Wikipedia:Bot requests

For the policy on bot requirements, see WP:BOTREQUIRE.

This is a page for requesting tasks to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to put ideas for uncontroversial bot tasks, to get early feedback on ideas for bot tasks (controversial or not), and to seek bot operators for bot tasks. Consensus-building discussions requiring large community input (such as request for comments) should normally be held at WP:VPPROP or other relevant pages (such as a WikiProject's talk page).

You can check the "Commonly Requested Bots" box above to see if a suitable bot already exists for the task you have in mind. If you have a question about a particular bot, contact the bot operator directly via their talk page or the bot's talk page. If a bot is acting improperly, follow the guidance outlined in WP:BOTISSUE. For broader issues and general discussion about bots, see the bot noticeboard.

Before making a request, please see the list of frequently denied bots, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. If you are requesting that a template (such as a WikiProject banner) is added to all pages in a particular category, please be careful to check the category tree for any unwanted subcategories. It is best to give a complete list of categories that should be worked through individually, rather than one category to be analyzed recursively (see example difference).

Alternatives to bot requests

• WP:AWBREQ, for simple tasks that involve a handful of articles and/or only needs to be done once (e.g. adding a category to a few articles).
• WP:URLREQ, for tasks involving changing or updating URLs to prevent link rot (specialized bots deal with this).
• WP:SQLREQ, for tasks which might be solved with an SQL query (e.g. compiling a list of articles according to certain criteria).
• WP:TEMPREQ, to request a new template written in wiki code or Lua.
• WP:SCRIPTREQ, to request a new user script. Many useful scripts already exist, see Wikipedia:User scripts/List.
• WP:CITEBOTREQ, to request a new feature for WP:Citation bot, a user-initiated bot that fixes citations.

Note to bot operators: The {{BOTREQ}} template can be used to give common responses, and make it easier to keep track of the task's current status. If you complete a request, note that you did with {{BOTREQ|done}}, and archive the request after a few days (WP:1CA is useful here).

---

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

#	Bot request	Status	💬	👥	🙋 Last editor	🕒 (UTC)	🤖 Last botop editor	🕒 (UTC)
1	Implementing the outcome of Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#Follow-up RfC on TV season article titles	BRFA filed	18	9	Wikiwerner	2024-04-20 17:49	Primefac	2024-03-27 12:55
2	Auto-WP:NAVNOREDIRECT	Not a good task for a bot.	10	5	Wikiwerner	2024-04-28 12:22	Primefac	2024-03-13 18:37
3	Automatic NOGALLERY keyword for categories containing non-free files (again)		9	5	Wikiwerner	2024-05-15 18:43	Usernamekiran	2024-04-13 02:17
4	Automatically replace superscripts with sup and sub tags		5	3	Qwerfjkl	2024-04-06 19:54	Qwerfjkl	2024-04-06 19:54
5	Long-dash URL		1	1	GreenC	2024-04-08 22:16
6	Can we have an AIV feed a bot posts on IRC?		6	2	Lofty abyss	2024-04-29 10:29	Usernamekiran	2024-04-15 11:27
7	Bot to sync talk page redirects with their corresponding page		10	5	Anomie	2024-04-17 11:40	Anomie	2024-04-17 11:40
8	Bot to update match reports to cite template		4	2	Yoblyblob	2024-05-25 22:00	Mdann52	2024-05-21 09:03
9	Bot to mass tag California State University sports seasons	Doing...	3	3	Frostly	2024-05-24 16:36	Primefac	2024-04-19 18:13
10	Football league infoboxes		7	4	Bagumba	2024-04-25 13:43	Primefac	2024-04-25 12:01
11	Clear Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects		6	3	A smart kitten	2024-04-23 10:56	DreamRimmer	2024-04-21 03:28
12	Find linkrot with a specific pattern		7	3	GreenC	2024-05-01 16:20
13	Fixing stub tag placement on new articles	Not a good task for a bot.	4	3	Headbomb	2024-05-19 20:17	Headbomb	2024-05-19 20:17
14	User:RetractionBot, v2	Y Done	8	5	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06

Legend
In the last hour
In the last day
In the last week
In the last month
More than one month
Manual settings
When exceptions occur, please check the setting first.

Bot for WikiProject News (WPNBot?)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

There seems to be a lot of support for this bot, so I will go ahead with the implementation. Since this is a quite complex project, to be implemented over an extended timeframe, I have set up a separate specification page at User:B. Wolterding/Article alerts. Comments are welcome there. I have copied this discussion to User talk:B. Wolterding/Article alerts and will be closing it here. --B. Wolterding (talk) 10:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

---

I got the idea a while ago when updating the Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Current activity page. It would be very useful to have a bot going around Wikipedia every day and update these lists automatically.

What it would need to check (IMO)

• Nomination, failing, promotion of Featured Articles, Featured Lists, Good Article.
• Opening and closing of Peer Reviews.
• Nominations for deletion, as well as the result.

A useful parameter would be something to specify that the first X number of articles in each sections are to be transcluded so very active Wikiprojects can have a "Current Activity" section that's of reasonable length on their main page.

It would also be nice if such a bot would produce short messages similar to those on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Current activity to tell people who nominated, to congratulate when their articles passed, link to the article talk page when it failed, etc... Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 13:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I was actually thinking a bit about a bot of that kind recently - at least with a part of that functionality (e.g. listing the current deletion nominations, listing the results would be somewhat more involved). It would certainly be a nice feature if someone wants to use it.

On the other hand, on a technical level, it would differ a lot from what I am currently doing, and details need to be evaluated. The bot would probably need to run on the tool server. Also, if this is supposed to be rolled out on a larger scale, i.e. for many wikiprojects, performance aspects might be much more tricky then they seem at first. Any hints/suggestions/experience?

So, first question would be, are there indeed some wikiprojects who would be interested in a bot like that? If so, and if others here think it's reasonable, I would see this, say, as a medium-term project for me, and try to look into it during the next months. Of course, if someone wishes to implement it on the short term, I don't want to stop him... --B. Wolterding (talk) 21:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well considering I "run" WikiProject physics, I guess we could say that there's at least that one that's interested. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 21:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Use by a single WikiProject might be not enough to justify the programming and testing efforts, which will be considerable. But we're not in a hurry. I will post a notice to the relevant forums (Village pump, some others) to see whether someone else is interested. Perphaps, in this way, we can also collect some valuable input regarding the bot's functionality. Meanwhile let me summarize in my words what the bot would do:

It would update a page (one per WikiProject) that lists project-related articles which have entered certain workflows on Wikipedia, including:

• Deletion nominations (WP:AFD, WP:PROD),
• Featured article nominations, featured article reassessments, and the same for Featured lists and Good articles,
• Peer reviews.

Where possible, articles would also be listed when they have left one of these workflows, with results indicated (e.g. article deleted, article kept). However this might not be feasible in some of the cases above. The list would be updated once a day (to start with).

"Congratulating" nominators etc. might be a bit much for the time being, and doesn't seem to be so central to me.

Please add any comments you might have, below. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I have now posted a notice on the Village pump, on WP:COUNCIL, and on the talk pages of the 20 largest wikiprojects. --B. Wolterding (talk) 12:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulating might not be central, since that person might not be the one who put the most efforts, but at least mentionning who nominated so people can reach him/her seems reasonable. But like you said, this is not central. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 12:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I had posted at Wikipedia_talk:Canadian_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Automate_Deletion_sorting_to_Candidates_for_Deletiona week ago about how it would be great it would be if our articles nominated for deletion list could be updated by a bot. I was waiting for more of a community response of support before coming here or approaching Maelgwnbot directly to have this automated. I think having the above workflows automated is even better. As shown over at Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians'_notice_board/AfD, this type of programming can be done. DigitalC (talk) 12:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment; just a quick clarification: Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/AfD seems to be updated from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Australia, which is in turn a manually updated list; while the idea here would be to update a list fully automatically, by evaluating the project banners on talk pages. --B. Wolterding (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

We've just had an editor on WP:Anglicanism complain taht many of "his" Anglican articles are being afd'd and so on, so wider notificaiton to the project would probably be useful. I glance at AFD from time to time, but a more focused idea of articles of interest would be useful. David Underdown (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I can definitely see this being using in WikiProject Video Games, among others. Would there be any breakdown by Task Force with this as well? --MASEM 15:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, doing the same for task forces rather than projects should be no major challenge I think. --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I see a huge benefit with such a bot. It would also make Peer Reviews easier to manage and keep track of (hopefully increasing their usage). --.:Alex:. 15:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There is already talk of adding functionality to the WP 1.0 bot to facilitate this task. If someone is planning to write this bot, please contact me so I can explain how WP 1.0 bot can make the task a lot easier for you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes please! This would definitely be useful to WikiProject Aircraft, and probably our parent the Aviation WikiProject. --Rlandmann (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I had an idea for a "sentry bot" once that was similar in most respects for this. I like the idea, and I'm all for it. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree. Would be very nice for wp:ships to know when someone has nominated something project related for deletion or review. Has happened to us several times in the past where we were never aware of the nominations. --Brad (talk) 03:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Can't speak for everyone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants, but I like this idea. We tend to hear about such things in a manual way, but a bot would be less likely to miss things. Because the bot would only tell us about articles tagged with our wikiproject, I don't really see a problem with seeing irrelevant information, and the volume of information should also be manageable, I would think. I'll leave it to others to discuss what is feasible from a technical point of view. Kingdon (talk) 04:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be useful to include happenings at WikiProject Stub sorting on this as well, as there we've recently been discussing how to make WikiProjects at least aware of our activities, particularly when stub types connected to their scope are involved in proposals, discoveries and deletion. Severo^TC 07:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Well support for this seems unanimous. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 08:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

This looks like a great idea, and in my personal view it would be very useful at WP:MILHIST. Nick Dowling (talk) 10:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm in the throws of reviving WP:WikiProject Gymnastics, and this does seem like a good idea, especially for those projects with relatively low numbers of users. It might also help those out that haven't got sufficient volume for this like deletion sorting in their own right. Would be curious on how this'd work -- whether we could pick a root category that a project would be interested in, or whether it would require tagging on the talk page (I guess "both" is ideal) -- ratarsed (talk) 11:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• I saw this comment on the trains wikiproject and while you didn't invite WP:MUSEUMS because we're small, I definitely see the use for this type of bot service. TravellingCari 13:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit corrector bot

A bot that would add links or cite sources or basically anything to help you make a perfect edit. (Sound good?)Wikidude57 23:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Note: I can't have my PC on ALL day.Wikidude57 23:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Impossible Although such a bot would be a great thing, it is impossible to write a bot to add sources or links. Such a task requires human judgement. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 15:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Idealy this bot could be ran on a new account and be ready to run for admin in 2 months without any outside help. I also want it to mow my lawn. Chillum 15:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Just give it resources and voila.Wikidude57 18:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Move tagging

Articles in Category:National Cycle Routes beginning "NCR" - the following to be added to the top of their talk pages:

{{multimove|new name|Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Roads#National Cycle Routes move request}}

where the "new name" is s/NCR /National Cycle Route /. Thanks. 217.36.107.9 (talk) 15:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This tagging looks like an ideal task for a bot. Is there any reason nobody has done this yet? 217.36.107.9 (talk) 08:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Conversion bot

A while back I proposed creating a "conversion bot" that could find all stand alone instances of measurements given either in stadard or metric form and convert them into dual measurements listing both standard and metric measurements. I think the idea died off, but I still think that the utility of such a bot would be a welcome addition to Wikipedia, and with the conversion templates now in use here I think the time is right to bring up the suggestion again. Would there be any interst in creating a bot of this nature here on wikipedia? TomStar81 (Talk) 02:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Strong oppose: Bots do not possess the ability to discern if conversions are necessary and this would yield unnecessary articles cluttered with conversions every 2 lines. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 08:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• Not really a task appropriate to a bot. A manual run through by a user using a semi-automated process may hold water. Stifle (talk) 11:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

PUI Bot

There used to be a bot who listed subpages of WP:PUI at WP:PUI#Holding_cell once they were 14 days old or older, so that they could be cleared out by an admin. But there doesn't seem to be any more. Now someone (usually me) has to manually add each new day. Can someone please create a bot task which runs once per day (ideally soon after midnight UTC) to add

 *[[Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/{{subst:#time:Y F j|-14 days}}]]

to the bottom of section 1 of WP:PUI? Stifle (talk) 11:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

need a simple bot

Just need a bot that will search for typos I give it and correct them for me. Have some programming experience so I could do some simple maintenance on it. Please write on my page if you would be kind enough to build it for me. DxNate 13:44, 30 May 2024 User-Talk-Contribs

Try WP:AWB -- maelgwn - talk 00:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i agree, AWB will work for what you want. but please note that you typos are not allowed to be fixed automaticly and each edit must be manually done. Printer222 (talk) 01:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Need a newsletter bot

As per this; WesleyDodds needs someone to deliver a newsletter for WP:ALM monthly. He'll leave you a note when the newsletter is ready. Please leave a note on his talk page if you can do this (and tell him I sent you). —Giggy 03:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I can do this, leaving a message now. Soxπed93^(blag) 03:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Now Commons bot

Forgive me if this has been brought up before, but I have been moving tons of PD pictures from WP to the commons, but occasionally there are images that need renaming in the process (for example Image:Cathal Brugha commemorative plague.jpg -> Image:Cathal Brugha commemorative plaque.jpg). Is there a bot that updates links to these images in articles? Normally it is not a problem as most images are uploaded with the same name, but if there is a typo, or another already exists, or the name just isn't descriptive, it would be great if a bot would catch that and move the links, so the WP version can be seamlessly deleted. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 05:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you delete the local images yourself? Or do you tag them with {{subst:ncd|Image:Filename.png}}? (Do you use Magnus' tool?) Does anyone know if User:MetsBot change image names in articles when it checks Commons tagging? – Quadell ^(talk) 14:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I think this answered my question, it looks like 718 Bot does it. Cool. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 17:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:MUFC

I need to add the parameter "ManUtd=yes" to the {{Football}} template on the talk page of every article in Category:Manchester United F.C. and its sub-categories. However, there are hundreds of articles in those categories: too much for one man to do alone. Therefore, I would like a bot to add the parameter for me and, in the case that the {{Football}} template is not present on an article's talk page, it should be added with the "ManUtd=yes" parameter. – PeeJay 13:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Doing... have skipped talk pages that don't exist but all existing talk pages have the Football template, now just adding ManUtd=yes where it is need, should be done soon. -- maelgwn - talk 00:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers mate. In the case of the talk pages that don't exist, could those be done later at some point? Is there a relatively large number of them compared to the number that do exist? – PeeJay 01:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Finished adding ManUtd=yes where it is required. Give the servers a day or so to catch up with the categories and I will check again for talk pages that dont exist but need tagging, I dont think there are very many. -- maelgwn - talk 05:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

That's perfect, mate. Now the task force can get on with doing some serious improvement work. – PeeJay 07:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Y Done -- maelgwn - talk 09:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Help: cfd tagging bot?

I've just tagged the following categories with {{subst:cfd|Unqualified "Terrorism"}}:

• Category:Terrorism by country‎
• Category:Terrorist incidents in the 1990s
• Category:Terrorist incidents in the 2000s
• Category:Terrorism victims by nationality
• Category:Terrorism deaths by country
• Category:Terrorists by nationality‎

But I believe there are an enormous number of (first level only) sub-categories that need to be tagged similarly before debate can continue. Is it possible that someone could do this with a bot, please? Thanks in advance. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 14:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

This makes me nervous. Could you link to relevant CFDs for terrorism-related categories, so I can see whether they were successful or unsuccessful and how much support they got? – Quadell ^(talk) 00:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I actually did, but I'll do it again: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_July_25#Unqualified_.22Terrorism.22. Thanks. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 15:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The date has now rolled over twice from my original CfD, so the {{subst:cfd|Unqualified "Terrorism"}} tag will no longer work. If you don't mind grabbing the code from one of the above categories and tagging the subcategories with that, it would actually work. Thanks again. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 15:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Please? It's not fair to debate this at CfD if these categories aren't tagged to give involved parties fair warning. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Popularity rankings

I would like to create a list of articles under the Aviation WikiProject's scope, sorted by popularity, in order to get an idea of which articles are most visible to the public and our project should work at improving to FA's quickly. The category with all the articles is Category:WikiProject Aviation articles, or alternately Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:WPAVIATION. Can the program used on Wikipedia:Popular pages be modified for this? - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 01:47, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

 Doing... working on the script now, should hopefully have a list in 24h or so. Mr.Z-man 02:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Sweeeeeet. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 02:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Greek letters

After discussion of an odd coding problem at this Help Desk page, I'd like to have a bot to help with United States micropolitan area links. There's a difference in the Unicode between the following links:

• Mankato-North Mankato, MN µSA
• Mankato-North Mankato, MN μSA

As you can see in the Help Desk page, someone recommended having a bot work with these, going exclusively to the micron character. Could someone write a bot to convert all the "mu" links to "micron" links? I'm not entirely sure which of these characters is a mu and which is a micron, but I believe that the vast majority of links are the lower of the two Mankato links, and from what was said in the Help Desk comment, I'm guessing that these links are "mu". Ask me for clarification if this request isn't clear: as you can see in the Help Desk section, I've been quite confused with this problem, which has just appeared to me today anyway. Nyttend (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

What is wrong with the redirect? -- maelgwn - talk 12:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but I was advised (see the help desk section) that it would be best to go to the micron. Ask User:Andrwsc, whose idea it was to come here. Nyttend (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, regardless of what you think of the mu redirects, it would definitely be helpful to have a redirect using a micron to everything where there's a redirect using a mu: it's quite confusing to link to the redirect, only to find that you're linking to the wrong redirect. For example, I had to create Mankato-North Mankato, MN µSA yesterday because only Mankato-North Mankato, MN μSA existed. Therefore: can you write a bot to create a redirect (using the micron) to every title that already has a similar redirect with a mu? Nyttend (talk) 16:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

My take on this is that the semantic meaning of the µ within the redirect is an abbreviation for "Micropolitan", and as such, should use the micron character. Although the "mu redirects" look the same, that character has a different semantic meaning. Since it is already causing confusion for editors working on these articles, the need for standardization on the correct character should be clear. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Andrwsc has posted a list of such links here. Can bots be operated on Commons? I know that several Commons images link to the "mu" versions. Nyttend (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Template-checking bot

There are quite a few large templates used on various mammal species and I was wondering if I could enlist a bot for some help. For example, the template {{Diprotodontia}} is on about 150 or so species articles. I go through periodically and check that the template: 1) is either on all of the species' articles or if it has legitimately been removed, then I remove the link from the template; and 2) that no page moves snuck by me (which quite a few do, since many of the animal articles on WP are still in their formative stages), and if there was a page move I fix the redirect (I currently use the "Related Changes" tool which has its drawbacks).

I've been doing these templates through WP:MAMMAL and the goal is to link all of the species (there's only 4-5 thousand or so, I say "only" because I'm nearing completion) via these templates. Is there any way a bot can compare the links on the template to the articles that contain the template and provide a report on demand? This would allow me to ensure there are no redirects on the templates and also that there is consistency on the WP articles about what is a living or extinct species, and what is a species or sub-species. Thoughts? --Tombstone (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation redirects

As per the discussion at WP:VPP#ALL disambiguation pages to end "(disambiguation)", a bot is being requested to create "Foo (disambiguation)" pages that redirect to "Foo" in cases where

1. "Foo" is a disambiguation page (i.e. bears the {{disambig}} template), and
2. the "Foo (disambiguation)" page does not yet exist.

Again, only redirects will be created. --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 14:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

There isn't yet a consensus to run that bot if it were to be created.

Also, some more work needs to be done as to defining "Foo". We might end up with Foo (place) (disambiguation), Foo (name) (disambiguation), etc.

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am the person who initiated the WP:VPP#ALL disambiguation pages to end "(disambiguation)" proposal. To address your concerns, could we have the bot ignore all articles with the "(" and/or the ")" character (i.e. where we have a Foo (name), instead of a Foo, article which contains {{disambig}}) for the moment, and thus at least set the bot on its way, creating the most clear-cut redirects which nobody will dispute and which do not require any thought or judgement? It Is Me Here (talk) 16:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

It'd be pretty simple for a bot to create redirects at Foo (disambiguation) where Foo contains {{disambig}} or one of its variants. It'd also be pretty simple to tell the bot to explicitly not do this for articles named Foo (bar). I'd be willing to do it myself - and I don't really see it as problematic. Creating redirects without changing existing content/names is pretty uncontroversial. Shereth 17:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks a lot - please keep us updated on the bot's progress! It Is Me Here (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking at this request a little more thoroughly and while I still agree that it is simple from a technical standpoint, I have a few questions/concerns that ought to be resolved. First of all, there are a lot of pages that use the {{disambig}} template. I am running a quick check to get an idea on what number there are that do not reside at Foo (disambiguation) and will report back. Secondly, it must be decided whether the scope of this work will touch only on those pages containing {{disambig}}, or whether it will include its variants, such as {{Geodis}}. It might be worth bringing up in a fresh thread on the VP. Shereth 18:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok. There are 85,625 disambiguation pages located at Foo rather than Foo (disambiguation). As far as how many of these already have a Foo (disambiguation) redirected at them, I do not know; but I can tell you that, at a bare minimum, we're looking at the creation of 60,000 redirects. This is a rather large number. If you factor in the other types of redirects, it's probably in the 75,000-100,000 range. I'm unwilling to embark upon this task without a bit more of a firm consensus - I will bring it up at the village pump, and subsequently run it by BAG for formal approval before taking off with something like this. Shereth 19:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Automatic time period category sorting (update)

What I'd like, is a bot which, whenever [[domain:xxx text]] is in [[Category:xxx ntext]], the sort key is set to Otext where:

• xxx is a year period, probably restricted to one of the following:
  • a millennium (examples, Category:1st millennium, Category:1st millennium BC)
  • a century (examples, Category:1st century, Category:1st century BC)
  • a decade (examples, Category:0s, Category:0s BC, Category:1820s, etc.)
  • a year (examples, Category:1, Category:345 BC, Category:2004, etc.)

• text is arbitrary text (or empty, with the sort key being set to " " in that case)
• ntext is arbitrary text

• Otext is calculated as follows:
  • if text is empty, or contained in words within ntext, set Text = " " (sort to top level)
  • otherwise, remove leading prepositions ("by", "of", "in"), and words contained in ntext, and capitalize the first remaining letter.
  • (There may be other rules suggested later, or manual readjustments suggested for some other rules)

To avoid possible accidential sort key errors due to something else starting with 2000 being in Category:2000 AD, we might restrict ntext to be null for years. It's less likely that something would be in a category such as Category:20th Century Fox with the "Century" not capitalized.

The bot should log its output in such a way that it can be reversed if it goes WP:ROUGE, remembering that a sort key of " " is not the same as a sort key of "". Remember, if the bot works at all as I request, it won't change any categories, merely change the sort order of within categories.

Some of the categories are populated by templates, so the bot won't effect those. A couple months ago, I changed Template:DeathsInCenturyBC‎ to properly tag the nth Century BC deaths articles.

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm having trouble following. Could you give a couple examples of changes this bot would make? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Assuming all of these were not generated by a template:

1. If Category:1st century deaths (or an article 1st century deaths)is already in Category:1st century, change the sort key to "Deaths" by changing the key line to:

   [[Category:1st century|Deaths]]

2. If 1st century is in Category:1st century, change the sort key to " " by changing the key line to:

   [[Category:1st century| ]]

3. If Category:1st century deaths by country were in Category:1st century deaths, change the sort key to Country by changing the key line to:

   [[Category:1st century deaths|Country]]

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I can do this, but I'd like to get some more feedback as to whether this would be useful and non-problematic. Any other opinions from folks out there? – Quadell ^(talk) 01:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard any objections; and I think I mentioned some of my manual changes in Wikipedia:WikiProject Years. Pehaps I should ask again in that project, or in WikiProject Time, pointing to this request? Can you think of any other venues where input should be obtained. It just seems obvious to me that articles should be sorted, in a category, by default, by whatever information is not included in the article but not in the category name, and this seems a partial implementation. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going on vacation soon, and wouldn't want to start it before I go. I'll be back on the 23rd. (If someone else wants to create this instead of me, I don't mind a bit.) In the mean time, you could ask at those projects, yes, and perhaps set up an official request for bot authorization. Or I'll write up a BRfA when I get back, if no one else has tackled the project by then. – Quadell ^(talk) 22:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Discussion in the WikiProject was one "go for it" — and no other comments. I don't think this is contraversial, and I've suggested it be set up as being reversable, so perhaps we should go with this. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)