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 The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

Operator: Tim1357

Automatic or Manually assisted:

Programming language(s): Pywikipedia

Source code available: replace.py

Function overview: Replace all links to

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Talk:United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010#Move.3F
Talk:United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010#Page_move.2C_revisited

Edit period(s): yearly

Estimated number of pages affected: Lets see, Next United Kingdom general election has 448 links and Next UK general election has 283 links so thats 731 pages.
Exclusion compliant (Y): Will add the python code found on ((nobots))  Done 01:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Nope, but has 2 BRFAS going at the same time : )
Function details:

Change links Next United Kingdom general election

and

Next UK general election to

United_Kingdom_general_election, 2010

as those links will be needed for the 2011 elections. Will leave the link name in place. ([[Next UK general election|Uk election]] ==> [[United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010|Uk election]]

Discussion[edit]

• There are plenty of articles where 'next uk general election' has been linked in its titled form without piping, because it makes sense in prose. What happens then? Obviously subbing 'uk general election, 2010' into a sentence is not good prose. MickMacNee (talk) 13:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Someone needs to check all the pages once the bot has run anyway. "Next UK general election" and "Next United Kingdom general election" are near-invariably bad prose as it is.
    
    Tim, can you please change the code so that it changes the link title to "General Election 2010" within an election-result box, in accordance with the established convention? Wereon (talk) 18:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • How is it bad prose? xyz will not happen until after the next United Kingdom general election. ? Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see. MickMacNee (talk) 22:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The bot would change only the base name if there is a pipe. Im not sure what you mean by ""General Election 2010" within an election-result box"? Can you elaborate? Tim1357 (talk) 23:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Tim, like the second half of this: [1]
  MickMacNee, because it nearly all cases where it is used the fact the article is talking about British politics has already been established, and hence "UK" or "United Kingdom" is unnecessary and unsightly. Wereon (talk) 00:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not think that would be a good idea to do a mass renaming of links. I will change the bot to do that if there is consensus here, however.Tim1357 (talk) 06:03, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wereon, I know for a fact it is used in article prose where it is necessary to distinguish betProxy-Connection: keep-alive

Cache-Control: max-age=0

en the UK and other jurdisdictions, so it is not helpful to make such generalisations. This is a bot, it won't know if it is changing the context of prose or not by removing UK or United Kingdom from article text. Tim, I am still unclear with your answer, are you saying the bot won't change the link where it is not already piped? If so, that is probably fine, as I doubt it is used in this full capacity in many places, and once the bot run is done, these can be done manually. Equally, it would be fine I would have thought for the bot to add piping to an unpiped link while keeping the prose intact, if that is what you meant. MickMacNee (talk) 13:59, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, right now I would only be changing piped links. That way, the bot won't screw up any article prose. I could have the bot log all links that are not piped for human review, If that would be better. Here is an example.

[[Next United Kingdom general election|The Election]] →  [[United_Kingdom_general_election, 2010|The Election]]

Tim1357 (talk) 18:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or I could change unpiped links so that "next uk general election" remains the links name so:

 [[Next United Kingdom general election]] →  [[United_Kingdom_general_election, 2010|Next United Kingdom general election]]

The second option is fine imo if it can be done. MickMacNee (talk) 11:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Exclusion compliance is built into the Pywikipedia framework by default, through wikipedia.Page.botMayEdit(). You won't have to implement it yourself, only use that function. — The Earwig @ 17:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks earwig. I updated the code so that it will preserve the link name, so the displayed text will not change, only the link. 67.142.130.12 (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note there are comparatively few links still needing moving, it may be better just to AWB the remaining ones. Rich Farmbrough, 06:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

That would be fine, but we should wait for the RfD to finish. Tim1357 (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The RfD has closed. I agree this is a job for AWB. I've started, but probably won't be able to finish for a few days. If anyone wishes to pick this up please do, otherwise I guess it will wait until then. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - did some 240 pages with AWB Tim1357 (talk) 04:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No more need for dashbot3. : Withdrawn by operator. Tim1357 (talk) 17:07, 22 December 2009 (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.