Revision as of 21:48, 20 December 2012 editWerieth (talk | contribs)54,678 edits →{{tl|Rayment}}: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:50, 21 December 2012 edit undoGoingBatty (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers642,857 edits →To change the order of languages in every page of Misplaced Pages: RfC closed with no consensus. AWB comment.Next edit → | ||
Line 222: | Line 222: | ||
:<s>Doesn't this already happen by default? Look at the left of ]. ] (]) 11:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)</s> Apparently on some pages simple is on top, others it isn't. This should be just a simple configuration change to pywikibot and existing bots will update when necessary. ] (]) 11:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC) | :<s>Doesn't this already happen by default? Look at the left of ]. ] (]) 11:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)</s> Apparently on some pages simple is on top, others it isn't. This should be just a simple configuration change to pywikibot and existing bots will update when necessary. ] (]) 11:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
::With the rollout of Wikidata next year this could complicate things. It currently hosts all interwikilinks in alphabetical order, and in 2013 interwiki links at the bottom of articles will be gradually be replaced with the ones in the Wikidata central repository. In the meantime, AWB should probably be notified that Simple English articles should be moved to the top of the list (unless it already does this, I'm not sure!), as it will be a while before every article is covered by Wikidata anyway. ] ] 12:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC) | ::With the rollout of Wikidata next year this could complicate things. It currently hosts all interwikilinks in alphabetical order, and in 2013 interwiki links at the bottom of articles will be gradually be replaced with the ones in the Wikidata central repository. In the meantime, AWB should probably be notified that Simple English articles should be moved to the top of the list (unless it already does this, I'm not sure!), as it will be a while before every article is covered by Wikidata anyway. ] ] 12:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::Looks like the RfC was closed with no consensus. If there was a consensus to change, however, ] would have been the page to modify so Simple would be moved to the top (or not moved from the top). ] (]) 02:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
This should '''not''' be done by bot. It should be done by filing a request in the Mediawiki Bugzilla to have Mediawiki automatically put Simple Misplaced Pages at the top for us when each page is rendered. Otherwise, there will be a needless permanent maintenance issue to have to keep resorting the language links. — Carl <small>(] · ])</small> 13:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC) | This should '''not''' be done by bot. It should be done by filing a request in the Mediawiki Bugzilla to have Mediawiki automatically put Simple Misplaced Pages at the top for us when each page is rendered. Otherwise, there will be a needless permanent maintenance issue to have to keep resorting the language links. — Carl <small>(] · ])</small> 13:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:50, 21 December 2012
Commonly Requested Bots |
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 Misplaced Pages 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:USURPREQ, for reporting a domain be usurped eg.
|url-status=usurped
- 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 Misplaced Pages: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
Legend |
---|
|
|
|
|
|
Manual settings |
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first. |
Bot-related archives |
---|
Noticeboard1, 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, 30 Pre-2007 archived under Bots (talk) |
Bot requests1, 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, 87 |
Bot requests (talk)1, 2 Newer discussions at WP:BOTN since April 2021 |
BRFAOld 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 |
Meteorites
Greetings.
Looking for a bot owner to help classify articles in Category:Meteorites and its sub-categories.
I've gone into a lot of detail below for my own peace of mind; most of this will be self evident to the experienced.
The task...
- For every article in the Category:Meteorites category tree:
- If its talk page does not contain {{WikiProject Geology}} add this with parameters "|class=|importance=|attention=|needs-infobox=".
- Do not touch "class=" if it is already set; otherwise set it to "Stub" if there is a stub tag on the article (in which case also set "|auto=Yes") or else leave "class=" blank.
- If the article contains "{{Infobox" set "needs-infobox=" to "No" otherwise set it to "Yes".
- If the article is a stub (ie stub tag on article or "class=Stub" on talk page) ensure that {{Meteoroid-stub}} is in the article and if it isn't then add it.
- If the talk page includes {{WikiProject Astronomy}} add its name to a list of articles for future consideration.
- Ensure that every image displayed in the article is included in Category:Meteorite files.
- Deleted task
- If its talk page does not contain {{WikiProject Geology}} add this with parameters "|class=|importance=|attention=|needs-infobox=".
- For every Category in the Category:Meteorites category tree:
- If its talk page does not contain {{WikiProject Geology}} add it with parameters "|class=".
- Do not touch "class=" if it is already set; otherwise set it to "Cat".
- If its talk page does not contain {{WikiProject Geology}} add it with parameters "|class=".
- Sub-categories of Category:Meteorites by find location take the form "Category:Meteorites found in <Country>". For each article in any of these except the one exception (Category:Meteorites found on bodies other than Earth):
- Check if {{WikiProject <Country>}} exists and if so that it is on the article's talk page. If not then add it using the usual rules for setting "|Class=Stub" and "|auto=Yes".
Having made many edits to these articles over the past few days with virtualy no response I suspect no one is interested in discussing this uncontroversial request. None the less I've added pointers to it (or am about to) at Category talk:Meteorites and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Geology. -Arb. (talk) 00:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Pointer also at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Astronomy for good measure. -Arb. (talk) 00:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a good idea to mix image and articles in a category, when you can have a separate image category instead. Category:Meteorite files should hold the media files. That way they can be properly placed into the media files category tree. -- 70.24.250.110 (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good point. Requirement above edited accordingly. Will re-categorise the few existing files manually. -Arb. (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Added task 3. -Arb. (talk) 12:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Meteorites has become the December collaboration of the month at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Geology#Collaboration of the month so it would be good if this request was dealt with soon. Many thanks. -Arb. (talk) 12:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- For (2), what if the category doesn't have a talk page? Should one be created with this template in it? — Wolfgang42 (talk) 20:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
- Coding... — Wolfgang42 (talk) 01:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- That's great. Any idea how long it will take you? -Arb. (talk) 12:28, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- I already have it about 50% done; I expect by next week it'll be ready. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 23:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
That's good news.
As you are still coding would you kindly accommodate a small requirement creep to step 1.1 (per Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Geology/Meteorites):
- When adding {{WikiProject Geology}}, include before the closing "}}" the string "|meteorites=Yes|meteorites-importance="
- If {{WikiProject Geology}} is already present then check if it contains "|meteorites=Yes|meteorites-importance=" and if not add it. Note that there might exist instances like "|meteorites=|meteorites-importance=" or "|meteorites=Yes|meteorites-importance=Low" and all possible permutations. If you come across one of these ensure "|meteorites=Yes" and leave "|meteorites-importance=<any value>" untouched.
Many thanks. -Arb. (talk) 01:32, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
{{Coord missing}} has several parameters for categorization. Would meteorites be considered astronomical objects to be placed in Category:Astronomical objects articles needing coordinates even if they've landed? — Wolfgang42 (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting question. My gut feeling is no; landed meteorites seem to be more the province of Geologists than Astronomers (though I am neither). If we really want to do that job properly it would be best achieved via a small update to {{Infobox meteorite}} and a new category Misplaced Pages infobox meteorite articles without coordinates similar to Category:Misplaced Pages infobox amusement park articles without coordinates. No bot action required. -Arb. (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Should I perhaps create a new Category:Meteorites articles needing coordinates so we can use {{coord missing|country|Meteorites}}? — Wolfgang42 (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Coords missing should be driven from the infobox. That's the most user friendly way to do the job in that once coords are added to the box the "no coords" category just goes away without the editor having to remember to delete coords missing. Just because you have a hammer (bot) does not make every problem a nail. Would much rather you focused on the requirements above. Thanks. -Arb. (talk) 01:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- So I should ignore task 1.5 above and not include {{coords missing}}? — Wolfgang42 (talk) 02:10, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- That does indeed seem to be the case. Task 1.5 was a mistake and, worse, I'd forgotten it was there. Humble apologies for wasting your time; feel free to call me any names you like under your breath. The rest are still anxiously awaited though. -Arb. (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- I understand completely. Leaving your mental state in the edit summary was extremely helpful—it gave me an idea of what was going through your head.
- I'm almost done; I just need to make sure that the code I've written actually works and then I'll submit the BRFA. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- That does indeed seem to be the case. Task 1.5 was a mistake and, worse, I'd forgotten it was there. Humble apologies for wasting your time; feel free to call me any names you like under your breath. The rest are still anxiously awaited though. -Arb. (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Requirement creep 2 if it's not too late:
- In requirement creep 1 above the strings should all be singular not plural ie "|meteorite=" and "|meteorite-importance="
- Task 1.1.2 should read: If the article contains "{{Infobox" or "{{MarsGeo" or "{{chembox", remove the "needs-infobox=" parameter (whatever it is set to) otherwise set it to "Yes".
By way of explanation, this is the first task force I've worked the detail for; I'm learning plenty as we go along. Many thanks for your understanding. -Arb. (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Should images on Commons also be tagged with Category:Meteorite files? — Wolfgang42 (talk) 00:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- Another issue with tagging images with Category:Meteorite files: The bot will also tag images such as File:Folder Hexagonal Icon.svg, File:Question book-new.svg and File:Commons-logo.svg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfgang42 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good catch there Wolfgang42. Commons images should not be tagged, Commons has a completely different category system.
- The background to this task is that there are a few Misplaced Pages hosted meteorite images in the target category; we want to ensure that all such Misplaced Pages hosted images that are used on any of the articles are so tagged. This would (clearly) not include the three you mention nor any others like them. If you can figure out a way to distinguish those from "ours" then great, otherwise we'll have to do this task manually.
- The only thing the three seem to have in common is that they are all in Category:Protected images... -Arb. (talk) 13:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- Overnight additional thoughts. Don't place these into a category but instead build a list and I'll use AWB to go through them manually; there won't be many it's just locating them that's time consuming. Filter out commons files and any others that are easy per discussion just above. -Arb. (talk) 11:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- BRFA filed I can filter out commons files, but trying to find the other ones without false negatives may be difficult. I'll look into it shortly. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 00:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Overnight additional thoughts. Don't place these into a category but instead build a list and I'll use AWB to go through them manually; there won't be many it's just locating them that's time consuming. Filter out commons files and any others that are easy per discussion just above. -Arb. (talk) 11:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Scottish Peaks (around 2,000 articles)
We have 8 list of Scottish Peaks on Wiki-cy which contain individual peaks: names and co-ordinates. The other 7 lists can be found here. My request is for a map to be placed in the Infobox ("Mynydd2"). All that I require is for someone to just add these two lines as the last lines of the infobox:
| lledred = 56.454 | hydred = -3.991
replacing the XY, of course with the corresponding / correct co-ordinates. Then, the map appears.
Sounds easy! Is it? - Llywelyn2000 (talk) 00:09, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure where I'd be getting the correct coordinates, though. Hazard-SJ ✈ 04:17, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Lists of films by country by year
As a followup to the closed move discussion at Talk:List of Bengali films of 2012#Requested_move, a further 850 such pages should be renamed, as listed at User:BrownHairedGirl/Film lists for renaming. (Note that this is a followup to a bot request I made in October, where I was advised to open an RM discussion on the proposal.)
Please note that:
- the sample of 12 pages which I listed at the RM has already been moved, so the bot should skip those entries
- Some other pages may already have been moved, so a check will be needed first
- In some cases there proposed new title redirects to the current title, so the move will have to override the redirect.
If these are issues which a bot cannot handle, please notify me so that I can remove any such entries from the list before the bot starts work.
Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- Doing.... I'll have the bot create a list of the articles it can't move and have you (or another admin) move them by hand. Legoktm (talk) 21:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
- Done. Only Singaporean films of 2010 and Singaporean films of 2011 will need to be moved by hand. Legoktm (talk) 06:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! I have done the last 2 manually, so this job is now complete. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:36, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Copy Town Infoboxes to the corresponding Wiki-cy articles
I realise that I'm asking a lot (!) but I have faith that the Welsh Wiki have friends in high places! This request (my last for a while) is for the copying of existing English langauge Infoboxes (Infobox UK place) from en to cy. I suggest that we try one county first: Ceredigion. There's a list of settlements on this page. The corresponding Welsh article is here. We have done this manually for maybe 25 articles. Not all articles have these Infoboxes.
We have redirected the English wording to the corresponding Welsh language articles. All will be manually checked. A Welsh Barnstar will be issued on all 3 requests as thanks! - Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:18, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- I have two questions about that task:
- Why isn't the enwp not using any infobox template?
- Can you direct me to the actual list? (or do you mean that list?
- Regards, mabdul 14:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Mabdul!
- Ganeshk has also responded to this on my Talk Page here.
- Your questions:
- 1. enwp has created some boxes on some towns and villages, but remember that we are in Wales, and we're not high in their priority list.
- 2. My (above) link is to a county called Ceredigion. Infoboxes have been created on some towns and villages. I can't find a main cat list of all towns and villages in Wales, I would need to open every county in turn. Ganesh addresses this issue on my Talk Page. Maybe we should continue there? Many, many thanks for your response. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 04:22, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Doing... mabdul 19:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Vital articles
Could someone please make a bot that could update the vital article pages (e.g. WP:Vital articles and WP:Vital articles/Expanded/Physical sciences)? It would save us humans a lot of tedious work on updating these pages, and would make sure that they are always up to date. StringTheory11 (t • c) 19:55, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- Legobot was approved to do this (nearly 5 years ago!!!) but the code is in severe need of an overhaul. I won't have time until late December to get to it (at the earliest) so if someone else wants to pick it up, please do. Legoktm (talk) 06:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- Coding... Thine Antique Pen (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Duplicate coordinates issue
Additional error detection has been added to the {{Coord}} coordinates template. This has identified a problem with a number of articles where an infoboxe has the coordinates specified twice.
The solution is this: For pages in Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags, if there is an infobox where |latitude=
,|longitude=
and |coordinates=
all have content, delete (or perhaps comment out) the |coordinates=
, as in this example.
Can someone run a bot or AWB script to fix examples in the category, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- This seems relatively easy to do: I'll see what I can do. Getting things right with parsing nested (and possibly also occasionally malformed) templates is probably the most complex part of this. I'll add it to my queue of things to do. -- The Anome (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- Actually this may be better done by fixing the template to suppress the coordinates parmeter if lat and/or long are present. Rich Farmbrough, 17:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC).
- There are multiple infoboxes involved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Not actually a request, but unsure where to ask this
Does anyone know of any way of adding all Talk: pages that are in both Category:Misplaced Pages requested photographs of mountains andCategory:WikiProject British and Irish hills to a new category I created, Category:Misplaced Pages requested photographs of mountains in the British Isles. I was thinking AWB, but I am unsure on how to implement it and going through the whole category by hand is taking far too long. I appreciate that this could probably be done with a bot, but I would prefer to be able to do it manually as I anticipate doing lots of similar categorisation in this area. Thanks--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- Done all 5 pages ( 5+the one you already found) are tagged now. mabdul 22:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
- If you're asking how to find the list of pages in the future, you could use AWB's List comparer functionality or CatScan. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 02:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- Ok thank you very much :) --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- If you're asking how to find the list of pages in the future, you could use AWB's List comparer functionality or CatScan. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 02:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Six Degrees Of Misplaced Pages Bot
I would like a bot that creates related links from normal articles to orphaned articles, quickly and easily, with an auto shut-off if it gets haywire.
Superwikiwalrus (talk) 01:05, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's not easy to avoid invalid links. To do this to a reasonable level you need a POS-tagger and a semantic context analyser. These are the sorts of questions which I am interested in, but even if a level more reliable than human de-orphaning were achieved, there is still a vociferous contingent who would reject it, so this one isn't going to fly. Rich Farmbrough, 15:01, 16 December 2012 (UTC).
- Instead of a bot creating links, how about a database report instead which humans could review and make the appropriate links manually? GoingBatty (talk) 15:22, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Listas parameter
Could a bot be created (or does one exist) that could go into an article, copy the **NAME** from {{DEFAULTSORT:**NAME**}}, then go to the article's talk page and paste it with "|listas=**NAME**" in the WikiProject Biography template? This could help to reduce the number of articles in Category:Biography articles without listas parameter. It wouldn't work for articles without a defaultsort, but many of the articles do have it above the categories. Del♉sion23 (talk) 19:26, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Coding... Hazard-SJ ✈ 02:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- It looks like User:ListasBot did this in the past, however it's operator, User:Mikaey, doesn't look very active. Legoktm (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- ISn't BGbot doing this? mabdul 19:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/BG19bot, maybe ask Bgwhite (talk · contribs) to improve his bot. mabdul 19:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- I do have a bot that fixes listas. The problem being is that there is no way for a bot to add the correct listas value for non-standard western names. Examples are Chinese, Burmese, Malaysian, Vietnamese names. The other problem deals with particles or prefixes. Sometimes Van or De are part of the sort value and other times they are not. All the messy details are at: WP:NAMESORT. You can't copy DEFAULTSORT into listas because of the high rate of errors DEFAULTSORT contains.
- A few of us did clear out the category about a year ago. A bot ran over the early summer to add WikiProject Biography banners to talk pages that were missing the banner. ~50,000 new articles were added to the category. I've slowly gotten the number down to ~19,000 by doing all the names starting with the letters A thru L. I've taken a break because I'm tired of doing listas and the letter M is next. The M's about killed me last time do to the vast number of Arabic names.
- If you would like to help. Grab a chunk of "weird names" and add the correct value for listas and DEFAULTSORT. Asian names are the easiest to start out on. Wrong values for DEFAULSORT on Asian names are either the name is in the wrong order or a comma is missing. I use two AWB windows when adding listas, one for the talk page and the other for the main page. Bgwhite (talk) 20:12, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- I completed my script, but haven't gone to request approval as a result of one of your points:
My bot was coded to do that as the primary method (with other fallback options). Do you have any possible suggestions of how to minimie errors from this method automatically?You can't copy DEFAULTSORT into listas because of the high rate of errors DEFAULTSORT contains.
- I completed my script, but haven't gone to request approval as a result of one of your points:
- In addition, I mentioned that my code offered fallback options. These options include the use of {{lifetime}} and {{persondata}} to get the value for
listas
. Do you think it would be okay if I got approval to just use these, is there's no easy way to overcome the DEFAULTSORT problem? Hazard-SJ ✈ 04:11, 16 December 2012 (UTC){{Lifetime}}
should always be substituted.- AWB does a pretty good job with DEFAUTLSORT, and if DEFAULTSORT is wrong then faulting the copy over to listas is shooting the messenger.
- Dealing with names that shouldn't be re-ordered is a problem but not one to stop progress. Moreover there are some fundamental usability questions which have been overlooked by those with, often new-found and often incomplete knowledge about these names. Some quick examples, Japanese names are often Westernised, meaning that they are already reversed, they then need to be re-reversed for sorting purposes. Icelandic names in Iceland are generally sorted by given name, matronynmic/patronymic however expecting a general reader to know whether to look for "Johan Magnusson" under J or M based on whether the person is technically an Icelandic citizen, actually has a family name, self identifies as Icelandic or whatever is patently absurd. This matter was raised a few years ago, and I'm not sure of the outcome of that debate.
- As BGwhite says a number of us have tackled this problem in the past, I certainly did thousands of these, and others (Rjwilmsi, Waacstats, Jim Cubb and Maglioladitis spring to mind, but I can't remember for sure) did in the low zillions. I would be willing to have another go at this work .
- Rich Farmbrough, 14:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC).
- In addition, I mentioned that my code offered fallback options. These options include the use of {{lifetime}} and {{persondata}} to get the value for
To change the order of languages in every page of Misplaced Pages
As per here, it appears that this proposal is likely to pass, pending the approval of a closing admin. To implement this, we shall need to move Simple Wiki to the top of the languages for every article on[REDACTED] (or atleast the most visited ones in the beginning). I think a bot shall be able to implement it best. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Doesn't this already happen by default? Look at the left of Main Page. Legoktm (talk) 11:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)Apparently on some pages simple is on top, others it isn't. This should be just a simple configuration change to pywikibot and existing bots will update when necessary. Legoktm (talk) 11:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)- With the rollout of Wikidata next year this could complicate things. It currently hosts all interwikilinks in alphabetical order, and in 2013 interwiki links at the bottom of articles will be gradually be replaced with the ones in the Wikidata central repository. In the meantime, AWB should probably be notified that Simple English articles should be moved to the top of the list (unless it already does this, I'm not sure!), as it will be a while before every article is covered by Wikidata anyway. Del♉sion23 (talk) 12:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like the RfC was closed with no consensus. If there was a consensus to change, however, Misplaced Pages:AutoWikiBrowser/IW would have been the page to modify so Simple would be moved to the top (or not moved from the top). GoingBatty (talk) 02:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- With the rollout of Wikidata next year this could complicate things. It currently hosts all interwikilinks in alphabetical order, and in 2013 interwiki links at the bottom of articles will be gradually be replaced with the ones in the Wikidata central repository. In the meantime, AWB should probably be notified that Simple English articles should be moved to the top of the list (unless it already does this, I'm not sure!), as it will be a while before every article is covered by Wikidata anyway. Del♉sion23 (talk) 12:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
This should not be done by bot. It should be done by filing a request in the Mediawiki Bugzilla to have Mediawiki automatically put Simple Misplaced Pages at the top for us when each page is rendered. Otherwise, there will be a needless permanent maintenance issue to have to keep resorting the language links. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Infobox Settlement to Infobox settlement (24914 articles)
The real template is Template:Infobox settlement and has 304251 transclusions according to the official counter.
Template:Infobox Settlement is a redirect to Template:Infobox settlement. The problem is that very likely all articles having Template:Infobox Settlement (the redirect) are not included in the counting, since they are given separately by the counter:
- 24914 at: http://toolserver.org/~jarry/templatecount/index.php?lang=en&name=Template%3AInfobox+Settlement
Task is:
- select all articles that include Template:Infobox Settlement
- replace Infobox Settlement with Infobox settlement.
NVanMinh (talk) 03:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- See WP:NOTBROKEN. Legoktm (talk) 03:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- But it ISBROKEN. NVanMinh (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, what is broken? Are the templates not displaying correctly? If it's just an external tool that isn't working perfectly, that's something to speak with the tool author about. Legoktm (talk) 04:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Counting is broken, and maybe other tools too. To my knowledge there is no tool to count Infobox Settlement AND Infobox settlement. And so, within in the project that cares about the template, it is not possibly to see with only one click on the "official transclusion counter" referenced from Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox settlement how many articles are transcluding Template:Infobox settlement. So, a little bot work, would help the editors a lot. NVanMinh (talk) 04:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- So if the counting is broken, we should fix that. And it's not an official tool, its just included there to help editors. The right solution here is to talk to Jarry1250 and ask him if he can modify his tool to count redirects. Having a bot modify 30k pages is not a "little" bot work. Legoktm (talk) 04:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No, it is not the right solution. Since such brokeness can occur again and again. Fix at the source and be done, don't hack around. There are many many other important things to do for tool programmers. NVanMinh (talk) 04:21, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- You're answer is exactly right. Fix the problem at the source. The tool. Renaming a whole bunch of templates transclusions because one tool is broken is just hacking around the problem. --Chris 04:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No, the source is here. And other tools may be broken too. I just found this one so far. The Wiki source puts extra burden on external developers. So fix at the wiki source. NVanMinh (talk) 04:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No. Redirects are a fundemental part of the wiki. Having a redirect to a template is not broken. Just think of how many template redirects already exist. The problem is in the tool.
- The burden of fixing this one bug in a tool is MUCH MUCH MUCH less than going through and removing every single template redirect. It is actually a pretty simple bug to fix. --Chris 04:51, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No. It's not a bug if the tool has the purpose of displaying what is included via the source directly. Some people may exactly want to see this. By hacking around, the functionality is changed. And tools that only work on the source of the articles in question, don't even see that Infobox whatever is a redirect to Infobox settlement. There are redirects with a purpose, but here there is none. The template is on 300 000+ pages, with all redirects maybe on 350 000. And on other articles it may be missing - i.e. "10%" of all WP articles are involved. Streamlining is helping a lot in management here. Fix once, and profit for all the years to come. NVanMinh (talk) 05:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No, the source is here. And other tools may be broken too. I just found this one so far. The Wiki source puts extra burden on external developers. So fix at the wiki source. NVanMinh (talk) 04:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- You're answer is exactly right. Fix the problem at the source. The tool. Renaming a whole bunch of templates transclusions because one tool is broken is just hacking around the problem. --Chris 04:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No, it is not the right solution. Since such brokeness can occur again and again. Fix at the source and be done, don't hack around. There are many many other important things to do for tool programmers. NVanMinh (talk) 04:21, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- So if the counting is broken, we should fix that. And it's not an official tool, its just included there to help editors. The right solution here is to talk to Jarry1250 and ask him if he can modify his tool to count redirects. Having a bot modify 30k pages is not a "little" bot work. Legoktm (talk) 04:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Counting is broken, and maybe other tools too. To my knowledge there is no tool to count Infobox Settlement AND Infobox settlement. And so, within in the project that cares about the template, it is not possibly to see with only one click on the "official transclusion counter" referenced from Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox settlement how many articles are transcluding Template:Infobox settlement. So, a little bot work, would help the editors a lot. NVanMinh (talk) 04:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, what is broken? Are the templates not displaying correctly? If it's just an external tool that isn't working perfectly, that's something to speak with the tool author about. Legoktm (talk) 04:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- But it ISBROKEN. NVanMinh (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
I now did 500 by hand. Left are 24414. So far, most of the affected articles are U.S. articles. One "bot" involved CapitalBot - great he converted from Infobox City to Infobox Settlement. Since the box is now at Infobox settlement it would be nice to have this changed. NVanMinh (talk) 06:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- What? Stop now.
You've been told its against current standing policyand now you're probably flooding the RC feed. If this were something that should even be done, it would take any bot operator a few minutes to get a bot to do it. There's a reason it isn't done. Legoktm (talk) 06:28, 18 December 2012 (UTC)- No, I have nowhere been told it is against current standing policy. I only have been told it is complicated for bot people. Now you tell me it would only take a few minutes to do it. I have not seen such unfriendly behavior. Maybe I should never have come to the bot request page. NVanMinh (talk) 06:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- You're right I misspoke. It's against current standing guidelines, which I linked to you in my first response. I never said it would be complicated for bots to do, I (and Chris) said it shouldn't be done, period. If an external tools isn't working the way you want, fix the tool. There is no need to edit 30 thousand wikipages to fix the case of one letter. Legoktm (talk) 06:43, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's not even in the guideline that you cited in the first response. And for complicatedness I was referring to your "Having a bot modify 30k pages is not a "little" bot work.". So if it is not little bot work, I do it by hand. Now you even want to stop me to do it by hand. So there is a problem and all you do is not only to not help but also to command me to not fix it myself. NVanMinh (talk) 06:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- You're right I misspoke. It's against current standing guidelines, which I linked to you in my first response. I never said it would be complicated for bots to do, I (and Chris) said it shouldn't be done, period. If an external tools isn't working the way you want, fix the tool. There is no need to edit 30 thousand wikipages to fix the case of one letter. Legoktm (talk) 06:43, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- No, I have nowhere been told it is against current standing policy. I only have been told it is complicated for bot people. Now you tell me it would only take a few minutes to do it. I have not seen such unfriendly behavior. Maybe I should never have come to the bot request page. NVanMinh (talk) 06:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Here is a fixed tool. You can choose whether or not to include redirects, and it will even warn you when you are viewing the transclusions for a template that is a redirect. There, problem solved. No need to make 30k edits. --Chris 06:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Chris, thanks a lot for this! It is not protecting from other problems, but at least there is now a possibility for counting. Really helpful. Again, thanks a lot. NVanMinh (talk) 06:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- It says 335392 transclusions - could it also say the number of articles? There may be two transclusions on one article. NVanMinh (talk) 07:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- That is the number of articles, I believe. The database doesn't record whether a page has more than one.
- Chris, could you publish the source code? (Or commit it to your repo?) Then I can update the tool for the benefit on non-enwiki users. Thanks! - Jarry1250 11:41, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- If the DB does not record it, them how else can it be obtained? It is also shown at the Jarry tool: "Number of transclusions". NVanMinh (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I checked the code (Thanks that you publish it, this is good documentation!) "SELECT count(*) FROM templatelinks WHERE tl_title", so one would need to look what is in "templatelinks". From what you said, one could assume that there is only one link irrespective of how many includes there are. NVanMinh (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Uploaded (direct svn). Sorry, it's a bit scruffy. --Chris 16:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- It says 335392 transclusions - could it also say the number of articles? There may be two transclusions on one article. NVanMinh (talk) 07:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
No one in this conversation has realized that the initial premise is incorrect? When a template redirect is transcluded, the templatelinks table includes both the redirect and the target so that when the target is edited those pages transcluding it via the redirect can be properly updated. So if you add the transclusions of Template:Infobox Settlement to those for Template:Infobox settlement, you're counting them double. The correct number of transclusions is, in fact, around 304443. Anomie⚔ 02:52, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe they took more care not to dive into assumptions about the database. If one looks at real data one may doubt you are correct for every instance in time. 2009-06-22 with 137966 has a drop in usage shortly after the template was moved. And what is the big drop for the redirect one year later? Set a side that only one thing can be true at a time and hence one thing here is wrong.. People have problems to present these simple things correctly and to make proper documentation, e.g. include the query string in the page. Keep it all simple, remove Infobox redirects and no one has any problems with them. KISS. NVanMinh (talk) 09:58, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to be you making the assumptions. The most likely reason for the drop in 2009 is because before the move, all transclusions of {{Infobox settlement}} were also transclusions of {{Infobox Settlement}}; after the move, this was not the case. The most likely reason for the big drop between 2010-06-08 and 2010-06-22 is probably because a bot bypassed the redirects while updating the template parameters for an approved task, as in this edit. I think it's time for you to drop the stick now. Anomie⚔ 13:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- For 2009 - what you say does not explain the drop, if your other logic that count for one is included in the count for the other. In what direction the redirect goes (S->s or s->S) does not matter for the max(S,s) value. But that dropped from 149533 to max(137966, 138391)=137966. For 2010 - the bot you mention already started to lower the case before the move took place. Documented now here. NVanMinh (talk) 03:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to be you making the assumptions. The most likely reason for the drop in 2009 is because before the move, all transclusions of {{Infobox settlement}} were also transclusions of {{Infobox Settlement}}; after the move, this was not the case. The most likely reason for the big drop between 2010-06-08 and 2010-06-22 is probably because a bot bypassed the redirects while updating the template parameters for an approved task, as in this edit. I think it's time for you to drop the stick now. Anomie⚔ 13:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Infobox settlement - data analysis
According to the counter made by Chris there are 335392 transclusions of Template:Infobox settlement. Is it possible to obtain some statistics for the field settlement_type? Most common fillings are:
- Foo
- ]
- ]
but there may even be two links, or one link and some wording outside the link. Maybe disregard this, and only give the values
- article name
- settlement_type-display (Foo)
- settlement_type-link (Foo or Bar or nothing)
- settlement_type-raw data
NVanMinh (talk) 07:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
It would be nice to analyse the data and detect inconsistency. Apart from the field settlement_type one can perform other analysis. If the type field contains a country specific link, one could also check whether subdivisions are filled correctly, e.g. if the type link goes to U.S. country, then there should always be a value for a U.S. state. And the state should be the same for all settlement that list this county in their subdivision listing. So this here, would only be a basic check. NVanMinh (talk) 21:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
{{Rayment}}
Template:Rayment should have the parameter external links=1 when used as an external link. I have often seen people forget that parameter, and that causes two error messages appear that should only appear when used as a source. Werieth (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Categories: