Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PkbwcgsBot

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.

PkbwcgsBot[edit]

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

Time filed: 13:55, Saturday, October 27, 2018 (UTC)

Function overview: The bot will make fixes to some WP:WCW errors using WPCleaner.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic, but I can do supervised on request (for some errors)

Programming language(s): WPCleaner

Source code available: WPCleaner bot tools

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Each error, three times a week as clarified below

Estimated number of pages affected: Around 800 pages per one-hour period of editing at 15epm, three one-hour sessions a week will make this approximately 2,700 pages fixed. Approximately six to seven minutes will be spent fixing per error in an editing session at 15 epm.

Namespace(s): Mainspace/Articles

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: I am going to run WPCleaner using the bot account and it will make WP:WCW fixes for errors: 1 (Template contains useless word Template:), 2 (Tag with incorrect syntax), 6 (DEFAULTSORT with special characters), 9 (Multiple categories on one line), 16 (Unicode control characters), 17 (Category duplication), 20 (Symbol for dead), 37 (DEFAULTSORT missing for titles with special letters), 54 (Break in list), 64 (Link equal to linktext), 85 (Tags without content), 88 (DEFAULTSORT with a blank at first position), 90 (Internal link after external link), 91 (Interwiki link written as external link or used as a reference) and 524 (Duplicate arguments in template calls). The bot will not do 45 (Interwiki duplication) because automatic fixing for interwiki duplication is causing errors. Most of the errors are being done by other bots. The bot is going to use the bot tools provided by WPCleaner. Each error will be run three times a week on a Monday, Thursday and Sunday with a one-hour editing session on each of the three days with the aim to fix approximately 900 pages at the rate of 15epm. There are nine errors so the bot will stick to a maximum of 100 fixes per error (800/8 = 100) in a single editing session. Due to over 6,000 pages reported as error 90, more time will be spent of it but this will come in a future BRFA but I will stick to a maximum of 100 fixes per editing session for this error for the time being. The figure of a maximum of 100 fixes per error at a one-hour editing session making it 300 fixes per error per week using this bot.

Discussion[edit]

  • You will need to register this account, also please make a userpage for your bot, you may want to redirect its talk page to yours. — xaosflux Talk 14:55, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • List of "errors": 1,2,6,9,16,17,20,37,54,64,85,88,90,91,524. — xaosflux Talk 14:55, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    A large portion of these are marked as "cosmetic only" - making only cosmetic updates with a bot is generally not supported, can you talk some about your strategy here? — xaosflux Talk 14:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux: Some of the errors listed are not cosmetic. Yes, I agree that fixing error 64 is cosmetic as it has no visible change. However, error 90 and 91 are not cosmetic because it changes the internal/interwiki from an external link to an internal link. Error 524, error 2 and error 16 are also not cosmetic. I will strike error 64 as I know that is definitely cosmetic. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:07, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Bot account has now been created. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux: I have struck off some more errors that I felt will be cosmetic. Out of the errors I have said, 2 (Tag with incorrect syntax), 90 (Internal link after external link) and 91 (Interwiki link written as external link or used as a reference) are either high priority or middle priority. Error 524 is also important as well as error 16 because it strips out unicode control characters which will reduce the bytes of the page. I can do error 20 manually on my account as there rarely is a backlog for error 20. I don't know what you think about the other errors. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia:WikiProject_Check_Wikipedia/List_of_errors doesn't have error numbers above 113, please point to a current documentation of error numbers you are dealing with. — xaosflux Talk 18:12, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The errors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation has error 524 and WPCleaner is also configured to fix error 524. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are requested an edit rate of 50epm, will you be configuring MAXLAG? — xaosflux Talk 18:11, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux: Yes, as that is a requirement when editing a high level of pages per minute. However, how to enable MAXLAG? Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    mw:Manual:Maxlag parameter , however if you don't know how to do this, you will need to just throttle down to a slower level like 10epm. — xaosflux Talk 18:17, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I can come down to 10epm to 20epm and make the editing time longer. I will amend this in "Estimated number of pages affected:". Also, based on what I can see at WP:WCW and the amount of pages that need fixing, I plan to run this bot two to three times a week. One hour for each editing session and that way, I can make it 10epm to 20epm and have things fixed quickly. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:22, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux: I have amended the data above. I plan on doing 15epm without going over. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:25, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    15epm is OK. — xaosflux Talk 18:30, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay. The bot will stick to 15epm. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux: Is there any update on this BRFA yet? Pkbwcgs (talk) 13:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Fixing duplicate arguments in template calls requires some tricky logic, and (IIRC) Sporkbot is already handling this fix for bot-fixable instances. Do you propose an improvement on what Sporkbot is doing? – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Jonesey95: It will handle ones which can be fixed automatically by the bot. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:44, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • More detail is needed. "Handle" does not describe what the bot will do. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SporkBot 5. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Jonesey95: The ones that can be fixed by WPCleaner. For example, if there are two blank parameters in an infobox then it will eliminate one of them. E.g. In this diff (on my account), there were two duplicate arguments in the infobox, the parameter |membership = was duplicated twice in this instance so it will eliminate one. Another instance of WPCleaner fixing duplicate arguments, is this diff where there are two duplicate parameters and both of them have the same value (| name = Augusto Heleno Ribeiro Pereira) so WPCleaner will eliminate one of them and it did in that diff. It also fixed link equal to linktext but when I am running the bot, I will not allow that to happen. I hope that helps. Thanks. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:14, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks. I believe that the key to bot eliminations of duplicate parameters is that the edit must not have an effect on the rendered page, except for the elimination of the hidden duplicate parameters category. As long as the bot adheres to this condition, it should be fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 09:57, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
            • {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Is this bot ready for trial? Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
              • I've been a bit busy, but anyone from BAG can move this along, I've added a tag to attract attention. — xaosflux Talk 15:21, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. I'd like to see a short trial of exactly what the bot does please. Could you please make 3 edits to each error you plan to fix, and link them below? Please link to this BRFA in the edit summary. SQLQuery me! 09:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Error 2: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 6:
    • Error 16: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 17: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 37:
    • Error 85: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 88: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 90: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 91: 1, 2, 3
    • Error 524: 1, 2, 3
  • @SQL: Trial complete. Here is the summary, it went fine and just as expected. However, I had to do error 91 manually as there was no automatic fixing for it. I didn't do error 6 and error 37 because there was no automatic fixing for those two and I didn't feel they were necessary so we are down to eight errors. I didn't use bot tools for this as it was only a few edits per error my trial was approved for so I felt that I wouldn't use bot tools for now. Also, I think that because it is not possible to stop WPCleaner from fixing for other algorithms. So, for example, if I was fixing error 2 and it found a page that contains error 64 (which I haven't put in this BRFA), it will automatically fix error 64 in that page as well. However, I will specifically not use the bot tools to fix error 64 directly. After from that, it all went fine. I feel that another extended trial maybe required with the use of bot tools for each error. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} What is the next step? Trial has been completed and functions have been updated as per the result of the trial. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:56, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have waited a week for a response and it has been over a month since I first opened this BRFA. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Xaosflux: Can you please give some input on this. This has been waiting for a while. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:55, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Approved. for tasks 2, 16, 17, 85, 88, 90, 91, and 524. Primefac (talk) 20:58, 16 December 2018 (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/PkbwcgsBot&oldid=874215737"