Wikipedia:Bot requests

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

Commonly Requested Bots Frequently denied Anti-vandal Archiving Autoassessment Newsletter delivery Template substitution WikiProject tagging

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).

#	Bot request	Status	💬	👥	🙋 Last editor	🕒 (UTC)	🤖 Last botop editor	🕒 (UTC)
1	Auto-WP:NAVNOREDIRECT	Not a good task for a bot.	10	5	Wikiwerner	2024-04-28 12:22	Primefac	2024-03-13 18:37
2	Automatic NOGALLERY keyword for categories containing non-free files (again)		14	7	Anomie	2024-06-23 11:50	Anomie	2024-06-23 11:50
3	Can we have an AIV feed a bot posts on IRC?		8	3	Legoktm	2024-06-21 18:24	Legoktm	2024-06-21 18:24
4	Bot to update match reports to cite template	BRFA filed	14	5	Yoblyblob	2024-06-20 21:21	Mdann52	2024-06-20 21:11
5	Bot to mass tag California State University sports seasons	Doing...	5	4	Frostly	2024-06-10 17:05	Headbomb	2024-06-09 17:28
6	Football league infoboxes		7	4	Bagumba	2024-04-25 13:43	Primefac	2024-04-25 12:01
7	Clear Category:Unlinked Wikidata redirects		7	4	Jlwoodwa	2024-06-21 06:41	DreamRimmer	2024-04-21 03:28
8	Find linkrot with a specific pattern		7	3	GreenC	2024-05-01 16:20
9	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
10	User:RetractionBot, v2	Y Done	8	5	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06	Mdann52	2024-05-25 16:06
11	Bot to change citations to list defined references	Not a good task for a bot.	3	2	Apoptheosis	2024-06-09 17:44	Headbomb	2024-06-09 16:56
12	Adding Facility IDs to AM/FM/LPFM station data	BRFA filed	10	3	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-12 14:29	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-12 14:29
13	Tagging women's basketball article talk pages with project tags		7	2	Hmlarson	2024-06-10 19:17	Mdann52	2024-06-10 19:15
14	Friendly support for Draft categories – feedback request		1	1	Mathglot	2024-06-10 19:40
15	'Literature of Kashmir'	Not a good task for a bot.	2	2	Usernamekiran	2024-06-11 07:37	Usernamekiran	2024-06-11 07:37
16	Adding links to previous TFDs		7	4	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02	Qwerfjkl	2024-06-20 18:02
17	Bot that condenses identical references	Coding...	9	4	Acebulf	2024-06-19 03:07	Headbomb	2024-06-18 00:34
18	Convert external links within {{Music ratings}} to refs		2	2	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11	Mdann52	2024-06-23 10:11
19	Stat.kg ---> Stat.gov.kg		2	2	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21	DreamRimmer	2024-06-23 09:21

The people who have tagged articles in WP:CHIBOTCATS with {{WikiProject Chicago}} have mostly gone inactive, except for one admin who no longer tags. Are there any bots that tag by category? If not we need a new one.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just got approval for one. What are you trying to do? Do you just want to tag as WPChicago or was that just an Example? --Kumioko (talk) 14:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we need all the new articles in the cats listed at WP:CHIBOTCATS (but not their subcats) tagged with {{WikiProject Chicago}}. Auto rating unrated pages would be good. I.e., if a majority of other tags have a class=x, then fill that class in for Chicago.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a request sitting with DodoBot - User_talk:DodoBot/Requests#WP:UKROADS - if you'd like to steal that one away and do it, I'd be much obliged. All details there, but you could come back to me - if you feel like doing it - should you need to know more. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I am currently going through some for WPUS and Oklahoma asked for a couple hundred too so after that I'll start working with these unless someone grabs them first. IN the Chicago one may I suggest also adding WikiProject Illinois if its not there already. --Kumioko (talk) 18:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for UKRoads. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, my bot, Hazard-Bot, is approved for such tasks.  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  23:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to steal UK Roads, I'm sure no-one would object. I'd just be fascinated to see it done ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do Hazard. Got another 65000 in the que before I can do it. --Kumioko (talk) 00:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I started, but not sure if I will do them all at once. I'll finish at a later time if so.  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  00:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So is Chicago in somebody's queue now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hazard-SJ (talk · contribs), can you handle this for me?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you watching here? I will ping your page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to help with it in the next few days. Got a couple others in the hopper at the moment. --Kumioko (talk) 04:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about the delay. I've started the UKROADS more than once and left it to run, but it seems an error prevented it from continuing. I believe I should make a page for these kinds of requests so it is easier to follow? I will continue working on UKROADS. If Chicago isn't done when I'm done, I'll attempt it too.  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  06:12, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any estimate on when you will be done with UKROADS?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply. I did some more, but I was having some problems, hence this. I'll get back to it ASAP, hopefully. As for Chicago, that would be a longer hold.  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  03:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can probably do some on Chicago but I'm not sure my bot is authorized yet to do that type of task. I can do WikiProject Banner replacement but I think I need to request a separate one for tagging new articles to a project. Its a pretty straightforward request with plenty of precadent though so it should be pretty quick. --Kumioko (talk) 04:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago tagging task

I submitted a BRFA to allow my bot to do this type of task but before I get started I got a couple questions about this one.

1. Can I remove the red linked categories from the above page so it doesn't conflict?
   • Yes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2. Does the project support all types of content classes (i.e. Category, template redirect, etc.)? If not which ones does it support.
   • Not really sure.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3. Are you just looking for me to add the Chicago banner or do you want me to do assessment as well? If you do want me to do some assessment what projects do you want me to inherit the class from? --Kumioko (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
   • In the past I believe we inherited by majority. Can you do that? Just make sure not to automatically do subcategories.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. I have to admit I don't know how to inherit by majority. I'm afraid that programming is above my level. What do you mean by not to automatically do subcategories? --Kumioko (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The list at WP:CHIBOTCATS includes the categories that are associated with WP:CHICAGO. Some of the subcategories of those categories include things that are far afield from the project. I will wait for Hazard-SJ (talk · contribs).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:12, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Kumioko (talk) 04:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Me sees.  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  07:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is the latest?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any update?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about a Me dos?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could help eventually but my bot is still awaiting the authorization to tag an article and even then it will be a bit limited. It can easily add the chicago banner but doing the assessments is a bit of a different story. As I mentioned above it can inherit the class from another project but my programmer skillz aren't enough to look for what class is most used. I usually just pick another project (usually one I have some faith in the class being correct like MILHIST, USRoads, NRHP and a few others) run through that and then pick the next one. Once I have gone through the more trustworthy ones then I can use the less reliable ones (like Biography for example). --Kumioko (talk) 20:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting for some reply from Hazard-SJ (talk · contribs). I am under the impression that he may be able to do more of what I want.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:35, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is one pain in the @$$ request.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got approval to do tagging but as I mentioned before I am still working on logic that does the assessments reliably. --Kumioko (talk) 15:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The assessment is a big part of it. I am hoping that you stumble across GAs, FLs, and FAs and want to maximize the possibility of finding them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Im not going to be editing much anymore and the bot is shutdown. good luck. --Kumioko (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all!

Due to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess#Automatic updated FIDE rating in infobox (by bot) there are some changes in how the FIDE rating is handeled in Template:Infobox chess biography now and thus it would be very useful if a bot could give some assist here. There are about 1000 pages out there using that template.

The task would be to look at all those pages (assuming they are chess player articles) and search the template:fide extract the value there, add it to the Template:Infobox chess biography as parameter 'FideID' and remove the ranking number from parameter 'rating'. So for example consider Anatoly Karpov:

We have

{{fide|id=4100026}}

there, so extract '4100026' and check the ranking (in chess infobox)

|rating = 2617 <br /><small>(No. 177 on the July 2011 FIDE ratings list)</small>

to be >= 2400 then change it to

|rating =  <br /><small>(No. 177 on the July 2011 FIDE ratings list)</small>

and add

|FideID = 4100026

to the infobox. In order to finish remove the

{{fide|id=4100026}}

template. If this template was not present or the ranking < 2400 do nothing to the article.

One question open is if in the end the template:fide has to be removed from the page also, but I will work on answering this. And there might be a minimal ranking (e.g. 2400) needed also.

If some bot operator is intressted in solving this task that would be very appreciated. Thanks in advance and greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 11:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No-one liking this one? ;)) Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 16:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Text modified in order to be up-to-date. Is there a issue with this request in general, or just everybody beeing busy at the moment? Thanks and greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 13:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be a continuous or one-time task? — madman 01:59, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a one-time task in order to switch to the new system (which uses another bot - DrTrigonBot - to automatically update the data and so on - but this is implemented already). Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 10:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I may look at doing this this weekend. Why should the number in the ranking parameter be removed? (And the linebreak kept?) — madman 19:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The number in the ranking parameter should be removed because of when using 'FideID' the ranking number from Template:Elo rating are used (for more info look at Template:Infobox chess biography). The linebreak is still there to give the final user full control over the appearance of the output, since I do not know if every infobox uses a linebreak at that point, thus remove the number only and keep the rest (and linebreak is no number... ;) Thanks a lot for your time and effort! Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 22:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be conducting training for the next few days so I may not be able to code this for a bit, but be assured I haven't forgotten about it. :) — madman 15:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info - looking forward to hear from you... Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 11:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The massive switch in {{Elo rating}} is extremely expensive to render. It is in many ways better to update the individual articles. Rich Farmbrough, 01:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Coding... — madman 04:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@madman: Thanks a lot!! I am curious on the result... So long... :)

@Farmbrough: This a very intresting point to consider - in fact I copied that 'big switch' from dewiki where some articles use templates like this already. The question is; how expensive it actually is since I assume the mw software to cache the result...? The other way around (instead of one big template to use a lot of small ones) seems tedious to maintain since then we would have hundreds of templates (or articles) to change when one URL source (or something other) changes. I am very intressted in finding better (or even the best) solution here - so if you have any alternative concepts please share your knowledge! Thanks for the hint and greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 09:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Starling has recently commented on this, re: #switch basically being used to implement databases or key/value pairs. There's currently no upper limit on the number of switch cases you can have, but in the future an upper limit of 2000 may be set, so you should be aware of that. The issue when rendering is not the time it takes to parse (it's still very fast), but the amount of memory used, which can sometimes send the servers into swap on larger/more prevalent templates. For this particular template, I'd defer to Wikipedia:Don't worry about performance for the moment. You are correct, DrTrigon, that the pages at least are cached (until they're edited, at which point they have to be re-rendered). In the future, Lua will be a better alternative for templates like this. — madman 14:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a test edit, DrTrigon. Looks like the code works perfectly; if that looks right to you, I'll continue. Cheers! — madman 19:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - it looks like the code works perfectly... it looks right to me! This are very good news! In my opinion this job can be done - maybe it is worth to wait another day to give other the time to add their opinions too...?! Again: Thanks a lot madman!!!

Regarding the huge '#switch'; I was not aware that MW wants to switch to Lua for template programming... Thanks for that hint (since this will become important for me ;) - despite the fact that I do not know Lua it sounds promising to me! ;) Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 12:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Y Done — madman 02:04, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Needed: A bot to make a list of articles on Category:Minor Planets that look like this one, 25001 Pacheco, in the following ways.

Here, “exactly like 25001 Pacheco” means that articles consist of:

1. No more than the following text: "(Article title) is a main belt asteroid discovered on (date) by (name(s)) at (place)." No more text than that. It might have less. For example, it might not include the date, name, or place, but it no more.
2. The only section break will be “External links”.
3. The only external link is “*http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov.....JPL Small-Body Database…...”
4. It will also include this Template:Infobox planet, a planet infobox template.
5. Next, it will have an empty reflist.
6. There will probably be more, but nothing that would establish notablity and therefore matters. There may be a minor planets navigator and a minor planets footer; a “DEFAULTSORT”; several categories such as "Main Belt astroids", "Discoveries by (name)", and “Astronomical objects discovered in (Year); a "beltasteroid-stub" designation; and maybe a number of links to other language wikipedia articles, the same name in different alphabets. None of this matters, again, as these things to not establish notablity.

Basically, we need a bot to make a list of all these articles that are just like this example: 25001 Pacheco. We need this list in order to move on to the next step very carefully. Later, more bots may be needed, but we're taking this one careful doable step at a time. Chrisrus (talk) 06:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this. Anomie⚔ 19:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I expanded the request slightly to include pages with "an inner-belt asteroid", "an outer-belt asteroid", "a main-belt asteroid", "a Jupiter Trojan", and so on, to include "Its provisional designation was whatever.", and also considered any other empty sections to be unindicative of notability. The final list is at User:Anomie/Asteroid list.

Many of the remaining articles just contain an additional sentence along the lines of "It was named after Joe Bloggs", which may or may not barely scrape the bottom of the "notability" barrel for some few of them. Or further variations of the text, e.g. "(Article title) is an asteroid. It was discovered on (date). It was discovered by (name) at (place).". I've placed a second list at User:Anomie/Asteroid list 2 of all the number-named asteroids sorted by the size of the wikitext after the templates and some of the other junk are removed. Anomie⚔ 00:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I hope that didn't take too much time out of your day. I'll start a new section to discuss the next step, but first: thank you for all your efforts thus far. I will now start a new section about the following step, below. 03:59, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a datasource to pull the information about minor planets? — Ganeshk (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, we're not looking for information about the minor planets from off Wikipedia. We are just looking for a reliable list of articles that for sure don't have enough information to establish notablity within them as they stand, and therefore cannot meet WP:NASTRO. Chrisrus (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. — Ganeshk (talk) 20:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bot needed to tag the list

Needed: A bot to tag each article on User:Anomie/Asteroid list thusly"{{Notability|Astro}}". Chrisrus (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to file a BRFA for this, but it looks like User:Avicennasis has already started this. Since this is a dated template, it would be better to add {{Notability|Astro|date=February 2012}}. GoingBatty (talk) 21:50, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I had replied here, but I guess I just previewed and never saved.  Doing... ^Avic_ennasis @ 02:22, 13 Shevat 5772 / 02:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ^Avic_ennasis @ 03:56, 15 Shevat 5772 / 03:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You guys are awesome! My sincerest gratitude, and, if I may, please accept from me sincere gratitude on behalf of the Wikipedian standard of Notablity. Chrisrus (talk) 01:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bot needed to perform "good faith effort to establish notablity"

Needed: A bot to automate the "good faith effort to establish notablity" referred to in WP:NASTRO. For example, if I copy and paste into the Google Scholar search box, in quotes, the name of the first article on User:Anomie/Asteroid list, (196297) 2003 FA, it returns "no hits" from any of the WP:RSes that it searches. Not one. It is my hope that this will fulfill NASTRO's "good faith effort", but we may need to find the proper database that Ganeshk seemed to be referring to above. If not, it's at least a good start. At this point, however, my question to you is this: Is it possible, practicable, very difficult, or problematic to create a bot that will find out which if any of these do not return exactly zero results on a Google Scholar search? Chrisrus (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking into this. Tim1357 ^talk 02:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. At this point google scholar does not have an API (that I can find). Using screen scraping would probably be a violation of their TOS. Tim1357 ^talk 02:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google also autodetects bots and offers them a simple turing test. I get this occassionally even when doing things manually. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. Instead of Google Scholar, I noticed that Wikipedia:NASTRO#Insufficient_sources recommends the SAO/Harvard abstract service of the Astrophysics Data System and the SIMBAD database's "display -> reference summary" in the "reference" section. Hopefully, that will be easier than Google Scholar. Actually, please have a look at that section of WP:NASTRO, which is a new document and so untried in the case of so many articles, so it may turn out that they while a good idea you may find don't turn out to be reasonable or doable or some such and still could be tweeked or an exemption could be requested. It depend on what happens when you go to implement them for this a list of more than six thousand articles to be checked and redirected to the List of minor planets chart, so please let us know if it's just not doable or reasonable or whatever the case may be. Chrisrus (talk) 03:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be sorry :), I like doing this stuff. The Harvard and Simbad databases look good. What do you want me to do when the queries return data? For example: 1173 Anchises returns 5 results with the Harvard database [1]. What should the bot do with this data? Just plop it in the Source section? Tim1357 ^talk 02:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, but to answer your question, it should remove them from the list most importantly. Because in the end, what we want is a list of these articles which not only contain no sign of notablity but also which we tried but could not find any sign of notablity to put in them. In the end, we'll have a list of articles to convert into redirects to the chart called List of minor planets. Ones like 1173 Anchises you discover have some chance of notablity, so putting the hits you find into such articles or their discussion pages or something would help a person who wants to bring them up to WP:NASTRO, so it's nice as a secondary goal. We could call them "possibly notable" asteroids or some such, and set them aside to work on later. We could give that list to the astronomy project or some place later for them to work on. But the important thing at this point is to separate out the ones that have some sign of notablity from the list of ones with no sign at all. Chrisrus (talk) 22:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well if that's all you want, I could bang out a script in 30 minutes. I'll post back. Tim1357 ^talk 02:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, its all written. I'm going to have it spit out a sortable wiki table of how many results the Harvard Database has for each asteroid. It should take about 5 hours, so I'll let it run while I'm sleeping. Tim1357 ^talk 03:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I'll wait for you to reply. Below is a sample of what I was planning for the output. Do you want anything tweaked or added before I run it? By the way, I couldn't figure out how to use the Sinbad database, so as of now, the script does not check it. If you can give me some instruction on how to use it, I'd gladly include it in the script. Tim1357 ^talk 04:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, that's fantastic. Will will be able to separate out make a list of "zero"s? The ones with zero results are the easiest ones to move ahead, to the "convert to List of minor planets chart redirects" step. I guess that won't be necessary if the bot only moves the zeros, but I had been looking forward to getting my hands on the list of zeros.

About the other website, there are some tips and places to go for questions discussed here at WP:NASTRO, but no I'm sorry I don't know how to use it. Chrisrus (talk) 05:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like a bot to add {{portal|conservatism}} templates to the See also sections of all articles which have {{WikiProject Conservatism}} banners where importance=top or importance=high or importance=mid . Thanks, – Lionel ^(talk) 10:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No bot is needed, I can do that easily with AWB. I will have to wait until tomorrow to start, but do you have any idea of the scale of how many pages I might need to do? Thanks, Rcsprinter (articulate) 22:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's great! And thanks! Let me get the count and I'll contact you on your talk. I'll also double-check the proposed articles. Give me a day or so. – Lionel ^(talk) 23:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing... Any updates? Rcsprinter (warn) 11:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And  done. Rcsprinter (Gimme a message) 16:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if there were a bot that would automatically place a notification at WikiProject talk pages when a new section is added to a discussion page. We have a collection of articles that do not have a current WikiProject, but logically belong to any of three other WikiProjects. One of the solutions is to make a working group, and post automatic notifications to the three WikiProjects when a new section is added, but we don't know if there's a bot that can do that. Anybody have any ideas? VanIsaac_WS^contribs 16:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, people. Is there a bot that will monitor a page and write a standard message to talk pages when a new section is added? It could also even be a simple bot that posts a message if there have been any edits during a 24 hour period. I'm looking for any help I can get here. Thanks. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 07:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can a bot add the short description parameter of the person data template to this list . The description can be based on the Category:Gaelic footballers by county in the Republic of Ireland and its sub categories. For exampleAaron Hoey would be SHORT DESCRIPTION =Louth Gaelic footballer Gnevin (talk) 09:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That project seems to cover multiple sports, not just footballers so I would ssuggest saying something like Gaelic athlete as the short description. If you want to specify just that Gaelic footballers category that could be done too. --Kumioko (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can skip any hand ballers or rounders players if they even exist . Would it be possible to add X Gaelic footballer in the the football cat, x Hurler if in the hurling one and x Dual player if in both ? Gnevin (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you well know, User:X! retired from Wikipedia a couple of days ago. User:SoxBot, among other things, created the current event page every day. Is it possible for a currently active bot to take over SoxBot's responsibility and automatically create sub pages for each day's current events? It's a very tedious task for a normal person, so it will be plausible for a bot to take over. -- Luke (Talk) 03:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is possible. →Στc. 05:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've created around 700 articles on all the Welsh mountain peaks here. As you can see, only the OS has been included. Is there a bot which could add the corresponding geotag next to the OS, so that the peaks become visible on the top of the artricle using GeoGroupTemplate? Diolch, thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure what you mean; could you do one sample edit? Thanks, — madman 18:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi madman! Done the first 3. Quite a job! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 04:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good day. The IMDb part of Template:CongLinks has been changed to match the usage of the other IMDb templates. We now provide only the IMDb ID, without the "nm"-prefix. About 1700 pages have been affected (NB: some of these pages use the template correctly). We need to change {{CongLinks [...] imdb = nmXXXXXXX [...] }} to {{CongLinks [...] imdb = XXXXXXX [...] }} (remove the prefix). Does anyone have a bot that might be up for this task? Ddnixx (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed — madman 20:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Y Done unless I'm very much mistaken. 34 pages were updated [2]. Of the remaining 1748 pages, 1649 have no imdb parameter, and 99 have an imdb parameter but no nm prefix. Let me know if you can find any page that might have been missed. — madman 04:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very good! Thanks for responding to my request. I'll do some manual searching get back to you. Ddnixx (talk) 04:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Due to my bot being stopped and the revocation of the previously approved task I need some help with a couple tasks.

1. Please convert the last 6000 articles in WikiProject Texas to WikiProject United States/TX. Please carry over any additional parameters such as needs infobox or image, assessment. The discussion approving this action can be found here. --Kumioko (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to get a bot to add {{EOL}} to the top of the ext link of species articles if it does not already exist. Creating a set of articles may be a problem but using those that have {{taxobox}} may be the way to proceed. It would then be a simple matter of using the "binomial" value of the taxobox as the search string at eol.org. If it is feasible I will run it past Wikipedia:WikiProject Animals and Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is feasible, so starting the discussions to make sure everyone agrees would be good. Do you have an idea of how many articles would be affected? Also, I'm a little confused by the {{EOL}} documentation; it says that the full title for this article would be Nicrophorus americanus Olivier 1790, but it looks to me like it's american burying beetle (Nicrophorus americanus). Does it mean whatever's emphasized in the classifications list? — madman 18:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure of the umber of articles affected. It may be 1000s. I have rehashed the {{EOL}} documentation. The binomial authority (Olivier 1790 in this case) is not needed in the ext links. eol.org use just the binomial name as a page heading, as does WP. The binomial authority is in the body of the page for both EOL and WP. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough; what would be the label, then? Just so I have an idea of what the bot should be parsing out of the article. — madman 19:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Some of the characteristics of the bot function would be:

• "What links here" for {{taxobox}} can be used as a source list (it has 193532 transclusions)
• The WP binomial article name or, if a common name is used, the binomial value in the taxobox is used for the EOL search string
• Can be used for genus, species and subspecies (and maybe more?)
• Articles already with {{EOL}} are ignored
• The template is placed at the bottom of an existing Ext links list.
• If there is no ==External links== section one is created for the template

There may be more but that is all I can think of at present. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That all sounds fine. Just want to confirm again: What should the first parameter be? If the bot places {{EOL}} on many articles with the incorrect label, people are going to be very unhappy with me. :P (Also, I'm going to wait until some people follow the links here and concur that this should be done before filing a BRFA.) Cheers! — madman 21:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By the first parameter do you mean the EOL number? That is obtained by entering the binomial name into the EOL search box. Can you write a script to do an automated query and create a list that matches the EOL number with the binomial name? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, I meant the second parameter, the label (herp derp). Title of the EOL article, full classification, or just the binomial name? — madman 22:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The second parameter would be the binomial name only. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 23:11, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha; thanks! The specifications look clear enough for me to code something up in my free time while discussion continues here. — madman 23:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It may be feasible, but I don't believe it's desirable to add {{EOL}} to pages robotically. Such links will generally fail the criteria WP:EL, and the decision to include them must be made manually. See WT:PLANTS#Bot task for species articles for more detail. --Stemonitis (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. N Not done — madman 17:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to either add an RSS feed from an external page to Wikipedia or have a bot update a Wikipedia page from the external page? Allen (talk) 11:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure its possible, yes. Is it desirable? I think you need to tell us more; for which articles / what content would this be useful? What sources are you thinking of? --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible, but I don't think there are any bots doing this. Definitely not on a blanket basis, as each source's RSS content syntax is different. But, as above, this should be done on a case-by-case basis. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If there was consensus for this task, it looks like it would fall within DrTrigonBot's scope. — madman 17:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add updates from my user page/list pages on Listal.

Just ask again if you need more clarification.

Allen (talk) 23:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that this is done via a javascript widget, which loads the content directly into the users browser without the need for continuous wikipedia edits. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If that is true, do you know what "javascript widget" it would be? Allen (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned by madman (tks for that! ;) this would be possible with DrTrigonBot (and is already done on - at least - 2 pages). The full answer is given at User talk:DrTrigon#Adding RSS Feeds to Wikipedia. Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of pages literally with "(citation needed)" rather than the template. I assume the existing bot(s) that date {{citation needed}} actually use the API equivalent of What links here to locate pages with templates, so to fix these plain text "templates" would require a search instead.

Once they've been found they can be simply replaced with the template and allow the dating bot(s) to do their thing, or the requested bot could aslo do the dating at the same time.

FYI To see the extent of the problem, search tries to find the relevant articles, though I have manually fixed the first three pages at the moment.

BTW see here for discussion of the general problem. Mark Hurd (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/H3llBot 10. Although it was initially meant to cover more specific cases and <sup> syntax. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games was converted to a taskforce (at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Adventure games). The task requested on behalf of WP:VG is two-fold:

There may be easier ways to accomplish the same results, just lemme know if anything else is needed.

• Part 1 - Remove all instances of {{WikiProject Adventure games}}, {{WikiProject Adventures}} and {{Advenproj}}. There are 671 pages with this banner, here's the list.

• Part 2 - Add a |Adventure=yes parameter to the existent WP:VG banners in 655 of the pages affected above (here's the list). Note the capital A is intentional. The other 16 pages (here's the list) simply do not have WP:VG banners. If it makes it easier they could be included in the list nonetheless and a {{nobots}} exclusion placed on them temporarily.

If some of that would be hard to do, or if there are easier ways, or if there's anything really, just lemme know!

Although this appears to be a trivial thing to do I would not recommend doing this as a bot action. There is a current community stir about bots and WikiProject tagging, partially due to my actions and it would probably just cause a lot of extra drama. It might be better just to do it manually even if it takes months. --Kumioko (talk) 15:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Care to link me to the discussion where consensus against bots editing WikiProject banners was established? Salvidrim! 15:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Theres no consensus against it but there are multiple discussions ongoing about tagging with bots. I can't say that knowone will do this but, given that there has been a request pending for Chicago for months with no action and I got a brutal beatdown for it in the last couple days (resulting in the revocation of my bot authority) I would recommend against it. You might get it done with no trouble, you might also get sucked into a multi discussion pissing contest that makes you question why you even bothered with the place. Sorry for the verbiage I am still bitter about the process and my tongue is raw form licking my wounds for the last 2 days. :-)--Kumioko (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this request should be judged on its own merits, not in comparison to the failures of others. This is pratically a simple text replacement task. Salvidrim! 15:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Like I said I can't/won't do it anymore but I certainly won't stand in someone elses way if they choose to take on this challenge. --Kumioko (talk) 16:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This request is inline with WP:VG/IPC. Salvidrim, I believe it is Anomie which has a bot to perform this task, though my memory is fuzzy on the point. --Izno (talk) 16:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- I've dropped him a line. Salvidrim! 16:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So the deal is that the "16 other pages" are not in the scope of the task force? Anomie⚔ 17:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it just hadn't been looked into yet. I went and added the WP:VG banner (in the next few mins), so there will be no need to handle them differently from the rest. Salvidrim! 17:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, all 671 needed articles have existing WP:VG banners (not all the same template (some use shortcut redirects)) with a varying amount of parameters. None of the 671 banners currently has a |Adventure=yes parameter so it is not needed to check whether one is already there before adding it. Salvidrim! 17:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nifty. I'll look at starting the run in a little bit; if I haven't posted here that I started it by about 22:30 UTC, post on my talk page to remind me. Anomie⚔ 19:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Wikipedia needs a bot to fix the placement of stub templates. I've notice that many articles have stub templates placed before navboxes or somewhere else. Those templates are supposed to be placed after that content. --JC ^{Talk to me} _{My contributions} 02:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's part of the genfixes AWB does. Salvidrim! 03:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are several of us that would love to do this however its considered a minor edit and to do so, without making a more significant edit at the same time, would result in at least a bot stop message or block. --Kumioko (talk) 03:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would there be a difference between fixes that impact how the page is rendered (e.g. moving from the top of the article to the bottom) and fixes that wouldn't (e.g. moving from before categories to after)? GoingBatty (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, not in this case. I can't provide an edit summery but CBM and someone else made a major issue out of doing this kinds of edit when Smackbot-gate was going on last year and they decided they weren't edits worth doing alone and used their clout to get the edits stopped. A short time later they forced AWB to change their rules of use after I made some changes that also provoked their wrath. With that said though if you get someone to pull a list of articles affected by this problem you could probably fix most of them by craftily engineering a script that changed other things (add Biography portals, categories, Infoboxes, persondata, AWB general fixes, etc.) so you can get the task done. Good luck --Kumioko (talk) 04:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is borderline WP:COSMETICBOT. Although it does change the display, the change is very minimal and more of an "OCD" layout issue. I'd argue moving from the very top of the page is a substantial change, moving around the navboxes isn't so much. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:32, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a very large number of articles on the wiki that previously had the Multiple Issues template, but that have since had all but one of the issues resolved. I'm frequently responsible for them myself, since as I work through many outdated tags in a short time I often don't bother to reformat the template. The task of replacing it with the appropriate standalone tag is completely unambiguous and thus is ideally suited for a bot, but would be tedious and time-consuming for a human. -- LWG ^talk 14:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BattyBot is doing a lot of work with Multiple Issues, and would be happy to investigate this tomorrow. GoingBatty (talk) 18:44, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Working - Part of AWB's general fixes are to remove {{Multiple issues}} if it has no parameters and convert it to the original template if it has only one parameter. I'm preparsing the list of 43,000+ articles that use Multiple issues now to see if there's a small number of articles that could be changed manually, or if a bot request should be filed. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed -GoingBatty (talk) 00:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In many cases, a species will have a photo in its infobox, but the higher taxa to which the species belongs will not have photos in their infoboxes. I'm not sure how involved coding this bot would be, but it would be great to identify articles for higher taxa missing images that should be filled in from the images in the articles for the lower taxa. E.g. Rufous-crowned Antpitta vs. Pittasoma (old revision because I added the image earlier today). Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This bot appears to have died. It's been suggested the operator's account is closed due to inactivity.

Can someone help establish if this is the case? Ideally with a view to getting the bot up-and-running again. I'm happy to look after a new account for the bot if need be (but, with the proviso I'd need to add some Python knowledge to my coding toolset were changes required). --Brian McNeil /^talk 14:24, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a quick look at it but this (or something similar) should be possible to do with User:DrTrigonBot out of the box. Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks very much DrTrigon (talk · contribs), please keep us posted? — Cirt (talk) 15:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do not have that much time at the moment - could you e.g. give me an example? May be a page that was updated/imported by the old bot and I'll convert it to DrTrigonBot. Then we can talk about the result... ;) Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1. n:Portal:Film/Wikipedia = sample source page
2. Portal:Film/Film news/Wikinews = sample output page

Thoughts? — Cirt (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Will be updated daily. There are 2 minor differences; the date has another formatting and all links include the interwiki part 'wikinews:en:'. Both of them can be solved by template programming. Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 16:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note the suggestion that the operator's account has been closed is incorrect; apparently, one of the toolserver machines is having issues. See WP:BON#Misza13's bots seem to be down. Anomie⚔ 17:09, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@DrTrigon, with the update from Anomie, will your changes still be needed, or do we instead need to bug somebody about fixing the tool server machines, or both? — Cirt (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry I should have noticed this by myself. In your place I would do now:

1. revert changes of User:DrTrigon
2. inform User talk:Misza13 about the problem and ask how to solve it
3. if no solution is found re-revert and use User:DrTrigonBot anyway (since it is there; and one central place for doing all kinds of substitutions in a general way ;)

...one strange thing is User:DrTrigonBot runs on the toolserver too - and still works... ;) But do not know why... Greetings --DrTrigon (talk) 17:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I frequently have a need to refer to the current revision of the article (eg., in GA reviews or dispute resolution procedures like WP:3O or WP:RFC). To do that I have to go to the "page history", copy down the link to the revision and re-format it into {{oldid}}. Some other editors instead just use wikilinking ([[]]), so to get the idea of how the article looked like back then one has to find the revision by hand.

My proposal is to create a template {{this revision|pagename}} which would display a normal wikilink ([[]]) until gets rewritten by Bot into {{oldid}}. If introduced and made known, this will save some considerable amount of editors' effort.

The algorithm for bot seems to be pretty clear:

1. starts on timer
2. gets the list of interclusions of {{this revision}}
3. for each item on the list:
   1. parses the arguments
   2. looks for the closest previous revision of the linked page
   3. retrieves oldid
   4. rewrites {{this revision}} with {{oldid}}
4. exists

Please leave me a {{talkback}} if you write to this thread. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You really should just watch this page, instead of demanding that everyone leave you a talkback if they reply. I'll leave you a talkback this once, but in the future watch the page for further replies.

This would be a simple enough task for a bot, but I wonder whether it's really so hard to just use the "Permanent link" link in the "toolbox" section at the right of the page. In most browsers you shouldn't even have to click the link just to find the oldid, hovering the mouse over it should show the target URL in the browser's status bar and/or you can right-click it and choose "Copy link location" or the like. Anomie⚔ 17:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have the sidebar disabled (with a screen resolution 1280x720 it occupies too much space). I turned it off via Special:Preferences, and I believe that some other editors did so a well. Furthermore, linking to current revision is not always the task, this template would have quite a lot of possible use cases. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:39, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could we have a bot to clean up the way that citations are placed in relation to punctuation? I often find commas, periods, and other punctuation placed immediately after a </ref> or <ref name=> tag, when instead they belong immediately before a <ref> or <ref name=> tag. I expect that it would be easy to move all punctuation that immediately follows a citation (without a space) so that it's immediately before the citation, and this type of formatting (unlike things such as stub template placement relative to navboxes) is a substantial type of edit that really should be corrected. The same thing could be used for the {{GR}} series of templates (note that they always have parameters; you'll see GR|6 or GR|2 all over the place, but I can't remember ever seeing GR by itself), since they automatically produce references. Nyttend (talk) 01:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]