Wikipedia:Bot requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcuts:

This is a page for requesting work to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to simply put ideas for bots. If you need a piece of software written for a specific article you may get a faster response time at the computer help desk. You might also check {{Botcats}} to see if the bot you are looking for already exists, in which case you can contact the operator directly on his or her talkpage.

If you have a question about one particular bot, it should be directed to the bot owner's talk page or to the Bot Owners' Noticeboard. If a bot is acting improperly, a note about that should be posted to the owner's talk page and to the Administrators' Noticeboard. A link to such a posting may be posted at the Bot Owners' Noticeboard.

If you are a bot operator and you complete a request, note what you did, and archive it. {{BOTREQ}} can be used to give common responses, and to make it easier to see at-a-glance what the response is.

There are a number of common requests which are regularly denied, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots for a list of such requests, and ensure that your idea is not among them.

If you are requesting that a bot be used to add a WikiProject banner to the talkpages of all articles in a particular category or its subcategories, please be very 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. Compare the difference between a recursive list and a properly vetted one.


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



UK railway station categories[edit]

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 = [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)

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)
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)
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)
It's been nearly 2 months now. Anybody? — Smjg (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
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)
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)
This has been waiting 5 months now. The backlog is getting worse. I'd probably try and implement it myself if I had more time to look into the necessary processes (acquiring or developing suitable tools, implementing the bot, getting approval, whatever else) and carry them out. Can anybody hazard a guess at:
  • what has happened to all the long-time bot authors?
  • what we can do to recruit new bot authors to replace the ones that have disappeared?
Smjg (talk) 16:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Question: Can I have an example edit on what the bot is supposed to do, for clarification? Also, I assume this will be a one-time bot?—cyberpowerChat:Limited Access 22:11, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
  • This can be handled with AWB for the simplest cases, getting rid of edge cases using filtering of categories. I could possibly take a look at this, but I'm hesitant to use a bot for this without clear consensus that it's worth ignoring all rules on WP:TEMPLATECAT. ~ RobTalk 22:40, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting wait.svg Doing... Since this is a one-time bot, it shouldn't take too long to create, and push through BRFA.—cyberpowerChat:Online 17:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Removal of duplicated citations[edit]

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)

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

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

YesY 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

  1. ^ Random citation Google. Retrieved at "random date".
  2. ^ 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)
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)
@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)
@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)
Why cannot you do this all? Then I can see what you are thinking. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@Qwertyxp2000: Apparently some people think that duplicate citations are acceptable. GoingBatty (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
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. ϢereSpielChequers 05:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
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)
So is this a good idea for a bot or is it already fulfilled by AWB? Because I am looking to start working on a bot (something I've been putting off for two years). :P Sn1per (talk)(edits) 13:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per: AWB's general fixes will also do this in some circumstances - see the page for more details. GoingBatty (talk) 22:57, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: I see this problem a lot though and perhaps it would be a good idea to have it actively fixed by a bot to take some work off of AWB users? Sn1per (talk)(edits) 15:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per: I don't object to a bot task to do this using AWB's rules. How would you create a list of articles to be fixed? GoingBatty (talk) 15:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per and GoingBatty: A database scan for <ref>([^\<]+)</ref>.+<ref>\1</ref> will find about 20,000 candidates. The first 1% or so are listed at User:John of Reading/Sandbox. But remember that the AWB general fixes will only combine duplicate citations if the article already has at least one named reference, to avoid changing the citation style (AWB documentation). -- John of Reading (talk) 16:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@John of Reading: Thanks John! You might want to tweak your regex to also include named references. GoingBatty (talk) 16:28, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: That would take more than a "tweak", but I'll think about it. If two references have the same name, the software will use only the first definition whether or not the definitions are identical. So the search would have to be for references that have identical content but different names, or one named and one unnamed. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@John of Reading: Thanks for the regex, I tend to be terrible at those :P I would assume that my bot should follow the same behavior as AWB to comply with the same policy? Sn1per (t)(c) 22:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per: Definitely, and even then you may run into objections. See this 2011 thread. Hint: it's surprisingly long. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
@John of Reading: I think I tweaked the regex, not sure if it works all the time but should be accurate enough to quickly select pages for further scrutiny. Are there any obvious errors? <ref(.|\n)*?>([^\<]+)<\/ref>.+<ref(.|\n)*?>\2<\/ref> Sn1per (t)(c) 18:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
(still working on improving the regex) Sn1per (t)(c) 18:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per: The ".+" in the middle will only work if the regex is run with the "singleline" option turned on - the dot/period needs to match newlines - so the "(.|\n)" can be simplified to just ".". That's <ref.*?>([^\<]+)<\/ref>.+<ref.*?>\1<\/ref>. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

@John of Reading: Thanks for the advice. Here is an improved regex: <ref([^\>]*)?>([^\<]*)</ref>.*?<ref(?!\1)[^\>]*?>\2</ref> It (should) be able to find two refs, where at least one has no attributes i.e. name="", or if both have different attributes. Sn1per (t)(c) 19:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
(note that I am using python regexs, where a "." doesn't seem to match newlines) Sn1per (t)(c) 19:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Nevermind, I'm an idiot. Just say your note about singleline mode. Sn1per (t)(c) 19:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per: Yes, that regex does the job - neat! Now, a quick reality check: on my laptop it will take 20 hours to run this against a database dump. My latest dump is from mid-May; I think it's not worth tying up the machine for so long to produce a list that is several weeks out of date. But I can produce a partial list of a hundred or so articles for testing purposes fairly easily. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Document-properties.svg Coding... Well, it seems like a good idea to me, so I'll start working on it. But if you guys strongly disagree, leave a message on my talk page so I don't waste too much effort. The bot will probably take a few days to work on given that I am new to the field. Sn1per (talk)(edits) 17:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
@Sn1per:, Why code it? Why not use the AWB library that already contains the code. - X201 (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
@X201: I was thinking of making a pywikibot-based robot based on the WMF Tool Labs servers so that the bot can run all the time, rather than relying on me to run it off my PC, given that the problem is pretty large. Sn1per (t)(c) 22:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Redirects to lists, from the things they are lists of[edit]

Please could someone do this:

  1. For every article titled "List of foo"
  2. if the article called "Foo" exists; do nothing
  3. 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)

Pictogram voting wait.svg Doing... - Though I have messaged WikiProject Lists to check consensus first. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 12:54, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Please see also #Century-item redirects, below. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol wait.svg 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)

It appears that User:Jamesmcmahon0 has dropped this. Can anyone else help, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I see User:Jamesmcmahon0 has been editing again... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:30, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Century-item redirects[edit]

Please could someone do this:

  1. For every page or category beginning with a cardinal number (e.g. 17th-, 21st-) century; or articles prefixed "List of..." matching that pattern:
  2. Create a redirect from the equivalent title, with no dash
  3. Create a redirect from the equivalent title, using words
  4. 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)

@Pigsonthewing: What redirect template(s) do you want included on these new redirects? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
@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)
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)
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)
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)
"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)
I for one keep making this "mistake", when using HotCat. The redirects will help me and other editors to find the categories we need to apply. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Can anyone help, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Anyone? User:Anomie, did you read the above exchange? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I read it. Didn't change my opinion. HotCat has various other shortcomings too, e.g. people adding maintenance categories directly instead of using the appropriate templates. Anomie 23:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol merge vote.svg Needs wider discussion We are talking about mass creating redirects. This to me needs a wider discussion.—cyberpowerChat:Online 21:50, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

GA Cup[edit]

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)

@Dom497: Doesn't seem that hard or complicated. I'll test around a bit but I'm not going to promise anything yet. -24Talk 21:39, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
@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)
@Negative24: Hey, just curious to see if you've had any positive results. Thanks again! :) --Dom497 (talk) 02:30, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
@Dom497: Sorry for the delay. I've been exploring everything related to bots and this being my first time even trying to make a bot, things are going a bit slow. I'm going to be going on a month long Wikibreak (related to a project in life that needs my time) and so I may not be able to code anything up before the 2015 GA cup. I'm going to leave this open for anyone to pickup (feel free to do so if you're interested) but I'm not able to fully start on something at the moment. I will resume this project when I have the time and if someone hasn't picked it up by then. Sorry, -24Talk 03:08, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
@Negative24: No problem at all! Thanks for trying! :) --Dom497 (talk) 19:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Question: While I am good with botwork, my experience with the GA process is non-existent. It would help to have some clarification. Maybe you can show me a scenario, and show me the diffs that need to be done?—cyberpowerChat:Online 22:02, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: If a GA nomination is being reviewed, the list of noms at WP:GAN lists their name (see this diff). With the GA Cup there are submission pages (see here for mine). On these I put all the articles I'm reviewing using a special template. This currently has to be done manually, and people forget. What I think Dom497 is looking for is a bot that will periodically look at WP:GAN, see if a GA Cup competitor is reviewing an article, and add that article to their respective submission page using the template. Hope that helps, if something isn't clear, just ping me as I'm not watching this page. Wugapodes (talk) 03:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I asked Legoktm if he could do it since he already runs bots in that area, but he says he's too busy, so I guess I'll do it. Keep an eye on this request.—cyberpowerChat:Online 23:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Signing user: Another Believer "Wiki Love Pride" announcements[edit]

Can a bot be set up to go through Another Believer (talk · contribs) postings to talk pages about "Wiki Loves Pride" (on June 3 and June 2)? All the announcements (such as this one [1]) are missing dated signatures, and are thus going to break the archival bots on all these WikiProject talk pages that automatically archive discussions based on a date timestamp. Missing the timestamp, these will not be archived, so will continue to advertise the event well after it is over, becoming useless congestion on the talk pages. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 04:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

per discussions at VPM there is support for having these signed. Can someone implement a bot to go through and sign these? -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 08:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I doubt this task is worth the use of a bot. The individual WikiProjects can manually archive these notices using One Click Archiver as they come across them. I don't see this as a request that is worth the trouble of creating a bot and going through the approval process when the solution takes a couple of seconds from a member of each of these projects. ~ RobTalk 16:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Accidental template protection[edit]

Occasionally, I've noticed that an article has been mistakenly template-protected. Perhaps a bot could monitor the protection log, and if a page in a namespace other then Template, Module, User, or Wikipedia is template-protected, deliver a "did you mean to do this" message to the protecting admin, i.e.

Hello administrator name. On date you template-protected [[page]] ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=protect&page=page (url-encoded) log]). As template protection is only meant to be used for templates, or other highly transcluded pages, did you perhaps mean to select a different level? Thanks, bot signature

or similar. - Evad37 [talk] 03:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Unsure if necessary - couldn't you just add something to said template? (Just lurking WP:BOTREQ to see what sort of things people want bots to do). E. Lee (talk) 04:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
@Elee: Which template are you talking about? And how does adding something to a template fix a wrongly applied protection level? - Evad37 [talk] 05:50, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
For an example of the problem and proposed solution (letting admins know that they may have made a mistake so they can fix it), see User talk:Ponyo#Maithali protection level, or User talk:Black Kite#Farshad Fotouhi‎ protection level - Evad37 [talk] 05:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
There are padlock templates added to protected pages. These "sense" if they are incompatible with the protection actually used, I believe, and put the page in a category to be fixed.
Arguably there is something that could be done along these lines.
A list of template protected articles can be found here (currently empty). A bot could check this, and act upon it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC).


Articles with {{Infobox Journal}} seek bot to ensure redirects are in place[edit]

As discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Academic_Journals#Bot_task?, there are several fairly standard redirects needed to each article in this project using that infobox. The box has parameters for the journal title and it's ISO abbreviation. Citations routinely vary the capitalization, abbreviations, and punctuation of these abbreviations, creating a need for redirects from each common variation to the actual article title (usually the same as the journal title, in sentence case). Is there a bot that might be suited to the task? LeadSongDog come howl! 01:23, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I've obtained the ISO 4 vocabulary to convert, e.g., "European Physical Journal" to "Eur. Phys. J."; it's a spreadsheet-format version of the PDF available at issn.org. Could you bot-wizards please tell us if such a conversion would be simply too complicated? Thanks! Fgnievinski (talk) 02:30, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Maybe an easier and useful thing to do instead would be to start from Infobox journal's title field (e.g., "European Physical Journal") and its manually-entered abbreviation field ("Eur. Phys. J."), and create the desired redirects: e.g., "European physical journal", "Eur. Phys. J.", "Eur Phys J", "eur phys j", "E. P. J.", "E.P.J.", "E P J", "EPJ". Fgnievinski (talk) 02:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Replacement of Template:Infobox Country World Championships in Athletics[edit]

Hello. Could I hire a bot to substitute all transclusions of {{Infobox Country World Championships in Athletics}}, per the outcome of this TfD? Alakzi (talk) 13:12, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Same with {{Infobox China station}} and {{Infobox Japan station}}, but using the sandbox version. Alakzi (talk) 17:34, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
{{Infobox Country World Championships in Athletics}} done - thanks Plastikspork. Alakzi (talk) 16:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
@Alakzi: is this still pending or done? Mdann52 (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
China and Japan station are pending. Alakzi (talk) 18:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I'm working on eliminating the backlog of requests, one request at a time. Unless, someone else takes this one, I will hopefully get to it soon.—cyberpowerChat:Online 00:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Updating US Census Estimates[edit]

Is there a bot available that could add the current United States Census Bureau population estimates (and unfortunately I wouldn't trust OCR for a lot of the older Census files because I often have to look carefully/zoom myself to tell 3 from 8 or 6 from 0)? It should be a fairly straightforward task. The Census updates can be found at census.gov/popest. I am in the process of adding data (mostly, I am using an AWK script on my computer to format data from a spreadsheet for copy/paste into Wikipedia) manually, and for that, I'm okay, since it gives me a chance to do spot edits on those pages as well and allows me to try to make sure that adding the USCensusPop widget doesn't completely screw up formatting of the page, but it's not something I could do every year.

Specifically, it could check to see if a page for a place has a Template:USCensusPop, and then if so, just update. Very simple. I'd write it myself, but it would be nicer if somebody either has code I can reuse or if they could do it all themselves. Thanks. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 23:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Convert (certain) external links to HTTPS[edit]

Pictogram voting wait.svg Doing... for reasons and explained here (among others) internet traffic should be encrypted. Recently, Wikimedia decided to use HTTPS by default. Which begs the question why we not also convert external links to HTTPS (wherever this is an option). For instance, one of the most-linked websites on Wikipedia, the Internet Archive, actually encourages HTTPS inbound links ever since 2013, yet most of the external links on Wikipedia to them still use insecure HTTP. Also, all Google services offer HTTPS access, and Google encourages one to use it, but there are still thousands of links to Google Books, Google News, and YouTube with HTTP. Long story short, what I am asking for is a simple search-and-replace bot, to convert:

http://[wayback.|web.|*]archive.org/https://[wayback.|web.|*]archive.org/
http://[news.|books.|*]google[.com|.co.uk|.ca|...]/https://[news.|books.|*]google[.com|.co.uk|.ca|...]/
youtube ... you get the idea.

Is it possible to have this done by a bot? --bender235 (talk) 17:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

bender235 does the htto to https econversion for extenal link has consensus? I recall some reactions in the past but I can't find any link to some discussion about it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
We had a discussion on VPP that concluded that we should use protocol-relative links to whichever site supports both HTTP and HTTPS equally. However, since Wikipedia moved to HTTPS by default permanently, protocol relative links make little sense. --bender235 (talk) 18:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
JFYI: this is why we do this: “Since the Internet Archive site uses HTTPS by default for its connections, Russian ISPs are unable identify which page is being requested by their users, and thus whether it is the one subject to the new ban.” ISPs can no longer interfere with a site's traffic. All they can do is block the entire domain, which sooner or later will cause public protest. --bender235 (talk) 05:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I think for youtube is better to convert to {{Youtube}}? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, raw Youtube links should be converted to {{Youtube}}, but those inside {{cite web}} or similar templates should just be converted to https. --bender235 (talk) 18:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
@Bender235: In early 2014 we discussed using protocol-relative links instead. GoingBatty (talk) 18:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
It appears that {{Google books}} uses protocol-relative links while {{YouTube}} and {{Wayback}} use https. GoingBatty (talk) 18:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I pointed out to Bender235 that over and above altering links from "http:" to "https:" that changing from a country specific address (such as co.nz) to .com may deny access to some people, as sometimes there appears to be a restriction in the access to text in one country but not another. Bender235 wants proof of this, but as I have not kept records of it and I make a lot of edits, I will provide one when I come across it, but in the mean time I see no need to change the country domain along with the connection type.

It has been pointed out that this sort of edit can easily mask vandalism (see User talk:Bender235#https), so as it is not a change that needs expediting, that must be weighed in whether this is a suitable candidate for automation (rather than for example adding to to a process like AWB to be done when other more specific changes are made). See also User talk:Bender235#AWB, apparently Bender235's AWB access was removed on by user:Materialscientist on 2 July 2015 (it has not been restored. When discussing this on Bender235's talk page it was suggested by Bender235 that the discussion Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 138#HTTPS by default was relevant to this and so should probably be included in this conversation.

-- PBS (talk) 09:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Removal of {{Start date}} from {{Singles}} template[edit]

It has become common practice in album articles to use {{Start date}} in the {{Singles}} add-on to {{Infobox album}}. Per Template:Start date/doc: "This purpose of the {{start date}} template is to return the date (or date-time) that an event or entity started or was created. It also includes duplicate, machine-readable date (or date-time) in the ISO date format (which is hidden by CSS), for use inside other templates (or table rows) which emit microformats. It should only be used once in each such template and should not be used outside such templates." i.e. {{Start date}} should only be used in album articles for the album release date, not single release dates. It would be nice to have a bot to clean this up, as this error is currently in who knows how many articles. Chase (talk | contributions) 16:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

DOI bot[edit]

Given a reference in the forms

"<ref>doi:10.[four digits]/*</ref>" "<ref>http://www.doi.org/10.[four digits]/*</ref>" or "<ref>www.doi.org/10.[four digits]/*</ref>",

the bot should insert the full reference into the article page and into Wikidata. It might be extended to add data to existing references that are, say, missing the date of publication.

See:

HLHJ (talk) 12:28, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

See User talk:Citation bot#Replacement citation bot? and the immediately preceding section. --Izno (talk) 13:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
That discussion does not appear to be leading to getting a bot to start working on the Cite Doi templates. Abductive (reasoning) 19:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
The bot in question preempts the need for doing so (were it turned on). Inserting {{cite journal|doi=value}} and then the bot fills in the other data is what the bot does (or did with {{cite doi}}). --Izno (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
As for Wikidata, I'm not sure of your intentions, so you will need to clarify. Regardless, that bot would need to be approved at Wikidata, not here. --Izno (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
That sounds good, and would do half my request. I hope it's back soon.
Apologies for the lack of clarity. Wikidata has a data format for journal sources, but there is currently no way to create items from citation templates. See this discussion. There are tools for doing it from a DOI; see the tools section here. It seemed to me that co-ordination between bots working on both might be helpful at avoiding duplicates, etc., but I take your point that separate bots might be easier. HLHJ (talk) 14:40, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
There is consensus at WPMED to replace cite DOI with cite journal on medical articles. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:35, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── For the record, we have an user tool that can be used to derive {{Cite journal}} from DOIs. Having a bot that can autoexpand DOIs to full citations would be useful. Maybe one could reuse the {{Cite doi}} template for it; the bot would convert it to a {{Cite journal}}. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Redirects to academic journals may lack WPJournals template (class=redirect) in their talk pages[edit]

Would it be possible to check, for each page with Template:WikiProject Academic Journals in its talk page, if its redirects also have Template:WikiProject Academic Journals (class=redirect) in their respective talk pages? Thanks! Fgnievinski (talk) 20:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Symbol wtf vote.svg Idea is not well explainedcyberpowerChat:Online 20:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
@C678: sorry, here's an example: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America has several redirects [2], some of which are correctly tagged with {{WPJournals|class=redirect}} in their respective talk pages (e.g, Talk:PNAS) others that are either blank or as a redirect to the target's talk page (e.g., Talk:Proc Nat Acad Sci). fgnievinski (talk) 22:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

PingBot[edit]

The bot would monitor recent changes and look for people adding username mentions to existing posts but not not changing the timestamp. It would then ping the new mention user, giving them a diff of where their username was added in an ineffective ping attempt. Opt-out capable for both the mentioner and the mentioned. –xenotalk 10:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It's a great idea, and would be better if I could make use of echo to the message delivery. Since I can't the fact that mentioning users with a bot opens up to mass spamming. So I'm going to have to say that this Symbol merge vote.svg Needs wider discussion.—cyberpowerChat:Online 20:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

the end of .an[edit]

On 31 July (that's next Friday!) the top level domain .an (used for the Netherlands Antilles, until their dissolution in 2010) will be terminated, which will result in a significant number of dead links. Most (but not all) domain owners moved to the corresponding Curacao domain (.cw), while keeping the .an page in tact. I'd like a bot to:

  • convert all .an links to .cw
  • if possible, check if these .cw domains give a result (any result) and if not: make a list for manual checking....
  • if possible, check if the link on the .an is the exact copy of the link to the .cw site (and make a list of non-conforming links)

Would that be doable or am I making a very complicated request? L.tak (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

@L.tak: There are 157 (well 156, I fixed one) links listed here. Easy enough to fix the project ones manually? (note there are many dead links which will need an archival copy search.)
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC).
Symbol question.svg Question: I think this can be done manually. Is this still needed? Cyberbot II can also link dead sources to archives when tagged dead.—cyberpowerChat:Online 20:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Using Infobox journal's language field to populate Category:Academic journals by language sub-categories[edit]

Could a bot please inspect values entered in field "language" of Infobox journal? Then possibly populate individual sub-categories of Category:Academic journals by language (as per WP:JWG). Thanks! Fgnievinski (talk) 02:14, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Fgnievinski: do you mean check they are valid, or add individual articles about journals to the category? Mdann52 (talk) 16:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@Mdann52: the latter, please; thanks for looking into this. fgnievinski (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@Fgnievinski: in that case, this is beyond my capability, I will leave this for someone else to take a look at. Mdann52 (talk) 19:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@Mdann52: a listing of inconsistencies between category membership and infobox language field would be a great start; then one could manually fix as appropriate. fgnievinski (talk) 19:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Userboxes[edit]

Any help is appreciated with diffusing Category:Userboxes, which was tagged as a container cat, possibly with operations such as considering moving pages in the 'User' namespace to the Category:Userbox user templates subcategory. --Slivicon (talk) 09:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't see why Category:Userboxes was tagged as a container cat to begin with. Barring any reasoning that still applies, the best option is to simply remove the container tag. Avicennasis @ 23:58, 24 Av 5775 / 23:58, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
@Avicennasis: I've removed the container with this edit and linked to here in the edit summary. If it is reverted, hopefully the editor will explain here. Slivicon (talk) 15:01, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Container aside, though, I think it would still be helpful for maintenance to diffuse the category where possible, if there are ways bots could help. Slivicon (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Question: Diffuse it in what way?—cyberpowerChat:Online 20:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Container category diffusion[edit]

Category:Container categories, by the current definition of the notice box, only allow subcategories, no other pages. If possible, I think it would help the maintenance process if a bot could check container categories for pages, and if found, check if they are already categorized in a subcategory of the container category being checked. If they are, remove them from the container category, referencing the subcategory and WP:SUBCAT in the edit summary. --Slivicon (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Music bot[edit]

Hello. I would like to make a request now for a "Music bot", to help expand the list at Wikipedia:Sound/list. This list is very helpful for finding music at Wikimedia Commons for insertion into Wikipedia articles. This bot would:

  • Look at Wikipedia:Sound/list/A and see all the ogg, flac, and midi files listed there.
  • Then, the bot would look at the list of notable composers at List of composers by name and observe which composers have surnames that begin with the letter "A".
  • Then, the bot would go to Commons:Category:Composers and look inside (recursively) all of the subcats named exactly like those names having surnames beginning with the letter "A".
  • Finally, the bot will make a list of ogg, flac, and midi files that are NOT already listed within Wikipedia:Sound/list/A, but that ARE inside those subcats at Commons.

Of course, the bot could perform this task for any letter of the alphabet other than "A", or even for a combination of letters like "Ba" (as in Bach). This bot would be very useful for identifying music that is sitting around at Commons needing to be inserted into Wikipedia articles. Thanks very much. Incidentally, please note that I have already done this tedious task for the letter "A" by hand, but the rest of the alphabet needs to be done too, and AWB is not enough to do the job.Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I posted this request a couple weeks ago, and just want to reiterate that I'm still very interested in it. Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Expand Japanese[edit]

It'd be nice if a bot automatically moved Template:Expand Japanese tags incorrectly placed on the talk page to the article page. I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response – czar 06:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

One-time error checking help[edit]

I've created new maps for almost every city, village, and township in Ohio, and I'm about halfway done with adding them to their articles. This normally works fine, but I periodically make errors, and it would help if a bot could check all 2200 of these pages for errors. In some cases, I've added the map of one place to the article about a different one; for example, here I copy/pasted one article's map into another article. In other cases, I simply haven't switched all the elements of the description correctly; for example, here I used the correct map, but I made a mistake in the caption, since the city's in Trumbull County, not Mahoning County as suggested by the description.

All maps follow a rigid naming convention: Map of COUNTYNAME County Ohio Highlighting PLACE TYPE.png. "Place" is simply the community or township name, and "Type" is City, Village, or Township (note the capital letter). Likewise, all captions follow the same convention: Location of PLACE in COUNTYNAME County, although "Township" is part of the PLACE section for townships (see the caption for Beaver Township, Mahoning County, Ohio). Given this convention, I expect that the bot can handle the situation easily. I'm imagining the following (collapsed so this request doesn't appear so massive):

Nyttend (talk) 18:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Ballet[edit]

Per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, templates should only be transcluded onto articles which are linked from the template. Currently {{Ballet}} is transcluded on 1400+ articles. Please could a bot remove from all other articles. We had a similar situation recently with #Template:Aviation lists. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:48, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting wait.svg Doing... Simple to do with AWB, and not something that I think needs specific consensus given that it's a minor change and existing guidelines support it. As soon as my existing BRFA is approved, I'll file one for this. ~ RobTalk 10:50, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Symbol wait.svg BRFA filed ~ RobTalk 13:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Jain Agamas[edit]

A bot to replace jain texts and jain Scriptures with Jain Agamas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capankajsmilyo (talkcontribs) 06:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Symbol unrelated.svg Impossible. This task sounds infeasible.—cyberpowerChat:Online 16:57, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Infobox[edit]

A bot to add infobox on pages with biography tag and vice versa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capankajsmilyo (talkcontribs) 06:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Symbol unrelated.svg Impossible It is impossible to have a bot select the appropriate infobox for all articles and populate it with the correct data. This is a task that needs human input and is far too complex for a bot. ~ RobTalk 16:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup of "naked" Google Books?[edit]

Right now there are approximately 2500 pages with "naked" google books entries (defined as containing the string >http://books.google.com/ ). I asked on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser whether there was any way to combine AWB and the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books at http://reftag.appspot.com/ to help on cleaning these up, and got a response to ask here. Would this be appropriate for a Bot? It *may* also be appropriate to include <ref>[http://books.google.com/... text]</ref> cleanup as well, but that would be a later request if the first makes sense.Naraht (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It would have to distinguish between reference and non-reference links, at any rate. IMO, changing the links in this way would be a net improvement of the wiki, at any rate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:20, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
OP:Absolutely. And given the small (but not non-existant) crossover between those users who would use named refs and those who would put a "naked" google book in a ref, I would be *quite* happy to limit this at the start to something like regexp <ref>http://books.google.com/[^ <]</ref> Naraht (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
@Naraht: If no one else pops up in the meantime, I'll take this on once my current BRFA is concluded, and I have sufficient time to sort this all out. Mdann52 (talk) 08:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

If you're going down this line (and it sounds worthwhile) I strongly recommend you set the bot to run slowly, so you give people a chance to notice and then feed back on any errors before they're reproduced on multiple pages that may not be actively Watchlisted. --Dweller (talk) 08:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@Naraht: Creating a appropriate cite tag requires human intelligence and eyeballs to correct mistakes. This is a big no-no for Bots. I see a case for a bot (or report) that lists all pages that have at least one naked books reference and allow people to work the report/backlog by sorting the cite tag out. Hasteur (talk) 12:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Just to note that if I do it, it will be a manual (or at best supervised) run, and won't be ongoing. If you want one that runs constantly, I'm not the person to write that. Mdann52 (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Category Bot[edit]

A bot that removes super category from articles. I mean that article has a category a and b. Category b is a subcategory of a. Then it should remove a from categories of that article. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 13:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol merge vote.svg Needs wider discussion. Mass decategorization of articles will need consensus.—cyberpowerChat:Limited Access 15:10, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The bot shouldn't remove category a if category a contains {{All included}}, such as Category:American films. GoingBatty (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • This bot is for article pages whereas {{All included}} is only for category pages. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 18:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I think you misunderstand. If {{All included}} is located on a category's page, the category should not be removed from an article even if the article belongs to a subcategory. A bot designed to do this would have to check each category it removes to verify the category doesn't have {{All included}} on it. ~ RobTalk 19:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
        • I'm not able to get it. Does all include add the category on article or article in category? If first thing is valid than does it appear on the article edit page? Cos this bot will only edit the article content available on edit page. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
          • {{All included}} is for information and doesn't add any categories by itself. There are cases where we do want an article to appear in a category even if it also appears in one or more of its subcategories. {{All included}} is used to document some of these cases. For example, Category:Bridges in New York City contains {{allincluded|bridges in New York City|bridges}} which produces: This means that it's OK for 145th Street Bridge to be in both Category:Bridges in New York City and it's subcategory Category:Bridges in Manhattan. See more at Wikipedia:Categorization#Non-diffusing subcategories, and see Wikipedia:Categorization#Eponymous categories for another situation where we want an article to appear in both a category and subcategory. The suggested bot run would make a huge number of category removals against guidelines, and I don't think it's realistic to code a bot to determine when to remove these categories. At best, a bot could produce a long list for human review, but in order to be useful the bot would need to check several things to reduce the number of false positives. It may be difficult to make the bot clever enough for editors to find it worth the time to review the produced list. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
            • It would be feasible to get a list of all categories that transclude {{All included}} and use that as a blacklist of categories not to remove. Alternatively, a continuous run bot could have a whitelist of categories that should not be present if an article is in a subcategory, which editors could add to. I'm just pointing out that there are ways to do this, but this discussion shouldn't continue further here. If someone wishes to pursue this bot, it needs a discussion at the village pump, most likely. ~ RobTalk 22:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Update the lists at WikiProject Fix common mistakes[edit]

We really need a bot that updates the lists at Wikipedia:WikiProject Fix common mistakes#Log. Right now they are being done manually, which is a very tedious process. Some of the entries have not been updated since November of 2014 and there are a bunch of errors that we haven't added because we can't keep up with the ones we list now.

Note: This was brought up before at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 63#Bot to updated lists at WikiProject Fix common mistakes, where it was marked as resolved and archived, despite the fact that we are still doing this by hand. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)