The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Approved.

Operator: Happy‑melon

Automatic or Manually Assisted: supervised automatic

Programming Language(s): pywiki

Function Summary: converting ((cite web)) templates to use |accessdate= and |date= consistently

Edit period(s): one time run

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

Function Details: Following from this discussion, and numerous others on that page, we conclude that the parameters |accessyear=, |accessmonthday= and |accessdaymonth= are more trouble than they're worth. They were created in the days of date autoformatting to force a display in ymd or dmy format; now this is deprecated in favour of setting |dateformat= in the template and passing the whole date in together as |accessdate=. As such, it is a very clear-cut process to convert from one to the other:

• When the parameters |accessdaymonth= and |accessyear= are present in an instance of ((cite web)), mash the two together into |accessdate= and set |dateformat=dmy
• Else if the parameters |accessmonthday= and |accessyear= are present, mash the two together into |accessdate= and set |dateformat=mdy

This should cover 99% of the simple cases; there are only a manageable number of instances out there, but they are currently broken, so speed is a consideration.

Discussion[edit]

• I see no problem with this. Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 23:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks simple enough, and as it's probably best to get these templates fixed ASAP: Approved for trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Richard⁰⁶¹² 16:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done for your delight and delectation :D Happy‑melon 17:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Looks fine to me.  Approved. Richard⁰⁶¹² 17:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.