Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Scaledbot

Scaledbot

Operator: Scaledish (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 12:58, Tuesday, September 16, 2025 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: GitHub

Function overview: Update US settlement census data

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Request 1 · Request 2

Edit period(s): Yearly; new estimates released yearly

Estimated number of pages affected: Unknown, likely low 10 thousands

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details:

Add the results of the latest U.S. Census to all instances of {{US Census population}} & {{{Infobox settlement}}, adding the appropriate ref
Remove estimates from {{US Census population}} & {{{Infobox settlement}} in the case that the estimate was made before the latest census, per Category:Pages using US Census population needing update
Add new estimates to both templates, if possible
Does not change or add statements like "As of the 2010 census"
Generally conservative.

Doesn't add to a template if it sees there are multiple of it on the same page
Doesn't overwrite info if it is same age or newer

Discussion

Supervised Test 1 & Supervised Test 2 Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 13:06, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Since this is your first bot task, I am treating this as a one-off task. For future years, a new BRFA will be needed, and then we can see if it can be approved to run annually. – DreamRimmer ■ 13:58, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{Operator assistance needed}} Anything on the trial? Tenshi! (Talk page) 11:52, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the trial is not yet concluded.

As part of the trial, the bot was ran twice, both times being stopped due to eventually forming a false association between the database and the article. This lead to the conclusion that the match script needs to be improved significantly, which I will do but haven't yet had the time. I still believe a reasonable fix is possible. Likely, as part of this, a semi-supervised confidence approach will be adopted where, if confidence isn't overwhelmingly high, the association is sent for manual review.

Also as part of the trial, an additional issue was identified. If the infobox population is from <2010, is cited using a named reference, and elsewhere in the body that reference is referenced, a cite error is caused because those references are now dangling. This may be a simple fix, but needs to be implemented.

When both of these fixes are implemented, I plan to resume the bot for the remaining ~25 trial edits. Afterwards, I will request an additional 50 trial edits. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 17:16, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{Operator assistance needed}} Any progress on the fixes? Tenshi! (Talk page) 12:32, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the delay, my real life workload is roughly cyclical—you can see that reflected in my xtools stats. I expect to be able to work on it again within a week or two. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 19:55, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]