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.

WaldirBot

[edit]

Operator: Waldir talk

Automatic or Manually Assisted: mostly manually assisted, occasionally automatic, with supervision

Programming Language(s): AWB, occasionally PyWB

Function Overview: Article and other pages' assessment/standardization for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cape Verde.

Edit period(s): Daily, at best, depending on my availability

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): N (Note: the same account has bot status on pt.wikipedia)

Function Details: The bot will be used for assessment, adding/updating/standardizing infoboxes, adding/fixing coordinates and/or standardizing their markup, for articles in the scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cape Verde.

Discussion

[edit]

I'm a little worried about the broadness of your request. I think it would be preferable, if you could manage it, to have separate BRFAs for separate major tasks when and as they come up. It's nothing personal, just how people expect us to operate. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I can do that, of course: rewriting the operations to be more specific; but that would probably exclude future WikiProject work that may come up... And since there are very few articles covered by the project (871 last time I counted, a few days ago), I think it's a little, may I say, overkill, having separate RFBAs for each task (especially since most of these will be done one time only). What do you think? --Waldir talk 19:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As long as there is a concise list of what exactly this task entails it should not be a problem as there are few pages that are affected. 'Page maintenence' is too vague a term. As mentioned future tasks would have to be filed separately. Q T C 00:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hum, you're right. I edited the function overview to make it more specific. --Waldir talk 01:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I think it still isn't specific enough. Tell how (giving examples) of what you plan to do these things, as well how you plan to do it. Also I think you should define what "other minor tedious tasks" are as that is too vague. —Nn123645 (talk) 01:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I honestly from the top of my head can't think of any tasks right now that would not be covered by the description I already added, so I removed the "other minor tedious tasks" part. As for the details, you can take a look at my recent contributions to get an idea: I've been tagging articles under the scope of the wikiproject with its banner, and currently I'm assessing them using the AWB's Plugin++. I also plan to mark in the banner those that don't have images or infoboxes. Later, I intent to convert some tables into standard infoboxes, as well as standardizing format and parameters for infoboxes already added. This will also include updating all articles with a given infobox or template to, say, include a new parameter or change an existing one. As for coordinates, I have a few sources from which I intend to create a list of coordinates and then add these to the articles. Probably I'll do this with a combination of manual and automatic editing, such as generating the list in a way I can copy/paste the values into a template inserted by AWB. There will also be some room to standardizing the coordinates templates, such as making all of them use ((coord)) instead of the deprecated ones, and standardizing the display parameter. Orphan articles may be listed in the see also section of other related articles. And finally, I'll perform general, AWB-assisted manual cleanup on articles marked as needing such. I hope I didn't leave anything out :) --Waldir talk 10:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
((BAGAssistanceNeeded)) Any more concerns? --Waldir talk 10:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So if I understand correctly this is a request to do 6 things:
1) Place Wikiproject Banner on all Relevant Pages, adding parameters which are relevent to the tempalate
2) Assess Article using KingBotK plugin for AWB
3) Standardize the format of all tables and infoboxes converting tables to infoboxes where practical
4) Change all coordinate templates to ((coord))
5) List orphaned articles in the see also section
6) Manual AWB Cleanup of Pages using General Fixes?
Except for task 5 and possibly task 3, it all looks pretty non-controversial. More details on how you plan to do that task would be nice. —Nn123645 (talk) 19:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Task 3 will be done with regex. I am quite familiar with the syntax and anyway since the edits will be supervised, no errors should pass through, ideally. Task 5 was more of an hypothetical one. So far I've done that from time to time in random articles that I find when looking for something (i.e. when using the encyclopedia as a reader) and find the task of getting to the topic I originally wanted harder than I think it should. This task, under the context of the WikiProject C.V., would consist in actively searching for orphan articles covered by the project, and after manually creating a list of related articles for each of them, add a link to them to the see also section of these related articles, using the find/replace feature. But on a second thought, considering that the number of articles I'd add the link to would rarely surpass 5, I don't think it is something that needs a bot (in fact, it could make the task even harder), so I'd rather strike that out. I'll keep only tasks 1-4 and 6. --Waldir talk 23:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please add WaldirBot to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Bots --Waldir talk 11:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, I added the request at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Bots --Waldir talk 11:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Trial complete. I had to delay the edits due to extra-wiki commitments, but today I ran the 20 edits, assessing articles with the KingBotk plugin. I believe everything went fine. --Waldir talk 12:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me here, but I noticed several of those edits are assessing the importance of articles. Is this always done manually (supervised)? The bot isn't automatically assigning importance without supervision, is it? – Quadell (talk) 15:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not :) As I pointed out in the request, I'll operate it mostly in a supervised mode. Occasionally I may run it unsupervised after a few test edits, for example in the adding/standardization of coord templates, but for assessment I'll always run it manually. --Waldir talk 16:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good. Just making sure. – Quadell (talk) 18:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. – Quadell (talk) 18:02, 8 April 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.
Category