Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 67: Line 67:
Hi guys, a long term aim of [[WP:FOOTBALL]] will be to empty {{cat|Football biography using deprecated parameters}} by converting a multitude of old infoboxes into the correct code found at {{template|Infobox football biography}}. However, with nearly 50,000 infoboxes to be converted, this will take a helluva long time - would it be possible for a bot to do this instead? Regards, [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi guys, a long term aim of [[WP:FOOTBALL]] will be to empty {{cat|Football biography using deprecated parameters}} by converting a multitude of old infoboxes into the correct code found at {{template|Infobox football biography}}. However, with nearly 50,000 infoboxes to be converted, this will take a helluva long time - would it be possible for a bot to do this instead? Regards, [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
:Three responses come to mind, but I'lltry to keep them short! :) Firstly, you may wish to cc [[WP:BOTREQ]]. Secondly, it may be possible to do this with [[WP:AWB|AWB]], which could be set to bot mode, thus allowing an AWB- (but not bot-)savvy user to fix the pages. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, you will want to be able to demonstrate that their is a significant, visible benefit to these edits. If not, you may wish to get them rolled into the work of a different bot editing the same group of pages, or vice versa. Regards, - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]]&nbsp;<sup>[''[[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|Who?]] [[User_talk:Jarry1250|Discuss]].'']</sup> 18:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
:Three responses come to mind, but I'lltry to keep them short! :) Firstly, you may wish to cc [[WP:BOTREQ]]. Secondly, it may be possible to do this with [[WP:AWB|AWB]], which could be set to bot mode, thus allowing an AWB- (but not bot-)savvy user to fix the pages. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, you will want to be able to demonstrate that their is a significant, visible benefit to these edits. If not, you may wish to get them rolled into the work of a different bot editing the same group of pages, or vice versa. Regards, - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]]&nbsp;<sup>[''[[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|Who?]] [[User_talk:Jarry1250|Discuss]].'']</sup> 18:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks for your answers. I've posted the same request over at BOTREQ. I'm not bad woth AWB, but this is way out of my league, and as for the benefit, infoboxes ''have'' to use the correct coding, something to do with accessibility for users who use screen readers I think. Regards, [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 18:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:30, 17 April 2011

    Bots noticeboard

    Here we coordinate and discuss Wikipedia issues related to bots and other programs interacting with the MediaWiki software. Bot operators are the main users of this noticeboard, but even if you are not one, your comments will be welcome. Just make sure you are aware about our bot policy and know where to post your issue.

    Do not post here if you came to

    Mark my edits by minor as default

    The following bots have the preference, which has been hidden on the English Wikipedia, set (locally):

    • SmackBot
    • VolkovBot
    • CmdrObot
    • H3llBot
    • Numbo3-bot
    • Melonbot
    • VoABot
    • Wilbot

    For obvious reasons they should not be relying on this functionality, and, in fairness, probably aren't. This is merely a notification that the bot's preference will be automatically switched to false for you on the English Wikipedia shortly and you may need to adjust your code appropriately. Regards, - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 16:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for heads-up! Although, as you say, personally I did not rely on this. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    What should I call my botcode?

    Hi everyone. I have written User:RichardcavellBot, a fully functioning bot in C, using libcurl. I open-sourced it on the off chance that someone might find it useful. To my genuine surprise, someone has joined the project and contributed code. Now, the thing has to run in an account, and when I run the bot on my machine, I will call it RichardcavellBot. But I want to rename the code and project to something that doesn't include my name. What should I call it? It's a generic framework written in C, highly portable, using standard libraries and libcurl. - Richard Cavell (talk) 14:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Don't ask me, mine is named "AnomieBOT::API". ;) I suppose you could copy "pywikipedia" and call it "cwikipedia", or copy Peachy and name it after a fruit that begins with C. Anomie 00:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    How about User:Sirlancabot. --Kumioko (talk) 01:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I like the pun of Sirlancabot. What I'm thinking is: Autobot (a Transformers reference), Koalabot, Taipanbot, Octopusbot. What do you think? - Richard Cavell (talk) 01:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Lancelot? Then, if it is accepted, I'd go for User:Spamabot. -DePiep (talk) 02:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I like Koalabot too...I always liked the Kwicky Koala cartoons when I was a kid. --Kumioko (talk) 02:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a line "The account's name should identify the operator or bot function" in the WP:BOTPOL, but afaik no one bothers to enforce or check this. As long as it has "Bot" in the name. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm talking about the framework, not the account. I intend that when I run the bot on my computer, it will always operate as User:RichardcavellBot. But others may choose to operate it under their own bot accounts. Obviously they'll need to make separate BRFA requests. - Richard Cavell (talk) 13:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, so no accountname asked. Then, suggestions like "pywikipedia" and "cwikipedia" stand. Any hint from its features? Nice experience while programming C? From your dog's name? That's the way is works, I think. (Keeping my gest alive, it could be "cpamalot", see Spamalot, or Spam. But this might be an insiders joke). -DePiep (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I'm not sure that "spam a lot" is a good name for a bot framework which is designed to gain the trust of the community. - Richard Cavell (talk) 23:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Sandbox bots

    It seems that the sandbox bots are no longer operative, and Cobi and X! are not active at the moment. So could other bots take over ? They reset the sandboxes, listed at Template:Template sandbox. I'd also request that they reset the Wikipedia:Introduction, so that we can leave it unprotected or with PC, because readers should be able to see the 'edit' button. Cenarium (talk) 16:57, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Due to the nature of Wikipedia:Introduction, a faster reset time would probably be appropriate (sandbox is 12hrs, if I'm not mistaken?). If the sandbox bots are confirmed to be off, I can create a sandbox bot fairly quickly. Noom talk contribs 15:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    See here for Chzz's sandbox bot. Noom talk contribs 20:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Working on it; I'll post more at the BRFA within days.  Chzz  ►  15:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Now operating; keeping the heading in place and sweeping. See BRFA, ChzzBot II (talk · contribs), User:ChzzBot II/doc. Please let me know if any changes are desirable.  Chzz  ►  15:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I have made a proposal for creating a central place for computer readable messages containing the interwiki sort order. At the moment each framework uses it own config file which has to be updated manually after changes to the list of wikis. Please respond to it on metawiki. Merlissimo 17:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

    DASHBot is broken - partially - maybe

    Tim1357 (who's been gone for a few weeks) programed DASHBot to automaticly resize fair use images placed in Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request. DASHBot has been running it's other tasks, but not this one. This means one of two things, a) the bot isn't working properly, or b) that function was turned off and either no one was told or it was announced somewhere I didn't see it. Please keep me in the loop. If he can be contacted to fix it, that would be preferable to me doing it manually. If someone else can fix it, I suppose that would be a good secondary option (but I'd rather not piss Tim off by treading on his toes.) If neither of those pan out, a new bot would be... nice. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Redlink counter bot

    Hi everyone. I've had it suggested to me to create a bot that will count redlinks and identify which terms are most frequently redlinked (ie they're linked to but there is nothing at the destination). How would such a bot work most effectively? Would the bot comb through all the pages in a category, or all the pages in 'what links here'? I don't own a server or domain name so would it be best if the results were posted on the requesting user's talk page? Or within the bot's own userspace? If the bot only posted in its own userspace, would it need BRFA approval at all? - Richard Cavell (talk) 06:23, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    This would probably be best done using a database dump. If a bot edits only its own userspace, and is not otherwise disruptive, it does not normally need a BRFA. Anomie 21:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Football biography using deprecated parameters

    Hi guys, a long term aim of WP:FOOTBALL will be to empty Category:Football biography using deprecated parameters by converting a multitude of old infoboxes into the correct code found at {{Infobox football biography}}. However, with nearly 50,000 infoboxes to be converted, this will take a helluva long time - would it be possible for a bot to do this instead? Regards, GiantSnowman 16:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Three responses come to mind, but I'lltry to keep them short! :) Firstly, you may wish to cc WP:BOTREQ. Secondly, it may be possible to do this with AWB, which could be set to bot mode, thus allowing an AWB- (but not bot-)savvy user to fix the pages. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, you will want to be able to demonstrate that their is a significant, visible benefit to these edits. If not, you may wish to get them rolled into the work of a different bot editing the same group of pages, or vice versa. Regards, - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 18:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your answers. I've posted the same request over at BOTREQ. I'm not bad woth AWB, but this is way out of my league, and as for the benefit, infoboxes have to use the correct coding, something to do with accessibility for users who use screen readers I think. Regards, GiantSnowman 18:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]