Wikisource:Bot requests

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Bot requests
This page allows users to request that an existing bot accomplish a given task. Note that some tasks may require that an entirely new bot or script be written. This is not the place to ask for help running or writing a bot.

A bot operating performing a task should make note of it so that other bots don't attempt to do the same. Tasks that are permanently assigned or scheduled for long-term execution are listed on Persistent tasks.

See also

Unassigned requests[edit]

Generic re-titler for Index: namespace (aka Special:Move-work)[edit]

Currently, Index pages can be moved manually. However this means that in order to avoid broken links Page:'s also have to be moved manually.

There is therefore a need for a tool-assisted edit script or bot which allows for an entire work to be re-titled.

The 2 input parameters would be the old Index name and the new Index name :-

The bot/script would be required to do the following:-

  1. Search for and compile a list of extant Page: namespace entries for "oldname.ext"
  2. For each Page (keeping a log of redirects created):-
    1. Check for a what links to the page,
      1. For a pages<\noiwki> entry update <nowiki><pages index="oldname.ext" ...> to <pages index"newname.ext" ...> if not already done so(ie no reference to oldname.ext on the page.
      2. For a link update [[Page:oldname.ext/...]] to [[Page:newname.ext/...]]
      3. For a transclusion update {{Page:oldname.ext/ ... }}to {{Page:newname.ext/ ...}}
    2. On the page itself (in addition to the above) update {{raw image}} params, and any links as previously.
    3. Check the index page for links/transclusions and update accordingly.
    4. Finally move the index page to "Index:newname.ext"
    5. Update links to the index page.
    6. Cleanup the redirects either by doing a deletion or taggging for sdelete with a suitable reason.

Can an existing bot cope with such a task? ( It's also my view that this sort of mass move relating to Page: and Index: namespaces should really be a Special: Page implemented in the relevant Mediawiki extension). ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Bulk page moves in Index:Our Sister Republic - Mexico.djvu[edit]

Original version had 6 missing pages now substituted with correct replacements. The source file & pagelist have been modified for the 6 missing scanned page issue as well. Now, please do the following via bot:

  • Move existing DjVu positions /503 to /525 up by +6 [new range D509 to D530]
  • Leave existing positions /531 to /541 untouched.
  • Create previously missing scan page nos. 487 thru 490 plus image & facing blank (a total of 6 pages) at positions /503 thru /508

Many thanks in advance & let me know if add'l help is needed. — Ineuw talk 01:47, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

tangent discussion
Note, I've moved the upper end of the range /526 to /530 manually. Couldn't move the lower end because Mediawiki doesn't let (with good reason a normal user move over an existing page.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Why? What did that accomplish except confuse the existing ranges carefully outlined above on top of jamming up what was 6 open /positions with speedy deletion requests instead? How is a bot suppose to account for that lack of 6 free spaces to work with? -- George Orwell III (talk) 10:28, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The moves were performed in good faith, but it seems only served to confuse things 10:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Consider it a lesson-learned. I suspect it will just have to go un-addressed for as long as it takes in order for that lesson to really stick with you (seems like I'm being overly mean but its how I learned (& remembered) this type of situational nuance) -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I posted a note on the Scriptorium about the underlying issue.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Not worth much - I'd leave it like this for the next year if only you'd take something away from the experience today. Unfortunately, your speedy delete requests were getting transcluded to the main namespace work -- which falsely inherited the speedy deletion tags request as well. See how the mess you made compounds the issue? Some other admin waking up on the other side of the world might have deleted Chapter 22 in error if it was left that way.

Anyway; the above position range(s) to be bulk moved (& left untouched) amended accordingly. -- George Orwell III (talk) 16:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah... should have <noinclude></noinclude> then? Which for some reason I have remembered to do on templates.. SighShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


  • Yes check.svg Done - All requested pages moved and the missing six pages were created (but not proofread; + image needed). Main namespace transclusion ranges for Chapters 21 & 22 should be double checked as well. -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Replacing the reference tags[edit]

Is there a bot that could replace the PSM <reference /> tags with {{smallrefs}}. The pages were generated before my time. If there is such a bot, can it be activated/implemented starting with with PSM Volume 31? Ineuw (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Header fixes[edit]

I messed up my header script template and wrongly italicised the header on every page from Page:The Lesson of the Master, The Marriages, The Pupil, Brooksmith, The Solution, Sir Edmund Orme (New York & London, Macmillan & Co., 1892).djvu/16 to Page:The Lesson of the Master, The Marriages, The Pupil, Brooksmith, The Solution, Sir Edmund Orme (New York & London, Macmillan & Co., 1892).djvu/66. I can't be bothered going back over those 51 pages to fix a recurring minor error that won't be transcluded anyhow, but it is there if someone feels like unleashing a bot on it. Hesperian 00:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 11:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Gosh thanks Hesperian 05:47, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Assigned requests[edit]

Substituting out diacritic templates for the actual diacritic[edit]

I have started to substitute diacritic templates for the actual diacritic. Sample edits can be sen in my contribs. If there are no objections, I am going to continue the clean-up. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Some more done as User:MpaaBot--Mpaa (talk) 19:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Done.--Mpaa (talk) 09:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me, but as a noob I don't understand. The templates like {{ae}} are not marked deprecated, and I know I read somewhere (sorry, I've read a lot of help files in the last week) that the templates should be used. Therefore I've been using them. Where is this policy explained? Sorry for posting this on this page. Laura1822 (talk) 19:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
In general, these might be replaced anytime: Category:Diacritic_templates, see top line. But you're probably right about {{ae}} and similar. As I have applied this list Category_talk:Templates_that_can_be_substituted, I think some instances might have been substituted. That list should be fixed if we do not want {{ae}} & co. to be replaced in future.
TBH, I do not know if this feature is still on: "support functionality for automatically turning on and off the display of ligatures". Comments welcome also from others.--Mpaa (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
So as a proofreader, should I use the template or insert the ligature directly? It's certainly easier to do the latter. Yes to some but not to others? What is the point of the template(s)? Laura1822 (talk) 13:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't remember too well, but I think it was a compatibility issue. Some displays couldn't render the ligatures, so to avoid a person seeing a little box, the template would break it into the "ae" or "oe" letters instead.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 13:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Template purpose is to assist in the entering of diacritics, see Help:Templates#Character_formatting. IMO, both ways are OK.--Mpaa (talk) 13:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Laura1822: for some they didn't know how to do the ligatures, so we just made templates available. You are welcome to use the templates or the actual characters. Every (not) so often, I run a bot through and do a replacement. It is neither here nor there on the frequency, and in many cases it is not overtly necessarily, though for a number of edge cases too many templates on a page is problematic. So in the end, it is just worthwhile running a bot through to do the work. Thanks for the question, it is worthwhile, and if you can think of some help pages where you see that it is of value to add the information, then we can look to do that. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! For what it's worth, on the Help page Mpaa linked above, I had completely missed the explanation that it was optional, since I was looking at the tables (probably looking for something else at the time). If the usage of the templates is somewhat obsolete, or intended only for use by proofreaders who can't see them for some reason, then I think that could be clarified. It would help for the templates themselves to have an explanation, or at least a statement that they are optional. Thanks! Laura1822 (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I have improved template pages for Diacritics with doc page.--Mpaa (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
This point is still not clear to me: is this feature still used: "support functionality for automatically turning on and off the display of ligatures (see {{ae}})" or we can substitute {{ae}} as well?--Mpaa (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)