Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 31

< Wikipedia:Bots | Requests for approval
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 Request Expired.

Yobot 31

edit

Operator: Magioladitis

Time filed: 19:49, Wednesday, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic, supervised

Programming language(s): AWB / WPCleaner

Source code available: AWB is open source. I can provide my settnigs file if asked.

Function overview: Moving HATNOTES on the top per WP:LAYOUT and WP:HNP to help accessibility and navigation

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Various discussions in various places show that this is a wanted task. Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 14

Edit period(s): Often

Estimated number of pages affected: 200 pages per month

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: I'll run through articles transcluding DABlinks. I ll use a custom module created for AWB and perform genfixes only if a DABlink and/or HATNOTE has to move on the top. AWB will do the rest.

It is my intention is to have auto-tagger activated too. If I am asked I can deactivate it.

-- Magioladitis (talk) 14:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

edit

BU Rob13 I provide a specific skip condition in case the main task is not done. Available at User:Yobot/Task 14. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some questions please:
    • Is this a checkwiki thing?
    • Do hatnotes always go on top or are there exceptions?
    • Is this something Yobot has done previously?
    • Are there any other bots which do this job?
    • To describe the function precisely, please could you link to a diff of such a change made manually?
    • Please give more details about this "custom module".
  • Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MSGJ

You are welcome. Community health is very important. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this should not require general fixes. The task description does not mention them, so I take it this task does not include them anyway, but for the sake of clarity it it worth pointing out explicitly. — Carl (CBM · talk) 12:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So are all hat notes within sections ignored? What if there is a hatnote somewhere in the body of a section, will the bot then move it to the top of the section? Next, how does the existence of {{dablinks}} suggest hatnotes are misplaced? Finally, what is "auto-tagger"? — MusikAnimal talk 17:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. No. I am not sure I understand. - Magioladitis (talk) 23:11, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-tagger is Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/General_fixes#Mainspace_tagger. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}}

@Magioladitis: In the function details you wrote I ll run throught articles trancluding DABlinks. I'm confused why you would look for transclusions of {{dablinks}} to find misplaced hatnotes. Wouldn't you instead look for {{hatnote}} and similar templates? What does Template:Dablinks have to do with hatnotes?
I can't really comment on the use of auto-tagger, as I'm not as familiar with AWB as others. It seems to me this is OK so long as the bot does not only do this. So it can add tags if and only if it also makes approved changes, in this case correcting the placement of hatnotes. I take it adding tags are not considered "general fixes"? Perhaps BU Rob13 has an opinion on the use of auto-tagger (pinging as he is more experienced with AWB)? — MusikAnimal talk 01:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Musikanimal: If "skip if no replacement" is checked, then there is no risk to running either genfixes or auto-tagger. Auto-tagger is just a small portion of the genfixes that can run independently, I believe, although I could be wrong on that. When you check "skip if no replacement", that means that all edits will be skipped which do not perform one of the replacement rules designed for the main task. Among the tens of thousands or possibly hundreds of thousands of AWB edits I've done or overseen (semi-auto and as a bot operator), I have seen zero cosmetic-only errors caused by bugs in that particular option. If it's enabled, auto-tagger or genfixes would both be extremely safe to include. ~ Rob13Talk 02:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Musikanimal: Err... I mean any of the hatnote templates (e.g. {{other people}} etc.). Not the dablinks template. Typo!!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Could we list all the relevant templates in the "Function details"? Perhaps you'll be looking for all templates in Template:Hatnote templates? — MusikAnimal talk 17:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Musikanimal: This is the regex. 
public static readonly Regex Dablinks = Tools.NestedTemplateRegex(new [] { "about", "about2", "about-distinguish", "about-distinguish2", "ambiguous link", "for", "for2", "for3", "dablink", "distinguish", "distinguish2", "distinguish-otheruses", "distinguish-otheruses2", "further", "further2", "hatnote", "otherpeople", "otherpeople1", "otherpeople2", "otherpeople3", "other hurricanes", "other people", "other people1", "other people2", "other people3", "other persons", "otherpersons", "otherpersons2", "otherpersons3", "otherplaces", "other places", "otherplaces3", "other places3", "otherships", "other ships", "otheruses-number", "other uses", "other uses2", "other uses3", "other uses4", "other uses6", "otheruses", "otheruses2", "otheruses3", "otheruses4", "other uses of", "otheruse", "outline", "2otheruses", "redirect-acronym", "redirect-distinguish", "redirect-distinguish2", "redirect-several", "redirect", "redirect2", "redirect3", "redirect4", "redirect5", "redirect6", "redirect10", "see also", "this", "two other uses", "three other uses", "disambig-acronym", "selfref" }, false);
-- Magioladitis (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thryduulf I will move the hatnote above those. The hatnote refers to Wikipedia in general. These templates only refer to the article itself. Still if somewhere is cleared that all these templates can be placed in the top in any order I can adjust accordingly. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, as long as it will not make any changes if the hatnote is below only templates that do not display anything in the content area of the article. i.e. if the hatnote is also below a visible template, or another authorised change would make a difference to how the article looks when rendered, then move the hatnotes above these templates at the same time, but otherwise skip the article. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thryduulf Ideally, this is fine and this is a good comment. How do we know if a template produces a visible output or not? -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am not aware of any single collection of all of them, but everything at the top of an article that has a name starting "Use " (including the space) is invisible and everything in Category:Top icon templates or a subcategory renders outside the content area. I don't know that that is all of them, but it's going to be the the vast majority at least. If you or someone else can generate a list of templates that are used on the first line of an article space page it should be possible to identify almost everything. Actually, a category for templates that produce no visible output might not be a bad idea as it wouldn't surprise me if other bots would find that useful to - any idea where the best place to propose that would be? 14:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I've just discovered another set of templates that are invisible - those in Category:Varieties of English templates and/or which start "Engvar". Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've started a discussion about categorising all the invisible templates at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#categorising article-space templates with no visible output that you may wish to contribute to. Thryduulf (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thryduulf The Varieties... should be all placed in the talk page and I have a code that works perfectly with that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What have talk pages got to do with this? Thryduulf (talk) 09:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thryduulf See {{American English}} for instance. "This template may be included on talk pages". -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have you thought how you will deal with temporary notices? e.g. {{User:RMCD bot/subject notice}} (used for requested moves), {{dated prod}}, {{Temporarily undeleted}}, {{Article for deletion}}, etc. All the deletion ones seem to be in (a subcategory of) Category:Deletion templates, but that also includes many other templates, I haven't found a category related to any requested moves or other temporary messages. I think hatnotes should appear above article maintenance templates that are not temporary (e.g. {{Globalise}}) or which have no definitive timeline (e.g. merging and splitting), so I'm happy for this bot to move those relative to each other even as the only change. However, I'd prefer it not to edit solely to move a hatnote relative to a temporary notice, but I'm willing to listen to other opinions. Thryduulf (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They should appear before temporary notices - someone hearing "this page is a copyvio" for example, will likely leave the page before getting the message that the info they re after is elsewhere. (In fact with the copy-vio template they would never see it.) The volume of edits is expected to be low. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Note: Some of these hat-notes are obsolete, I will make a request at WPT:AWB to have them removed from the regex. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:41, 27 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Logged phab:T166440. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:17, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — it seems there's no major objection to a trial. If you can, please try to diversify the run with as many test cases as possible (i.e., to demonstrate the areas of concern above). --slakr\ talk / 04:32, 4 August 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Yobot_31&oldid=841912981"