Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 7

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was

Approved.

FrescoBot 7[edit]

Operator: Basilicofresco (talk · contribs)

Automatic or Manually assisted: auto

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available:

Function overview: Additional fixes for the task Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 2

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#Wikilink simplification

Edit period(s): montly or less

Estimated number of pages affected: 35k?

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y

Function details: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 2 already fixes a wide range of wikilink syntax problems and some redundancies. I plan to extend it a bit with:

Simplification of selected piped wikilinks in the "shortened sort-of-piped link". This substitution has to improve the intuitiveness and readability of the wikitext, for this reason I will be pretty conservative and I will convert only few popular suffixes:
- suffix "s", [[architect|architects]] --> [[architect]]s
- suffix "es", [[virus|viruses]] --> [[virus]]es
- suffix "n", [[Croatia|Croatian]]n --> [[Croatia]]n
- suffix "ns", [[Sardinia|Sardinians]] --> [[Sardinia]]ns
- suffix "an", [[Europe|European]] --> [[Europe]]an
- suffix "ian", [[Egypt|Egyptian]] --> [[Egypt]]ian
- suffix "ic", [[logarithm|logarithmic]] --> [[logarithm]]ic
- suffix "ist", [[steel guitar|steel guitarist]] --> [[steel guitar]]ist
- suffix "ern", [[Middle East|Middle Eastern]] --> [[Middle East]]ern
- In this way I will avoid to create not-so-intuitive shortcuts, eg:
  - I will not convert [[Mi-171|Mi-171Sh]] --> [[Mi-171]]Sh
  - I will not convert [[Rødby|Rødbyhavn]] --> [[Rødby]]havn
  - I will not convert [[comp|compositions]] --> [[comp]]ositions
  - I will not convert [[Windows 2.0|Windows 2.03]] --> [[Windows 2.0]]3
  - I will not convert [[Siddha|Siddhar]] --> [[Siddha]]r
Title linked in text (Check Wikipedia #48). Wikilinks to the current page will be de-linked (example).
- [[pagename]] --> pagename
- [[pagename|label]] --> label
Additional syntax fixes:
- [[Brahin (meteorite|Brahin]] --> [[Brahin (meteorite)|Brahin]] = Brahin --> Brahin

Please note, these fixes will be added to this collection.

Discussion[edit]

Comments? Is there any exception for #2? Are there other link fixes that I should fix? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 06:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Magioladit asked my help for #1 because FrescoBot is faster than AWB bots. After catching up with the backlong he doesn't expect many links created per week. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 10:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For additional syntax fixes, you can add [[Brahin (meteorite_|Brahin]] --> [[Brahin (meteorite)|Brahin]] since that is a plausible typo. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, good idea. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 20:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see little benefit in part 1; those are minor problems that hardly merit their own bot looking after them. They could be integrated into AWB's general fixes, though (perhaps they already are). Ucucha 20:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, take a look at Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#Wikilink simplification. The main reason for this request is that AWB is not fast enought to reduce the whole number of redundant links. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 21:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this urgent? Ucucha 21:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not actually urgent, but speed matters. Here are some numbers:

within enwiki-20100730 file dump there were 25142 articles in need of #1 replacement;
within enwiki-20100916 file dump there are 24156 articles in need of #1 replacement.

It means -4% in about 6 weeks. How many years will take to AWB users to reduce the number of these articles by 50%? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 16:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And in that time SmackBot was AWBing about 3-600 articles a day, with Smack sleeping I would bet the number is actually going up. Rich Farmbrough, 16:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

So what? If this were a major problem, I could see your point, but I don't see how it is one. Ucucha 17:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that this must be a major problem just to warrant a bot operation. There are many small tedious fixes that can be performed as well. Besides, these additions build up with previous tasks and eventually we may have a bot that does a long list of corrections. I have nothing against small steps when they lead to overall improvement. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This task is just an enhancement of what FrescoBot is already doing. [[foo|foo]] is already fixed by FrescoBot and it's an approved task. I agree that FrescoBot could do much other tasks at the same time but at some point we have to find a balance of what is "too much" and what is "too few". -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For me code cleanup is an important matter. Many other errors (unbalanced brackets, etc.) are caused because sometimes wikicode isn't easy to check with naked eye. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AWB does already do some or most of it. If FrescoBot was going to do clean up run specifically on the non-broken but improvable links, then I would say use Awb with genfixes, tagging and unicodifying. For broken tags, approval for a trial run is a no-brainer. Rich Farmbrough, 16:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, AWB does most of it. The good thing with FrescoBot is that is faster and it already has approval to do most of the job already. I thought it would be a speedy approval but it takes some time. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}}

So if there are no objections we can go for a non-BAG close? :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. MBisanz ^talk 23:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.