Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 25

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.

Yobot 25[edit]

Operator: Magioladitis (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 11:53, Tuesday, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: If requested

Function overview: Fix WikiProject banners with deprecated or invalid parameters found in Category:Deprecated parameters

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 2,000 in first run. Less than 10 per day after that.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Adminbot (Yes/No): No

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Bot to empty

I already have approval for the last two categories. It can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 17. This is an extension of this task to other WikiProject banners. I already have been doing this using AWB from main account. I was asked to use my bot account. As before the bot will also align the talk pages per WP:TPL (WP:GENFIXES#Talk page general fixes). In order genfixes to run in optimal way a custom module is used.

Discussion[edit]

Relevant discussion at

→ User talk:Magioladitis#Stop violating the bot policy

@Bgwhite, GoingBatty, Catnip the Elder, and Intgr: to comment if needed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In here I discuss only talk space edits. I can extend this task if requested but not in this BRFA because I want this to be clean, clear and uncontroversial. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you clarify whether this task will involve cosmetic only edits? (Not that this will be an automatic reason to oppose: such changes should be approved if there is sufficient reason and consensus for them.) But I think it is better to state that openly here. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MSGJ No cosmetic only changes. As I wrote there will be a main task here. The delist pages from tracking categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In what way(s) will the rendered page be different after you have made the edit? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why it should? The page after the edit wont be listed in the tracking category. This should suffice. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:17, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the rendered page is not changed then the edit is called "cosmetic", which I am surprised you didn't know. Anyway I think we are clear now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above changes are not cosmetic. There is no strict definition of this anyway. But, in case since the outcome will be delisted from tracking categories, the two versions won't be the same. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: I would definitely argue that removing a page from a tracking category by fixing an underlying issue is not a cosmetic task. I haven't looked at the details in this particular case yet, though. — Earwig ^talk 22:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the US banners for instance this helps because not all states are part of WPUS and people tend to add wrong parameters in the WPUS. Another think is that wrappers are not very appropriate in cases of multiple tasks in a single page. The best way to control this is to keep the banner clean. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: (1) Is changing template parameters the only thing this task will perform, or do you also plan to enable other AWB cleanups, such as normalizing WikiProject template names? (2) Are {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} templates without the |1= parameter included in the deprecated parameters category? -- intgr [talk] 10:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr No. It will also add WPBS where needed, and perform talk general fixes. But it will perform this only for the pages in question. I expect no more than 2,000 pages to be affected. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:20, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Fair enough, but the BRFA should clearly state, what those "general fixes" are. It seems you also forgot to reply to my 2nd question. -- intgr [talk] 11:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr The general fixes are those written in WP:GENFIXES under the "Talk page general fixes" section. In fact, they are all thee changes suggested in WP:TPL. They will only be done in addition to the main task. (2) They are not. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Thank you for filing this BRFA and working to clean out these maintenance categories. Since people reviewing Yobots edits won't see a category being removed, what edit summary will Yobot use to let people know why it's making these edits? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty the edit summary will be "fixing deprecated parameters and making general fixes". -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:22, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty Any ideas for better edit summaries are welcome. I have bad history in good edit summaries. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:43, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: I suggest adding a link to make it "fixing deprecated parameters and making general fixes". Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GoingBatty OK. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Earwig most of the things described in this task are already done. The last 2 categories are fixed by the same rules via Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 17. The US category is kept almost clean by multiple editors. The request is mainly to help reduce manual editing in favor of bot editing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One more part of the list above has been approved in the past: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Kumi-Taskbot. In fact, Yobot is just to perform a take over from a task already done. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but... — Earwig ^talk 02:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My 2 cents: If these categories provide value, then I believe it would be more efficient to let a bot do the work, which would also make it easier for people to exclude the edits from their watchlist. Magioladitis has demonstrated the technical ability to perform many bot tasks, and I'm sure a trial would demonstrate that he could do well with this task too. However, if there's a feeling that the categories are not needed, then they should be taken to CfD so people can work on other tasks to provide value to Wikipedia. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Earwig I was referring to the specific task not the bot that was performing it, The general idea was that this task was OK but it should not be performed by Kumioko. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:34, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After a more careful look (and more sleep), I think you are correct on that point. I misjudged the nature of the task. This appears to boil down to replacing deprecated invocations of state- or country-level project banners with country- or continent-level ones. While the category is one thing, the existing usage is arguably confusing for anyone editing the page since the pages currently make reference to banners that don't exist and ask for parameters that can't be provided without replacement. So, yes, I am in support of this now. — Earwig ^talk 04:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — I think it's safe to at least get a good trial run and see what kind of edits end up being made. Changes that deal with adding/removing tracking categories aren't usually considered COSMETIC, but there are probably still concerns that genfixes-only changes will crop up and those might be labeled COSMETIC. Hopefully this will assuage those fears. --slakr^\ talk / 04:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete.. This edit really shows the usefulness of the task because it revealed a duplicated tag. I am not sure if I could fix these while converting. I can try though. After the big run, I can check all daily edits manually since there will be no more than 15-20 new pages per day. The full list of 50 trial edits can be found here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Please explain this edit, for example. What was "deprecated" here that needed changing? -- intgr [talk] 08:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr Thanks for the heads up. I had to add Louisiana in my list which I just did. I'll check if I missed any other projects. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:38, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also fixed a typo in edit summary. "Ffixing". -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: My point is that you're still changing WikiProject templates to bypass redirects. I'm not surprised by that -- but when creating a BRFA, you must be upfront and transparent about the actions your bot will perform. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this change does not appear to be documented in either WP:GENFIXES#Talk page general fixes nor this bot request.

If you properly document these changes in your bot request and the community approves the bot, it's fine to make changes like that. But until then, I think these changes aren't justified. -- intgr [talk] 10:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? It was a script mistake. 1 out of 50 edits. All other edits were fine. I provided the list of 50 diffs for user review exactly for that reason and that's why we have a trial mode before approval. I fixed the code. I am not willing to do these edits. I took precautions not to have this in the future. I activated "Skip if no replacement" and the replacements are only about the main task. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr I provided the list of 50 diffs for user review exactly for that reason and that's why we have a trial mode before approval. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: This is not about "Skip if no replacement". This is about documenting all the changes that your bot does, not just some of them. It's not just one mistake, see [1] changing "WikiProject Women Scientists" to "WikiProject Women scientists" and [2] changing "WikiProject Food and Drink" to "WikiProject Food and drink" (among other changes). This is the kind of change that you were ~~banned~~ blocked for, for a week. Please document all changes that the bot does in your bot request, not just the main one. Why is this so difficult to understand? -- intgr [talk] 13:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done and I fixed one more. Intgr thank for reviewing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: In human language, please. -- intgr [talk] 13:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand... I was never banned. I was blocked for bot like editing. Now, this is a formal bot request for a small portion of edits that I believe are beneficial. I am confused of what you want me to write. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:48, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: As far as I can tell, here's how your bot works: it finds all talk pages in those "deprecated tags" categories. With those pages, your bot:

Fixes those deprecated tags, as described in this BRFA.
Unrelated to the original purpose, it applies all regular AWB talk page fixes, a description is now linked from this BRFA: WP:GENFIXES#Talk page general fixes.
Applies some unrelated WikiProject template changes from "your custom module" User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects (this link was just recently added to BRFA), but there's no human-language explanation about what it does.

Because you didn't describe #3 in your BRFA, I had to reverse engineer and infer that from the edits made in the trial. We could have skipped all this long discussion if you had described all the tasks upfront, and your bot might already be approved by now. Again, if I'm misunderstanding something, please correct me. -- intgr [talk] 16:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr Thanks... Btw, #2 and #3 will only be done if #1 is done. This is the original intention of this BRFA. The same way BattyBot does #2 and #3 only when it adds WPBS. The same was done by KumiBot. This is standard practise for AWB bots working on talk pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:27, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Geezus. It is so difficult to communicate with you, it's User talk:Magioladitis#Magioladitis's problematic behavior all over again, always downplaying the issue ("1 out of 50 edits. All other edits were fine") and then acting like everything has been addressed while it hasn't.

Anyone watching this page... Am I being too demanding, expecting the BRFA to explain in English the changes that the bot does? Is it "standard practise" to get the bot approved for one thing and then also do a bunch of other things that aren't explained anywhere? -- intgr [talk] 21:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr No. I did not complain. After your requests I think the "Function details" contains everything now. Tell me if something does not make sense. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Please describe everything that #3 (from the list above) does in English. -- intgr [talk] 00:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty: -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting out of hand. It is NOT Magioladitis' custom module. Many people use it and update it including in my bot runs and GoingBatty's bot. Both of our bots were approved with this, including others. It is the same thing included in AWB's main program of Template redirects. Read the link. The module does the same thing as the link's, except for talk pages... converts a template redirect to the actual template's name. ~95% of all AWB bots do this (unless the bot is run with a very specific task that is done with a specific module). Magioladitis mentioned Yobot 17 at the beginning. This task was approved in 2010 and mentions the template renaming and the module. In many cases, including my bot's and when dealing with Biography banners, the module HAS TO be run before doing the bot's task. Magioladitis is not doing anything new. It is a long, standard practice done by many bots. Bgwhite (talk) 08:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgwhite: Thank you! Finally someone who understands what I'm asking. I've been trying to coax it out of Magioladitis without any success. I did not realize that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 17 already documents what this module does and I admit it's a misunderstanding on my part.

If multiple bots are running this module, maybe there should be a separate page explaining what the module does, like there are Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Template redirects, Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/General fixes etc. Then it can be linked from each of the bot requests. But regardless, that shouldn't stop this BRFA from going through. -- intgr [talk] 10:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr The module is currently located at User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects. It's the same thing as the template redirect page, but in a different format. There are pluses and minuses to moving it under the AWB pages. Plus: It's not enabled for everybody, one has to know about it and have a specific reason. It's format is more powerful (regex). Minus: Trying to figure it out, such as in your case. It's in a different format and not as many people updating it.

The reason why the module has to be run first, such as with the Biography banners, becomes more obvious when seeing the module. There are currently over 50 different redirects for the "WikiProject Biography" template. For example, if one is trying to remove/fix the priority parameter, one needs to know the names of all 50+ redirects. You want to remove/fix the parameter only for the Biography banner and not any others. You either add all 50+ redirects to your code or use the module to change it to "WikiProject Biography" first, thus only coding up one name. The module can be reused by other people and kept more upto date. Can also see how one can become, ummm, "obsessed" about talk page redirects. Bgwhite (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the past when I've written bots that deal with talk page templates, the bot compiles a list of redirects to the template at the beginning of the run using the API equivalent of Special:WhatLinksHere and works off that, rather than a hard-coded list. I assume AWB is more restricted due to not being a general-purpose programming language, but still. We typically strive to interfere with the page as little as possible, aside from things (like most AWB genfixes) that are uncontroversial minor cleanup. Not saying the replacements are bad, mind you, just that there are other approaches. — Earwig ^talk 23:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig we are dealing with 4000 redirects here. Moreover, usually minor edits on talk pages never annoyed anyoned so everybody was too lazy to wrote a good code on it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: "usually minor edits on talk pages never annoyed anyone" — really? Says the person who has several long discussions on his user talk page about exactly these edits and has been blocked for a week for it. -- intgr [talk] 08:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

intgr I recall that you complained on the watchlist issue not about the edits themselves. Btw, I added description to the custom module. I hope this helps. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:55, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I brought up the block again. I'll unwatch this BRFA now. -- intgr [talk] 10:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

slakr I think it's better I do an extra test run to prove that there will be no mistakes this time. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} -- 15:57, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. As requested. — Earwig ^talk 06:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I discovered a duplicated tag which I fixed. An updated script will also fix these in one run. Full list of 50 edits. I checked every edit and there were no problems. Moreover, I enabled "skip if no replacement" as requested. I discovered one more deprecated template that was not in my list and I added it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

((BAGAssistanceNeeded)) Test run was flawless and the task was approved in the past for other bots. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's only been a few days... sigh... — Earwig ^talk 21:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: So will future duplicate tags be caught by the bot, or will you have to monitor its edits? — Earwig ^talk 02:40, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Earwig I ll monitor the changes for starts. I have to cooperate with GoingBatty to find a bot solution for this. But I am confident I can do this in the next month. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I think we're fine.

Approved. — Earwig ^talk 10:03, 13 December 2015 (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.