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]

Populate category "Women authors"[edit]

I created this category and I think it’s important on this project, but it would take much time to fill it entirely manually, while the task may be easily completed using data from Wikidata, so I propose it to be completed by bot. --Nonexyst (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I can take it. Just need some free time.--Mpaa (talk) 10:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for response.--Nonexyst (talk) 10:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 21:09, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Actually this would be more efficient with a switch in the Author template, something like:
{{#switch: {{#property:P21}}| female = [[Category:female]] | male = [[Category:male]] }}
As on my talk page concerns were issued (see User_talk:Mpaa#Categorizing_by_gender), when the discussion is settled down with the proper actors (@Prosfilaes:, @EncycloPetey:, @Nonexyst:) and a decision is taken, I can remove this category the explicit category if needed if the decision is not to have the category or to implement it directly in Author template. Waiting for further input in the meanwhile.--Mpaa (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, I still argue for keep the categorization by gender, since it’s carried out in many wikis including English Wikipedia and French Wikisource, and gender of an author is much expressed in the author’s works, especially in case if fiction writer/poet, so the category has to be useful. Many wikis use male gender as default, but nevertheless I don’t oppose creating "Male authors" category.--Nonexyst (talk) 21:03, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

We would be better to utilise enWP's categorisation module thingy, and just categorise from WD straight, without any intervention by switches. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:37, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
See w:Module:Category handlerbillinghurst sDrewth 10:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I miss how "Module:Category handler" fetches data straight from WD, but I leave the implementation to someone more familiar with both Lua and WD. My point was that we do not need to explicitly indicate [[Category:Men/Women author]] on each author page, but only embed the logic which gets the gender info from WD directly into the author template.--Mpaa (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I modified {{Author}} to automatically categorise based on WD (if someone finds a better implementation, please improve). I also created the three categories correspondent to Property P21 values (Category:Female Authors, Category:Male Authors and Category:Transgender Female Authors).
I did not move Women authors, so we have the two options to review. If this is fine, I will remove this last one and delete or redirect the category to Female Authors.
If a better naming is desired, no objections from me.--Mpaa (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I was in doubt how to name the category, but finally chose "Women authors" in order to make it uniform with Wikipedia (Category:Women writers, Category:Women scientists, etc., though, Category:Male writers, etc.), so I think the best is the conform Wikipedia style in naming categories. And finally all words except first in these category names should have their first letters decapitalized. --Nonexyst (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Renamed to: Category:Women authors, Category:Male authors and Category:Transgender female authors and added Maintenance categories (Category:Author pages with gender in Wikidata, Category:Author pages with no gender in Wikidata‎ and Category:Author pages with gender manually categorised‎)--Mpaa (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Great work! My appreciation. Sorry, I didn’t pay attention to one, as I think, important detail. I think there’s no need in two categories for transgender authors, since these categories shall not be highly populated in nearly future, moreover, I don’t know if there exist any transgender female author whose works are eligible for Wikisource, while one trans man definitely exists. So maybe the best solution is "Transgender and transsexual authors", conforming to Wikipedia. In such case, an author should be placed in two categories, e.g. "Women authors" and "Trans… authors", which, as I understand, should be even easier to implement.--Nonexyst (talk) 23:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Fine. Getting tricky ...--Mpaa (talk) 07:39, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. To me, it’s complete now. --Nonexyst (talk) 08:52, 5 April 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)

@Ineuw: We would have to trawl the pages and do a replacement. There may be a means to find them by some arcane prodding of the dumps, however, in the end, it is probably just as easy to just grab the main ns pages for PSM and do the replacement. [I am presuming that you are talking main ns, and not Page: ns, which would not seem a worthwhile exercise. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I’d like to see Page:s done also. Moondyne (talk) 02:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
That is a lot of pages trawled for replacements of no demonstrated value. Why do you wish to see it done there? If it is for your viewing, then you can write some css to changes its presentation. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
I dont care. Moondyne (talk)

I want to thank whoever inserted the smallrefs into vol 33 of PSM. @Billinghurst: I understand your objection to inserting this in the Page namespace because of it's limited value, but aside from my preference of reading the contents in the Page namespace, it also helps me to keep focused on details and correct errors (I) made. This also applies to the running headers - which I put back after removing them initially. All main namespace pages already have the smallrefs.— Ineuw talk 22:30, 21 April 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)