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: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	Automatic NOGALLERY keyword for categories containing non-free files (again)		27	11	Anomie	2024-08-04 14:09	Anomie	2024-08-04 14:09
2	Clear Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects		9	6	Wikiwerner	2024-07-13 14:04	DreamRimmer	2024-04-21 03:28
3	Fixing stub tag placement on new articles	Not a good task for a bot.	5	4	Tom.Reding	2024-07-16 08:10	Tom.Reding	2024-07-16 08:10
4	Adding Facility IDs to AM/FM/LPFM station data	Y Done	13	3	HouseBlaster	2024-07-25 12:42	Mdann52	2024-07-25 05:23
5	Tagging women's basketball article talk pages with project tags	Y Done	20	4	Usernamekiran	2024-09-05 16:55	Usernamekiran	2024-09-05 16:55
6	Bot that condenses identical references	Coding...	12	6	ActivelyDisinterested	2024-08-03 20:48	Headbomb	2024-06-18 00:34
7	Bot to remove template from articles it doesn't belong on?		3	3	Thryduulf	2024-08-03 10:22	Primefac	2024-07-24 20:15
8	One-off: Adding all module doc pages to Category:Module documentation pages		7	3	Andrybak	2024-09-01 00:34	Primefac	2024-07-25 12:22
9	Draft Categories		13	6	Bearcat	2024-08-09 04:24	DannyS712	2024-07-27 07:30
10	Remove new article comments		3	2	142.113.140.146	2024-07-28 22:33	Usernamekiran	2024-07-27 07:50
11	Removing Template:midsize from infobox parameters (violation of MOS:SMALLFONT)	Resolved	14	2	Qwerfjkl	2024-07-29 08:15	Qwerfjkl	2024-07-29 08:15
12	Change stadium to somerhing else in the template:Infobox Olympic games	Needs wider discussion.	8	5	Jonesey95	2024-07-29 14:57	Primefac	2024-07-29 13:48
13	Change hyphens to en-dashes		16	7	1ctinus	2024-08-03 15:05	Qwerfjkl	2024-07-31 09:09
14	Consensus: Aldo, Giovanni e Giacomo		17	5	Dicklyon	2024-08-14 14:43	Qwerfjkl	2024-08-02 20:23
15	Cyclones		3	2	OhHaiMark	2024-08-05 22:21	Mdann52	2024-08-05 16:07
16	Substing int message headings on filepages		8	4	Jonteemil	2024-08-07 23:13	Primefac	2024-08-07 14:02
17	Removing redundant FURs on file pages		4	2	Jonteemil	2024-08-12 20:26	Anomie	2024-08-09 14:15
18	Need help with a super widespread typo: Washington, D.C (also U.S.A)		32	10	Jonesey95	2024-08-26 16:55	Qwerfjkl	2024-08-21 15:08
19	Dutch IPA		4	3	IvanScrooge98	2024-08-25 14:11
20	AnandTech shuts down		9	6	GreenC	2024-09-01 18:39	Primefac	2024-09-01 17:28
21	Date formatting on 9/11 biography articles		5	2	Zeke, the Mad Horrorist	2024-09-01 16:27
22	Discussion alert bot		6	4	Headbomb	2024-09-08 12:29	Headbomb	2024-09-08 12:29
23	Regularly removing {{coords missing}} if coordinates are present	BRFA filed	11	2	Usernamekiran	2024-09-07 13:19	Usernamekiran	2024-09-07 13:19
24	Latex: move punctuation to go inside templates		3	2	Yodo9000	2024-09-07 18:59	Anomie	2024-09-07 03:38
25	Removing spurious nobot notice	BRFA filed	4	2	DreamRimmer	2024-09-07 12:55	DreamRimmer	2024-09-07 12:55
26	de-AMP bot	Resolved	4	3	Primefac	2024-09-09 16:01	Primefac	2024-09-09 16:01

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.

Fix coordinates display for USGS-derived articles

Articles in Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the USGS Geographic Names Information System need to have the coordinate templates set to |display=inline,title (if not already so), like this, please. this will casue them to appear in the mapping part of our mobile apps, and in Google Maps' and similar services' Wikipedia layers. If using the deprecated {{coor dm}}, it should be changed to {{coord}}, at the same time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a community discussion regarding this you can point to? Josh Parris 01:25, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding which aspect? We currently have many hundreds of thousands of articles geo-tagged with "title" coordinates; our mobile app has been coded especially to make use of them; our external partners are known to make use of them. {{coor dm}} has been deprecated for several years, and is now a redirect to {{coord}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The part with the articles in the given cat needing a particular setting on a template. Josh Parris 14:35, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

There is no specific discussion. As noted above, it's the generic setting for articles on geo-locatable subjects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:57, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Geographical_coordinates points in this direction in the final line of the Quick how to box, where it says "Use |display=title (or |display=inline,title) once per article, for the subject of the article, where appropriate." The vast majority of the uses of coord follow the convention. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd be interested in taking this one on.--v/r - TP 13:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. What, if anything, do you need from me, in order to do so? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Conversion to date templates

A great many infoboxes already emit microformats, and have for months, or even years. However, in some articles, these are incomplete, because the dates which form part of them do not use an appropriate sub-template, in order to emit the date in the correct metadata format. A bot (or bots - this task could be subdivided) is required, to complete the task of converting opening-, release-, first shown-, incident- and such dates from plain text to use {{Start date}}, as seen in this example edit for a year, and this one for a full date and as described in the various infoboxes' documentation. Note that {{start date}} allows for YYYY, YYYY-MM, YYYY-MM-DD and in a few cases YYY-M-DD:HH:MM formats. Note also that Smackbot was approved to do this, and started, but failed to complete the task. A list of affected templates is available. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Snotbot 6 for the likely result should you attempt this task. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 14:17, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

You're right; I'd forgotten that that request for review was still unresolved. Apologies for that. how do you suggest we resolve it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Start a well-publicized RfC on the subject and get a clear consensus for the changes. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 00:11, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

As note in that request for review, we had one: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Microformats. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Karl Eberhard Schöngarth

Hi, I'd like a bot to change all of the links to Eberhard Karl Schöngarth (which is a wrong name and a redirect) to Karl Eberhard Schöngarth (which is the right name). Hoops gza (talk) 18:57, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Bot request was not actually necessary; it could easily have been done manually by yourself. Rcsprinter (state) 19:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Bot to convert bare URLs to valid refs

Hello, following this thread at VPT I learned that we used to have a bot that converted bare URLs to valid refs (User:DumZiBoT/refLinks), but this bot appears to have died a tragic bot death. Is it possible to get another bot to take over this duty, like User:Citation bot? ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 19:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't believe there is consensus for this. WP:CITEVAR suggests that no one citation style is preferred, and "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference." For that reason, a bot should probably not do this. Blevintron (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

That page says "It is therefore considered helpful... to improve existing citations by adding missing information (for example, replacing bare URLs with full bibliographic citations)". That seems pretty clearly in favor of this behavior, right? Preferably the bot would conform to the citation format already in place, but any citation formatting is better than bare URLs. Was this an issue for previous bots with this behavior? ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Simply adding the title to external links is fine, I think. I believe the only reason the task stopped is because the bot stopped. That said, making links into citations will become controversial fairly quick if the bot doesn't respect citation styles. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible to check the references and use the most common style? If there is a tie, it could prefer the style of the two more common across Wikipedia. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

It's easy to detect citation templates for those styles (CS1 {{cite web}}, CS2 {{citation}}, and Vanc {{vcite web}}), but pretty hard for anything manually entered. It's not impossible, but pretty hard for an automated and error-free process. If the bot finds only a templated style, it should be relatively easy to fill in the remaining stuff. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

It's perfectly fine for a bot to use citation templates replace bare URLs. A filled {{cite web}} beats a bare http://www.example.com. It will be MUCH easier for humans to convert a properly filled citation templates to a non templates (if the dominant style is to not use citation templates), than it would be to convert a non-template reference to a template reference (if the dominant style is to use citation templates). Citation bot is already approved to do so (with detailed rationale), and it never caused any fuss. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

FYI: As I can see on tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/reflinks.py this bot just used to run the reflinks.py script from pywikipedia framework. This should be fairly easy to re-setup and run for any pywikipedia bot operator. Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

wikiproject articles by size

Now saying bot-working is not my area of expertise is an understatement, but I am wondering if these articles can be updated by bot - Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/bird articles by size], Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/fungus articles by size and Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs/dinosaur articles by size. There is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/mammal articles by size but it is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/mammal articles by size. Now the dino one was started early but all were updated at one point by Betacommandbot (talk · contribs) before later input from 718 Bot (talk · contribs) and ClueBot II (talk · contribs). Now I'd love these to be periodically updated again and wasn't sure whether to ask one of the bot operators or throw it up here...? All help appreciated while I fumble round with this....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Bot to tag several orphaned {{cite doi}} etc...

Category:Science citation templates is filled with orphaned templates due to deletions, article updates and rewrites, and so on. I think it's time for a good cleanup is done there. Specifically, when no page what-so-ever (redirects don't count as links) links to a template categorized in the following categories

• Category:Cite doi templates
• Category:Cite hdl templates
• Category:Cite jstor templates
• Category:Cite pmc templates
• Category:Cite pmid templates

They should be tagged with {{db-g6|rationale=Unused {{cite doi/hdl/jstor/pmc/pmid}} template.}}. This would remove the useless clutter from these categories, and let bots/humans focus on cleaning up the citations that are actually used, rather than spend time on useless ones. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Anyone? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Why would we delete the DOI ones? It seems like we could keep all the unused DOI ones indefinitely in case we want to use them again. Otherwise we may end up creating and deleting the same template numerous times. As long as the content is correct, what is the deletion rationale apart from the fact that the template isn't in use? If we just need a list of templates that are actually used, I could immmediately generate that from a toolserver query. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

They serve zero purpose, needlessly increases the maintenance burden on editors, skew WP:JCW data, etc. If they ever need to be used again (which is very unlikely since most of those are due to deleted articles), the bot will re-create them as needed in the correct citation style. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I think that there is some benefit to having a complete record - why delete and recreate a page with the same content? The JCW data could easily restrict itself to only things that are actually used in articles. I guess I don't view them as "clutter", I view them as the desired contents of the categories. They could also be useful for editors who want to browse through a list of sources, since a bot could make a report of all the papers that have templates in existence, and people could look through that to see if there are papers relevant to articles they are interested in. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The templates are purposeless bot-generated content, and purposeless templates (created by bots or humans) are deleted. None of them would survive speedy deletion, nor would they survice TfD. Browsing cite doi/pmid/etc... templates looking for a specific citation is just about the most retarded way to find a relevant source for an article. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course we would need to add some subject-specific sorting to help with browsing. For example, math articels would have a mathematics subject code (MSC) which would allow someone to search by area. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Which is again, plain silly. Why in the world would you want to browse a tiny tiny tiny subset of mathematical papers on a subject in the hopes that you might find something relevant, rather than brownse an actual mathematical database? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Updating attribution for Dave's Garden photographs

Greetings, old friends. Back in 2006, I received permission from Dave Whitinger at Dave's Garden <http://davesgarden.com/> to release all his photos at that site under the GFDL. I uploaded several here, and many other people uploaded other photos here from that site. These have since been moved to Commons.

Dave is not with the Dave's Garden site anymore, and his "about" page has been removed from that site. He created a new site at <http://allthingsplants.com>, and all his photos have been moved there. He e-mailed me, asking if I could update the image description files to attribute him at his new site. (He also explicitly released the images under the GFDL and cc-by-sa on his new site, rather than relying on an e-mail confirmation.) Could someone run a script to update these?

Specifically, there are a couple hundred images on Commons that say:

This photo was taken by [http://davesgarden.com/members/dave/ Dave] at [http://davesgarden.com/ Dave's Garden]. Released under the GFDL, as documented [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Successful_requests_for_permission#Dave.27s_Garden here].

(There may be others with different wording, but all will link to <http://davesgarden.com/>.) They all need to change to say:

This photo was taken by [http://allthingsplants.com/users/profile/dave/ Dave Whitinger] at [http://allthingsplants.com/ All Things Plants]. Released under the GFDL and cc-by-sa-3.0 licenses, as documented [http://allthingsplants.com/plants/browse/user/images/dave/ here].

This will help to save several hundred great plant images on Commons, most of which are used in multiple wikis. Thanks for any help! – Quadell ^(talk) 18:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

If the images are on Commons, you'd probably do better to ask at commons:Commons:Bots/Requests. The only local files linking to any page under http://davesgarden.com are File:Pulsatilla alpina fruit edit2.JPG and File:Cherokee.purple.jpg, which can easily enough be fixed manually. Anomie⚔ 20:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I can ask there too, it's just that... in my experience, things move a lot slower there, and there are fewer people with the tools needed. I was just wondering, if this is easy and non-controversial, if someone could knock it out without too much trouble. If not, that's fine, I'll see what traction I get there. – Quadell ^(talk) 23:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

commons:Commons:Bots/Requests is the parallel to Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval here. It's where one might request permission to run a bot. It's not a forum where I might ask someone to develop and run an automated task; that doesn't seem to exist on Commons at all. – Quadell ^(talk) 17:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

D'oh, you're right. commons:Commons:Bots/Work requests is the equivalent to this page. Anomie⚔ 18:24, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I'd missed that. I'll ask there. – Quadell ^(talk) 12:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit notice for WP:ARBPIA articles

All the WP:ARBPIA articles are under 1RR.Usually editors active in the are tag the talk page of the article {{ARBPIA}} tag(for example Talk:Israel) but they usually don't add edit notice(ex. of edit notice. Template:Editnotices/Page/Israel) so the article stays without edit notice(for ex. Israel Defense Forces) and new editor ussualy don't see talk page or don't pay attention so they may break the rules.I ask that bot will add edit notice as soon one of editors will add the tag to the talk page.--Shrike (talk) 09:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Changing <br/> to <poem> on Sonnet pages

See [1]. <poem></poem> tags are more efficient and less distracting in the editing window IMO than <br> / similar tags on every line. So could a bot go through Shakespearean sonnet pages, remove all instances of <br>, </br>, or <br/>, and place <poem></poem> around the text, inside the {{sonnet}} template? It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 17:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox

ChzzBot II has stopped, and the sandbox is no longer being cleared automatically. Is anyone willing to take over the task? 124.149.84.97 (talk) 02:03, 29 April 2012 (UTC)