Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bot requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 75.35.110.164 (talk) at 12:48, 7 June 2007 (→Please end the tyranny of  ). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

This is a page for requesting work to be done by a bot. This is an appropriate place to simply put ideas for bots. If you need a piece of software written for a specific article you may get a faster response time at the computer help desk. You might also check Wikipedia:Bots to see if the bot you are looking for already exists. There are also quite a few "frequently denied requests", for various reasons, such as a welcoming bot, as it would de-humanize the process, and an anti-vandalism bot, as several already exist. If you want to request a bot to populate a category for a wikiproject, please create a subpage with a full list of categories to be used, as most bot operators who can complete this task will not go into all subcategories, as some members may be irrelevant to your project. Also note that if you are requesting that an operator change or add a function to an existing bot, you should ask on his talkpage, if you have questions about certain bots, they should be directed to the bot owner's talk page to the Bot Owners' Noticeboard, and that if a bot is acting improperly, it should be posted to the owner's talk page, the Administrators' Noticeboard, or AIV, listed in increasing levels of severity, and a link to the discussion may be posted at the Bot Owners' Noticeboard if appropriate. Please add your bot requests to the bottom of this page.

If you are a bot operator and you complete a request, note what you did, and archive it. Requests that are no longer relevant should also be archived in a timely fashion.

See also: Current policy on bots and Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots, to make sure your idea is not listed.
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 5 days are automatically archived to Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 12. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
Archive
Archives
  1. August 2004 – September 2005
  2. June 2005 – November 2005
  3. August 2004 – January 2006
  4. February 2006 – April 2006
  5. November 2005 – February 2006
  6. February 2006 – April 2006
  7. May 2006 – July 2006
  8. August 2006 – December 2006
  9. January 2007 (Part A)
  10. January 2007 (Part B)
  11. February 2007 – March 2007
  12. April 2007 – current

Updating Progress Templates.

We would need a bot that updates progress templates (Like this one) At least once a day, the problem is that these templates almost never get updated, and therefore it is nearly impossible to know how many articles are left. Flubeca (t) 21:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Each progress template would have to be done separately, of course. If you specify where this data comes from, it would be easier to create the bot. – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, this is a count of articles in a category? (Hey gurus, how do you tell how many articles are in a category anyway?) – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Easiest way I know of is running AWB and getting a list from a category. It spits out the full number, regardless of paginating. ^demon[omg plz] 18:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
write up exactly what needs updated and how you need to update it, the category counting is very simple it takes me ~15 seconds to write a bot for that. But how you want it with that template..... Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have been doing this manually – about once a week – for {{Notability progress}} since April. I recently started also doing it for {{Copyedit progress}}, {{Merge progress}}, and {{Wikification progress}}. I have been doing it the low-tech way ... manually clicking "next 200" for each monthly category. I know it probably sounds awful ;), but each update takes only about 10 minutes. It would be nice to have the process automated.
On a separate note, the structures of the templates are slightly different. For instance, {{Merge progress}} and {{Notability progress}} are essentially identical, but both differ from {{Copyedit progress}}. Then there's a template like {{Wikification progress history}}. Which progress templates should this request cover? If the differing formats of the templates would present a challenge to having the bot automatically update them, I could standardise the format of all except {{Dead external links status}} (not organised by month) and {{Wikification progress history}} (graphic archive). Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 23:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
the template structure is not an issue, my question is how do I add data to them properly and keep the template from breaking. (I have no clue what im looking at) Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 01:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That I can't say for certain as I have no knowledge of how to program bots. Maybe it would help to take a look at this diff. Essentially, this is the only information that should change from one update to another. Let's assume we have a template that covers three categories, starting with March 2007. The relevant lines for the bot (listed below) are those that include a '#...#' paramater. I don't know if surrounding a value with '#'s actually does anything ... I've just done it to highlight the fields for this example. 

  bar:March2007
  from:0 till:#X# text: "[[:Category:Articles to be merged since March 2007|March 2007: #X# articles]]"
  bar:April2007
  from:#X+1# till:#X+Y# text: "[[:Category:Articles to be merged since April 2007|April 2007: #Y# articles]]"
  bar:May2007
  from:#X+Y+1# till:#X+Y+Z# text: "[[:Category:Articles to be merged since May 2007|May 2007: #Z# articles]]"

  bar:Total color:Total
  from:0 till:#X+Y+Z# text:"Total: #X+Y+Z# articles remaining"

The fields surrounded by '#' are the minimum that the bot would need to change (for purposes of simplicity, I have excluded mention of the "Unclassified" bar, which simply counts the number of pages in the main category – in this case, Category:Articles to be merged – and which can be dropped from the template altogether). So, conducting the update would require:

  1. Counting the number of articles in each category;
  2. Replacing the values X, Y, and Z with the updated numbers; and
  3. Updating the rest of the figures using the new data by erforming a few computations (addition only) in order to modify the lengths of the bars.

It would be nice if the bot could also update the date and time of the last update ... a date stamp (~~~~~) should suffice. Ideally, the bot would also add a new bar for each new month as time passes. Such an update would include two steps in addition to the 3 listed above:

  1. Adding a new bar to the "BarData = " field in the form ... bar:MonthYear just above bar:Total (see here)
  2. Displaying the bar on the template and linking to the new category by adding the below text (which continues the example above) just above the line bar:Total color:Total
  bar:MonthYear
  from:#X+Y+Z+1# till:#X+Y+Z+α# text: "[[:Category:Wikipedia articles with topics of unclear importance from Month Year|Month Year: #α# articles]]"

Does that information help at all? Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 04:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

where X Y Z are what? Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry ... X, Y, and Z are the number of articles in the respective categories. In the example above, X is the number of articles in Category:Articles to be merged since March 2007, Y is the number of articles in Category:Articles to be merged since April 2007, and so on. -- Black Falcon (Talk) 04:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I have an Idea of what im doing so im going to go be evil program some ideas. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 22:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok code is 95% done I just have to kill a bug before Its runnable. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First there was getting an inanimate entity to do things for you and now squashing bugs ... this smacks of sorcery. ;) A quick question, please: would it be easy to make the bot update progress templates (using the same structure as above) other than the ones that have been discussed so far? In particular, I'm thinking of creating progress templates for Category:Articles with large trivia sections, Category:Articles lacking sources, and Category:Articles with unsourced statements. The latter two each contain 70000+ articles, so I doubt I'll create them if I have to update them manually. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 18:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New templates will be very easy Im just fighting a error (computer bug) with Unicode text, Im hoping to correct that tonight. So once I get this fixed we can move on to other templates. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! Best of luck with the pesky little critter, Black Falcon (Talk) 19:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you get frustrated and want to hand this off, Betacommand, I offer to take over. (I was coming here to work on this, actually, before I saw you were on top of it.) Or if you've got it, that's cool. – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I need a list of stuff:

examples taken from: {{Notability progress}}

  1. list of templates
  2. for each template I need the

{{Tnavbar-header|'''Notability Progress'''|Notability progress|bgcolor=#cccff}} line

  1. and the main category to check for each template. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am listing below 5 of the 7 progress templates in Category:Wikipedia progress templates; the structure of the other two is substantially different (as noted above, one is not even organised by month).

Template:Categorization progress
{{Tnavbar-header|'''Categorization Progress'''|Categorization progress|bgcolor=#ccccff}}
Category:Category needed
Template:Copyedit progress
{{Tnavbar-header|'''Copyedit Progress'''|Copyedit progress|bgcolor=#ccccff}}
Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit
Template:Merge progress
{{Tnavbar-header|'''Merge Progress'''|Merge progress|bgcolor=#cccff}}
Category:Articles to be merged
Template:Notability progress
{{Tnavbar-header|'''Notability Progress'''|Notability progress|bgcolor=#cccff}}
Category:Wikipedia articles with topics of unclear importance
Template:Wikification progress
{{Tnavbar-header|'''Wikification Progress'''|Wikification progress|bgcolor=#ccccff}}
Category:Articles that need to be wikified

If there is a problem with the structure of any of the templates, I'd be happy to change its format to approximate {{Notability progress}}, which I assume is the one you worked off of. It'll probably be easier to change the template format (it shouldn't take more than 1-2 minutes per template) than change the code for the bot. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 20:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WelcomeBot

Yes! I know this is something that is frequently denied! But R has an idea:  :)

A bot is set to run on an account without the word "bot" in it. It will place a welcome template on new user's talk page (I like {{WelcomeMenu}}). Now, everyone always says "it's doesn't have the feeling to it if you're welcomed by a bot". This is why the name wouldn't include "bot" and the account could be shared (ahh...a violation of account policy :) ) by several trusted users/admins who would answer questions left on the bot's talk page (since it would be welcoming every user, it would probably receive a lot of messages.) Like I said... just a proposal. May sound a little crazy. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of a welcoming bot, but I think the only way to get around the obvious impersonal problem is for the bot to sign the welcome from a user (the user could be changed with each welcome taken from a list of users that wish for the bot to sign their name). I think this could alleviate most of the problems that are associated with a WelcomeBot. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow Ryan...I never thought of that. That's a great idea! Maybe I'll find someone who's programmed a denied welcome bot before and ask them if they can do that. Then submit a BRFA. I think ST47 has written one. I've asked him if he could do something like you've suggested. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be interesting. perhaps users could 'sign up' and for every welcome, one of their signatures could be used at random? I'll pull the code out of where ever it is and try to hack something, we could do, say, if a user edits and has a blank User talk, they get welcomed, but it would need to be people who edited and have no warnings...someone should post to the VP. --ST47Talk 23:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the list should be kept offline? --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's probably wise. Two processes would be the way to go, one to get the list of users and another to screen them, first for contribs, then for a user talk page.
So it would only welcome users who have made an edit? And I've linked to this at the pumps proposal's page. --R ParlateContribs@

(Let's Go Yankees!) 23:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, a blank talk, with contribs would be best, but maybe it should be kept to users that have registered within the past week/month (not sure how feesable that is)? VP might be a good idea for this one. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it'd be accounts that had just registered. The IRC end would look for new accounts and make a list, and then once it hits 500, output the oldest 100. --ST47Talk 23:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please, please, don't welcome vandals, trolls, impersonators, blockable usernames, spammers or sockpuppets, especially for their contributions. It really cheapens genuine welcomes. For this reason I think it is a bad idea, but whatever. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it wouldn't leave a message if the page exists, so if it has a vandalism warning, it won't be welcomed. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's also the vandals without warnings who shouldn't be welcomed. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(2ec)Well, if this goes forward, it'd welcome users who had edited but had no warnings, and I added the delay to ensure that if they had vandalized, there would have been time to warn. --ST47Talk 23:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If we wanted a name without "bot", User:Welcomer is available. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like an interesting idea... TimV.B.{critic & speak} 15:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You really should not welcome people at random, but rather should look through their contributions and give advice as needed. A bot cannot do that. (H) 00:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most people just place a welcome template, H. Which is what the bot would be doing. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
H: Noone does that, this bot would be no different. --ST47Talk 00:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I like this idea of a special bot. As R said before, User:Welcomer is available and that would fit perfectly with the template chosen. Let me know about the progress of this :) Extranet is now E talk 00:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do precisely that. I would hope many editors do. If you don't look through contributions you could be leaving an utterly inappropriate message. Why else would all the specialized welcome messages exist if not for people welcoming individually based upon context?
See also bugzilla:9213: New-messages bar not coming up and/or getting stuck up for anons. --Quiddity 01:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you used the signature of or maybe as second signature (i.e. User:welcomer & User:jeepday {<-- me}) where the second user was not only a volunteer on the welcome committee but was also actively editing currently. That way they are getting a welcome from someone who is actually currently online. I think I would also welcome IP's with message tailored to them talking about the benefits of signing up. There is nothing wrong with dropping a welcome message on the talk page of a new vandal, lets them know they are not working in the dark. (I sometimes drop a {{welcome}} instead of a "test tag" on IP's) Jeepday (talk) 13:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How would we determine who is online? I could make an IRC channel where people - who already signed up with their sig and IRC name - could sign in and out? --ST47Talk 14:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome them by hand thanks. This has been denied many many times, and the idea of having it deliver on behalf of people has been discussed as well. ^demon[omg plz] 15:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about something like User:SuggestBot. Users opt-in, and then receive a small list of some new users with blank talk and some contribs. A user can then make sure the contribs are helpful and post whatever welcome message is best. -- pb30<talk> 16:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome from a bot is no different that a custom account creation message. I oppose welcoming people without examining their contributions to see if they should be welcomed. (H) 15:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As said above, if it's a vandal, it will probably have warnings. If it has warnings, the page exists. If the page exists, it won't welcome them. (There is an amount of time between the account creation and the welcome). --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 21:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have done mass welcoming manually, using blank pages as a list, that is not the case. Many of the blank talk pages I was going to welcome did indeed have vandalism only histories. Other had made simple mistakes like not understanding our inclusion criteria. My point is that dropping a welcome and leaving was not enough, I had to examine the contributions and act accordingly. (H) 02:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So how about this: A user signs up to receive a handful of users to welcome, delivered by a bot. The bot looks at new users who have been a member for X amount of time, have X amount of edits, and have a blank talk page. This way users can look at the contribs, pick the correct template, and post it. -- pb30<talk> 03:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Being welcomed by a bot (actually all the communication with WP automatons) could be quite a turnoff for people. Look at the bot informing people about their pictures proposed for delete - either people ignore it, get upset or take it as already made decision of some power controling the robots. I can't remeber if I ever saw the desired response for this message on IfD. Pavel Vozenilek 20:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Did you mean ...?" redirect-, disambiguation-, and otheruses-warning bot

Any thoughts on a bot that detected new links to disambiguation pages, redirected pages, or links to pages with an otheruses template and put an "Are you sure you meant to do that?" notice on the user's talk page? This would educate users and cut down on links like Supreme Court, many of which should be Supreme Court of the United States.

Even better if the bot would look for a reply that contained some special content, like {{fixbadlink}} and fix it automatically.

The latter may not be worth the effort but the former is certainly worthwhile and very low-risk as it doesn't change any articles.

Of course any such bot would have to respect an "I know what I'm doing" notice on the User's main or talk page so as not to bother experienced editors. davidwr 09f9(talk) 22:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely no reason to go around fixing redirects though. See this section of the redirect guideline, the dabs or links that go to the wrong target should be addressed but not the redirects. IvoShandor 15:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Caps fixing - articles and links

Could someone do the following replacements (per WP:MOSTM and WP:MOSCL) please?

  • 'bmi' -> 'BMI'
  • 'bmibaby' -> 'BMI Baby'
  • 'bmi regional' -> 'BMI Regional'
  • 'wagn' -> 'WAGN'

81.104.175.145 22:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On what articles? --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 23:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Any that contain them. 81.104.175.145 23:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


This still here? 81.104.175.145 01:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

postion

Task: replace all instances of "postion" with "position" (retaining existing capitalisation). I can't imagine any circumstance where "postion" would be correct. Currently there are about 200 instances. (Well, I did a Search for "postion" and it said there were 765 results but it only displayed 200) and I don't fancy fixing them all manually. Also, please advise if there's a simple way I can/could have done this task myself, e.g. if there is some existing "general purpose word substitution bot" which I could have just configured and executed myself. Thanks. DH85868993

You can do this yourself with WP:AWB if you run windows :) --ST47Talk 10:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can do. The problem with automatic spell checking though, even if it's just simple search and replace work as it is in this case, is that there are bound to be false positives. Even misspellings that look like nobody would possibly ever use them on purpose will invariably generate false positives and, usually, there will be a handful in a batch of 500 or so edits. That's why those edits should always be reviewed by a human. It's mundane work that will most likely go completely unnoticed but it's important. -- Seed 2.0 11:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, looks like you did it yourself. -- Seed 2.0 11:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Community noticeboard linking bot

Threads on WP:AN, WP:ANI, WP:CN and probably other similar boards are frequently linked to from other pages, e.g. block reviews on the relevant user talk pages. However, these links go stale rather fast as the board thread is archived. This is regrettable, as such threads often contain important procedural discussions.

I propose a (probably dedicated) bot that would periodically go through the most recent archives of these boards, search for links pointing to sections in them and update these. E.g., the bot would change WP:ANI#Foo or Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Foo to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive251#Foo. Sandstein 05:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually working on such a bot, as suggested here. I didn't expect it me to take as long, but I'm easily distracted :-$ --Android Mouse 05:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot approved and now running. --Android Mouse 02:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sandstein 15:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Data gathering bot on Unused Images

See User:Mecu/OrphanImages. I would like a bot to automate the task of gathering the data. Once a day (preferably in the low-usage hours) it would go to Special:Unusedimages perhaps by using the link at the bottom of the data page and figure out how many unused images there are. It can go up and down by 500, with probably starting with the number from yesterday. If there aren't that many images, (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Unusedimages&limit=500&offset=200000 ) it will get a message saying so and it will know to decrease by 500. If there are more than 500 images, it will say 500 images and also have a "Next 500" link. When it's at the limit, it display "there are 234" images for which it could then add to the offset number to get the number of orphaned images. (this is how I've been doing it manually.)

I've been doing this manually (with another user stepping in when I was slacking), but would still much prefer an automated bot to do this. Updating the chart would be a bonus, but not required immediately. Getting the data recorded is more important to me for now, and generating the pretty chart could come later, perhaps by a separate bot if needed. MECU≈talk 16:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted --Auto(talk / contribs) 18:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good news, I wrote something that will work. Bad news: there's an "if" in that statement... if the bug I uncovered in the Special:Unusedimages page is fixed... --Auto(talk / contribs) 23:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What bug? I might be able to get a dev to work on it. MECU≈talk 16:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bug #10153. It's alright, though... I switched the method I was using from counting the images to reading the header at top (which will be another small bug report later... it reports the right number instead of the number selected as a limit, but the wording is wrong). So, in conclusion... it works. How often do you need it run and where do you want the results? --Auto(talk / contribs) 16:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Once a day, preferably at the same time each day. You can just report the results and append them onto the end of the table that's going at User:Mecu/OrphanImages. Start ASAP. I don't care what time of day it runs, so in the off-peak hours is fine. Thanks again! MECU≈talk 17:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done 16:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Dating trivia tags

Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trivia Cleanup and Template talk:Trivia, {{trivia}} was modified to allow articles to be categorised by month (see diff) by adding a date paramter to the template. There are currently thousands of articles in Category:Articles with large trivia sections that contain a tag without a date parameter. The last count, on May 23, was 3122 articles; this has probably increased substantially due to recent tagging by a bot. So, would a bot please add a date parameter (|date=Month Year) to all transclusions of {{trivia}} and {{toomuchtrivia}}? It would be nice if the bot could add the month and year that the article was tagged (that way articles that have been tagged for many months could be fixed first) but, if that is not possible, noting the month and year of the bot's edit should work also. Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 21:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a feature request for WP:AWB which auto-adds the date to other cleanup tags. Also User:SmackBot auto-dates other templates, could probably do {{trivia}} as well -- pb30<talk> 22:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding the AWB feature request. Since this is a recurrent task, I'll notify Rich Farmbrough to see if this is something that SmackBot would take on. I didn't notify him initially as the bot was not operating the last time I checked, on May 29 ... but it seems to be up now. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 22:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, SB took a four day break while I was visiting my father. It has now taken this on. Rich Farmbrough, 15:56 4 June 2007 (GMT).

This is just about that old thread back in this archive. I was going to post that regex for scraping the images (and removing them), but never got around to doing so. Anyway, here's a better version that can account for wiki-links in the image call code. Once again, it hasn't been tested, so if someone could fix it if I screwed up somewhere, that would be great :-): s/(\[\[|<gallery>)\s*($image)\s*(|.*(\[\[.*\]\].*)*)?(\]\]|<\/gallery>)//g. TimV.B.{critic & speak} 15:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation delivery

Could someone deliver Wikipedia:Meetup/Philadelphia 4/invite to this list of people Wikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia/Philadelphia meet-up invite list? Thanks! --evrik (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you can figure out the TBD info first? --Auto(talk / contribs) 15:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done manually by some other user... --Auto(talk / contribs) 17:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Manitoba Stub Tagging Bot

I have hundreds of stubs, tagged with a few Manitoba related templates, in a couple categories, which are going to take me a REALLY REALLY long time to tag, if possible, could a Bot be created, (temporarily), to automatically add the Project banner, and assess as stub class on the article talk page? This would make my job a lot easier. The bot does not need to run for a very long time, and doesn't need to do it quickly, just faster than me, which is pretty slow. Thanks, GrooveDog 22:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my bot can do this, can you expand on what you want though? Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 22:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiProject which I founded, "Wikipedia:WikiProject Manitoba", is in need of a bot that can go and tag all stub talk pages with the {{WPMAN}} template. The stub name is {{Manitoba-stub}}, and there are a couple types of Manitoba related stubs.
The fact is, all that tagging will take forever, and I was wondering if a bot could do it for me. :) GrooveDog 02:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
define and there are a couple types of Manitoba related stubs otherwise it sounds clear cut. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 03:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would need your bot to tag the talk pages of all articles that include the {{Manitoba-stub}}, {{Manitoba-road-stub}}, {{Manitoba-geo-stub}}, and {{Manitoba-politician-stub}} templates. It would tag those talk pages with {{WPMAN|class=stub}} template, so that I don't have to, because there are many many many stubs in those categories. GrooveDog 12:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ok give me a few days. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 15:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Currently running myself. --Auto(talk / contribs) 17:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Work will finish tonight.. (tagging one page per minute). --Auto(talk / contribs) 19:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use on User pages

Hey, I have a reasonably simple bot request, I would write it myself (It is incredibly simple), but my bot framework I am using (jwbf for java, if anyone knows any better ones tell me) has some MAJOR bugs regarding categories, and it can't fetch subcategories.

The idea is to parse Category:Fair_use_images and its subcategories, and reading the list of pages the images are used on and seeing if they are used on any User namespace pages. If so, it removes them and warns the user in question. It's a task I know many users do, and it would probably free up a lot of time.

Note that I am new to images, and I believe that image policy agrees with this idea, however if not please correct me.

Thanks! Matt - TheFearow 08:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's my understanding that Eagle 101's Gnome bot already does this and I think BetacommandBot still processes ORFU'd images. --Seed 2.0 08:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please end the tyranny of &nbsp;

Dear Bot People: Please replace "word&nbsp;word[&nbsp;word...]" with "{{nowrap|word word[ word...]}}" because editing wikitext with &nbsp;'s in between words is hard and discouraging to the newcomers. Thank you. 75.18.212.28 15:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Winbot is already doing unicodification work (and Curpsbot-unicodify used to). In addition to that, many users are unicodifying articles they're cleaning up or otherwise working on with AWB. Having said that, if you don't mind waiting a couple of weeks, I could grab the latest DD and make a list. After that, the next step would be to see if there's consensus to convert NBSPs and the like which, frankly, might be a problem. I suspect false positives might be a another issue, in which case those edits would have to be supervised. But, yeah, it might be worth looking into. I'm a bit busy right now but please feel free to remind me in a couple of weeks. As an aside, you might want to read WP:ACCOUNT to make it easier for others to contact you (see this). --Seed 2.0 16:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Is converting &nbsp; to {{nowrap}} related to unicodification? 75.35.110.164 12:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot that removes deleted images from articles

Could we have a bot go through the deletion log and remove deleted images from articles? There are hundreds of images that are deleted each day, and the admins don't have the capacity to remove them. The bot should probably mention the admin who deleted the image and the reason from the deletion log so that questions is directed correctly and not to the bot operator (ref.). Rettetast 17:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of deleting or delinking the images, I would recommend replacing them. A simple placeholder image, like eg. Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg should do the trick. That way, the layout of the article's doesn't get screwed up (well, hopefully). --Seed 2.0 18:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but it has to be a general image since there a number of reasons why images are deleted. I forgot one thing the bot should do. It should ignore images withe deletion summary that includes "I8" which means that the image has moved to commons, and it should also check if there is an image at commons with the same name and ignore it if it exists. Rettetast 18:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You could do it with AWB, but it would take a while. --Wikihermit (Talk • HermesBot) 23:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to make this bot, but I never found a way to sort the logs by namespace. ^demon[omg plz] 23:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In AWB? Make List from: then add the log. It doesn't work for AWB because the image is already deleted. If you wanted to do this with AWB, you would have to manually add the deleted image under More. I don't think there is a simpler way with AWB. Maybe you could check with Betacommand, Rettetast. Wikihermit (Talk • HermesBot) 00:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fix Double redirects

Hi, I want fix Double redirects by my BOT. I do test , Plaese see. Thanks--OsamaK 09:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRFA --ST47Talk 10:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bot_requests&oldid=136587195"