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	Auto-WP:NAVNOREDIRECT	Not a good task for a bot.	10	5	Wikiwerner	2024-04-28 12:22	Primefac	2024-03-13 18:37
2	Automatic NOGALLERY keyword for categories containing non-free files (again)		14	7	Anomie	2024-06-23 11:50	Anomie	2024-06-23 11:50
3	Can we have an AIV feed a bot posts on IRC?		8	3	Legoktm	2024-06-21 18:24	Legoktm	2024-06-21 18:24
4	Bot to update match reports to cite template	BRFA filed	14	5	Yoblyblob	2024-06-20 21:21	Mdann52	2024-06-20 21:11
5	Bot to mass tag California State University sports seasons	Doing...	5	4	Frostly	2024-06-10 17:05	Headbomb	2024-06-09 17:28
6	Football league infoboxes		7	4	Bagumba	2024-04-25 13:43	Primefac	2024-04-25 12:01
7	Clear Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects		7	4	Jlwoodwa	2024-06-21 06:41	DreamRimmer	2024-04-21 03:28
8	Find linkrot with a specific pattern		7	3	GreenC	2024-05-01 16:20
9	Fixing stub tag placement on new articles	Not a good task for a bot.	4	3	Headbomb	2024-05-19 20:17	Headbomb	2024-05-19 20:17
10	User:RetractionBot, v2	Y Done	8	5	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06
11	Bot to change citations to list defined references	Not a good task for a bot.	3	2	Apoptheosis	2024-06-09 17:44	Headbomb	2024-06-09 16:56
12	Adding Facility IDs to AM/FM/LPFM station data	BRFA filed	10	3	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-12 14:29	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-12 14:29
13	Tagging women's basketball article talk pages with project tags		7	2	Hmlarson	2024-06-10 19:17	Mdann52	2024-06-10 19:15
14	Friendly support for Draft categories – feedback request		1	1	Mathglot	2024-06-10 19:40
15	'Literature of Kashmir'	Not a good task for a bot.	2	2	Usernamekiran	2024-06-11 07:37	Usernamekiran	2024-06-11 07:37
16	Adding links to previous TFDs		7	4	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02
17	Bot that condenses identical references	Coding...	9	4	Acebulf	2024-06-19 03:07	Headbomb	2024-06-18 00:34
18	Convert external links within {{Music ratings}} to refs		2	2	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11
19	Stat.kg ---> Stat.gov.kg		2	2	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21

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.

Resurrecting bot request - bot to tag Category:Physiology articles

Resolved

In order to get a grip of articles under the scope of the new WP:Physiology, I request that all articles under Category:Physiologists and Category:Physiology and all subcategories be tagged with:

{{WikiProject Physiology |class=|importance=|field=}}

Thanks in advance, --LT910001 (talk) 00:13, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Do you want the "class" parameter copied from existing banners? And set to stub if the article is a stub? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 05:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC).

Thanks for your help! If you are able to, that'd be wonderful. Thank you! --LT910001 (talk) 06:16, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

How's this going, Rich Farmbrough? --LT910001 (talk) 23:17, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I can't do it - I am not allowed. I was just reminding you to specify the auto class setting, as I said at VP. I'm sure there are are people who do this a lot. If no one volunteers, I'll find someone. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:34, 3 May 2014 (UTC).

Keeping this eminently doable request from being archived without action. Thryduulf (talk) 07:41, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Ping to keep this thread alive. Would be very grateful if someone would take it on. --LT910001 (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• sigh* LT910001 I'll take a look at it tomorrow. If only the WP:BAG would do something about the last tagging request you made (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HasteurBot 7) I could do this as well. Hasteur (talk) 12:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeh, and thanks again for helping out, I've responded there. This particular shouldn't be a difficult request and would be much appreciated by WP:PHYSIOLOGY. Who is this group? As they are small and this appears to be holding things up for a number of months, we may need eventually to hold an RfC to change this structure. There is no process that I know of on Wiki that has been delayed for 2+ months because a very small group of (apparently) unelected Wikipedians are not responding. I am sure the BAG mean well, but this is not fair or appropriate on WP. --LT910001 (talk) 10:24, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Posting to stop this from being archived. Still in need of attention. --LT910001 (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Pinging again. Would value some help! --LT910001 (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I can do it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 02:41, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!! --LT910001 (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

 Doing... -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

 Done LT910001 I did the all the pages in the first category and all its subcategories. It was impossible to grab all the pages of the second category and subategories. They should be thousands. Maybe to badly constructed category tree? -- Magioladitis (talk)

Thanks Magioladitis. This is a relatively new WP which I anticipate will probably have a moderate scope. If you could start with tagging all pages directly situated in Category:Physiology I'd be grateful, and I'll endeavor to sort out the subcategories shortly. --LT910001 (talk) 01:36, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Specific requests

Resolved

Looking at the confusing category tree makes me quite depressed... I think instead I will ask for some specific subcategories, and then other things can be tagged as the project develops. If possible, could you please tag:

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=neuro}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Neurophysiology (no subcategories)
2. Articles directly in Category:Proprioception (all subcategories)
3. Articles directly in Category:Reflexes (no subcategories)

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Sleep physiology (all subcategories - has none)
2. Articles directly in Category:Homeostasis‎ (depth of three subcategories, ie. to [[:Stress] and its pages, but not the subcategories of Stress)
3. Articles directly in Category:Electrophysiology‎ (all subcategories)
4. Articles directly in Category:Circadian rhythm‎ (all subcategories - has none)
5. Articles directly in Category:Physiological instruments (no subcategories)
6. Articles directly in Category:Physiology templates (no subcategories)
7. Articles directly in Category:Skin physiology (all subcategories - has none)
8. Articles directly in Category:Thermoregulation (all subcategories - has none)
9. Articles directly in Category:Human hormones‎ (all subcategories - has none)

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=renal}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Urine (all subcategories) *I'll remove the eight articles about urinals, but it's a bit cumbersome otherwise.
2. Articles directly in Category:Acid-base physiology‎ (all subcategories)

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=cell}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Human cells‎ (all subcategories)

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=respiratory}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Respiration‎ (depth of 2, ie. to the level of Category:Abnormal respiration but not including any subcategories

 Done With {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=mid|field=blood}}:

1. Articles directly in Category:Blood (no subcategories)
2. Articles directly in Category:Blood antigen systems‎ (all subcategories - has none)
3. Articles directly in Category:Blood products‎ (no subcategories)
4. Articles directly in Category:Blood proteins‎ (all subcategories)
5. Articles directly in Category:Fibrinolytic system‎ (all subcategories - has none)
6. Articles directly in Category:Hematology (no subcategories)

And that should be a fairly comprehensive overview of articles under our scope. Please let me know if there's any grouping I can do to make this easier for you. I and WP:PHYSIOLOGY are very grateful for your help! --LT910001 (talk) 02:16, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

As a note to any physiologists who are watching, these fields are somewhat approximate, but will hopefully be more helpful than not. --LT910001 (talk) 02:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

LT910001, Rich cannot do it and I have to do it manually since by bot is blocked for 2 weeks now! -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Dammit! You were my main hope! Maybe @Ohconfucius: can help? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:21, 31 May 2014 (UTC).

If not, Mag, can you make a list of articles talk pages in a sandbox page? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC).

Thank you all! --LT910001 (talk) 21:12, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Trams

Can I please have this done for WP:TRAM all articles are in Category:WikiProject Streetcars articles and I need the WikiProject Trains template replaced with {{WikiProject Streetcars}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fremantle99 (talk • contribs) 09:09, June 2, 2014 (UTC)

@Fremantle99: Just checking - you would like {{WikiProject Trains|...|streetcars=yes|...}} changed to {{WikiProject Streetcars|...}} and leave the other parameters as is? Or replace it with {{WikiProject Streetcars|class=|importance=}} so others can populate the parameters? Could you please point us to a discussion where consensus was made for this move? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: {{WikiProject Streetcars|class=|importance=}} Please. You can find consensus at [1]. Sorry for the late reply. Fremantle99 (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

@Fremantle99: No apologies needed - I think replying within 24 hours is fine. Thank you for providing the link. If I'm reading it right, I see three editors that don't agree with creating a new WikiProject, and none that agree. I also don't see any discussion about removing the |class= and |importance= parameters. While this would be easy for a bot operator to do, I'm concerned that there doesn't yet seem to be consensus to perform this task. GoingBatty (talk) 01:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:, Yes, you do read it right to a certain degree, only two editors disagreed, however, on WikiProject trains I received support, and those editors are now on board with the idea particularly @Bahnfriend: who helped create the portal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fremantle99 (talk • contribs) 08:56, June 4, 2014 (UTC)

@Fremantle99: I don't see a conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. Could you please provide a link to the discussion? I should have mentioned before that the request for bot approval form asks bot owners to provide a link to demonstrate consensus. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: [2] is the discussion that is old enough to make it to the archives. Redrose64, gave reluctant support, Bahnfriend helped work on the portal and DanTD gave some advice. If you require a more definitive consensus on this particular move I could make a vote but I would think these are sufficient. Aneditor (talk tome) 20:02, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Bot that operates on orphaned files

Hi! I want to create a bot called Nahnahbot (named after me), but I don't know programming language. I want to request for a bot that can help to put the {{di-orphaned fair use}} template at orphaned files quickly, so that it will be easier. Not just that, the bot will after that add it into the category and then inform the owner of the file. In this case, it will be easier. Thanks! --Nahnah4 | Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! | No Editcountitis! 06:56, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I believe this is a task that Betacommand Bot used to do, or akin to it. The category would be transcluded by the template, so that bit is simple. I would suggest that you familiarise yourself with WP:AWB to get some idea of how such a thing might work. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:38, 3 June 2014 (UTC).

Create one page of Actor

Please create one Page on Actor Called "Aashish Mehrotra" from C=the serial of #Paanch from #Channel V :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShruSD (talk • contribs) 05:50, May 30, 2014‎ (UTC)

@ShruSD: Creating one article isn't a job suitable for a bot. Wikipedia:Requested articles might be a better forum for you. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 23:07, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Changing USA to U.S. but only in pages with certain templates

As stated in the guideline WP:NOTUSA, the term "U.S." is preferred over "USA", with some exceptions. I primarily edit geographic infoboxes, so it occurred to me that a bot could make many of the edits I have made such as this without much risk of error.

My idea is to have a bot that would make the change 'USA → U.S.' only if USA appears within a geographic infobox template (such as Infobox mountain, lake, river, mountain pass, etc.) and only then make the same change in the body of the article if USA appears there as well. Bot action would include a linked reference to the MOS guideline WP:NOTUSA in the edit summary.

My rationale is if USA appears in the these templates, it is almost certainly a part of location description of a geographic feature in the United States, so the change to "U.S." (rather than to "US") would be appropriate. I have already made a couple hundred of these edits myself and it seems the vast majority of times, USA is appearing in small, under-developed or inactive articles. It is unlikely these articles would also have an exception term such as "Team USA"; and I suppose you could program exceptions, so the bot would ignore certain character strings such "Team USA", as an added measure to reduce false positives.

While a bot working under these rules would only be fixing a small percentage of total number misuses of USA globally within WP, it would take care of most of the articles on geographic features, and do so with a very low error rate I expect.

Is it feasible for someone to create this bot? --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 00:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

On second thought, maybe not. I just remembered the infobox location map names often include USA in front of the the state name, 'map = USA Washington' for example. In some cases I think this is necessary and with some states it's optional. Either way the resulting text "U.S. Washington" would cause an error as it would be an invalid value for the map parameter. And there's probably more things I haven't considered. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 00:35, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Could the bot's action be confined to only certain parameter values within the infobox templates? The 'map_caption = ' and 'location = ' parameters for example are two places where the term is likely to appear, and neither of those parameters require specific syntax in order to be functional. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 00:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

• There is an issue with the "Roads" infobox (one of the places we use ISO 3166-3 due to the project's local standards), which would require the undeletion of a small template before this could be done. I will try to find the template name and get it undeleted anyway, since it is a Good Thing.
• "US" is better than "U.S.". There are various reasons for this, firstly it is a valid ISO 3166-2 code, so it is especially good for templates where it can be manipulated, secondly you don't get the issues with multiple fullstops as at the end of the previous sentence, thirdly style in general (and on Wikipedia in particular) is shifting away from dotted abbreviations, and fourthly whenever we use US with UK, USSR, USAF (US Army and USAF) we don't dot the abbreviation. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 10:38, 1 June 2014 (UTC).
  

I am pleased to hear "US" is preferred to "U.S.", agree is better, but the MOS differs as pointed out above. Can that guideline be changed easily? --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 14:40, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind last question as it has already been changed a couple weeks ago.

OK, so could a bot change "USA" to "US" in only certain parameters of geographic infobox templates, assuming we can get around any foreseeable problems, and change "U.S." to "US" while we're at it? --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 15:18, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Racerx11: For the benefit of the person interested in taking on this task, could you please provide a list of the geographic infobox templates to be changed, and a list of parameters for each infobox to be changed? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure:

• Infobox mountain

location, photo_caption, map_caption, range, first_ascent

• Infobox mountain range

photo_caption, country, country1, country2, border, border1, highest_location, map_caption

• Infobox mountain pass

location, photo_caption, map_caption, range

• Infobox lake

caption, caption_lake, location, basin_countries

• Infobox river

caption, origin, mouth, location, basin_countries

These are the templates I am familiar with and the ones I am interested in for the bot. If the bot designer really wants to carry it further with deserts, swamps, etc. that would be up to them, and they should get an idea from the above which parameters to fix and which to avoid, as well as I can decide, for those. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 23:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

There are 40,663 pages using these templates. Very few as a percentage use "USA" in those fields (I have not looked at "U.S."). I will post a list of the articles tomorrow, meanwhile I have manually fixed the river ones. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:11, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

Thanks. I have manually "fixed" large percentages of the mountain, mountain pass and lake templates, although my "fix" was to "U.S." rather than to "US" I'm afraid. There should be fairly large number of cases where USA still appears in lake infoboxes. That one looked really dense. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 01:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

There's about 1,349. The list is at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rich_Farmbrough/US_mountains_rivers_and_lakes. It will very slowly become out of date. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

If you want to use this list directly you can copy it to en:WP or use https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rich_Farmbrough/US_mountains_rivers_and_lakes/remote which has the interwiki link to en:WP. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:44, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

How did you compile the list? If I use it to manually fix the remaining pages it may help or become necessary to update it. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 22:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I created it with WP:AWB. I can re-create it later if needed. There will doubtless be a few oddities in it, since we are dealing with human generated text. Note that the template {{USA}} (which it picks up) puts a flag and the words "United States", I believe the flag icons are deprecated in this type of infobox. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:20, 5 June 2014 (UTC).

OK thanks Rich, and on the flag icons, yes, another ongoing endeavor of mine. I have removed several thousand flag icons from geographic infobox templates over the past couple years, so I would be getting those as well. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 02:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Tagging unreliable/dead sources

Could a bot tag all references to Falling Rain Genomics as ({{unreliable source}}) and all references to FindArticles.com as {{dead link}}s, as proposed in this discussion? Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#An_unreliable_source_and_a_dead_one:_Falling_Rain_Genomics_and_FindArticles.com. There are about 3,700 of the first, and 2,400 of the second. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Asking for Noting bot

Pinging Ceradon for status on something that seems to have been dropped. If Ceradon is no longer active, or does not respond, can anyone else provide information? Please see Did You Know Noting bot. Matty.007 originally input the request on Feb 23, 2014, and Ceradon said on March 2, 2014 that he was coding this. Ceradon again replied March 28 that the coding was going well, and he should have the task filed by Monday, March 31. We are now two months past that date, and no bot in sight. It looks like Ceradon created Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Cerabot II, User:Cerabot/Umbox and User:Cerabot/Run/Task 2 for DYK, but nothing has been done with these. I don't see anything on Bots/Requests for approval that bear Ceradon's name, or anything in the bots denied. — Maile (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Maile66, Matty.007, and Ceradon: I am currently writing a bot that will perform that task. The code is located on GitHub. APerson (talk!) 21:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Hooray! You are now receiving a virtual pat on the back. Matty and I are just contributing editors at DYK, so, hopefully, you can work out how this will all automatically work. — Maile (talk) 21:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much APerson! Best, Matty.007 10:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• APerson, Just to make sure, recapping what was requested of this bot. There should be a feature to "opt out" of getting this bot, enabled/disabled under individual user Preferences settings, not the nomination template. The criteria for this bot is found on the nomination template, and not the article history. When a DYK nomination template is created for any article, if "created by" is other than "nominated by" or "self nominated", a bot posts on the individual user's talk page to notify them of the nomination. This means registered users, IP addresses and unregistered users listed under "created by". Some nominations have multiple creators that include the nominator's name as a creator. In such a case, all but the nominator listed as "created by" would get the notification.

Mandarax, BlueMoonset, Orlady, Crisco 1492, Victuallers, Allen3, Casliber, Art LaPella, Materialscientist, ThaddeusB, Nikkimaria, PFHLai, TParis, pinging some DYK interested parties who might like to keep an eye on the progress of the bot. — Maile (talk) 13:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure - I'll expand some articles....this not is if someone nominates something I've expanded, right? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI, I pinged you as a frequent DYK admin, so you aren't left out of the loop. This is for all nomination templates, and is the result of a Feb 2014 RFC by Matty.007. And the "opt out" feature would prevent you from getting these notices if you don't want them. — Maile (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Maile66: Is it fine if the opt-out only makes use of {{bots}} as opposed to some other mechanism? APerson (talk!) 20:25, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

APerson, I don't know what that means. Please explain. — Maile (talk) 20:32, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Maile66: I was wondering if it's fine if the "feature to 'opt out'" which you described is not enabled through the preferences, as you said, and is instead implemented using {{bots}} as the flag telling the bot that the user has opted out. APerson (talk!) 21:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

APerson, I guess the part I don't understand is how any bot would know to tell another bot the user opted out. It should be a blanket opt out by user, enabled or disabled at the user's discretion. And the opt out should not be something that could be done on the templates themselves. Let me explain how the DYK nominating process currently works, and why this notification bot has become necessary. Let's say APerson has created a new article but doesn't think it's ready for DYK, which means an appearance on the main page. Meanwhile, because there is no ownership on Wikipedia, Maile66 can come along and see that new article out there, and nominate it at DYK without APerson knowing it happened. The "created by" editors are frustrated that they are not notified. On the other hand, some editors contribute to so many articles that they don't want all those notifications. But it's the article creator/expander who should make that decision, not the nominator who creates the template. The only way I know that could happen is with Preferences. Please explain how a bot would know to notify another bot about this. — Maile (talk) 22:46, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Maile66, {{bots}} tells whichever bot(s) is (are) specified in the template that they should (or should not) edit the page where the template is. I was planning for the bot to use that.

As a side note, the bot now successfully generates a list of user talkpages to notify. APerson (talk!) 02:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

APerson, Thanks for the update. And I believe you need a more informed editor to answer your question as to whether or not a bot can be used, instead of user Preferences, to opt out any individual user. Pinging Orlady, Materialscientist and BlueMoonset, hoping one of them can answer that question correctly. — Maile (talk) 12:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

APerson, None of the editors I pinged have answered here. But I've been reading and think you might be referring to Template:Bots, possibly by any given editor placing one on their talk page and have something like {{bots|optout=APersonBot/DYKNotice}} - and if that's all there is to it, I think it serves the purpose. Just please make sure you let us know exactly what wording should be there to opt out, and if it's supposed to be placed on the user talk page. Thanks for all the work you're doing on this. — Maile (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to but in: APerson: what kind of timescale are we talking before the bot goes operational? Thanks, Matty.007 12:17, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll most likely be ready to submit a BRFA in about 14 hours. I'm currently coding the part where the bot places messages on the user talkpages. APerson (talk!) 12:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

BRFA submitted. APerson (talk!) 13:37, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Any idea when it will be up and running? Thanks, Matty.007 13:40, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You can check the status of the bot at the BRFA page. APerson (talk!) 20:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Can someone make a bot to scan articles on prehistoric creatures and add the Category for the year it was described?

Can someone make a bot that would scan articles in WikiProject Paleontology and WikiProject Dinosaurs, extract the year from the genus authority heading of the infobox, and automatically add Category: Fossil taxa described in 2014, to the bottom of the article with the appropriate year extracted from the infobox substituted for 2014? Abyssal (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

There appear to be some 4-6,000 such articles. I have created a new template {{Fossil taxa by year}} for the new categories that will be needed. I will post a list of articles presently. Should we include ichnotaxa? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rich_Farmbrough/dino list of 6624 articles that use taxobox or species box, and don't have a suitable category already. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

There are some more subtleties. Titanosaur I gave two categories, one for the Titanosauroidea superfamily and one for the parent Titanosauria clade. The type species has its own article.

Troodon is simpler, since the article is about the genus, it gets the 1856 category:

Troodontinae should get 1924

Troodon formosus (type species) also 1856

Other species

Troodon inequalis 1932

Troodon asiamericanus 1995

So we can do this with redirects.

But we are moving away from trivial here. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:06, 5 June 2014 (UTC).

Ifasya seems to be a fossil genus, but it's not in WikiProject Palaeontology. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC).

That is really amazing work, Rich! I am a bit concerned about including categories for the year non-type species in articles on genera, though. If a genus was erected in 1951, but a second species was named in 1987, a reader viewing the "Fossil taxa described in 1987" category would probably assume the genus itself was named that year instead of a second species inside it. Is there any way we can remove the categories for years that only non-type species in a genus were described? Abyssal (talk) 02:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I did with Troodon. All the other categories are in redirects, so Category:Fossil taxa described in 1856 contains an entry for Troodon formosus.

Titanosaur is different because it's not a clade (or maybe it is: a monophylic taxon, the article is not quite clear) - but we should decide how to handle paraphylic and polyphylic taxa.

The categories could again go in the redirects for Titanosauroidea and Titanosauria, I believe this would probably be best. Done

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:19, 6 June 2014 (UTC).

OpenStreetMap wiki

Would any of you care to assist with the OpenStreetMap wiki? (It documents OSM; it's not part of the map itself.) There is an apparent need for a number of bot tasks, for example resolving hundreds of double redirects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:36, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Coding.... All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC).

Nicely done thanks. Rich.

There's another OSM bot job that needs doing, which is more directly relevant, and of benefit, to Wikipedia - adding links from OSM entities (that is editing the map, not the OSM wiki) to Wikidata (and optionally to Wikipedia). It's a large and complex task, which will need to be tested and agreed with the OSM community. Details are in my OSM user space. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:27, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Faulty ISBNs that substantially match DOIs

I've been doing a bit of work fixing articles in Category:Pages with ISBN errors. I've noticed that a number of them were of journal articles, where a completely fake ISBN was pulled from the DOI. I finally got around to looking for the source of the error, and discovered that it was the fault of a bot. Would it be possible for someone to make a list of articles where a citation template has both a DOI and an ISBN parameter defined? I'm concerned that there may be cases where this bot introduced an error that created a nominally valid, but fake, ISBN which wouldn't show up in the cleanup category. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 22:17, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I think there will be too many of these. I'll have a think. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC).

I would be inclined to narrow this down by looking at the bot's edits which mention ISBN in the summary. if this list is too long, it can be narrowed down further. What do you think? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC).

That sounds like a good approach. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 15:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Integers tagging

Proposal: Per Category talk:Integers#199E03 vs. 199e03 (no objection, from 2011, but PrimeHunter still hasn't gotten around to it) All articles (not redirects) in Category:Integers which start with a digit are to have sort key set as follows (ignoring commas and spaces):

One digit "d" or "d (number)"

0d

Two digits "de" or "de (number)"

d e

Three digits ("def"), etc

def

or not set

Four digits ("defg"), etc.

dE03 defg

Five digits ("defgh"), etc.

dE04 defgh

... etc

If it starts with a digit, and is not of the form digit-string or digit-string (number), or if starts with a "0" and and is not just "0"

- pagename

To be run occasionally. As Category:Integers presently has only 384 members, it doesn't cost much. I have no objection to an AWB addon, but it would require a new macro (template) to compute the key. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

This only works for numbers less than a googol, but I guess that's OK. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC).

The key is computable with AWB regexen. However there are only 55 pages that need changing, so I am just doing it manually. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC).

That was 55 four or more digit pages. Also 27 3 digit pages and a whole bunch of 2 digit pages. Oh well. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:27, 7 June 2014 (UTC). Done

Incoming link fix bot

Can someone create a bot to fix some incoming links for Skate? Per talk:Skate (fish) pages were swapped. So pages in Category:Rajidae that linked to "skate" should now link to ((skate (fish)|skate)) and "skates" to ((skate (fish)|skates)) . -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 06:39, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

 Doing... using WPCleaner. GoingBatty (talk) 20:42, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

 Done! GoingBatty (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Making Category:Wikipedia template categories a container category

In theory, Category:Wikipedia template categories should be a container category with nothing but subcategories. In practice, it's not. Could a bot go through the main categories and systematically remove every subcategory from Category:Wikipedia template categories? This is a massive undertaking I'm aware (approximately 24k subcategories into a few main ones). For example, Category:10-Team bracket templates is in Category:Tournament bracket templates which is in Category:Sports templates, etc., etc. If it was cleaned out, I think it would be useful as a holding area for templates that haven't been categorized. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:19, 8 June 2014 (UTC)