Wikipedia:Bot requests

This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors.
Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.

Commonly Requested Bots

Shortcuts

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	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
3	Bot to update match reports to cite template	BRFA filed	14	5	Yoblyblob	2024-06-20 21:21	Mdann52	2024-06-20 21:11
4	Bot to mass tag California State University sports seasons	Doing...	5	4	Frostly	2024-06-10 17:05	Headbomb	2024-06-09 17:28
5	Clear Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects		9	6	Wikiwerner	2024-07-13 14:04	DreamRimmer	2024-04-21 03:28
6	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
7	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
8	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
9	Tagging women's basketball article talk pages with project tags	BRFA filed	15	4	Hmlarson	2024-07-18 17:13	Usernamekiran	2024-07-18 17:10
10	Adding links to previous TFDs		7	4	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02
11	Bot that condenses identical references	Coding...	12	6	ActivelyDisinterested	2024-08-03 20:48	Headbomb	2024-06-18 00:34
12	Convert external links within {{Music ratings}} to refs		2	2	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11
13	Stat.kg ---> Stat.gov.kg		2	2	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21
14	Add constituency numbers to Indian assembly constituency boxes		3	2	C1MM	2024-06-25 03:59	Primefac	2024-06-25 00:27
15	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
16	One-off: Adding all module doc pages to Category:Module documentation pages		6	2	Nickps	2024-07-25 16:02	Primefac	2024-07-25 12:22
17	Draft Categories		12	6	Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins	2024-08-07 17:56	DannyS712	2024-07-27 07:30
18	Remove new article comments		3	2	142.113.140.146	2024-07-28 22:33	Usernamekiran	2024-07-27 07:50
19	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
20	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
21	Change hyphens to en-dashes		16	7	1ctinus	2024-08-03 15:05	Qwerfjkl	2024-07-31 09:09
22	Consensus: Aldo, Giovanni e Giacomo		16	4	JackkBrown	2024-08-07 06:30	Qwerfjkl	2024-08-02 20:23
23	Cyclones		3	2	OhHaiMark	2024-08-05 22:21	Mdann52	2024-08-05 16:07
24	Substing int message headings on filepages		7	4	Jonteemil	2024-08-07 14:51	Primefac	2024-08-07 14:02

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.

UK railway station categories

Last year, a dft_category parameter was added to {{Infobox GB station}}. However, still only a minority of railway station articles are using it, although there have been Wikipedia categories for them for much longer.

I am therefore requesting a bot to go through these articles (categories A–C2 have been done manually, and so only D, E, F1 and F2 still need to be done). The action to be performed on each is to add | dft_category [[:Template:Equals]] [category] to the infobox, and remove the manually-added category (since the infobox automagically adds the article to the relevant category, and having it there manually as well would create a risk of the two becoming out of sync).

I can see that there are cases that would need to be considered:

pages where the parameter has already been added (in which case the bot shouldn't do anything, except possibly remove the redundant manually-added category if there is one)
stations that are in more than one category (in which case the bot should flag them for human attention)
redirects and other similar templates (Infobox London station)
nested templates that may be present (though if the new parameter is added right at the beginning of the template transclusion this shouldn't be an issue).

— Smjg (talk) 17:28, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I am not fun of categories added via templates/infoboxes in pages. This causes inconsistencies between pages having an infobox and those how don't. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would be WP:TEMPLATECAT. But there are no articles without an infobox for which one of these categories is applicable: every station that has been assigned by the Department for Transport to one of their categories (A, B, C1, C2, D, E, F1, F2) has a Wikipedia article; and every one of those articles has either {{infobox London station}} {{infobox GB station}} or its redirect {{infobox UK station}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that the comment in WP:TEMPLATECAT is merely a recommendation, not a policy. Moreover, the reasons for it don't seem to be applicable here - once this work is complete, these categories will be populated almost entirely through these templates, thereby making it easier to restructure. Maybe there are still drawbacks to this approach, but I think it is a lesser evil than having to maintain the DfT category in two places in parallel (the infobox and the article categories) and the consequential likelihood of somebody inadvertently updating one but not the other. — Smjg (talk) 14:04, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's been nearly 2 months now. Anybody? — Smjg (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Smjg, I can see why you'd want to do this and it wouldn't be tricky to do. But there are some tricky edge-cases that suggest it's not as simple as you suggest. For instance, United Kingdom railway station categories says that St Pancras railway station is in two categories. I see how the template handles this, but how would the bot know what to do? Relentlessly (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relentlessly, I already began to explain this. When the bot stumbles upon an unusual case such as this, it would not alter the article, but flag it for human attention in some way. — Smjg (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Idea is not well explained.

An article/reference bot

It would be helpful to have a bot that compiled a numerical result showing how many articles on any given Wikipedia edition lack references. While quality assessment is very difficult, such an analysis would give a rough 'verifiability index' of individual editions (and a possibility for comparisons between editions).

I assume a simple string search for <ref or reference tags in each article would suffice. If found, the article can be added to the number of referenced articles and the bot can skip to the next one. If it reaches the end of the article and no reference tag is found, the 'unreferenced' count is increased. The end result would just have to be the two resulting sums, which constitute the ratio of referenced vs. unreferenced articles.

I realize there is a certain error margin due to several factors, e.g. malformed references, but that would probably even out, as such errors would be equally distributed between editions.

There's no need for the bot to make any markup, it would just be for statistical QA.

If such a bot already exists or easily can be modified for the task, please advice. Thank you! Asav | Talk 18:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the trick will be to get a transclusion count of the {{Reflist}} template. The current number is 3,410,088. Then, subtract it from the number of articles (currently 4,717,510). The downsides of this method are:

Jarry1250's tool counts all transclusion, AFAIK, even the non-mainspace ones.
All articles with {{Reflist}} might not have references.
Articles might have malformed references.

--QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 18:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the article might use <references /> instead. Then there are the articles with neither, but which are still fully-referenced - such as Actuary. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actuary does have a {{Reflist}}. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 04:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't have done. It looks like it was added in error by PoeticVerse (talk · contribs) as the wrong fix for this edit, which had used <ref>...</ref> (contrary to WP:CITEVAR and WP:PAREN). Following this edit, the {{reflist}} should definitely have been removed; so I've now done that. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your responses so far, but the bot has to be edition agnostic, so so looking for '<references>', '{{Reflist}}' or '{{references}}' tags won't work; as the Norwegian edition uses '{{Referanser}}' and the French '{{références}}', for example. The bot needs to tackle localized editions as well, hence my suggestion that it count occurences of articles containing '<ref'. (This probably won't work for non-Latin alphabets, but it's better than nothing.) Malformed references and related errors are not a major problem; they'll even out in statistical terms, given the huge numbers we're talking about. Asav | Talk 20:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't read the "any Wikipedia edition" part. We can run the templatecount.py script through a global bot on each wiki. And we can just change it to the localized template each time on a new wiki. All sensibly referenced articles have the {{Reflist}} template, so I believe we'll get almost accurate numbers. In fact, most articles with inline citations will have the template. We can change it to transclusions in article namespace, so the python script should work fine. I'm fine with running the script but someone has to help me migrate it to the Labs cluster. And I'm going away on 21st. So, I would rather do it before that. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 04:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And some wikis still use the deprecated {{Ref}} which can be tackled by the script. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 04:46, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I may be a bit slow here, but when you say 'All sensibly referenced articles have the {{Reflist}} template,' do you mean the localized or the translated versions (such as {{Referanser}} and {{références}}) as well? Also, quite a few articles still use the deprecated <references> tag. Would that bot work on those too, or will it have to be adjusted for national/localized editions?

Would python templatecount.py -count {{Referanser}} <references> do the job on the Norwegian edition, for example? Asav | Talk 19:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm bumping this, since QEDK is on a wikibreak. Asav | Talk 10:06, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should. The problem is however, templatecount.py (with -count) doesn't count the articles but the number of transclusions so if your mentioned "keywords" occur twice, thrice or more, it counts that number and not the number of articles it has checked. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 12:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! What about articles that use parameters within the {{Referanser}}< tag, such as {{Referanser|2}} (for two column layout). Would each possible parameter have to be listed, or is there some sort of a wildcard function? Asav | Talk 19:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of -count, do not enter any arguments at all, just set it in the article namespace. Btw, this script would take days to output the number on a very large wiki. Anyway, the code for {{Referanser}} would be templatecount.py -namespace:0 referanser. I have no idea if this script supports redirects or parameters. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 16:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Needs wider discussion.

I think this would be hugely controversial and difficult, but if it can happen it could change WikiPedia forever. I think we need to get concencus--88.104.132.1 (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

access date without url

Per this discussion: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#access_date_without_url And this categoryCategory:Pages_using_citations_with_accessdate_and_no_URL Remove access dates from {{citation}} and {{cite}} when there is no url. Only do this if(and only if) there is another link out such as HDL, PMC, PMID, JSTOR, or DOI. Otherwise assume that a human needs to look at it, since there is an access date, but no link of any kind. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 15:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

what is HDL, BTW? I did not find it in the documentation to those templates. --Pavlo Chemist (talk) 09:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like just need a bot to remove them all Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Error_data_-_accessdate_without_URL AManWithNoPlan (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This can't be that difficult. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can do the task with the following restrictions:

accessdate parameter (name and value) will be removed, if there is no url provided, even if such identifiers as DOI are given. In case of DOI, for instance, there is always a fixed link in the form http://dx.doi.org/(DOI), so accessdate does not really matter here. If you think that it does matter, then you have to discuss it in an appropriate place, because Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration adds pages to the Category:Pages with archiveurl citation errors, only if there is no url regardless whether identifiers such as DOI are provided.
accessdate will not be removed from {{citation}} and {{cite}}, if there is a parameter "website", as there can be found missing url from the given title and website (e.g. 20th hijacker: {{cite web|last1=Sciutto|first1=Jim|title=New Allegations of Saudi Involvement in 9/11|website=CNN.com|accessdate=April 9, 2015}}). Here human intervention is necessary.
accessdate will not be removed from {{citation}} and {{cite}}, if there are present any "http" or "www", as the url is likely to be just misplaced (e.g. 1990 FIFA World Cup: {{cite web |title=Mascots |http://www.fifa.com/about-fifa/marketing/brand/mascots.html |publisher=FIFA |accessdate=24 April 2015 }}). Here human intervention or for many such cases another bot task is necessary.

Please comment, if you agree with this restrictions or there are any other restrictions necessary. --Pavlo Chemist (talk) 09:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AManWithNoPlan, GoingBatty, and Rjwilmsi: for advice and for the questions posed by Pavlo. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 02:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavlo Chemist: Presuming that this applies to all citation templates, I think this looks good. I also suggest adding a restriction to present removal of the accessdate if the reference contains ".com" or ".net", as those would probably fall into the logic behind restrictions #2 and/or #3 above. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:19, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a bot to automatically generate featured topic progress templates for categories

Can anyone write a bot that could scan all the categories under the jurisdiction of a particular Wikproject, fill in a template like this along with a calculation for what percent along the way the category is to each article having featured status, then paste that template as a new section on the category talk page and in a new subpage for the wikiproject listing all of the newly generated templates, vaguely like the bot that does the popular pages template? I think a bot like that would be really useful for helping wikiprojects evaluate which categories are most in need of work and which could be most easily made into good or featured topics. Abyssal (talk) 04:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Abyssal, I've been thinking about this a bit. It looks like the bot will do 2 things:

Post a message to each category talk page saying something like "X% of the articles in this category are featured", and
Update a subpage of the wikiproject with a table containing the percentages for all the categories

I agree that this would be a great idea for a bot. Am I understanding you correctly? APerson (talk!) 05:44, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but don't forget filling in the template! :D Abyssal (talk) 10:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SpongeBob SquarePants task

Over at WP:AFC/Redirects we've had a lot of requests for redirects for articles relating to SpongeBob SquarePants. Specifically, SpongeBob can be written as Spongebob, and SquarePants can be written as Squarepants. It is also reasonable to redirect squarepants to Squarepants.
The requested task would search for all articles containing the word SpongeBob and/or SquarePants and create appropriate redirects for alternative capitalizations. These redirects would be tagged with {{R from other capitalisation}}. Thank you. --LukeSurl^{t c} 21:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@LukeSurl: Since the correct spelling is "SpongeBob SquarePants", should redirects with typographical errors "Spongebob" and/or "Squarepants" be tagged with {{R from misspelling}} instead? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think you're right. --LukeSurl^{t c} 09:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@LukeSurl: So, for example, for List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters, how many redirects would you want?

What else? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the only difference is in whether "B", "S" or "P" is capital or small, it's not a difference in spelling; hence, those are not candidates for {{R from misspelling}} but {{R from other capitalisation}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: {{R from misspelling}} states "This is a redirect from a misspelling or typographical error." Using an incorrect capitalization is not a typographical error? GoingBatty (talk) 15:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a special case of a typographical error. Surely it's better to use the most specific template? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Using {{R from misspelling}} will include it in Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings, so editors can fix the typos in the incoming links. GoingBatty (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: I think you've got it exactly right with that list. --LukeSurl^{t c} 07:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Status Unknown. What has ended up happening with this?--88.104.132.1 (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a Commons bot operator

Could anyone help with a Commons bot request? I left a request at COM:BOTR two months ago, but it was archived without action: it shouldn't be hard to program, so I suppose that it's just that nobody got around to it. Here's the request, copied from Commons:Commons:Bots/Work requests/Archive 11.

I've just discovered Commons:Category:Photographs by date and would like to have its subcategories added to my uploads. This will take a while if I do it manually, as I've uploaded over twelve thousand pictures. Could a bot do it? I'm imagining that the bot goes one-by-one through most of my uploads (details below), adding a date category only when the image uses {{Information}}, and using the date supplied in the |Date= parameter. Bonus points if the bot logs all images that don't use {{Information}} and all images that use the template but don't have anything in the data parameter or have something in it that's not precisely YYYY-MM-DD (example of this), and then gives me the full logs for both types so that I can check them and fix them if necessary. I've started adding date categories to new uploads (example), so it should also check to see if an image is already in a date category and ignore ones that are. Since they're not broken, there's no need to log these images. I was imagining that the bot would go through every image in eight categories; it should ignore things I've uploaded that aren't in any of these categories, and it should add a date to anything uploaded by someone else that's in one of these categories. The categories in question are Commons:Category:Aerial pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Building-centered pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Community pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Highway pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Miscellaneous images by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Portraits by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Scenery pictures by User:Nyttend, Commons:Category:Signs by User:Nyttend.

Thanks for the help. Nyttend (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coding... Seems like a useful bot to have BMacZero (talk) 05:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed Commons:Commons:Bots/Requests/BMacZeroBot BMacZero (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend: Do you think it would be better, for pages that already have a Photographs by date category, to add "Taken on" and remove the existing category? "Taken on" also include automatic localization BMacZero (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! But what do you mean, "add taken on and remove the existing category"? Could you make such an edit manually and then show me what you mean? Nyttend (talk) 16:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an example: [1] BMacZero (talk) 20:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, interesting; I've never seen that template before. Sure, go ahead, and it's also fine if you add the template to pages that don't have the date category, e.g. [2]. Nyttend (talk) 22:13, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend: Oh, haha, that's weird - I could have sworn that you had mentioned that template in your original spec. I must have discovered it while I was coding and subconsciously inserted it. That's what I get for working late. Just to make sure I am still sane: what the bot will be doing when it's approved is replacing "|date=YYYY-MM-DD" with "|date={{Taken on|YYYY-MM-DD}}" (which adds the category you wanted), and removing any existing "Photographs taken on" category that matches that date. It will log pages with missing or differently-formatted dates or non-matching "Photographs taken on" categories. Is this good for you? BMacZero (talk) 23:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All's what I was hoping to see. Thanks a lot! Nyttend (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of duplicated citations

I suggest a bot that can remove duplicated citations. If you look at the source code, you can see what I mean by "duplicated citations". Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Markup

Renders as

====Without duplicated citations===
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.<ref name="random thingy" group="example ref1">[https://www.google.com Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..<ref name="random thingy" group="example ref1" /> Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

====Dummy refs====
{{reflist|group="example ref1"}}

{{tick}} This is acceptable


===With duplicated citations===

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.<ref group="example ref2">[https://www.google.com Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..<ref group="example ref2">[https://www.google.com Random citation] Google. Retrieved at "random date".</ref> Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

====Dummy refs====
{{reflist|group="example ref2"}}

{{cross}} This is not acceptable

Without duplicated citations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.^{[example ref1 1]} Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..^{[example ref1 1]} Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

Dummy refs

^ ^a ^b Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

Y This is acceptable

With duplicated citations

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.^{[example ref2 1]} Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim. Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus..^{[example ref2 2]} Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a.

Dummy refs

^ Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".
^ Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

N This is not acceptable

@Qwertyxp2000: AWB's general fixes will do this - see the page for more details. GoingBatty (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty, thank you for finding the right page. I will soon be changing the {{Duplicated citations}} tag. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwertyxp2000: You might want to have the template link to WP:REFNAME instead of the AWB page. GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwertyxp2000: You might want to have a comment in the documentation saying that AWB may be used to fix the issue, and provide the link to the AWB page. GoingBatty (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why cannot you do this all? Then I can see what you are thinking. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwertyxp2000: Apparently some people think that duplicate citations are acceptable. GoingBatty (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the second scenario, if I have referenced the first and last sentences of a paragraph to the same source but not the middle of it, or per haps the middle is cited to another source, then if someone comes along and removes a "duplicate" cite, I would revert that as vandalism. We encourage people to use inline citation and multiple sources, but we don't limit people to only citing one statement from each source they use. Ϣere SpielChequers 05:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are misunderstanding, WereSpielChequers. No one is saying a statement can only be referenced once. Qwertyxp2000 is wanting a bot to fix references which are duplicated (rather than referenced twice or more). Duplicated references produce two entries to the same thing in the list of references, whereas a reference used multiple times will have one entry with multiple uses (the little "^ a b" you see next to the example reference in the first example). I recently manually combined a bunch of duplicate references here (I also normalized the references so they could be referred to multiple times). Maybe that will help clarify things. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unanswered questions

I am not sure but somebody would have already asked it.
Can there something be done to Teahouse so that unanswered questions have some notice (either in bold or a tag on it like {{unanswered}}) for those questions which has not been answered yet?
Sometimes, I see some user's question goes down (under other questions:) and other were actually answered quickly but not his/her
aGastya ✉ let's have a constructive talk about it (: 15:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging for Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand

Resolved

Could all articles in the categories listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_Zealand/Category_List please be added to WP:WPNZ using the {{WPNZ}} template. As a secondary concern, the automated tagging of biographies, politics, maori and music subs would be icing on the cake. Stuartyeates (talk) 11:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates I can do that. Here are the rules: User:Yobot#WikiProject_tagging. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

5157 categories... -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates is member of the WikiProject ΝΖ
I was notified
Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand was notified on its talk page about the request
Official bot request was made
Request includes list of pages or categories with no subcategories.

Thus, the bot run will start in 3 days. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 22:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates I expect 20,000 new pages to be tagged for the project. The project right now has 36,714 pages and after the tagging it will expand to 56,714 pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As somebody who does a lot of WPNZ article assessment, could I please ask that {{WikiProject New Zealand|class=|importance=}} be added instead, so that assessment is a tad easier? Schwede66 01:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Schwede Of course. In fact this is what I was planning to add anyway. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am 100% ready to run the bot. I performed the preliminary run that is needed in order to avoid duplicated tags, etc. If I have not started in the next 2 days, please ping me. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doing... Bot started. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just reverted this edit on the article for Backspacer. It has nothing to do with New Zealand. I'm assuming it was tagged as it's in this category - Category:Albums certified gold by Recorded Music NZ. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: - the bot is tagging dozens, if not hundreds of albums that have nothing to do with NZ. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, Mothership (album), Ten (Pearl Jam album), Metallica (album), etc. Please can you take a look at this. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugnuts: thanks for stopping the bot. Stuartyeates please check the category tree again and remove the inappropriate categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugnuts: The bot did 1523 edits prior to stop. Please free to remove all those who were not appropriate. I won't be online for the next 48 hours. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates please check the category tree again and remove the inappropriate categories. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 18:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Yes, there's a problem. I've reverted a couple and I'll go through the rest when I have time in the nest 48 hours. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted Abbey Road, The Beatles (album) and Back to Black - there are probably more. If a bot does this again, it would be useful if its edit summary could link to a discussion like this, as it just looked like a routine maintenance copyedit until I checked carefully. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 06:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got the rest of them. Not the way I want to be increasing my edit count. There may also have been an error in the bot setup, since I asked for only talk pages of articles, but see, for example Category talk:People from Alexandra, New Zealand. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates I missed the "only articles part". I removed all non-articles from the list just right now. 14,846 to be tagged unless someone tells me which categories are going to be excluded. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333 I renamed the section in order to directly link here per request. I set some rules of how the bot tagging is done. It is responsibility of the person who requests the tagging and of the wikiproject to check the details. This is the reason I give 3 days to raise questions about the tagging. I usually start 3 days after the last comment. This time I started 4 days after. It turns to be a common situation that a bad category is included in the list requested. It was slightly reduced after the tagging stopped including subcategories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:41, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with User:Magioladitis on this. I'm happy to shoulder the blame. In the medium term I have a proposed solution to this problem and will ping you when I post about it. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Magioladitis I've removed even more cats. Are you thinking of restarting the bot, or are we giving up on this? I'll trust your judgment as a bot operator. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:18, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuartyeates I started generating the new list. Let's see first how many pages are subject to tag. 5,102 categories loaded. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:01, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Less than 10,000 pages. Much better than last time. List reduced 50%. I'll start the bot soon. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doing... Bot started again. Lugnuts, Ritchie333, Stuartyeates feel free to stop the bot at anytime. I'll limit tagging in 6 pages per minute for the first few hours. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checking a couple of dozen looks good. Lots of flora and fauna, some footballers who've played a season down here. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have done some assessment and the only strange one I've come across is "Oh Yeah!" Live; any idea what triggered this? Schwede66 22:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Why? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:19, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These cats now removed from the list. I'll go through the cats and remove inappropiately tagged articles when I have time over the weekend. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped the bot to investigate. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:25, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64 and Schwede66:: These were in the category tree

Category:English language
Category:English-language literary awards
Category:English-language television stations

-- Magioladitis (talk) 22:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

213 pages affected... -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart, the bot appears to be going through the list category by category, so it's perhaps easiest to just undo from the 'user' contributions list; try to find the beginning here. Schwede66 22:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64 and Schwede66:: I'll fix all. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64, Schwede66, and Stuartyeates::Done. I removed all the invalid tags. I resumed the bot. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped temporarily to fix my PC. I'll resume in a few hours. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resumed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:50, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

America (Razorlight song) and American Boy don't make sense to me. Schwede66 07:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped the bot to investigate. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Schwede66 pages are in hidden Category:Singlechart usages for New Zealand. (A reason I dislike hidden categories). -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed category from the list. 412 pages affected. Fixing them. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2000 pages excluded from the to-do list. Bot resumed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64, Schwede66, and Stuartyeates:: Bot run completed. Feel free to review the edits. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great effort, team. Thanks to everybody involved. The WPNZ article count now stands at close to 45,000. Schwede66 03:39, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stuartyeates: I question the tagging of international treaties in Category:Treaties of New Zealand, e.g. Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International Criminal Court. Following that logic, Talk:Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International Criminal Court should be tagged with the banners of the national WikiProjects of all 74 parties to the agreement, which doesn't seem helpful to me. Also, I have reverted the tagging of non-NZ-native members of Category:Tasman Series, Category:Tasman Series cars and Category:Toyota Racing Series drivers - racing cars and drivers compete all over the world - I don't think it is appropriate or helpful to tag their articles for the national WikiProjects related to all the series in which they compete. DH85868993 (talk) 01:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

two points here. Firstly, reverting a bot is an entirely appropriate thing to do if you disagree with them. So thank you. Secondly, which articles fall under which wiki projects is up to the projects themselves and open to a consensus debate within them (you mention logic, which has little role here). I disagree on your first call (but don't feel strongly enough to revert you) and agree with you in the second call. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Note that I didn't actually revert the tagging of the international treaties; I was just questioning it. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 06:43, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stuartyeates:, @DH85868993: I have to agree with DH85868993 in this regard. The articles in Category:Treaties of New Zealand have little to do with the WikiProject and should not be tagged as such. Since you, Stuartyeates, are the curator of the Category List, would you be open to removing it? I'm not sure what the procedure is for making this change. – Zntrip 21:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stuartyeates: I reverted 7 pages per User_talk:Magioladitis#Yobot_and_WikiProject_New_Zealand. The rest is up to WikiProject to decide. Everyone feel free to revert my bot. I just did what I was asked to do. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 18:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: done. The run is over but I'm hoping to reuse the list. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivoyage

Its been years since Wikivoyage moved under Wikimedia umbrella and it was discussed somewhere that links to Wikitravel articles on respective geographical articles on WP will be replaced by links to Wikivoyage articles but I can still see many WP articles still have links to to Wikitravel articles but not to Wikivoyage. I on behald of Wikivoyage community kindly request that a bot be run to replace all the Wikitravel links with Wikivoyage and add template where there's no link right now. --Saqib (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Could you please provide an example of an edit like this that you've done manually? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[3] and [4]. --Saqib (talk) 22:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Thanks, although I believe the second one should be this diff. GoingBatty (talk) 22:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. BTW, many geo articles on WP also missing link to Wikitravel articles but Wikivoyage as well Wikitravels have articles on those geo places. Is there a way to make sure Wikivoyage template be added to all geo articles? --Saqib (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from valid links in Wikitravel and List of wikis I only found 21 English Wikipedia mainspace links to http://wikitravel.org with Special:LinkSearch, using my own ad hoc text filter to isolate mainspace links:

http://wikitravel.org is linked from Pauri Garhwal district
http://wikitravel.org/en/Ba%C3%B1os is linked from Baños de Agua Santa
http://wikitravel.org/en/Deoghar is linked from Thakur Anukulchandra
http://wikitravel.org/en/Iran is linked from History of Iran
http://wikitravel.org/en/Japan's_Top_100_Cherry_Blossom_Spots is linked from Nihonmatsu, Fukushima
http://wikitravel.org/en/Katiki_falls is linked from Katiki Falls
http://wikitravel.org/en/Khagrachhari is linked from Alutila Cave
http://wikitravel.org/en/Kunming is linked from Western Mountains
http://wikitravel.org/en/Leighton_Buzzard is linked from Will Ludford
http://wikitravel.org/en/Lundazi is linked from Lundazi
http://wikitravel.org/en/Lviv is linked from The Mother of God
http://wikitravel.org/en/Mae_Sai is linked from Mae Sai River
http://wikitravel.org/en/Orlando is linked from Little India (location)
http://wikitravel.org/en/Pauri is linked from Pauri Garhwal district
http://wikitravel.org/en/Rail_travel_in_India is linked from Indian Railways
http://wikitravel.org/en/Roatan// is linked from Pirate's Grog Rum
http://wikitravel.org/en/Salar_de_Uyuni is linked from Salar de Uyuni
http://wikitravel.org/en/Sicily is linked from Sicily
http://wikitravel.org/en/Solapur is linked from Solapur
http://wikitravel.org/en/Taipei/Beitou is linked from Hot spring
http://wikitravel.org/en/Wuhan is linked from Wuhan

This is too little to code a bot. Just examine them manually. There are around 1200 links in other namespaces but I don't think they are worth dealing with. http://www.wikitravel.org has no mainspace links. I guess the mainspace WikiTravel links have already been systematically removed before but 21 were later added to those articles. If you want to prevent this in the future then you could post a request to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. I don't know whether it would be accepted. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you PrimeHunter. You're right we don't need to run bot for such a small task which can be done manualy. Now repeating query I posted earlier above: Many geo articles on WP also missing link to Wikitravel articles but Wikivoyage as well Wikitravels have articles on those geo places. Is there a way to make sure Wikivoyage template be added to all geo articles? --Saqib (talk) 10:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject-related bots and scripts

Hi there! As part of WikiProject X, we are looking for volunteers to work on some bots and gadgets that will help address the various needs of WikiProjects and Wikipedia editors. If you are interested, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Volunteers, which will be updated as new ideas are developed. Thanks, Harej (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

picture uploaded to my article

i have created two articla one name Chrome (Rapper) AND THE OTHER IS AN ARTICLE ABOUT A RAPPER NAME CHROME WHO I HAVE BEEN WRITTING AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE TITLE OF THE PAGE IS project landlord (chrome)..can you please help me
MuzicFan1981 (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2015

Specifically. What are you are asking for help with? There isn't an article called project land lord (chrome), there is one called Project Land Lord (Album), what help do you need? - X201 (talk) 11:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Harmonising the use of abbreviation of Creative Commons licenses

Wikipedia often refers to Creative Commons licences in our references and sources. The way that they are referred to is not always correct. There should never be a dash between the CC and its license elements. So CC BY, not CC-BY.^[1] Also Creative Commons capitalises its license abbreviations. I've made a table with common misspellings of the abbreviations:

Bad	Good
CC-BY	CC BY
CC-BY-NC	CC BY-NC
CC-BY-SA	CC BY-SA
CC-BY-NC-SA	CC BY-NC-SA
CC-BY-ND	CC BY-ND
CC-BY-NC-ND	CC BY-NC-ND
cc-by	CC BY
cc-by-nc	CC BY-NC
cc-by-sa	CC BY-SA
cc-by-nc-sa	CC BY-NC-SA
cc-by-nd	CC BY-ND
cc-by-nc-nd	CC BY-NC-ND

I've started changing this manually, but that seems like a large repetitive task (I also get a lot of false positives as the search engine ignores the dash.^[2] To me this seems like a task for a bot.

Full disclosure: I work for Creative Commons in the Netherlands, I do not want to create the impression that I am changing material on behalf of Creative Commons, I want te factually represent the licenses and their abbreviations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martsniez (talk • contribs) 14:11, 16 April 2015‎

References

^ See the top of https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ as an example of how Creative Commons does this
^ See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22CC-BY%22&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&fulltext=1

I don't think I'll have time to pursue this but I ran a search on the latest database dump. As a rough ceiling, about 30 000 articles contain the 'bad forms' listed above, though this includes many non-mainspace. See User:Jamesmcmahon0/CC abbreviation typos.

This could be probably be added as a typo correction at WT:AWB/T

That all said, I think you should probably go else where first and get a consensus for the changes. For instance there are quite a few templates such as Template:Cc-by-sa-1.0 (here:Category:Creative Commons copyright templates) that use your 'bad forms' Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 10:35, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How does it do so? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing:The template names are Cc-by-sa-1.0 etc. but 'should be' CC BY-SA-1.0 (if capitalised) or at least Cc by-sa-1.0 - I don't really have an opinion on which way should be used, nor do I really know the template naming conventions, I was just trying to point out a few things Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 12:54, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think template names are less of concern than content displayed to our readers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I went through all templates in that category, none of them use the abbreviated license name when embedded in an article. I agree with User talk:Pigsonthewing that the naming convention of these are not a concern in this case. I will link to this discussion from WT:AWB/T to see if we can get more consensus on this. --Martsniez (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some examples of where this change might be made are needed. Also, care should be taken that the bot does not change quoted text. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe User:Jamesmcmahon0 has found over 30k articles where this could be changed, are you looking for more than this? --Martsniez (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Martsniez: - I think he meant provide a few diffs of the type of edits. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the need for this. The abbreviations we use here are the ones we use here. As long as the license link points to the right page on the CC site, what does it matter if we don't always capitalize things the way they do? This seems to be mostly a non-problem in search of an answer. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re-categorize Kenyan towns/cities by county?

This might be impossible, but I was wondering if a bot could help recategorize Kenyan villages/towns/cities into the appropriate county. There were previously eight provinces in Kenya, and most "populated places" in the county were categorized according to those provinces. Category:Populated places in Central Province (Kenya), for instance, contains 625 articles. Category:Populated places in Coast Province‎ contains another 481.

In a 2010 constitutional change, these provinces were eliminated, and replaced by 47 different counties. Yet five years later, a huge number of these place articles have never been updated to reflect the change. The only way to me, as a user, to update these articles is to open the article, click on the geo-location coordinates, figure out from google maps (where the county boundaries are clearly marked) which county it belongs to, then place it in the appropriate category. http://www.fallingrain.com/world/KE/

Is there any way a bot could go through these categories, look for articles with coordinates, compare those coordinates with the boundaries of the counties, and place the article in the appropriate county category? To me, that sounds like a lot to ask, but maybe it's possible? Thanks! - TheMightyQuill (talk) 07:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The co-ordinates approach sounds next to impossible without knowing detailed boundaries, which I haven't been able to find online. On the other hand, I've found this data, which seems to be a fairly comprehensive list of places in Kenya, sorted by their counties. I've got this data in a database now, and it seems fairly trivial to update every article where they match. This won't be all of them (I'm sure there are spelling differences, etc.), but it should reduce the numbers fairly well. The rest could be done by hand. How does this sound, TheMightyQuill? Relentlessly (talk) 21:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my late reply - I've been on vacation. That sounds amazing, @Relentlessly:. If you move the ones you can, I can manually edit anything left over. By any chance, can a bot automatically update any existing infoboxes as well? - TheMightyQuill (talk) 22:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update population data for Indian Villages and Towns from 2011 census

Most of the Indian villages and towns does not contain any population data or have older(2001) data. This bot will update insert data from official Indian census website — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittalmailbox (talk • contribs) 14:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need a bot to capture data from a website

I need a bot that can receive input data, feed it into a field on a page, and then request that data be returned from the server. This process needs to be done repeatedly with hundreds of data samples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.141.50.174 (talk) 02:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@120.141.50.174: We'll need more information about what input data, and what pages this will be used on. Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (pronounce) @ 16:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Automated identification of excessive WP:Tag-bombing

There are many articles on Wikipedia that have too many cleanup tags, and many of these tags have remained in place for years without being resolved. I propose the creation of an automatically maintained category called Category:Articles with more than 5 cleanup tags, which would help us to remove these unnecessary tags. Jarble (talk) 03:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The bot could add tag to such articles... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One issue that I realised years ago is that many tags exist on articles in cases where the article itself has already been fixed. I have always wanted to create a single bot to basically manage all of the tags possible to manage by bot, but I have never had the time. :/ ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 19:39, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do we also have a bot to see if a tag and its more generic version are used on the same article? For instance, {{One source}} and {{Refimprove}} shouldn't be used together. APerson (talk!) 15:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to lists, from the things they are lists of

Please could someone do this:

For every article titled "List of foo"
if the article called "Foo" exists; do nothing
otherwise, create "Foo" as a redirect to "List of foo"

For example, I just created Birds of Tunisia as a redirect to List of birds of Tunisia.

This might usefully be added to a list of monthly cleanup tasks, for new "List of..." articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doing... - Though I have messaged WikiProject Lists to check consensus first. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 12:54, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Please see also #Century-item redirects, below. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed - Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval#MoohanBOT 8 It is just for this task as I had already generated the list of pages needed and there seems to be no opposition to it. I will have a look at #Century-item redirects in a few days but feel free to jump ahead GoingBatty as that one may be outside of my regex expertise... Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 11:05, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replace links from a referenced site for WP:ANIME

Basically, a website changed their linking from okazu.blogspot.com to okazu.yuricon.com, and made some other tiny changes to the URL (mostly removing ".html" and replacing it with a "/", and adding a day in the URL).

For example (to use the example given in the discussion):

http://okazu.blogspot.com/2009/05/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain.html

is now located at

http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/15/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/

You can read the details here. The list of links which need to be fixed is here.

Thanks for any help! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

136 pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you need any other info? Please let me know. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any word on this? It's been over a week since anyone else commented here. Also, I moved the following section up and made it a subsection of this one as the tasks would be the same, just for different URLs. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Idea is not well explained. @Nihonjoe: Ok, I'll ask a question, How do we derive the YMD structure from just the YM structure that was there previously present short of having the bot opening a search on the new page looking for the "slug" that matches. My gut reaction is that I think this is a bad idea for a bot to do as it will need some sort of human component to decide which one is right. Hasteur (talk) 19:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can see how that would make things more complicated. Seeing as it is only the day and the .html that are different between the URLs, wouldn't it be fairly easy to have the bot cycle through the (at most, 31 for each entry) possibilities and then replace it with the one which comes up as a valid URL? Just have it go through a process like this:

http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/01/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/02/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/03/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/04/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/05/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/06/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/07/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/08/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/09/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/10/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/11/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/12/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/13/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/14/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - Error 404 - Page Not Found
http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/15/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/ - valid
Replace "http://okazu.blogspot.com/2009/05/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain.html" with "http://okazu.yuricon.com/2009/05/15/lesbian-anthology-sparkling-rain-english/"
move on to the next one

I imagine a bot could do that much more quickly than a human. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nihonjoe Have you contacted the site requesting permission for us to brute force crawl their website like that? The method you describe can be done, but is extremely resource intensive on the server being hit up. Also do you really want all of those pages updated? I think we're more looking at Articlespace pages and possibly active Talk pages (WT: and Article Talk). Hasteur (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes (waiting for a reply), though if it was done in small groups over a week or so, I imagine it would be fine as it would spread the load over an extended period. The mainspace and mainspace talk pages are the most important ones, but it would be nice to fix all of them. There are only 136 links which need to be fixed, so if they were done 2-3 at a time, 2-3 times a day? ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Got a tentative "Yes", but waiting to hear from the webmaster (the owner of the site replied). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 02:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihonjoe: Ideally the task will run to completion, but I can insert a ~5 minute period. The links in Archives, I'm thinking not changing because we don't want to change talk archives. Also, do we want to save the state of the page after every unique link replacement or do we want to wait till we have all the links replaced before we move forward? This work for you? I'm going to start designing the bot task over the next few days. FYI: This does not look at the subsection below. Hasteur (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hasteur: Okay, the owner of the site wrote back: "Hey, thanks so much for letting me know about this. Most of my traffic is from the USA, although I do get a fair amount of global traffice, but the upshot is, if you do the update during 12AM-8AM Eastern US time, it should be okay." The webmaster also wrote saying it was fine, as well. As for talk page archives, you can leave those alone. If there are multiple links on one page, it's fine to replace all of them and then save the page. If you can have the bot do the following task at the same time, that would be great. The one below is just a simple search and replace, not involving any web searches. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

akitashoten.co.jp needs links need update

See my example fix here. I need someone to help me spot and fix those links in case there are more of them. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So the only thing is that CGI/search/syousai_put.cgi?key=search&isbn= gets replaced by comics/4253? Nyttend (talk) 01:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This could be combined with the request above as they are both for the same thing, just different URLs. For the same project, too. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Century-item redirects

Please could someone do this:

For every page or category beginning with a cardinal number (e.g. 17th-, 21st-) century; or articles prefixed "List of..." matching that pattern:
Create a redirect from the equivalent title, with no dash
Create a redirect from the equivalent title, using words
Create a redirect from the equivalent title, using words, with no dash

For example, for the existing Category:20th-century war artists, I just created:

Other examples matching the above pattern would include:

This might usefully be added to a list of monthly cleanup tasks, for new articles and categories matching the above pattern. Note the overlap with #Redirects to lists, from the things they are lists of, above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing: What redirect template(s) do you want included on these new redirects? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: I suppose {{Redirect from alternative spelling}} would be best, but I have no strong feelings on the matter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This request doesn't seem to match with Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Redirecting categories, unless they each "frequently have articles assigned to them accidentally, or are otherwise re-created over and over." But there's no evidence of that presented here. Anomie ⚔ 11:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I read it, the CFD thing you quote is in a different context: it's saying "We delete most categories, but if it's a likely mistake, we redirect it instead of deleting it". I don't see it as being at all relevant to the idea of creating the likely mistakes in the first place. Nyttend (talk) 23:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except it doesn't say "unless it's a likely mistake" at all. It says "unless people keep actually making the mistake". Anomie ⚔ 00:56, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Likely" is demonstrated by the fact that people make it, but again, the context is that of deletion versus redirecting, where the category already exists; it doesn't address the request being made here. Nyttend (talk) 01:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup

On the behalf of myself and Figureskatingfan, we are looking at the possibility of having a bot help assist us in the GA Cup. We held the first competition at the end of 2014/beginning of 2015 and after the success of it, we are currently planning a second competition, hoping for it to be a even bigger success. In the first competition, some of the participants expressed their frustration in the how the submission process for their Good article reviews was not very efficient. For the upcoming competition, we were wondering if it would be possible to have a bot scan the Good article nomination page for reviews being conducted by participants and add the appropriate review links to a page.

More specifically, ideally, the bot would scan the nomination page and say BenLinus1214 was reviewing an article, it would add it under the appropriate header.

If anyone is interested in helping us I would be glad to have you on board and will be more than happy to answer any questions!--Dom497 (talk) 23:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dom497: Doesn't seem that hard or complicated. I'll test around a bit but I'm not going to promise anything yet. -24^Talk 21:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Negative24: Thank you so much for trying! I would have done it myself but I don't know enough code to do it!--Dom497 (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need a bot revived from the dead

User:Jogersbot used to do a bunch of helpful tasks. Would anyone with bot knowledge be able to resurrect this bot in order to repopulate lists User:Jogers/List3 through User:Jogers/List7? Thanks, from the WP:ALBUM community. --Fisherjs (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fisherjs, all of them seem pretty straightforward to do. I'll see if I can hack up a script that populates the lists. APerson (talk!) 16:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing Trains project template with Trains in Japan project template

Per this section on the main page of the Trains in Japan WikiProject, we need to search the talk pages of all articles listed in the Category:Rail transport in Japan (and it's sub categories) for any of the following templates:

...and replace the above templates with Template:Trains in Japan. Additionally, a check should be made for "|Japan=yes" or "|japan=yes" and remove it if present as the replacement template automatically includes that. Here's a few examples of what the bot would do: 1, 2, 3, 4. The purpose of this is so the articles will be properly automatically placed into the appropriate articles by quality category. This will affect several hundred articles, though some have already been done so those would be ignored by this bot process. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why {{Trains in Japan}}? Why not {{WikiProject Trains in Japan}}? Have WT:RAIL been informed? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{WikiProject Trains in Japan}} would be fine, too. They both point to the same thing. WP:RAIL hasn't been informed as I was just going by the referenced section on Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains in Japan (I'm a member of that project). This is simply implementing instructions already part of the project (the instructions specifically state to use {{Trains in Japan}} (which points to {{WikiProject Trains in Japan}}). As this doesn't affect WP:RAIL in the least (since it's a descendant project), there's no reason to notify them. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I recall we should avoid the wrapper and move the other direction. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why? The wrapper exists for a reason, so why not use it? It reduces the amount needing to be typed when adding the template. Also, for some reason, the Template:WikiProject Train doesn't put things into the correct categories, even though it should when |Japan= is present. I haven't been able to figure out why not. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nihonjoe the later seems impossible. Maybe Frietje can check this. My guess that the wrapper was created for a reason but nowadays with all these bots running and with the WikiProject standardisation we may not need to use these wrappers anymore. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hence, the request to replace all of them with the wrapper. If you (or someone else) can figure out how to get the Template:WikiProject Train with |Japan= to work, then nothing needs to be done. There are other descendant projects where it works fine, and I copied the syntax used in those parts of the template, but it still won't work. Using the wrapper does. Very weird. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:55, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please give examples of talk pages using {{WikiProject Trains in Japan}} where the categorisation is correct. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:32, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any of the pages showing up in the various subcategories here. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many of those pages don't use {{WikiProject Trains in Japan}} at all, but instead use {{WikiProject Trains|Japan=yes}} or equivalent, yet the categorisation is the same. This suggests to me that it does not matter whether the wrapper is used or the main template. One thing that I noticed when I first looked at this matter is that every single one of the pages in subcategories of Category:WikiProject Trains in Japan articles by quality has {{WikiProject Japan|trains=yes}} or similar, which was an indication that it is {{WikiProject Japan|trains=yes}} which produced the categorisation that you desired.

I see that a few hours before this thread was raised, you made these changes. This should have the effect of populating subcategories of Category:WikiProject Trains in Japan articles by quality, and again it will not make a difference whether {{WikiProject Trains in Japan}} or {{WikiProject Trains|Japan=yes}} is used. Is there any problem with the categorisation? --Redrose64 (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was doing things one step at a time, so the only changes were made to the {{WikiProject Trains}} template. I wanted to get it working correctly there before attempting to get it to work on {{WikiProject Japan}}. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've looked into this a bit more. If a page has e.g. {{WikiProject Trains |class=c |Japan=yes }} (and no other banners) it is placed in Category:C-Class rail transport articles Category:Unknown-importance rail transport articles Category:C-Class WikiProject Trains in Japan articles, whereas if it has {{WikiProject Japan |class=c |trains=yes }} (and no other banners) it is placed in Category:C-Class Japan-related articles Category:Unknown-importance Japan-related articles Category:WikiProject Japan articles. There is thus nothing basically wrong with {{WikiProject Trains}}; however, code does seem to be lacking from {{WikiProject Japan}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the code for this to {{WikiProject Japan}} — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That was going to be my next step after getting it to work in {{WikiProject Trains}}. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{WikiProject Trains in Japan}} reduces the amount needing to be typed - yes, it saves one character compared to {{WikiProject Trains|Japan=yes}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I generally just type {{Trains in Japan}} or {{TIJ}}, and the latter saves quite a lot. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as there are bots going around bypassing those redirects, I considered it fairer to compare the full template names. I could have suggested {{TWP|Japan=yes}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe @MSGJ: can help? He really knows templates. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I really know templates too, particularly the WikiProject banners and especially {{WikiProject Trains}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently so. In the past, I've always worked with MSGJ when I've run into WikiProject banner issues. Glad to know of a second person who is able to help.

···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nihonjoe We can add |Japan= to the existing banners if you like. --- Magioladitis (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment just above. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above by several people, it's better practice to use the parent template {{WikiProject Trains}} with the parameter |Japan=yes. If there is a problem with categorisation, I will look into it. I've just replaced one and the categories seem to work just fine ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Real time net worth

Is it possible to automatically change the net worth to whatever it says here http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:realtime or can it only be done manually? --Iady391 (talk) 16:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a good idea too.--88.104.133.190 (talk) 11:02, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any progress?--88.104.132.1 (talk) 11:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Needs wider discussion.

Discussion

I added the advertisement parameter to see what people think of this idea.--88.104.132.1 (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A user has requested the attention of a member of the Bot Approvals Group. Once assistance has been rendered, please deactivate this tag by replacing it with {{t|BAG assistance needed}}. << I added this tag, hopefully some help should be here.--88.104.132.1 (talk) 17:46, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request for category adding

Could someone have a bot add all the articles on User:Exoplanetaryscience/List of numbered asteroids to Category:Numbered asteroids? exoplanetaryscience (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy discussion endorsing this? Need to have a positive assertion that we're ok. Hasteur (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd discussed it with Tom.Reding in the section Summary of Remaining Redirected & Unredirected Asteroid Articles, and nobody else seemed to have any particular problem with it. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is more of a category-maintenance request. Of the 19,237 numbered asteroid pages, only 529 currently exist in that category. Please let us know if a separate discussion is still necessary and we'll start one at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 17:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 14:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coming here from WT:AST; this seems like a very reasonable request; I can't see any downsides to doing this. StringTheory11 (t • c) 15:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As both someone involved in WP:AST and WP:BAG, this request is uncontroversial and has consensus. However, before proceding, WP:AST needs to think about how it wants to sort articles in the category. It's quite likely you'll need some form of 0 padding, and take care of a couple of cases manually. E.g. do you sort Ceres as 000001 Ceres or as Ceres? Do you sort 693 Zerbinetta as 000693 Zerbinetta or as Zerbinetta? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why would {{default sort}}ing need to be taken care of in the same bot request as simply adding a category? 693 Zerbinetta is still a numbered asteroid, regardless of how it's sorted. Furthermore, I haven't seen [[Category:Numbered asteroids]] with a qualifier attached (such as [[Category:Numbered asteroids|000001]]). I too want to see a standard {{default sort}} among the numbered asteroids, but grouping all the numbered asteroids seems like it should be the 1st step in that multi-step process. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 16:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to go through every asteroid article and get this sorting done sooner or later, preferably sooner. Creating such a thing for the category itself would be a waste of programming, as I would later undo it anyways, so just leave it they way it is by default and I will later fix it manually or submit a separate request for such a thing to be done. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 18:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm doing is using the fact that [[Category:Numbered asteroids|000001]] doesn't exist ~~(nor should it)~~ as an argument for the simplicity of adding [[Category:Numbered asteroids]] to those articles needing it.

There is concensus at WT:AST, so I hope someone picks up this request. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 13:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At the time of posting here, there are three people in support of adding the category, but nowhere is the category's sort order addressed. If the sort key is omitted, then the sortkey set by {{DEFAULTSORT:}} will be used, which may not be present, in which case the page name becomes the sort key. This is alphanumeric, not pure numeric, so the sort order will by default be 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000, 100001, 100002 which might not be what is desired. It is in fact contrary to the present sort order of Category:Numbered asteroids, which is Ceres, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... because those pages each have a sortkey, either a {{DEFAULTSORT:000001)}} or the explicit [[Category:Numbered asteroids|000001]] etc. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 6 if you include exoplanetaryscience, StringTheory11, and myself.

Thanks for clarifying the problem; I see it now. Even though only 11/564 pages in Category:Numbered asteroids use a 0-padded 6-digit sortkey, the majority of articles to be placed in that category have a {{DefaultSort}} using a name instead of a number, so they'd be displayed improperly. I've updated the discussion at WT:AST. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅contribs ⋅dgaf) 19:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need bot that can change the formats of dates.

What about a bot that can change the dates in reference tags? Such as in the outside of the "cite web" template, date could be incorrectly put outside the cite web template (which is within reference tags), or the date format is incorrect. For example, below is a date used incorrectly used within ref tags. (Note: ignore the filler text.)

<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page|title=Wikipedia}} Retrieved on 25th May 2015</ref>

It should really be...

<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page|title=Wikipedia|accessdate=25 May 2015}}</ref>

Do you reckon this is a good idea? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 06:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is a good idea. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, what coding could be possible? Got any ideas? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 08:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, does your bot, Yobot, correct common Wikitext errors? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 08:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Qwertyxp2000 my bot fixes common syntax fixes but I think it's better someone else codes this and runs it. Perhaps GoingBatty. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I am just wondering about Yobot. Anyway, why not ask GoingBatty? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 20:36, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest a scan of the database be performed to determine how much of a problem this is. There is a risk that the proposed bot would see a date outside the citation tag and think action should be taken when in fact the date is legitimate. For example, it may be necessary to add date-related information outside the citation template because the citation template cannot represent it. Example:

Sean Urban; P. Kenneth Seidelmann, eds. (2013). Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac. University Science Books. p. 12. Errata retrieved May 25, 2015.

Jc3s5h (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwertyxp2000: This would be outside of the scope of my current BattyBot date fixing task, because it doesn't generate a CS1 date error. However, it would be interesting to try it manually for a while. I also wonder how Ohconfucius' date fixing script would handle this. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc3s5h: Could you represent the citation as

{{cite book|title=Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac|editor1 = Sean Urban | editor2=P. Kenneth Seidelmann | publisher = University Science Books | year = 2013 | page = 12 |chapter-url=http://aa.usno.navy.mil/publications/docs/exp_supp_errata.pdf |chapter=Errata |accessdate=May 25, 2015}}

, which renders as:

Sean Urban; P. Kenneth Seidelmann, eds. (2013). "Errata" (PDF). Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac. University Science Books. p. 12. Retrieved May 25, 2015.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GoingBatty (talk • contribs) 00:40, 26 May 2015 UTC

I have several concerns with the use of cite book suggested by GoingBatty. Most important, since there is no way to deal with errata in the template documentation, editors are at liberty to improvise a way to deal with it, and it is an error for a bot to change any reasonable way of providing this information into false gibberish. Also, the proposed method provides false metadata. Also the proposal puts the word "errata" in double quotes as if it is a title, when in fact it is a description of the material.

I believe if a bot were created with the philosophy "If I find any date inside ref tags but outside the citation template, I'm going to turn it into an access date" the bot will make mistakes. The only hope of writing a bot that didn't make many mistakes would be to look for a very specific pattern. Something like <ref> followed by a CS1 template followed by "Retrieved on" followed by a date in an allowed format followed by </ref>, with not one single character of other information, except white space, present. But that would be such a rigid requirement that there might not be a worthwhile number of errors in the wild to correct. Jc3s5h (talk) 01:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

my Sources script will remove the entire ref because it points to a WP page; my MOSNUM script will strip the ordinal notation from the access date, but does not do anything apart from that. I haven't see that "problem format" before, so never contemplated a fix, and my feeling is that a targeted run by someone using AWB with a custom regex would quickly have that sorted. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 04:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Language icon templates

one pattern i see a lot more often and which inho may warrant a bot fix is a citation template followed by a language icon template. such language template could easily and more efficiently combined using the |language= parameter within the citation template. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 04:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius: BattyBot's task 31 removes the language icon templates from citation templates. I run this about once a month. I have submitted a Reflinks bug report, but I'm not aware of any fixes yet. GoingBatty (talk) 23:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GB: i'm glad you thought of that one. the other, which i was referring to, is where the language icon is within the <ref></ref> tags and placed specifically after (not within) the {{citation}} template. Perhaps you could submit a bot task to catch those? -- Ohc ^¡digame! 05:51, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius: Oops! You're referring to edits to change {{xx icon}} to |language=xx like this one. It's easy to change, but not easy to check to see if the template already has a |language= parameter, and then determine what to do (e.g. this edit). GoingBatty (talk) 16:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change MSDS to SDS

The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) is a harmonization scheme that many countries have adopted, including nearly all major English-speaking countries. Part of the GHS is the Safety Data Sheet (SDS), which is a standardized version of what was formerly known as a "Material Safety Data Sheet" (MSDS) in many countries. The page "material safety data sheet" has been moved to safety data sheet and I have requested a change be made to Template:Chembox & Template:Chembox Hazards. If you need more details, see Talk:Safety data sheet#Move to Safety Data Sheet and Wikipedia talk:Chemical infobox#Change MSDS to SDS.

Many chemicals have a page titled "[name of chemical] (data page)" which has a section titled "Material safety data sheet" and a link to the old page title Material safety data sheet. For example: Methanol (data page)#Material Safety Data Sheet (I didn't change that page so it could be an example for this discussion). I am asking for the help of a bot to:

Change links to "Material safety data sheet" to "safety data sheet" (it's not the existence of a redirect link that is of concern, but the text displayed for the link)
Change the section titles on pages titled "[name of chemical] (data page)" from "Material safety data sheet" to "Safety data sheet"

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Chemical infobox#Change MSDS to SDS concerning changes in the chemical infoboxes. At the time of making this request, there was no response in that discussion about whether a parameter in the infoboxes should be changed from "ExternalMSDS" to "ExternalSDS". Another editor made these changes to one of the infobox templates. I'm not familiar with template coding, so someone else will need to determine and coordinate any changes to the template parameters.

Also note that there are some links to the old page title that appear in the "What links here" (with transclusions and redirects hidden), but I cannot find the link in the article. For example Carbon monoxide is on the "What links here" (with transclusions and redirects hidden) for material safety data sheet, but when I click the edit tab and use the find functionality in my browser, I cannot find the link to material safety data sheet. I'm not sure why. On a final note, I'll be around for a few hours after making this request, but won't be around for the next couple of days. AHeneen (talk) 01:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@AHeneen: Do you mean Carbon monoxide, or do you mean Carbon monoxide (data page)? Only the latter appears in Special:WhatLinksHere/Material safety data sheet; and the link is in the "Material safety data sheet" section. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll rephrase. One request is: in page Carbon monoxide (data page), change section title "Material safety data sheet" (if exists) into "Safety data sheet". There are some 155 such (datapage)'s, listed (indirectly, by parent page) in Category:Chemical articles having a data page. -DePiep (talk) 10:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki to templates in Arabic Wikipedia

Hi Everyone, I'm a sysop in Arabic wikipedia. Recently, I found there that we have a lot of templates directly translated from English Wikipedia (English names have been maintained) but without interwiki. The templates are mainly for sport and chemistry articles. Is it possible to run a bot in English wiki that tries to find the equivalent in Arabic wikipedia and merge wikidata pages ? For example : Template:Chembox Dipole must be linked to ar:قالب:Chembox Dipole. The word قالب means Template. Thank you a lot. --Helmoony (talk) 16:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Local copies of Commons-specific license templates

When transcluding Commons media in the main page's "In the news" section, we upload local copies to ensure that they're protected immediately. Templates for the most common free licenses exists on both sites, but Commons also uses numerous tags of greater specificity or relevance to licenses rarely encountered at the English Wikipedia. In such instances, copying and pasting the image's description results in a broken license template transclusion (a red link).
I request that a bot scan c:Category:License tags (and its subcategories) and create local copies of all templates that don't exist at the English Wikipedia. This would require the substitution of all subtemplates (down to the lowest level), replacement of any Commons-specific CSS classes with code that functions here, and replacement of Commons categories with Category:Wikimedia Commons copyright templates (to be created specifically for this purpose).
Is this feasible? —David Levy 01:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Beautiful Women of All Time

Can we possibly change these rankings and automatically place them onto the respective Wikipedia page? The Most Beautiful Women of All Time e.g. in the Audrey Hepburn page mentioned that she is ranked #4 ?--88.104.132.1 (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Needs wider discussion.

[random_thingy-1] Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

[2] Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

[3] Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".

[4] See the top of https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ as an example of how Creative Commons does this

[5] See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22CC-BY%22&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&fulltext=1

[example ref1 1]

[example ref2 1]

[example ref2 2]

[1]

[2]

Bot-related archives (v·t·e)
Noticeboard 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Bots (talk) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22 Newer discussions at WP:BOTN since April 2021
Bot policy (talk) 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 29 Pre-2007 archived under Bots (talk)
Bot requests 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Bot requests (talk) 1, 2 Newer discussions at WP:BOTN since April 2021
BRFA Old format: 1, 2, 3, 4 New format: Categorized Archive (All subpages)
BRFA (talk) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Newer discussions at WP:BOTN since April 2021
Bot Approvals Group (talk) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 BAG Nominations
Wikipedia Wikipedia_talk