus, this is not the correct place to get it, please see WP:VPT or WP:VPR. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Note: you may make a bot that post summaries to it's own userspace, this would be allowed per WP:EXEMPTBOT, if it would be helpful to have some demos for the proposal. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Redirects with curly apostrophes

For every article with an apostrophe in the title (e.g. Piglet's Big Game, it strikes me it would be useful to have a bot create a redirect with a curly apostrophe (e.g. Piglet’s Big Game).

This could also be done for curly quotes.

Once done, this could be repeated on a scheduled basis for new articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The justification for creating redirects with ASCII hyphen-minus to pages titled with en-dashes is that en-dashes are hard for people to type since they aren't on most keyboards. The opposite would be the case with curly quotes: straight quotes and apostrophes are on most people's keyboards while curly versions are not. This seems like another one that would be better proposed at WP:Village pump (proposals) to see if people actually want this.

Further complicating this is that the bot would need a reliable algorithm for deciding when to use ‘ versus ’. The general algorithm may need to be part of the community approval. Anomie ⚔ 12:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

This probably isn't a useful thing to be doing; as Anomie says ' is almost often shown as ' during regular typing, and curly apostrophes are often Office-related auto-changes. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to a bot fixing in-text curly apostrophes, but we shouldn't be proactively creating redirects. Primefac (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I think straight versus curly for single and double quotes is mostly an OS thing. When I tap on the redlink Piglet’s Big Game and close out the editor, I get {{Did you mean box}} linking the valid title at the top of the page; if I search for the title with &fulltext=0 I'm redirected to the bluelink. The curly apostrophe also resolves to the straight apostrophe if typed into the search box.

Really, the piece missing here – if any – is automated fixing of redlinks with curly punctuation in the target.

User:Citation bot replaces curly apostrophes and double quotes with ASCII versions within citation template parameters, even though Module:CS1 renders them identically. Some user scripts are capable of doing a gsub over an entire article, like User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/DraftCleaner.js. (I know this isn't directly related to the OP, but tangentially related to the suggestion just above.)

I suppose the genesis of this request was this Help desk request? Folly Mox (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I will also note that a curly quote is on the title blacklist, so it should be the case that we shouldn't even be accidentally creating these in the first place. Primefac (talk) 16:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I added that to the blacklist because I was tired of articles being created with curly quotes and having to move them to the correct title, when that's almost never correct. The intend wasn't to block redirects with curly quotes.

Nevertheless, I oppose this because we already have a {{did you mean box}} warning for the situation, and that's sufficient.

Finally, if this is done, it definitely needs some logic to auto-retarget and G7 any redirects that have diverged from their sources, as AnomieBOT already does for dashes. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Not done, consensus against the bot from multiple experienced users raising genuine concerns (I also think due to ‘ vs ’ it is inherently a WP:CONTEXTBOT), and redundant as curly quotes are now on the blacklist. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Bot for replacing/archiving 13,000 dead citations for New Zealand charts

Dead citations occur due to the website changing the URL format. For example https://nztop40.co.nz/chart/albums?chart=3467 is now https://aotearoamusiccharts.co.nz/archive/albums/1991-08-09.
Case 1: 9,025 pages that are using these URLs found through search. Some may already be archived.
Case 2: 4,133 citations using ‹The template Template journal inline is being considered for deletion.› {{cite certification|region=New Zealand}} and ‹The template Template journal inline is being considered for deletion.› {{Certification Table Entry|region=New Zealand}}, categorized Category:Cite certification used for New Zealand with missing archive (0).

An ideal transition seems difficult as it would require the following steps:

Find an archived version through the wayback machine, e.g., https://web.archive.org/web/20240713231341/https://nztop40.co.nz/chart/albums?chart=3467 for the above. For case 2 this requires inferring the URL first (https://nztop40.co.nz/chart/{{#switch:{{{type|}}}|album={{#if:{{{domestic|}}}|nzalbums|albums}}|compilation=compilations|single={{#if:{{{domestic|}}}|nzsingles|singles}}}}?chart={{{id|}}}))
Harvest the date 11 August 1991 either from the rendered archived page or from the archived page source, <p id="p_calendar_heading">11 August 1991</p>
For case 1, translate the URL accordingly to https://aotearoamusiccharts.co.nz/archive/albums/1991-08-11.
For case 2, add |source=newchart and replace |id=1991-08-11.

Note that for case 1, the word after "/archive/" changed according to the following incomplete table. For case 2 this is handled by the template so no need to worry about it.

Old text	New text
albums	albums
singles	singles
nzalbums	aotearoa-albums
nzsingles	aotearoa-singles

If someone is willing to go through the above, at least for simple cases, I think it is the ideal solution, especially for case 2. Failing that, a simpler archiving procedure can be taken.

For case 1: add |archive-url= and |archive-date= per usual archiving procedure. Add |url-status=deviated. If no archive exists (which should be a minority), add {{dead link}}
For case 2: add |archive-url= and |archive-date= per usual archiving procedure as they are supported by the templates. Add |source=oldchart (even if no archive is found)

I will be happy to support any technical assistance. Muhandes (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Muhandes, I believe WP:URLREQ is the place for requests like these. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I thought case 2 above will require a post here, but I'll repost there. Muhandes (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Deferred to WP:URLREQ and successfully completed there. :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 05:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Meanings of minor-planet names

Should we move to a hyphenated version of "minor-planet" instead of without hyphen for "minor planet", which is moved per Talk:Minor-planet designation#Requested move 21 September 2021, by numbers ranging from 100001–101000 to 500001–501000. Absolutiva (talk) 16:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Working, the bot is running now completing that task. I will let you know when it is done. :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Currently in the 300000s... will be done soon! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, Absolutiva, it's moved all the long dash (–) between the numbers ones to use "minor-planet". The short dash (-) ones just redirect to the long dash versions (which then redirects to the correct name), I had it programmed to fix the double redirects created, but there's no need because another bot already fixed these automatically while my bot was moving the titles! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Reference examination bot

I want a bot to help me.can anyome pls help me with this. Wiki king 100000 (talk) 07:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Could you please elaborate further? – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

guessing from the title, I think they want the bot to fact-check the reference or something similar that. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes the same. Actually my english spelling problem. Wiki king 100000 (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. Would be a WP:CONTEXTBOT. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

VPNGate

Would any admin be interested in setting up a bot that automatically blocks vpngate.net IPs? VPNGate is frequently used by LTAs (notably MidAtlanticBaby) and is very hard to deal with because of the number of rotating IPs available. User:ST47ProxyBot used to do some of this but is no longer active. T354599 should also help but this would be an interim solution to prevent disruption.

I looked into this and it should be pretty simple. VPNGate apparently has a (hidden?) public API available at www.vpngate.net/api/iphone/ which lists all currently-active proxy addresses. You can use regex (e.g. \b(?:\d{1,3}\.){3}\d{1,3}\b) to find the listed IPs from the API endpoint, check if they're already blocked, and then block them for however long as an open proxy. Theoretically if this is run once or twice a day the vast majority of active VPNGate IPs would be blocked. I wrote a quick script and tested it on testwiki and it seems to work. C F A 19:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@CFA: Looking near the bottom of vpngate.net/en/ you see the following warning: Using the VPN Server List of VPN Gate Service as the IP Blocking List of your country's Censorship Firewall is prohibited by us. The VPN Server List sometimes contains wrong IP addresses. If you enter the IP address list into your Censorship Firewall, unexpected accidents will occur on the firewall. Therefore you must not use the VPN Server List for managing your Censorship Firewall's IP blocking list. It sounds like they are intentionally putting incorrect IP addresses in those lists to discourage people from using the list for unintended purposes. Polygnotus (talk) 03:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I think that's an empty threat. It's possible, I suppose, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. C F A 03:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Possibly, but its wise to portscan instead of assume. Polygnotus (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, not a bad idea. C F A 03:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

CFA, I'll note that the "ingress" IPs listed on the website are not the IPs that will actually be editing Wikipedia if MAB uses them. For example, if I connect to VPNgate's "210.113.124.81" using OpenVPN, the IP address that requests are made to the outside internet with is 61.75.47.194.

To test this theory, I made a pywikibot that uses the list of IPs and OpenVPN config on the link CFA provided, connects to them and determines the actual "output" IP connecting to Wikipedia and then blocks with TPA revoked (I won't say why, but WP:ANI watchers will know). I tested it on a local MediaWiki installation and blocking the input IPs (i.e. the ones listed on the VPNgate website) had no effect but blocking the output ones (obtained by connecting to each input IP's VPN and making a request to [1]) effectively disabled VPNgate entirely.

Will this actually be useful and would you like me to submit a WP:BRFA? MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

To demonstrate: It's me, User:MolecularPilot, using the VPN listed as "210.113.124.81" (as that's the "input" IP) but actually editing with the output IP of 61.75.47.194. This output IP is not listed anywhere on the VPNgate website or CSV file. Can this IP also be WP:OPP blocked? 61.75.47.194 (talk) 02:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Huh, well that's an interesting find. I suppose that's what they mean by The VPN Server List sometimes contains wrong IP addresses. It would certainly be useful, but the harder part is finding an admin willing to do this (non-admins can't operate adminbots). Maybe a crosspost to AN would help? C F A 02:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

CFA, thank you for your very fast reply! Actually, I just examined the config files (they are provided in Base64 format at the CSV you gave, that's what the script uses to connect), and the listed IPs they give are actually blatant lies. For example, the VPN listed as "210.113.124.81" actually has "74.197.133.217:955" set as the input IP that my computer makes requests to, and, as shown above, actually makes requests to the outside internet/edits with "61.75.47.194". In fact, the VPN server list always contains wrong IP addresses - they're not even the correct input IP. The people behind VPNgate are quite good at tricky/opsec it seems. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

74.197.133.217 is actually listed in a completely different section of the VPNgate list (and the associated config file for it of course does not actually use 74.197.133.217), so the provided "IPs" do not match the actual input IP in the config file but the IPs for a different config file. Regardless, these input IPs are useless and it's the output IPs (only findable by testing) that we are interested in. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bot policy states In particular, bot operators should not use a bot account to respond to messages related to the bot. You mistakenly used bot account to respond below :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh I'm so sorry, I meant to reply with my main account, I didn't realise I was still logged into my bot account (I needed to login to make a manual fix to the JSON file). Thank you for picking up on it and correcting the mistake. :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 01:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Done bot is live and collating data about VPNgate egress IPs at User:MolecularBot/IPData.json. A frontend to lookup an IP address (and the number of times it's been seen as a VPNgate express node, as well as when it was last seen) is available [on Toolforge]. It also can generate statistics from the current list, currently with 146 IPs (only a small drop in the bucket generated during my testing and development, overly represents more obvious IPs) - 42.47% are currently blocked on enwiki and 23.97% are globally blocked. Working on guidelines for an adminbot to block these IPs based on number of sightings (ramping up in length as the IP has more sightings, to not overly punish short term volunteers) and will then post at WP:AN looking for a botop once ready. Consensus developed for both this bot and a future adminbot at WP:VPT. 06:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MolecularBot (talk • contribs) ^<diff>

Creation for nano bot

The 'Nano bot'(Natural Auditor and Native Organiser) will be useful for helping users create their user pages based on their recent actions and edits. Prime Siphon (talk) 20:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Since userpages are an expression of individuality, and are not necessary to create an encyclopedia, having a bot create them would not work. Polygnotus (talk) 03:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. Primefac (talk) 16:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Logging AfC drafts resubmitted without progress

This is essentially a request for the implementation of Option 2 of the RfC here. "The bot should add ... submissions [that haven't changed since the last time they were submitted] to a list, similar to the list of possible copyvios." JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 15:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

{{Working}}, I expect to be done in around 20 minutes. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 05:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Success, it will flag any re-submitted drafts without changes to User:MolecularBot/AfCResubmissions.json. Working on an accessible frontend on tool forge so that's its easy to lookup if a draft has been re-submitted. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 06:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Frontend coding done. Deploying this task to run continuously and also host the frontend on Toolforge... MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 06:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Frontend is now hosted at [2]. Waiting for a Toolforge task to complete in order to deploy the bot to run continously. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 07:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Will complete Toolforge deployment tomorrow. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 07:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I think you should use GET method instead of POST so that it can be used in the Template:AfC submission/tools template. – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

A GET-based JSON API is now avaliable by doing this (but replacing dummy with the actual name of the draft, excluding the Draft: prefix) https://molecularbot2.toolforge.org/resubAPI.php?pageName=Dummy Thanks for your feedback! :) However, I don't think it should be used in Template:AfC submission/tools because the RfC closed against commenting or labelling the actual submission page. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 01:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer Is it possible for you to publish a wikicode frontend based on the json. Something like Wikipedia:AfC sorting? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I think MolecularPilot can help with this. – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Oops, wrong ping thanks to the tiny buttons on mobile. Sorry DreamRimmer! @MolecularPilot: the real intended ping. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 11:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Done here: Wikipedia:Declined AfC submissions resubmitted without any changes! It uses a template I made ({{AfCResubmissions}}) that uses a module I made (Module:AfCResubmissions) which fetches the data from the bot's user JSON file. :) Just need to finish Toolforge deployment! MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, finally running successfully on Toolforge. See [3] and [4] for examples of behaviour. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Note that for adding an item to the list, the requirement is that it has an AFC submission wizard edit, directly after an AFCH decline.

For removing an item from the list, the requirement is that it has a change that is not done with AFCH or the AFC submission wizard.

The bot watches Special:RecentChanges for these. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
@MolecularPilot Thanks for the wiki frontend. Is it possible for the bot to exclude any null changes, and list them on the json? This will allow it to catch more pages and submissions. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 03:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Bunnypranav, do you mean a WP:NULLEDIT? Is there a reason someone would make one to a draft? MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Basically any edit with no (significant) changes. I do not have examples on hand, but I have seen resubmissions after Help:Dummy like edits as well. The bot can find cosmetic edits (only white space, casing changes for eg.). It's up to you to what extent you can implement. :) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 04:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense, thank you so much for the feedback! I'll have a look at what I can do. :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

List of schools in the UK

Hello. I'd like to request for a list of pages in Category:Schools in England, Category:Schools in Northern Ireland, Category:Schools in Scotland and Category:Schools in Wales and whatever file is used in their infobox. Format will be as such [ PAGE ] , [ Link to file ]. If possible, skip pages that are using a SVG file. Pages will go into User:Minorax/Schools in England, User:Minorax/Schools in Scotland, etc. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 14:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I assume you want to check the categories recursively, to some depth? — Qwerfjkl talk 15:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeap, hopefully you can dig deep into the large category (or any level you define as a possible-to-do) whilst skipping pages based on the following criteria where 1) an .svg extension file is used in the infobox, 2) there is no infobox available. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 16:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Minorax

Done User:Minorax/Schools in England, User:Minorax/Schools in Northern Ireland, User:Minorax/Schools in Scotland and User:Minorax/Schools in Wales. – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks! --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 09:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Category:University and college logos

Good day. I'd like to request for all .svg files in the above category be moved to Category:SVG logos of universities and colleges. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 02:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Working}}, the bot is running and doing the task right now! MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Update: still running, there's a lot of pages hahaha, but it's all working :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Seems to be {{Done}} now, thank you for all your work on schools! If it missed some or didn't do something right, please don't hesitate to reach out to me! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Wait, so it turns out some pages don't have the category explicitly set (the bot did move all the ones that explicitly set it), but use {{Non-free school logo}} which sets the category using a parameter. I'm running the bot now to update the template usages to use the new category. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

A LOT of pages have the category implicitly set this way so it is still running... but I can confirm it's definitely working and fixing these. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Actually

Done now hahaha! As before, if you it didn't catch everything please don't hesitate to reach out to me, Minorax. Happy new year! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Seems good. Happy new year to you too. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 04:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

"Was" in TV articles

Moved to WP:AWB/TASKS (diff)

Deferred to WP:AWBREQ as such a task would require human confirmation and is not appropriate for a bot to do. I have posted a copy of this discussion to that noticeboard now. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 05:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Request to replace usurped links

The domain www.uptheposh.com has been usurped, and all links (including sublinks like http://www.uptheposh.com/people/580/, http://www.uptheposh.com/seasons/115/transfers/) now redirect to a gambling site. I request InternetArchiveBot to replace all links containing www.uptheposh.com with their corresponding archived versions from the Wayback Machine.

This is my first time doing this - if I need to request somewhere else or anything is better done manually, please let me know! Nina Gulat (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Nina Gulat, you want WP:URLREQ. Primefac (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Nina Gulat (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Tagging Category:Cinema of Belgium

Hello, I would like to kindly request that all articles, categories, files, etc. within the Category:Cinema of Belgium be tagged with the newly created Belgian cinema task force. This will help streamline efforts to improve the quality and coverage of Belgian cinema-related content on Wikipedia. Earthh (talk) 11:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

How far down? I went down 3 levels and found Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which does not seem likely. Primefac (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Just a quick clarification: please tag all entries in the Category:Cinema of Belgium with the Belgian cinema task force, except for the entries of the following categories, as they may include films that are not necessarily Belgian:

Thanks for your help! --Earthh (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

I've cross-posted this to WP:AWB/TASKS as I think it's small enough for manual addition (though I may have miscounted, will check when I get home later). Primefac (talk) 14:35, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Earthh, as Primefac suggested, this can be done at WP:AWB/TA. This query with depth of 2 shows 717, and 86 with depth 1. Could you clarify on that. Also, what template changes are you suggesting? Like what should one tag it with? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience as I worked through the depth question. For this request:

Category:Cinema of Belgium: tagging should include up to depth 2.
Category:Belgian films: tagging should include up to depth 3.

The template to use is: {{WikiProject Film|Belgian-task-force=yes}}. Let me know if there are any issues or further clarifications needed.--Earthh (talk) 18:35, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

If it's over 700 it does push it a little into the bot territory, but if we can nail down a final number that would be best. Primefac (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

This one for Category:Belgian films and this for Category:Cinema of Belgium shows 717+956=1673 total. Is that right? @Earthh Also, all these pages are already tagged with film banner right, only the param is required? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 04:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

1682 for Category:Belgian films and 1189 for Category:Cinema of Belgium, including articles, files, templates, categories and portals. If these are already tagged with the film banner, |Belgian=yes or |Belgian-task-force=yes parameters will be enough. Earthh (talk) 15:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

will file a brfa tomorrow.

Not a big deal, but If these are already tagged means are they or not? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Just as a note of caution, per WP:Film#Scope, {{WikiProject Film}} should not be added to biographical articles/categories/etc., which should use {{WikiProject Biography|filmbio-work-group=yes}}. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 16:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. For entries tagged with {{WikiProject Film}}, the parameter |Belgian=yes should be used. For entries tagged with {{WikiProject Biography}}, the parameter |cinema=yes should be added to {{WikiProject Belgium}}. However, it seems that this parameter is not yet supported. I've submitted an edit request on Template talk:WikiProject Belgium to address this. Earthh (talk) 22:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Tom for the disclaimer.

@Earthh I shall do it like this. Replace {{WikiProject Film with {{WikiProject Film|Belgian=yes similarly {{WikiProject Biography with {{WikiProject Biography|cinema=yes For the pages in both above petscan queries. Is that fine? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your availability.

{{WikiProject Film}} should be replaced with {{WikiProject Film|Belgian=yes}}.
{{WikiProject Biography}} should be replaced with {{WikiProject Biography|filmbio-work-group=yes}}.

For the entries in both Petscan queries, {{WikiProject Belgium}} should be replaced or added as {{WikiProject Belgium|cinema=yes}} if not already present. Earthh (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

BRFA filed. Now time to wait! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Earthh: All done from the lists I hade made. Please tell if I missed any! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

@Earthh: {{WikiProject Film|Belgian=yes}} should be used per Template:WikiProject Film#National and Regional task forces. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 12:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

They are both in use at the moment; the one you suggested is definitely shorter :) Earthh (talk) 15:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav: Thank you for all the work you've done! Many individuals are still missing because we excluded the addition of the {{WikiProject Belgium}} tag and opted to only modify the parameters where it was already present. Is there anything we can do about this? Earthh (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Earthh Unless we have a clear cut definite list, I'm afraid it can't be a bot run ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:58, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Earthh Do you have anything more, or should I mark this as done and archive it? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 17:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav: everything is fine, it's all good to go. Thank you again for your help! Earthh (talk) 15:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Bulk remove "link will display the full calendar" from articles about calendar years

There are presumably hundreds of articles about calendar years (for example, 671) that contain the text "link will display the full calendar".

I believe this text violates the spirit of WP:CLICKHERE, specifically:

phrases like "click here" should be avoided [...] In determining what language is most suitable, it may be helpful to imagine writing the article for a print encyclopedia

The text "link will display the full calendar" would of course make no sense in a print encyclopedia, so I think it should be deleted. Given the number of articles that this text appears in, this deletion would best be done by a bot. Stephen Hui (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

A total of 1562 pages use this wording. – DreamRimmer (talk) 07:22, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, Stephen Hui, this has been discussed before at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 84#(link will display the full calendar). — Qwerfjkl talk 11:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

It has also been raised a number of times at WT:YEARS including following the linked BOTREQ (1, 2, 3), all of which were asking to remove it (without reply). Suffice to say, I think per WP:SILENCE there is a general lack of concern about whether this text is removed. Unless there is any significant opposition raised here in the next few days, I would be okay putting in a BRFA to remove the offending text. Primefac (talk) 22:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

If it hasn't been done already, I'd also suggest doing a few dozen "by hand" first, to see if that provokes any objection. I don't expect it will. Dicklyon (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Easy enough to mass-rollback, I just forgot I was planning on doing this. Primefac (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Done by the way. Primefac (talk) 12:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Bot to simplify "ref name" content

I have come across some very long ref names in ref tags, sometimes automatically generated by incorporating the title of the work that is being referenced, which is disfavored by WP:REFNAME, which asks that reference names be kept "short and simple" to avoid clutter. A ref name is nothing more than a piece of code by which to identify a reference, and can be as short as "A1" or the like. However, according to this search generously provided by Cryptic, insource:ref insource:/\< *ref *name *= *[^ <>][^<>]{76}/, there are over 1,600 Wikipedia articles containing ref names that are over 75 characters in length, which is ridiculous. I have started hand-fixing these, and that is arduous, and I suspect bot-fixable. I would therefore like a bot that checks each page for ref names over the length of some set number of characters, perhaps something is short as 30 or 40 characters, and where a ref name is excessively long, shorten it to a more reasonable length (that does not match any existing names on the page).

In the course of this search, I have also come across quite a few ref names that contain complete urls, [[bracketed]] terms as would appear in linked text, and various non-standard characters or text usually used for formatting. I would like any instance of brackets, use of "http://" or "https://" or characters outside of the English alphanumeric set of letters, numbers, and basic punctuation to be stripped out or replaced with characters in that set. BD2412 T 03:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd support bot-shortnening without seeing a demo of it. This seems to be more in the wheelhouse of semi-automated fixes. I'm opened to be convinced though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

A ref name is not article text. It is literally just a signal to allow multiple uses of a reference. We could replace every ref name in the encyclopedia with a random string of three or four letters/numbers, so long as each ref name was unique within its article, and it would not change their functionality at all. Granted, there are some projects (like those working on comic book movies) where they craft ref names for more informative purposes, but where this is done, the ref names are never excessively long or made with brackets, URLs, or exotic characters. The only thing an excessively long or convoluted ref name accomplishes is reduce usability and clutter up the Wikitext wherever it is used. BD2412 T 03:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

See also User:Nardog/RefRenamer-core.js which is an awesome tool for quickly renaming all refs in a given article. -- GreenC 04:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

@GreenC: Does it rename all of them? I am just concerned about the ridiculous ones (see, e.g., this fix). BD2412 T 04:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Kudos on the fixes you've done already. One point of WP:REFNAME is that reference names should have semantic value (not, for example "A1" or a random string of characters). It doesn't make the slightest difference to the reader, of course, but makes it easier for human editors to cite the correct source. Are you familiar with RefRenamer? I use it to replace reference names like ":0" and "auto1" with reasonably short but meaningful names, and it makes the replacement process a lot easier. It could simplify the task of replacing obscenely long reference names with much shorter ones, although it's still a by-hand tool, not a bot. It only changes the ones you tell it to. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll check it out, thanks. However, with thousands of articles having excessively long ref names, there is still likely an advantage for having a bot do some of this lifting. BD2412 T 04:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I might be able to do it manually with this tool, but it does not always actually shorten the name, sometimes it just formats it. This should work on the worst cases, though. BD2412 T 04:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it should be possible to use the code from RefRenamer in combination with Bandersnatch to run it semi-automatically. — Qwerfjkl talk 14:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Seems like a good example of WP:CONTEXTBOT to me. While "Author year" style, for example, will probably work well for types of sources where an author usually only publishes one per year, it won't work all that well for others. And personally I wish people would make more use of naming conventions that are more likely to be globally unique rather than less, often enough I've seen multiple articles on related topics that all cite different articles from a website and, since each only uses one article, the website's name gets used as the ref name, which has led to accidental bad refs if content is copy-pasted between the articles. Anomie ⚔ 15:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a good point about copying to other articles. "Authorlastname" is usually sufficient, if not then "Authorlastname YYYY-MM". Likewise the citation should have |last= as the first field so it's easy to visually find. I've found these two methods (with RefRenamer) are my current best practice. -- GreenC 16:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Even so, I think we can all agree that it is bad to have ref names like:

"Legitimate politics : a source of codification between theory and practice: A fundamental study of the uniting unity between politics and jurisprudence"
"urlThe Alkaloids of Tabernanthe iboga. Part IV.1 The Structures of Ibogamine, Ibogaine, Tabernanthine and Voacangine - Journal of the American Chemical Society (ACS Publications)"
"Dr. Coburn Stands for Science:Opposes Congressional efforts to honor debunked author linked to failed global malaria control"

That said, I have played around with the ref renamer tool pointed out be GreenC and Worldbruce, and I do think that I can use it to handle this task without needing a bot. BD2412 T 18:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

As such,

Request withdrawn by requester. NotAG on AWB (talk) 14:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC) I have amended the template used in this comment because it was causing errors. The BOTREQ template does not have a "withdrawn" option. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 08:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't agree those are bad, at least not for the reason you think they are. The second should drop the odd "url" prefix and the third could use a space after the colon if they're going to be titled like that, but if editors of an article find it useful to use the full title of a work as its ref name then 🤷 why should we care? I've seen you insist on doing things that I personally think are stranger. Anomie ⚔ 15:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Sortname redirects do not sit in the article's Wikitext, making it difficult to see where the reference even begins and ends. I literally just removed a "ref name=The Edinburgh Gazetteer: Or, Geographical Dictionary: Containing a Description of the Various Countries, Kingdoms, States, Cities, Towns, Mountains, &c. of the World; an Account of the Government, Customs, and Religion of the Inhabitants; the Boundaries and Natural Productions of Each Country, &c. &c. Forming a Complete Body of Geography, Physical, Political, Statistical, and Commercial with Addenda, Containing the Present State of the New Governments in South America..."; and a "ref name="[RECRUES 2020/2021] Arrivée officielle à Sapiac de @Dylan_Sage11 pour la saison prochaine! Médaille de bronze aux Jeux Olympiques de Rio 2016, 134 sélections pour 155 points, il arrive pour renforcer l'effectif de l'USM et faire vibrer la @rugbyprod2 #AllezSapiac". BD2412 T 04:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Deletion of navboxes at Category:Basketball Olympic squad navigational boxes by competition

List of templates for deletion at Category:Basketball Olympic squad navigational boxes by competition

Requesting for bot help to nominate 156 navboxes for deletion (listed above). These navboxes are for teams that finished lower than third place in the Olympic basketball tournaments. Such templates are subject to WP:TCREEP and were previously deleted per May 31, 2021, April 22, 2020, June 7, 2019, and March 29, 2019 (first, second and third) discussions (to name a few). – sbaio 17:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe one day I'll complete User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD and things like this will be much easier.— Qwerfjkl talk 17:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

It is very easy to list these templates at TFD as a batch. Someone with AWB should be able to help you apply the correct TFD template to all of them. Notification of the templates' creators might also be not-too-hard with AWB, especially if you provide a list of those editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Ill tag them, if I could get the editors users ill notify as well.

Working with AWB. Geardona (talk to me?) 23:48, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Geardona, have you completed this task? Thanks! (I'm trying to sort out all the discussions and either make the bot to do them, or close them). MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Basketball biography infobox request

On the basketball biography infobox, all instances of |HOF_player= and |HOF_coach= should just be |HOF= as there is no actual difference between the two. The issue can be seen on Lenny Wilkens where both parameters are used and link to the same page. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Bill Sharman appears to not hold to that trend, so it would appear that it is not true to say "all" instances must be changed. I will also note that there are only 79 instances of both parameters even appearing in the same article, so this is too small a task for a bot (try WP:AWBREQ or just tweak things manually). Primefac (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I meant that even single instances of |HOF_player= and |HOF_coach= should be moved to |HOF=, allowing the removal of the first two parameters within the infobox itself. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

If the other two parameters are reasonable alternate parameters, it would make more sense to have them as alternate parameters rather than edit every page using any single parameter. Primefac (talk) 20:36, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

They are redundant as they both link to the same exact page as there is no official designation between being inducted as a player or coach into the Naismith Basketball Hall of Fame. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

And yet, Bill Sharman uses both parameters with different values in them. The might have the same base URL, but clearly the values passed to them can be different. Primefac (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually, it does seem like there are separate pages to represent an inductee's playing and coaching accomplishments despite there being no official difference between the two, as per Bill Sharman. In that case, I suppose there must be more of a consensus to merge/remove the parameters before this can be implemented. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Marking for the table above that this

Needs wider discussion. NotAG on AWB (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Lowercasing the word "romanized"

I've never done this before, but I've noticed a rather annoying issue that no human has the time to sort out manually. (Incidentally, my request is very similar to another active one.) There are thousands of stubs on Iranian locations that have the word "romanized" needlessly capitalised mid-sentence (apparently all mass-created by the same now-retired user). I'm not sure exactly how to track all of them down, but see categories like Sarbisheh County geography stubs or Qom province geography stubs. Anonymous 23:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

It looks like there may be around 820 pages, though there might be some valid uses in there (beginnings of sentences, Title Case, etc). Primefac (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think this is a comprehensive list (indeed, many of them use "Romanized" in a different sense and most seem correct in doing so). The stub articles on Iranian villages I'm referencing all follow the same basic layout and all appear to be miscapitalising the word in the exact same spot. There have to be tens of thousands — I seem to land on one at least every twenty presses of the "random article" button. Anonymous 18:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

That is a case-sensitive regex search; it will only return capital-R-Romanized. If they aren't on that list, then they don't exist. Next time you see examples please post them here. Primefac (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm getting this message on my end: A warning has occurred while searching: The regex search timed out, so only partial results are available. Try simplifying your regular expression to get complete results. If there are indeed only 820 instances in all of Wikipedia, then that means that the chance of landing on any article with uppercase "Romanized" when hitting "random article" should be around 0.01%. It happens to me with fair consistency. Does it seem plausible that I'm getting these at several hundred times the normal rate? Anonymous 20:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

So you're clicking the random article button, and landing on dozens of Iranian villages (of which you still haven't given any examples)? That seems more unlikely than there being mysteriously thousands of articles not showing up on a search. Primefac (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that I'm lying about something this mundane and pointless? Here are six examples of articles I have randomly landed on and corrected: Lal-e Tazehabad, Golab-e Pain, Neyneh, Rudbarak, Gilan, and Dahich (check the edit history if you need proof). If your numbers are correct, these six articles represent around 0.7% of all articles that use(d) "Romanized" (for comparison, they're around 0.00008% of all English Wikipedia articles). Anonymous 21:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

No, I was not suggesting you were lying, I was trying to discover the mismatch between what you were saying and what I was seeing. I was searching for Romanized, while the text you are seeing is [[Romanize]]d, which are two very different things. That search gives ~41k pages. Primefac (talk) 09:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Probably worth letting {{langx}} handle this like this. Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

That would probably also reduce or remove a lot of the CONTEXTBOT issues I was envisioning. Primefac (talk) 09:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Bot to block proxy servers and VPNs automatically

I think we should have a bot that would block proxy servers and VPNs automatically as we have a LTA right now who is very disruptive and uses proxy servers and VPNs to spam over and over to a point where most help pages like WP:AN WP:ANI WP:Help desk WP:Teahouse etc are protected i was thinking that a bot could automatically block all VPNS and proxy servers to reduce this LTA while reducing the disruption to normal users by the semi protection Is la🏳️‍⚧ 22:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't User:ProcseeBot already do this? Nyttend (talk) 22:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Has not worked since 2020 Is la🏳️‍⚧ 01:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Same here, I thought User:ST47ProxyBot did this but it turned out to have been retired in 2024 Rusty 🐈 01:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

There is a Phabricator task for this: T380917. – DreamRimmer (talk) 01:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Serial commas in page titles

Hello, I'm not sure that this request can be completed automatically; please accept my apology if it can't. I just want some lists, without edits to anything except the page where you put the lists, so it's not a CONTEXTBOT issue: just a "good use of time" issue. Could you compile some lists of pages in which serial commas are present or are omitted? I just discovered List of cities, towns and villages in Cyprus and created List of cities, towns, and villages in Cyprus as a redirect to support serial commas. Ideally, whenever a page could have a serial comma in the title, we'd have a redirect for the form not used by the current title, but I assume this isn't always the case.

First off, I'd like a list of all mainspace pages (whether articles, lists, disambiguation pages, anything else except redirects) that use a serial comma. I think the criteria might be:

[one or more words]
comma
[one or more words]
comma
["and" or "or"]
[one or more words]

I'm unsure whether they're rigid enough, or whether they might return a lot of false positives.

Secondly, I'd like a list of all pages whose titles are identical to the first list, except lacking a serial comma. Redirects would be acceptable here, since if I'm creating serial-comma redirects, it helps to know if it already exists.

Thirdly, I'd like a list of all mainspace pages (whether articles, lists, disambiguation pages, anything else except redirects) that could use a serial comma but don't. I think the criteria would be:

[Page is not on first or second list]
[one or more words]
comma
one or more words]
["and" or "or", but no comma immediately beforehand]
[one or more words]

Once the list is complete, the bot checks each page with the following process: "if I inserted a comma immediately before 'and' or 'or', would it appear on the first list?" If the answer is "no", the bot removes it from the list.

Fourthly, I'd like a list of all pages whose titles are identical to the third list, except they have a serial comma. Again, redirects are acceptable.

Is this a reasonable request? Please let me know if it's not, so I don't waste your time. Nyttend (talk) 20:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Nyttend, I guess intitle:/[A-Za-z ]+, [A-Za-z ]+, (and|or) [A-Za-z ]+/ would work for the first request and intitle:/[A-Za-z ]+, [A-Za-z ]+ (and|or) [A-Za-z ]+/ would work for the second.
The latter two lists are trickier. I think your best bet is probably WP:QUARRY. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Is there a way to download a list of results from a particular search? As far as I know, the only way to get a list of results is to copy/paste the whole thing somewhere and delete everything that's not a page title. (With 11,544 results for the first search, this isn't something I want to do manually.) Also, the first search includes redirects, e.g. Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Nations is result #1. Nyttend (talk) 20:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

@Nyttend: If you have AWB installed, you can use its 'Make list' function to generate a list of pages. https://insource.toolforge.org is a tool that can generate a list of pages from search results. Currently, it only supports the insource: parameter, but I plan to add functionality for other parameters like intitle: and incategory: soon. If you are unable to generate the list yourself, feel free to message or ping me, and I will create it for you and add it to your userspace. – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, DreamRimmer, but someone at WP:QUARRY provided me with a list. Now I just need to do the filtering work to create redirects. Nyttend (talk) 08:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Note that search results are limited to the first 10,000 pages. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Create redirects from human-curated list

Following User:Qwerfjkl's advice in #Serial commas in page titles, I filed a Quarry request and got the information I wanted. I'm about to begin checking them, and I know I'll have heaps of potential redirects to create. Are there any bots already in existence that are already approved to create redirects from human-curated lists? It would be convenient if I could just dump a few hundred pairs of links (the title to be created, and the title to be the target) and have a bot create them. Probably there will be many more than a few hundred, so I was envisioning providing lists here and there, without a schedule. Nyttend (talk) 05:34, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

There are not, and you would need a solid consensus to have a bot do so. Primefac (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't DannyS712 bot III do something like this? JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 17:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

No, that's for patrolling them. Primefac (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I linked to the wrong one. I meant to link to this AnomieBOT BRFA. JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 17:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but that is to overcome a technical challenge (as it says in the edit summary, "endashes are hard") so there is precedent but for a different issue. Primefac (talk) 17:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Also that task too was proposed to the community. Looking back I'm a little surprised the community's response was mostly WP:SILENCE, I guess people worried about it less back in 2016. Personally, if you were to run this by Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) and get WP:SILENCE too, I'd be satisfied. You'll also want to consider details like which Rcat templates should be applied. Anomie ⚔ 12:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Help clear Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors

If someone could write a bot that

Checks Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors
Checks (e.g.) Category:Military history articles by quality (recurse 1 level) and convert from talk pages (see Category:Articles by WikiProject for other '<Wikiproject> articles by quality' categories)

Compare both list, and create a report

Province over-capitalization

See WP:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#50K articles with over-capitalized "Province" and WT:WikiProject Iran#Fixing widespread over-capitalization of "Province" (just started). There are over 50,000 articles with over-capitalized Province since the Jan 2022 multi-RM that moved all the Iranian province titles to lowercase. Assuming the project discussion doesn't turn up resistance to fixing, many of these would be easily amenable to bot fixing, like the task that User:BsoykaBot did for NFL Draft over-capitalization. Dicklyon (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Actually, there's not much activity at WikiProject Iran, so if anyone wants to see this discussed more, point me at a better place to bring it up. Dicklyon (talk) 04:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

I did a bunch of these by hand on Dec. 6 (example). No reaction from anyone. Dicklyon (talk) 04:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Bsoyka and DreamRimmer: Thank you both for volunteering to help if/when we see clear consensus or a closed discussion on this. Does anyone have a good idea how to provoke more response? All I've got so far is silence. The big RM was similarly quiet, with no opposition and just 2 supports. Dicklyon (talk) 21:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

This is why bots go through trials; not only does it allow for the bot operator to demonstrate that their bot operates as intended, it gives users the opportunity to give feedback on the task. If this is a potentially contentious task, we can have the bots not mark the edits as minor during the trial to raise more awareness of it prior to acceptance. Primefac (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, a trial not marked minor is a good idea beyond the bunch I did by hand not marked minor. Are you prepared to approve such a trial? Bsoyka has a bot that's got demonstrated competence at doing such things, while avoiding purely cosmetic edits. Dicklyon (talk) 02:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

I've got no response at the discussion I opened at the project. Is it OK to move forward with bot approval process? Dicklyon (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Bsoyka and DreamRimmer: would either of you be willing to file an RFBA on this now, or should I try to provoke discussion elsewhere? Dicklyon (talk) 23:39, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Dicklyon, you can file a WP:BRFA yourself if you are seeking approval to use AWB for this. I recommend the easy-brfa.js script linked on the page. :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I am not seeking to use AWB for this, but for someone else to do so. Dicklyon (talk) 07:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Replacing FastilyBot

Now that Fastily has retired, FastilyBot is no longer running. Any chance of a replacement? On the bot's deleted userpage, one can see that it ran 17 tasks and updated 31 database reports. ✗plicit 14:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I have written code to update ten database reports. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I have restored the userpage to Special:Permalink/1258404221 for tracking purposes. If anyone needs any of the code from any of the subpages, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I am taking over the following database reports: 4, 11, 12, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, and 31. – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, given the availability of the sql queries https://github.com/fastily/fastilybot-toolforge/tree/master/scripts, it might be better to convert the pages to usse {{Database report}}. — Qwerfjkl talk 18:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I second this suggestion for database reports. I converted Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of non-existent templates (number 18 on the list) to use {{database report}}, and after fixing a couple of bonehead oversights on my part, it is working well and more functional than the previous report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I have spent time writing code to update these database reports. There are some config files for certain database reports, so I have included functionality to exclude files from the report that transclude any templates or belong to any category listed in the config file. Database reports cannot do that, but I have no problem if you all want to use SDZeroBot's database reports. – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, I agree that if it's not possible or feasible to use {{Database report}}, it makes sense for you to handle it; but where we can, it's nice to have some kind of standardisation for the reports. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:34, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll look into taking over the deletion discussion notifier. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 16:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

BRFA filed DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 23:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

except for database reports, let me know if I can help with any other task. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Since I'm heavily invested in the file namespace, tasks 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, and 17 are relevant for my work. ✗plicit 00:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
I would strongly second that tasks, 1-2, 4-12, and 14-17 are more or less essential for keeping this area running smoothly. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
alright. So what tasks are remaining now? —usernamekiran (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Tasks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15 and 17 are still pending. If my assistance is needed with any task, I would be happy to help with some of them. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
@DreamRimmer: I think Explicit is going to take over tasks 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, and 17. What I mean is, first we should make it clear who is going to tackle which task, before spending time working on it. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Nope, I'm clueless in this area. Those are the tasks are the ones I would like to have kept going. ✗plicit 14:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Is the code for these tasks available somewhere? It might be fairly simple to get it up and running again. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Looks like it's availabe at https://github.com/fastily/fastilybot/blob/main/fastilybot/bots.py. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
There are also some config pages on-wiki, I think I managed to undelete them all but if one is missing let me know. Primefac (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Since no one is taking these, I am going to take over two tasks, Task 4 and 10. I will code these from scratch and file a BRFA in a few hours. – DreamRimmer (talk) 07:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
BRFA filed and BRFA filed. – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Current progress

Just creating a table below for a quick idea of which tasks (based on Special:Permalink/1258404221) are being handled. Please add ~~~~~ at the bottom if you update things. Primefac (talk) 12:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Original task	Description	New Task
1	Replace `{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}`, for local files which are already on Commons, with `{{Now Commons}}`.	CanonNiBot 1
2	Remove `{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}` from ineligible files.	CanonNiBot 1
3	Report on malformed SPI pages.	MolecularBot 4
5	Add `{{Wrong-license}}` to files with conflicting (free & non-free) licensing information.	KiranBOT 15
7	Replace `{{Now Commons}}`, for local files which are nominated for deletion on Commons, with `{{Nominated for deletion on Commons}}`.	CanonNiBot 1
8	Replace `{{Nominated for deletion on Commons}}`, for local files which have been deleted on Commons, with `{{Deleted on Commons}}`.	CanonNiBot 1
9	Remove `{{Nominated for deletion on Commons}}` from files which are no longer nominated for deletion on Commons.	CanonNiBot 1
11	Fill in missing `date` parameter for select usages of `{{Now Commons}}`.
13	Post various database reports to Wikipedia:Database reports.
17	Remove instances of `{{FFDC}}` which reference files that are no longer being discussed at FfD.	KiranBOT 14
15	Remove `{{Now Commons}}` from file description pages which also translcude `{{Keep local}}`	CanonNiBot 1
14	Leave courtesy notifications for uploaders (who were not notified) when their files are proposed for deletion.	DatBot 12
4	Remove `{{Orphan image}}` from free files which are not orphaned.	DreamRimmer bot 3
6	Leave courtesy notifications for uploaders (who were not notified) when their files are nominated for dated deletion.	DatBot 12
10	Add `{{Orphan image}}` to orphaned free files.	DreamRimmer bot 2
12	Leave courtesy notifications for uploaders (who were not notified) when their files are nominated for discussion.	DatBot 12
16	Leave courtesy notifications for article authors (who were not notified) when their contributions are proposed for deletion.	DatBot 12

12:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Since nobody's taking them, I'm gonna try working on tasks 5 and 15. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for volunteering :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:32, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

updated task 17 with KiranBOT 14. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I've claimed the malformed SPI task. My bot will be an WP:EXEMPTBOT for this task and not require BRFA because it will just report malformed SPIs to User:MolecularBot/MalformedSPIs.json, which will then be displayed on the malformed SPIs page in projectspace through a template and Lua module, similar to my AfC bot (botreq by JJPMaster below). MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 06:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Completed & running continously (it watches RecentChanges) on Toolforge :) See Wikipedia:Malformed SPI Cases. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 08:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

working on FastilyBot 5 "add {{Wrong-license}} to files", will file BRFA when code is ready. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Tagging Category:Cinema of Israel

Hello, I would like to kindly request that all articles, categories, files, etc. within the Category:Cinema of Israel be tagged with the newly created Israeli cinema task force. This will help streamline efforts to improve the quality and coverage of Israeli cinema-related content on Wikipedia.

Please exclude the following subcategories, as they may include films that are not necessarily Israeli and these categories include biographies (which are not part of WP Film):

I saw the request above on Belgian films and used it as a template for my request. Thank you. LDW5432 (talk) 05:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

This query with depth of 5 returns 1003 articles. I have checked a few random ones, and they seem fine. @LDW5432, can you please go through some random articles and let me know if there are any that should be removed from the list? – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Hold on with the bot. I need to remove people pages from the category as they aren't supposed to be in the film task force category. I will list a few that should not be included or we can manually remove later--:

Tel Aviv University

ICon festival

Jinni (search engine)

Kibbutzim College

- LDW5432 (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I updated the bot request to not include biographies. If you run it now with the new parameters and exclude the following four pages then everything should be good to be tagged. @DreamRimmer

Tel Aviv University

ICon festival

Jinni (search engine)

Kibbutzim College

- LDW5432 (talk) 21:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

@LDW5432:This updated query shows 356 pages. If we remove these four, there will be 352 pages left to edit. Can you please confirm, so that I can tag them? – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this is a good list. Please tag them. Thank you. LDW5432 (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I am finding that the depth isn't high enough to tag many films. Can you run another query on this category? Category:Israeli films

And exclude this category: Category:Israeli–Palestinian conflict films

- LDW5432 (talk) 18:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Done Tagged 334 pages. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for tagging those 334 pages.

In my previous comment, I mentioned that the initial query doesn't have a depth which reaches important articles. The query you ran missed important films like Lemon Popsicle and The House on Chelouche Street.

Can you run the query again but on this category: Category:Israeli films

And exclude this category: Category:Israeli–Palestinian conflict films

Thank you.

- LDW5432 (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@LDW5432: Can you please tell me which depth is correct? – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

This query finds the missing films. LDW5432 (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

There are many articles, such as Hounds of War and Gwen Stacy (Spider-Verse), that do not belong to the Cinema of Israel. There are many such articles. If you can provide me with the correct query or a list, I can help. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Hounds of War is made by an Israeli director so it should be included. Some films have Israeli producers. You are correct that the other pages shouldn't be included. I reduced the depth to "2" and it fixes it. Query. - LDW5432 (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

@LDW5432: This list contains some articles that do not belong to Israeli cinema, and some users have complained about it. The good thing is that I have only tagged a few from the second query. Please create a correct list; otherwise, I will not be able to assist with this. I am going to revert the last few changes. – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Do you not want to include foreign films made by Israeli directors and producers? They don't need to be included. LDW5432 (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Bot to track usage of AI images in articles

There are two similar tasks, both relying on categorisation data from Commons, which are currently only being done manually and occasionally:

Tracking when an image from a subcategory of commons:Category:Upscaling is being used in a Wikipedia article. (Such files almost always go against MOS:IMAGES#Editing images, and in some cases the upscaled version of an image will be restored repeatedly whenever a new editor is pleased to have found a "higher res" version on Commons.)
Tracking when a file from a subcategory of commons:Category:AI-generated media is being used in a Wikipedia article. (This is fine when illustrating an AI topic, but needs review in other contexts. Such usage is currently being recorded manually at Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/AI images in non-AI contexts.)

I don't know what output would be appropriate, whether it should be a hidden maintenance category or a list page somewhere. Would this be a good job for a bot? Belbury (talk) 10:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Belbury: Hello. Yes, this is doable. I mean, finding images from commons categories being used in enwiki articles is doable. I think two plain lists (on separate pages) can be generated —— one for upscaling, other for AI generated. With text something similar to: * File:Arcturian.png in article Arcturians (New Age). The page/output can be formatted in various ways, similar to Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup/AI images in non-AI contexts as well. I am not sure how to work with hidden maintenance category. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Two lists sounds like they should be enough. I don't know if that even needs to be a bot, or if it could just be a script that was hosted off-site somewhere.

I'll notify Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup of this discussion in case they have any input. Belbury (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
@Belbury: I have published both lists in my sandbox. Feel free to copy them from there. – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Published script at User:DreamRimmer/commonsfileusage.py. – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:10, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! That looks really useful.

So we'd need to find somebody else to host that script and run it on a regular basis? Belbury (talk) 11:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
You can run it on PAWS and then copy-paste the results onto the wiki. I don't think automating it is necessary since there won't be many pages each week. Just run it on PAWS as needed. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Automation would be good so that the list was always up to date and didn't rely on a person remembering to process it, but I'll see where it can be taken from there. Thanks again. Belbury (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:MLS

Per the RFD discussion here, the redirect above is to be retargeted, but there's still many cases where the redirect is being used instead of the actual template. A bot to replace the current transclusions of Template:MLS with Template:MLS player, allowing the former to be retargeted per the discussion is requested. oknazevad (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

This looks fairly simple and straightforward, and may be better suited for WP:AWBREQ ~ Rusty ^meow ~ 02:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

@Rusty Cat https://linkcount.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&page=Template%3AMLS shows that there are 1500+ transclusions, this is a job better suited for a bot. @Oknazevad: I am ready to do this task, but since this is basically a redirect bypassing job, do you think more consensus is needed apart from 3 people at the RfD, say at some wikiproject? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 07:21, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

If you think so, but since it would just be replacing the redirect with the actual template, I don't think there could be much objection. As I said at ten RFD, it would allow the redirect to point to the navbox template consistent with other similar template redirects. oknazevad (talk) 07:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

@Oknazevad Gotcha,

BRFA filed ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 07:55, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

For what it's worth, my bot is already approved for this sort of thing, but carry on. Primefac (talk) 07:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

If my task gets approved, can I also do such small runs without explicit approval? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

No, because your task is specific to this template. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

@Oknazevad Job is

Done, MLS transclusions show no mainspace usage, I believe this is good to be retargeted. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:40, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

And retargeting

Done. Thanks all! oknazevad (talk) 15:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

IUCN Status Bot

Anyone have a bot to update the conservation statuses of organisms? If not, I can help make it myself (granted, my knowledge is very limited but I am willing to learn). AidenD (talk) 04:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey @AidenD, I made a template to link TNC status from Wikidata to organisms. If you want to work on IUCN I would be willing to work with you on doing something similar. Template:TNCStatus Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Sure! Are you free to reach out on, say, Discord? AidenD (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Bot to go over pages at Category:Talk pages with comments before the first section

Category:Talk pages with comments before the first section description says that these pages can cause display issues on mobile. WP:AWB, as part of its general fixes adds "Untitled" to these sections, which I think is a good enough fix and is much better than just leaving these as is. If someone can get a bot to do that would be the easiest solution. Gonnym (talk) 15:52, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I think the bot should ignore /todo and /GA pages for the first pass as those might need a different fix. Gonnym (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Is that cat accurate? I randomly chose a page (Talk:Abersychan School) which does not fall into that category, and it's been unedited long enough I don't see it as a cache issue. Primefac (talk) 17:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

That page has {{WikiProject Schools}} which uses |info= that the software sees as a comment (not really sure how relevant that system of comments inside banners is in 2025. I doubt any comment from 2007 in a banner can be helpful). Gonnym (talk) 17:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I actually read the cat documentation (shocker!) after I posted; agree that's why. Curious how many other pages like that are technically fine but the system thinks they're messed up... Primefac (talk) 17:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

BOT to clean-up spaces round non-breaking spaces

Hello, there is a need for a BOT to remove leading and trailing spaces from the non-breaking space character ( ). If a space exists then you end up with 2 spaces in the rendered text and it negates the purpose of having a non-breaking space as a break can be made between the space and the non-breaking space. You should ignore the cases where a non-breaking space is used as a template parameter or a cell entry in a table. Keith D (talk) 00:10, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Keith D, sounds like WP:CONTEXTBOT - try WP:AWBREQ. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:51, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

@Keith D - Would this be a candidate for WP:AWB/Typos? GoingBatty (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Auto URL Access Level

Specific publications (generally newspapers) have global URL access requirements. Believe it would be useful for a bot to crawl for specific websites within citations and apply the {{registration required}}, {{subscription required}} and {{limited access}} based on a list somewhere

Example

www.smh.com.au -> {{limited access}}

www.afr.com -> {{subscription required}}

both of these publications particularly were heavily referenced prior to the subscription model being introduced. A fair chunk of other various rags would find their place in this list, too. :) Losbeth (talk) 15:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

@GreenC, does your bot do this? — Qwerfjkl talk 18:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

No, I don't. I think this sort of bot could be error prone. You have to assume nothing. If a website supposedly has a global policy, it almost surely is not a global policy, there will be exceptions. And that policy will change in the future. At best maybe a bot that detects known page warnings, such as a sub required banner, checks each URL one by one. It's adding |url-access= based on verification. Here is an afr.com page that is not subscription required. -- GreenC 22:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

A bot that blocks adblocks.

Non-starter. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You know the deal here. Companies no likey adblockers. Swede the Great I (talk) 03:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

And what does this have to do with Wikipedia? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:53, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh. Swede the Great I (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not have ads, never has, and never will, so this is unnecessary.
Wikipedia is not owned by a for-profit company. It's owned by the Wikimedia Foundation.
That's not what bots are for. You seem to be suggesting a MediaWiki feature, and feature requests go to Phabricator, not here.

JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 04:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bot Request for ChemistBot – Modifying ChEMBL IDs in Drugboxes

Dear Wikipedia Bot Approvals Team,

I am writing to request approval for ChemistBot, a bot that I have created to assist with editing Wikipedia pages. The intended task for ChemistBot is to automate the process of modifying and updating ChEMBL IDs in the drugboxes for relevant drug articles.

Bot Description: ChemistBot will be used to: Search for drug articles with missing or incorrect ChEMBL IDs. Update the drugbox infoboxes with the correct ChEMBL ID. Ensure the data in the drugboxes is accurate and up-to-date.

Bot's Workflow: ChemistBot will focus on articles for pharmaceutical drugs and related compounds. It will use reliable external databases such as ChEMBL to gather accurate IDs. The bot will not make major editorial changes to the article text but will solely focus on modifying the ChEMBL ID within the drugbox template.

Approval Information: The bot will be fully automated and will operate under a clearly identified account named ChemistBot. I have ensured that the bot complies with all relevant Wikipedia guidelines, including those for bot edits and automated tasks.

Please let me know if you require any additional information or if there are further steps I need to follow. I look forward to your approval to help maintain and improve the quality of drug-related information on Wikipedia. Best regards,

ChemistBot (Bot Account) ChemistBot (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

A few things:

Please read WP:BOTPOL
Please do not edit using this account again until you
File a BRFA with your personal account

Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for your reply. I've read the WP:BOTPOL and ensured the Bot would comply with Wikipedia's policy. Kindly, consider the request for ChemistBot as outlined above to allow modifications of ChEMBL IDs. Chemist1986 (talk) 00:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Step 3 is not optional. This page is BOTREQ, not BRFA. Primefac (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Even if they do find BRFA, it's likely WP:BOTNOTNOW is going to apply. Anomie ⚔ 02:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

True; I thought we had an essay on the matter but could not find it so I did not mention it. Primefac (talk) 11:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Redlinked web-url categories being spawned by template

Resolved

Due to recent changes to {{non-free promotional}}, the redlinked category report has been hit with dozens and dozens of redlinked nonsense categories named after web urls. The issue is that the template has traditionally allowed the insertion of a web url to link the image source's terms of use — but because the coding of these wasn't always consistent in the past, the recent changes have caused the template to now interpret some of them as category declarations instead of terms of use.

This can easily be fixed by ensuring that any web url in the template is clearly coded as terms=, but there are just so damn many of them to fix that I'm not inclined to go through them all manually.

So is there a bot that can go through all uses of {{non-free promotional}}, to ensure that any iterations of |http or |1=http are replaced with |terms=http? Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Bearcat, 82 results (using a flawed search that will have a few false positives). — Qwerfjkl talk 16:58, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

That's not what I need. Special:WantedCategories already has the resulting redlinked categories on it, so finding the affected pages in the first place wasn't the problem — the issue is that I'm looking for a bot to make the redlinked categories go away (ideally today so that they don't carry over to tomorrow's 72-hour update), so that I don't have to gnome my way through all of those pages for hours and hours fixing it manually. Bearcat (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

It looks like most of this was already fixes by others. I AWB-ed about 40 and fixed 4 manually, which should be all of it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Bearcat, ah, I see. I've just purged them all now. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:30, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

... though WP:AWBREQ is probably a better place for requests like these, in the future. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Bearcat (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
Come to think of it, I should add that in theory I could have just done that in AWB myself, but I have no idea how to take a list of redlinked categories and turn it into a list of the individual pages inside the categories — I genuinely attempted that, but couldn't make heads or tails of how to make a batchable list of the pages that needed to be gone through. So if i do need to do something similar in the future, how would I even do that? Bearcat (talk) 17:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
I used Qwerfjkl's list, which was done by an insource search specific to this scenario. I'm not aware of any good genericized way of doing that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:07, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
I suppose you could write a pywikibot script. Something like this:
import pywikibot site = pywikibot.Site('wikipedia:en') categories = [ page for page in site.wantedcategories() if page.title(with_ns=False).startswith("Http") ] pages_to_edit = [] for category in categories: for page in category.members(): if page not in pages_to_edit: # avoid duplicates pages.to_edit.append(page) print(pages_to_edit)
But there aren't many searching tools that work with special pages. — Qwerfjkl talk 21:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing, I did an AWB run and thought I made all the replacements after the template change, but apparently not!— TAnthony^Talk 01:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

How about this: A bot that keeps a eye on vandalism (more security measures, the better!)

User has been indeffed. See also reason given above. ~ Rusty ^meow ~ 04:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Just read the title. Swede the Great I (talk) 03:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

User:ClueBot NG. You clearly don't have the competence to be a useful contributor to this process and I would strongly suggest disengaging. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Note that after a closer look I've blocked Swede the Great I as WP:NOTHERE. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Redundant to ClueBot NG, and creator now indef'ed. Closing to update status in the table at the top of the page. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 00:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request to Rename and Merge Monthly Talk Page Archives into Yearly Archives

Resolved

I apologize in advance if this is the wrong venue.

Page affected: User talk:Nemov/Archives

Description: I want to update my ClueBot III archive settings to use yearly archives instead of monthly ones. However, my past archives are still stored as User talk:Nemov/Archives/2025/January, User talk:Nemov/Archives/2025/February, etc.

I would like a bot to:

1. Move and merge all my old YYYY/Month archives into a single YYYY archive (e.g., 2025/January → 2025).

2. Update any archive links on my talk page to reflect the new format.

Additional Notes: The content from each month's archive should be appended to the corresponding yearly archive. Redirects can be left behind to avoid breaking old links. Nemov (talk) 16:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Nemov:

Done I have moved the content and redirected all monthly archive pages to yearly ones. It's getting late here, so I will set up the new archive tomorrow unless someone else wants to jump in and help. – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Nemov::

Done Your settings are now updated to archive new sections by year. Your archive links on your talk page are updated to show by year now too, instead of all the year and month links. Matthew Yeager (talk) 07:35, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

@Matthew Yeager What should I do with all the old month pages? Request for them to be deleted? Thanks for all your help. Nemov (talk) 13:17, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Personally speaking, I would just leave them be - in your talk page history there are links to every one of them, and having them be redlinks would confuse people trying to find a specific conversation or where it went. Redirects are cheap and keeping them around can only help people navigate your archives. The archive box can be adjusted to exclude them. Primefac (talk) 13:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

ok, thanks. Nemov (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Whitespace fixes needed in stub templates

Sorry in advance for what might be seen as a talk fork, but circumstances have changed. At first, this was affecting only a dozen pages, so I fixed them. Then it was 1,000 pages, so I posted at AWB tasks. Now there are over 6,000 template pages that need whitespace fixes, so I am posting here, because that is probably too many pages for a non-BRFA AWB task. If you take this on as a bot task, I'll make sure to note that at the AWB page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

The solution appears to be a straightforward regex replace that doesn't require manual intervention. If no one else claims it, I'd take it up with User:CX Zoom AWB tomorrow. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 09:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

For every instance that I have seen (about 50 of them), that is correct: removing a line break (or any consecutive white space) with a regex should work fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Should I file a BRFA then, or is it no longer required? —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 08:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

See below; we should probably figure out if this is a fixable bug before we spend time and effort editing things. Primefac (talk) 14:54, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

It appears that Anomie implemented a change to the underlying module such that the Linter errors are no longer present. That said, noinclude tags are supposed to be placed immediately after the end of template code for good reason. IMO these minor whitespace errors will cause visual trouble at some point. A quick bot run to tidy them would help reduce the spread, via copy-paste, of this suboptimal syntax. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the page you linked over there, it's "misnested tags" complaining about <code>? Where exactly is the misnested <code> tag that gets fixed by this proposed change? Anomie ⚔ 15:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Looks like this may be a bug of some sort in Parsoid. A Lua module invocation is supposed to return wikitext that already has any templates expanded. Module:Article stub box, when producing the documentation for e.g. Template:1850s-autobio-novel-stub, outputs text including Typing <code>{{1850s-autobio-novel-stub}}</code> produces the message shown at the beginning. But if I make an API query for action=parse&page=Template:1850s-autobio-novel-stub&parsoid=1, it appears that Parsoid is expanding that template-like text anyway. How exactly the proposed whitespace removal fixes the misnesting is unclear to me, but if we have to work around the Parsoid bug it would probably be better to alter the module's output to produce something like Typing <code>{{1850s-autobio-novel-stub}}</code> or the equivalent of Typing <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>1850s-autobio-novel-stub}}</code> or the like. Anomie ⚔ 16:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Request to add a template on several pages (+generate a list)

Hello! I would like to add Template:TvN (South Korean TV channel) television dramas on the following pages:

12 Signs of Love
Ice Adonis
The Wedding Scheme
Queen and I (South Korean TV series)
I Love Lee Taly
I Need Romance 2012
Reply 1997
Glass Mask (TV series)|Glass Mask
The Third Hospital
Flower Boys Next Door
Nine (TV series)
Crazy Love (2013 TV series)
Monstar
Dating Agency: Cyrano
Who Are You? (2013 TV series)|Who Are You?
Basketball (TV series)
Let's Eat (TV series)
I Need Romance 3
A Witch's Love
High School King of Savvy
The Idle Mermaid
The Three Musketeers (South Korean TV series)
My Secret Hotel
Liar Game (2014 TV series)
Family Secret (TV series)
Righteous Love (TV series)
Hogu's Love
A Bird That Doesn't Sing
Hidden Identity (TV series)
Ugly Miss Young-ae
Bubble Gum (TV series)
Cheese in the Trap (TV series)
Pied Piper (TV series)
Another Miss Oh
Bring It On, Ghost
Drinking Solo
Introverted Boss
The Liar and His Lover (TV series)
Circle (TV series)
The Bride of Habaek
Criminal Minds (South Korean TV series)
Argon (TV series)
Because This Is My First Life
Avengers Social Club
Prison Playbook
Mother (South Korean TV series)
Cross (South Korean TV series)
My Mister
A Poem a Day
About Time (TV series)
What's Wrong with Secretary Kim
Familiar Wife
The Smile Has Left Your Eyes (TV series)
100 Days My Prince
Tale of Fairy
Top Star U-back
Encounter (South Korean TV series)
The Crowned Clown
Touch Your Heart
Ugly Miss Young-ae
He Is Psychometric
Her Private Life (TV series)
Abyss (TV series)
Search: WWW
Designated Survivor: 60 Days
When the Devil Calls Your Name
The Great Show
Pegasus Market
Miss Lee
Catch the Ghost
Psychopath Diary
Black Dog: Being A Teacher
Money Game (TV series)
The Cursed (TV series)
Memorist
Hospital Playlist
A Piece of Your Mind
Oh My Baby
My Unfamiliar Family
Flower of Evil (South Korean TV series)
Record of Youth
Tale of the Nine Tailed
Birthcare Center
Awaken (TV series)|Awaken
True Beauty (South Korean TV series)
L.U.C.A.: The Beginning
Mouse (TV series)
Navillera (TV series)
Doom at Your Service
My Roommate Is a Gumiho
You Are My Spring
The Road: The Tragedy of One
High Class (TV series)
Yumi's Cells
Hometown (South Korean TV series)
Secret Royal Inspector & Joy
Melancholia (TV series)
Ghost Doctor
The Witch's Diner
Dr. Park's Clinic
Work Later, Drink Now
Military Prosecutor Doberman
Kill Heel
The Killer's Shopping List
Eve (South Korean TV series)
Link: Eat, Love, Kill
Adamas (TV series)|Adamas
Poong, the Joseon Psychiatrist
Mental Coach Jegal
Love in Contract
Behind Every Star
Missing: The Other Side
Our Blooming Youth
The Heavenly Idol
Stealer: The Treasure Keeper
Family: The Unbreakable Bond
Delightfully Deceitful
My Lovely Liar
Twinkling Watermelon
A Bloody Lucky Day
Maestra: Strings of Truth
Marry My Husband
Captivating the King
Wedding Impossible
Queen of Tears
Lovely Runner
The Midnight Romance in Hagwon
The Player 2: Master of Swindlers
The Auditors
Serendipity's Embrace
Love Next Door
No Gain No Love
Dongjae, the Good or the Bastard
Jeongnyeon: The Star Is Born
Parole Examiner Lee
Love Your Enemy
When the Stars Gossip
The Queen Who Crowns
My Dearest Nemesis
The Potato Lab
The Divorce Insurance
Resident Playbook
Unknown Seoul
The Tyrant's Chef

Additionnaly, if possible, could you generate a list of pages that are from Category:TvN (South Korean TV channel) television dramas but do not contain the template?

Can you help, please? Juliepersonne2 (talk) 11:59, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

WP:AWBREQ is probably a better place for requests like this. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll move the request. Thank you for the reply. Juliepersonne2 (talk) 13:14, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Remove external links from NASCAR entry lists

As seen in pages such as 2024 NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series Championship Race, there are external links listed in the entry lists. This is a violation of WP:ELLIST, and they should be unlinked. A discussion is here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_NASCAR#Should_sponsor_website_links_be_included_in_entry_lists. Not sure how many years this goes back, but they would likely be on at least a hundred pages. I don’t see them on pages pre-2020, but have not gone through it all. I have also not seen anything like it on NASCAR Cup Series race pages. It would be a lot to go through, but the category Category:NASCAR races by track should have all the races in it. Thanks! Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:17, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

If you're looking at <250 pages, then WP:AWB/TASKS is the better location for this request. Primefac (talk) 15:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Put a request in there. Thanks! Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Bot to clean up ISBNs after buggy copy-paste by Visual Editor

The Visual Editor, when it is used to copy and paste an ISBN, turns {{ISBN|1234567890}} into the less friendly [[International Standard Book Number|ISBN]] [[Special:BookSources/1234567890|1234567890]] or similar. There are a few variations, including ones that insert <bdi>...</bdi> tags and nsbp characters. See T174303 for more details.

It appears that T174303 is not getting any attention, so it would be helpful for a bot to reformat these ISBNs periodically. The basic task would be to convert ISBNs in the following formats back to {{ISBN}}, like this.

[[International Standard Book Number|ISBN]] [[Special:BookSources/1234567890|1234567890]]
[[ISBN (identifier)|ISBN]]&nbsp;[[Special:BookSources/978-0-85745-565-9|<bdi>978-0-85745-565-9</bdi>]]
[[ISBN (identifier)|ISBN]] [[Special:BookSources/9780521562867|<bdi>9780521562867</bdi>]]
[[ISBN (identifier)|ISBN]] [[Special:BookSources/978-1846098567|978-1846098567]]

There may be a few more variations on the format; I have a set of replacement patterns for this bug, along with other ISBN issues that should probably not be addressed by this proposed bot task, at User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/twoisbnparams.js. You can see a nice sample at Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/WPC 069 dump, which is updated monthly, or by searching for likely strings in article space.

This bot would need to run periodically, at least once a month. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Jonesey95, how many pages are affected? — Qwerfjkl talk 16:25, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

It looks like there are about 530 on the current report, though some of those may have been cleaned up since the 15 December report date. New ones are created all the time. I get about 275 from an insource search. Other identifiers (DOI, ISSN, etc.) have the same problem, so there are more pages affected by the bug. In any event, the article count appears to be in the hundreds. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Jonesey95, I think the easiest thing to do here would be running mw:Manual:Pywikibot/replace.py on Tooforge in this case. (Despite not mentioning it in the documentation, it does seem to support multiple replacements.) — Qwerfjkl talk 11:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Don't use the current counts as a sign of how bad it is, I'm been fixing a large number of these with AWB or by hand.Naraht (talk) 18:26, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: What patterns need to be cleaned up for DOI, ISSN, etc.? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't know if they are as consistent, but here are some DOIs in a form that needs to be templated, here are more DOIs, and here are ISSNs. And some JSTOR. And some S2CID. And some PMID. And some PMC. It looks like the article populations overlap quite a bit, so a scripted pass should probably check for all of these IDs and maybe more. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

@Jonesey95 - The bot that generates Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/WPC 069 dump hasn't updated the file since December 15. Is it still operational? GoingBatty (talk) 04:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Reported here, at the bot operator's talk page. In the meantime, Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/ISBN errors is updated more frequently, and can be updated manually by anyone with WPCleaner access (including me). – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

VE has a long history of producing garbage syntax of infinite variety. It needs a garbage collector. If the garbage collector can't fix the problem, it can at least detect and stop the diff from posting. Patterns can be maintained by editors similar to spam blacklists. -- GreenC 16:29, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Of course it does. This has been clear from very early in VE's existence, but not much appears to have changed, hence bug reports like T174303, from 2017. How do we go from "this is a problem" to "developers are working on fixing the problem"? – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

cleaning out the Augean stables. I admire your long term commitment. The last post by matmerex sounds a little optimistic. -- GreenC 16:10, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Text swap

Change all "Cercanías Ferrol" references to "Cercanías Galicia", mostly in these pages: https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Especial:LoQueEnlazaAqu%C3%AD/Cercan%C3%ADas_Galicia&limit=100. The denomination Cercanías Ferrol was never correct, but absent of a better one, it was chosen as the standard on Wikipedia. Renfe has now declared it Cercanías Galicia. UnniMan (talk) 09:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Use WP:AWBREQ instead. – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Sounds goog thanks UnniMan (talk) 11:23, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Drafts in categories

I've asked for this in various places previously, only to face constant runaround and buck-passing, so I thought I'd try again here.

The job of WP:DRAFTNOCAT cleanup inevitably hits a lot of pages that started as mainspace articles and then got draftified as inadequate, but the draftifier overlooked the part of the process where they need to also get the draft version of the page out of mainspace categories. This doesn't account for all categorized drafts, but it does account for a big chunk of the total, and it's a task that could easily be farmed out to a bot to substantially reduce the amount of time that human editors have to invest in that report.

There's a bot that automatically detects that the page move has occurred and tags the moved page with {{Drafts moved from mainspace}}, which could easily be modified to also automatically disable any categories on the page at the same time as it adds the tag — and there's a bot that automatically checks Category:AfC submissions with categories on a regular basis to disable categories on drafts that have an AfC submission template on them (but not all or even most drafts actually do have an AfC submission template on them, which is why this bot isn't fully controlling DRAFTNOCAT problems on its own), and could easily have "go through Category:All content moved from mainspace to draftspace to check for any categories on drafts" added to its task list. But I previously approached both of those bots' maintainers directly, only to have them each decline the request and tell me to approach the other bot's maintainer instead, and when I tried to escalate to VPT, I was just told to talk to the same bot maintainers who had already rejected my request.

So the need still remains for a bot that could disable any mainspace category declarations that are still on pages that have been moved from mainspace to draftspace, in order to substantially reduce the amount of time that human editors have to invest into cleaning up categorized drafts. If the existing bots can't or won't be modified to add this task, then is there a new one that could be created to take it on? Bearcat (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

If no one picks this up in the next few days, one of my bots can take care of it. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bearcat: This is the current list, but I am not seeing any drafts that can be fixed. Can you please take a look? – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

On a spot check of a few random titles, I found Draft:2025 Bielefeld mass shooting. But, of course, it's not just a one-time task: there are always new articles being moved into draftspace every day, so it's a regular check that would have to be performed at least once a day every day — several times a day would be even better, if possible, but certainly no less often than once daily.

I should add that I did also find Draft:Mad Max: The Wasteland, which has Category:Warner Bros. drafts on it — that's not a problem, because that's a category meant for drafts, but because it's directly declared on drafts itself rather than being transcluded by a template it's a complication that any bot would need to account for. So if this does go ahead, the bot needs to skip, and not disable, categories whose names specifically end in "drafts". Bearcat (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bearcat: Would it work for you if I skip this list and instead check and disable categories in newly moved drafts daily? I'll also skip any category that ends with 'drafts'. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but it kind of sounds like you think this is more complicated than it actually needs to be. All of the moved drafts are already tracked in Category:All content moved from mainspace to draftspace, the maintenance category that gets automatically transcluded by the {{Drafts moved from mainspace}} template. So it's really, truly just a matter of having a bot take a run through that category once or twice a day to check for any categories on those pages and disable them if necessary, rather than having to manually generate your own lists. Bearcat (talk) 15:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

This is not a manually generated list. These drafts come from Category:All content moved from mainspace to draftspace. This search query removes all drafts that either have no categories or are already disabled. I meant that since there are currently no fixable drafts in this category, it would be best to skip all current members and check only newly added ones. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bearcat: Are you okay with it? – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:27, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm "okay" with any solution that gets the job done, so what works for you is the only thing that matters here. Bearcat (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed – DreamRimmer (talk) 08:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Text swap in refs

Replace interlanguage links for publication names in refs of Korea-related articles with redlinks. See my talk page; I was a dummy and used AWB to add these interlanguage links without realizing I shouldn't have done so. I'm not sure how many pages are affected by this; it's at least several hundred and I think likely over a thousand.

Task:

Run bot on all pages in Category:WikiProject Korea articles (I basically only use AWB on these pages)
Run these three find+replace actions (in any order):

Find (?<param>work|publisher|website|newspaper|encyclopedia|journal|agency)(?<space1>[ ]*)=(?<space2>[ ]*)\{\{ill\|(?<articlename>[^\|]+)\|lt=(?<ltval>[^\}]+)\|ko\|(?<kowikiname>[^\|\}]+)\}\}
Replace ${param}${space1}=${space2}[[${articlename}|${ltval}]]
Find (?<param>work|publisher|website|newspaper|encyclopedia|journal|agency)(?<space1>[ ]*)=(?<space2>[ ]*)\{\{ill\|(?<articlename>[^\|]+)\|ko\|(?<kowikiname>[^\|\}]+)\}\}
Replace ${param}${space1}=${space2}[[${articlename}]]
Find (?<param>work|publisher|website|newspaper|encyclopedia|journal|agency)(?<space1>[ ]*)=(?<space2>[ ]*)\{\{ill\|(?<articlename>[^\|]+)\|ko\|(?<kowikiname>[^\|\}]+)\|lt=(?<ltval>[^\}]+)?\}\}
Replace ${param}${space1}=${space2}[[${articlename}|${ltval}]]

seefooddiet (talk) 01:36, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject Korea articles has a huge number of pages, and with your total edits at 29,923, processing the entire category may not be the best use of resources. If you can share the timestamps for when you started and stopped adding interlanguage links, we can pinpoint the relevant pages and make the replacements with minimal effort. – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Bad news; I have a previous account with 77k edits and started doing this on that one too. The bulk of my edits involve AWB. I received AWB permissions on May 6, 2023. I probably started adding ILLs a few months after that. seefooddiet (talk) 23:52, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh wait we can just search by regex for which pages are affected. busy atm but can write one up in a bit seefooddiet (talk) 23:56, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

insource:/(work|publisher|website|newspaper|encyclopedia|journal|agency)=\{\{(ill|interlanguage)/

This regex query yields 5,301 articles. A good chunk of these are not my doing, but they need fixing anyway so I think may as well do. seefooddiet (talk) 00:44, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

I can have a look if no one else beats me to it, it may take me a week or so to get something together. I think this is going to be a case where parsing the template is better than a regex replace, especially as we have non-latin characters involved. Mdann52 (talk) 15:16, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Tagging pages listed at User:Alex 21/sandbox/No episode table with Template:Convert to Episode table

Could someone help with a bot to tag the pages listed at User:Alex 21/sandbox/No episode table with {{Convert to Episode table}}? Gonnym (talk) 09:16, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Coding... ~ Rusty ^meow ~ 16:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed. ~ Rusty ^meow ~ 18:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

List of your articles that are in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors, 2025

Currently, this project has about ~<NUMBER> articles in need of some reference cleanup. Basically, some short references created via {{sfn}} and {{harvnb}} and similar templates have missing full citations or have some other problems. This is usually caused by templates misuse or by copy-pasting a short reference from another article without adding the full reference, or because a full reference is not making use of citation templates like {{cite book}} (see Help:CS1) or {{citation}} (see Help:CS2). To easily see which citation is in need of cleanup, you can check these instructions to enable error messages (Svick's script is the simplest to use, but Trappist the monk's script is a bit more refined if you're interested in doing deeper cleanup). See also how to resolve issues.

These could use some of your attention

To do

...

If you could add the full references to those article/fix the problem references, that would be great. Again, the easiest way to deal with those is to install Svick's script per these instructions. If after installing the script, you do not see an error, that means it was either taken care of, or was a false positive, and you don't need to do anything else.

Sent on behalf of User:Headbomb, 11:07, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

and then post is on each WikiProject's talk page. Those with matches anyway.

See for example Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#List of your articles that are in Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors, 2025.

Pinging @Trappist the monk, ActivelyDisinterested, GoingBatty, Hike395, and Folly Mox: as users that could might have feedback on this task. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:52, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

@Headbomb: If someone wants to go down this route to provide a list AND the details on how to fix the errors, I suggest adding a sentence in the first paragraph to explain the problem, such as "If a user clicks on one of these erroneous short references, it will not take them to the full citation."

If you're just looking for the list, its already included in the WikiProject Cleanup Listings (e.g. Cleanup listing for WikiProject Military history). GoingBatty (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Highlighting the issue to editors wouldn't be a bad idea. As the error messages are off by default there are many editors who aren't aware there is even a problem. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:36, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's kind of clunky, but I don't think you need a bot:

Using PetScan, I made you a PagePile (65098) of the talk pages of all of the current members of Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors.
Again using PetScan, you can do the intersection with the Wikiproject pages in Talk space, then convert back to main, with wiki output. See here for an example of the intersection with WikiProject Military History.
You can then paste this into your template on the corresponding WikiProject talk page.

The only issue is that the intersection can be pretty large and daunting. For Military History, it's 673 articles. — hike395 (talk) 22:37, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

From what I can tell, User:CleanupWorklistBot is still active, and dumps these every week or so: here is its equivalent report (page size warning). Folly Mox (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't particularly care how the list is generated, but the point is to post the current list on the talk pages (perhaps with a link to a dynamic list) with instructions, so that people can go "Hey, I worked on that article, I'll take a closer look" or "I can do reference work, let me install those script and take a look", and strike articles from the list as progress is made, as well as provide a space for collaborative work (User:Bob do you know who Smith 2006 is? There's an issue with Example, but the script doesn't flag it... It is resolved or is there another issue I'm not aware of?).

People engage with these posts a lot more than an external dynamic list. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:34, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Upon review, GoingBatty already said the exact same thing as I just did. I'll reverb that echo by restating that we might want to link a projectspace page on common repair tools before sending the mass message.

Does anyone know of one? I'm aware :Category:Harv and Sfn template errors § Resolving errors displays the guidance add a missing full citation, but it may be worthwhile to collate tips about finding a full citation, like

clicking through to section hatnotes
clicking through to section links
doing an insource: search for the author(s) and date
checking (if exist) sister project articles linked in the language switcher
checking the revision history to find the diff prior to the introduction of the error (I've once resorted to perusing the error-introducing editor's contributions around the time the error was introduced)
and I guess like google scholar if you're stymied.

Oh right I guess if there does already exist a collation of tips I'm probably just repeating that too. Folly Mox (talk) 00:49, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Checking sister projects and checking the revision history may be performed by bot. Wikiwerner (talk) 17:01, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Automatically resolve search.app links

I've just encountered a few citations that link to https://search.app instead of directly to the sources. Is there a bot that fixes these tinyurl type redirects already that could plug this in? If not, this shouldn't be too difficult.

Here's an example of what I mean that I fixed manually. ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 18:10, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

If it's a URL shortener or redirector, it should probably be raised at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist. Anomie ⚔ 22:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for sending me that way, I posted the request ~ฅ(ↀωↀ=)neko-chan^nyan 22:53, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Meanwhile I'll activate AnomieBOT 58 to clean up the existing instances. Watch User:AnomieBOT/ReplaceExternalLinks4 problems for any that need manual fixing. Anomie ⚔ 02:46, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Done All existing links replaced and the site is blacklisted at Meta. Anomie ⚔ 11:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Help with a broken table

Resolved

I need a bit of help with List of The Nature of Things episodes. The issue is that somebody wrapped all of the episode dates in {{start date}} without formatting them correctly, so that right across the board the episode broadcast dates are consistently displaying as blaring red "not a number value" error messages instead of dates because the template coding is going {{Start date|11/06/1960 (Sun)}} instead of formatting the dates properly. It doesn't appear to be a recent edit that I can just revert, either — going back in the edit history, it appears that the dates have always been formatted that way right from the article's creation a decade ago, but I can confirm for a fact that the page wasn't displaying error messages in lieu of dates the last time I looked at it, so it appears that the template has been recently edited in ways that broke this table.

I'd just remove the template myself, but the show's been on the air since 1960, so there are literally hundreds of start-date calls in it, so I'd be at that job for hours and hours. So is there a bot that can just quickly hit that list and wipe out all instances of {{start date}} in it? Bearcat (talk) 06:22, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Bearcat:

Done This was a very simple find-and-replace task. You could use a text editor that supports regex to fix this type of issue. – DreamRimmer (talk) 06:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Just noting that while AWB is usually used for editing many articles in a similar fashion, it's also really good at doing these sorts of fixes for single articles when there are dozens/hundreds of things to fix on the same page. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Since I don't know how to code or use regex, this isn't a task I could have done myself at all — it's a thing I would have needed help with regardless of whether it was an AWB task or a bot task. But thanks. Bearcat (talk) 16:37, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Feel free to drop me a note on my talk page if you need help with any find/replace or regex with AWB, always happy to give a hand. Primefac (talk) 14:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Request to update links from Mongol siege of Kaifeng to Siege of Kaifeng (1232)

Doing... Hello, could a bot replace all links from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mongol_siege_of_Kaifeng&redirect=no with `Siege of Kaifeng (1232)` across Wikipedia? The page title was changed, and I want to update all links accordingly. Thank you Shadow. 547 (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Please request this at WP:AWBREQ instead, since only 57 pages need to be edited. – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:04, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

bot to remove links to copyvio material used in references

Per Wikipedia:Teahouse#resolving links to copyvio used in references, I'm here to ask after a robot job to remove links to copyvio material from references that appears in several tens of thousands of articles.

There are lots of links to worldradiohistory.com and americanradiohistory.com. These sites host PDF scans of various indsutry magazines, and I think it's apparent the material is being redistributed without the knowledge or approval of the copyright holders. Wikipedia:Copyright violations says that Copyright-infringing material should also not be linked to. I sometimes manually remove these, but I've recently noticed the enormity of the problem: looks like there's about there are about 60,0000 such links to worldradiohistory.com. (Seems there are more; maybe 60,000 is the limit of the scrolling on the Special Links results. If I remove more, more appear ending at 60,000 always.) There are more than 23,000 links to americanradiohistory.com.

I've been working these by removing just the url= parameter, so the copyvio link is gone but the balance of the reference remains. Maybe some URL-dependent parameters must be removed, like access-date or format or website.

Can a robot help with removing these links, leaving the rest of the references intact? -- mikeblas (talk) 19:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Mikeblas, this might be a better job for WP:URLREQ (@GreenC?). — Qwerfjkl talk 11:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

It's about 24,500 pages which is a lot. I don't have boilerplate code for this sort of thing, it would have to be developed. It would require a lot of scenarios, like what do you do with square links (inside and outside refs) including in external link sections. Cite web would be converted to a different template (a url is required for that template). Archive URLs removed, including {{webarchive}}. Also I find that when deleting URLs people tend to knee-jerk badly so it would need more than a single-person request at BOTREQ. Much of this content is probably legitimately linkable at the Archive.org public library. And the owner of the site is "Recipient of the 2023 National Association of Broadcaster's & Library of American Broadcasting Foundation NABF Excellence in Broadcast Preservation Award" so he seems to have some legitimacy in the library world. Libraries operate under different copyright paradigms, what constitutes a library can be variable. -- GreenC 14:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Before we get into the weeds of technical issues of removal, recommend starting a thread at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and see what people think about this site, given it has some claim to legitimacy given the award from the Library of American Broadcasting. -- GreenC 15:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

OK. I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- mikeblas (talk) 20:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I have code in C# that handles <ref>{{cite ... patterns. -- mikeblas (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Language tracking categories

Each time Special:WantedCategories updates with new redlinked categories to clean up, there's virtually always at least one category, and very often several categories, of the "Articles containing [Language]-language text" variety — and sometimes (although less frequently) categories of the "Articles with [Language]-language sources ([Langx])" variety as well — which I inevitably end up having to create.

Since these are internal project tracking categories that are allowed to be empty, however, nothing would preclude simply having all of the possible categories of this type created in one go, so that they're already in place when any new uses of the lang template are added to articles. (There have additionally sometimes been categories of the "Pages with [Language] IPA" variety as well, but other editors seem to stay on top of those so promptly that they've almost always been already blued in by the time I actually saw the list, so that I haven't had to create one of those in months — but since that is still human editors dealing with something that could genuinely be botted out, it should probably still be considered part of this request anyway.)

Accordingly, I wanted to ask if there's a bot that could run through all the possible language codes used by lang templates, to ensure that their appropriate text, sources and IPA categories either already exist or get created if they don't, so that they stop turning into redlinked category problems? (I'd also note for the record that I'm not the first editor ever to ask for this.) Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Bearcat, can you link to some examples of these categories, so it's easier to determine what to put on the categories, and what the possible languages and language codes are. — Qwerfjkl talk 11:20, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Category:Articles containing French-language text, parent Category:Articles containing non-English-language text

Category:Articles with French-language sources (fr), parent Category:Articles with non-English-language sources

Category:Pages with French IPA, parent Category:Pages with IPA

In terms of what languages, these are basically generated by the use of any ISO-639 language code in a {{lang}}, {{langx}}, {{in lang}} or {{IPA}} template, so the set of languages with categories of this type should correspond to the set of ISO-639 language codes. I don't offhand know where there's a complete reference list of all the codes, though I'm sure there is one somewhere. Bearcat (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

There's over 8k language codes. That's around 5k of empty categories to create just for the first group and around 8k for the second. That seems like a very bad idea. Gonnym (talk) 14:26, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

FYI, the list of codes valid with {{lang}} appears to be Module:Lang/data/iana languages. That list currently contains 8038 active codes and 228 deprecated codes. As Gonnym noted, that would be a lot of empty categories. While not technically covered by WP:MASSCREATE (user-visible categories are, but hidden categories are not), if someone created a BRFA for this task I'd still want to see a consensus on a Village pump or the like. Anomie ⚔ 16:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I'd rather see a bunch of empty but properly formatted and named categories than have them created one by one by editors who don't know how to set them up with proper, consistent content (Bearcat, this does not mean you, obviously). – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

It's one template. A report can be setup to check if any category with those names is missing that template. Gonnym (talk) 05:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

If this is going to be problematic, then perhaps another alternative would be some kind of tracker bot that leaves the nonexistent categories redlinked in the interim, but then jumps in to immediately create any redlink that suddenly does have pages added to it? After all, the point of redlinked category cleanup isn't just to happily clean up any and all redlinked categories with a smile and a whistle — it's also to actively take steps to reduce the number of redlinked categories that even have to get cleaned up in the first place, by seeking solutions that can prevent their generation (such as fixing template errors, or identifying systemic patterns that could be farmed out for automation). The ideal state is for the redlinked category report to always be empty, because no non-empty redlinked categories ever exist at all — and while we'll likely never actually reach that state, the goal in the meantime is still to take steps to get us as close to that state as possible, by looking for solutions that prevent or solve redlinks at the system level before they hit the report at all.
So I'm not necessarily wedded to the idea that every category has to be created all in one go, but is there some kind of middle ground solution that can still identify when a nonexistent category of this type has become populated and immediately create it right away, so as to prevent categories of this type from lingering for up to three days as redlinks that fall on me to fix? Bearcat (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
A bot creating the categories as needed would be a lot more likely to be approved without issue. There'd probably be some delay on the creations rather than "immediately", of course; for example, when AnomieBOT creates dated maintenance categories it checks for new ones every 2 hours. Anomie ⚔ 22:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
Two hours is more than "immediate" enough for what I meant. I just meant "doesn't simmer in the red for three days until the WantedCategories report regenerates", not "needs to magically happen the very second a page gets added", so an hour or two is fine. Bearcat (talk) 16:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
BRFA filed Anomie ⚔ 00:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

a centijimbo bot

a bot that automatically updates your centijimbo count Willbill6272 (talk) 17:31, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Bots to update edit counts have been frequently denied in the past. What would be the benefit to this beyond feeding editcountitis? Anomie ⚔ 11:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

it updates your user page watchlist count. Willbill6272 (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Much of a muchness, I suppose. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:55, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

so no? Willbill6272 was here (talk) 19:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Correct. Primefac (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Bot Request: Infobox Converter

Overview

I propose to operate a new bot named Infobox Converter. The bot’s objective is to automatically detect and convert legacy infobox templates to a standardized, modern format. It will function similarly to Jacobolus by analyzing the current infobox code, reformatting parameters, adjusting wikilinks, and ensuring consistency throughout articles. This process should increase readability and maintenance across the encyclopedia.

Function Details

- Purpose:

 The bot will convert outdated and inconsistent infobox parameters into a uniform structure. For example, on pages like [Burkard Polster](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Burkard_Polster&diff=1279290057&oldid=1277063387&variant=en), where legacy formatting is evident, the bot will update the infobox to align with current Wikipedia standards.

- Methodology:

 The bot will:  
 1. Scan the main namespace for pages containing legacy infobox templates.  
 2. Extract the infobox’s contents using a parsing tool (e.g., Python with the `mwparserfromhell` library).  
 3. Apply a set of conversion rules (renaming parameters, normalizing wikilinks, etc.) and rebuild the infobox in the updated format.  
 4. Post the revised infobox back onto the article after a short preview phase (or on a test run namespace), ensuring that changes are both accurate and non-disruptive.

- Technical Details:

 - Programming Language: Python  
 - Tools & Libraries: Use of the MediaWiki API, `mwparserfromhell`, and regular expressions for text processing.  
 - Edit Safety:
   - Edits will be tagged with a bot flag for easy reversion if required.  
   - Changes will first be deployed in a limited test run so that any unforeseen issues can be addressed quickly.  
   - A detailed log file will be maintained will be available for any manual intervention.

Scope & Impact - Pages Affected:

 The bot will primarily target pages in the Main namespace that employ legacy infobox templates. An initial test run will focus on a subset of articles to ensure that no side effects occur; a full run may affect several thousand articles.

- Frequency of Edits:

 The bot will operate on an as-needed basis. The initial run is planned for a short, supervised period before transitioning to a semi-automated, periodic update schedule.

Rationale Legacy infobox formats often lead to inconsistencies and maintenance challenges. The Infobox Converter bot will help standardize these elements, streamline ongoing edits, and relieve editors of repetitive manual work. By following a methodology similar to Jacobolus, the bot is expected to perform uncontroversial, targeted improvements while adhering strictly to Wikipedia policies.

Conclusion I believe that Infobox Converter will serve as a valuable tool in improving the consistency and accuracy of infoboxes across Wikipedia. I welcome feedback on the proposed methodology, technical implementation, and overall scope of the project. Dominic3203 (talk) 05:40, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

AI-generated fluff lacking a specific task (what is a "legacy infobox"? What exactly should the bot do?). No. Just no. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I think Pppery is probably right, but just in case, can the OP link to any previous discussion that was motivating this proposal? The linked diff does not look like something that could be done by a bot. A human with a script could do such edits if there were consensus, maybe, but that doesn't require a bot request or a BRFA unless changes will be done at a mass scale. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

There are a few pages listed at Category:Pages needing an infobox conversion though that could do with a manual infobox replacing with a template. Not a bot task though. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Technically I already have a task related to this request; if there are concerns with a particular infobox folk can ask me to run the bot on transclusions (though I won't run it just to "clean up the code"). Primefac (talk) 12:14, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

WPEUR20k Bot

Resolved

The WPEUR10k Challenge banner needs to be changed to WPEUR20k. As the WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has been updated today to the WikiProject Europe/The 20,000 Challenge. So all templates for the Challenge banner on talk pages needs an update. Maybe a bot could help with this task. BabbaQ (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

BabbaQ, I have moved {{WPEUR10k}} to {{WPEUR20k}} and updated the wording. Is this acceptable? Primefac (talk) 12:45, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Looks good! --BabbaQ (talk) 13:12, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Outdent bot

I have noticed an issue in talk pages where there is too much indenting to be able to read the conversation.

This is particularly more important for pages that are considered more "controversial" (i.e this talk page at this comment)

I tried to do this manually, however, that turned out to be far too overwhelming for my brain to handle.

The Actual Request

A bot should automatically scan for x (configurable) or more indentations and dedent, scan, and re-indent replying comments to suit at least decently sized monitors.

The bot would also possibly need to reorder comments based on where they don't interfere with the dedent task. Showier [on alt] (talk) 19:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I would be very surprised if an unattended bot would be able to perform this task without errors. Humans insert too many combinations of : and *, often in invalid sequences, for a bot to get changes right every time.

One question: What is the extent of this problem? Does it occur on 10 pages, 10,000 pages, more, or somewhere in between? – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I have no idea what the extent of the issue is, but I can go and make a rough count with a database download within a couple of days.

The bot could probably ignore cases where a tree includes the invalid combinations of * and :'s. Because it is a policy to include indents, it's probably fine to assume any combination of : and *'s before the text is expected to be indentation (/^([:\*]{10})(.+)$/gm). Showier [on alt] (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

FWIW, 15 colons of indenting takes up 275 pixels of width on my screen, which is one-third of the content width even if I narrow my browser window to 1,125 pixels, a pretty narrow window on modern devices. That leaves the indented text perfectly readable. So anything that we reformat, assuming we got consensus to do so, would have to exceed that amount of indenting; maybe 20 colons is the right number to aim at. I did a search for 20 colons in discussion pages, which times out but which yields under 1,000 pages each time. A better search is welcome.

To give an idea for my screen, on wide (as I do not have access to styles currently), it takes up 100% and is actually overflowing after around 2 words on a line. (14 lines of text for the comment I linked) Showier [on alt] (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

FWIW that comment is also entirely gone on mobile Waterfox (Galaxy A14 5g) Showier [on alt] (talk) 20:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I can't download the DB dump in a reasonable amount of time. ShowierData9978 (talk) 22:54, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Just noting that we had an indent bot a few years ago and it never made it past the trial phase - there were just too many issues and novel situations that couldn't be accounted for. I would be hesitant (to speak with my BAG hat on) to approve a bot for this sort of task again. Primefac (talk) 13:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Do you mean IndentBot? I believe it was approved. — Qwerfjkl talk 14:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

... by yourself, apparently. — Qwerfjkl talk 14:59, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

That's what I get for trying to remember instead of just looking! It had a loooooong trial period though. Primefac (talk) 15:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I tried looking for it but I couldn't -Showier on mobile 47.220.165.238 (talk) 16:36, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion § Help maintaining the bot that indexes old articles

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion § Help maintaining the bot that indexes old articles. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:59, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Clerk Requested Moves/Technical

Has been previously discussed here, I just don't have the time right now to learn PWB again and then make the bot, so if someone could do it here instead that would be nice, it essentially should periodically check to see if requests have been complete and then remove them, and if a request has been contested and inactive for 72h+ it should remove it and then message the requestor with instructions on how to file a requested move on the article talk. Feel free to ping if you have any more questions regarding it, thanks :) Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 19:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Coding... @Zippybonzo: do you have any ideas on how the message to users when their request is contested should be worded? Tenshi! (Talk page) 00:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Not entirely sure, but I'd say something along the lines of this, although maybe a little friendlier and less confusing:

Hello {user},

Your recent request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical has been contested by {contestor}. There has been no activity in that discussion for the last 72 hours, and as such I have automatically removed it from the requests page. If you'd like the page to be moved, consider following the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to encourage more participation in a move discussion.

Thanks, {bot sig} Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 18:54, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Tenshi Hinanawi: thank you for picking this up. If you want something simpler (for example, without the contestor's name), I can point you to my previous suggestion. Cheers, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:25, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I've made the notification template at User:TenshiBot/RMTR contested notification, if you have any further suggestions please do tell. Otherwise, if my testing goes well, I'll file a BRFA tomorrow. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 23:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed— Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:28, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Done Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Because the original bot discussion happened a while ago, I've notified Wikipedia talk:Requested moves of this discussion. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:33, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Templates falsely claiming to have collapsible option

I have answered a few help questions like Wikipedia:Help desk#Navigation template is not collapsed (permanent link). This search currently gives 12559 templates which appear to falsely claim to support a state parameter. See Template:Navbox#Setup parameters for what it's supposed to do. My search may have false positives. I haven't examined the results carefully. The normal fix is to add |state = {{{state|}}} to the template code but {{collapsible option}} can also be removed from the documentation which may be on a doc page. Some templates like {{Joban Line}} do set state but to a fixed value. Will somebody look more carefully at it than me? state parameters aren't used a lot in calls but 10000+ possibly false documentations is a lot. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Usages with {{Navbox documentation}} should not be removed but use |stateless=yes. Related, but the previous task that added {{Navbox documentation}} should continue to run and add that to the navbox that are missing it. Gonnym (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Bot that bypasses news aggregator URLs in references?

I'd imagine this has been asked before, but I could not find such information in the archives of this page:

Do we have a bot that works to bypass URLs to news aggregators (www.msn.com, www.yahoo.com, etc.) to change the URL to directly link to the article on the respective publication's site? (I'd imagine we don't, since it would probably be a rather complicated task that cannot be done with AWB, but thought I'd ask ... since I just did this edit, and I'd imagine there are more URLs like that which need to be fixed.) Steel1943 (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

I would support such a bot, because I have come across similiar references several times in the past, which I had to fix manually or left as it is. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 11:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Good idea in theory, could be quite difficult in practice, given the bot would need to scrape the aggregator site to get the original URL, check it is the same article, and then link it - and that sort of automated activity is almost certainly against the MSN T&Cs, to use that example above - and their website is a nightmare for scraping anyway! It's not going to be one for AWB either, as there's no obvious pattern to the URLs.

I may attempt to have a bit more of a look at this on Friday, but I can't see any easy way to automate this, especially as a lot of these are suffering very badly from linkrot. May be a manual process to fix unfortunately. Mdann52 (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Is there consensus to do so? As a reader, I would be fine with, for example, a link to the Yahoo News copy of a paywalled Washington Post article, provided the {{cite news}} has |via = filled in. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352: If we don't have a guideline for this somewhere, I'd be surprised. To me, it's just common sense, such as removing the unnecessary 10000 characters Google puts in a URL to track internet traffic when someone clicks on a link to a page in their search results. But, I do understand your stance: It's better to be able to view a reference than to not be able to view it at all. (Makes me wonder though if news aggregators archive their own version of the articles they display, especially in the event the article disappears from the initial site; it's a thought/question I do not know the answer to.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Steel1943: MSN News do not archive the articles - and generally I think should be bypassed. There's a lot of dead link.... Yahoo does arhive a lot of "newwire" type articles, so I'm less worried about those. So far, it's not looking good as there's no easy way to resovle the original URL from the MSN page though. Mdann52 (talk) 17:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for responding to my question, Steel1943! The following is less a firm view and more thinking out loud. My tentative opinion is that the proposed bot task is, at the very least, complicated from a policy perspective:

the existence of the proposed bot would imply all or almost all citations of news aggregators should be replaced with links to the direct sources, in a way that does not [usually] require a human to make some sort of judgment—making the task a good candidate for automation
I have yet to find a policy that uses such a strong recommendation. Even WP:USEORIGINALSOURCE's Direct links to the original source should be preferred over the aggregator's, is noticeably weaker than, for example, "Direct links...should replace the aggregator's".
My wild guess is that WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT has some influence over the choice of wording in USEORIGINALSOURCE. I do not know if this is an unreasonable reading of SAYWHERE: if, using my previous comment's example, I have read only the Yahoo News link but not the original WaPo (e.g. due to not having enough resources or time to pass the paywall), SAYWHERE says I should cite the Yahoo link. Now, of course, you could verify that the original WaPo article supports the enwiki article text and change my citation to the original WaPo article, but the need for a human to verify the enwiki article text accurately reflects the contents of the original news article renders the task ill-suited for automation.
I would not argue very strenuously against anyone who says my interpretation of SAYWHERE is nullified by its So long as you are confident that you read a true and accurate copy clause. Simultaneously, I do not know how often we can assume an aggregator's link is a true and accurate copy of the original, which may have been corrected after the aggregator posted their copy.

Again, I have no strong opinions; just wanted to write out my thoughts. Thanks again, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:TAG retargeted

Per this RfD, WP:TAGSWP:TAGS has been retargeted to Wikipedia:Tags. It was noted in the discussion that this is a long-standing shortcut and that WP:GAN reviews routinely link to WP:TAGS. It was suggested that a bot run could update the now incorrect incoming links to the old target, Wikipedia:File copyright tags. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 04:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

DYK

I have noticed that in older DYK talk templates the (Check views) link is dead since years back. Like here https://stats.grok.se/en/201309/Meral_Tasbas at Meral Tasbas talk page, this message has not changed for years. I would say that this goes for most articles that appeared in the DYK section before 2017. Is there a chance that a Bot could change this (Check views) link on all older DYK talk pages. Because in newer DYK articles the link work. BabbaQ (talk) 04:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

That shouldn't require a bot to change anything, just someone to edit {{DYK talk}} to update the parenthetical (which unless I am misreading it has an "if date > X then show link" code). Primefac (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Removing fully completed daily RfD list pages from the main RfD page

When you close the last discussion open for a certain day at RfD, you need to manually remove the page transclusion from WP:RFD (example diff: Special:Diff/1292638726). In practice, this is often done by Jay mopping up after the rest of us who didn't notice that we closed the last one. It would be convenient to have a bot handle this instead.

User:DumbBOT currently creates each new subpage in the morning, but my understanding that the operator is not very active these days and probably not a good person to go to for new bot tasks. Rusalkii (talk) 01:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Rusalkii I am now working on this as task 2 for VWF bot. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Rusalkii (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Just out of personal curiosity, do you have the source code available publicly? I was considering doing this myself and am interested in looking at what the implementation ended up being. Rusalkii (talk) 17:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Not opposing Vanderwaalforces's work, but even though Tizio (DumbBOT's operator) is not much active, Tizio and DumbBOT would have been a good choice for this task. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Or, if people want, we could have AnomieBOT do RFD like it does TFD, CFD, and FFD. Anomie ⚔ 22:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

yes, that will centralise the tasks under one bot account. —usernamekiran (talk) 08:01, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

...Jay isn't the only one who does that cleanup... Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Sync stale sandboxes

A bot should overwrite "Template:X/sandbox" with the content of "Template:X" if either of the following are true:

The most recent edit to the live template is newer than the most recent edit to the sandbox
or neither the live template nor the sandbox have been edited in a year.

I've seen several times edit requests being made on top of a stale sandbox, and I have to painstakingly rebase them before deploying. Probably year-old tests aren't important (and they will still be in the page history if they are) and if a change is made without sandboxing it should clearly be synced over. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

If no one takes this up in the next few days, I will file a BRFA. – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:42, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

My only small-ish concern and this isn't a deal breaker, but I would be happy if this could be addressed with the bot. Some templates are simple enough that the one-line documentation is used in the template itself and not in a /doc page. On those pages, the categories are also used on the template page itself. Sandbox pages should not be categorized. If possible, wrap the categories (in both live and sandbox) in a {{Sandbox other}} block. Gonnym (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The #1 condition is problematic for a template like {{rint}} where there are often multiple sandbox edits to add new lines, but while those are pending it is often the case that the main template is the most recent of the two to be edited; make the "either" into a "both" and it should eliminate that problem. I'd also be okay with dropping the time to 6 months or even less. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I disagree with "both" - just as often someone sandboxes something that turns out to not get done for one reason for another and it should be reset for the next user eventually. Maybe add "and the talk page doesn't have an active edit request" to #1, although the {{rint}} workflow is broken anyway when that happens as it puts an unwanted burden on template editors to do the rebasing when that burden should instead of on edit requestors. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

So, what are the final conditions? – DreamRimmer ◆ 02:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Or we could just exclude rint for now. I'm happy to take this up and file a BFRA. GalStar (talk) 01:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Yesterday I came across a case where a sandbox has been being used by the non-sandbox version of a template for several months. A syncing bot should check for situations like that before overwriting the sandbox. Anomie ⚔ 15:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Confirm sources for claims such as "cult film", "urban legend"

I'd like to automate the search for sources that support claims such as "cult film", "cult following" (for a film), and "urban legend". If the first source listed after the claim does not contain the same term, then I want the article link to be saved to a list for manual review. My intent is to remove unattributed claims from articles. There are at least several thousand articles which contain these claims.

Bot operation steps:

1. Search for articles that contain these terms.

2. For each article containing a term, find the closest sited source after the instance of the term.

3. Visit the source link.

4. Search for the term on the source web page.

5. If the term is found, move on to the next article.

6. If the term isn't found, add the article URL to a list for manual review.

7. Send me a link to the article list when the automated search is complete. Gamboler (talk) 14:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I'd be willing to code this if the community thinks it would be helpful. The only issue I can see is Step 7: that could result in a lot of unnecessary notifications if you decide you want to run this continuously. I think hosting the list from Step 6 in the bot's userspace, and watch listing it on your main account would be the best way to implement that because both you and others could subscribe and unsubscribe to those notifications as you see fit, without changing the code. Doing it that way may also qualify for the BOTUSERSPACE exemption, although the volume of edits may be too high in reality. JarJarInks_{٩(◕_◕)۶}^{Tones essay} 17:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

No response but I really think this qualifies for BOTUSERSPACE so I'm

Coding... JarJarInks_{٩(◕_◕)۶}^{Tones essay} 18:01, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

This seems useful, any updates? GalStar (talk) 05:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Are you aware of discussions on Talk:List of cult films? There has been many ideas how to handle what qualifies as a cult film. IMO checking for "cult film" in a nearby source is not the best way to determine a cult film. — GreenC 06:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I’ll take a look, and I agree that it may not be the deciding factor. But having a simple list of possible unsupported claims hosted in user space would still be a useful tool. (Written on mobile, apologies for any grammar issues) JarJarInks_{٩(◕_◕)۶}^{Tones essay} 12:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Bot to Notify Users of Stale User Drafts

This situation came to my attention at MFD. Four incomplete placeholders in user space were nominated for deletion. The nominator said that they had found them in the maintenance category Category:Stale userspace drafts. I have taken a quick look at that maintenance category, and I think it is clear what is needed, which cannot be done by MFD and cannot be done by humans looking at the pages. There are 39,535 stale userspace drafts in that category. Any human-based process is the wrong way to deal with the category, regardless of whether the category needs dealing with. What is needed is a bot to walk through the category and determine which of the authors are in good standing, and notify those authors that they have stale drafts, and to produce a report listing the indeffed users who have drafts in that category, and how many drafts each indeffed user has. Some of the users have simply forgotten that they started work on those drafts, and notifying them will reduce the number of drafts in the category. That is the first step. I don't know whether there is a second step, but I think that a bot is needed to notify users that they have stale userspace drafts, and to report on stale userspace drafts by blocked users. (A human can determine whether the drafts by blocked users qualify for G5.) Robert McClenon (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I've made the userspace draft report here, albeit I will ask whether a bot is necessary for the notifications. A MassMessage may be better suited to this if this is infrequent. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 13:33, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Tenshi. Your list is not as long as I had expected, which means that fewer of the authors of stale drafts are blocked than I had expected. That probably means that more of the authors are active or at least sporadic. I think that creates more of a case why a bot should notify users that they have stale drafts in user space. They might either update them or G7 then. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The simultaneous village pump discussion you started is not (currently) showing a consensus that deletion of these drafts is desirable, rather it's leaning in the opposite direction. Given this, I think you should gain consensus for a mass message or bot-delivered message about stale drafts before sending one. Thryduulf (talk) 16:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Discussion was archived a couple days ago. Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:48, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Change "articles" to "pages"

We recently moved lots of categories like Category:File-Class articles to Category:File-Class pages. There are quite a few links to update, and a lot of these seem to be in the userspace of Audiodude. It would be great if someone familiar with AWB or similar could edit these pages. An example edit is: [5] Any non-article classes (Template, Category, Disambig, File, Redirect, Project, etc.) are changed from "articles" to "pages". Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:38, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

I believe WP:CFDS is where category-renaming requests (and their cleanup) go, or are you talking about actually changing links (i.e. not [[Category:... uses)? Primefac (talk) 12:42, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Primefac, in the example edit it's changing template parameter values. — Qwerfjkl talk 18:54, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Ah, yes, seem to have misread it. Primefac (talk) 18:56, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Behavior change for {{PresFoot}}

(Moved from WP:AWBREQ due to quantity of pages, 18:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC))

Hello! The other week I found a template with awkward usage and after this discussion with fellow editor Jonesey95, about (primarily this presidential election results table set), I have a bot proposal for addressing this awkward template usage on the 2950 pages affected.

Currently {{PresFoot}} is doing two tasks— closing tables as expected, but also behaving as the last row, which is not the expected standard. The expected standard template trio is that of the general "xHead (takes table style parameters)", "xRow (takes content parameters)", "xFoot (Just a closer)". With PresFoot currently doing both, it makes end of table changes (new last rows) somewhat bothersome since you would need to change the existing PresFoot to PresRow, and then add a new PresFoot. This is probably why a fifth of the existing cases of PresHead forgo using PresFoot and are closed by a regular table closer bracket. Also, in the edge cases of a table only have a single row of content, the current usage would require you'd have {{PresHead}} followed by {{PresFoot}}, with no {{PresRow}} usage. The other issue with this current {{PresFoot}} setup is if an editor who wasn't familiar with this unexpected behavior were to use these and did PresHead, PresRows, and closed it with an empty PresFoot, they'd get a table of content with an extra "null" row for 2020 (1 vote/ea. for a 33% spread (Rep/Dep/Third). This is one example. A short overview of the usage cases can be seen in my sandbox example here.

A Request for Comment was posted May 15th on the template set's talk pages (crossposted notices on PresHead/PresRow linking to the discussion on PresFoot's talk) and no objections have been stated since.

I do not expect any false positives coming with this proposal, and should be a one time run. There are three pages (two articles 1, 2), and my Sandbox2) using PresFoot in the expected no taken parameters way and shouldn't need changing.

Key Actions Requested:

Before the two actions below,

Change the contents of Template:United States presidential election results table footer to #REDIRECT [[Template:End]] (1 case; manual edit)
Delete (as T5) Template:United States presidential election results table footer/doc (1 case; manual edit)

For all articles transcluding {{PresFoot}}

IF {{PresFoot}} is present, change all existing cases of PresFoot(with parameters) to PresRow(with parameters). (2950 cases)
ADD {{PresFoot}} with no parameters to a new line after final {{PresRow}}. (same articles)

example of these changes

Additional Action Requested

While doing these changes it makes sense to bring these tables' usage into compliance with WP:CHRONO (earliest to latest). All cases I've sampled of these PresTables were contrary to this standard. My hope is that this task can be combined with the above and still be a single edit per page.

example of Chrono change

If easy to check behind, add this, otherwise if complicated, ignore

It's in the realm of possibility that some articles that have a PresFoot are also followed by an unnecessary stray table closer, but I'm not expecting this with any frequency. I also suspect that checking for these in cases where it is a stray and not closing some other table would be a harder task with a fair chance of false positives, so I'm not requiring this extra check. If I am wrong and this is an easy thing to check for so there aren't stray table closers, great, please add. Otherwise a few stray table closers won't be harming anything.

Thanks for considering, Zinnober9 (talk) 02:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I'll try to work on this. Will file a BRFA tomorrow. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:55, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Zinnober9: Extremely sorry that I couldn't get to it earlier even though I claimed it. I have filed a BRFA now, see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/CX Zoom AWB 2. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 12:58, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

No worries, I'd rather it done right than done quickly. Thanks for updating and filing. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed: template for the summary box above. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 14:52, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Rename all usages of Chart to TreeChart

As mentioned in Template talk:ChartDisplay#Parameter case it would be ideal to have the Template:ChartDisplay template be called Template:Chart rather than Template:ChartDisplay. However Template:Chart is being used as a redirect by ~900 pages to Template:Tree chart. As such it would be nice if all those pages could be modified to directly call Template:Tree chart so that Template:Chart can be usurped.

I'd be happy to hack something together to do this if someone doesn't already have something.

Cheers, GalStar (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

GalStar, wouldn't this need a TfD or RfD? Not sure which. — Qwerfjkl talk 12:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Probably RFD since chart is ambiguous and should probably be dabbed (there is also {{Graph:Chart}}). Primefac (talk) 13:09, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Primefac, done with Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 7#Template:Chart. Doesn't {{Graph:Chart}} no longer work? — Qwerfjkl talk 10:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

It doesn't, I'm just saying that there is a risk of ambiguity in there with a bunch of things having similar names. Primefac (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Even so, I think it would make more sense for {{Chart}} to cover the extension of the same name. — Qwerfjkl talk 10:24, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

There is precedence, as the german wikipedia has de:Template:Chart. GalStar (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

For anyone wondering, this has been completed (

Done, but not by me). GalStar (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Bot to convert legacy Graph extension graphs into the new chart extension

There are graphs that say This graph was using the legacy Graph extension, which is no longer supported. It needs to be converted to the new Chart extension. Would it be possible for a bot to convert the legacy graphs to the new chart extension Is la🏳️‍⚧ 12:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

There is already a bot, User:GraphBot, that is approved to port graphs into charts. – DreamRimmer ■ 12:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Done GalStar (talk) (contribs) 05:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

WikiProject Nova Scotia importance tags

Through Template:WikiProject Canada, WikiProject Nova Scotia has its own importance parameter defined as ns-importance. This was done so that articles could be better sorted by their relevance to the province specifically as opposed to Canada as a whole. Now that I have curated the articles accordingly, there is approximately 5,000 articles remaining to be tagged as ns-importance=low (see User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Nova Scotia). I was told a bot would be the best way to do this. Thanks, MediaKyle (talk) 23:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Coding... Tenshi! (Talk page) 11:20, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed Tenshi! (Talk page) 01:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Doing... Tenshi! (Talk page) 17:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Done Tenshi! (Talk page) 11:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Rename/update old signatures we had made with our new username

After a user changes their username to a new one, their old signatures they had on an article talk page and other communication page shows their old username instead of their new one.

Could a bot be made to help update a user's old username signatures to their new username?

Would be wonderful if so! Thank you 4vryng (talk) 15:44, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

No, we don't update signatures after a username change. Renamers generally leave a redirect when renaming a user so that links in signatures across all discussions where the user has participated continue to work. – DreamRimmer ■ 16:29, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. this is by design. If a post-rename request requires to update the user's signature on say 5,000 pages — then redirect is better than a bot updating these pages which might include closed discussion, and archive pages. A simple redirect is the wisest choice. In other cases, there is WP:clean start, and WP:vanishing. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Date Formatting Bot for references

Is there any way a permanent bot could be coded to format dates in references, so the formatting is consistent within each article? It's just in my contests a lot of time is spent having to prompt editors to use one style and them chasing things up. I think a bot should be operating making date formats consistent in articles so nobody needs to worry. I personally prefer a 8 July 2025 format than 2025-07-08 but obviously we would need some consensus if it was to mean the whole website. For now, a bot which reads the most common used format within each article and is able to convert the others to make them consistent? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. This seems unnecessary (and cosmetic) given that CS1 and CS2 citation templates already automatically convert YYYY-MM-DD dates to the format specified in the article. For example, see this draft I'm working on; in the source, I use YYYY-MM-DD dates in the citations, but they are rendered in MDY format because of the {{Use mdy dates}} tag at the top of the wikicode. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 22:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Create Bot

Hello, I need make a bot to do better and precisely editing but I am not familiar by making it, Who can help me its making process completely by detail or at least my account https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:July2806 from a simpler editor account change to a bot for better management affairs. July2806 (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Not related to a bot task request. @July2806: Hey! This page is intended for requesting that someone automate a specific task on Wikipedia, not for learning how to do so. Additionally, bots are approved to work on very specifically defined tasks, not just general editing, which it sounds like you're referring to. (See some of the other topics on this page for some examples of what bots can do.) I'd also recommend getting more familiar with Wikipedia and our policies before considering automating any tasks around here, especially because gaining more experience might help you find good things for a bot to help with. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 15:59, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Replace Germany4 with Germany

Go over Category:Album chart usages for Germany4 (0) and replace "Germany4" with "Germany". See Special:PermanentLink/1305490623#Germany and Germany4.
I'm pretty sure some existing bot can do this but I don't remember which one. If you prefer, I'd be happy to reactivate my own muhbot as well. Muhandes (talk) 11:03, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Coding... – DreamRimmer ■ 11:42, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Germany.ipynb – DreamRimmer ■ 12:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed – DreamRimmer ■ 12:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Done – DreamRimmer ■ 08:25, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Replace all description lists without prior description terms in article namespace with appopriate alternatives

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Replace all description lists without prior description terms in article namespace with appopriate alternatives

– Sapphaline (talk) 16:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

A auto-message bot for AfC reviews?

Hi all. I don't know if this has been proposed before or could be added to a existing bot. I am suggesting a bot to let AfC reviewers know - via talk page - that it has been more than 72 hours since they marked a submission as "Review in Progress". If this is technically feasible, it would only have maximum 5 pages every few days.

Currently, there is one example, Draft:Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, marked as under review on the 26 of April by AlphaBetaGamma. I got the original idea from @Robert McClenon. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:32, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, User:CF-501 Falcon. Our concern is drafts that have been tagged as In Review by a reviewer who then forgot that he had tagged them. (I am referring to the reviewer in the masculine gender because when I become aware of the situation, I am referring to myself.) Another suggestion has been made that the bot could also untag the draft so that it is available for another reviewer, in case the first reviewer has gone on vacation. That is all right if the reviewer simply forgot, because then the first reviewer can go back and review the draft again. So it is simply a matter of noticing that the draft has been in review for 72 hours for a status that is supposed to take 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Coding... About untagging the drafts marked as being reviewed, I think there should be some time given to the reviewer after the notification, for example after the notification on the reviewer's talk page at 72 hours, to only remove it after 96 hours (4 days afterwards). Does this seem reasonable? Tenshi! (Talk page) 14:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Tenshi Hinanawi, Thank you! I think the additional 24 hour hold, while a great idea, may lengthen the overall time a little too much. It may be better to leave a notification at 48 hours then untag it at 72. @Robert McClenon, What do you think? CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 14:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

User:CF-501 Falcon - The exact number of days or hours doesn't matter much to me. In thinking about situations in which this has come up with my reviews, I think that 48 hours is fine, because that means that I have forgotten that I started the review. The exact number is less important than the existence of the robotic check, so 48 and 72 hours is fine. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Sounds Great! CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 19:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Done Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

@CF-501 Falcon, Robert McClenon, and Tenshi Hinanawi: Just to make the point that will be made at a BRFA... Can a discussion be started over at WT:WPAFC about this, if it hasn't already? Mdann52 (talk) 17:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#Drafts_Marked_as_Being_Reviewed_but_Forgotten, and you may resume the discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Redirects related to those nominated at RfD

Per the initial discussion at Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion#Avoided double redirects of nominated redirects I believe there is consensus for an ongoing bot task that does the following:

Looks at each redirect nominated at RfD
Determines whether there are any other redirects, in any namespace, that meet one or more of the following criteria:
- Are marked as an avoided-double redirect of a nominated redirect
- Are redirects to the nominated redirect
- Redirect to the same target as the nominated redirect and
  - Differ only in the presence or absence of diacritics, and/or
  - Differ only in case
If the bot finds any redirects that match and which are not currently nominated at RfD, then it should post a message in the discussion along the lines of:
- Bot note: {{noredirect|Foo Smith}} ^{(talk · links · history · stats)} is an avoided double redirect of "Foo Jones"
- Bot note: {{noredirect|Foo smith}} ^{(talk · links · history · stats)} is a redirect to the same target as "Foo Smith"

The bot should not take any actions other than leaving the note, the goal is simply to make human editors aware that these redirects exist.

I don't know how frequently the bot should run, but it should probably wait at least 15 minutes after a nomination before checking or editing so as not to get into edit conflicts or complications as discussions of multiple redirects are often nominated individually and then the discussions manually combined. Thryduulf (talk) 13:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

There is a strong consensus; if there are no objections in the next day or so, I'll file a BRFA. In the meantime I'll code up the bot. GalStar (talk) 17:56, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

I've just thought of a third case to check for: differences only in hyphenation/dashes. Thryduulf (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Actually that's generalisable to differences only in punctuation. Thryduulf (talk) Thryduulf (talk) 03:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

@GalStar is there any update on this? Thryduulf (talk) 20:01, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm still working on it. I'm still getting some of the underlying tooling working, but I should be done soon. GalStar (talk) 16:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Thryduulf (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

If anyone is wondering, I'm currently porting my code to toolforge, so it can run continuously, and without the unreliability of my home network. This is taking longer than I expected however. GalStar (talk) 17:17, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed GalStar (talk) (contribs) 20:56, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Non breaking spaces in lists of minor planets

Good morning, I've just inserted non breaking spaces before "km" in some lists of minor planets. 87.21.146.58 (talk) 05:47, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Not a good task for a bot. inserting the non-breaking spaces solely is WP:COSMETICBOT. This can be done with other tasks, or with other non-cosmetic WP:AWB edits. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:16, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Inserting non-breaking spaces would technically not be WP:COSMETICBOT, as it does make a difference to the rendering of the page if the browser would otherwise break the line between the number and the unit. MOS:NBSP specifically calls for non-breaking spaces in this case. That doesn't mean a bot is a good idea or not though. Anomie ⚔ 00:03, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

@Anomie: yes, that is a good point. should I remove the template? I think I already have a code that might work for this task. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:09, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Eh... if you look at Category:Lists of minor planets by number, there might be about 876 pages but most will probably already be properly formatted, and the IP already got a dozen of 'em. Primefac (talk) 23:19, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

This won't make any rendering differences. They're no way a short string like "1.1 km" would ever break in a table cell unless you zoom in or out beyond reason. 23:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC) Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Or you're on a mobile device. I went to List of minor planets: 300001–301000, hit Ctrl+Shift+M to activate Firefox's responsive design mode, and sure enough, short strings like "2.5 km" wrapped in the table. Then I did it again in a private browsing window and tried it on en.m.wikipedia.org to check the default skins. Anomie ⚔ 11:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Album articles without track listings

Just now I found The Truth About Christmas, an album article which somehow has no track listing. I would like to know if there is a way for a bot to find any other album articles without track listings as a means of adding them in. I imagine this could be done by finding articles that are both 1. in at least one category with the word "albums" in it, and 2. does not have a header with the word "track" in it. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:16, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Coding... It seems possible, but might take a bit to make a report. — Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:34, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Doing... Tenshi! (Talk page) 02:18, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Done Pages. There seems to be a few false positives because of variants in the track listing section (Track list, Tracklist, etc.) and some other issues. Tenshi! (Talk page) 13:10, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Cleaned up the false positives a bit, so it should be fine now. Tenshi! (Talk page) 14:57, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

hhttps

Need change hhttps to https. Example. Mitte27 (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Done Fixed 116 pages. – DreamRimmer ■ 14:01, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

(Requests like this are probably better suited to WP:AWBREQ, for future reference.) — Qwerfjkl talk 14:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Culling categories to update lists

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Archive 53#Is anyone maintaining these "lists of MLB players"? regarding updating the Lists of Major League Baseball players with a bot rather than manually. Ideally, whenever a new article is created and added to a teams' players' category, a bot would add it to that team's list of players. First, there is not really a consensus to do so, just discussion at present. Second, would such an activity be possible for a bot? And third, are automated edits like this permitted in article space? Just looking for input here at this stage. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps the trickier part would be removing items inserted in error. It would certainly be possible, and if there was consensus to do it, then it would be permitted. In principle it could be a clean operation, but there are a lot of detailed decisions to be made. For example Boston Red Sox all-time roster has bolding for Hall of Famers and flags (possibly against guidelines) for non-US players. Anything like this would either need to be supported, not interfered with, or overwritten. There would have to be acceptance that the article name for the player would be the name used in the list, or some other way of determining that. There might be no entries for people who did not have an article. Nothing impossible to deal with, but it would need to be worked out. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC).

Thanks for the feedback. I'll take this back to the Project in case a decision is made to move forward with the task. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 22:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Bot to add missing hyphens to multiple article titles?

Following on from the discussions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Olympics#100_metre_vs_100-metre_vs_100_metres_vs_100m hundreds of swimming articles are missing the hyphen and per MOS:SUSPENDED, articles like Swimming at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre butterfly should be at Swimming at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Men's 200-metre butterfly. Valenciano (talk) 02:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Despite MOS:SUSPENDED+1 (Suspend refers to the previous bullet point.) I'm not convinced this is a good idea. Firstly I'm not sure it's good style or that SUSPENDED+1 applies, while "100 metre breaststroke" is clearly a noun phrase the modifier can be taken as "breaststroke". Secondly common usage is without the hyphen - see ngrams. Thirdly, since thousands of article names, as well as categories and templates, not to mention section headers, tables and text would be affected I think a much wider discussion, and clearer consensus would be needed. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 06:59, 25 July 2025 (UTC).

Hey @Rich Farmbrough, thanks for weighing in on this. I think that argument you use for taking the modifier as "breaststroke" can be used for most situations of MOS:SUSPENDED+1, which means you would be arguing for repealing the guideline almost entirely. I'm not sure what you meant by "see ngrams", but in case you meant search the Google ngrams search, I did (here), and it seems the dash is common usage? I certainly would not be opposed to seeking further consensus. Where would be the best place to take it from here to let the community weigh in? IAWW (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

It's complicated, I have a variety of results from Google, they are not consistent either on a style level or with themselves. If you take your example and select British English you only get the no-hyphen version. if you select American English you get "no ngrams to plot" - very odd.

Your example shows a reversal in the last few years, but compared with 100 metres freestyle (no 100-metres freestyle found) here, the story changes.

With yards it's different again here.

100 metres breaststroke

I'd start an RFC at WP:Village pump (proposals), and leave messages at the appropriate project(s) and MoS talk page. I'm not sure if I have an opinion on what's better here, I think I might look at what the international swimming and athletic bodies do. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC).

Rich Farmbrough thanks for the reply, which I've only just seen. The issue is that I feel that I'm going round the houses here. I first raised this at the help desk who advised me to head to the relevant Wikiproject and already did raise this at the most relevant Wikiproject (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Olympics#100_metre_vs_100-metre_vs_100_metres_vs_100m) who referred me here. Now I'm being passed somewhere else yet again. Sadly, leaving out the hyphen is one of the most common mistakes in English these days, up there with your/you're, it's/its, there/their/they're etc so I have absolutely no doubt that there are many links using it, but it's still wrong according to every style guide, including our own. I feel a little like I'm at an impasse here. Valenciano (talk) 12:27, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

How I understand it, at least for the sport of athletics, is that the 400 metres hurdles is run on a 400-metre track. The '400 metres' distance is modified by 'hurdles', so '400 metres' ends in 's' and has no hyphen, whereas the 'track' is modified by '400-metre', so '400-metre' doesn't end in 's' and has a hyphen. By analogy, it would be: 200 metres butterfly in a 50-metre pool. Here it doesn't mean a specific type of butterfly stroke used over 200 metres (which would probably be a 200-metre butterfly), but a distance modified by the type of stroke used; at the same time, it does mean a specific type of pool (a 50-metre pool). Looking at the website of World Aquatics, they typically abbreviate the distance as '200m' which removes the question altogether; I couldn't find many examples of the longer form, there are a couple in this report, both '200 metres' and '200 metre' (no hyphen) are used here, but that's not much to go on. So taking all this into account, for swimming, I would use the form '200 metres butterfly' for the article titles. – Editør (talk) 14:50, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I can see it's frustrating. It doesn't appear that anyone is whole-heartedly behind this idea so far, apart from you, you may wish to move on to something else. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:53, 11 August 2025 (UTC).

@Rich Farmbrough by the way you accidentally removed a much of replies with your reply IAWW (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I get edit conflicts with myself from 3 seconds ago, but not from other users days ago! All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:10, 11 August 2025 (UTC).

I agree in principle that we should follow our MOS there, but this needs to be well settled in discussion, and manual moves and edits accepted, before bringing it up as a bot request. Dicklyon (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

And of course it's not just a few hundred swimming articles. Here are over 14,000 more to consider (not carefully pruned yet; about 50 have the hyphens already). Dicklyon (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

In general, I'd prefer to shorten the titles using standard abbreviations, with space, not hyphen, (e.g. "100 m") per standards about how such things are done, and not just our MOS. Dicklyon (talk) 17:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Removing Template:Now Commons from files tagged with Template:Keep local

Hi, I would like to request a bot to take on the task of removing the {{Now Commons}} from pages tagged with {{Keep local}}. Files tagged with the latter are not eligible for deletion in accordance with WP:CSD#F8 and should not be tagged as such. I usually take care of these manually, but there are currently over 100 files tagged as such in Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons as of unknown date, which is too large of a burden. This task was previously handled by FastilyBot (see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FastilyBot 15), but has never been picked up after the operator's departure. ✗plicit 00:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@CanonNi plans to do this with Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/CanonNiBot 1, but they have not been active lately and are not responding to questions on the BRFA. I can take this on if they do not reply within a few days. – DreamRimmer ■ 01:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

We're still a few days off from the task expiring mainly due to a lack of feedback/input from the botop, but if there's still radio silence by next weekend that's what will happen. Primefac (talk) 15:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Here's a Petscan. It's currently empty. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 00:08, 25 July 2025 (UTC).

Noting that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/CanonNiBot 1 has expired. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:18, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Feel free to take this up, I have other tasks pending. The code is ready, so let me know if anyone wants it. – DreamRimmer ■ 15:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll look at having AnomieBOT do it, and the other things from CanonNiBot 1 as well. Anomie ⚔ 16:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed Anomie ⚔ 04:52, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

{{BOTREQ}} Bot is now running. Anomie ⚔ 16:15, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Typo fix for template redirect

Could a bot please replace all uses of the misspelled template `{{CA-Ministers of Intergovermental Affairs}}` with the correct version, `{{CA-Ministers of Intergovernmental Affairs}}`?

It's a simple typo (missing an "n") cleanup affecting the 15 pages listed here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:CA-Ministers_of_Intergovermental_Affairs.

Thanks!

Anamul Haque Nayeem ^{💬 🛠️} 01:44, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Manually completed using WP:AWB. As a side note, I took the liberty of redirecting those to the parent template, {{Ministers of intergovernmental affairs of Canada}}. Phuzion (talk) 03:02, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

{{BOTREQ}} -- Tagging done for archiving purposes. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:21, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Replace template

{{resolved}} Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 January 26#Template:Infobox Jewish leader; please replace {{Infobox Jewish leader}} with {{Infobox religious biography}}. There are about ~1,100 transclusions. The parameters have already been merged, so there should be no issues on that front. Thanks! Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 12:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@Primefac, does Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PrimeBOT 24 cover this? — Qwerfjkl talk 13:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Probably this should be taken to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell, which is the normal place for templates needing replacement after TFD to be handled. That page lists three bots that can handle this sort of thing. Anomie ⚔ 15:36, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes it does, and per Anomie it should be listed at TFDH so someone such as myself can take care of the merger. It's very possible that this merge can be made into a subst wrapper that Anomie's bot can handle (but I haven't looked at the merge yet). Primefac (talk) 23:44, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

It was at previously at WP:TFDHC however it was recently removed after I made this request saying it was a template wrapper and that it didn’t need to be there. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 00:00, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try to take a look in the next few days and see about sorting it out. Primefac (talk) 00:14, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Please do not do this. The merge is already complete. The merged {{Infobox Jewish leader}} template assigns |religion= automatically, which the pre-merge template did, and which a redirect or replaced template would not do. That quirk was not mentioned at the TFD; everyone who voted to merge just appears to have assumed everything would work fine without actually looking at the details. The OP here also assumes there would be "no issues" with just replacing the template name, but that is not correct.

These templates were at the holding cell. I merged the parameters from Infobox Jewish leader into {{Infobox religious biography}}, then turned Infobox Jewish leader into a wrapper that assigns one parameter automatically. I suppose a bot could edit all 1,200 transclusions of Infobox Jewish leader to add the |religion= parameter and then Infobox religious biography instead, but I don't see the point of that. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:00, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Inducks.org links

Hi Can you please change all web links with the domain name "coa.inducks.org" into the domain "inducks.org". There are hundreds if not thousands of them in Wikipedia. Here is an example of what should be done: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Junior_Woodchucks&diff=1311246207&oldid=1305819590 You can safely change any https URL with domain coa.inducks.org into inducks.org, except in archive.org URLs of course. Lerichard (talk) 07:41, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Requests for changing URLs should be made at WP:URLREQ. – DreamRimmer ■ 08:14, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

OK thanks! Lerichard (talk) 08:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

{{BOTREQ}} to WP:URLREQ for the archiving bot. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:14, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Please update redirects following article move (Kotwica → MKP Kotwica)

{{resolved}} Due to the 2nd September 2025 move of the article named "Kotwica Kołobrzeg (football)" to "MKP Kotwica Kołobrzeg" - there are now thousands of articles that redirect to Kotwica Kołobrzeg (football), instead of MKP Kotwica - including players, managers, league's and cup's seasons. As I do not have the rights to move them all myself, I kindly request creating a bot that will update these redirects to the new name (MKP Kotwica Kołobrzeg). Marina redaktor (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I see no redirects pointing to Kotwica Kołobrzeg (football); the double-redirect fixing bots probably got them all shortly after the move. If you're complaining about the incoming links to the redirect, I have to wonder whether WP:NOTBROKEN applies. Anomie ⚔ 14:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I mean "millions" of pages pointing to Kotwica Kołobrzeg (football) - there are 120 of them (lets see - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Kotwica_Ko%C5%82obrzeg_(football)&limit=500). I would like them to point MKP Kotwica directly. Marina redaktor (talk) 14:44, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Of those, a typical link appears to be the one at Josip Šoljić. That's a normal link to a redirect, and WP:NOTBROKEN applies. I don't see any non-article-space links. I don't think there is anything for a bot to do here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Agree with the above; linking to Kotwica Kołobrzeg (football) is functionally equivalent to linking to MKP Kotwica Kołobrzeg, especially if it is piped. There is little reason to change any of them. Primefac (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Cleaning up params in infobox animanga

Trying to do a clean up of Category:Pages using infobox animanga with unknown parameters (0). So far it looks like 99% of the issues come from the use of |demographic= which as deprecated and removed. Would be great to get a bot to run through and remove the calls. — Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:29, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Are you just removing demographic=? if so, AWB is probably the move Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 14:45, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Primefac has an approved bot task for standardising parameter usage in templates, so you can request them to run it for you. This is not urgent, but if they are not available to do the cleanup, I can help if needed. – DreamRimmer ■ 16:29, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

@Scaledish: I actually have been running an AWB script but given the large number it would be great to have an automated process (I.E. a bot) run them. I don’t want to click save 4,601 times…

.

@DreamRimmer: thanks for the tip. You are correct it certainly is NOT urgent. I have found that cleaning up the unknown parameter categories aids in preventing vandalism as the first thing often target by vandals is the infobox. So when those categories are emptied, it makes spotting the vandalism easier.

@Primefac: might you be available to run this one?

—Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:10, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Sure, I'll put it on my list. Primefac (talk) 21:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

{{BOTREQ}} Primefac (talk) ~~20:08, 27 September 2025 (UTC)~~ 01:59, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! - Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:11, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Non- admins in admin categories or template usage

{{resolved}} I was was looking at the category tree of Category:Wikipedia administrators by inclination and noticed that some former admins (maybe also non-admins?) are listed in this category. This also goes for transclusions of {{Administrator topicon}}. I couldn't find any guideline about mispresenting yourself (either by accident or not) as an admin (although I'm sure there is, with the closest I found being WP:MISLEADNAME). I think having a bot go over these group of pages and templates once a month or so and remove any non-admins is a good idea to minimize any confusion. Some examples of pages:

User:Aaron Schulz - uses a manual pseudo-userbox
User:Voice of All/History/monobook.js - category in .js page
User:BozMo - top icon template
User talk:7 - top icon template talk page
User:Roger Davies - in Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall

Gonnym (talk) 16:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Gonnym, to edit the .js page the bot would need to have interface admin permissions. Also, in the case of transcluded categories it will probably not be feasible to remove the category automatically. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:41, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

For transcluded categories via templates, the template itself should also be removed. Gonnym (talk) 19:26, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I suspect you'd be better served by a bot generating a report and then human work to clean up any userpages flagged by the report. Anomie ⚔ 21:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Or just this quarry: quarry:query/97500. Anomie ⚔ 21:44, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Or this report: Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted administrator categories (thanks to Anomie's query). — Qwerfjkl talk 12:16, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Cleanup an old CfD

There are ~5000 pages with the wikitext {{MonthCategoryNav|topic={{title year}} events in {{title country}}}}. These should be changed to {{MonthCategoryNav|topic={{title year}} in {{title country}}}} since the relevant categories were speedy moved. The current code technically works in most cases, but it relies on following redirects - while redirects were left for the ones that existed at the time of the rename, they won't be for any new creations. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:44, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

I will file a BRFA. – DreamRimmer ■ 03:01, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

BRFA filed – DreamRimmer ■ 10:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

{{done}} – DreamRimmer ■ 16:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for GAN striker bot

{{resolved}} Hi all.I hope you're doing well. Is it possible to write a bot for October 2025 GAN backlog drive to strike the GAN review which was started before 1 October and after 31 October 2025? And then change the codes every time when the backlog drive happen. Hope for positive response. Cheers! Fade258 (talk) 05:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I am struggling to understand what exactly you want to automate. Could you please share more details? – DreamRimmer ■ 08:40, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I mean to say that, Is it possible to write a bot to strike the GAN nomination which was started to review outside the date of 1-31 October 2025. For example: If participants added a review entry started before 1-31 October 2025 i.e 28 September in their name section in Wikipedia:Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/October 2025#Participants and reviews tracker and to strike out that entry as it was not eligible for the drive. Fade258 (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I have gone through the past drives but did not see any review that was created outside the drive period, so I am not sure it would be helpful to run a bot to strike out such reviews. I wrote a script that prints any invalid reviews, so you can run it from time to time and strike out invalid reviews manually. – DreamRimmer ■ 13:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I understand that but since my technical knowledge is not good, How can I run the script which you mentioned above? Fade258 (talk) 14:09, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

First, go to https://hub-paws.wmcloud.org/ and log in with your account. From the launcher menu, create a Python file named user-config.py with the following content:

family = 'wikipedia'
mylang = 'en'
usernames['wikipedia']['en'] = 'Fade258'

Once the file is saved, create a Python notebook from the home menu icon. In a notebook cell, paste pip install pywikibot and click the Run icon at the top menu to install Pywikibot if it is not already installed. After it is installed, paste your script into a new cell and click Run. If you get stuck, you can search YouTube for guidance on running scripts in a Jupyter notebook, and if you still face difficulties, leave me a message on my talk page and I will help you with the next steps. – DreamRimmer ■ 14:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I will try to do it. Thank you for your kind help. Fade258 (talk) 15:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

I executed a simple codes in test Wikipedia sandbox, which works. But unfortunately I did some error while trying to do extra things. Eventually, I edited with my main account in English Wikipedia sandbox. Will that lead to me block from editing Wikipedia? Fade258 (talk) 16:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. You can use PAWS in supervised mode from your main account. I noticed that you named the config file Fade258-config.py, but it should be user-config.py. Do not replace user with your username. When you run the script I provided, it may take a few minutes because it needs time to make requests and retrieve data . You will see Busy or Idle on the PAWS bottom taskbar. Idle means the script is not running, and Busy means it is running. Manual:Pywikibot/Pywikibot and PAWS have helpful tutorials, but before running any other scripts, make sure you understand what you are doing, as PAWS is powerful and can cause disruptions if used irresponsibly. – DreamRimmer ■ 16:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer. I will remember these things from onwards. I think I still need to gather technical knowledge to do it. I still have some problem regarding to update data in progress section of that 2025 October GAN backlog drive. Can you help me out there? I have asked about it in Mike Christie's user talk page but didn't get any response. Fade258 (talk) 02:18, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure about the values to fill in both tables. I have made an edit here, so could you check if there are any mistakes? The data I used is: Old nominations 533, Awaiting review 739, and total GA nominees 897. Please let me know if anything needs to be corrected when filling in the tables. – DreamRimmer ■ 13:30, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DreamRimmer, Sorry, I misunderstood. You have done a great job. Now, Can you make a bot for it as by making update time daily at 7:00 UTC. Fade258 (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2025 (UTC)