Wikipedia:Bot requests

For the policy on bot requirements, see WP:BOTREQUIRE.

This is a page for requesting tasks to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to put ideas for uncontroversial bot tasks, to get early feedback on ideas for bot tasks (controversial or not), and to seek bot operators for bot tasks. Consensus-building discussions requiring large community input (such as request for comments) should normally be held at WP:VPPROP or other relevant pages (such as a WikiProject's talk page).

You can check the "Commonly Requested Bots" box above to see if a suitable bot already exists for the task you have in mind. If you have a question about a particular bot, contact the bot operator directly via their talk page or the bot's talk page. If a bot is acting improperly, follow the guidance outlined in WP:BOTISSUE. For broader issues and general discussion about bots, see the bot noticeboard.

Before making a request, please see the list of frequently denied bots, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. If you are requesting that a template (such as a WikiProject banner) is added to all pages in a particular category, please be 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 (see example difference).

Alternatives to bot requests

• WP:AWBREQ, for simple tasks that involve a handful of articles and/or only needs to be done once (e.g. adding a category to a few articles).
• WP:URLREQ, for tasks involving changing or updating URLs to prevent link rot (specialized bots deal with this).
• WP:USURPREQ, for reporting a domain be usurped eg. |url-status=usurped
• WP:SQLREQ, for tasks which might be solved with an SQL query (e.g. compiling a list of articles according to certain criteria).
• WP:TEMPREQ, to request a new template written in wiki code or Lua.
• WP:SCRIPTREQ, to request a new user script. Many useful scripts already exist, see Wikipedia:User scripts/List.
• WP:CITEBOTREQ, to request a new feature for WP:Citation bot, a user-initiated bot that fixes citations.

Note to bot operators: The {{BOTREQ}} template can be used to give common responses, and make it easier to keep track of the task's current status. If you complete a request, note that you did with {{BOTREQ|done}}, and archive the request after a few days (WP:1CA is useful here).

---

Please add your bot requests to the bottom of this page.
Make a new request

#	Bot request	Status	💬	👥	🙋 Last editor	🕒 (UTC)	🤖 Last botop editor	🕒 (UTC)
1	Bot to remove template from articles it doesn't belong on?		4	4	Wikiwerner	2024-09-28 17:28	Primefac	2024-07-24 20:15
2	Removing redundant FURs on file pages		5	3	Wikiwerner	2024-09-28 17:28	Anomie	2024-08-09 14:15
3	Discussion alert bot		6	4	Headbomb	2024-09-08 12:29	Headbomb	2024-09-08 12:29
4	Regularly removing coords missing if coordinates are present	BRFA filed	11	2	Usernamekiran	2024-09-07 13:19	Usernamekiran	2024-09-07 13:19
5	Latex: move punctuation to go inside templates		3	2	Yodo9000	2024-09-07 18:59	Anomie	2024-09-07 03:38
6	de-AMP bot	BRFA filed	13	7	Usernamekiran	2024-09-24 16:04	Usernamekiran	2024-09-24 16:04
7	Articles about years: redirects and categories	BRFA filed	7	3	DreamRimmer	2024-09-16 01:18	DreamRimmer	2024-09-16 01:18
8	WikiProject ratings change	BRFA filed	3	2	DreamRimmer	2024-09-15 11:43	DreamRimmer	2024-09-15 11:43
9	QIDs in Infobox person/Wikidata	BRFA filed	11	4	Tom.Reding	2024-10-06 14:23	Tom.Reding	2024-10-06 14:23
10	Remove outdated "Image requested" templates		3	2	7804j	2024-09-21 11:26	DreamRimmer	2024-09-19 18:53
11	"Was" in TV articles		5	3	Primefac	2024-09-29 19:34	Primefac	2024-09-29 19:34
12	Films by director	done	9	4	Usernamekiran	2024-10-03 13:30	Usernamekiran	2024-10-03 13:30
13	altering certain tags on protected pages?		10	5	Primefac	2024-10-20 14:47	Primefac	2024-10-20 14:47
14	Request for Bot to Remove ARWU_NU Parameter from Articles Using Infobox US University Ranking Template		4	2	Primefac	2024-10-13 12:50	Primefac	2024-10-13 12:50
15	Removal of two external link templates per TfD result		6	4	Primefac	2024-10-14 13:48	Primefac	2024-10-14 13:48
16	Replace merged WikiProject template with parent project + parameter	Done	7	3	Primefac	2024-10-21 10:04	Primefac	2024-10-21 10:04
17	Bot Request to Add Vezina Trophy Winners Navbox to Relevant Player Pages		3	3	Primefac	2024-10-19 12:23	Primefac	2024-10-19 12:23
18	Replace standalone BLP templates	Done	7	3	MSGJ	2024-10-30 19:37	Tom.Reding	2024-10-29 16:04
19	Assess set index and WikiProject Lists based on category as lists		15	5	Mrfoogles	2024-11-03 03:51	Tom.Reding	2024-11-02 15:53

Legend
In the last hour
In the last day
In the last week
In the last month
More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first.

Delete broken links

Template:CongLinks, used in External links, has a washpo parameter, for Washington Post. The broken links are all alphabetic (plus underlines and possibly commas) but the working ones are a mix of alpha and numbers in two versions. For example, Blanche Lincoln is broken, Dick Durbin works, and anything that looks like f9d0a3fa-4bbc-11e2-8758-b64a2997a921 works. I need a bot to go through and blank out only the broken (old version) instances. 184.78.81.245 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you please clarify? It appears that an all alphabetic parameter on Dan Coats works just fine. Do the broken links all contain underscores? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Should the |nndb= and |findagrave= parameters also be removed at the same time, since the template no longer supports them? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Why delete instead of repair? If the link used to be valid at some point, then the material is most likely still there just under a different url. For example, Blanche Lincoln is under /blanche-lincoln/gIQA5gxz9O_topic.html. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Deleting would remove the incorrect links that are currently on articles, and would still give the ability to repair later on. However, would you prefer to have a report of all of the parameters that need repairing? GoingBatty (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

GoingBatty, you are absolutely correct about Dan Coats. Would it work to delete washpo parameter values which include an underline? I wouldn't delete findagrave and nndb, as those were removed with no discussion, and Template:NNDB and Template:Find a Grave are widely used. There's often confusion between links acceptable for EL and links which are acceptable as reliable sources for references. Perhaps after the cleanup is done, a list of current Senators and Representatives who lack a washpo parameter would be a useful addition to the relevant Wikipedia Project, or perhaps post an example of the code needed to scan for a missing or valueless parameter in templates, starting from a list of articles such as the members of the 113th Congress. I've now remembered a related broken link problem with the votesmart parameter. I believe those which include alpha characters no longer work. 184.78.81.245 (talk) 17:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

BRFA filed here. GoingBatty (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

 Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done -GoingBatty (talk) 00:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:JAZZ redux/revisited

A couple of months ago, Yobot fulfilled a request that I made on behalf of WP:JAZZ; the details are available in the archived discussion. It appears that at least some of the edits need some cleanup:

• The {{WikiProject Jazz}} banner did not inherit the class= rating from the existing WikiProject banners (or derive it from article's length, or presence of a stub template in the article)
• The 'bot always placed the banner at the top of the page, regardless of whether {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} or {{Talkpageheader}} was already present. (In at least one case it fixed a redirect link to {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} but didn't place the new banner inside the shell; in another it actually added the shell but didn't include the banner in it: [1].)
• For pages in the /Songs list, the parameter songs=yes was added; it should have been song=yes (I'm not sure if it affects all the song articles, but I've noticed it with those pages that were originally tagged with album=yes and then re-tagged a few minutes later).

I have spot-checked a few dozen edits from Jan. 4-5 and I'm consistently seeing these issues. For example, [2], [3]. Of course where there were no existing assessments, or no banner shell, this is a non-issue (other than not identifying stubs).

I apologize that I didn't spot this and bring it up any sooner. I'm not sure if Yobot (or another 'bot) can simply retrace its earlier steps, or whether it needs to go back through the categories again, but the category scheme remains largely the same (cat. list is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz/Categories. I'm making a few edits to remove red links, add at least one known new category, etc.). If it does need to go through the categories again, maybe tag any new articles along the way, as per the previous request. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry my edits weren't perfect. I hope someone helps to fix these because I am busy in real life to deal with this task. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Doing... some manually - checking to see how many have |songs=yes before proceeding further. GoingBatty (talk) 20:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Magioladitis, my request for auto-assessment may not have been clear in the first place – I very briefly mentioned it in my request and then placed a link to the 2010 request, so it was very easy to miss. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

BRFA filed here. GoingBatty (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Based on a suggestion in the BRFA, |songs= is now also a valid parameter for {{WikiProject Jazz}}. GoingBatty (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I did the same for albums=, just in case... -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

 Doing... GoingBatty (talk) 02:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Auto-assessment

Can we get a 'bot to help with the auto-assessment?

• We wish to inherit class= from other WikiProjects (if any):

• Inherit class= if only a single rating is available
• Inherit class= if two or more ratings are available; in the event of auto-stub/inherit conflict, inherit the most frequent (or highest) class= rating
• Presumably these auto-assessments would be flagged as such, e.g. |auto=yes   |auto=inherit   |auto=length   |autoi=yes

• Otherwise, tag as class=stub based either of the following criteria:

• One or more stub templates in the article
• The text of the article is 2,500 bytes or less

• We do not wish to inherit importance= ratings.

Thank you! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Category redirects to be created

The following categories were renamed to include a dash instead of a hyphen. Now category redirects are needed. Could someone create them? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

BRFA filed  Hazard-SJ  ✈  02:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Y Done  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:29, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Over-precise coordinates

As discussed most recently at Over-precise coordinates – things of the past?, {{Coord}} should have values no more precise than 6 decimal places. We have some instance with as many as ten. A bot could usefully truncate any such values at the 6th decimal place. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

This seems like a good idea. There was a similar bot-assist effort targeting French communes in January 2012. Note that many overprecise coordinates reach {{Coord}} indirectly, by way of templates such as {{Infobox settlement}}. Also, coordinates in dms format probably should not provide more than 2 decimal places (in the seconds). —Stepheng3 (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Agreed that we also need to deal with such coordinates in infoboxes; and DMS format. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hath no bot's creator here a BRFA for us? —Stepheng3 (talk) 15:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

If there's still demand, I can probably take up this request. I'll need a little time because I'm still developing a new bot framework, but this weekend is looking good. If the request is still valid, then you can basically consider it: Coding.... --ikseevon^(T)(E) 05:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! —Stepheng3 (talk) 15:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Updating tables with alternating rows

The table on Structural alignment software contains a lot of information, so alternating rows have different colors. This formatting has been around since 2007, so I'm assuming it has community consensus. No doubt there are other examples of tables with alternating row colors. However, the current method of alternating rows using a bgcolor row parameter makes it extremely difficult to add a row in the middle of the table, since all later rows must be recolored.

Recoloring seems like a good task for a bot. After major edits, the bot would

1. Sort the table according to some column (eg 'Name' or 'Year' for the above table)
2. Reset the bgcolor property to maintain the alternating color property

It might also be nice to modify the javascript that handles sortable tables so that it maintains the alternating colors after the rows are resorted by the user.

Is any of this functionality provided by existing bots or scripts?

--Quantum7 21:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

If only there was a way to define a table header so it would automatically alternate row colors, instead of having to do it at the row level.... GoingBatty (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thinking more about this, it seems like it should be a javascript-based solution rather than a bot. Something like we add 'alternating' as a CSS class to the table. Then a javascript hook gets triggered during page load and after sorting operations which recolors all the constituent rows. I'm not sure what the procedure is for getting javascript on wikipedia (presumably there's some sort of security audit), but I might be willing to take a stab at this. --Quantum7 18:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, we could do this entirely in CSS, if it comes to that. Just do table.alternating tr:nth-of-type(2n){ background-color:<color>; } . Writ Keeper (t + c) 19:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I tested this out using User:Quantum7/common.css on User:Quantum7/sandbox#Alternating-color sortable tables and it works great. Interacts well with 'sortable', no side effects that I could see. People with old browsers would see tables with default non-alternating coloring, but that seems fine to me. The question is, where would be the appropriate place to add this style? It needs to be in the page header, rather than as a style property. It's not used on many pages, so I'm not sure it should be in MediaWiki:Common.css. Is there a mechanism for adding article-specific stylesheets? --Quantum7 20:40, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so, but I don't know of any reason not to put it in the sitewide CSS file. The only question about that is, instead of adding it to common.css, should we add it to each of the skin.css pages separately, so that we can have a different color for each skin. I don't know whether a single color would fit well with all the different skins? Writ Keeper (t + c) 20:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a good idea. The only reason not to put it in the global skins would be to reduce bloat, since currently I don't know many pages that would use zebra striping. --Quantum7 21:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Since this discussion has definitely diverged from the original Bot topic, perhaps it would be better to continue it on MediaWiki talk:Common.css#New style for tables with alternating row colors --Quantum7 21:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Virginia redirects

I have a massive number of redirects for a bot to create. Bellow is a list (from Former counties, cities, and towns of Virginia) of former Virginia counties, now part of West Virginia and Kentucky. The list also includes some cities and towns that are now part of West Virginia. The list has been modified so that it links to X, Virginia instead of X, Kentucky/West Virginia

The vast majority of entries on this modified list are redlinks. I would like a bot to redirect these redlinks to the correct Kentucky/West Virginia article. Be aware that, as the article says "Many of these [Kentucky] names were later reused to name other new Virginia counties. Some of those were "lost" again when the state of West Virginia was formed in 1863." so in those cases where Kentucky and a West Virginia county have the same name , I would strongly recommended the bot create a disambig instead of a redirect to eater article. In the case where a current Virginia location has the same name as one of these old counties/cities/towns, I would like the bot to create a hatnote. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 01:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: I've taken care of the Kentucky counties manually, including the ones that needed a disambig for a West Virginia county having the same name. That just leaves the West Virginia ones for the bot to take care of. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Update:I've manually added the hatnotes, now the bot just needs to create the redirects. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• I'm hoping I understood your request, as it stands with the current updates. You want the rest of the redlinked pages (<county>, Virginia) redirected to West Virginia pages (<county>, West Virginia), considering the such target exists? If so, I could do it. If not, please clarify.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, and all target should exist. If one doesn't let me know. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, so where is the full list of pages?  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

These redlinks are the full list of redirects I'll like created. This list is a modified copy of Former counties, cities, and towns of Virginia#West Virginia. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Kentucky

List of lost counties

The ten Virginia counties "lost" in the formation of the new Commonwealth of Kentucky were (alphabetically):

• Bourbon County
• Fayette County
• Jefferson County
• Lincoln County
• Madison County
• Mason County
• Mercer County
• Nelson County
• Woodford County

West Virginia

List of lost counties

Listed alphabetically, the 50 counties of Virginia lost to the formation of West Virginia were:

• Barbour County
• Berkeley County
• Boone County
• Braxton County
• Brooke County
• Cabell County
• Calhoun County
• Clay County
• Doddridge County
• Fayette County
• Gilmer County
• Greenbrier County
• Hampshire County
• Hancock County
• Hardy County
• Harrison County
• Jackson County

• Jefferson County
• Kanawha County
• Lewis County
• Logan County
• Marion County
• Marshall County
• Mason County
• McDowell County
• Mercer County
• Monongalia County
• Monroe County
• Morgan County
• Nicholas County
• Ohio County
• Pendleton County
• Pleasants County
• Pocahontas County

• Preston County
• Putnam County
• Raleigh County
• Randolph County
• Ritchie County
• Roane County
• Taylor County
• Tucker County
• Tyler County
• Upshur County
• Wayne County
• Webster County
• Wetzel County
• Wirt County
• Wood County
• Wyoming County

List of lost cities and towns

Also lost to Virginia with the formation of West Virginia were many cities and towns. A partial listing of these (there were many more) is:

• Beckley
• Bath (Berkeley Springs)
• Beverly
• Capon Springs
• Charles Town
• Charleston
• Clarksburg
• Fairmont
• Fayetteville
• Frankfort
• Franklin
• Gerrardstown
• Grafton
• Harper's Ferry

• Harrisville
• Hedgesville
• Lewisburg
• Martinsburg
• Moorefield
• Moundsville
• Morgantown
• New Cumberland
• North River Mills
• Parkersburg
• Paw Paw
• Philippi
• Piedmont

• Point Pleasant
• Princeton
• Ripley
• Romney
• Shepherdstown
• Springfield
• St. George
• St. Marys
• Summersville
• Union
• Weston
• Wheeling
• White Sulphur Springs

Can someone give me a list of all of the articles by a user?

See User talk:Drmies#The best way to check all of the articles by an editor. I would like a table with all of the articles created by User:Kavdiaravish with empty cells labelled "Copyvio", "Grammar", "accuracy", "spam", and "Other". Is anyone able to do that? Ryan Vesey 14:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

This should be useful: http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/contributionsurveyor/survey.php?user=Kavdiaravish You can get it as wikicode and create a subpage so people can cross off articles once they are checked. SmartSE (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Is this what you're looking for, Ryan? Writ Keeper (t + c) 14:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Do note, though that my table is only the articles created by the user; IIRC, Dcoetzee's tool returns all the articles edited by a user. Writ Keeper (t + c) 15:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you both of you, I'm going with the table Writ made for now. It's probably 10 times more simple to use the toolserver information and just cross them out, but I want to create a record of sorts. Ryan Vesey 00:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Archive version bot

Per my comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Shouldn't dead link be an in-line template, like citation needed? there any possible way someone here could design a bot that searches archive sites (like the waybackmachine or WebCite and any others if they exist) any time {{Dead link}} is used and see if there are any archived copies, then organize that into a table for humans to look through and possibly update? Ryan Vesey 00:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I could probably take this on, if you don't mind waiting a week or so (I'm coding another task.)? --ceradon ^talk_contribs 17:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Dealing with refs

If it is possible, I would like a bot that can sort out refs into {{cite book}}, {{cite news}}, or {{cite web}}. If it is possible, of course....It's really tiring to clean up refs manually.--Seonookim (What I've done so far) (I'm busy here) (Tell me your requests) 06:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

If you're asking if a bot can convert URLs into citation templates with all the fields populated properly, then the answer is not really. You can ask for User:RjwilmsiBot to run against your favorite articles, try invoking User:Citation bot, or use WP:REFLINKS as alternatives for manually creating citation parameters.

If that's not what you're asking, please let us know. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Please make your sig more easily readable and fix the mystery-meat navigation in it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

A Bot to notify uploaders about missing descriptions

Task:

Scan images in File namespace looking for missing descriptions or authorship, and leave appropriate talk page notes.

Reason for request:

The category into which {{Missing description}} categorises currently has over 2000 files in it. Whilst I've been attempting to reduce this manually, I feel that a bot which notified uploaders automatically, giving advice, would aid this task, by encouraging them to add the information which make the images useful.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Non-notable diplomat stub articles

We have a large number of stub articles about diplomats. (I found at least 2,000 of them before I stopped counting.) The structure of categories can be seen at Category:Diplomat stubs. Most of these stubs are only self-referenced (if at all) from government lists and publications (e.g. Category:Canadian diplomat stubs). They clearly don't meet the notability standard of WP:DIPLOMAT.

Obviously it would be impractical to put notability notices (or indeed prod) these articles individually. Would it be possible to run a script to distinguish the articles that are not properly referenced and put notability notices on them? (I would of course contact any relevant projects before any bot run.)

Has anyone done anything similar to this before? Would anyone feel able to help with it? Thanks and regards. --Kleinzach 13:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

A bot could check if an article (1) has no external links and (2) doesn't have reference tags, and tag it as such, but I don't know how the community would feel about a bot adding {{notability}} to articles if it isn't supervised. Perhaps {{BLP sources}}? --ikseevon^(T)(E) 14:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I have an open mind on this. I've never come across such a huge cache of non-notable articles before. Putting {{BLP sources}} on them is perhaps kicking the problem into the long grass? Unfortunately there don't seem to be any related projects except the country ones, so involving 'the community' is difficult. My impression is that these articles are being added systematically. For example List of Canadian diplomats shows that some editor(s) have been working through the red links alphabetically. --Kleinzach 15:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think a bot could reasonably distinguish which ones should be tagged and which ones shouldn't. However, we'd be in a completely different situation if you were to list the pages that should be tagged; I know it's more work, but this is a subjective thing that can't really be automated. I'd suggest that you create a list of all possible candidates (just copy/paste the contents of the category) into userspace, and then quickly open each one and look at it; you could then remove pages from your list if you think they shouldn't be tagged. When you've completed this, a bot will have an easy time tagging all of the pages that are linked on your userspace page; an edit summary such as "Tagging per request [link to this request]; contact Kleinzach for input". Nyttend (talk) 19:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds practical. I could prepare batches of 100 or 200 articles at a time. Nyttend, are you are a bot owner? Could you work with me on this? Kleinzach 03:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

What Nyttend suggested is a smart and probably the easier solution. I would have no problem filing a BRFA for this, could you prepare atleast one batch first though so I [and BAG members] can have some examples of what we are dealing with? :) -- Cheers, Riley 03:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have prepared a batch of 74 articles at User:Kleinzach/Dips. --Kleinzach 13:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

One last thing, at the top of the list I will need you to also put which template you want placed on the pages (please do that for this first batch too) so that way I will be able to tell whether you want the listed pages to have either the {{Notability}} tag or a {{Proposed deletion}} tag. Sound good? -- Cheers, Riley 16:35, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Right, I've done that. I've put {{Proposed deletion}} as I think all the articles listed would be straightforward prods if i were doing this by hand. Kleinzach 16:48, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• BRFA filed here. -- Cheers, Riley 17:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Mark a lot of pages for microformatting, round 2

Repeating the request that I made in the final section of Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 51. Basically, I'm asking for a bot that would:

• Looks at every instance of {{Infobox NRHP}}.
• Whenever it finds the | built = parameter, followed by a four-digit number, it encases the number in {{Start date}}.
• Whenever it doesn't find the parameter, or when it finds the parameter empty or followed by something other than a four-digit number, it does nothing.

Here is a human doing exactly what I'm hoping the bot will do. The previous request got bogged down when someone kept objecting to the idea of the template in the first place, despite the fact that it has widespread support. Nyttend (talk) 19:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

[ec x2] We've already had a successful RfC for this specific task, in more permutations, across a wider number of infoboxes than the one mentioned here (and, before that, bot approvals). Further this request will not add a single microformat to Wikipedia; it will make dates in the existing microformats machine-readable, as explained in that RfC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy;

(begin section that was hatted with label "People trying to require the bot to pass BRFA before it exists.)

I object to an involved party (one supporting the bot run) hatting this and hiding the objections to the bot run. There is a certain mad technical logic to saying a BRFA must be started, but the objections to the bot run in general are relevant and should not be hidden. --doncram 18:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

This should go through the BRFA process, to ensure that it does have community support. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

How can we go through BRFA when we don't have a bot yet? What I mean is that there's widespread support for using this template and emitting this microformat; I wasn't making a statement about what bot-savvy editors have said or thought. Nyttend (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

The process is to identify a bot operator who is willing to run this task, and then file a BRFA for it. The BRFA is the place where the community consensus can be documented (the way to do that is to have discussions elsewhere that demonstrate broad support for the bot task). Microformats have been a contentious issue, and it would not be prudent for a bot operator to insert them into thousands of articles without a formal bot request. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

And...a formal bot request is what I'm making. This microformat has gotten consensus from the metadata and microformat perspective; nobody who's been involved with the process will question having a human doing all of these edits. The only reason we need a BRFA is to ensure that the bot will behave properly, since we've already followed the BRFA's instructions to "seek consensus for the task in the appropriate forums". The person to talk to is Pigsonthewing, and I've asked him to come here to provide the links to prove that this has consensus. Nyttend (talk) 20:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you provide links to relevant discussions where consensus for this task has been achieved? Werieth (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

For the procedure to make a formal bot request, see WP:BRFA. This page is just for informal "hey, can someone do this" requests, not for formal bot approval. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

We know. Both of us have made lots of requests in the past, and all of the ones I've made started here and were then approved after the request was made. Nyttend (talk) 20:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

[ec x2] We've already had a successful RfC for this specific task, in more permutations, across a wider number of infoboxes than the one mentioned here (and, before that, bot approvals). Further this request will not add a single microformat to Wikipedia; it will make dates in the existing microformats machine-readable, as explained in that RfC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I am looking for is a specific BRFA for the task, not just for an RFC. The BRFA would lay out exactly the changes to be made, the scope of articles to make them on, etc., and is required by the bot policy. I have looked at several previous discussions and I see that some of them are in favor of microformats and some are not, which is why I think this is something that needs to be addressed more clearly than it could be on this page. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're not going to get a BRFA until someone writes a bot. It's impossible for a bot to be approved before it exists. Nyttend (talk) 20:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

(end passage that was hatted; now unhatted)

• I'm coding a bot to do this task. -- Cheers, Riley 01:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
• BRFA filed here. -- Cheers, Riley 03:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Your trial edits look great. When the full task is done, would you be willing to look at the other infoboxes mentioned in the RfC? The task is a little more complex (dates with days and months; DMY and MDY formats, etc.), but I'd be happy to work with you to analyse it and break it down into manageable chunks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
    • I would be glad to look at the other infoboxes once this task is done. :) -- Cheers, Riley 17:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose, and Request a bot to undo any of this done so far. Per the previous discussion, it was pointed out by me that the idea of using the NRHP infobox's "built" date field is flawed. For one reason, the "built" in an NRHP infobox for a church article is not the founding date of the church, which usually/often is earlier. For another, the NRHP infobox field is often incorrect as a built date. It is present in many articles because it is interpreted by an off-wiki support page that generates NRHP infoboxes, incorrectly assuming that a "date of significance" must be a built date. That is sometimes incorrect.

This new BOT request appears to be in BAD FAITH, being railroaded through by selectively asking a previous supporter of the bot or two to comment, and not informing commenters (me) at the previous discussion.

Seriously, if a bot has been running already, its work should be undone now. --doncram 18:02, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

You should comment on the BRFA, since the BAG members may not also check for comments here. This applies both to people who support the request and those that don't, of course. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, yes, commenting at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RileyBot 9. --doncram

I've already addressed Doncram's comments at the BRFA, but his accusations here of bad faith are without merit; and his concerns, which appear to be about the data already infoboxes rather then the bot task proposed, were addressed the last time round. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

a) Without merit? You selectively requested Nyttend participate/open this bot request, and you did not inform others, including me.

b) Serious question: do you, Pigsonthewing, seriously not care that the bot run would introduce incorrect information, for the cases of churches, schools, libraries, other items where there is an NRHP infobox present about one of such entities' buildings, when the start date of the entity is different? Seriously, do you care about accuracy of the start date? --doncram 18:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)