Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage

Home
Introduction and rules
User manual
How to use AWB
Discussion
Discuss AWB, report errors, and request features
User tasks
Request or help with AWB-able tasks
Technical
Technical documentation

Archives of this page

Requests for registration

Please read the guide on the main page before requesting permission. In applying for AWB access, you indicate that you will abide by its terms.

Also, this page is for requesting AWB Access for this wiki (English Wikipedia) only. Other projects have their own check pages and you should ask administrators there to add you.

Please add your name to the bottom of the appropriate list (user or bot) on this page below using *{{AWBUser|your username}} ~~~~~. Enter your user name exactly as the software displays it, for example in the 'Basic information' section of your preferences. Do not use underscores instead of spaces or change the case of the first letter. Note that all usernames begin with an uppercase letter or a symbol.

If the list contains undecided entries that are over 48 hours old, please change {{noadminbacklog}} to {{adminbacklog}} at the top of this page.

Note that users with under 500 mainspace non-automated edits are rarely approved. You only need to give a reason for wanting AWB access if you have fewer than 500 mainspace non-automated edits. Administrators are automatically approved and do not need to list themselves.

If approved, your name will be added to the CheckPage. If you will make many or fast automated edits using AWB, you may wish to use a separate (or bot) account for the purpose.

Users

Estevezj (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) 05:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NahidSultan (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) 10:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have under 500 article edits, what would you like to do with AWB? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flat Out (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) Flat Out let's discuss it 05:29, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:28, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EnglishEfternamn (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email)

Done INeverCry 17:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Argento1985 (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) ((Argento1985) 12:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Done INeverCry 17:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

XPTO (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) 13:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 14:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Theonesean (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) (My edit count breakdown is misleading. A lot of the "Wikipedia talk" namespace edits are Articles for Creation. AWB will allow me to quickly improve basic WP:MOS vios, add categories, infoboxes, and other WP:SOFIXIT edits. Thanks.

I would support this user having AWB privileges and I can verify that he is a major contributor to the AFC project. Technical 13 (talk) 14:55, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done INeverCry 17:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sssssss340 (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) 13:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)I would like to make corrections to typographical errors, currently I do them by hand and I could accomplish more with some automation. sssssss340 13:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done 38 edits just isn't enough experience here to trust you with the use of AWB. Please request this again when you've built a bit of a track record. 500 edits is the usual minimum. INeverCry 17:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PBASH607 (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) (I have around 2000 article space edits) 01:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the edits are from Stiki, Huggle or are reverts, what would you like to do with AWB? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken a break from vandal fighting for now and I am moving towards the article space, fixing errors fast and with efficiency. --PrabashWhat? 11:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Melonkelon (talk • contribs • non-automated contribs • wikichecker • count • total • logs • page moves • block log • email) 01:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these edits are reverts or automated. What would you like to do with AWB? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bots

Please only list approved/trial approved bots here and add a link to your bot approval at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval.

Edit request on 10 June 2013

‹ The template below (Edit fully-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I'm requesting that {{Anchor}} points be put in for each letter of the Approved users section. Something in the nature of:
{{Anchor|Approved users - 0}}
{{Anchor|Approved users - 1}}
{{Anchor|Approved users - 2}}
Through:
{{Anchor|Approved users - X}}
{{Anchor|Approved users - Y}}
{{Anchor|Approved users - Z}}
To facilitate easy linking from other pages such as a verify link on a userbox/topicon/User## template or other types of requests. Grouping of short sections would be fine by me (such as {{Anchor|Approved users - X|Approved users - Y|Approved users - Z}} or what have you). Thank you for your consideration. Technical 13 (talk) 13:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm worried that changing the formatting of the list might break AWB because of the way it parses the page, but I'm not sure if it's actually a problem or not. Maybe Rjwilmsi, Reedy or Magioladitis could shed some light on the situation? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is a reasonable concern. I'm not in too big of a rush, just think that this would be useful because the list is so long and it would make it so much easier to link to a name (I'm thinking about mostly trivial things like userbox/topicon but it would also be nice for slightly larger User## template). Thanks for a response Mr. Stradivarius. Technical 13 (talk) 16:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've deactivated the request for now. Feel free to reactivate it if you get the ok from one of the three users listed above (the AWB developers). Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adding in one or more {{anchor}} will not affect AWB's lookup of user names. Rjwilmsi 12:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This would affect User:ListManBot which sorts the list alphabetically, renames users and removes administrators. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kingpin13 can ListManBot be modified to add remove these anchors automatically as the list changes? That would simplify this request. Thanks. Technical 13 (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be that difficult to add I suppose, the bot will probably require a complete rewrite when renaming moves away from local wikis anyway. Personally I don't really see much of an advantage to these anchor links though. The example you give above of allowing users to link closer to their name in topicons doesn't really convince me. Personally, if I want to verify if someone has AWB rights already I just use a Ctrl+F search on the page, so it doesn't make much difference what the starting point is. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 17:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you could add it on the re-write, that would be great. I use [ctrl]-[f] too, but some people actually still use browsers without search features and some just don't want to be bothered. That is why I was asking... Thank you. Technical 13 (talk) 18:36, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If there is consensus that having the anchor tags is a good idea I'll rewrite the bot to manage them. Personally though I would be opposed to them. I just don't see the advantage, I find it hard to believe there are any users who want to check the approval list of AutoWikiBrowser and don't use a browser with a search feature. The list is sorted alphabetically anyway, so it's not exactly difficult to check. I just don't think the anchors are going to help at all in locating users, in almost every single case. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 18:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I don't think the effort is worthwhile. The list is not that big and I doubt that it is frequently visited by humans (who are not admins maintaining it). Mcewan (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]