New to bots on Wikipedia? Read these primers!

Approval process – How these discussions work
Overview/Policy – What bots are/What they can (or can't) do
Dictionary – Explains bot-related jargon

If you want to run a bot on the English Wikipedia, you must first get it approved. To do so, follow the instructions below to add a request. If you are not familiar with programming it may be a good idea to ask someone else to run a bot for you, rather than running your own.

Instructions for bot operators

I

Before applying for approval

Ensure that you have read the bot policy and that your bot is compliant with it, and that your idea isn't listed as a frequently denied bot.
If your task could be controversial (e.g. most bots making non-maintenance edits to articles and most bots posting messages on user talk pages), seek consensus for the task in the appropriate forums. Common places to start include WP:Village pump (proposals) and the talk pages of the relevant policies, guidelines, templates, and/or WikiProjects. Link to this discussion from your request for approval.
You will need to create an account for your bot if you haven't already done so. Click here when logged in to create the account, linking it to yours. (If you do not create the bot account while logged in, it is likely to be blocked as a possible sockpuppet or unauthorised bot until you verify ownership)
Create a userpage for your bot, linking to your userpage (this is commonly done using the {{bot}} template) and describing its functions. You may also include an 'emergency shutoff button' just in case anything goes wrong.

II

Filing the application

easy-brfa.js can be used for quickly filing BRFAs. It checks for a bunch of filing mistakes automatically! It's recommended for experienced bot operators, but the script can be used by anyone.

Enter your bot's user name in the box below and click the button. If this is a request for an additional task, put a task number as well (e.g. BotName 2).
Complete the questions on the resulting page and save it.

Your request must now be added to the correct section of the main approvals page: Click here and add {{BRFA}} to the top of the list, directly below the comment line.
- For a first request: use {{BRFA|bot name||Open}}
- For an additional task request: use {{BRFA|bot name|task number|Open}}

III

During the approvals process

During the process, an approvals group member may approve a trial for your bot (typically after allowing time for community input), and AnomieBOT will move the request to this section.
Run the bot for the specified number of edits/time period, then add {{Bot trial complete}} to the request page. It helps if you also link to the bot's contributions, and comment on any errors that may have occurred.
AnomieBOT will move the request to the 'trial complete' section by moving the {{BRFA}} template that applies to your bot
If you feel that your request is being overlooked (no BAG attention for ~1 week) you can add {{BAG assistance needed}} to the page. However, please do not use it after every comment!
At any time during the approvals process, you may withdraw your request by adding {{BotWithdrawn}} to your bot's approval page.

IV

After the approvals process

After the trial edits have been reviewed and enough time has passed for any more discussion, a BAG member will approve or deny the request appropriately.
- For approved requests: The request will be listed here. If necessary, a bureaucrat will flag the bot within a couple of days and you can then run the task fully (it's best to wait for the flag, to avoid cluttering recent changes). If the bot already has a flag, or is to run without one, you may start the task when ready.
- For denied/expired/withdrawn requests: The request will be listed at the bottom of the main BRFA page in the relevant section.

Bot Name	Status	Created	Last editor	Date/Time	Last BAG editor	Date/Time
BattyBot 80 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-12-03, 19:11:21	GoingBatty	2023-12-03, 19:11:21	Never edited by BAG	n/a
Cewbot 12 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open: BAG assistance requested!	2023-12-03, 14:07:42	MSGJ	2023-12-06, 09:26:34	Never edited by BAG	n/a
Qwerfjkl (bot) 27 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-11-28, 16:54:12	Jonesey95	2023-11-30, 19:13:53	Never edited by BAG	n/a
BattyBot 79 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-11-24, 23:28:39	GoingBatty	2023-11-24, 23:28:39	Never edited by BAG	n/a
Qwerfjkl (bot) 26 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-11-19, 18:03:51	MSGJ	2023-12-01, 21:41:12	Never edited by BAG	n/a
BattyBot 78 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-11-12, 04:21:14	GoingBatty	2023-11-26, 00:55:49	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 05:27:57
The Sky Bot (T\|C\|B\|F)	Open	2023-11-12, 00:48:49	Awesome Aasim	2023-11-27, 16:31:20	ProcrastinatingReader	2023-11-18, 09:33:50
ButlerBlogBot 3 (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-11-09, 15:02:18	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 06:20:22	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 06:20:22
DeadbeefBot 3 (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-10-22, 14:38:51	0xDeadbeef	2023-12-06, 11:59:29	SD0001	2023-11-05, 07:42:31
Qwerfjkl (bot) 25 (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-10-09, 16:37:55	ClueBot III	2023-12-08, 18:14:28	Primefac	2023-10-24, 09:21:49
SDZeroBot 12 (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-10-23, 12:37:19	Primefac	2023-10-24, 09:18:18	Primefac	2023-10-24, 09:18:18
CapsuleBot 2 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Extended trial	2023-06-14, 00:14:29	Capsulecap	2023-10-21, 15:44:20	Headbomb	2023-07-21, 21:12:50
SodiumBot (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-05-30, 02:43:11	Sohom Datta	2023-11-22, 20:05:25	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 05:35:42
RoccBot (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-05-04, 11:03:06	Philroc	2023-11-17, 07:38:30	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 06:53:24
Credibility bot (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-05-07, 22:38:08	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 07:11:27	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 07:11:27
AussieBot 1 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Extended trial	2023-03-22, 01:57:36	Hawkeye7	2023-10-15, 22:33:38	SD0001	2023-10-15, 19:10:34
DoggoBot 10 (T\|C\|B\|F)	In trial	2023-03-02, 02:55:00	Frostly	2023-10-21, 20:33:38	Primefac	2023-03-08, 10:27:40
BaranBOT (T\|C\|B\|F)	Trial complete	2023-11-12, 07:56:08	DreamRimmer	2023-11-17, 15:01:35	The Earwig	2023-11-17, 06:50:20
ButlerBlogBot 2 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Trial complete	2023-10-06, 18:09:50	Butlerblog	2023-11-18, 14:57:58	Primefac	2023-10-24, 09:22:31
Qwerfjkl (bot) 24 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Trial complete	2023-10-04, 20:04:00	MSGJ	2023-12-06, 09:55:15	SD0001	2023-10-24, 03:52:06
KiranBOT 8 (T\|C\|B\|F)	Trial complete: BAG assistance requested!	2023-10-19, 18:02:49	Usernamekiran	2023-11-25, 03:57:08	The Earwig	2023-11-25, 03:25:01
PrimeBOT 39 (T\|C\|B\|F)	On hold	2023-05-11, 12:48:50	Primefac	2023-09-22, 10:51:59	Headbomb	2023-07-02, 17:38:58

Current requests for approval

BattyBot 80

Operator: GoingBatty (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 19:11, Sunday, December 3, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Fix Australian Dictionary of Biography CS1 template errors

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#Australian Dictionary of Biography CS1 template errors

Edit period(s): One time run (unless requested otherwise)

Estimated number of pages affected: 1,300

Namespace(s): Mainspace

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No):

Function details: Fix {{cite book}} references to the Australian Dictionary of Biography in articles containing Category:CS1 errors: periodical ignored by doing the following:

Convert {{cite book}} with a |website=/|work=Australian Dictionary of Biography value to {{cite Australian Dictionary of Biography}} without the |website=/|work= parameter
Remove the |publisher= parameter
Convert the |url= parameter to |id2=/|id= per Template:Cite Australian Dictionary of Biography#Parameters

For examples, see this edit and this edit and this edit.

This bot will not fix all issues. Some of the references will have to be fixed manually, such as those {{cite book}} templates with different values in |title= and |chapter=.

The bot will also perform AWB's general fixes. Thank you for your consideration! GoingBatty (talk) 19:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Cewbot 12

Operator: Kanashimi (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 14:07, Sunday, December 3, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Implement WP:PIQA + Merge {{VA}} into {{WPBS}}.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): wikiapi on GitHub

Source code available: 20200122.update vital articles.js on GitHub

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles#Break 2, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 May 17#Template:Vital article

Edit period(s): weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: Talk pages including WikiProject templates. (['Category:WikiProject banners without quality assessment', 'Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment', 'Category:Inactive WikiProject banners'] - ['Category:WikiProjects using a non-standard quality scale'])

Namespace(s): Talk

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: This task is basically Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 26 plus the transfer of the {{Vital article}} and the handling of |activepol=, |blpo=, |listas= in {{WikiProject Biography}}. In the future it might be possible to discuss automatically removing |blp= after a person has passed away.

Discussion

There are some tests:

The goal of this task is to be the main operator for the additions described above, and to work with Qwerfjkl (bot) for the rest. Also, User:MSGJ, I'm a bit curious, since we've transferred all the important functionality of {{WikiProject Biography}} to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template, can we just remove {{WikiProject Biography}}, just like we do with {{Vital article}}? --Kanashimi (talk) 14:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WPBiography does quite a lot more than that. And I think this task is already complex enough, shall we focus on the matter at hand? May be a project for the future though. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to note my support for this task, and confirm it fits within all recent discussions we have had on how to merge the {{vital article}} template. My thanks to Kanashimi for taking this on. One small note on 3 above: there was a clash in ratings - would it be better for a human editor to review cases like this, rather than overwrite one of the ratings? You could transfer the rating from {vital article} and leave the rating on the other template. That will automatically place the page in Category:Articles with conflicting quality ratings which is monitored. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a good idea. I've fixed the code. [5] [6] Kanashimi (talk) 23:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All new test cases look good to me. #7 is not a vital article? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. #7 is from {{WikiProject Biography}}. I would like to be able to traverse all the WikiProject pages eventually, it would be nice to add Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BattyBot 79, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 24 and the like. Kanashimi (talk) 21:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some issues with recent edits:

[7] - did not add |vital=yes. Also it did not transfer the |listas= to the shell.
[8] - did not remove |class=start from other banners
[9] - can you remove |class=B from the banners which agree with the PIQA rating? (Keep the C-class for human review.)
[10] - did not add |vital=yes, did not transfer the |listas= value, did not remove class from conforming banners

Also, I know you are an experienced bot operator, but I believe you are supposed to wait for BAG to approve a trial before doing the trial? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:49, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your comments. #1,2,4 are algorithmic problems and are fixed. As for #3, I have included it in practice. For the PIQA part, I'll wait for test approval. Kanashimi (talk) 13:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A user has requested the attention of a member of the Bot Approvals Group. Once assistance has been rendered, please deactivate this tag by replacing it with {{t|BAG assistance needed}}. Please review and approve a trial, thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:26, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Qwerfjkl (bot) 27

Operator: Qwerfjkl (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 16:54, Tuesday, November 28, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Pywikibot

Function overview: Fix a lint error.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): one time run

Estimated number of pages affected: 93,500

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Using the query [11], the bot will use the regex (\| *quote *= *You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles\. See the \[\[Wikipedia:Article wizard ?2\.0\|Article Wizard\]\]\.)''''' → $1

Discussion

Thanks for taking this on. If possible, you may want to have the bot check the page post-edit, but before saving, to ensure that there are no more Linter errors on the page. That appears to be the best practice for Lint-fixing bots; see loads of previous complaints about MalnadachBot's multiple visits to pages. Legobot, when it was doing Lint fixes, had this check in place. See also this search, which is similar text. I get about 125 additional pages, although the search times out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edited to add: This one bot run has the potential to fix 5% (about 180,000) of all remaining Linter errors, according to the current count at firefly's table (3.6 million errors). – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jonesey95, sorry, I meant to respond to this sooner. I don't think it will be practical to skip pages where there are further Linter errors. In my opinion it would be better to just clear these up in one go - there aren't that many large scale fixes like this one that we can do. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's fine with me. I strongly support this bot task that will clean up 5% of all remaining Linter errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BattyBot 79

Operator: GoingBatty (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 23:28, Friday, November 24, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Fix/remove unknown WikiProject parameters

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Subcategories of Category:WikiProject templates with unknown parameters

Edit period(s): Monthly

Estimated number of pages affected: 100,000

Namespace(s): Talk, Category talk, Draft talk, File talk, etc.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Fix WikiProject template parameters (e.g. impotance → importance, importancelow → importance=low) and remove unsupported WikiProject template parameters to remove pages from subcategories of Category:WikiProject templates with unknown parameters. Before removing any parameters, I will manually check the WikiProject template documentation and source code to confirm the parameter is not supported, and manually report any technical issues I discover (e.g., this conversation). This bot will not be able to fix every issue, but removing the low-hanging fruit should make it easier for editors to find those pages that need to be fixed manually. This bot task would also utilize User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects and AWB's general fixes. GoingBatty (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Qwerfjkl (bot) 26

Operator: Qwerfjkl (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 18:03, Sunday, November 19, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Pywikibot

Function overview: Implement WP:PIQA

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests#Implement project-independent quality assessments, WP:PIQA

Edit period(s): one time run (with future runs if necessary)

Estimated number of pages affected: hard to estimate, very high number - most talk pages I would assume

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: From the bot request:

If there is a banner shell already on the page, then add |class= parameter and remove from project banners, e.g. [12]

If there is no banner shell, then add it and move class rating from project banners, e.g. [13]

If there are no assessments on page, then add empty |class= parameter to encourage editors to add a rating, e.g. [14]

If assessments of projects differ, then add the majority rating to the banner shell and leave any different assessments on those banners, e.g. [15]. These will be manually reviewed by human editors.

If assessments of projects differ, but there is no majority rating, then add banner shell with empty |class= parameter. These will be tracked and reviewed manually.

If the page has {{WikiProject biography}} with |living=yes or |blp=yes then add |blp=yes to {{WikiProject banner shell}}.

If any project banner has |listas= then move this to {{WikiProject banner shell}} and remove from project banners, e.g. [16]

For any of the projects which have opted out, the class parameter should not be changed or removed.

The bot will also replace redirects to wikiprojects with the actual template.

The bot will obey MOS:TALKORDER insofar as it is reasonable to do so (GIGO), including moving a pre-existing {{WikiProject banner shell}} (this can be changed if desirable).

Discussion

The bot does not handle duplicate wikiprojects. It will treat them as distinct. — Qwerfjkl talk 18:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Qwerfjkl: Hi. Is the source code publicly available (in your userspace or github)? With such a high number of pages effected, I think it should be. —usernamekiran (talk) 00:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @Usernamekiran, it is publically avaliable on PAWS, here. I apologise if the code is messy. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've done a few live tests of this to ensure the code works, and I've fixed a few more bugs. These edits can be found here. — Qwerfjkl talk 19:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: for consensus supporting these changes please see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 198#Project-independent quality assessments and the various follow-up discussions on Template talk:WikiProject banner shell and its archives — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: Which namespaces would you include? Talk, category talk, draft talk, and file talk? GoingBatty (talk) 16:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: How does your code identify which templates are WikiProjects? Would it be beneficial to utilize User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects to convert redirects to {{WikiProject ...}} templates? GoingBatty (talk) 16:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- GoingBatty, I was planning on running it on all talk pages that could have WikiProjects i e the Talk, Category talk, Draft talk, File talk, Wikipedia talk, Help talk etc. namespaces).
  The code identifies which templates are redirects using the contents of Category:WikiProject banners without quality assessment, Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment, Category:Inactive WikiProject banners.
  I haven't used User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects directly, instead I have just bypassed the redirects without regex (but it will still have the same effect).
  I have linked the code above which you can review. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  The template redirects are not listed in those categories. I think GoingBatty was asking how you can identify these redirects. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:32, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  MSGJ, by checking WhatLinksHere and filtering it out by redirects in namespace 10 (Template). — Qwerfjkl talk 14:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Okay thanks, that sounds reasonable — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BattyBot 78

Operator: GoingBatty (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 04:20, Sunday, November 12, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Remove url-access info from citation with dead URL

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Help talk:Citation Style 1#Subscriptions and archived URLs – recommendation for added guidance, Template:Cite_web#Access indicators for url-holding parameters

Edit period(s): One time run per domain

Estimated number of pages affected: 1,827 for higbeam.com

Namespace(s): Mainspace

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: For citation templates with dead domains (e.g. www.higbeam.com), remove the |url-access= parameter (e.g. this edit) and/or {{subscription required}} template (e.g. this edit). Will also run AWB's general fixes. GoingBatty (talk) 04:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

There was discussion of this at Help talk:Citation Style 1, and this does appear to be the correct thing to do; the parameters are useless/confusing when the domain to which they pertain is dead. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 17:18, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GreenC: Am I reading your comment here right in that you and other editors would object to this task? I don't have very strong feelings about this, but I can see value in indicating an archived URL requires a subscription; even if said subscription is no longer available, the full content remains unaccessible at the archive URL. — The Earwig (talk) 05:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, during discussions 3 or 4 editors objected. There were actually two threads, the first was Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Subscription_and_via,_when_link_is_dead. The more we know about the original source the better it is to verify. If the source was subscription, it can be assumed the archive version won't have the full (or any) content which makes it a higher-value target for editors doing verification work. Particularly in the future, when AI can help with verification. -- GreenC 22:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I think it's helpful information as well. Easier to know when the source was accessed in the past. I don't think it should be removed at least. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: This bot task would NOT remove the |access-date= parameter which contains the value to know when the source was accessed in the past. This task is to remove the |access-date= parameter and/or {{subscription required}} only in those cases where there no longer is a registration/subscription option to view the source. GoingBatty (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Sky Bot

Operator: Robertsky (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 00:48, Sunday, November 12, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: Replace {{ct}} with {{UCI team code}}

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Template_talk:UCI_team_code#Requested_move_30_October_2023

Edit period(s): one time run

Estimated number of pages affected: 11,500

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: Making use of regex {{ct\|(.*?)}} to replace transclusions of {{ct}} with {{UCI team code}} in the article namespace, in preparation of usurpation of {{ct}} redirect for {{Contentious topics}}.

Going by the linkcount tool, there are currently 11,400+ articles to be worked on, and 200-300 non-article namespace pages to look at. This bot will primarily work on the article namespace as the usage of the {{ct}} template is pretty much direct there, whilst the non-article namespaces will be worked on either manually or semi-automated manner in case of surprises.

As for the result of the regex application to find and replace the template, I have worked on some of the pages which can be seen at Special:Contributions/RobertskySemi.

If this passes, I would like to request for AWB perms for the bot account as well. Can it be granted through here, or I will have to request at the AWB perms board? – robertsky (talk) 07:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

Hmm. This will make old revisions very annoying to read on 11,500 articles for the benefit of creating a short redirect for {{Contentious topics}}, which is a disambiguation template and not even something we'd ever use directly? I admit I'm not a big fan of this. — The Earwig (talk) 06:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig, I think this should be part of the post-closure discussion at Template_talk:UCI_team_code#Requested_move_30_October_2023 at the very least. Courtesy ping to @Awesome Aasim, who's the OP of the abovementioned move discussion that leads to this request. – robertsky (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would agree with Earwig. Template:Contentious topics is a placeholder template as well. I'd be suspicious that the benefits of having that at {{ct}} outweigh the negatives of breaking old page revisions. I know we'd generally give up support for old page revisions where this materially improves our ability to present or deliver content (eg appropriate TfDs), but there's definitely a weighing of pros/cons that needs to be done. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am willing to disagree. It might break old page revisions in the short term, which will be a little annoying for anyone viewing an old ID, but in the long term it will become less confusing. We could also have the Ct page read this:

<includeonly>{{UCI team code}}</includeonly><noinclude>[disambiguation stuff]</noinclude> Awesome Aasim 16:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bots in a trial period

ButlerBlogBot 3

Operator: Butlerblog (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 15:02, Thursday, November 9, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available:

Function overview: Clears entries in the television project maintenance category Episode lists with unformatted story or teleplay credits

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): daily/weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: 10-15/week on average

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: The television maintenance category lists episode list articles in which articles use raw wikicode for italicizing Story and Teleplay credits. Using a series of regex patterns that have been already tested using manual AWB, the bot task converts the raw wikicode to use {{StoryTeleplay}}.

Discussion

Approved for trial (25 edits or 14 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. It looks like we won't have a ton of edits, so this is a small trial, but ideally we can test as much as possible. — The Earwig (talk) 06:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DeadbeefBot 3

Operator: 0xDeadbeef (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 14:38, Sunday, October 22, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Rust

Source code available: https://github.com/fee1-dead/deadbeefbot/tree/main/src

Function overview: Converts various talk page templates to {{Article history}}

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DeadbeefBot 2, User talk:SandyGeorgia/arch119#Article history

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: >10,000

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: This task supersedes the previous one by enlarging the scope of its operations. This bot task can:

Create Article history templates on talk pages with a GA/FailedGA/FA/etc template where information about DYK/ITN/OTD/peer review/etc can be folded in together
Remove standalone DYK/ITN/OTD/peer review templates by adding the information into an existing {{Article history}} template.

I will be gradually implementing additional functionality supporting more information to be folded in as time goes. As always, I will do some supervised edits before letting it process everything when I add new things, so consider this as a pro forma about its enlarging scope. Here are some supervised edits that I have carried out to test some of the new behavior: [17] [18]

Discussion

Just a note - other approvals for same or similar tasks:

– SD0001 (talk) 04:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The OG bot that did this and was really good at it but went down and has not been properly replaced yet: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GimmeBot 2. cc SandyGeorgia. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad to see this effort ongoing! Some questions and comments:

How will Deadbeefbot handle those many cases where the GA closer failed to add the oldid ? (It happens often.) Gimmetrow (Gimmebot} used to use an old Dr pda script which was able to look up the oldid based on the timestamp; it's not critical to have them if the closer didn't provide them, but just raising this for the sake of completeness.
Separately, maybe we can get someone to fix the GA template/script so that it won't allow a GA pass without providing an oldid. Not sure who to ask on this; Mike Christie?
The bot does try to add an oldid if the closer forgot. I just had a look through the last few passes and couldn't find a case where the closer didn't add an oldid, but as far as I recall it works correctly. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it possible roll otd date and time into one line ? See Talk:Guy Fawkes Night for a sample of how long they can get.
I am unclear why DYK is numbered; is more than one allowed and has it ever happened?
Before a certain date, DYKs did not have nom pages (just raising this for completeness).
Would it be better to fully spell out the GA link? That is Talk:Articlename/GA1 rather than just /GA1 so that the link won't be lost when pages move ?
I am confused about the role of APersonbot ... are they still doing anything? MilHistBot is Hawkeye7, so still maintained, but not sure if APersonBot is still doing any articlehistory stuff.

Thanks again !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it won't try to add it. I could try adding that functionality but it looks like Mike's bot already does that?
Yes, I've changed this.
Not sure about this, but made it so that the first dyk entry is always un-numbered.
The bot would not specify a nom page when folding it into article history.
Yeah, changed.
that task is inactive per User:EnterpriseyBot#Tasks.

0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. – SD0001 (talk) 07:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Will come back to this probably this weekend. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:59, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Qwerfjkl (bot) 25

Operator: Qwerfjkl (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 16:37, Monday, October 9, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: pywikibot

Function overview: Resend MassMessages at WP:VPM.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 85#Forward VPM MassMessages to a new MassMessage list

Edit period(s): continious

Estimated number of pages affected: Depends on how many users and themselves to the list and how frequently messages are posted at VPM.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Major WMF announcements go to WP:VPM because it's listed at m:Distribution list/Global message delivery. Users cannot subscribe there because it's for noticeboards. The bot would repost any MassMessages from VPM to a new MassMessage list. Example: Special:Diff/1179359075.

Discussion

Thanks for working on this, Qwerfjkl. Much appreciated. I think this could wind up being really helpful. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 16:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits or 30 days, whichever happens first). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. I think it would be a good idea to get this onto the Admin Newsletter and/or crosspost somewhere so that users know this is an option. Primefac (talk) 09:21, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@@L235, could you set up a MassMessage list for this? — Qwerfjkl talk 14:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: I've set one up at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe. Once you get the trial going, I'll put out a few announcements that this is available. Thank you! Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 20:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@L235, okay, thanks. I've started the trial now. i'm not entirely sure if the code actually works, so ping me if there's a message at VPM that doesn't get sent. — Qwerfjkl talk 14:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Honestly the whole point of MassMessage was to remove bots from the message delivery process. Having users subscribe to WMF notifications seems like a reasonable use case, have you asked them to use a different delivery list in addition to the main one? Legoktm (talk) 03:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Legoktm: Hm, the thing is, I want every MassMessage posted to VPM, but there are quite a few different lists that include VPM in the list. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SDZeroBot 12

Operator: SD0001 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 12:37, Monday, October 23, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): TypeScript on Node.js

Source code available: GitHub

Function overview: Purges drafts so that Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions appears populated

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Archive_45#Bot_running_required_to_take_over_from_User:Joe's_Null_Bot, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/NovemBot_5

Edit period(s): Hourly

Estimated number of pages affected: 874 on first run, variable after that

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Simple bot that precisely figures out the pages needing a purge (see quarry:query/77493) and only purges them.

It's not clear if the existing AfC purge bot operated by User:ProcrastinatingReader works. As of writing there are 874 pages that should have been in Category:AfC_G13_eligible_soon_submissions but are not. Approach used by the existing bot is to try purge all pages in AfC categories which are too many in number so has caused issues. The approach followed here is more scalable, and also avoids triggering a re-purge if ProcBot has already been through them.

Discussion

Notified AfC project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#New_purge_bot_BRFA. – SD0001 (talk) 12:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know much about bots and how they operate but I will add to this discussion that SDZeroBot's list for expiring drafts (CSD G13) turns up a great deal more drafts and user page drafts than those that appear in Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions. I don't know why there is this discrepancy but SDZeroBot's list is much more complete. Because admins handling CSD G13s stay on top of their expiration dates, the AFC G13 category isn't as important as it used to be. Previously, regular editors would use this category to tag expiring drafts for speedy deletion but this practice doesn't happen as frequently as in years past. But still, if this category is going to exist, then it's best that it's up-to-date. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:35, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (30 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. I realise this has no tangible output, but I suppose that's kind of the point. As long as it's doing what it should be doing, and not what it shouldn't be doing, I have no issues with approving this at the end of the trial. Primefac (talk) 09:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CapsuleBot 2

Operator: Capsulecap (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 00:14, Wednesday, June 14, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: This task checks the Top 25 Report page frequently to see if the current report has updated. If it was updated, then it will go through all pages in the new report and add or update the Template:Top 25 Report template on their talk pages.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: No, but if necessary I can upload it

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests#Top 25 report

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 25 pages/week

Namespace(s): Talk

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Function details: This task first checks the page Wikipedia:Top 25 Report to see if the transcluded link was modified. (This should mean that the report was updated.) If it has, then it uses the first revision of the transcluded page, which is always a basic list, to get a list of article talk pages to modify. It then goes through each talk page, updating the Template:Top 25 Report template if it exists and adding it if not. As for exclusion compliance, I have not added that feature in yet.

Discussion

The Top 25 report is updated weekly. Why does this task need to run twice a day? Primefac (talk) 09:08, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wanted to ensure that the template is added quickly. I've changed it to daily, and if it should be longer then you can tell me. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Additionally, some reports (including the one for last week) are finished late, and do not get added until later on. I wanted to ensure that the pages on the report get the template on their talk page. If the next report is done on time, then the maintainers of the report will replace the transclusion to the late report with the new one less than a week after the old report replaced the one before it. I agree that twice a day was a bit too excessive. Daily should be fine. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Capsulecap is right about this. And task need to run twice a day.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:58, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Capsulecap: Hi. What would happen if the same article comes in top 25 report again, say with a gap of four months? —usernamekiran (talk) 17:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If that happens, then there will be no difference from if it was featured twice with more than a four month gap. There is nothing that says to do anything different for pages on T25 which are featured multiple times in a small timespan, and pages like Talk:ChatGPT feature multiple such examples. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (1 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. I'm trying to wrap my head around what's this bot supposed to do exactly, so I'm going to approve it for a one-time run of 1 day. This should give me (and perhaps others) a better idea of what this is about. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:34, 2 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Headbomb: Although I did a trial run, the bot made test edits with numerous errors. I have fixed the code causing these issues, and will (with permission) restart the trial when the next report comes in. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Capsulecap: can you link to the results nonetheless? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See edits 4 through 29. Note that the newest three edits were a test run for a fix to something which happened in Talk:Elemental (2023 film), and that many incorrect edits were caused by other editors modifying talk pages to add the template before the test run was done. Although the bot will not add redundant templates assuming that nobody adds the top 25 placement before it, I am considering adding redundancy protection. One problem — the one on the page about the Titan submarine incident — was one I didn't think of, as the talk page was moved with the main page, causing the top 25 report template to be placed on a redirect instead of the actual talk page. This is a problem I am working on fixing, as I have noticed that "current events" pages that show up on the report often frequently get moved. The bot also ended up creating the page "Talk:Errible things in Russia, the North Atlantic and HBO have the most attention this week.", but I fixed the source issue and tagged the page for CSD. few of the edits are fine, and most would be fine if there was redundancy protection or if the top 25 templates didn't already have the week in there. One question, though — since the bot will run daily, and people wouldn't need to modify top 25 templates anymore — should I implement redundancy protection? Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Should I implement redundancy protection" I would say that's a good idea, regardless of how often it comes into play. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just finished implementing the redundancy protection along with the redirect traversal stuff. The bot should work just fine now. Do I have to redo the trial? Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. See 21 most recent contributions. Out of the 25 pages in the June 25th to July 1st edition, 21 pages were correctly edited, two pages (Talk:Money in the Bank (2023) and Talk:Titan submersible implosion) were not edited because of unexpected and likely erroneous formatting in the report's first revision (a space was in place of the usual tab after those two pages' titles), and two pages were not edited as they already had this week in their templates. For context on those two pages which didn't get the template on accident, the first revision of the report is always an imported set of tab delimited data — in this case, spaces were in place of tabs for the names of those two articles. The bot created two new talk pages on accident, which I quickly tagged for CSD. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: I've come up with a solution to this problem and will be implementing and testing it soon. This is the last issue which I will have to fix. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:26, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for extended trial (25 edits or 7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. One week's worth, or 25 edits, whichever you need. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:16, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. See See 25 most recent contributions. This time, I verified that all edits the bot would make would be correct on a script that had editing commented out. They were all good edits, so I ran the full script. All 25 pages on the report had the template added or changed on their talk pages. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Most seemed fine, but there was this that stood out.

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed that and didn't pay much attention to it as it was merely cosmetic. Since that was considered problematic, I'll get to fixing that and keeping the collapse as the last edit. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For testing you can revert to a prior state and unleash the bot on it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:17, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. See 22 most recent edits. Also see this test edit which the bot made in user talk space showing a similar condition to the page Talk:Deaths in 2023. If you would like, I can manually revert the edit on Talk:Deaths in 2023 which added the newest date and run the bot again to show you. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well... the collapsed stuff is handled correctly, but now it's inconsistent the other way around. It should list the ranks when they're there, or omit them when they're not.

Or, probably a better idea, update old listings to list the ranks, e.g. [19]. You might need some discussion before though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:18, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it's a good idea to retroactively add the rankings to the templates, but I'm not sure of where to obtain consensus for that, and it would either require a bot task or lots of manual work. The other way you listed is probably easier, but causes inconsistency between pages. Something else I thought of is a Lua module that automatically grabs the placements, but I'm not sure if such a thing is supported. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What if it deleted what was there first, then re-added the template with all dates and ranks? In the same edit that is. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:46, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It could work, but I think I would have to submit a separate bot task for that. A separate (and much simpler) approach would be to add a "ranks" parameter that does nothing to the bot category. If set to yes, then the bot will add ranks when it updates the report. Otherwise or if unset, the bot will only add the date. This maintains consistency within talk pages, but not between talk pages; the latter would require consensus strongly towards either using ranks or not. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for extended trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Indeed, consistency within talk pages is usually a lesser threshold to clear. I'm giving you trial for that (make sure to include a mix of both types of edits), but if you want to have that (should we always rank things) discussion first, you can also wait for consensus to emerge before trialing. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:11, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Capsulecap, are you still doing this? — Qwerfjkl talk 14:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I am. Have taken a long break from editing but I never canceled this bot project. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:44, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SodiumBot

Operator: Sohom Datta (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 02:43, Tuesday, May 30, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: supervised

Programming language(s): NodeJS + mwn

Source code available: TBD (will publish in a dedicated subpage/on github)

Function overview: Adding Navboxes to pages corresponding to Indian villages

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Expected to be uncontroversial

Edit period(s): one time run

Estimated number of pages affected: ~3300 ++

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No (Will/Can respect any variation of {{nobots|deny=AWB}} if required)

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details:

- Finding all instances of articles inside of Category:Villages in India by district.

- Filtering articles that do not have a Navbox corresponding to their district. (The heuristics I used to get to the 3300 number is by checking if a template with the name of the district existed in the page)

- Adding appropriate navbox related to the district to which the village belongs.

Discussion

Could you please give an example or two of an edit the bot would be performing? (please do not ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Something similar to 1156232688 and 1156210338. Sohom (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sohom Datta: Could you please help me understand 1156232688? It appears Yermal is not included in {{Settlements in Udupi district}}. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GoingBatty Yermal does show up in Category:Villages in Udupi district and benefits from being linked to a bunch of other articles via the Navbox. That being said, I did not see that it was not linked in the Navbox, and it maybe we can expand the scope to add the article to the navbox as well ? Sohom (talk) 00:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sohom Datta: If it is appropriate to add the article to the navbox, then it is appropriate to add the navbox to the article, per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. GoingBatty (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, WP:BIDIRECTIONAL is important here. Anytime a navbox is added to an article, it should already be wikilinked in the navbox. It would be out of policy to add navboxes to articles that aren't in the navbox. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 09:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Noting here, I'll be traveling till the end of June, will run the trial once I'm back. Sohom (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sohom Datta any update? — Qwerfjkl talk 17:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This appears to have fallen off my radar, will run the trial in a bit Sohom (talk) 14:07, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sohom Datta: Have you had a chance to look at this? Anything we can do to assist? — The Earwig (talk) 05:35, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not yet I'm afraid :( Will take a look this weekend to see if I have time to implement it. Sohom (talk) 20:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RoccBot

Operator: Philroc (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 11:03, Thursday, May 4, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: [20]

Function overview: Update various Billboard chart articles to reflect current number-one songs and albums.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Once per week

Estimated number of pages affected: 38

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: The bot will extract the title and artist of each chart's current number-one song/album from the official Billboard website, combine them into a wiki-friendly format and insert the final product into the "current number-one" statement found in the chart's corresponding article.

Discussion

Approved for trial (21 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. In other words, three full updates. Primefac (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Philroc: Looks like it's been a while, have you had a chance to start working on this? — The Earwig (talk) 06:53, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig: Sorry, real life's been getting in the way. I should have some trial results ready before the new year. Philroc (talk) 07:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Credibility bot

Operator: Harej (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 22:38, Sunday, May 7, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Generates reports and alert lists for source usage. Initially for the Vaccine safety project but with plans to support future WikiProjects.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Under development on GitHub

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:Vaccine safety#Ongoing overhaul of Wikipedia:Vaccine safety/Sources (note that this bot only edits in pages specifically relevant to the report and not really being edited by other people)

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: about 2 project pages per subscribed WikiProject

Namespace(s): Project

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): not applicable (bot only edits its own pages)

Function details:

Scans perennial sources tables such as Wikipedia:Vaccine safety/Perennial sources and uses of external links in articles, according to a pre-defined set of pages.
Prepares reports of frequent usage of unrecognized domains in articles, as well as usages of "flagged" domains in articles. "Flagged" means the article is known to be of poor or mixed reliability. There will be other reports in the future. Example: Wikipedia:Vaccine safety/Reports
Prepares alerts based on these reports. Alerts are summaries of new changes to the report, like a notification. Example: Wikipedia:Vaccine safety/Alerts

Harej (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

{{BAG assistance needed}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harej (talk • contribs) 00:10, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

non-bag comment: the task seems to be non disruptive, and helpful. I don't see any issues with giving it a trial, especially given Harej's credibility. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:51, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits or 28 days, whichever happens first). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 08:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Primefac, I am just now seeing this, can I restart the clock on the trial? Harej (talk) 17:48, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It hasn't started yet if you haven't started yet. Primefac (talk) 08:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Harej, any updates on this? — The Earwig (talk) 07:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AussieBot 1

Operator: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 01:57, Wednesday, March 22, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Mark unassessed stub articles as stubs

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): C#

Source code available: Not yet

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 84#Stub assessments with ORES

Edit period(s): daily

Estimated number of pages affected: < 100 per day

Namespace(s): Talk

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Go through Category:Unassessed articles (only deals with articles already tagged as belonging to a project). If an unassessed article is rated as a stub by ORES, tag the article as a stub. Example

Discussion

Note: This bot appears to have edited since this BRFA was filed. Bots may not edit outside their own or their operator's userspace unless approved or approved for trial. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
^. Also, may potentially be a CONTEXTBOT; see Wikipedia:Stub: There is no set size at which an article stops being a stub. EpicPupper (talk) 23:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Bot run only affects unassessed articles rated as stubs by mw:ORES. The ORES ratings for stubs are very reliable (some false negatives – which wouldn't be touched under this proposal – but no false positives). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Sounds reasonable as ORES is usually good for assessing stub articles as such. – SD0001 (talk) 11:41, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Y Bot run with 50 edits. No problems reported. Diffs: [21]. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment: Some behavior I found interesting is that the bot is reverting start-class classifications already assigned by a human editor, and overriding those with stub-class. [22] and [23] EggRoll97 ^(talk) 03:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This should not be happening. Frostly (talk) 03:58, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The question is: what should be happening? The article were flagged because some of the projects were not assessed. Should the Bot (1) assess the unassessed ones as stubs and ignore the assessed ones or (2) align the unassessed ones with the ones that are assessed? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:21, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per recent consensus assessments should be for an entire article, not per WikiProject. The bot should amend the template to use the article wide code. If several projects have different assessments for an article it should leave it alone. Frostly (talk) 05:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hawkeye7: Courtesy ping, I've manually fixed up the edits where the bot replaced an assessment by a human editor. 6 edits total to be fixed out of 52 total edits. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 07:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bot has been amended. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:51, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{BAG assistance needed}} This has been waiting for over 2 months since the end of the trial, and over 4 months since the creation of the request. Given the concerns expressed that the bot operator has since fixed, an extended trial may be a good idea here. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 05:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My apologies. I have been very busy. Should I run the new Bot again with a few more edits? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for extended trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. – SD0001 (talk) 19:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DoggoBot 10

Operator: EpicPupper (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 02:55, Thursday, March 2, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s):

Source code available:

Function overview: Replace AMP links in citations

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): BOTREQ, Village Pump

Edit period(s): Weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: Unknown, estimated to be in the range of hundreds of thousands

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Using the AmputatorBot API, replaces AMP links with canonical equivalents. This task runs on all pages with citation templates which have URL parameters (e.g. {{cite news}}, {{cite web}}, etc).

Discussion

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 10:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just noting that I'm working on this but it may take some time. EpicPupper (talk) 23:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Been a bit busy IRL, but will get to this soon. Frostly (talk) 20:33, 25 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

soon — Frostly (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bots that have completed the trial period

BaranBOT

Operator: DreamRimmer (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 07:56, Sunday, November 12, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: standardize parameter usage in {{Infobox Indian constituency}}

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Template talk:Infobox Indian constituency#Changes requested

Edit period(s): one time

Estimated number of pages affected: 1050

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: After a change request on the talk page of {{Infobox Indian constituency}}, six parameters were replaced, and two parameters were removed from the template. These deprecated parameters still exist in almost 1128 pages after six months of the change. This bot run will replace the outdated six parameters with the relevant new ones and and remove two invalid parameters. It involves a simple find with regex and replacement inside the template calls, for e.g. |ls_constituency= → |loksabha_cons =

Discussion

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Ideally we can have edits testing each of the eight changes several times. — The Earwig (talk) 06:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. Edits – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:01, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ButlerBlogBot 2

Operator: Butlerblog (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 18:09, Friday, October 6, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: Monitors television project-specific maintenance categories for proper date formatting in project-specific templates {{Infobox television}}, {{Episode list}}, and {{Series overview}}.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 20-30 per day

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details:
1. Using entries in the date-specific television project maintenance categories, it corrects the date format in {{Infobox television}}, {{Episode list}}, and {{Series overview}} to make sure that the following exist:
1a. Format Infobox television |first_aired={{Start date|YYYY|MM|DD}} (add df=y when applicable)
1b. Format Infobox television |last_aired={{End date|YYYY|MM|DD}} (add df=y when applicable) or "present" (lowercase)
1c. Format Episode list |OriginalAirDate={{Start date|YYYY|MM|DD}} (add df=y when applicable)
1d. Unformat Episode list |AltDate={{Start date|YYYY|MM|DD}} per reasons given in template documentation, applies MOS date format accordingly (either January 1, 2023 or 1 January 2023, depending on formatted parameter)
1e. Series overview start/end dates should use {{Start date|YYYY|MM|DD}} and {{End date|YYYY|MM|DD}} respectively.
2. Since it already has the article open, it checks the television infobox to apply other genfixes to clean up additional items, including removal of unknown, deprecated, and unnecessary parameters, as well as parameter values for images that are malformed.
This is selected from a series of regex patterns I have used and refined in AWB manually clearing these maintenance categories and then manually running daily over the past year to keep them cleared. It is limited to regex patterns that are robust enough to provide a zero-intervention rate. I already do this via manual AWB daily; I'm just seeking to approve for automation.

Discussion

As one of the maintainers of some of the above templates and tracking categories, any step that can automate editor actions and free them up for other stuff is always helpful. I see the edits Butlerblog and others do daily to keep up with new entries and they are always helpful. If the bot run does exactly what they manually do then there should not be any issue. --Gonnym (talk) 14:10, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, Gonnym, for your confidence. Just some clarification for BAG: what I have been doing "manually" is run this using AWB as a "regular" AWB user. So from a "trial" standpoint, it's already in use clicking the "save" button. I'm just looking to take it that additional step to an AWB bot. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:21, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 09:22, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For the trial, I added an AWB request to add the bot account User:ButlerBlogBot to the enabledbots on the checkpage. The edits in the this list with the summary "format dates and other infobox fixes per {{Infobox television}}" are from AWB as submitted, just under User:Butlerblog. Most (all but 3?) of the first 50 are this task (and another 20 or so on the next page). Once User:ButlerBlogBot is added to the check page, I can do 50 under the bot account if needed. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. @Primefac: See 50 trial run edits here. Note: The recent changes/additions to the date tracking category for additional date params slowed things down a bit. ButlerBlog (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial is complete and there were no specific issues that I know of... ButlerBlog (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Qwerfjkl (bot) 24

Operator: Qwerfjkl (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 20:04, Wednesday, October 4, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Pywikibot

Function overview: Resolve conflicting class values where it is an article/non-article conflict

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Template talk:WikiProject banner shell#Moving ahead with project-independent quality ratings

Edit period(s): one time run, with more if necessary

Estimated number of pages affected: <1000

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: For the purposes of this, an article is anything in mainspace that's not a redirect or dab page. The bot will run on Category:Articles with conflicting quality ratings. If the page is not an article page, the bot will remove any classes with values 'fa', 'a', 'ga', 'b', 'c', 'start', 'stub', 'fl', 'list' If the page is an article it will remove any classes with values 'file', 'image', 'img', 'draft', 'category', 'cat', 'categ', 'disambig', 'diamb', 'disambiguation', 'dab', 'redirect', 'redir', 'red', 'template', 'temp', 'templ', 'tpl', 'project'

Here's what the edits would look like: Special:Diff/1178602607, Special:Diff/1178602456.

Discussion

@Qwerfjkl: ~~first diff is not working~~ — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops. Thanks. — Qwerfjkl talk 20:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to confirm this task will be useful, and is very similar to the already approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Qwerfjkl (bot) 21 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{BAG assistance needed}} — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:39, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. Looks pretty straightforward. I'd suggest setting this up as a monthly cron rather than just a one-time run. – SD0001 (talk) 03:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I'm away from my computer right now so I'll do this in a day or two. — Qwerfjkl talk 08:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SD0001,

Trial complete. See these edits. There were a few bugs in how the bot recognised WikiProjects, so I fixed the code and ran a few extra edits. (The earlier edits may miss out a few wikiprojects in their edits because of this.) — Qwerfjkl talk 18:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All the edits I checked were on redirects, and the task for this is already approved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, that's because of the error I was talking about. The previous task missed these pages because of the bug in the code, and it seems the majority of the conflicting class errors are due to redirects. The scope of this task also covers redirects. If necessary, though, I can redo this and skip redirects? — Qwerfjkl talk 08:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So we don't actually need additional approval to run this task because it is already covered by task 21? In which case, please run the task! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, no, rather this task covers the scope of task 21 and more cases. — Qwerfjkl talk 15:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All the edits I checked were covered by task 21, so why not run those and then we can see how many are left? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, sorry, what do you mean by run those? — Qwerfjkl talk 16:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The ones covered by task 21, i.e. the redirects — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, sure, that was my plan. I've started the code running, but it has to make quite a few API calls to ensure it matches all the redirects. It should start editing in about half an hour. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, ah, I see the problem. Task 21 only covers cases where the class=redirect; this covers cases where the class calue is anything. — Qwerfjkl talk 16:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think we already confirmed that several lines above? In any case I will leave you to work on these as soon as convenient. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

┌──────────────────────────────┘
@MSGJ, sorry, I'm not sure I quite understand. The edits from the trial were not in scope of task 21 because it affected redirects where the class parameter value wasn't redirect. — Qwerfjkl talk 17:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I have said multiple times, I think the edits in the trial are exactly in scope with task 21. Of course the class value wasn't "redirect", otherwise there would be no conflict. I feel we are going round in circles here, so I will leave this discussion and allow you to work on these as soon as convenient. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, sorry about that, I think I misunderstood what task 21 was. Anyway, I've run the task, it fixed around 800 pages. — Qwerfjkl talk 15:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SD0001, in light of the above conversation I've redone the trial on non-redirects (see these edits). I doubt there will be very many pages left (i.e. >500) because the bot made it up to F in the category. — Qwerfjkl talk 19:42, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to note, the bot did not remove the start-class in this edit — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:25, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You missed "album" in this edit — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MSGJ, okay, I've looked at these. The first one is because it's from an old version of the code (works now). The second problem was because the template matching was case sensitive; I've fixed it now. — Qwerfjkl talk 09:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to note that this has taken a long time to get approved and probably is not needed anymore. We have changed the logic so it is impossible to rate a non-article with an article quality rating. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

KiranBOT 8

Operator: Usernamekiran (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 18:02, Thursday, October 19, 2023 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): pywikibot

Source code available: github

Function overview: archive entries/blurbs from Template:In the news

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): requested at BOTREQ, and further discussion at Wikipedia talk:In the news.

Edit period(s): once per day

Estimated number of pages affected: archive bot, will create one page per month

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: The bot goes through the edit revisions/diffs of Template:In the news, and archives the entries that have been added.

If a new line begins with *[[ or * [[ then the bot considers it as a recent death. If it begins with <!--, it considers the entry as news/event.
the bot excludes lines beginning with | (if there is a white-space after the pipe), and [[Image:
based on the date of first addition (from diff), the bot adds the entry to header of corresponding date, including diff, editor, and time. If a news entry is updated (eg death toll), then the bot adds the new updated entry under the last matching entry (more details in 8.2).
the entries are added to the archive page in following format: <entry> <special:diff/diff|updated> by <username>, <timestamp>
when an entry is removed, the bot looks for that entry in the "current archive page", and in "previous archive page". in case it is a recent death/RD, the removal update is appended to the same line. otherwise, the removal entry is added below the last matching entry.
1. in case the entry is not found in both the pages, the entry is then added to the current archive page.
so far the only issue is with "currentevents" parameter within the ITN template. They are being treated as normal news. The folks at ITN are okay with this, but I am working on it. It may take a while to come up with a solution as I am currently very busy in real life.
as there were no particular standards/MOS back in the day, the archive pages of the early days will look a bit odd. But I am planning to fix them manually (ie using AWB, or some other script/program).
I tested the program extensively, and it has only two issues so far.
1. the first is regarding "currentevents" parameter
2. the second issue arises because of the way diff is presented in html. to circumvent multiple other issues, the program captures all the additions/removals/changes from one edit, and saves all the changes to archive page in one single edit. because of the way these changes are saved, sometimes the update message doesnt go below the last matching entry of original addition/update, and ends up with a message "updated by" in diff's date.
the folks at the WT:ITN are okay with that. I will also be working to improve the program, and fix these issues.

In the first run, the bot will archive all the entries starting from March 2004. That would be around 40,000 edits. After that I will setup a daily cronjob to go through latest 100 edits. The current average is around 50 edits per day for the ITN template since creation, and 7 edits per day since last 8 years, but we should keep it 100 revisions for "just in case". I have already implemented a check in program based on revision ID/diff, so there would be no repeated archrivals.

Kindly feel free to ask any questions/doubts you have. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

~~PS: I will post links to sandbox/trial edits shortly. —usernamekiran (talk)~~ 18:09, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

trial runs: partial archive of November special:permalink/1180926363, complete archive of December: special:permalink/1180928235, partial archive of January 2023: special:permalink/1180928235 —usernamekiran (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

As the initiator of the original request, this is pretty much what I was hoping to see so that we at ITN can track how the ITN template box changes. Excellent work! --Masem (t) 00:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits or 30 days, whichever happens first). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 09:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. The bot created the archive page Wikipedia:In the news/Featured/February 2004 (for consistency with ITN candidates archive at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/April 2005). Everything worked as expected. Requesting an extended trial with 2,000 edits. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just added a new function to update the Wikipedia:In the news/Featured/Archives (consistent with /Candidates/Archives) as the bot creates a new monthly archive page. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:55, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

~~BAG assistance needed~~ The trial went as expected, and new functionality of updating index worked as expected in sandbox. Is it possible to get this task approved? —usernamekiran (talk) 13:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

doing some experiments, no hurry. —usernamekiran (talk) 05:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A user has requested the attention of a member of the Bot Approvals Group. Once assistance has been rendered, please deactivate this tag by replacing it with {{t|BAG assistance needed}}. based on the discussion at WT:ITN#Archive of ITN postings, no changes were made to the original program except for changing the target location for archive pages. requesting extended trial for 500 edits. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi usernamekiran, I have a couple requests. (1) Can we make the header, i.e. the green box at the top, into a template so the wording/formatting can be updated in one place if ever necessary? (2) Can you batch the edits together when you update a page? All of the edits here are done in quick succession using information that should be available to you at the start of the run, so it should be doable in one edit. This should greatly reduce the estimated 40,000 edits. — The Earwig (talk) 07:07, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig: Hi. (1) I had thought about the header to be transcluded something like {{Wikipedia:In the news/Featured/Archives/header}}. The header for all the candidates archive page is same (Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/November 2023), but in our case, there is one extra line: "The relevant discussions for additions of entries to the Wikipedia talk:In the news, kindly see Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/November 2023, or the previous month's page thereof." I am not sure how can we come up with something so that the header could be updated from single place/edit, as even if we use substitution somehow, it wouldnt be editable from single location in the future. Kindly let me know if you have any suggestions/ideas regarding that. (2) Regarding the edits in rapid succession: I was having a lot of difficulties because of the way mediawiki presents diffs in the html format. eg, even if a single word (eg death toll) is updated from 10 to 15, then the diff is presented as the original line completely removed, and an entire new line with the updated word as a totally new line. To circumvent this issue − and to avoid repeated entries, the bot relies on diff IDs already present in the archive page. Also, in current days, the ITN template gets edited/updated around 5 to 7 times in a day. So, in the first run, bot will archive all the entries (around 40,000), and then it will run everyday to archive the new 5 to 7 entries. In short: appending all the changes in single edit for a single run is not feasible (also difficult, as lot of entries do not go in same months, eg a blurb being added on 29 Nov, and being removed on 2 Dec). This can be resolved by adding a delay of 3 (or 5) seconds between each save operation. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Usernamekiran: For (1), I don't see why we can't have the bot transclude a template like you said... we can do that variable text for the month/year with either a parameter or parser functions. I can make an example to show you if you want. For (2), could you share the bot's code? It would make it easier for me to understand the issue. — The Earwig (talk) 08:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig: Hi. I added the link to github in this same edit. The code is very rudimentary/crude. Also, it was developed over a long period with a few breaks of few days, so it might look a little odd. I tried to add comments wherever there might be doubt. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig: Hi. If there are any possible improvements in the code, please let me know. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:21, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@The Earwig I created Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives/header, it is working as expected at Wikipedia:In the news/Featured/February 2004. @Primefac We are good to go for another trial. The Earwig's both requests have been addressed — transcluding the header, and a delay of 3 seconds between each save operation. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the header template, looks good – I am busy with holidays/family obligations over the next couple days so I won't have a chance to review the code until later, but I still believe we should be able to do this task in far fewer edits. — The Earwig (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I'm not sure what is the issue with number of edits. I mean, these edits will take place currently non-existent/unwatched pages. The task for creating complete past archive should take around 34 hours (40,000 diffs — 1 edit per 3 seconds). After that, on an average there are only 5 to 7 entries to archive per day. The bot will run only once per day, running for ~25 seconds. I think reworking the code for that wouldn't be feasible. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PrimeBOT 39

Operator: Primefac (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 12:48, Thursday, May 11, 2023 (UTC)

Function overview: Convert template use following update

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: WP:AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates § Request for a template

Edit period(s): OTR

Estimated number of pages affected:

Namespace(s): 783

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: {{Wikisource author}} recently was updated to allow for a |lang= parameter to link directly to non-English versions of wikisource for an author. A similar template, {{Wikisourcelang}}, links to a generic search on said language wiki for said author. This task will change {{Wikisourcelang|<lang>|otherstuff}} into a {{Wikisource author|lang=<lang>|otherstuff}} call.

Discussion

{{BAG assistance needed}} valid request not attended by any BAG members for almost two months. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Approved for trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.

This seems pretty straightforward. Let's go to trial.

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:38, 2 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. Edits. As a note, I did not run genfixes just to make the proposed change more obvious, but if this task does proceed I will be running genfixes alongside them.

Piotrus, I think this request is a little more convoluted than initially requested. Languages such as de do not use an "author" prefix (see e.g. Adolph Friedrich Johann Riedel and his corresponding page on de Wikisource), but I can't figure out which languages it holds to. I am not necessarily seeing a specific pattern between what languages do and do not. My thoughts are of two possibilities - run this task only for languages where the proposed change has the intended effect, or just scrap this BRFA and do these changes manually. Primefac (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Primefac I think we can run it for some languages that we can determine now, it shouldn't be that hard as long as it is consistent for each language (ex. German never uses, Polish always uses it, etc.). We could create a list for all languages that wikisource exists on, or just run it for now for some editions that are the biggest (ex. the ones with interwikis here). I did some checks and it seems it's pretty consisten - just a wikisource naming convention. Note that depending on the language, the "author" prefix is different - Polish is "autor". Swedish is "Författare", etc. In the end, what we need to fix is not the outgoing links but the text on our side. Consider this case, similar to the German one you quote, where we improved the language or our template but messed the link: before, diff, after. Since the links work, can we just figure out the way to change the wording in the template but retain the same link as before? The older template was able to do it, somehow, seems we are introducing a new error somehow? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you wouldn't mind making a list of which languages use the Author (in whatever language) prefix, I can hard-code their use into the template so that there isn't any issue.

This wasn't a problem before because {{wikisource author}} only linked to to the English version so no translation or odd coding was necessary. As mentioned in the original discussion, {{wikisource lang}} just links to a general search (which does sometimes turn up the author page directly) and thus does not require the "Author:" prefix. Primefac (talk) 08:06, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On hold. Just for now, while we deal with actual template issues. Primefac (talk) 08:31, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Primefac See talk, is this helpful? Those are most larger Wiki source projects, should be enough to get most of our stuff sorted out. We can take a look at what, if anything, is left after dealing with those languages? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should do, thanks for that. Going to keep this on hold for a bit longer, there's a TFD for merging all of these together and I might be able to enact these proposed changes during the merge process. Primefac (talk) 08:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Primefac Just checking the status of this? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:54, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Somewhat stalled, been rather busy myself and it doesn't look like anyone has started work on the template merger. I think I might have cleared my on-wiki plate somewhat (touch wood) so I'll see about prioritising the merger. Primefac (talk) 10:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved requests

Bots that have been approved for operations after a successful BRFA will be listed here for informational purposes. No other approval action is required for these bots. Recently approved requests can be found here (edit), while old requests can be found in the archives.

BattyBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 77) Approved 08:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Aidan9382-Bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 3) Approved 16:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
StradBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 18:25, 22 October 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
PonoRoboT (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 09:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 23) Approved 09:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 22) Approved 09:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
WegweiserBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 16:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
TFA Protector Bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 3) Approved 17:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 21) Approved 09:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
SdkbBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 4) Approved 08:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
SDZeroBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 9.1) Approved 08:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
TheSandBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 11) Approved 08:41, 30 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Bot1058 (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 8) Approved 17:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
MajavahBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 5) Approved 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
PrimeBOT (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 41) Approved 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Josvebot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 14) Approved 21:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
CX Zoom AWB (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 12:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
PrimeBOT (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 40) Approved 18:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
KiranBOT (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 7) Approved 15:17, 3 July 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
BattyBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 76) Approved 17:34, 2 July 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 19) Approved 08:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Yet another TfD implementor bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 10:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
BattyBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 75) Approved 10:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
IngenuityBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 2) Approved 10:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
VulpesBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Approved 10:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 20) Approved 09:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
IngenuityBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 3) Approved 10:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
BattyBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 74) Approved 09:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
GalliumBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 3) Approved 12:42, 17 May 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]
Eejit43Bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 2) Approved 12:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC) (bot has flag)Reply[reply]

Denied requests

Bots that have been denied for operations will be listed here for informational purposes for at least 7 days before being archived. No other action is required for these bots. Older requests can be found in the Archive.

UrbanBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 2) Bot denied 14:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aesthetic Bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 19:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dušan Kreheľ (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: V) Bot denied 11:24, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UrbanBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 12:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

pumi (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 11:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYKToolsAdminBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 11:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

KiranBOT (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 5) Bot denied 07:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PuggleBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 12:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dušan Kreheľ (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: IV) Bot denied 13:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CapsuleBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 08:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BsoykaBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 17:50, 3 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dušan Kreheľ (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: III) Bot denied 17:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dneo bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Bot denied 17:32, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DoggoBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 6) Bot denied 08:30, 6 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BHGbot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 9) Bot denied 08:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Expired/withdrawn requests

These requests have either expired, as information required by the operator was not provided, or been withdrawn. These tasks are not authorized to run, but such lack of authorization does not necessarily follow from a finding as to merit. A bot that, having been approved for testing, was not tested by an editor, or one for which the results of testing were not posted, for example, would appear here. Bot requests should not be placed here if there is an active discussion ongoing above. Operators whose requests have expired may reactivate their requests at any time. The following list shows recent requests (if any) that have expired, listed here for informational purposes for at least 7 days before being archived. Older requests can be found in the respective archives: Expired, Withdrawn.

FABLEBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Withdrawn by operator 16:10, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Avery Bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 5) Expired 10:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CircularRedirectsBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Expired 08:51, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TNTBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 5) Withdrawn by operator 10:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 18) Withdrawn by operator 03:26, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Qwerfjkl (bot) (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 14) Withdrawn by operator 12:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PuggleBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 2) Withdrawn by operator 00:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NovemBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 5) Withdrawn by operator 19:29, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CenPop (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Expired 16:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BareRefBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Expired 12:19, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AssumptionBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Withdrawn by operator 22:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DoggoBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 9) Expired 10:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fluxbot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) (Task: 8) Withdrawn by operator 14:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ConservationStatusAndRangeMapBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Withdrawn by operator 16:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ButlerBlogBot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) Expired 05:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

v t e Wikipedia technical help
Get personal technical help at the Teahouse, help desk, village pump (technical), talk pages or IRC.
General technical help	Browser notes Bypass cache Keyboard shortcuts Editing CharInsert Edit conflict Edit toolbar Reverting How to create a page IRC Tutorial Mobile access Multilingual support Page history Page information Page name Help Printing Software notices Editnotice Special Characters Entering User access levels VisualEditor Help
Special page-related	Special page help Edit filter Emailing users Logging in Reset passwords Logs Moving a page History merging Non-admin and admin-only page moves Notifications/Echo FAQ Page Curation Page import Pending changes Random pages Recent changes Related changes Searching Linksearch Tags User contributions Watchlist What links here
Wikitext	Wikitext Cheatsheet Columns Line-break handling Lists Magic words For beginners Conditional expressions Switch parser function Time function Redirects Sections and TOCs Tables Introduction Basics Advanced table formatting Collapsing Conditional tables Sortable tables Using colours
Links and diffs	Links Interlanguage Interwiki Permanent Diffs Simplest diff guide Simple diff and link guide Complete diff and link guide Colon trick Link color Pipe trick URLs
Media files: images, videos and sounds	Media help Files Creation and usage Moving files to Commons Images Introduction to images Picture tutorial Preparing images for upload Uploading images Options to hide an image Extended image syntax SVG help Gallery tag Graphics tutorials Basic bitmap image editing How to improve image quality Graphics Lab resources Sound file markup Visual file markup
Other graphics	Family trees Graphs and charts How to create Barcharts To scale charts Math formulas Math symbols Musical scores Musical symbols Timeline EasyTimeline syntax WikiHiero syntax
Templates and Lua modules	Templates Advanced template coding Template documentation Template index Template limits Template sandbox and test cases Citation templates Lua help Lua project Resources To do Substitution Purge Job queue Transclusion Labeled section Costs and benefits Guide to Scribbling
Data structure	Namespaces Main/Article Category Draft File File description page Help Portal Project/Wikipedia Talk Archiving Simple Template User User page design MediaWiki Bug reports and feature requests TimedMediaHandler extension Module Special
HTML and CSS	Cascading Style Sheets HTML in wikitext Catalogue of CSS classes Common.js and common.css User CSS for monospaced coding font Classes in microformats Markup validation Span tags Useful styles
Customisation and tools	Preferences Gadgets Skins Citation tools Cleaning up vandalism tools Customizing watchlists Hide pages IRC Scripts User scripts Guide List Techniques User style Tools Alternative browsing Browser tools Editing tools Navigation shortcuts Optimum tool set Wikimedia Cloud Services Beta Features at MediaWiki
Automated editing	AfC helper script AntiVandal AutoWikiBrowser Bots Creating history HotCat Huggle Navigation popups RedWarn Twinkle Ultraviolet WPCleaner Inactive igloo STiki
See also: Category:Wikipedia how-to Category:Wikipedia information pages Further navigation at: Help pages Administrators Accessibility Accounts Bots Referencing Citation metadata Templates User scripts

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