Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/John of Reading Bot 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.

John of Reading Bot 2[edit]

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

Time filed: 19:40, Tuesday, January 20, 2015 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: The AWB settings are at User:John of Reading/X3 Permalink

Function overview: Update two-column portals to use alternative CSS classes that switch to one-column display on the mobile site

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): phab:T86495 and Wikipedia talk:Portal#Portals on the mobile site

Edit period(s): One time run

Estimated number of pages affected: 800?

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Most portals do not display well on narrow screens in the two-column format, as there isn't space. The initial suggestion at phab:T86495 is that we disable them entirely on the mobile site.

But we can do better than that. Back in 2011, Brion VIBBER (talk · contribs) added new CSS classes to MediaWiki:Common.css and edited Template:Box portal skeleton to make use of them. Portals that use these classes switch to single-column display when viewed on the mobile site. For example, compare this from the main site with this from the mobile site.

But most of the 1000+ existing portals were created from older versions of the "skeleton" and don't use these classes. I'd like to address this; I've developed an AWB script that can do most of the work. Please see my edits to Portal:AC/DC, Portal:24, Portal:Abkhazia, Portal:1950s and Portal:1920s.

A downside is that the classes only support splits that are 50/49, 60/39 or 70/29 [the other 1% is the gap between the columns]. The old default in the "skeleton" was 55/44, so the switch to the new classes will change the appearance of the portals slightly. Nevertheless I think this is worth doing.

Discussion[edit]

Approved for trial (20 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete.

Five of the portals needed additional edits afterwards because the bot edits did not do the whole job. I can solve this using "Skip if contains" and "Check after", so that the bot job only saves edits where all the relevant divs have been edited. More seriously, the bot edit broke Portal:Bridges because it inserted an HTML comment inside a large block of commented-out code. I'll have a think about that and request a new trial when I'm ready. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John of Reading what about fixing most of the stuff semimanually so that you review each edit? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to do the easy cases automatically. A semi-manual method with review might take 30 seconds per portal, which comes to about seven hours. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:28, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(More) I'm ready for a new trial. User:John of Reading/X3 has the revised settings. These will do 90% of the portals and leave the others alone. Those it won't touch include portals where a left box width is outside the range 44% to 79% and/or a right box width is outside the range 20% to 55% (eg Portal:Kurdistan, Portal:Narnia, Portal:Neuroscience, and those where the "width" divs contain extra HTML keywords such as "clear" and "background" (eg Portal:Python programming, Portal:Rhön). But by all means lets see if Frietjes wants to comment. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think Frietjes will be interested about this task. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for extended trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. John of Reading let's try the revised settings! -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete.

This has worked correctly, as far as I can see. It made 50 edits without breaking anything and skipped two where the "width" divs contain extra keywords (Portal:The Clash and Portal:Television in Australia). -- John of Reading (talk) 11:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John of Reading thanks. I ll wait 48 hours in case someone wants to raise any concerns. Please ping me if I forget to come back here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:22, 25 January 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.