Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BG19bot 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.

BG19bot 2

Operator: Bgwhite (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 00:39, Wednesday February 22, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: Yes

Function overview: Remove WikiProject Sports template from biography talk pages.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): One time run, then periodically as needed.

Estimated number of pages affected: 6,000

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: WikiProject Sports does not include people in their scope. There are alot of talk pages that include "WikiProject Sports", "WikiProject Sport" and "WikiProject Handball". The code only removes the WikiProject Sports/Sport/Handball template. A list of just fencers with the sports template can be found in my Sandbox. I may do other WikiProjects in the future. For example, WikiProject Film is another project that does not include people. Should I seek approval from BRFA first before doing another WikiProject? Bgwhite (talk) 00:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

The existence of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Handball unreferenced BLPs implies that WikiProject Sports does concern itself with BLPs. You haven't linked to any discussion forming a community consensus; if you haven't already, please publicise your BRfA at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Sports so as to demonstrate consensus for these changes. Josh Parris 05:32, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also: yes, I'd be fine with this BRfA applying to other WikiProjects in the future, but I must emphasise that bot edits without a demonstratable consensus must not be made. Josh Parris 05:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the bot task itself is fine, as long as you can show a discussion by each project to that end. Could you do that for Sports or Films before we get to a trial? MBisanz ^talk 21:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has already been started at Sports. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#Running a bot to remove articles from WikiProject Sports. I haven't contacted any other WikiProjects and I won't until if/when Sports is taken care of. I don't want to do too much at once. I will contact any WikiProject and gain approval from here before I move to another project. I saw the Kumioko drama over his bot and will be conservative in hopes to not repeat that mess. Bgwhite (talk) 22:01, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I for one have no problem with this type of bot, provided that the project opts in (aka there is explicit consensus that some articles are excluded from the scope of a project). On this specific task, since those are biography articles, it seems to me that the bot should make sure that the WikiProject Biography template is present, with inherited class assessments and relevant taskforces flagged. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion has been running for just over a week at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#Running a bot to remove articles from WikiProject Sports. I belive a consensus has been established. Bgwhite (talk) 21:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trial

What I understand from that discussion is that the {{WikiProject Sports}} template will be removed if the talk page already contains BIO banner with sports group set and there is another banner for a sports project. If that's correct, then

Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding: Do not remove {{WikiProject Sports}} if there are no other WikiProjects for that individual to belong to. Handball or field hockey players would be an example. If there are other Sport WikiProjects for the individual, then the Sports banner could be removed. Fencers or footballers would be and example.

The bio banner/sports group... What was mentioned about that was an article only had WikiProject Handball as the only banner on the talk page. The person was concerned that if it was removed, no banner at all would be on the page. Another mentioned that bio banner wasn't enough and the Sports banner should be included. However, it is no problem to add the bio banner and sports group if they are missing. AWB already can do this. It has been granted before in Yobot 9 and I've already talked to Magioladits about taking over Yobot 9's functions. Bgwhite (talk) 22:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to create lists:

Number of fencers who have WikiProject Sports but not WikiProject Biography: 0

Number of fencers who have WikiProject Sports but not WikiProject Fencing: 0

Number of baseball players who have WikiProject Sports but not WikiProject Biography: 0

Number of volleyball players who have WikiProject Sports but not WikiProject Biography: 0

I couldn't quickly find one without a biography, but I did find one without the sports group. List of 25 is here Bgwhite (talk) 23:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you want to do another 5, or call the trial complete as is? Josh Parris 03:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops. I read 25. Yea, call it complete. I can do more if you want. Bgwhite (talk) 19:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Hellknowz? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Parris (talk • contribs)

Well, it doesn't have to be the same BAGger :) But, yes, I didn't see trial complete. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to; too tired. And the op asked over at BRFA3. Josh Parris 11:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] -- What is the logic behind changing newlines? In one case it added, in another it removed.

Anyway, otherwise looks good. Do you want more trial or are you confident it works? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confident it works. But I'm going to double check the new lines before I go into automatic mode. I can do another test if you would like. Bgwhite (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the code that removed the newline. It's just back to a simple replace and nothing fancy. Bgwhite (talk) 21:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Subject to consensus for each batch performed. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:25, 9 March 2012 (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.