Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AvicBot 7

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.

AvicBot 7

Operator: Avicennasis (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 17:14, Wednesday August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Automatic supervised/unsupervised

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Standard pywikipedia

Function overview: Maintaining (and adding?) {{Commonscat}} templates.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:BOTREQ#Links to Commons

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: Unknown

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: For the maintaining side (automatic unsupervised):

1. Get a list of all pages that currently transclude {{commons category}}

2. Check the EnWp link to the Commons category for a match.

2a. If a match is found, do nothing and move on.

2b. If a category redirect is found on Commons, it will update the link on EnWp.

2c. If neither a category nor a redirect is found (or if a disambig category is found on Commons), it will scan all the interwiki links from the EnWp page, and see if a Commons category is found on another wiki. If one is found, it will update the link on EnWp to match.

~~2d. If no category link is found at all, it will remove the template.~~

For adding (automatic supervised):

1. Scan for pages without a Commonscat template.

2. Scan all the interwiki links from the EnWp page, and see if a Commons category is found on another wiki. If one is found, it will add the link on EnWp.

Discussion

Q1. Does 2c check if the Commons category pointed from another wiki exists and if it's a redirect?
Q2. Under 2c, is it not allowed to link to dab categories?
Q3. Under 2d, what if Commons changes the category and makes it a dab page, and all other wikis have old entries too. I don't think the template should be removed, rather tagged for manual check.
Q4. Same as above, but original Commons cat is deleted, would storing a list of these pages be useful for future review? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 17:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Q1. Yes.

Q2. It's useless. See the template at Warwick currently. The article is clearly about Warwick, Warwickshire, England, yet the Commons:Category:Warwick dab cat at Commons contributes nothing. It should be updated to Commons:Category:Warwick, England.

Q3&Q4. 2d striked for now. I may have it dump a report to a page in userspace or something later. ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:20, 17 Av 5771 / 18:20, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So would Q2 not require manual review/correction? If there is a dab at Commons, would it not be a sane assumption that since the {{commons cat}} was used, then there is a decent chance there could be a matching category on the Commons? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, and that is why we will update it. Example is below:

Bot

Commonscat template is already on Warwick
Found link for Warwick at [[simple:Warwick]] to Warwick, England.


>>> Warwick <<<
- {{Commons category}}
+ {{Commons category|Warwick, England|Warwick}}

Comment: Bot: Changing commonscat link from [[:Commons:Category:Warwick|Warwick]] to [[:Commons:Category:Warwick, England|Warwick, England]]
Do you want to accept these changes? ([y]es, [N]o, [a]lways, [q]uit)

So, it scans the Warwick page, sees it has the {{commonscat}} but that it links to a dab cat on Commons. It then scans all the iw links from Warwick - here it finds a link to a non-dab Commons category on SimpleWp, and asks if we want to update the link on the EnWp article to match. (This last part would be automatic when actually running.) Does that answer your question? Or did I misunderstand something? :-) ^Avic _ennasis @ 18:45, 17 Av 5771 / 18:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's great work! But I meant when there are no links from any other Wikis. Since English is the largest Wiki, we propogate most changes first. If English WP has lost "connection" to a Commons category, then other Wikis will have suffered the same fate. What I mean is that tagging the template for attention would be preferable to removing it, when it points to a dab on Commons and no other Wiki has a non-dab link. Also what about conflicts between wikis? Do you review those manually? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:51, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Currently, if senses that a category needs to be updated (for any reason; dabs, conflicts, et cetera) but it fails to find a way to update it, it just drops it and moves on. Although, like I said, I may try to find a way to log these in Userspace later on. :-) I will do manual runs sometimes to check these in the meantime. ^Avic _ennasis @ 19:07, 17 Av 5771 /

Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. - see here. ^Avic _ennasis @ 21:05, 17 Av 5771 / 21:05, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits seem good. One issue: [1] -- MediaWiki page first letter is case insensitive. Anyway, I'm fine with the task. Leaving open for more comments, other BAG commentary. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. It's been open for over a week post-trial without any concerns, so I think you're good to go. Do fix the case-sensitivity bug, though; no reason to make a pointless edit like the one above. — The Earwig ^(talk) 02:59, 28 August 2011 (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.