Open main menu
Bot requests
This page allows users to request that an existing bot accomplish a given task. Note that some tasks may require that an entirely new bot or script be written. This is not the place to ask for help running or writing a bot.

A bot operating performing a task should make note of it so that other bots don't attempt to do the same. Tasks that are permanently assigned or scheduled for long-term execution are listed on Persistent tasks.

See also

Unassigned requestsEdit

Use of Match and splitEdit

Is it normal for the Match and Split Phe-bot to not be running, and how does one get it going again?Jasonanaggie (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

It is not normal for it not to be running (especially as I was trying to match-and split a page when I found it wasn't running). As @Phe-bot is run by @Phe, I believe pinging them should do the trick. -Einstein95 (talk) 01:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
@Phe, @Phe-bot: the bot is not running again (or still not running) — "match_and_split robot is not running. Please try again later." —Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Template:Header to Template:Translation headerEdit

We have a situation that I am parking here for broader consideration, especially as it is not one that I have the best familisarisation. We have moved numbers of main ns works to the Translation namespace due to their being Wikisource-sourced translations. Numbers have been moved and not converted to use {{translation header}}. They take a little bit of manipulation based on knowledge of the works, though that should be evident from the language of the work. We need to review and automate those that can be automated, and either manual update the remainder, or look to populate with information that allows for automation. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:35, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Can someone who likes working in Translation: ns please advise on the requirements for converting these works. There will be something like "header" to "translation header"; addition of language parameter (and use the categorisation to determine that parameter). What else needs to happen? — billinghurst sDrewth 21:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Masss subst: requestEdit

Mass subst of {{Statute table/titles/footer}} to enable templates removal. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:16, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

This only works if a new line is left in the footer: "\n|-\n|}", I wonder if it is a robust solution, as a the first new line might be stripped for some reason, see [1]. Can this be made more robust?— Mpaa (talk) 22:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Replace {{blank line}} with {{nop}}Edit

The template {{blank line}} is deprecated and is slated for deletion per WS:PD, but it is used on nearly 2000 pages, and needs to be replaced before deletion can occur. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:41, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

One comment: replacement should be done according to recommended usage of nop (used at the end of a paragraph in the PAGE: namespace where the paragraph terminates the page). So if blank line is at the beginning of a page, it should be inserted at the end of the previous page.— Mpaa (talk) 17:04, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
I have tested it, and it appears to work correctly with nop at the top of the page. If the bot can be made to put it at the bottom of the previous page, that would be great, but I do not think that is necessary. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:13, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
It is deprecated usage, not wrong usage. Why are we bothering? Can't we live with it? — billinghurst sDrewth 22:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
I'd think so, but several people indicated a preference to delete at WS:PD and nobody opposed until today. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 11:18, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Just to note that "blank line" is a (wacky) span template, and "nop" is a div template. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

  Question can we close this as   Not done. It is two separate bot tasks taken without clear vision of the consequences, and for little evident value. That there was a deletion discussion will just mean that the template will need to exist until it is done by other means. I would suggest that someone runs a check on new usage and see if we need to restrict future addition. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Layout borders for Once a WeekEdit

I’ve decided I need to change the standard width of the page layouts for Once a Week from 500px to 600ox, to accommodate various pages where text and image are side-by-side. This is causing me all sorts of woe. I am adding a layout box to the Page namespaces in the form of a border; unfortunately, before I figured out what exactly I am doing, I added some borders that aren’t helpful. The following bot actions would greatly speed up my work:

  1. find and replace {{border/s|maxwidth=620px}}{{border/s|maxwidth=610px|style=padding:10px}} with {{border/s|maxwidth=635px}}{{border/s|maxwidth=625px|style=padding:10px}}
  2. find and replace {{border/s|maxwidth=530px}}{{border/s|maxwidth=520px|style=padding:10px}} with the same
  3. find and replace {{border|{{border|style=padding:10px| with the same, and change the closing }}}} to {{border/e}}{{border/e}}
  4. find and replace {{border|maxwidth=620px|{{border|maxwidth=610px|style=padding:10px| with the same, and change the closing }}}} to {{border/e}}{{border/e}}
  5. to all existing pages that don’t have any of those, add {{border/s|maxwidth=635px}}{{border/s|maxwidth=625px|style=padding:10px}} before any header text that may already be there, and add {{border/e}}{{border/e}} at the end of the footer

Thank you very much --Levana Taylor (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Maybe it is just me, but I can't see the benefit of having this kind of complexity in headers/footers of Page ns to mimic the something that in the Main ns will be lost. Other comments welcome.— Mpaa (talk) 19:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
It is just for people who will be working with tables and images on those pages (there are rather a lot of tables an images, considering that OAW is 8K pages in total). Having a box around the preview helps with getting the relative size of such elements consistent throughout the magazine. Levana Taylor (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Can you please give examples so we can better understand. At this stage I am with Mpaa's position of "why?" If we have to make changes and there is a necessity to have Page: ns formatting, and there is the potential requirement for change, I would much prefer that we had a template that was specific to the work and the namespace, so if changes were required then we just have to amend a template. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Well, yeah, that’d be even better. See this, this, this, this, this and this for six examples of places where I can’t fit things into less than 600px wide unless I reduce the font size -- I thought it would be better to keep the default font size. If you have ideas for making this business easier, please do tell me! Levana Taylor (talk) 22:08, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

(unindent) I’ve been thinking. The best way to make sure the images are always correctly scaled relative to each other is to have a template where their width is expressed as a percent of the width of the page, as measured on the original images. That way, these percents can be translated to an absolute size by a value stored in the template (100% = 600px in my current thinking), and thus changed globally while staying the same relative to each other. Would it be much trouble to make such versions of {{FI}} and {{FIS}} for Once a Week? Levana Taylor (talk) 02:12, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree with User:Mpaa even though I indulge in it occasionally. It is only for personal gratification and for varying the editing experience. Otherwise, it's a waste of time. — Ineuw (talk) 22:59, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Agreed, as to borders. But what do you think about having a percent-sizing template for images? Levana Taylor (talk) 23:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Comfortable with running a bot through to resize images. That seems reasonable, and I will look to do it. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
That is not what I meant. I should have, I suppose, moved this conversation to the area for template proposals. What I mean is, that currently the images for Once a Week have been sized (in pixels) according to several different principles. I might like to see a template to facilitate consistency, namely, work-specific versions of FI and FIS with the size expressed in a percent of page width; the percents to be converted to absolute pixels as a percent of some globally-set pixel value (600, I would argue; that is the width which I have now found necessary to accommodate text+image combinations.) I would have to set the percent values of existing images by hand because they have not been done consistently and thus can't be converted automatically. It would only take me a couple of days though because there aren't yet very many images uploaded. I wouldn’t be in such a mess if I had done the image sizes by percent to start with and could easily scale them! This is hardly a very high-priority template though--to be done only if it’d be easy! --Levana Taylor (talk) 06:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
On yet further thought, I don’t think this is necessary. I don’t think (fingers crossed!) the layout sizes will be adjusted again. Mot worth the work to create a template, though, as I say, if only it existed to begin with … so, forget this whole idea, no work is needed. Levana Taylor (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Cato's LettersEdit

Would it be possible to move the parts of this work to subpages? Cato's Letter No. 1 -> Cato's Letters/Letter 1 and so forth. Headers need to be updated too, but I can fix them afterwards using AWB. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:00, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Beleg Tâl: What about Additional Letter of Cato No. 1? –MJLTalk 21:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Cato's Letters/Additional Letter 1 I guess? —Beleg Tâl (talk) 03:37, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
done.Mpaa (talk) 18:14, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Page Shift in Tolstoi's Complete WorksEdit

I found pages 72 and 73 of Index:The Complete Works of Lyof N. Tolstoi - 11 (Crowell, 1899).djvu were duplicates, and at the same time that pages 82 and 83 were missing entirely. I have reconstructed the file to remove the duplicated pages and add in the missing pages, but could use some assistance shifting the contents around. I've updated the Index to match the new DjVu, but the contents of pages 72-83 are out of sync now.

The text contents of book pages 74-83 need to be moved 2 pages earlier in the document, so that the text that now appears on page 74 needs to be shifted two pages earlier so it will be on page 72, and page 75 needs to be shifted two pages earlier so it will be on page 73, and so on, up until page 83 getting shifted so its text is on page 81. Page 84 and everything after does not need to be moved. —Dcsohl (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

@Dcsohl: You'll probably want to specify exactly what page moves are needed so that whoever handles the request doesn't have to research it themselves. Running a bot to move pages is relatively quick; but researching exactly what needs to move takes time, and is best done by the one who altered the DjVu and knows the work. --Xover (talk) 17:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@Xover: I've updated the original request above, trying to be more specific. Does this look good? —Dcsohl (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@Dcsohl: That does indeed look good. Thanks for helping improve this work! --Xover (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Done.Mpaa (talk) 18:21, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@Mpaa: Thank you!

Assigned requestsEdit