Wikisource:Bot requests

From Wikisource
(Redirected from Wikisource:BOTR)
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]

Section Collator[edit]

Is there a bot that is capable of collating the section begin tags e.g. ## Deb, Binaya Krishna Raja ## from the djvu pages of the The Indian Biographical Dictionary (1915) e.g Page:The_Indian_Biographical_Dictionary.djvu/160 and converting them to content list entries. There are several hundred entries and this seems to me like a task that should be suited to a bot. Even the creation of a list that could then be converted to content entries would be simpler that manually extracting tags from each page. --GreyHead (talk) 14:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Are you asking something like: Wikisource:Bot_requests#A_Dictionary_of_Music_and_Musicians_.28new_requests.29, point 2? I.e. creation of subpages from section headings (and a summary list)?--Mpaa (talk) 19:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm very much a beginner and find most of these posts pretty hard to understand. I think that point 2 is one step more than I was asking for and therefore more useful. For the Indian dictionary there is no contributor and only a scattering of Wikipedia links. Where i have found them they are shown immediately after the section begin tag as e.g.
## Vijiaraghava Chariar, Hon’ble Mr. C. ##<br /> [[w:C. Vijayaraghavachariar|'''Vijiaraghava Chariar, Hon’ble Mr. C.''']]
or, in a very few cases with an added language,
## Urquhart, Rev. William Spence ##<br /> [[w:de:William Spence Urquhart|'''Urquhart, Rev. William Spence''']]
--GreyHead (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
You can find the list of section tags here. You can ask for deletion of the page once you are done.
I can create subpages in main spaces with a bot if you deem so.
Right now there is a mismatch between Page and Main ns in the use of straight/curly apostrophe which prevents correct transclusion, that needs to be fixed. See some pages were you have "Hon’ble" in the tag but "Hon'ble" in the page title (e.g. The Indian Biographical Dictionary (1915)/Zain-ul-abdin Sahib Bahadur, Hon'ble Shifaul Mulk).
My recommendation is to fix the mismatch converting to straight quotes (I can do it by bot as well), but that's a matter of opinion. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 21:20, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much, I'll take a look at the list over the weekend and work out how I can best use it. Just for my education, what is the problem with the curly quote? The pages appear to transclude manually OK e.g. The_Indian_Biographical_Dictionary_(1915)/Agnew,_the_Hon’ble_Mr._P._D.. --GreyHead (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
In your example there is consistency between the quote used to indicate fromsection/tosection in "pages" tag used for transclusion and the one used in the "section begin" tag in the page in the Page:ns. My previous example above is not transcluded because the former has a straight quote and the latter a curly quote. I would recommend a uniform approach across the whole work (Page ns and Main ns, including page titles). Now the use of straight and curly is different on a per page basis, both in tags and in titles.
Note that in the list I generated, the red title is obtained using "section begin" tag, so the page title will have the same quote style as the tag.
One comment related to style: the new pages you are transcluding have a different layout compared to the existing, also here it would be nice to have a uniform style. Bye--Mpaa (talk) 18:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I understand now. I've fixed all of the mismatched quotes to be consistent. I've also gone back and re-formatted the earlier pages to match the more recent ones; there's still a large block at the end to be done.--GreyHead (talk) 12:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the updates and for the formatting. There are two is one other potential bot tasks: there's a block of about 2,200 entries in the main body of the directory and a second block of about 38 entries in the Supplementary biographies that still needs to have transcluded pages created using the modified template in e.g. The Indian Biographical Dictionary (1915)/Tytler,_Adam_Gillies. Is that something that a bot can do something to help with?--GreyHead (talk) 22:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it can be done. For what I could see of the work, the best way is to get a section name from Page:xxx and to create the main ns page with "The Indian Biographical Dictionary (1915)/xxx (if not present already). You have the list of sections, I could refresh it if you need. Once you are sure that that list is OK, then we could proceed.--Mpaa (talk) 13:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Just double checking before I go and try to create two two thousand pages by hand . . . it's not possible for a Wikisource bot to create the pages, just to edit existing pages? If not then it might be worth my creating some desktop macros that will do some of the heavy lifting.--GreyHead (talk) 14:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Update: I've created a spreadsheet that builds the header code from a list of page numbers and titles. Plus a desktop macro that pastes in the header and puts the page in preview mode. That makes the process of creating pages a lot quicker.--GreyHead (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
It is possible to create new pages by bot. Just leave a note if you decide not to proceed with your approach.--Mpaa (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done In the this was done partly by bot and mostly by hand. With hindsight, better more consistent preparation might have allowed a bot to do more of the heavy lifting. I am now very clear that the task of transcluding 'dictionary' works with thousands of entries is not trivial, maybe something could be done to help automate this. It is very different from transcluding a work with dozen or so chapters. GreyHead (talk) 10:18, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Archive Bot[edit]

RE Wikisource:Scriptorium#Split.3F would anyone be interested in cloning the archive function of user:sanbeg (bot)? It had been archiving Scriptorium, but has been inconsistent for sometime. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 15:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

When Validated[edit]

I made a suggestion at Wikisource:Scriptorium#When_Validated for a categorization by month and year that a work is validated. Adam suggested that this would require a bot, to search for and add works to the categories. Is there anyone who would/could be interested in this ongoing task? Jeepday (talk) 01:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. One solution is to use a query, setting start and end date (change the bold fields in cmstart=2013-02-01T00%3A00%3A00Z&cmend=2013-02-28T00%3A00%3A00Z). And then categorize manually. See below.--Mpaa (talk) 15:34, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
See e.g. for Index validated in February:
Or you can use the API Sandbox as interface and select the output format you prefer:
  • Withdraw request, a lot of work, with limited community support. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 14:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
    Actually, I might be able to do this. I can't do complicated bot stuff but it occurred to me recently that this might be possible with AutoWikiBrowser. It helps that most of the the validations appear to fall in December 2012 (I don't know why but 594 out of 993 have this date, as at time of writing). I think a template might work best; I've noticed categories sometimes get removed from index pages when they are edited. I still need to think about how to do that. However, this won't cover future validations, this would have to be done semi-regularly to keep everything up to date (and could be done manually in some months). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 20:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I do not know how you got December, but I noticed that too using the query above and removing the time interval or e.g
category             = Index Validated
addfirstcategorydate = true
order                = descending
To me, it looks strange, as I checked at random and the history does not match with the indicated December timestamp.
Maybe someone more knowledgeable in queries might explain why?
A possible brute force approach is to run a bot to scan the revisions of the validated indexes and check when progress changed to "validated". I can't promise when but I might give it a try.--Mpaa (talk) 22:14, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
There was an edit to MediaWiki:Proofreadpage index template, the page that controls all Index pages, at about the same time (2012-12-16 00:21Z). That might have affected the categorisation. I know Dynamic Page List, and probably the API, records the last time a page was added to a category, not the first time. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 08:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
If someone is interested, here is the list. Dates indicate when Progress has been set to "Done". I made some spot checks and should be OK.--Mpaa (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
That's great! My idea for implementation was to add a template like {{index validated date}}, still experimental at the moment, to each index in the table of contents section (just so it is in the index page somewhere, not left the end where it might get lost if the page is edited, and in a location that shouldn't interfere with anything else). I can add the template in blocks for each month with an automated search and replace, although even then it wouldn't be quick. I have made a live test on Index:Frontiers.djvu (which is apparently our first ever complete index). The top icon is just to easily and quickly identify indexes with or without this template; it can be removed if it is a problem. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Great job ! Jeepday (talk) 10:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Once you're done with experimenting and what is wanted is settled and agreed, we could see how to handle the changes in a more automated way.--Mpaa (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I've made an initial run through a few months, all sorted into subcategories of Category:Indexes validated by date. I'm just going to wait for a bit to see if this is working, correct and that I haven't broken anything. If there are no complaints, I'll finish the task soon. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Great start Adam, umm User:Robbie the Robot might want to drop a note here before doing to much more. Just to keep with the formalities. Jeepday (talk) 11:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Will do. (To be honest, I thought that wasn't necessary if it was listed on the page. However, as lots of people will see these edits, I suppose some information is appropriate). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 09:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done See Category:Indexes validated by date (I've also made a portal, Portal:Proofreading milestones, for the key validations). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 01:08, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Add to persistent tasks[edit]

Can this task be added to the list of /Persistent tasks? It can be performed by any AWB-based bot, any AWB user or even manually (although this last one may be a lot of work in some months). The task will need to be performed at least monthly to keep the categories up to date. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Volume information for CE1913[edit]

As was done with Wikisource:Bot requests/Archives/2012#Volume information for EB1911 2 can a bot add volume information added to the header or the article pages of CE1913.

This has been done by hand for some entries (eg the first in the encyclopaedia Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Aachen) but has not been done for entries such as Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Good Friday

In addition it would be nice to have the contributor field filled out as it is for the "Aachen" entry but has not been done for the "Good Friday" example. But I appreciate that this is more complicated and perhaps the two processes should be done independently of each other.

-- PBS (talk) 11:22, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Is there a volume list? — billinghurst sDrewth 11:26, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the contributor, is there at least a list of contributors per article (asking for too much maybe), or how they are usually indicated in text? E.g. A.A. MACERLEAN = Andrew Alphonsus MacErlean, so one can try to make some match at least?--Mpaa (talk) 11:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
In the meantime I started with pages with contributors.--Mpaa (talk) 18:43, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Done for pages with contributors, when linked to /Volume N. There is a bunch of pages not linked anywhere. The rest is on hold, pending the decision to set up info on contributors or continue and take the two steps in two different runs.--Mpaa (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

NB that the initial Catholic Encyclopedia posting is a right mess. A number of quite arbitrary decisions were made, some of them dating back to the New Advent digitisation. The volume listings we have here are essentially worthless. They are quite untrustworthy, and if I need to know a volume number, I would always consult where you can see the pages and their order. I have worked through volume 1 here, and volume 2 up to Benedict Biscop, only. Other than that, there is no reason to believe that the article titles are sensible or correct or standard, or that "previous" and "next" are correct links.

If there is interest now in doing it right, the page WS:CEU and its talk are available. Creating the author pages is semi-routine from The Catholic Encyclopedia and its Makers. Dates of death can present a problem. The article listings in that work are quirky and often not quite complete. Charles Matthews (talk) 07:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll will not proceed further then. Note that there could be the chance to add contributors on articles, based on their signature at the end of an article. If someone is interested, just leave a note. --Mpaa (talk) 09:42, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

That sounds to be of interest. The signatures do require checking: some are in bad shape. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:04, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll post at WS:CEU talk page what I have in mind.--Mpaa (talk) 21:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (new requests)[edit]

With the need to change from the DL format there are a few tasks that I need bot assistance with.

1. Change all internal links of the format [[A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/B#Beethoven, Ludwig van|{{sc|Beethoven}}]] to [[../Beethoven, Ludwig van|{{sc|Beethoven}}]]. These will be found in Index:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians vol 1.djvu and Index:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians vol 4.djvu.

done--Mpaa (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

2. Create subpage articles for all articles in Index:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians vol 1.djvu pp. 13 to 780 and Index:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians vol 4.djvu pp. 533 to 700. Please use {{DMM}} for the header. The subpage name for each article will be the name in the section tags. The content for the Contributor = field will be found in the Author: link at the end of each article. Previous = & Next = will be from the section tags of the previous and next article in sequence in the volume. Articles from volume 4 should have "Published in the Appendix" in the Notes = field. Make the Wikipedia = field the subpagename and the DMM project will go through them and amend or remove links as appropriate.

Regarding Wikipedia = , do you mean to use {{SUBPAGENAME}}? I guess not many pages on Wikipedia are named "Surname, Name". Wouldn't it be better to try to reverse the section tag to "Name Surname"?--Mpaa (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
You're quite right (of course). Thanks for catching that! Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:29, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Created a few under A. Can you take a look if it's OK like this?--Mpaa (talk) 12:19, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
They look fine to me. Much appreciated. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:29, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi again. One more check before proceeding further. Prev/next for Vol 1 should be based on Vol 1 and Vol 1 only or consider also Vol. 4 entries? Current bot is considering only Vol 1, as you can see from red entries here, A, where articles from Appendix are not part f the prev/next sequence.--Mpaa (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Stick to current with the sequence per volume. The alphabet structure at 1:1 ... is a construct that isn't a part of the work as published and is just intended to make navigation easier. Thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
A couple of refinements that would be nice, but not essential if not practical. 1) If score tags are present in the article, then set Score = to yes. 2) If ref tags are present in the article, then add {{smallrefs}} after the pages command. 3) Include Type = on all articles, but leave blank (filling this in has to be done by a human). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Articles in Vol. 1 created.--Mpaa (talk) 18:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Articles in Vol. 4 created.--Mpaa (talk) 19:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

3. Create a list of all articles created through #2 above for the letters H & I at Wikisource:Wikiproject DMM/H and Wikisource:Wikiproject DMM/I Many thanks, Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

List of DL, as done before, for H and I now in Wikisource:Wikiproject DMM/H. Let me know if I got you wrongly.--Mpaa (talk) 08:45, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Bible Bulk Moves[edit]

In Index:The Holy Bible, containing the Old & New Testament & the Apocrypha (Volume 3).djvu, we need every page currently existing in the range

  • D/652 to D/1478 moved up by +2 [new range: D/654 to D/1480]

Thanks in advance (... and I don't know why folks can't follow instructions). -- George Orwell III (talk) 11:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Bad index usage bulk deletes[edit]

It appears the Index: space was used to create Pages in spite of no pdf source actually existing. The file itself would not appear to be hostable anyway since it seems to a 2011 proprietary guidebook. Request all pages under the faux file...

... be bulk deleted. TIA. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done . I tried Nuke for bulk delete and it worked. Might be useful for similar future requests.--Mpaa (talk) 07:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks; it didn't dawn on me that the Pages were recent enough creations. Usually Nuke gives me fits and whatnot when the target(s) in question are "older" than 30(?) days. They might have tweaked it since I last tried it so the page-name-pattern option might work better now - I'll try to keep Nuke in mind for next time regardless. Thanks again. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Alphabetical work index[edit]

Per Wikisource talk:Works#Work index revision, we are attempting to create a new, alphabetical work index along the lines of Wikisource:Authors. Could a bot create the "A" page, please?

Header: {{work index page|A}} (the template has not been created yet).

Then there should be several headings like this:

== Aa ==


== Ab ==


Under each heading there should be a list of all pages whose title begins with those two letters, excluding subpages and pages in Category:Mainspace disambiguation pages, Category:Case disambiguation pages, Category:Versions pages, and Category:Translations pages. After the title, the categories of each page should be listed in parentheses, for example:

I hope I was clear enough. Thanks in advance.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 09:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Bulk page moves in Index:Mystery of the Yellow Room (Grosset Dunlap 1908).djvu[edit]

Original version had several missing pages now substituted with the correct scan pages. The source file & pagelist have been modified in addition to the fixes for those missing scanned page issues. Now, please do the following via bot:

  • Move existing DjVu positions 155 to 317 up by +3 [new range D158 to D320]
  • Move existing DjVu positions 53 to 154 up by +1 [new range D54 to D155]
  • Move existing DjVu positions 16 to 52 down by -1 [new range D15 to D51]
  • Create previously missing scan page nos. 38, 39, 142 & 143
  • Adjust mainspace transclusion ranges accordingly.

Many thanks in advance & let me know if add'd help is needed. -- George Orwell III (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 16:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Who will clean up my mess?[edit]

I previously worked on an ill-fated attempt at a massive music template. The fossilized remains are to be found at User:Eliyak/music and its children - now they just sit there taunting me. I would appreciate if some kindly bot would delete them all. --Eliyak T·C 05:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 23:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Bulk page moves in Index:Armistice Day.djvu[edit]

Original version had 2 missing pages now substituted with blank position holders. The source file & pagelist have been modified for the 2 missing scanned page issue. Now, please do the following via bot:

  • Move existing DjVu positions 376 to 480 up by +2 [new range D378 to D482]
  • Create previously missing scan page nos. 354 and 355 at positions /376 and /377

Many thanks in advance & let me know if add'd help is needed. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Bulk correspondence categorization in Popular Science Monthly[edit]

I tried doing manually until realizing that I was only 1/3 done, and should have used an intermediary category. If possible, please:

  • For all of the articles listed in Portal:Popular Science Monthly/Correspondence and Portal:Popular Science Monthly/Discussion and Correspondence.
    Hmm? what is it that you are wanting done to these works?
    Sorry if this was unclear, I meant that for all of the articles listed by those two lists, to categorize with Category:Popular Science Monthly correspondence, and to also decategorize any that I had mistakenly placed in Category:Correspondence.
  • Remove any from Category:Correspondence. Add to Category:Popular Science Monthly correspondence. Yes check.svg Done
  • If trivial to do, add sortkey corresponding to year and month. For example, Popular Science Monthly/Volume 3/May 1873/Correspondence would have sortkey "#1873-05".
    why the hash character? What value is it providing? Grabbing the year isn't overly tricky, juggling the month is not so simplistic, it has to be parsed from the text, recognised, and converted, and hoping that a month doesn't appear elsewhere in the title. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:10, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
    The hash is mostly for appearance, as otherwise in the category these would show up as the first number of the year, which isn't very useful (they would all show up as "1" anyway, or would show up as large blocks under "8" and "9" if the "1" were trimmed). This simply explicitly signifies that they are sorted by a number scheme rather than alphabetically. I based this off of how some Wikipedia categories handle it, such as for example w:Category:Births by year.
    I don't know the software limitations, but if it's possible to feed just the articles from the two lists, the month shouldn't appear in any other way than is standard for the publication. Then it's likely just a matter of interpreting each of the twelve months to the respective number, with a leading zero to ensure they are sorted correctly. The "1873-05" part is essentially the ISO date with no day specified. The volume number and other title information beside the year and month can be ignored. djr13 (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, djr13 (talk) 08:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Trying to grep the data, grab the two separate components, then convert the month to a numerical number is non-trivial for little benefit. There is never going to be horrendous ability to find the specific component, and should be reasonably easily be eye-read. I am going to pass on the task. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Would you be willing to do this without the sortkey step? As in, categorizing the articles in the two lists? (Note, Volume 33 and under are already categorized.) djr13 (talk) 12:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 21:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Bulk obituaries categorization in Popular Science Monthly[edit]

If possible, please move all pages (not categories though) from Category:Obituaries in Popular Science Monthly to Category:Obituaries in Popular Science Monthly by name, preserving the sortkey. For these same pages, remove from Category:Obituaries. Thanks, djr13 (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done }--Mpaa (talk) 20:10, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Bulk obituaries categorization in The Times[edit]

Last one for a long while, I promise! :) Please, if possible, move all The Times articles from Category:Obituaries into Category:Obituaries in The Times, preserving sortkey. Thanks, djr13 (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Donebillinghurst sDrewth 11:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned Pages upon File and Index rename[edit]

It appears it is still not clear to some that renaming a source File: and moving its related Index: page does not mean any existing Page:s created under that Index: are automatically moved as well. As a result we have a few dozen orphaned Page:s in the Page: namespace under the old Index: Request all existing Pages found under the now renamed file -

- be moved under the new File: and Index: scheme ( Index:The History of the Standard Oil Company Vol 1.djvu ).

Please Note: File:History of Standard Oil Vol 1.djvu was unwisely made into a redirect to the desired file, File:The History of the Standard Oil Company Vol 1.djvu on Commons. The redirect can make certain views or lists to display unreliable information; Go with the list linked above for the Pages that need to be moved instead.

TIA -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:57, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Update:' The same issue exists with the second volume - it's Pages...
Those Pages, of course, need to be moved under the new File: and Index: scheme for Volume 2, ( Index:The History of the Standard Oil Company Vol 2.djvu ). -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:24, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Purge all indices[edit]

Something or other went bad a month or two ago, causing Page namespace links on Index namespace pages not to have the colored backgrounds that indicate page status. Manually purging the index fixes this. If someone could make a bot purge everything in the Index namespace that would be pretty swell I think. Prosody (talk) 04:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Index page links request[edit]

Page:Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 1.djvu/509 to /520 contain two indexes. Could a bot please go through and change the bare page numbers into TOC links? The page offset throughout this book is 14. In the first index (pp. 509 to 513) all numbers are print page numbers, however some are for page ranges and only the first number needs to be linked. In the second index (pp. 514 to 520) only numbers in the fourth column of the table are print page numbers. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Not TOC link but I hope it is the same.--Mpaa (talk) 18:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. The particular technique used doesn't worry me as long as it behaves. Excellent job. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Index page move request[edit]

Index:Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican.djvu has been moved to Index:Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican, Vol 1.djvu. Can someone please run the bot to move the pages (all validated) over to the new index. Thank you. — Ineuw talk 15:35, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 21:14, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Another index move request[edit]

Can Index:A History of the Medical Department.djvu (and its pages) please be moved to Index:A History of the Medical Department of the University of Pennsylvania.djvu. The Commons file was moved back in February. Since then this has been the only index file we have that functions via a file redirect. And of course the name is too short. Hesperian 10:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done --Mpaa (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Assigned requests[edit]

For noting {{PD-old}}[edit]

A quick note to say that I have been running Sdrewthbot through Author: ns pages for those authors listed as dying between 1880-1912 and either adding the licence if it doesn't have a licence, or converting any that don't say PD-old to be using that licence. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Migrating from {{edition}} to edition = y[edit]

There are 4k+ pages that transclude {{edition}}. I am considering using my bot to run through and rm the template and add the parameter line edition = y to those pages' {{header}}. Checking the attitude of the community to this proposed bot run. — billinghurst sDrewth

Just been doing some tests and found at least one anomaly. Found that Gettysburg Address had {{versions}} and {{edition}} which would seem to be a dichotomy. This is probably a case of the main ns page being moved and the talk page being left behind. Initially I updated the versions template, which I quickly rolled back for the preceding reason. I would think that there will probably be similar situations with {{disambiguation}} in which I would think that the same logic of the display of edition would be incongruous. I will still undertake their replacement to the edition parameter, however they will not display unless we choose to make them display by updating the templates, and this will also apply to the these subsidiary templates of header. about 50-70 templatesbillinghurst sDrewth 06:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Though not documented, found that {{edition}} takes the parameter title= as used in National Geographic Magazine/Volume 31/Number 6/Our State Flowers/The Mountain Laurel. Skipping these for example work, and probably in any first batch of the replacement run. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Notification of forthcoming job — Category:No reference tag[edit]

A while back I did some tagging of reference errors, and the WMF task bot has finally caught up. For the main namespace pages in Category:No reference tag, I am planning to append the pages with {{smallrefs}}, either at the end of if it is just a transclusion, or before a copyright tag if it exists on the page. Other pages in the category will just be skipped at this time, and will be revisited. If there is any reason to hold off, or requests, or suggestions, please let me know. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Should it be also before Categories, if any?--Mpaa (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
My mental + blah blah didn't make it to the page. Caught in an iterative loop elsewhere. Yes, that was my meaning. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:35, 17 February 2013 (UTC)