Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/IznoBot 2

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was  Approved.

Operator: Izno (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 03:07, Thursday, October 18, 2018 (UTC)

Function overview: Lint DYKN ARCHIVE pattern

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): WT:Linter#Quick misnested tag fix for 1,000 to 2,000 Template:DYK pages

Edit period(s): One-time.

Estimated number of pages affected: ~900.

Namespace(s): Template

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Standard AWB

Function details: Will F+R the exact pattern (or so--something large to be conservative) <b>[[WP:TPG|talk page guidelines]]</b> for [[WP:ARCHIVE|(<b>more</b>)]] information.</i></span>{{clear}} with <b>[[WP:TPG|talk page guidelines]]</b> for [[WP:ARCHIVE|(<b>more</b>)]] information.</span></i>{{clear}}, which swaps the location of the span and the i before the clear. Will work off the templates in this search.

Discussion

Please add this pattern as well, which will catch another 100 or so:

for \[\[WP\:ARCHIVE\|\(\'\'\'more\'\'\'\)\]\] information\.)(\'\')(\<\/span\>)/gi, '$1$3$2'

It's the same pattern, just with wikitext bold and italic marks. You can see the patterns that worked for me on a few hundred articles at User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/doi.js, in the "misnested tags" section. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:09, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. --Izno (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Search isn't finding that pattern. @Jonesey95: Please feel free to provide a link to a search which does. --Izno (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: Should be 50. I only ran against the pattern originally requested per my comment to Jonesey. I will plan to add the 2nd pattern if he can produce a search identifying the issue using the equivalent wikitext. --Izno (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: looks fine, do you want to wait for the second test (20 sample edits should be fine)? — xaosflux ^Talk 03:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: I'd prefer to execute the first since it's so simple and I would guess the pages are mutually exclusive. I'm happy to drop a note on your talk page for the 2nd group for trial of that set. --Izno (talk) 03:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:44, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.