Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Petan-Bot task7

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.

User:Petan-Bot[edit]

Operator: Petrb (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 05:39, Monday April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Auto

Programming language(s): c++

Source code available: on request

Function overview: Replace tags

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=424560464&oldid=424557282

Edit period(s): one time

Estimated number of pages affected: 50 000 (+- 100)

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: Will replace deprecated parameter per WP:FOOTBALL

Discussion[edit]

It would be nice to have a discussion within Wikiproject football to link to. People who might be able to raise problems with the automation of this task may not read the bot requests page. I suggest you raise the issue there to see if anyone has any concerns. Gigs (talk) 13:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does "replace tags" mean? We'll need a lot more detail than that to understand what your proposed bot will do. Which templates will it modify? Which parameters in those templates will it modify? What will it do to the information contained in those parameters? Will it retain the information and rename it under a current parameter, or will it remove the information altogether? Are you aware that another user is already working on this task? —SW— ^chatter 20:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course that I am aware of that but actually that user didn't work on it before I posted this nor announced it here, so I couldn't know it. Perhaps someone should make a bot to watch all the noticeboards around. Petrb (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Magioladitis' comment was made about 9 hours before you posted this BRFA. —SW— ^yak 21:06, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But on another noticeboard than original request I do not watch all Petrb (talk) 06:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I posted at BOTREQ (a page you do watch) seven hours before this request was filed to inform you about Magioladitis' task preparation. Giant Snowman 15:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified WP:FOOTBALL about this request. Giant Snowman 15:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any immediate objections at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Category:Football_biography_using_deprecated_parameters, so how does a trial sound? MBisanz ^talk 13:54, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 16:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC) Done (less than 30) Petrb (talk) 21:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC) Sorry I have to rollback most of the edits since I changed the template it had horrible format. I will retag it now Petrb (talk) 21:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Petrb (talk) 21:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Petrb, I have reverted your edits to the infobox - the coding is fine. Giant Snowman 22:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By changing it to this you only get to troubles in future there is no valid way to convert the template if it's this Petrb (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's that template put () over the parameter so x is displayed as (x) but how can you work with parameters like this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aleksandr_Abdulkhalikov&diff=prev&oldid=425225485 only posible way is to insert values like this 1) (20) (47) (32) (18) (26) (4) (7 so that first and last bracket work, is that ok? it will leave a mess on 50k of pages so think about it I recommend to change template. Petrb (talk) 00:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Layman's terms please? Giant Snowman 00:27, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you put something in goals template now put it in brackets but there might be values separated by break to more lines so if you use template as it is it doesn't work can you show me example how it should be converted of some line which has more than one record Petrb (talk) 04:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just one question: Why can't the bot change for example
caps(goals) = 10 (5) 33 (2)
into
caps1 = 10 | goals1 = 5 | caps2 = 33 | goals2 = 2
(and change the years and clubs parameters as well)? Then the parentheses wouldn't be a problem. I don't see
caps1 = 10 33 | goals1 = 5 2
as so desirable in any case. --Jaellee (talk) 08:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me example what all bot should edit, so that I can set it to bot Petrb (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why I need to change year or club? Petrb (talk) 10:28, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at this edit, that's what I'd like the bot to do (the order of the parameters is not that important, they could be sorted differently). --Jaellee (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing the trial edits, such as this, has show that it has failed - linebreaks need to be removed completely from the new infobox. Giant Snowman 11:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The edit was not from now as you can see from time Petrb (talk) 17:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was from yesterday's trial run! Giant Snowman 17:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was before I got this explained as you can see (it was few hours ago, now bot is doing it right I will show you example soon) Petrb (talk) 18:11, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now corrected Petrb (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Petan-Bot/Sandbox_task&diff=425398470&oldid=425397881 doesn't work? I believe that template is really broken now Petrb (talk) 20:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I have made 2 example edits of now fixed Petrb (talk) 21:20, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do more than 2 please. These infoboxes vary greatly an I'd like to be sure we are not going to be creating a mess on a significant number of articles. For example, a number of players have multiple youth clubs listed, a number have multiple national teams, there are those that have managed multiple teams, where "''manageryers=''years'' ''years'', managerclubs=''club1'' ''club2''" needs to be changed to "manageryears1= manageryears2= managerclubs1=- managerclubs2=". these two do not show this is covered.--ClubOranje^T 21:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right I am moving to test for a while and copy few of the articles there is still much to fix Petrb (talk) 22:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you review few last edits by my bot - anyone if you want to change something let me know Petrb (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look at some of the latest edits.
These changes are okay: [1], [2], [3].
These are not correct: [4] (as there are no caps(goals) the bot only writes caps1 = and goals1 = but not caps2 = and goals2 = and so on.

What is wrong here why bot should write caps2 when caps were empty? Petan-Bot (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the template cannot cope with missing caps1/goals1 or nationalcaps1/nationalgoals1, especially if parameters with higher numbers are present. But it would also be helpful for humans who will edit after the bot. --Jaellee (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same here: [5], [6].
Here [7] there are no caps(goals) listed for the 16th club and the bot moves falsely the caps(goals) of the 17th club to the 16th club and the caps(goals) of the 18th club to the 17th club. Same here: [8], [9].
This [10] is also a problem with the order of the nationalcaps(goals) =. They get falsely attributed to nationalteam1.
Here [11] the caps(goals) are not properly handled, there are still 
tags.
Here [12] the bot writes caps1 = years1. This is not correct.
Here [13] the caps and goals parameter is not changed at all, but in this case the mix-up has happened before, years = and clubs = should not be mixed with caps1 and goals1 =. From my point the template was used falsely here (by a human editor).
Here [14] the bot completely loses the reference (but otherwise I'm surprise how good it copes with the mangled input). --Jaellee (talk) 08:49, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok what is bot supposed to do when caps(goals) is empty, it should remove it? Petan-Bot (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was logged as my bot :) I eas extracting the category list Petrb (talk) 09:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the wrong numbering on nonsense values. Petrb (talk) 09:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Petan-Bot/Sandbox06&diff=425473565&oldid=425473457 so? Petrb (talk) 09:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That looks good now. --Jaellee (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed also the rest of mistakes can I start another few examples? Petrb (talk) 10:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who can gice you the approval for this. --Jaellee (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning 14: it's nearly impossible for bot to check where such text belongs to so it will skip such templates for now Petrb (talk) 10:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the bot can only fix the "easy" ones this would already be a tremendous help. --Jaellee (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't see the source that is only reason why you think it's not complicated task :) Petrb (talk) 11:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for extended trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. To demonstrate errors have been fixed - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC) Trial complete. Petrb (talk) 19:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me, well done! Giant Snowman 21:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two issues I mentioned on IRC:

Seemingly arbitrary newlines that most likely arise from parsing, like here. This may aid reading, but not if inconsistent.
Not preserving bold-face for goals "Total" row, like here or here — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Petrb (talk) 20:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Make sure you babysit some edits in case weird cases turn up. Otherwise, good sailing! — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 16:29, 26 April 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.