From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bot pages:	Bot policy | Currently running bots | Requests for bot approval | How to create a bot | Bot Approvals Group
	Requests for work to be done by a bot | Bot owners' noticeboard | Bot status page | BAG Admin Tools

Shortcut: WP:B/RFA WP:BRFA WP:RFBOT WP:RFBA

If you want to run a bot on the English Wikipedia, you must first get it approved. To do so, add a request below. Rather than running your own bot, it may be a good idea to ask someone else to run one for you at Bot requests.

See also: Current policy on bots and Wikipedia:Bots/Frequently denied bots, to make sure your idea is not listed.

Contents 1 Organization 2 Current requests for approval 2.1 BetacommandBot 2.1.1 Discussion 2.1.1.1 Spam Stats 2.1.1.2 Subst 2.1.1.3 WikiProject 2.1.1.4 CFD/TFD 2.2 DieBucheBot 2.2.1 Discussion 2.3 UncatTemplateBot 2.3.1 Discussion 3 Requests to add a task to an already-approved bot 3.1 SmackBot 3.1.1 Discussion 3.1.2 Discussion2 3.2 VshBot 3.2.1 Discussion 3.3 Shadowbot 3.3.1 Discussion 3.4 DomBot 3.4.1 Discussion 3.5 BJBot 3.5.1 Discussion 4 Bots in a trial period 5 Approved Requests 6 Unapproved requests 7 Expired/withdrawn Requests

I	Creating a user account and user page for the bot describing its functions. please state the following: To log the creation of the bot account under your operator account click here while logged in. Describe the bot's purpose, language it uses, what program(s) it uses (pywikipedia framework, etc). Describe whether it is manually assisted or automatically scheduled to run. The period, if any, we should expect it to run. Identify the maintainer. Add the bot's user page to Category:Wikipedia bots (By adding {{bot|your user name}} to the bot's user page)
II	Listing your bot here. Replace BotName with your bot's user name in the box below and click the button. If this is a request for an additional task, put a task number as well (e.g. Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BotName 2). Complete the questions on the resulting page and save it.. Edit this page, adding the following text to the appropriate section (replacing BotName with your bot's name): {{Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BotName}}
III	Waiting for approval. You must wait for approval from someone in the approvals group. Please add a link to the approval request to the bot's userpage.

[edit] Organization

New bots

Please list new requests in this section. Be sure to document the name of the bot, your name, and exactly what the bot will do, in detail. Community members are invited to comment on requests, and an approvals group member will approve or reject requests after a reasonable amount of time.

New tasks for existing bots

Please list requests for approval for new tasks for your existing bot in this section Be sure to explain the new task in detail. A member of the approvals group will approve or reject the new task after a reasonable amount of time has passed for community input.

Need assistance?

If you've waited a reasonable amount of time for a reply, or if you have an urgent issue, you can place {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} onto your bot request. This is intended for use if urgent attention is needed or if a request is being neglected, do not use it after every comment.

Active trial runs

(Approvals group members only)

If a bot is placed on a trial run, please document it in this section. Further comments should take place there, as will the decision to approve or deny the full run.

Approved bots

(Approvals group members only)

When a user has completed a trial run (if needed), their bot has been approved, please:

1. Add a clear statement indicating approval of the bot on the bot's subpage.
2. List the bot here.

Archiving

When a reasonable time has passed for the operator to know about the approval (a few days in most cases), and the bot already has the flag (if needed):

1. Tag the discussion top and bottom of the discussion with {{subst:Bot Top}} and {{subst:Bot Bottom}} respectively (See this example). Updating the categories is also recommended as in this example.
2. After more than 7 days have passed on the list of recently Approved Requests, archive the discussion in the current archive.

Bot Name Status Last edit Date/Time Last BAG edit Date/Time BetacommandBot (T|C|B|F) Approved: BAG assistance requested! Mets501 2007-04-06, 16:12:34 Mets501 2007-04-06, 16:12:34 DieBucheBot (T|C|B|F) Open Yonatan 2007-04-07, 14:01:00 Mets501 2007-04-05, 03:18:04 UncatTemplateBot (T|C|B|F) Open Balloonguy 2007-04-06, 21:06:47 Mets501 2007-03-02, 21:45:17 TeckWizBot 3 (T|C|B|F) Open TeckWiz 2007-04-09, 15:32:37 Martinp23 2007-04-09, 14:57:57 SmackBot approval XI (T|C|B|F) Request Expired Rich Farmbrough 2007-04-09, 08:20:43 Mets501 2007-04-01, 02:26:20 VshBot 2 (T|C|B|F) In trial Kingboyk 2007-04-08, 21:50:54 Kingboyk 2007-04-08, 21:50:54 Shadowbot 2 (T|C|B|F) Open Martinp23 2007-04-09, 10:07:36 Martinp23 2007-04-09, 10:07:36 DomBot 2 (T|C|B|F) Open DomBot 2007-04-09, 04:13:22 Kingboyk 2007-04-05, 12:31:19 BJBot 3 (T|C|B|F) Open Picaroon9288 2007-03-28, 19:39:38 Kingboyk 2007-03-18, 16:05:17 ProteinBoxBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Mets501 2007-04-07, 00:19:10 Mets501 2007-04-07, 00:19:10 Sumibot (T|C|B|F) In trial Mets501 2007-04-05, 17:32:48 Mets501 2007-04-05, 17:32:48 SieBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Siebrand 2007-04-09, 10:04:03 Mets501 2007-04-05, 18:05:50 Ocobot 2 (T|C|B|F) In trial Mets501 2007-04-05, 00:33:03 Mets501 2007-04-05, 00:33:03 DvyBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Mets501 2007-04-04, 21:52:55 Mets501 2007-04-04, 21:52:55 Rschen7754bot (T|C|B|F) In trial Mets501 2007-04-05, 00:23:38 Mets501 2007-04-05, 00:23:38 StewieBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Eagle 101 2007-03-23, 03:01:18 Kingboyk 2007-03-22, 19:57:43 MMOGMailMan (T|C|B|F) In trial ST47 2007-04-04, 23:44:16 Martinp23 2007-04-04, 21:51:09 VshBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Martinp23 2007-04-08, 18:51:38 Martinp23 2007-04-08, 18:51:38 AccReqBot (T|C|B|F) In trial ST47 2007-04-06, 12:48:33 Mets501 2007-04-05, 20:18:02 BrownBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Martinp23 2007-04-05, 16:16:17 Martinp23 2007-04-05, 16:16:17 STTWbot 2 (T|C|B|F) In trial SlaveToTheWage 2007-04-06, 21:21:12 Mets501 2007-04-06, 19:20:11 DRVBot (T|C|B|F) In trial Xaosflux 2007-04-07, 20:32:31 Xaosflux 2007-04-07, 20:32:31 Last updated 15:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC) by Bot Approvals Group helperbot.

Archives Old Format Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4 New Format Approved - Rejected     all subpages of this page

[edit] Current requests for approval

[edit] BetacommandBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Automatic or Manually Assisted:Auto

Programming Language(s):Python & AWB

Function Summary: CFD/TFD, Substing, WikiProject tagging, Spam stats

Edit period(s) :Continuous

Edit rate requested: depending on the task edit rate varies no more than ~10epm

Already has a bot flag :N

[edit] Discussion

I've divided each area into its own subsection. -- RM 12:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam Stats

AFIAK the bot was cleared for spam stats w/ no edit flag. Perhaps splitting the bots work into multiple accounts would be a good thing here -- Tawker 00:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a need to. The CFD and Wikiproject and substing would warrant a flag, but the spam stats need not show up on RC or watchlists, I believe a link is simply posted to a channel, so is there any harm in running the stats with a flag? ST47Talk 00:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I dont see a reason to split accounts as the stats task post only to a few pages and anyone interested with that data more than likely just uses the IRC link. Tawker all approval was withdrawn. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 01:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact, Tawker, perhaps the linksearch function could be speedily approved, whether under this account or another, as it supplies extremely helpful information on external links and affects nothing outside of the Wikipedia namespace. ST47Talk 01:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The linksearch feature is already under another bot, with another operator. It is still in trial though. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 02:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

This does not seem to be a very controversial task. I put forth a motion for speedy approval. Naturally this must be the exact same approval as Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/VixDaemon_4, so all those comments will apply in this case as to what is allowed and not allowed. -- RM 12:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Provided we have the strict condition that the data isn't to be used for automated or semi-automated link removal until such time as a seperate application has been lodged for such a task (as you allude to), go for it. --kingboyk 12:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

A special note on the semi-automatic link removal. I know that this caused a tremendous amount of problems, but I'd like to see this tool tested and verified by BAG and the rest of the community. With proper oversight, this could be an extremely useful tool which at some point should go through a separate approvals process, as mentioned by kingboyk above. -- RM 12:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedily Approved. The spam stats / linksearch function has already been mostly tested, so there is no reason to put this through trial, unless someone wants to disagree. The VixDaemon trial is basically done and ready to be approved anyway. It is explicitly not to be used for any automated or semi-automated link removal without a separate approval, which you are encouraged to seek. The bot flag will not be granted for this task, but will likely be granted when the other tasks are approved. -- RM 12:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to make a request for this task. I would like open ended approval for stat work so I can develope more and better data collection and interpertation to assist in counter spam. (I have a few design ideas that of how to interpret and display link data. they may or may not end up working out) but I would like approval to continue development of statical functions. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

How about making a new account and a seperate application for that task proposal? (I don't like the sound of "open ended" but we can discuss that when the task is formally requested and more technical info supplied). --kingboyk 15:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

When I mean open ended I want only approval for anti-spam data analysis within the wikiproject spam space. I will not leave that area but would like to be able to expand on the stats that are currently generated. IE be able to track spam counts over time and other stats. this will NOT be anything else than stats within the WP:WPSPAM subspace. I dont see any issues here or the need to split accounts. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah OK, if it's analytical work within that project area I see no problem at all. Thanks for clearing that up Beta. I was thinking you wanted to apply for approval to test your link removal code, which I definitely think should be a seperate application. --kingboyk 22:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Subst

Betacommand, we don't want more problems. You need to be more specific. "Substing" is not a task summary. —METS501 (talk) 04:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

that is per WP:SUBST or a random TfD by request. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 04:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

That's not really specific. Which templates will you be substituting? Which namespaces will you be operating in? I know you've been doing all this for a while, but it's very vague what exactly you mean by "substing". Be specific. -- RM 11:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

anything listed under under sections 2 and 3 of WP:SUBST Templates that should be substituted and Templates that must be substituted this task as does the nature of templates spreads across all namespaces. I shall be very careful in the template namespace when edits are needed there more than likely I will do those simi auto. TFD will be answered in section below Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

How will the bot deal with pages like User:CliffC/Temp? —METS501 (talk) 18:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I tend to filter out several namespaces such as Wikipedia:, Help:, and user subpages so those should not come to the bot. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, Speedily Approved. —METS501 (talk) 16:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject

Adding wikiproject banners to article talk pages and associated issues. IE if pages are tagged as {{WikiProject}} but are listed in a sub cat I may add or change {{Wikiproject|class=stub}} or variants of that. or if its in cretin categories add the template to talkpages. see [1] for a request that has been asked. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I recommend using my plugin when you're tagging for projects which it specifically supports, and optionally for all such requests. I'm in the process of writing a page explaining why but trust me, it makes your life easier :)

Also, please be aware that there is mounting dissatisfaction at the number of talk pages with multiple tags, so if you get requests which would result in lots of double tagging - because the projects share scope but don't work together - you might want to gently ask them to consider template sharing.

Those points aside, this is a mostly non-controversial task which you've been doing for a long time. The request you showed us looks fine too. I move to speedy approve this task, which will also necessitate a bot flag. --kingboyk 12:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I tend to use your plug in unless I cant get it to do what I need, But by default that is what I use. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedily Approved. As per kingboyk's motion for a speedy close. This is the least controversial of Betacommand's tasks. I should also note that I approved of his usage of "Infoboxneeded" on those talk pages, as that was similar enough. Placing maintenance tags for the Wikiprojects on article talk pages is exactly what he is doing here, whether or not it is labeled "WikiProjectXXXX" or not. It should be pretty obvious whether a differently named tag is sufficiently different to require bot approval. I should note that I like when Betacommand takes requests from specific WikiProjects to do these things. Just be careful, as kingboyk points out, that these types of banners may at some point be frowned upon, so care must be taken to stop immediately if anyone complains and engage in a dialogue as appropriate. -- RM 13:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CFD/TFD

Could you describe this task in specific detail? -- RM 12:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:CFD and WP:CFD/W decisions either remove a category or rename it. same thing cydebot does. in regard to TFD I have only done one or two such request but I might as well get approval for any future request if they come up. {{smiley}} was a widely used template with at least four variants of it, a total of over 50 parser functions that were used to display facial images. there was a TfD in which it was decided that {{smiley}} should be deleted. But if users just removed the {{smilely|what ever face number}} that would /could change the tone and meaning behind the post. I was asked to orphan and delete the templates when that was done per tfd. I coded several bot runs (basically one per template). Mets you pointed out one diff that was made in that run on the previous discussion of BCbot. Without checking for parser functions I just substed it. when it was pointed out that it used parser functions (part way through the first template) I then coded BCBot to examine the templates and play template namespace and figure out what the parser functions did and then replace the template with what ever the template would have render into any way. IE {{Smilely|happy}} would become Image:Happy face.jpg or what ever the corispnding image would have been. this was extremely esoteric template task that I doubt any other bot operator would have bothered to do. (there was originally just a request for a bot to remove the template.) Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Cyde even stated "impossible to properly substitute" yes there were a few bugs with that task but I am very happy with the outcome. FYI {{smiley}} alone had 22 parser functions to subst. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That task would have been very easy with Special:ExpandTemplates. —METS501 (talk) 22:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

In that case not really the parser function results were simple. the matter was coding them all in and the variants that were used in order to be able to remove the template completely with a bot. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DieBucheBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: User:DieBuche

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic, but supervised

Programming Language(s): pywikipedia framework

Function Summary: Do some replacements especially superseded pictures from commons

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): 3-4 times a week

Edit rate requested: 4-5 edits per minute

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function Details: This Bot replaces pictures on commons that have been marked as "superseded" [2] with the new picture.

[edit] Discussion

• Will this bot work on commons, on en-wiki, or on both? Is the idea here that you type in the name of a superseded image, and the name of the better image, and all pages using the old image on en-wiki will be updated to link to the other image? Gimmetrow 00:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It works only on en-wiki, i tell him which images have to be replaced, he doesn't find them automatically --DieBuche 13:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

How do you get the pages on which to replace it? All pages or only those in article namespace? If you're using python regexp to replace the image links, how do you plan to deal with varations in use of underscores and spaces? (There are a couple ways to handle this.) Gimmetrow 19:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think about this. Can you tell me how to do it ? --DieBuche 19:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, the simple solution is to convert all underscores to spaces, then search for the image name with spaces. This is convenient (doesn't even need a regexp) but will change every underscore on the page. I'm pretty sure some tools do this, and it's usually OK. Or you could make a bit more complex regexp to only convert underscores between sets of double brackets. Gimmetrow 22:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

This is overall a good idea, but there is no reason to change the entire page at all. Perhaps this is what you meant, but let me explain. It is a matter of retrieving the page, converting a local copy from underscores -> spaces and upper case -> lower case, find the strings that match in the page and remember their indicies. Next, perform the replacement on a different copy that has not had the conversions applied. Then submit the latter copy when finished doing the find and replace. The alternative is to do this with a complex regexp, just depends on personal preference. -- RM 12:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

"Remember their indices" is a little tricky if it's using regexp or replace. There are some tool(s) which leave the underscore->space replacement in the article. Gimmetrow 13:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I understand that. That's why I said regexp is a separate solution (and probably the best one) from the one I described. Doing article processing would require custom code to perform the scanning, finding, and replacing. My overall point is that the tools may not be good enough, since doing a global underscore->space replacement is a bad idea, as it could remove legitimate underscores. That just makes this a little more difficult to pull off correctly. But I won't approve a bot that has a known risk of adding errors, so the work has to be done to make it work correctly. -- RM 13:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought it could been done without regexp; But now I know that I've to. --DieBuche 15:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

How about this - enter the image name with spaces, and generate a form for the image name with underscores for spaces. Then go through all pages which link to the image, and replace any instance of either the all-space or all-underscore version to the updated image name. When all pages are done, have the bot tell you if any pages still link to the image, so you can do those by hand. There will be no errors in the articles, and only rarely will you need to do anything by hand. Would that work? Gimmetrow 19:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sound's good --DieBuche 14:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

What if some are spaces and some are underscores? The best way to do it is this. Get the page text. Perform a regex replacement on the page text, where the regex replacement string is gotten from command line input with all spaces replaced with [ _], the regex code for "space or underscore". So, for example, here's some c# code for what I'm saying (sorry, I'm not good with python)

Console.WriteLine("Enter image name:");
string regex = Console.ReadLine();
regex = "[Ii]mage:" + "[" + char.ToUpper(regex[0]) + char.ToLower(regex[0]) + "]" + regex.Remove(0, 1).Replace(" ", "[ _]");

At this point you would have a regex string "regex" stored, and then you need to declare a regex and perform the replacement on the article text. Hopefully you understand C#, or someone can translate :-) —METS501 (talk) 03:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Question: Can you give an example of images that you will be replacing? Not all images currently using the superseded tag should actually be superseded (if they were, we could have just asked User:Orgullomoore to change User:CommonsDelinker's replace.py function). For example, not all png's that have been superseded by svg's should be replaced (even if they have, they probably shouldn't be deleted) and if you do run this it could cause *a lot* of problems for commons. I suggest you request for bot approval on commons as well since this is technically representing the commons community. Yonatan ^talk 14:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UncatTemplateBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Balloonguy

Automatic or Manually Assisted:Automatic

Programming Language(s):AWB

Function Summary:Adds Category:Uncategorized templates to templates that do not have a category

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run):One time run

Edit rate requested: 5 edits per minute

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):

Function Details: By using a list of uncategorized templates, it goes through and adds Category:Uncategorized templates to these templates.

[edit] Discussion

How are you generating the lists of pages to run it on? -- Tawker 17:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I use Special:Prefix index to get all the pages in the template namespace. Then I use cat scan to get all pages in Category:Wikipedia templates and its subcategories. I then compare the list and whatever is not in Category:Wikipedia templates and its subcategories get tagged.--Balloonguy 23:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

May sound silly, but i persume it is adding to the templates? Reedy Boy 13:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually

[[Category:Uncategorized templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]

--Balloonguy 17:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Would it add a line break before adding the category? That might not be a good idea because it would add white space. —METS501 (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

No, because according to the disclaimer on Category:Uncategorized templatesIf you add this code at the end of the template, please make sure that the opening <noinclude> starts on the same line as the last char of the template code. Experiments revealed that some templates became seriously defunct when that rule was violated.

It will be like this:

last line of template[[Category:Uncategorized templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]

but with no includes--Balloonguy 17:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. Can you use query.php to get the page lists, though? (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php) —METS501 (talk) 04:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how to use query.php, need help--Balloonguy 23:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I didn't see that you were using AWB. I will implement a feature in the next day or two to get all pages in a namespace through the query.php interface, which is much less taxing on the servers. If you can just wait a couple of days for the next release of AWB, that would be great. —METS501 (talk) 01:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, I can wait.--Balloonguy 22:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think the easiest would just be to get a database dump which contains only the titles (pages-articles.xml.bz2 which has the contents would work too) and extract the list of pages in the template namespace from there. —METS501 (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Is there actually established consensus for categorising every single template, which seems implicit in the premise of this 'bot? Last time I checked there was an explicit disclaimer not to do this (though it seemed to becoming "more honoured in the breach", even then). In particular, we've been all around this before for stub templates -- which are normally in their corresponding stub categories, but which started acquiring "stub template categories" some time ago (which were in turn subsequently deleted). If this goes ahead, can you either: exclude anything that looks like a stub template; or, include the whole Cat:stub categories hierarchy in the "whitelist" of categories-templates-should have? (Or, some combination of the two.) Alai 20:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I was the one that requested that a bot be set up to do this. I've been doing a lot of work recently with sorting out the template categories (see Category talk:Wikipedia templates for the bulk of it). I've not encountered any disclaimers not to do this, and I would disagree with any disclaimer that said that. My reorganization of the template categories stemmed from the difficulties I was having in locating existing templates on a subject; I kept finding more every way I turned, which frequently duplicated the functionality of other templates.

What I would like to ultimately see set up is a whole series of categories like Category:Astronomical templates, which contain all of the relevant templates for that subject area. This then creates a pool of templates that editors can dip into to find the templates they need easily. I view this bot's task of gathering together all of the templates that aren't in these category structures as a necessary first step along this path.

Note that I've put the stub templates for that subject area in there as well; personally I don't distinguish between them and other types of templates, at least from a subject-orientated viewpoint. Mike Peel 20:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Apparently the text of the "templates" category started 'drifting' about a year ago [3], and has kept on doing so ever since. But I'd still like to see where explicit consensus that every template needs to be so categorised was establised.

On the previous go-round of this: specifically, I was thinking of Cat:stub templates and its (former) sub-categories: see CFDs (plural, both deleting) here and here. I think similar arguments apply to categorising them on a different axis.

I don't see how the organisational and duplication issues you mention could arise for stub templates: there's a consolidated list of them (WP:WSS/P), and they're in a hierarchy of their own already. It seems unlikely that someone decides they're looking for "an astronomy template", starts rummaging through that category, and only then decides it's actually an astronomy stub template they're looking for. Said categorisation would obviously vary from the coding of stub templates suggested by the stub guidelines. I don't especially object to case-by-case by-subject or by-wikiproject categorisation (I've noticed some instances of both when "cleaning up" stub code, but retained them) as the presumption that all stub templates must have them. (Should I also mention that doing this will also page-cache-invalidate about half the article space... twice?) Alai 03:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I have similar concerns to Alai - I'm not sure whether he's mentioned this anywhere abovce, but stub templates were all at one time categorised into specific stub template subcategories, but it caused considerable problems and was redundant with other methods of sorting stub templates, so these were deleted. It seems very odd that anyone would consider going back to a system which proved more inefficient than the current one, and would be very keen to see stub templates excluded from this categorisation process. it should be easy enough to do, since they all have uniform names ending in "stub" (the only templates which have that form of name are stub templates). Grutness...wha? 04:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

BTW, there are other comments on this proposal - mostly negative - here. Grutness...wha? 04:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I am _not_ wanting to duplicate existing work. All of the stub types are already listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types; a Category:Stub templates would be entirely redundant to that. However, I _am_ wanting to see the stub templates put into their subject area's category. This aim has grown rather a lot since I started it (I was originally just trying to find astronomy templates for Category:Astronomical templates); maybe now would be a good time to seek this "consensus" from the community at large. Mike Peel 09:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, since stub templates are all automatically in their respective stub categories, all of which are subcategories of their main (permanent) category, they are already in their respective subject area's category. I can understand a wish to make the system uniform across all templates, but it does seem a little like duplication as far as th stub types are concerned. Grutness...wha? 23:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I've now posted this on the village pump; see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Categorization_of_templates. Mike Peel 15:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• If (re)categorizing stub templates might cause ruffles, I say shelve them for the time being; meanwhile, there's a whole host of templates whose categorization would, I believe, benefit editors, if only to prevent unwitting duplication. I think it would also benefit the encyclopedia to be able to direct editors to well-populated template categories, so (a) they may see how much template ground has or hasn't been covered; and (b) they may find a useful template they hadn't yet considered. (I've certainly appreciated the latter!)  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 02:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• • That's exactly what I'd suggest. If someone really wants to work on categorising stub templates by topic under the "templates" hierarchy, in addition to under the "stubs" hierarchy, the "uncategorised" ones are easy to find: it'd be almost all of these. If someone does a significant number, and it proves wildly popular, it'd be a simple matter to extend this task to include the remainder at that point. Alai 07:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, there are a lot of templates that do not even have a category, I'll avoid stub templates.--Balloonguy 17:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I see no reason not to go ahead with trialing this, with the above stipulations. If there's any other large class of templates it's also not 100% clear if they should be categorised on this sort of basis, I'd suggest taking it easy and doing just a few, and seeing if anyone yelps.

However, if you wait a while for a fresh db dump (which should be fairly soon, as the old cycle has (eventually) just finished, but it's well beyond my ken to predict this exactly) then I'll be able to generate a list of candidate templates without you having to do a "live" traverse of the template categories, or rely on catscan, which as I understand it is using month+ replication-lagged toolserver data. Alai 03:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

If you can generate a list than that would be better, I can wait.Balloonguy 21:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Alai has provided me a list of uncategorized templates. I have updated the description accordingly.--Balloonguy

[edit] Requests to add a task to an already-approved bot

[edit] Discussion2

1. "What does this actually achieve?"
   

   It gets the correct template on the pages concerned. Note tat this is a low use template unlike the two it replaces, enabling the relevant items to be found and dealt with quickly.

2. See also the talk page of template in question. It is part of the dab project.
3. The run was requested by a user, see [4].
4. Archived request. I'm a bit peeved to find this archived, when it took over a fortnight for the first significant question about the request to appear. I kept an eye on the request for a while, but can you notify people before archiving their requests?

   Rich Farmbrough, 08:15 9 April 2007 (GMT).

[edit] VshBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Vishwin60

Automatic or Manually Assisted: both

Programming Language(s): AWB

Function Summary: Tags the WP:NJSCR banner on talk pages of articles that reside in Category:State Routes in New Jersey and tags the WP:MASH banner on talk pages of articles that reside in Category:Numbered routes in Massachusetts

Edit period(s): One time run

Edit rate requested: 15 10 edits per minute

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): N

Function Details: Tags the WP:NJSCR banner on talk pages of articles that reside in Category:State Routes in New Jersey and tags the WP:MASH banner on talk pages of articles that reside in Category:Numbered routes in Massachusetts. Most of the articles that are in the scope in those WikiProjects are not tagged, and thus the WP 1.0 bot won't detect them as part of WP:USRD.

[edit] Discussion

Can you link to the banner templates which will be placed please? Also, it may be easier (and quicker) for an already approved bot to do the task for you, as many are approved for adding Wikiproject banners. Thanks, Martinp23 17:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It's worth me noting here that 15 edits per minute is the absolute maximum editting rate for time-critical tasks. The maximum rate that this bot will edit at is 10 per minute (additionally, 15 epm is probably not technically possible to achieve with AWB, taking into account the time taken to load and save a page. I'm being told that the minimum in most conditions is 5 seconds between pages in AWB). Martinp23 17:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's actually for tagging and assessment; that's why it's human assisted as well as automatic. Those banners are {{NJSCR}} and {{Massachusetts state highways WikiProject}}.  V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 17:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahh ok. When tagging pages with banner templates, it's important to avoid tagging articles which are in the category, but which aren't relevant. It's best to check through the list before starting AWB, and remove anything which doesn't fit. On these grounds - Approved for trial. 20 edits in each category. Thanks, Martinp23 17:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks OK overall - just a few one small thing:

1. This edit summary should be fixed - just removing the "add" from the start should fix it

Thanks, Martinp23 21:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

As we've just discussed off-wiki Martin, the user was following instructions, but in very recent of versions of AWB the requirement to have something in the edit box has gone. User:Kingbotk/Plugin/User guide has been updated. --kingboyk 21:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

You really don't need bot approval to use the assessments feature of my plugin; also as you're exercising your personal judgement in those edits it would probably be more appropriate to use your personal account. If you're also wanting to do automated talk page templating you will of course need bot approval and a bot flag (which I see no reason not to approve very quickly). --kingboyk 21:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shadowbot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Shadow1

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): Perl

Function Summary: I'm requesting the approval of a new mode for Shadowbot, called Autokill.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Continuous

Edit rate requested: 10 edits per hour

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): N

Function Details: Essentially, Autokill will check if the link that a spammer adds is on a separate blacklist than Shadowbot's normal one. If it is, then Shadowbot will automatically revert any additions by that user and report them to AIV. This is being implemented to help combat Jonathan Barber, a spammer who has created over 70 sockpuppet accounts to spam Wikipedia.

[edit] Discussion

You are also going to want to see the massive number of socks created on multiple wikis by this same guy. The request can be found on a meta request for checkuser. Shadowbot won't help for those wikis, but it sure can help for this wiki. A side note, I would advise putting some message into the report to AIV detailing the situation. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 16:54, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

What sort of thing is on this seperate blacklist? I'm guessing that it would be the specific link(s) added by the spammer and his socks. This raises the possibility of a legit user wishing to add the links for a reason, and getting reverted and reported by a bot - it does smell of WP:BITE to me :). Of course, if the links being added are pure spam, and wouldn't be expected to appear in any article, then this isn't a problem, but then - why don't we add the domain to the spam blacklist on wikipedia? Is agree with Eagle 101 that it would be good to have details about what's going on in the AIV report. Thanks, Martinp23 10:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DomBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Chidom

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Manually Assisted

Programming Language(s): AWB

Function Summary: Correct wikilink to bypass redirect on multiple articles.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run with possible "touch up" runs

Edit rate requested: 15 edits per minute? (Whatever current maximum is)

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y

Function Details: List of gay porn stars is included in the "See also" section of 264 mainspace articles. The article has been renamed List of male performers in gay porn films; the distinction is an important one and changing the link will (hopefully) keep the old title from being used on new articles. Future edits to change the name would most probably be done by hand, but it would be good to have approval to use the bot for those as well. I realize that changing links to bypass redirects is generally not done; however, there is a difference between referring to someone as being gay and referring to them as having appeared in a gay porn film. I believe the distinction is important enough to override Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken and feel that Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules of use (Avoid making insignificant minor edits) doesn't apply as the change is significant; it is akin to changing the link for a category name that has changed. Thanks.—Chidom ^talk  22:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

While I agree that this is a valid activity, I disagree with the comparison to WP:CFD/W. Now, you estimate 264 edits, you're simply changing a link, so I don't see any problems that I would want addressed, hopefully a BAG member will be along shortly. ST47Talk 23:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I believe policy says 15 edits per minute is for use in necessary tasks, or some wording such as that - perhaps this could be done at the older standard of 10 if it will be done during peak times. Also, I don't see a reason that this would need to be manually assisted, if you're simply using a find and replace. ST47Talk 23:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a really ghastly list isn't it?! It's redundant to the category and doesn't seem very useful at all. Why would you even want to link to it? --kingboyk 12:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

This isn't a solicitation of your opinion of the list article; your finding it "ghastly" has no bearing here. You're mistaken, the list is not redundant to the category, see Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes. Like it or not, the list is quite useful to others; you may not share their interests, but that doesn't invalidate the list or its usefulness; it's not the only list of its kind on Wikipedia. The article is linked to; I just want to correct the links.

Considering what has recently been said about BAG members being "role models", your comment here is a bit surprising. Since you've made a comment without approving or rejecting the request, is someone else from BAG going to make a decision, or was this a back-handed "reject"?—DomBot / ChiDom ^talk 04:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BJBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Bjweeks

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic; manually started

Programming Language(s): Python (pywikipediabot)

Function Summary: Comment out fair use image in all non-mainspace pages.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Run when needed (biweekly most likely)

Edit rate requested: 6 per minute

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y

Function Details: The bot will go though a list of fair use image being used outside of mainspace (from db dumps at this time) and check the images to see what pages are using it (not linking) and if any non-mainspace pages are using it will then comment out the offending image. This is following the fair use policy and any non-mainspace pages currently using fair use images are in violation of the policy.

[edit] Discussion

I support this (and indeed perhaps take some collateral blame for the idea). I would, however, add some caveats: obviously doing this in the user: space has in the past proven somewhat controversial (though selective linkifying is a 'lighter touch' approach than some have used in the past (such as mass blanking)). Also, there may be some "legit" instances of fair use images in the template namespace, though these should be the rare exception to the general rule: ideally there'd be a 'whitelist' maintained somewhere. Other namespaces I see no reason not to go ahead with immediately. It appears the majority of these are actually occur on article talk pages, for some unknown reason; I'll have to double-check that for false positives arising from whackiness in the categorisation of images, of which I have little doubt there will be large amounts. (Probably images in both the "free" and "fair use" categories, which probably need some sort of separate treatment by way of a "please clarify the status of this image" tag.) Alai 19:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

For false positives I'm checking to make sure a known fair use template in on the page first just like with the OrphanedFairUse bot. A whitelist is a good idea and I was already thinking of putting one in but I think it should be private SoSomebodyWhoKnowsWhatThey'reDoing TM must add the page to the list. BJ^Talk 17:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there a distinction between "known fair use template", and anything that categorises images in the "fair use images" category? Is there such a thing as "known 'free image' tags", and likewise, does that differ from the "free images" category? The overlap between the latter pair seems quite large, but possibly my criteria are blunter than the bot's (though we can take the detail of that off-page). I'd prefer if the whitelist were not private as such, on the basis of transparency being the surest and speediest way to fix problems, but I could see a case for protecting it if there's thought to be potential for abuse. Alai 05:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Depending on how you plan to handle image inclusion that occurs via template expansion, you might want to give some thought into how your bot will interact with Template:Gallery. I've seen it in use on many user pages, usually to display thumbs of images that the user has uploaded or that they particularly admire. Template:Gallery also occasionally appears elsewhere outside mainspace. I don't think the bot could safely convert these images into links. How do you plan on handling these galleries? Do you intend to remove fair use images from galleries, perhaps by commenting them out in the template parameter? If so, perhaps a note should be added to the corresponding talk page? —RP88 14:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Mmm those can be dealt with vie a regex replace function as far as I understand. Instead of Find '\[\[(?<image>Image:Blah)\]\]' Replace <!-- ${image} -->. You should be able to modify that to \[?\[?\s*(?<image>Image:Blah)\]?\]?' Replace <!-- ${image} --> With some success. I've not looked into this further to see what to do in cases of say... image captions, but that should be a rather trivial modification of the above regex. I am of course assuming that you are using regex in the first place ;) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

For images removed from the userspace a message will be left. As for breaking people's galleries, I really don't care, they can fix it themselves. BJ^Talk 17:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No, that doesn't work for me. Even if the user is doing something wrong, you can't break their userpage. —METS501 (talk) 18:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Time to go do some testing, will post when done. BJ^Talk 18:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, linking is not going to work the images will have to be commented out, which doesn't break anything. Changing request as such. BJ^Talk 18:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Can't you just skip usages in {{gallery}}s on user pages? Or, comment those out, and linkify all others? Unless I'm misunderstanding something, this sounds like a matter of Bigger and Better regexes, as Eagle says. Alai 05:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• This bot's code will need to be adjusted to not function on the pages in Category:Wikipedia fair use exemptions, or their subcategories. These pages are often time crucial to operating the project (see WP:FUE). — xaosflux ^Talk 01:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  (addendum) These are mostly categories so would not be affected by this bot, but discussion pages get added here from time to time to deal with issues. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  I don't see anything on that page will be affected by the bot. BJ^Talk 02:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• Will BJBot_3 allow exceptions in general? I'm specifically thinking of the fair use images used on templates that were or are on the main page. --Iamunknown 02:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, a whitelist exists. BJ^Talk 02:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Those templates are now tagged in the WP:FUE exemptions category. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
      • OK, not anymore, looks like we don't want FU on MP anymore (Wikipedia_talk:Fair_use_exemptions#Removing_exception_in_policy_for_.22Main_Page.22). — xaosflux ^Talk 12:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Fair use can appear in FA of the day, and it's for humans to decide which are allowed, not a bot. Likewise the FA of the day queue - where folks post the synopsis of FAs for consideration for front page status - should also be skipped. There must be a whitelist and if there's any doubt humans must decide. Beyond that, this seems to be a worthwhile task for a bot. --kingboyk 16:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
          • I think that instead of a whitelist, the bot could be set to only remove the images in question from userspace and user talkspace, creating a list of those it finds in all other namespaces to be sorted through by humans. The fact that (excepting Main page related things, vandalism, and BJAODN) I've only seen one fair use image placed outside of the user (talk) and article (talk) spaces suggests that there will really hardly be any instances of this. Because of that, I think a whitelist is likely to be more time-consuming than a simple dump on a subpage. Picaroon 20:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
            • What BJAODN page? They shouldn't be there. --Iamunknown 19:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
              • Of course they shouldn't, but they are. This and this are two removals I made from just one page; who knows how many there are throughout the whole 60 or so? Picaroon 19:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
                • Thanks for doing that. At one point I went through all 61 of the main BJAODN pages and watchlisted all of the fair use images; but, they got swallowed by my watchlist and I haven't had time to go back yet. --Iamunknown 19:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Agreed, I will put that into the code today, thanks. BJ^Talk 20:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please be away that some fair use tags such as {{Money}} can be applied to public domain items as well. Also, images in Category:Fair use images used with permission should be left alone. I am working on a similar project at User talk:HighInBC/FU in userspace. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I've got another question for BJ: why will it only comment out the images? They should be removed straight out so they can't get put back in. Unlike the images OrphanBot removes from articles these images are never going to be appropriate outside of articlespace. So there's no reason to simply leave them commented out. Picaroon 19:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bots in a trial period

• ProteinBoxBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• Sumibot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• SieBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• Ocobot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2)
• DvyBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• Rschen7754bot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• StewieBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• MMOGMailMan (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• VshBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• AccReqBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• BrownBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)
• STTWbot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2)
• DRVBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log)

[edit] Approved Requests

Bots that have been approved for operations after a successful trial will be listed here for informational purposes for at least 7 days before being archived. No other approval action is required for these bots. Older requests can be found in the Archive.

• Staeckerbot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved 13:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [5])

• YonaBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved 23:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [6])
• MartinBotIII (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Approved 14:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Already flagged
• AlexNewArtBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved on 12:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [7])
• MetsBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 8) Approved on 22:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [8])
• Fettgesicht (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved on 18:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [9])
• GimmeBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 3) Approved on 18:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [10])
• WarddrBOT (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 3) Approved on 18:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [11])
• Madhubot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved on 00:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [12])
• Botx (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Approved on 21:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [13])
• DarioBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Approved on 21:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [14])
• PDFbot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Approved on 09:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [15])
• AdambroBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Approved on 02:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC) (bot has flag [16])

[edit] Unapproved requests

Bots that have been denied for operations will be listed here for informational purposes for at least 7 days before being archived. No other action is required for these bots. Older requests can be found in the Archive.

• Rschen7754bot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) 18:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
• Rschen7754bot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 3) Denied at 19:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• AntiRedirBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Denied at 21:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Spelian (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Denied at 01:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expired/withdrawn Requests

These requests have expired, as information required by the operator was not provided. These bots are not authorized to run, but such lack of authorization does not follow from a finding as to merit. A bot that, having been approved for testing, was not tested by an editor, or one for which the results of testing were not posted, for example, would appear here. Bot requests should not be placed here if there is an active discussion ongoing above. Operators whose requests have expired may reactivate their requests at anytime. The following list shows recent requests (if any) that have expired, listed here for informational purposes for at least 7 days before being archived. Older requests can be found in the Archive.

• TeckWizBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 3) Withdrawn on 17:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
• Andrew Hampe (Bot) (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) Withdrawn on 08:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
• WarddrBOT (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Withdrawn on 18:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
• QxzBot (tasks • edits • actions log • block log) (Task: 2) Withdrawn on 12:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)