Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:49, 7 July 2007

• ]

Overview Dictionary Bot policy Bot Approvals Group Guide Noticeboard Newsletter Bot Requests Requests for Approval Adminbots {{BAG Tools}} Creating a Bot List of bots Activity monitor Status report History Types

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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages:Bots/Frequently denied bots, to make sure your idea is not listed.

Add a new request

Archives
August 2004 – September 2005 June 2005 – November 2005 August 2004 – January 2006 February 2006 – April 2006 November 2005 – February 2006 February 2006 – April 2006 May 2006 – July 2006 August 2006 – December 2006 January 2007 (Part A) January 2007 (Part B) February 2007 – March 2007 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)

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 16:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

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 16:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

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 18:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

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 19:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

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 23:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

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 01:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

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: "]"
  bar:April2007
  from:#X+1# till:#X+Y# text: "]"
  bar:May2007
  from:#X+Y+1# till:#X+Y+Z# text: "]"
  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: "]"

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

where X Y Z are what? Betacommand 04:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

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 04:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok I have an Idea of what im doing so im going to go be evil program some ideas. Betacommand 22:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok code is 95% done I just have to kill a bug before Its runnable. Betacommand 05:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

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 18:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

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 19:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Best of luck with the pesky little critter, Black Falcon 19:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

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 15:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

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 19:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I am listing below 5 of the 7 progress templates in Category:Misplaced Pages 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:Misplaced Pages 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:Misplaced Pages 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 20:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Has the bug been resolved? Flubeca (t) 21:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

All the major bugs have been solved. ill work on getting it out within the next 36 hours. Betacommand 21:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you! Flubeca (t) 13:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand passed the source off to me, as he's kinda strapped for free time right now. I'm finishing up a few things, and I should be ready in the next day or so with it. ^demon 00:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It has been a few days now. Is the bot having any troubles? -Flubeca (t) 17:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Any news? I'm posting mostly so that this section won't be automatically archived (it's seen no activity for almost 5 days). -- Black Falcon 23:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

As you can see, I made a successful run on Template:Notability_progress today. I'll set the rest up tomorrow, hopefully. ^demon 22:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. By the way, the bot seems to have removed Template:Notability progress from Category:Misplaced Pages progress templates. Was that accidental or is that necessary for the bot to function? -- Black Falcon 19:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Accidental, sorry. I'll fix it when I get back to the code tomorrow (it's on a server at work). ^demon 19:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's running on Template:Notability progress, Template:Copyedit progress, and Template:Merge progress just fine. I'll plug the last 2 in after lunch. As I don't want to run this on my main bot account and I'm starting a second one, how often do we want to update these when I put a BRFA in? ^demon 15:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

It's working fine on Template:Notability progress, but there are some issues with the other two. For Template:Copyedit progress, the bot also counted Category:All articles needing copy edit, which is redundant to all of the monthly ones. For Template:Merge progress, I think you may want to work off of Category:Merge by month to avoid problems. -- Black Falcon 16:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As for updating frequency ... once a day should probably be enough, but Flubeca may something different in mind. Thanks, by the way, for working on this. Cheers, Black Falcon 16:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Once a day is good.-Flubeca 03:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh and when will the other 2 be implemented. -Flubeca 03:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way, the Template:Categorization progress is also having a double counting problem similar to the copyedit progress chart. Thanks for implementing this. --Fisherjs 10:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Is the bot running?-Flubeca 19:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Template:S-cite, Template:S-pol

Unlike other succession box templates that seem to have sparked a limited controversy over at WikiProject Succession Box Standardization, these two are relatively unambiguous and have on their side what is closest to consensus (given the current state of the project). I thus request:

1. That Template:S-cite should be replaced by Template:S-ref in all articles in the main namespace. The two templates have already been merged and the former redirects to the latter, which is in compliance with SBS's three-letter name rule (while still retaining the ability of the name to be easily interpreted) and was initially included in the s-ref anyway. The change is a simple one: change {{s-cite|...}} in all succession boxes to {{s-ref|...}}. No complications whatsoever should ensue, as both templates work in the exact same way.
2. That Template:S-pol should be replaced by Template:S-civ (parameter |pol) in all articles in the main namespace. The two templates are headers, which makes the change even easier: all that has to be done is change {{s-pol}} to {{s-civ|pol}} in all succession boxes; the resulting headers will be identical. The change has been decided because a whole template just for police appointments is considered superfluous, given the relatively low number of offices that are to use it, while a more general header like "Civic offices" (with parameters for police, fire, and medical appointments) will prove more efficient, helping us reach the desired balance between a low number of templates and specific, useful headers.

I believe this change cannot be achieved by any means other than by bot (unless a great deal of time and effort is spend on the task), and is justifiable enough to be approved. The two templates are to be deleted after the change is done, so any help with speeding this process up would be greatly appreciated. Waltham, The Duke of 23:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

2. So why dont you redirect Template:S-pol to S-civ|pol :: maelgwn :: talk 23:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Because that's impossible, maelgwn. As for #1, I see no need for a bot to perform this task. Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 05:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Aah sorry. Was getting my sections and my seperators all confuddled. It should be easy enough for a bit to do. :: maelgwn :: talk 06:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

But... Wouldn't it be better to get rid of a spare template than just hide it? I thought templates placed a burden on Misplaced Pages servers.

In any case, will you at least do number two, please? Waltham, The Duke of 18:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about performance. I could create a task request, but I'd like to see some evidence of consensus. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 23:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

We are gathering consensus; it was not easy to discern previously. I will notify you when we gather sufficient support. Waltham, The Duke of 13:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not easy to gather a consensus when so many people are away instead of commenting on the issues at hand. I have tried to gather opinions in favour of the substitution at WT:SBS, but only myself and Whaleyland have voted so far. I also know that other people are favourable as well, but this might not be easily proved. BrownHairedGirl was against the proposed action initially, but it seems that this is no longer the case. She is too away, however, and thus currently unavailable for a comment. I do not know what to do right now but to urge the members of SBS to comment and keep this section from being prematurely archived, but the circumstances do not allow me to do anything more. Still, if you add the lack of opposition (other members do see the page even if they do not comment) to my previous arguments and the lack of alternatives, you shall see that the substitution is indeed the best solution to our problem. If you would just proceed...? Waltham, The Duke of 17:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Comparison articles into searchable databases

What open-source text editors that run on both Windows and Linux support both Regex search-and-replace and UTF-8 encoding? This is the sort of question the tool I'm requesting (probably on the toolserver or offsite) could answer by reading the tables in Misplaced Pages comparison articles. The tool would load all the tables from each comparison article, find the common column and merge them into one database table per article internally, and then provide an interface for search queries to these tables. NeonMerlin 19:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by "comparison articles", don't understand why you're posting on this page, and don't understand where the results of the table merges would be housed (or, if you will, how interested readers/users would find the tables). Wouldn't Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Database analysis or Misplaced Pages:Tools or Misplaced Pages:Toolserver be a better place to post this? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

This could be done, but quite frankly I don't believe its worth the time to configure a bot. We have comparison articles for a reason. --Draicone 22:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

image replacer bot

need a bot to replace all articles that link this image http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Heinrich_Himmler%2C_Richard_Heydrich%2C_Karl_Wolf.JPG to the newer and better one http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Vlcsnap-5522132.png

Y Done —METS501 (talk) 04:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Queensland Rugby League State of Origin players

I don't know if a bot can do it, and I don't think so. But can a bot tag every link on this page Queensland Maroons Players with Category:Queensland Rugby League State of Origin players.

I have removed any un-nessasary links from the page (temporarly) so that all links should be there. But it shouldn't repeat the task if a link is there twice, because there are alot there. It shouldn't also have any there that are red links, because there are quite a few, and you can't have an article with just a category. SpecialWindler talk 12:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

That's something a bot could definitely do. Is there a particular reason why you want to turn the list into a category and is there consensus that this should be done? --S 13:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that you want to sort by state of origin. That makes it somewhat more error-prone and a bit less trivial to do automatically. Frankly, I also don't really see the need since most player's articles already are sorted by nationality (ie. Category:Australian rugby league players, etc). Is there a specific reason why you want to do this?-- S 13:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Because if you notice most players are by nationally of that 1/20th would actually be state of origin players. I want to do this so it is easy to understand from a players point of view wether they played state of origin or not, by looking at the categories. SpecialWindler talk 20:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Can someone reply please. SpecialWindler talk 21:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Stupid archiving, I'm re asking this as nobody replyed. I wouldn't have if someone said No but I think it should be done. SpecialWindler talk 10:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I did reply on your talkpage. The question still stands: does the Rugby league Wikiproject agree that this should be done or not?-- S 10:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I know you did, but this was archived when its was still active dissucussion. On Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Rugby league under the "Bot request" section, I have posted a message to fellow Rugby league members. It was posted 5 days ago (on 28 June), but has been no reply. SpecialWindler talk 11:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, let's give this another 24 hours. -- S 10:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a fairly trivial request, so I don't see why the operation needs consensus, especially from a low-activity group. In any case, the operation can be reversed very quickly and easily, If needed, I've hacked together a simple script with error checking to do the tagging, in case anyone else hasn't configured a bot to do it yet, so if the bot is needed and the task gets approval let me know and I'll run the operation. (Of course, its practically an AWB job...) SpecialWindler: Bots can do practically anything these days =) --Draicone 13:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Trivial, yes but I'd rather not rehash the the old lists vs. categories duplication debate that we've had a bajillion times. Hence, I was asking if there were any objections. By the way, based on your message to the list, I thought you had left the project. Have you decided to stay? -- S 13:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if we do a bot run but keep a record of the diff IDs of each edit it can all be reverted in about ten minutes later if needed, and judging by this the categorising is sorely needed. I've kind of left the project, turns out Mike42 couldn't think of anyone more obsessive than me when it came to clearing backlogs so I'm lightly helping out with AFC at the moment. (Lightly being a hundred edits a day.) I don't believe I'll resume active editing, and I certainly won't accept an RfA as many on IRC have suggested. --Draicone 22:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

NFL -> National Football League_National_Football_League-2007-07-02T22:38:00.000Z">

We could use a bot to fix links to the following pages:

• National Football League (as opposed to NFL)
• National Football League playoffs, 2006-07 and all prior pages included in Category:National Football League playoffs (as opposed to NFL playoffs, 2006-07.
• 2007 National Football League season and all prior pages included in Category:National Football League seasons (as opposed to 2007 NFL season)
• 2007 National Football League Draft and all prior pages included in Category:National Football League Draft (as opposed to 2007 NFL Draft) Pats1 22:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)_National_Football_League"> _National_Football_League">

Are you requesting that the redirects be replaced by the actual page? If so, you might wish to read WP:REDIRECT#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. -- JLaTondre 23:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)_National_Football_League"> _National_Football_League">

That would make sense, then. My bad. Pats1 23:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

CityTrain -> Citytrain_Citytrain-2007-07-04T01:48:00.000Z">

A significant number of pages have links to, text (usually in links), and use templates with "CityTrain". I have replaced a lot of these instances with the correct capitalization of "Citytrain" (see my discussion of this here) – can I request a bot do the rest? This will include over a hundred pages of each train station in the network. I believe I have created correctly-titled templates to allow this to happen with no disruption; seems to work already now anyway, but best done thoroughly. Seo75 01:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)_Citytrain"> _Citytrain">

Pages with links to old (replaced) CamelCase templates that need some bot action include Template:CityTrainQld/Navigation and Template:CityTrain Platforms (I wouldn't say that the links to these two replaced templates are definitive lists). Many thanks in advance... :) Seo75 01:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)_Citytrain"> _Citytrain">

So i gave this a trial and it kinda broke it. See . Some of the templates have not been renamed. :: maelgwntalk 03:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for giving it a go. I have fixed the even-more templates so the page looks okay again, and perhaps ready for another trial? Seo75 03:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

That looks fine now. Sorry i dont have time at the moment to put in a bot request ... so hopefully someone else can do it or get back to me after my holiday (about 15th July) and I can do it then. :: maelgwntalk 04:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I might be able to arrange a bot to take care of it. First I'd just have to move everything to the correct capitalisation then rename it, that should avoid all conflicts (as the redirects would be created). --Draicone 22:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it has been mostly done – or is progressing – with no more obvious breakages (I thought I had move/redirected everything but then found there was more in the 4 July test-run. Thank you again for the work so far! Seo75 01:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Archival bot

Can we get one of the talk page archival bots to come to Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion? Thanks. >Radiant< 10:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Next time the bot runs, it should archive the page. --ST47Talk 15:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

ArbCombot

I have an idea for a bot. When ArbCom rules that a certain editor cannot edit an article, the bot operator could input the user and article into the system, and when the banned user edits the article that is prohibited, it would automatically undo the edit, and place a notice at WP:ANI or some other noticeboard. Cool Blue 16:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I can do this, if there's consensus to do so. Can you post the idea at WP:AN or WT:ARBCOM to see if it's needed? In the meantime, I'll start on a bot. Let me know if there's a discussion anywhere. :) --ST47Talk 18:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Bad idea. See my comments. Thatcher131 15:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Rejected - doesn't really fix the problem, as evasion is done by sockpuppets and as bans are often against Foo and related articles. Both of these problems could probably be fixed, but my solutions are not server-safe and probably would cause false positives. Maybe I'll work on a tool that would allow scanning of a RFCUed or SSPed sock's contribs to check for edits to articles that link to articles or are in a certain category, but I don't know if that's needed. --ST47Talk 17:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Keyword based archiving

Are there any bots that archive (or could be set up to archive) page sections that contain a certain keyword rather than by date? sbandrews (t) 17:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There might be one for WP:AN/I, I don't know how that works. If one doesn't exist, you could ask User:Shadow1 for the code of his archiving bot and he or I could adapt it for this use. --ST47Talk 18:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the helpful reply :) as far as I can see WP:AN/I is archived by date of last entry. I'll have a word with Shadow1, regards sbandrews (t) 18:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a way to have shadowbot archive by tag <!--werdnabot archive--> does it and just set the date archive limit to say 365 days. 21:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

italicizing bot?

A bot that italicizes and if necessary de-capitalizes foreign terms would be a really useful for using across the sumo wrestling articles that I edit. It would also be useful for any articles that use foreign terms as italicizing conforms with the Manual of Style. I looked around, but could find no such bot. I would like to request one (or kindly be directed to where I can request the use of an existing one). Do I have to make a request for a specific article? I, and others have already went through and fixed some of the bigger articles, such as sumo by hand, but there are many more related articles out there that need fixing. Thanks so much. Malnova 20:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

If you request approval for WP:AWB, you ca use find-and-replace to make it almost automatic. --ST47Talk 20:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply and suggestion! Malnova 20:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

List of United Kingdom locations: entry count

Having had no response to my previous request, it looks like I'm going to have to split the sub-pages of List of United Kingdom locations manually. Could a bot count the entries on each for me, please? Andy Mabbett 21:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Done: User:ST47/UKLC. --ST47Talk 22:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. I think... Andy Mabbett 22:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Bot for Conservation Status of North American organims

I know very little about programming, but I thought I'd go ahead and make a request in the hopes that it is a feasible idea. I often add the conservation status for plants in North America, which involves using the same formula over and over again. It takes quite a bit of time to do myself, but I imagine its simple and mechanical enough for a bot to handle. It essentially works like this:

1)I insert a piece of copied text inside of an existing taxobox above the field for "| regnum =" like this:

| status = G5
| status_system = TNC
| status_ref = <ref name=natureserve>{{Cite web
  | publisher =NatureServe
  | title = Eurybia divaricata
  | work = NatureServe Explorer
  | url = http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Eurybia+divaricata
  | accessdate = 2007-06-13}}</ref>

such that it looks like this with the new text:

{{Taxobox
| color = lightgreen
| name = White Wood Aster
| image = Aster divaricatus R0019871.JPG
| image_width = 250px
| status = G5
| status_system = TNC
| status_ref = <ref name=natureserve>{{Cite web
  | publisher =NatureServe
  | title = Eurybia divaricata
  | work = NatureServe Explorer
  | url = http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Eurybia+divaricata+
  | accessdate = 2007-06-13}}</ref>
| regnum = ]ae
| divisio = ]
| classis = ]
| ordo = ]
| familia = ]
| tribus = ]
| genus = '']''
| species = '''''E. divaricata'''''
| binomial = ''Eurybia divaricata''
| binomial_authority = (]) G.L.Nesom
| synonyms = 
*''Aster divaricatus'' <small>L.</small>
*''Aster corymbosum'' <small>]</small>
}}

2)I then change the text under "title" with the formula "| title =Genus species"

3)I change the part of the url such that "searchName=Genus+species"

4)I change the "accessdate" to today's

5)if there is no {{reflist}} tag, or a ==References== section, then I add one or both of those when needed

Problems might arise with the fact that some articles have taxoboxs and some don't. Also not all articles on a list of North American species would necessarily have articles. If anyone thinks this bot is a possibilty, it would save a lot of time and improve the Plants project significantly. If there are any more questions needed to be answered just let me know. Thanks! Djlayton4 | talk | contribs 21:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Spell checker bot

Misplaced Pages needs a bot to correct spelling errors. As there is no spell check, spelling errors can occur. There should be a bot to correct these errors.--Sefringle 04:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Please read Misplaced Pages:Bots/Frequently denied bots before making requests like this. — Shinhan < talk > 09:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Tagging public domain images to move to commons

Okay. I figure it would be cool that all public domain images on Misplaced Pages could be tagged with {{Move to Commons}}. This would include images that transclude the following licence templates:

• {{PD}} - links
• {{PD-old}} - links
• {{PD-art}} - links
• {{PD-ineligible}} - links
• {{PD-USGov}} - links
• {{PD-US}} - links
• {{PD-self}} - links
• {{PD-user}} - links
• {{PD-because}} - links

My rationale is that Misplaced Pages is NOT "a repository of links, images, or media files". All public domain images could be moved to commons and that way, sister projects can use them too. One could point out that some images are falsely tagged. Well this process of just tagging it with {{Move to Commons}} makes it a candidate; it's not automatically moved. There are three people who go through these images that can catch a falsely tagged image:

• An editor performing the move
• An administrator that reviews the wikipedia image for deletion (it must satisfy these conditions)
• A reviewer at Commons (they're really good)

So what do you think? -- Reaper X 08:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

the thing is people are stupid. I have a bot that can move them to commons and tag them. the issue is that over 10 percent are miss-tagged as PD when they are copyrighted. Also the devs are working on a better method of transwikiing images so lets give them some time first. see User:Betacommand/Commons 10:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Replacement bot for Refdeskbot

RefDeskBot seems to be down, is there any substitute for archival of WP:HD, WP:RD, etc? — E _bots 13:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

You mean a clone? I don't think that one exists. If I knew enough about bots to run a clone and had access to RefDeskBot's source code I would run a clone. FunPika 01:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Review

Well, I have no experience with bots at all, and this probably isn't the right place, but could someone please run a check on my source code, here? It takes various tasks for the Chicago WikiProject and puts them all in once place on an automated noticeboard. Thanks, Cool Blue 13:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

"Cross-reference" bot

I don't know if this sort of request would be at all practical. However, it is really time-consuming for any project to go through all the articles within its "scope" (or category/categories) and find all those which have been created since the last "go-through" and haven't yet had the project banner placed on them. Also, I can see how particularly new or undermanned projects (and they're all undermanned) would like to have a quick way to check on which of their articles have had DYK's, been selected for GA, FA, WP 1.0 releases, and whatever. Would there be any practical way to create a bot which could:

• (1) Check to see which articles in a given category do not have something (like a project banner), and
• (2) Check to see which articles in a given category, or with a given banner, do have something (for instance, GA, FA, or 1.0 tag), and the bot then make a list of only those articles which meet the specified criteria? Having such a bot available would keep the amount of time projects have to expend on "maintainance" activity down, and with any luck make it easier for them to keep track of articles which for whatever reason might be of more concern to them. Thank you for your consideration and any answers, positive or negative. John Carter 13:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, a bot to crawl through a category and report on what it sees is easy, post what you need and someone will do it. --ST47Talk 14:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The specifics would be variable, because (with luck) the bot could be used by multiple groups. But, basically, a bot to check a category for those articles which do not have a particular piece of content on the talk page. The specific piece of content would vary, depending on particular use, so it might be best if it would be possible to type in the specific type of content to be cross-referenced for each use. Generally, though, it would be searching for some kind of template/banner on the talk page. I'm assuming if one were to type in the template name, like {{WikiProject Saints}}, a bot could search for its presence, and, with luck, issue a "report" listing only those articles in that category which don't yet have the template. Alternately, if it would be possible to set up a bot which were capable of one of a number of functions (only one at a time, of course) one that could check for the presence of a template, like a project banner, and the presence of another template, like the GA, FA or 1.0 tag, and list only those articles which have both. This would be particularly useful for projects which don't do assessments, A full list of all articles in a category would, I think understandably, make the relevant page regularly huge. John Carter 14:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Generally, to do this sort of thing, I run a bot without approval, since there's only one edit being made. If a project needs a specific task, they can list it here, and it's a 15 minute project for me. I can set up an interface on toolserver if that would help, where anyone can do something like this? --ST47Talk 14:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That would probably be ideal. I think a lot of projects might potentially find this particular function useful, so letting several people potentially do it would probably be very welcome. John Carter 14:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, well, here's what you do. The script is at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~st47/cgi-bin/WikiProject.pl?category=PUTCATEGORYHERE&templateyes=TEMPLATEHERE

In order to use it, replace PUTCATEGORYHERE with the category, replace TEMPLATEHERE with whatever it is that you are looking for on the page - or change templateyes to templateno and it will look for pages without that thing. To get it to automatically convert to talk pages, add &talk=1 on to the end. It's still pretty much hackish, I'll improve it in the next few minutes. --ST47Talk 15:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Might it be useful if this were integrated with m:CatScan? -- TimNelson 02:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Uses to Applications?

Could your bot clean up some articles I have edited on the English site? I would like ==Uses== changed to ==Applications== to make them more compliant. Idsnowdog 19:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Could you give us a list of these pages? We can't easily filter your contributions list and check every article as it creates too much load on the server. --Draicone 05:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages bots
• Non-talk pages automatically signed by HagermanBot