Wikipedia:Bot requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a page for requesting work to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to simply put ideas for bots. If you need a piece of software written for a specific article you may get a faster response time at the computer help desk. You might also check Wikipedia:Bots/Status to see if the bot you are looking for already exists, in which case you can contact the operator directly on his or her talkpage.

If you have a question about one particular bot, it should be directed to the bot owner's talk page or to the Bot Owners' Noticeboard. If a bot is acting improperly, a note about that should be posted to the owner's talk page and to the Administrators' Noticeboard. A link to such a posting may be posted at the Bot Owners' Noticeboard.

If you are a bot operator and you complete a request, note what you did, and archive it. {{BOTREQ}} can be used to give common responses, and to make it easier to see at-a-glance what the response is.

There are a number of common requests which are regularly denied, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots for a list of such requests, and ensure that your idea is not among them.

If you are requesting that a bot be used to add a WikiProject banner to the talkpages of all articles in a particular category or its subcategories, please be very careful to check the category tree for any unwanted subcategories. It is best to give a complete list of categories that should be worked through individually, rather than one category to be analyzed recursively. Compare the difference between a recursive list and a properly vetted one.

UK railway station categories[edit]

Last year, a dft_category parameter was added to {{Infobox GB station}}. However, still only a minority of railway station articles are using it, although there have been Wikipedia categories for them for much longer.

I am therefore requesting a bot to go through these articles (categories A–C2 have been done manually, and so only D, E, F1 and F2 still need to be done). The action to be performed on each is to add | dft_category = <category> to the infobox, and remove the manually-added category (since the infobox automagically adds the article to the relevant category, and having it there manually as well would create a risk of the two becoming out of sync).

I can see that there are cases that would need to be considered:

  • pages where the parameter has already been added (in which case the bot shouldn't do anything, except possibly remove the redundant manually-added category if there is one)
  • stations that are in more than one category (in which case the bot should flag them for human attention)
  • redirects and other similar templates (Infobox London station)
  • nested templates that may be present (though if the new parameter is added right at the beginning of the template transclusion this shouldn't be an issue).

Smjg (talk) 17:28, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I am not fun of categories added via templates/infoboxes in pages. This causes inconsistencies between pages having an infobox and those how don't. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
That would be WP:TEMPLATECAT. But there are no articles without an infobox for which one of these categories is applicable: every station that has been assigned by the Department for Transport to one of their categories (A, B, C1, C2, D, E, F1, F2) has a Wikipedia article; and every one of those articles has either {{infobox London station}} {{infobox GB station}} or its redirect {{infobox UK station}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Note also that the comment in WP:TEMPLATECAT is merely a recommendation, not a policy. Moreover, the reasons for it don't seem to be applicable here - once this work is complete, these categories will be populated almost entirely through these templates, thereby making it easier to restructure. Maybe there are still drawbacks to this approach, but I think it is a lesser evil than having to maintain the DfT category in two places in parallel (the infobox and the article categories) and the consequential likelihood of somebody inadvertently updating one but not the other. — Smjg (talk) 14:04, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
It's been nearly 2 months now. Anybody? — Smjg (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

An article/reference bot[edit]

It would be helpful to have a bot that compiled a numerical result showing how many articles on any given Wikipedia edition lack references. While quality assessment is very difficult, such an analysis would give a rough 'verifiability index' of individual editions (and a possibility for comparisons between editions).

I assume a simple string search for <ref or reference tags in each article would suffice. If found, the article can be added to the number of referenced articles and the bot can skip to the next one. If it reaches the end of the article and no reference tag is found, the 'unreferenced' count is increased. The end result would just have to be the two resulting sums, which constitute the ratio of referenced vs. unreferenced articles.

I realize there is a certain error margin due to several factors, e.g. malformed references, but that would probably even out, as such errors would be equally distributed between editions.

There's no need for the bot to make any markup, it would just be for statistical QA.

If such a bot already exists or easily can be modified for the task, please advice. Thank you! Asav | Talk 18:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, the trick will be to get a transclusion count of the {{Reflist}} template. The current number is 3,410,088. Then, subtract it from the number of articles (currently 4,717,510). The downsides of this method are:
  • Jarry1250's tool counts all transclusion, AFAIK, even the non-mainspace ones.
  • All articles with {{Reflist}} might not have references.
  • Articles might have malformed references.
--QEDKTC 18:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, the article might use <references /> instead. Then there are the articles with neither, but which are still fully-referenced - such as Actuary. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Actuary does have a {{Reflist}}. --QEDKTC 04:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
It shouldn't have done. It looks like it was added in error by PoeticVerse (talk · contribs) as the wrong fix for this edit, which had used <ref>...</ref> (contrary to WP:CITEVAR and WP:PAREN). Following this edit, the {{reflist}} should definitely have been removed; so I've now done that. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your responses so far, but the bot has to be edition agnostic, so so looking for '<references>', '{{Reflist}}' or '{{references}}' tags won't work; as the Norwegian edition uses '{{Referanser}}' and the French '{{références}}', for example. The bot needs to tackle localized editions as well, hence my suggestion that it count occurences of articles containing '<ref'. (This probably won't work for non-Latin alphabets, but it's better than nothing.) Malformed references and related errors are not a major problem; they'll even out in statistical terms, given the huge numbers we're talking about. Asav | Talk 20:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't read the "any Wikipedia edition" part. We can run the script through a global bot on each wiki. And we can just change it to the localized template each time on a new wiki. All sensibly referenced articles have the {{Reflist}} template, so I believe we'll get almost accurate numbers. In fact, most articles with inline citations will have the template. We can change it to transclusions in article namespace, so the python script should work fine. I'm fine with running the script but someone has to help me migrate it to the Labs cluster. And I'm going away on 21st. So, I would rather do it before that. --QEDKTC 04:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
And some wikis still use the deprecated {{Ref}} which can be tackled by the script. --QEDKTC 04:46, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I may be a bit slow here, but when you say 'All sensibly referenced articles have the {{Reflist}} template,' do you mean the localized or the translated versions (such as {{Referanser}} and {{références}}) as well? Also, quite a few articles still use the deprecated <references> tag. Would that bot work on those too, or will it have to be adjusted for national/localized editions?
Would python -count {{Referanser}} <references> do the job on the Norwegian edition, for example? Asav | Talk 19:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm bumping this, since QEDK is on a wikibreak. Asav | Talk 10:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it should. The problem is however, (with -count) doesn't count the articles but the number of transclusions so if your mentioned "keywords" occur twice, thrice or more, it counts that number and not the number of articles it has checked. --QEDKTC 12:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! What about articles that use parameters within the {{Referanser}}< tag, such as {{Referanser|2}} (for two column layout). Would each possible parameter have to be listed, or is there some sort of a wildcard function? Asav | Talk 19:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Instead of -count, do not enter any arguments at all, just set it in the article namespace. Btw, this script would take days to output the number on a very large wiki. Anyway, the code for {{Referanser}} would be -namespace:0 referanser. I have no idea if this script supports redirects or parameters. --QEDKTC 16:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Authority control templates[edit]

Could someone add Authority control templates to c. 1000-4000 biograms like bot [1] [2] in Polish wikipedia. Code here: [3] Thanks. Mały koleżka (talk) 15:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mały koleżka: You may have more response by asking on the Polish Wikipedia equivalent of this page: pl:Wikipedia:Zadania dla botów. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 16:12, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

access date without url[edit]

Per this discussion: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#access_date_without_url And this categoryCategory:Pages_using_citations_with_accessdate_and_no_URL Remove access dates from {{citation}} and {{cite}} when there is no url. Only do this if(and only if) there is another link out such as HDL, PMC, PMID, JSTOR, or DOI. Otherwise assume that a human needs to look at it, since there is an access date, but no link of any kind. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 15:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Looks like just need a bot to remove them all Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Error_data_-_accessdate_without_URL AManWithNoPlan (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

This can't be that difficult. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Leave a note on the talkpages of users who add vague stub templates[edit]

Stub sorting has been a perennial problem. All too often editors tag articles with Template:Stub, Template:Bio-stub, and other vague stub categories. This leaves categories that should be empty, like Category:Stubs, with hundreds of articles that have to be manually resorted. I propose a bot that leaves a message on the talkpage of users who add vague stub tags, informing them of how stub sorting works and linking them to the article they tagged, asking them to retag it. The disambiguation bot works this way now, so I'm sure it would work for stubs. The stub categories defined as too vague by WikiProject Stub sorting are Template:Animal-stub, Template:Japan-stub, Template:Magazine-stub, Template:Bio-stub, Template:Rpg-videogame-stub, Template:Sports-videogame-stub, Template:Stubs, and Template:Videogame-stub.  Liam987(talk) 01:28, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Bot-doable, of course, but I don't think it's a good idea. For example, you might not have time to use a more specific stub, or you might not understand Japanese topics well enough to use anything more precise than Japan-stub. You're definitely helping by adding the stub in the first place. Nyttend (talk) 03:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Some people, if asked to be more specific, but not knowing enough about the topic, might guess - and get it wrong. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
They will at least know enough to be able to categorise it as {{France-stub}} or similar. The main problem is people using {{stub}}.  Liam987(talk) 00:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't want to put anyone off from adding {{stub}} to appropriate articles, without stub-sorting them, except in the specific case where they're obviously working on a large group of very similar articles (eg British badminton champions of the 1950s) and it would be sensible for them to work out the correct stub type for {{UK-badminton-bio-stub}} or whatever, and add it as they go.
The editors who might be worth messaging by bot in relation to {{stub}} are:
  1. the ones who put it in the wrong place (usually at the top)
  2. those who add it to articles which already have a sorted stub template (often those two groups coincide)
  3. those who don't add a stub template but put the article directly into Category:Stubs or one of its subcats, without adding the template which creates the note on screen.
Different people do different things. I stub-sort like mad, but I don't often add categories, usually just slamming in {{uncat}} (or {{catimprove}} where I've done the {{subst:L|bdate|ddate|sortkey}} thing which I always do while stub-sorting bio stubs, as it adds a couple of cats). Each to our own, as long as we're not actually doing anything which harms the encyclopedia or makes life harder for other editors. If you're going to criticise editors for adding {{stub}} rather than {{Widereceiver-1950s-stub}} or {{Chittoor-geo-stub}}, then you might as well criticise them for not adding {{DEFAULTSORT}}, not adding geocoordinates, not adding Category:Living people, not adding image or inforbox, not expanding the text to the level of an FA ... but we don't. PamD 08:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
If there is a wrong place for this template then rather than botslap people for putting a template in the wrong place, why not use a bot to simply move templates to the right place? That would seem to me a helpful sort of bot ϢereSpielChequers 06:13, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Need both user-script writers and bot writers for an initiative at the Signpost[edit]

Hello all, we at the Signpost are currently underway introducing technical archival architecture at the Signpost, and we're in need of talented people to develop the damn thing =). There are essentially two different things we're trying to do:

  • Story-tagging: Mr. Stradivarius has written and is still working on a module that tags stories in the Signpost archives according to a manually-generated list which I've put together on top of an automatic "greatest-hits" one. So for instance, if you hit {{#invoke:Signpost|tag|wikisym}} you will get:


We want to extend this system to every Signpost article to date, a massive task that'll require combing through more than a decade's worth of published material by volunteers. For the moment, however, I have presented what I hope will serve as the lynchpin of this effort, a proposed research hub of sorts, at User:Resident Mario/sandbox. The next steps are outlined in the To-do. Even populating this list is going to be a challenge and so we need a userscript that'll help us maintain the hub—adding things, deleting them, changing information, etc.

  • Historical linking: I've created a proof of concept in one of my other sandboxes but have not acted much further than that so far because at this point. This is a simple idea—an option to give readers links to articles as they appeared at publication time—that I think would be valuable to people going through old stories trying to get a picture of the "way things were". Introducing this into articles will require the work of a bot working together with the templates that the Signpost has used over time to integrate this feature into all of our articles.

Please help us! :) ResMar 17:11, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Moving drafts in Wikipedia talk: namespace to draftspace[edit]

Why not use a bot to move all pages listed at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation to the corresponding Draft: title? All pages should be moved except (i) redirects and (ii) pages beginning with a number (which are not drafts but talk pages of archives). SD0001 (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Find (likely) bad fair use in novels.[edit]

A common issue with novels is to take a non-notable cheap modern edition of a classic work - say, a Penguin Classics, a Signet Classics, you get the idea. Some modern paperback - and claim irreplaceable fair use on it, when, of course, they are not only replaceable with at least a {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} image, the replacements have far more encyclopedic value.

I'd like a bot to work backwards from Category:1922 novels until, I don't know, categories will presumably stop by the 17th century or so, and after giving seven days to allow for any actually valid justifications to be stated and made into a whitelist - I wouldn't expect very many - it should nominate all images not on that whitelist for RFU. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Adam Cuerden: (Non-expert comment) I'd prefer to see this run as a report first. Is this going to find tens of images, hundreds, thousands? What proportion of the claimed fair use images are likely to be (a) deletable, (b) fair use with a custom rationale, (c) old enough to be public domain? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
If the novels were published before 1923, we can use covers of their first editions under {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} - there will be a small number of cases where a novel was written, but not published before 1923 which will be the exception. I've done three spot checks:
Category Number of articles Number of bad fair use images found Number of images that shouldn't be fair use in the first place. Uncertain (insufficient documentation)
Category:1920 novels 45 1 1a, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6a 6b, 6c, 6d, 7, 8 1, 2, 3, 4 (this one really bad: very obvious.), 5, 6, 7, 8 1 (may be a valid fair-use. Published as book much later than written; depends if this is the first book edition, really.)
Category:1870 novels 15 None None None
Category:1820 novels 5 None 1 (at worst, needs cropped) None

Moral: People are idiots when it comes to copyright. Also, it may be better to list for discussion, rather than nominate for deletion. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Requesting a bot to automatically generate featured topic progress templates for categories[edit]

Can anyone write a bot that could scan all the categories under the jurisdiction of a particular Wikproject, fill in a template like this along with a calculation for what percent along the way the category is to each article having featured status, then paste that template as a new section on the category talk page and in a new subpage for the wikiproject listing all of the newly generated templates, vaguely like the bot that does the popular pages template? I think a bot like that would be really useful for helping wikiprojects evaluate which categories are most in need of work and which could be most easily made into good or featured topics. Abyssal (talk) 04:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

SpongeBob SquarePants task[edit]

Over at WP:AFC/Redirects we've had a lot of requests for redirects for articles relating to SpongeBob SquarePants. Specifically, SpongeBob can be written as Spongebob, and SquarePants can be written as Squarepants. It is also reasonable to redirect squarepants to Squarepants.
The requested task would search for all articles containing the word SpongeBob and/or SquarePants and create appropriate redirects for alternative capitalizations. These redirects would be tagged with {{R from other capitalisation}}. Thank you. --LukeSurl t c 21:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@LukeSurl: Since the correct spelling is "SpongeBob SquarePants", should redirects with typographical errors "Spongebob" and/or "Squarepants" be tagged with {{R from misspelling}} instead? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I think you're right. --LukeSurl t c 09:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Bot for fixing broken redirect section anchors[edit]


It would be helpful for dealing with some of the over 10,000 broken redirect section titles if we could had a bot that quickly found very similar section titles for redirects, having found List_of_Tom_and_Jerry_characters#Tom_.26_Jerry_Kids to not work, it would check section headings and find List_of_Tom_and_Jerry_characters#Tom_and_Jerry_Kids works, so replace/recommend replacing it with that (depending on if it is automatic or semi-automatic). Ideally it would also do captialisation

It would also be helpful if when presented with Direct sum of abelian groups which redirected to the broken Direct sum#abgrps it noticed Direct sum#Direct sum of abelian groups and suggested this (ie noticed the title of the page it's redirecting from as a section header).

Ideally I'd like this bot to run on the two pages of Wikipedia:Database_reports/Broken_section_anchors directly. Banak (talk) 05:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

@Banak and Ladsgroup: Dexbot operated by Ladsgroup was fixing some of them, but its last fix was on December 20, 2014. --Bamyers99 (talk) 14:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
If you want I can re-run it :) currently I'm planning on rewriting it for better performance :)Ladsgroupoverleg 23:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
If it's easy to restart the bot, it would help a lot. Banak (talk) 00:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Sure. :)Ladsgroupoverleg 00:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Is this really resolved? Special:Contributions/Dexbot shows zero contributions since 19 March 2015, before his discussion started. Banak (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Looking for a Commons bot operator[edit]

Could anyone help with a Commons bot request? I left a request at COM:BOTR two months ago, but it was archived without action: it shouldn't be hard to program, so I suppose that it's just that nobody got around to it. Here's the request, copied from Commons:Commons:Bots/Work requests/Archive 11.

I've just discovered Commons:Category:Photographs by date and would like to have its subcategories added to my uploads. This will take a while if I do it manually, as I've uploaded over twelve thousand pictures. Could a bot do it? I'm imagining that the bot goes one-by-one through most of my uploads (details below), adding a date category only when the image uses {{Information}}, and using the date supplied in the |Date= parameter. Bonus points if the bot logs all images that don't use {{Information}} and all images that use the template but don't have anything in the data parameter or have something in it that's not precisely YYYY-MM-DD (example of this), and then gives me the full logs for both types so that I can check them and fix them if necessary. I've started adding date categories to new uploads (example), so it should also check to see if an image is already in a date category and ignore ones that are. Since they're not broken, there's no need to log these images. I was imagining that the bot would go through every image in eight categories; it should ignore things I've uploaded that aren't in any of these categories, and it should add a date to anything uploaded by someone else that's in one of these categories. The categories in question are Commons:Category:Aerial pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Building-centered pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Community pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Highway pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Miscellaneous images by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Portraits by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Scenery pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Signs by User:Nyttend.

Thanks for the help. Nyttend (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

IMO Numbers[edit]

Per discussion at WT:SHIPS#On hull/pennant numbers I'd like to request that a bot create redirects from IMO Numbers to ship articles. The redirects would be in the form of IMO 12345767890, where 1234567890 represents the actual number. The IMO numbers are listed in the infoboxes of ship articles where the ship is listed in Category:IMO Number. Once created, a monthly or bi-monthly run to update would be required. Mjroots (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Considering how {{IMO Number}} works, it would be easier for the bot to look at the category sortkey (i.e. this query). This might cause unexpected results if an article has multiple instances of that template, though (specifically, it would use the number from the last instance of the template) or if an article doesn't use the template correctly (it'd probably get skipped); would that be ok?
Also, is there an appropriate "R from" template to place on the redirects? If not, I'd recommend creating Template:R from IMO number for that purpose. Anomie 20:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
An article should not have more than one {{IMO Number}}. The IMO Number is something that does not change, even if a ship's name changes several times. Should there be a case of duplicate instances, then skipping is fine. Maybe the bot could report these for manual fixing. Mjroots (talk) 17:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
If I do the bot (I've got code started already), it won't even know about duplicate instances. Anomie 19:31, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, we'll just have to sort those out manually. Mjroots (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Symbol wait.svg BRFA filed Anomie 01:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Remove Template:Iw-ref[edit]


Please remove {{Iw-ref}} from all articles and replace with {{Translated page}} on the article's talk page. Consensus here: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 22#Iw-ref. Thank you, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Removal of duplicated citations[edit]

I suggest a bot that can remove duplicated citations. If you look at the source code, you can see what I mean by "duplicated citations". Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Markup Renders as
====Without duplicated citations===
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.<ref name="random thingy" group="example ref1">[ Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..<ref name="random thingy" group="example ref1" /> Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

====Dummy refs====
{{reflist|group="example ref1"}}

{{tick}} This is acceptable

===With duplicated citations===

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.<ref group="example ref2">[ Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..<ref group="example ref2">[ Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

====Dummy refs====
{{reflist|group="example ref2"}}

{{cross}} This is not acceptable 

Without duplicated citations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.[example ref1 1] Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..[example ref1 1] Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

Dummy refs

  1. ^ a b Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

YesY This is acceptable

With duplicated citations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.[example ref2 1] Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..[example ref2 2] Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

Dummy refs

  1. ^ Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".
  2. ^ Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

N This is not acceptable

@Qwertyxp2000: AWB's general fixes will do this - see the page for more details. GoingBatty (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
GoingBatty, thank you for finding the right page. I will soon be changing the {{Duplicated citations}} tag. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Qwertyxp2000: You might want to have the template link to WP:REFNAME instead of the AWB page. GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Qwertyxp2000: You might want to have a comment in the documentation saying that AWB may be used to fix the issue, and provide the link to the AWB page. GoingBatty (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Why cannot you do this all? Then I can see what you are thinking. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Qwertyxp2000: Apparently some people think that duplicate citations are acceptable. GoingBatty (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Looking at the second scenario, if I have referenced the first and last sentences of a paragraph to the same source but not the middle of it, or per haps the middle is cited to another source, then if someone comes along and removes a "duplicate" cite, I would revert that as vandalism. We encourage people to use inline citation and multiple sources, but we don't limit people to only citing one statement from each source they use. ϢereSpielChequers 05:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Remove Template:Maintained from all uses[edit]


Quite a simple request. Need a bot to go through the template populated category of Category:Maintained articles and remove all uses of {{Maintained}}. I have been using this edit summary so far, but with 4,000-ish transclusions a bot would be quicker. Removing {{Maintained}} from header per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 March 16#Template:Maintained. Thanks! EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 00:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done by SporkBot (talk · contribs) Thanks! EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 14:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Unanswered questions[edit]

I am not sure but somebody would have already asked it.
Can there something be done to Teahouse so that unanswered questions have some notice (either in bold or a tag on it like {{unanswered}}) for those questions which has not been answered yet?
Sometimes, I see some user's question goes down (under other questions:) and other were actually answered quickly but not his/her
aGastya  ✉ let's have a constructive talk about it (: 15:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

This is very similar to Wikipedia talk:Teahouse#Idea and Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 136#Idea, please see WP:MULTI. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Moving "citation needed" templates after periods[edit]


On a daily basis, I come across {{Citation needed}} templates placed incorrectly. When put at the end of a sentence, the template should be located after the period, not before. For example: "X is Y.{{Citation needed}}" is correct; "X is Y{{Citation needed}}." is wrong. Would it be possible to have a bot move the template (as well as other similar inline templates) to the correct position? Many thanks. --Albany NY (talk) 16:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I could swear that I already saw bots doing that ... Krano (talk) 16:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Yobot, BG19bot and other fix this error daily. In fact, is part of WP:CHECKWIKI and in particular it is part error #61. We provide list of pages with references and citation templates before punctuation. The fix is also part of WP:AWB's general fixes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I did wonder whether it was already being done. Any idea why the error remains so widespread with so many bots working on it? --Albany NY (talk) 16:54, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Albany NY No idea. We get more than 500 pages per day with misplaces punctuation. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Imre Horváth - help fixing links[edit]


When working on some other page, I found that there was more than one Hungarian Politician named Imre Horváth. I created a new article for the other one (Imre Horváth (Hungarian politician, born 1944) Currently the name links to one of them, and has a number of backlinks (which I assume are to the correct person, as he seems more famous). My request is to help change the links that link to Imre Horváth to link to Imre Horváth (Hungarian politician, 1901-1958) (also, did I get the naming correct?), so a disambiguation page can be added for the name. WP:FIXDABLINKS recommends changing links before creating a disambiguation page, and seing as it suggest using a bot to accomplish this I though it would be relevant to ask here. Øln (talk) 00:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

EDIT: Please ignore this request, as it turns out most of the links are from the same template, so fixing it manually won't be as much work after all.Øln (talk) 00:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Adding Category:New Zealand and descendants to Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand[edit]

I would like a bot to add Template:WikiProject New Zealand to the talk page of all articles and lists that are in Category:New Zealand and descendants. I'm not 100% sure that none of the descendants link to Category:Humans or something insane, so some kind of check may be needed. Leakage to other parts of the Realm of New Zealand is expected due to the ambiguity of 'New Zealand' and not a problem. I'm happy to do manual checking if necessary. I expect these additions to be non-controversial, but I'll post a message to the Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board pointing to this discussion. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:New_Zealand_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Automatically_adding. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
That's an excellent initiative. I'd like to suggest that we go a tad further than that and also tag the active sub-projects / task forces: politics (Category:Politics of New Zealand), Māori (Category:Māori and Category:Moriori), and music (Category:New Zealand music). The relevant tags to add would be |politics=yes, |maori=yes, and |music=yes. Lastly, I'd like to suggest that the class and relevant importance parameters be included as empty fields. By way of example, if an article were to be part of all three sub-projects, the complete code to add would be as follows: {{WPNZ|class=|importance=|politics=yes|politics-importance=|maori=yes|maori-importance=|music=yes|music-importance=}} Schwede66 10:01, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
The list of categories needs to be explicit, there cannot be any "and subcategories" shorthand, because there is the danger of tagging too many pages. The last time that this matter came up on this page was Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 61#Tagging articles for a WikiProject. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Can the list of categories be based on their membership of the wikiproject like this ? Stuartyeates (talk) 22:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Schwede66:: I've created a list at Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand/Category List from this. The only obvious issues are those containing 'Australasia' I'm very tempted to just remove all of those immediately prior to the bot running. If anyone adds/removes non-trivial numbers of cats let me know and I'll rebuild. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Category:1950 British Empire Games, Category:1974 British Commonwealth Games, and Category:1990 Commonwealth Games shouldn't be included in the bot run. Plus remove the yyyy in Tokelau categories, and the various Heineken Opens. Schwede66 11:09, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Tokelau suggests that it's part of New Zealand. All the others I agree with. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
A bit of playing around suggests that quite a few biographies are going to be added to the wikiproject, either as having played sports in / for New Zealand or having been educated in New Zealand. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:55, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
@Stuartyeates: When you say "played sports in New Zealand", would that include the members of touring sports teams from other countries, such as the British and Irish Lions or the English cricket team? --Redrose64 (talk) 11:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
@Redrose64: No, people who've played for New Zealand and/or top level New Zealand sports leagues. The examples you give should not be included and I can find no indication they would be. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Good, that's what I hoped --Redrose64 (talk) 20:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I have removed all the suggested cats as per above. Stuartyeates (talk) 11:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Try again[edit]

Could all articles in the categories listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_Zealand/Category_List please be added to WP:WPNZ using the {{WPNZ}} template. As a secondary concern, the automated tagging of biographies, politics, maori and music subs would be icing on the cake. Stuartyeates (talk) 11:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

GA bot/Stats[edit]


I messed up with User_talk:Legobot#GA_bot.2FStats. Can anyone help? -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Denied Legobot with the bots tag as a temporary fix. Banak (talk) 16:05, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I feel bad because it was my intervention that resulted to that. Still, we have to find a solution that the bot will work independently of any edits made by others in the page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Problem fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


Its been years since Wikivoyage moved under Wikimedia umbrella and it was discussed somewhere that links to Wikitravel articles on respective geographical articles on WP will be replaced by links to Wikivoyage articles but I can still see many WP articles still have links to to Wikitravel articles but not to Wikivoyage. I on behald of Wikivoyage community kindly request that a bot be run to replace all the Wikitravel links with Wikivoyage and add template where there's no link right now. --Saqib (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Saqib: Could you please provide an example of an edit like this that you've done manually? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
[4] and [5]. --Saqib (talk) 22:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Saqib: Thanks, although I believe the second one should be this diff. GoingBatty (talk) 22:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. BTW, many geo articles on WP also missing link to Wikitravel articles but Wikivoyage as well Wikitravels have articles on those geo places. Is there a way to make sure Wikivoyage template be added to all geo articles? --Saqib (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Apart from valid links in Wikitravel and List of wikis I only found 21 English Wikipedia mainspace links to with Special:LinkSearch, using my own ad hoc text filter to isolate mainspace links:
  1. is linked from Pauri Garhwal district
  2. is linked from Baños de Agua Santa
  3. is linked from Thakur Anukulchandra
  4. is linked from History of Iran
  5.'s_Top_100_Cherry_Blossom_Spots is linked from Nihonmatsu, Fukushima
  6. is linked from Katiki Falls
  7. is linked from Alutila Cave
  8. is linked from Western Mountains
  9. is linked from Will Ludford
  10. is linked from Lundazi
  11. is linked from The Mother of God
  12. is linked from Mae Sai River
  13. is linked from Little India (location)
  14. is linked from Pauri Garhwal district
  15. is linked from Indian Railways
  16. is linked from Pirate's Grog Rum
  17. is linked from Salar de Uyuni
  18. is linked from Sicily
  19. is linked from Solapur
  20. is linked from Hot spring
  21. is linked from Wuhan
This is too little to code a bot. Just examine them manually. There are around 1200 links in other namespaces but I don't think they are worth dealing with. has no mainspace links. I guess the mainspace WikiTravel links have already been systematically removed before but 21 were later added to those articles. If you want to prevent this in the future then you could post a request to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. I don't know whether it would be accepted. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you PrimeHunter. You're right we don't need to run bot for such a small task which can be done manualy. Now repeating query I posted earlier above: Many geo articles on WP also missing link to Wikitravel articles but Wikivoyage as well Wikitravels have articles on those geo places. Is there a way to make sure Wikivoyage template be added to all geo articles? --Saqib (talk) 10:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixing edit links on lists of minor planets[edit]

The "Edit" links on many "List of minor planets" articles no longer work, due to some mass page moves a few years ago. To fix this, and to keep things tidy, these articles should be edited to bypass the redirects that say "asteroids" instead of "minor planets". Specifically, every occurrence of "List of asteroids/" should be replaced with "List of minor planets/" on every page beginning with "List of minor planets: ". See List of minor planets: 16001–17000 for an example of a page that needs to be fixed, and see my manual edits here and here for examples of the change that needs to be made. Thank you. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

On a related matter, five months ago Yobot (talk · contribs) added a {{DEFAULTSORT:}} to a lot of these subpages, but placed them outside the existing <noinclude>...</noinclude>, with the result that the pages transcluding them end up in Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts - because e.g. List of minor planets: 110001–111000 transcludes ten subpages, each with a different {{DEFAULTSORT:}}. I've fixed a few, like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I have SporkBot working on it. I am going to use <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude> instead of the dual <noinclude>...</noinclude> since that one is easier for Yobot to understand. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks guys. Nobody have ever reported this bug on the past AFAIK. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Plastikspork is this task done now? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Probably, but you can double check if you want. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Infobox German location parameter names[edit]


Instances of {{Infobox German location}} which use German parameter names should have them replaced with English parameter names (both sets of names are listed in the template's documentation). Can someone oblige, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I can do it. Easy. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Pigsonthewing I need you to complete Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Rename_template_parameters#Infobox_German_location. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
@Magioladitis: Thank you. Now done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Pigsonthewing Bot started. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing Bot done. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject-related bots and scripts[edit]

Hi there! As part of WikiProject X, we are looking for volunteers to work on some bots and gadgets that will help address the various needs of WikiProjects and Wikipedia editors. If you are interested, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Volunteers, which will be updated as new ideas are developed. Thanks, Harej (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

picture uploaded to my article[edit]

i have created two articla one name Chrome (Rapper) AND THE OTHER IS AN ARTICLE ABOUT A RAPPER NAME CHROME WHO I HAVE BEEN WRITTING AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE TITLE OF THE PAGE IS project landlord (chrome)..can you please help me
MuzicFan1981 (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2015

Specifically. What are you are asking for help with? There isn't an article called project land lord (chrome), there is one called Project Land Lord (Album), what help do you need? - X201 (talk) 11:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Harmonising the use of abbreviation of Creative Commons licenses[edit]

Wikipedia often refers to Creative Commons licences in our references and sources. The way that they are referred to is not always correct. There should never be a dash between the CC and its license elements. So CC BY, not CC-BY.[1] Also Creative Commons capitalises its license abbreviations. I've made a table with common misspellings of the abbreviations:

Bad Good
cc-by CC BY
cc-by-nc CC BY-NC
cc-by-sa CC BY-SA
cc-by-nc-sa CC BY-NC-SA
cc-by-nd CC BY-ND
cc-by-nc-nd CC BY-NC-ND

I've started changing this manually, but that seems like a large repetitive task (I also get a lot of false positives as the search engine ignores the dash.[2] To me this seems like a task for a bot.

Full disclosure: I work for Creative Commons in the Netherlands, I do not want to create the impression that I am changing material on behalf of Creative Commons, I want te factually represent the licenses and their abbreviations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martsniez (talkcontribs) 14:11, 16 April 2015‎

  1. ^ See the top of as an example of how Creative Commons does this
  2. ^ See