Wikinews

Wikinews:Bots/Archive 5

< Wikinews:Bots
2006-2007
2008-2009
2010-2011
2012-2020
2021-present
This is an archive of past discussions from Wikinews:Bots. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current page.



The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



  • Closed as unsuccessful. Unfortunately this request has been open for almost two years with little progress. Please feel free to open a fresh request if and when needed. [24Cr][talk] 19:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DannyS712 bot (talk · contribs)

The below SQL query retrieves, for each template that has a "use count" sub template, the template/module name, the full number of transclusions, the number that would be put in the template (not the exact number, but some number below it to say "over xxx"), and the name of the use count page. I've only some of the results here, but the total query retrieves 61 rows

SQL Current result 
USE enwikinews_p;
SELECT
  CONCAT (
    CASE
      WHEN tl.tl_namespace = 10 THEN 'Template'
      WHEN tl.tl_namespace = 828 THEN 'Module'
    END,
    ':',
    tl.tl_title
  ) AS 'Page',
  COUNT(*) AS 'Transclusions',
  CASE
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 1000 AND MOD(COUNT(*), 100) < 60
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, LENGTH(COUNT(*)) - 2), '00' )
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 1000
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, LENGTH(COUNT(*)) - 2), '50' )
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 10000 AND MOD(COUNT(*), 100) < 60
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, 1), ',', SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 2, 1), '00' )
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 10000
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, 1), ',', SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 2, 1), '50' )
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 1000000 AND MOD(COUNT(*), 1000) < 600
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, LENGTH(COUNT(*)) - 3), ',000' )
    WHEN COUNT(*) < 1000000
      THEN CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, LENGTH(COUNT(*)) - 3), ',500' )
    ELSE
      CONCAT( SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 1, 1), '.', SUBSTR(COUNT(*), 2, 1), ' million' )
  END AS 'Over',
  CONCAT (
    CASE
      WHEN tl.tl_namespace = 10 THEN 'Template'
      WHEN tl.tl_namespace = 828 THEN 'Module'
    END,
    ':',
    tl.tl_title,
    '/doc/use-count/doc'
  ) AS 'Counter'
FROM templatelinks tl
WHERE tl.tl_title IN (
  SELECT
    SUBSTR(pg.page_title, 1, LENGTH(pg.page_title) - 18)
  FROM
    page pg
  WHERE
    pg.page_title LIKE '%/doc/use-count/doc'
    AND pg.page_id IN (
      SELECT cl.cl_from
      FROM categorylinks cl
      WHERE cl.cl_to = 'Possible-risk/use-count'
    )
)
AND tl.tl_namespace IN (10, 828)
GROUP BY CONCAT(tl.tl_title, tl.tl_namespace)
HAVING COUNT(*) > 100
ORDER BY COUNT(*) DESC;
Page Transclusions Over Counter
Template:Tl 2638432 2.6 million Template:Tl/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Plink 2610092 2.6 million Template:Plink/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Howdy/content 2610023 2.6 million Template:Howdy/content/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Howdy 2610021 2.6 million Template:Howdy/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Xambox 28934 28,500 Template:Xambox/doc/use-count/doc
Template:W 23205 23,000 Template:W/doc/use-count/doc
Template:COinS 21993 21,500 Template:COinS/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Date 21985 21,500 Template:Date/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Source 21152 21,000 Template:Source/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Social_bookmarks 20524 20,000 Template:Social_bookmarks/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Publish 20517 20,000 Template:Publish/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Archived 19025 19,000 Template:Archived/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Source/uc? 15613 15,500 Template:Source/uc?/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Haveyoursay 12068 12,000 Template:Haveyoursay/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Evalx 11858 11,500 Template:Evalx/doc/use-count/doc
Module:Wikilisp 11857 11,500 Module:Wikilisp/doc/use-count/doc
Template:InfoboxStart 11110 11,000 Template:InfoboxStart/doc/use-count/doc
Template:InfosectionStart 9036 9,000 Template:InfosectionStart/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Peer_reviewed 8734 8,700 Template:Peer_reviewed/doc/use-count/doc
Module:Rptchars 8515 8,500 Module:Rptchars/doc/use-count/doc
Template:(* 8483 8,450 Template:(*/doc/use-count/doc
Template:*) 8483 8,450 Template:*)/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Wikinewline 8338 8,300 Template:Wikinewline/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Peer_reviewed/Passed 8321 8,300 Template:Peer_reviewed/Passed/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox/lookup 8301 8,300 Template:Infobox/lookup/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox/p2 8301 8,300 Template:Infobox/p2/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox_table 8301 8,300 Template:Infobox_table/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox 8300 8,300 Template:Infobox/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox/p1 8300 8,300 Template:Infobox/p1/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Infobox/select 8278 8,250 Template:Infobox/select/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Image_source 6738 6,700 Template:Image_source/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Commentary/LQT 6312 6,300 Template:Commentary/LQT/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Datecategory 5478 5,450 Template:Datecategory/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Wikinews 4602 4,600 Template:Wikinews/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Imbox 3950 3,900 Template:Imbox/doc/use-count/doc
Template:Commentary 3603 3,600 Template:Commentary/doc/use-count/doc
Template:DateDPL 2992 2,950 Template:DateDPL/doc/use-count/doc

The bot would, at a set duration, go and update each counter template with the current transclusions, to keep them (relatively) up to date. The bot will only edit pre-existing templates. Let me know if there are any questions. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 21:37, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

@DannyS712: Thank you for the prompt reply. My main concern was that it’s been open for so long. I know that you are less active here than you used to be. I think it would be unfair to ask you to commit to this unless you actively wanted to do it. Otherwise I’m not opposed to the proposal. --Green Giant (talk) 03:56, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well since I already did the hard part of writing the query, it should be fairly simple to implement if this gets approved and whenever I have time --DannyS712 (talk) 03:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The normal process of bot approvals requires a test run, analysis of that run, and then approval if deemed to be done correctly. When you are ready, please go ahead and do a test run of 10 edits. Then we can look at it. Please keep the edit rate at no more than two edits per minute. --Green Giant (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it is *that* kind of bot which has multiple edits, but then, I am not too entirely convinced we require tables like these, do we?
•–• 04:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
 @DannyS712: It’s been a fortnight since the last comment. Please could you update us on any progress? If not, shall we close it for now? [24Cr][talk] 12:51, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have enwikinews in my global watchlist so I didn't see it. The table above is just for demonstration of the data that the bot gets, it doesn't edit such a table but rather as I explained above "[t]he bot would, at a set duration, go and update each counter template with the current transclusions" so yes, it has multiple edits. An initial run would probably update most of the existing templates because I assume they haven't been updated in a while. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:15, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, could you do a test run of maybe 10-20 edits so we can see it in operation? Cheers. [24Cr][talk] 16:38, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



InternetArchiveBot (talk · contribs)

Comments

Task 1

Old requirements 

We needed IABot to take care of two different tasks. Upon careful discussion, it was agreed to split the tasks, the prior being taking the snapshot of all the sources in archives (currently under progress, oversee by user:acagastya); and the other being taking snapshots of all the sources for new articles. Since the first task is under progress, let's focus the discussion on just the latter task.
•–• 20:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Task 2

  • Comment @Harej: All the sources used in a mainspace article are expected to be listed in the url parameter of {{source}}. {{source}} also accepts archiveurl parameter. Could you configure IABot in such a way that it archives the sources from mainspace articles (which are NOT archived), from url and update archiveurl? @Pi zero: does this sound safe? I hope I am not overlooking something, please let me know if I am.
    •–• 20:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have configured the bot to recognize the "archiveurl" parameter. Harej (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seems to me one ought to wait until publication-plus-24-hours before archiving sources. Other than that, I have no strong objection; the most technical harm that could possibly be done is quite limited. --Pi zero (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question @Harej: Does IABot have specific triggers (like working at the time of new page creation)? Or does it work in a said time-interval? Re what @Pi zero: has added Harej, I think IABot can just check, if(wikitext.categories.includes('Published')) { run(); }. Will that work? Additionally, can you control which snapshot instance will be added to archive URL? The snapshot with timestamp closest after category:published was added will be ideal.
    •–• 07:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Yeah, published will likely do, which would admittedly be much easier.) --Pi zero (talk) 17:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Acagastya, IABot does not have triggers. However, the bot will use the archive corresponding to the stated access time in the citation, or the closest one to when the URL was added. Harej (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Cromium: I think that is because noone here is voting -- we need to vote it to pass or fail for them to proceed.
•–• 12:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Acagastya: Is that why it is listed as stalled? If so, we can vote but I was hoping to see a test run of 10-20 edits first. However, if the same task is being done on another wiki, I guess we can move to approval. [24Cr][talk] 13:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We have been trying to do test edits on the bot and have not been succeeding. Basically the bot goes through AllPages in alphabetical order and all the pages it has come across are protected. The bot will work for “single page” runs via the Management Interface (makes edits on your user account’s behalf, so it will work on the pages you normally can edit) and also multi-page runs for unprotected pages. If you want the bot to make background edits, it will need to be promoted to admin. Harej (talk) 19:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Harej: I’ve promoted the bot to admin for a month to help the test run. Please advise if anything else is needed. [24Cr][talk] 12:53, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Harej, I saw the bot made a single edit so far (diff). If the bot is rescuing a dead link in sources, can it also add "brokenURL = true" so that it displays the archived link in the article? —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 04:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
chaetodipus, it will add that parameter on future edits. Harej (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

Support given the limitations of the bot (the way it was designed, to serve a specific purpose), I think it is achieves a part of the task, and I am okay with the compromise.
•–• 17:34, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And thinking about it, if the bot does not edit semi-protected pages, we won't royally screw up. :D
•–• 17:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support if it gets the process moved to implementation. [24Cr][talk] 00:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think this would definitely be useful in recovering the many dead sources in our archives. —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 05:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I am familiar with IAB and find it extremely useful on other projects. I am surprised to learn in viewing this request that it isn't already approved. I think including this is a no-brainer. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



Neriah bot (talk · contribs)

Operator: user:Neriah

Bot tasks for which permission is being sought: Treatment of Double Redirects (450+).

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic.

Edit type: one time.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute):

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): I need a bot flag for a week.

Programming language(s): python.

Neriah (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

@Gryllida: Can you close this if the bot was approved? Also, please update the active bot list. I don't know anything about the tech aspects of our beloved Wikis. Cheers, --SVTCobra 02:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep it open for another two days to finalize the discussion of the expiry date on the bot's account, above. I will update the active bot list soon. Gryllida (talk) 02:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it open? Didn't User:Neriah bot run on February 1 with nearly 500 edits? I am quite certain you granted the bot user rights on January 31. Maybe there's something I don't understand.. Cheers, SVTCobra 02:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, in the comments above, Neriah asked to extend the bot flag duration from 'one month' to 'indefinite'. If this request is closed, then this section will not be editable, and that discussion will need to stop (and start elsewhere). This would make it fragmented. That's why I am trying to finish that discussion here before closing this request. Gryllida (talk) 03:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gryllida At first I asked for it on my account, but if it's on the bot's account I'd love it to stay forever, so I can run the bot every month. Thanks! Neriah (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both. I will adjust the bot flag expiry and close this section within about a day. Gryllida (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gryllida Can you handle and store? Neriah (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bot flag expiry set to 'Does not expire'; closing the discussion now. Gryllida (talk) 01:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

See my comment above.--Bddpaux (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews:Bots/Archive_5&oldid=4713938"