User talk:JL-Bot/Archive 2

Change from {{col-begin}} to {{div col|colwidth=}}?

Would it be possible for the bot to change from using {{col-begin}} and {{col-break}} with a hard set number of columns to {{div col}} with the |colwidth= parameter set (say, to 20em or 30em)?

There is such a wide variety of screen sizes and oreintations out there. On phones, readers have to scroll off the page to see the second column, and on particularly large screens (like on a lot of desktops these days) there is an awful lot of white space left. By using {{div col|colwidth=20em}}, the browser can determine the appropriate number of columns for the device.

Also, it would mean less work for the poor bot—it wouldn't have to keep moving {{col-break}}s around. CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 00:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Which mobile browsers have that problem? The ones I've used display the columns within the given screen space - that typically means the text is wrapped pretty significantly, but there is no need to scroll to the right. I agree that {{div col}} is a more elegant solution, but it's unfortunately not supported by IE 9 and below - which is still the bulk of IE users. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess if such a change would affect hundreds of millions of users, I guess that settles it, at least as long as people keep running old Windows machines. The phone I was using was an HTC Desire with a 3.7in screen with the stock Android browser (though I've just switched to an HTC J Butterfly with a 5in screen and Chrome). CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 03:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

WoRC-cat

Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Recognized content uses a parameter |WoRC-cat=yes that is not described in the template documentation. Could this parameter be added to instructions for use? Thanks Illia Connell (talk) 05:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

That is not a bot parameter. The bot ignores invalid parameters so having it there doesn't cause any issues, but it doesn't do anything either. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder what someone thinks it's doing! I'll leave a note at the Physics project page. Illia Connell (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Recognized content

Would it be possible to add a parameter to optionally suppress the bullets when icons are used. I think the output may look a bit cleaner. Thanks Illia Connell (talk) 05:26, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

It should be doable. I'll think about how easy it would be to do. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Illia Connell (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Zimbabwe/Recognized content

Did I set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Zimbabwe/Recognized content correctly? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

There are some issues:

1. The bot supports only one template per page. If you want to list multiple on the same page, then you need to create subpages, each with a single template, and transclude the subpages to that page.
2. Template:Zimbabwe topics is an article template. You need to use the project template that goes on the article talk page (Template:WikiProject Zimbabwe I believe based on the project page).
3. Where you have |parameter-name -- lists ... content, you should have only |parameter-name.
4. Where you have |content-a-class-articles = Name of project A-Class category -- lists specified category's content, you should have |content-a-class-articles = category-name where category-name is replaced with the actual category name

-- JLaTondre (talk) 14:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Phil Lamason

Why does this Bot keep removing the Phil Lamason article from the GA list?? Spy007au (talk) 06:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Only articles that are marked as being part of a project are listed. That article was not marked as part of WP:ANZSP until you made this change after you left this message. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject United States and JL-bot

Greetings. I noticed that JL-bot hadn't updated the featured content page of WikiProject United States since November 2012. It looks like the template is right but I'm not sure if something changed. Would you mind taking a look? Kumioko (talk) 10:30, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

It appears the listing has become larger than Wikipedia's servers can handle. The bot is processing the page and generating an update, but the update is not being saved. I logged the output and manually tried saving it. I received a Mediawiki server error. I cannot even preview the change. I updated the page to have a maximum result size and that worked fine. It looks like the project will need to break that page into multiple subpages if it wants it automatically maintained with a full listing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok thank you. Sorry for the inconvenience. I'll see what I can do about breaking that up a bit. Kumioko (talk) 23:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Shouting in edit summaries

Hi. Regarding edits such as this, there's probably no reason to shout the word "construction". :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Probably not; changed. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you! --MZMcBride (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Removing recognised content

JL-Bot recently removed an edit I made to Portal:Freedom of speech/Recognized content. As the article concerned, 1988–94 British broadcasting voice restrictions currently has GA status there shouldn't be a problem with its inclusion on the page. Can someone check that all is well? Thanks Paul MacDermott (talk) 15:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

While that article has GA status, it isn't marked as part of the WikiProject Freedom of speech. Since that portal page is setup to only list articles tagged with {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}, the bot is working correctly. You will need to add the article to the project if you wish it to be listed. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see where I went wrong now. Looks like while I added freedom of speech to the portals bottom of the page I overlooked the talk page template. Should hopefully be ok now. Thanks. Paul MacDermott (talk) 10:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Columns

What needs to be done so that the output at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Poland#High_quality is in columns, rather than one very long list? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Use the |columns = # parameter. See "Optional Parameters" at User:JL-Bot/Project_content. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. PS. How to tell the bot to use 4th level headings (with four =) rather than two? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Use |heading = 4. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Help

I don't know how to get Wikipedia:WikiProject_Poland#High_quality to display? I tried to make it into a collapsible list, as the original one took too much of the page, but now nothing shows. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. The bot was expecting a newline before the bot's template closing brackets ( }} ). I changed it to handle it with or without the newline since the template syntax is valid either way. Thanks for finding that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject West Virginia

JL-Bot / JLaTondre, I just reconfigured the parameters for the "Recognized content" section at Wikipedia:WikiProject West Virginia. Could you please check that I've configured the JL-Bot template properly? I wanted it to resemble Wikipedia:WikiProject Virginia/Recognized content. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 01:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

If by resemble you mean only the display format, than you have the same settings. You have quite a few additional content types then the Virginia page, however. I ran the bot against your page. You can see if it achieved what you wanted. Let me know if you have questions on anything. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

JLaTondre, the bot achieved exactly what I wanted--thank you again! -- Caponer (talk) 02:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Formatting

Is it possible to format content displays in a wraparound style like WP:CHIGA?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:54, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Like this? If so, use the compact option. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but can you make the print small like my example so that the list does not take up too much space.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I can add a small option; probably won't get to it for a few days. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Why haven't Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Good articles or Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Featured articles updated yet?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

That tasks runs once a week; usually on the weekends. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

It ran. Can you tell me how alphabetization is being handled for 2003 Chicago balcony collapse, Eliel Saarinen's Tribune Tower design, Jean Baptiste Point du Sable, and Winsor McCay.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:09, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

See the sorting explanation at User:JL-Bot/Project content. By default, it uses the articles' DEFAULTSORT. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• Why didn't the Millennium Park WP:FT show up?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:26, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Millennium Park is not marked as being part of the Chicago project. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:07, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Is it O.K. now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Yup, re-ran it on Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Featured articles. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

A small option has been added to use <small><small> in compact mode. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Morocco/recognised content

Hello, I recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject Morocco/recognised content, are the paramters correct? if so when does the bot updates the page? Thank you --Tachfin (talk) 16:03, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

The parameters look fine (other than "WoRC-cat=yes" is not a bot parameter, but it will ignore it). The recognized content task runs ones a week, typically on the weekend. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, the bot has now updated the page --Tachfin (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Larry Doby

I am curious about this edit that removed Larry Doby from Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Good articles.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

See this edit. Legobot removed the good article status and replaced it with a former featured article candidate status. Since it is no longer marked as a good article, it was removed from the listing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:11, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

When articles fail at WP:FAC they do not lose their GA status. I have reversed that status.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Historic houses task force

I have tried to set up the recognised content template on Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Historic houses task force and we are currently tagging articles. I see the bot has just run and I was wondering if there was something else I needed to do to get this task force included?— Rod ^talk 13:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

The template was added (19:59, 14 June 2014) after the last bot run started (15:21, 14 June 2014). As the bot generates a list of pages to process at the start of the run, it didn't know about your page for the last run. I have just re-run it against your page and it's been updated. It now has the bot list as well as the manual one. You will need to decide how to handle the overlap. Also, not all the pages on the manual list are on the bots list so you probably need to tag them to get the bot to recognize them. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - we are hoping to get several thousand tagged by a bot. I will raise of the talk page the overlap.— Rod ^talk 16:11, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

New query

Why did Shake It Up (TV series) get removed?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

That page was moved prior to the last bot run and then moved back after the start of the run. Depending on the timing of the second move, the bot probably saw it under one name when querying 'Category:Wikipedia Did you know articles' and another when querying 'Template:WikiProject Chicago'. As the names wouldn't match in that case, the page wouldn't get listed. This is an unfortunate issue with page moves, but as recognized page names tend to be relatively stable, it doesn't usually happen in the middle of a bot run. I have re-run against the Chicago page and it's been picked up. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

JL-Bot removing featured/good articles from Recognized content

The bot is removing featured/good articles apparently from all the Recognized content pages today. Are these going to be restored at some point? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Example: WikiProject Greater Manchester --Redrose64 (talk) 18:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Looking into it. As soon as I figure it out, I'll re-run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Problem found (associated with a specific starting case) and fixed. Re-run in progress. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick fix! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 23:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Removal of articles from a Recognized content page.

I would like to notify the operator that this bot has recently deleted a large number of articles from WikiProject Argentina's Recognized content page.[1] I am unsure of the reasons behind this removal and, in case it was not intended, I would like to know whether or not this issue will be solved any time soon. Thanks in advance, --OneEuropeanHeart (talk) 05:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

JLaTondre, is this the same issue as User talk:JL-Bot/Archive 2#JL-Bot removing featured/good articles from Recognized content? --Redrose64 (talk) 18:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Nope. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Appears to have been a transient error; possibly in the API query. At least I don't see anything that changed (template changes are the usual culprit, but nothing appears to have been changed / reverted). I re-ran it on that page and it picked up the missing articles. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

It's also happening to WikiProject Haiti's reconized content page [2] Also, my recognized content chart isn't updating its numbers; do you know why that could be? [3] Savvyjack23 (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

No, the bot is acting correctly there. Neither of the two articles removed have talk pages in Category:Haiti articles and so will not be listed per the bot configuration the project created. It looks like Haiti articles are added to two different categories based on whether the {{WikiProject Haiti}} or {{WikiProject Caribbean}} (with Haiti=yes option) templates are used. The project can fix this be either consolidating to a single category (better from an overall wiki perspective) or updating the bot configuration to use both categories. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

JLaTondre, thanks for your reply. I've been attempting to move it all into its own project. Would you know how I could do so? Like is there a way to transfer all the articles in Category:Haiti articles to Category:WikiProject Haiti articles in one shot? Once this is taken care of (even if I have to go through them manually like I have been doing) would this finally take care of the problem? Thanks again. Savvyjack23 (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) At Template:WikiProject Caribbean, amend |TF_8_MAIN_CAT=Haiti articles to |TF_8_MAIN_CAT=WikiProject Haiti articles --Redrose64 (talk) 18:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the category change moved all the articles to the single category. I updated the project settings to use the new category. When the bot runs this weekend, it should see all the articles. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:01, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Women writers

Hi, this bot was placed at this newly-established WikiProject, but it doesn't seem to have gone through yet. Could you please help us with that? Thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Figureskatingfan: I think it's just a case of waiting. The template was added at 23:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC) but the bot didn't start another "recognised content" run until about 13:56 (UTC) today. It goes through in alphabetical order, and as I write this, has reached WikiProject Film. It might be as much as another five hours (say 22:30 UTC?) before WikiProject Women writers is reached, and that's near the end of the list. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Figureskatingfan: It's been done now, see this edit - less than three hours. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Thanks, Red, for your patient tutoring. Bots are not my thing! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:10, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Addition of good article for Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists

Hi,

I saw your name in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists section covering Good articles on the project page and wondered if you could help me.

Grandma Moses was passed as a Good article today. Is there a way to manually update the list of Good articles - or is one of your bots run periodically that picks that up?

Thanks!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:54, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @CaroleHenson: As with the section immediately above, I believe that you just need to wait. The bot doesn't do an "updating recognised content" run every day, and the last one finished at 20:19, 6 September 2014. There should be another run within the next two days. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Excellent, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: It turned out to be four days, but it did get updated. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, not sure how I missed this. That task only runs once a week; usually on the weekends. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Women artists

Hello, Thanks so much for updating the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists page with GA, etc updates. The Kate Millett GA (Art and architecture) did no come across - and I'm wondering if that was because it wasn't tagged as a WikiProject visual arts on the talk page. So, I added that WikiProject. Was that the reason (i.e., it will get picked up on the next run)?

Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @CaroleHenson: I'm not sure what the problem is here: judging by the last edit to the lists, Kate Millett was moved from the "Good article nominees" list to the "Good articles" list. Was this the wrong action? --Redrose64 (talk) 08:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

That list is 'Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers'. She was asking about 'Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists'. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

The bot settings on 'Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists' require articles to be tagged with Template:WikiProject Women artists in order to be listed (i.e. to be tagged as part of WikiProject Women artists). You would have to add that template if you want it listed at 'Wikipedia:WikiProject Women artists'. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64 and JLaTondre: Yep, she should be on the writers list, too. But I don't see her on the artists list.-CaroleHenson (talk) 12:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That was my original question. I added the template. I'll look for her to get picked up on the next run. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for rerunning the program. I thought I added the Women artists template on the talk page, but I added Visual arts. It's on the talk page for Millett now. I'm sure it will get picked up on the next run. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Featured portals no longer supported?

Are Featured portals no longer supported in Recognized content lists? Imzadi 1979 → 01:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

There was an edit to Template:Article history that caused it to no longer place categories on portal talk pages. This emptied the categories the bot uses. Basically, in the last run, Wikipedia was telling the bot there were no featured portals. Template:Article history has been fixed, but since it is used on many pages, it might take awhile for the Wikipedia job queue to catch up and fully repopulate the categories. Everything should be back to normal by the next bot run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

The Invisible Barnstar

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For all the work you do that goes largely unnoticed but is greatly appreciated, you are hereby awarded this Invisible Barnstar. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:08, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Alphabetical ordering

I've been noticing this for a while- does JL-Bot just have have an issue with alphabetical ordering? It seems like every time it makes an update to the video games recognized content page, it moves a few articles around out of order, then sometimes moves them back later. --PresN 05:06, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Odd. It uses DEFAULTSORT so if that is edited, the sorting will change. However, that is only the case for one of the changes. I will have to dig into this. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. The next run will have an update to the sort order, but after that, it will be stable. Thanks for finding this. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Recognized content for WP:Romance

Hi, I set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Romance/Showcase/Recognized content for WP:ROMANCE on June 5, but the bot didn't pick it up. Did I set up the params wrong? In looking into it, I thought maybe it was because I didn't add the category--Wikipedia lists of recognized content, but saw that Women writers didn't either but it ran, so wasn't sure what I did wrong. Thank you! plange (talk) 02:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

There was an error in one of the parameters. I fixed it for you and re-ran against that page. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you sorry about that! plange (talk) 20:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Help

Hey, I'm trying to experiment a bit with your bot. How is this supposed to work? Do you have to activate it manually? The page I'm testing this out on is Wikipedia:WikiProject Palaeontology/test. Abyssal (talk) 02:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The bot only runs once a week, on weekends. I looked at your configuration and it's not correct. You need to specify the source properly (see 'Project Parameter' at User:JL-Bot/Project content) and if you want any optional parameters, then you also need to specify those specifically (see 'Optional Parameters' at the previous link). Let me know if you have questions. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I think I have things fixed now. I don't feel any need to mess with the optional settings until I see the main stuff working. Thanks for making this cool bot. Abyssal (talk) 00:50, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Missing Journals cited by Wikipedia

Dear bot: would it be possible to update Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Missing1? Thanks! fgnievinski (talk) 05:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

@JLaTondre: I was about to request the same thing. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Run in progress. Let me know if you see any issues. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Woohoo! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Sort tweak

@JLaTondre:, could the next revision of the bot put sortkeys at the bottom of those lists? Specifically

For numbers and symbols (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Num1)

{{DEFAULTSORT:0-01}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:0-02}}
...
{{DEFAULTSORT:0-99}}

For letters (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/A1)

{{DEFAULTSORT:A01}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:A02}}
...
{{DEFAULTSORT:A99}} (or whichever is last)

For popular pages (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Popular1)

{{DEFAULTSORT:* Popular-01}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:* Popular-02}}
...
{{DEFAULTSORT:* Popular-99}} (or whichever is last)

For missing pages (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Popular1)

{{DEFAULTSORT:* Missing-01}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:* Missing-02}}
...
{{DEFAULTSORT:* Missing-99}} (or whichever is last)

Thanks.

Yes, I will look into that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not high priority though, so don't lose hair over it. It'll just have better sorting in Category:Missing_encyclopedic_articles_(academic_journals). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

"next" logic tweak.

The bot missed this the last time. Probably some logic tweak is in order. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

JCW logic tweak

@JLaTondre:

In Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/K1, the Kailash entry redirects to Mount Kailash. However, Kailash (journal) exists and redirects to Kailash: A Journal of Himalayan Studies. Likewise in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Popular1, the Lancet doesn't recognize that Lancet (journal) exists and redirects to The Lancet.

It would be great if the bot recognized this sort of thing, if it's possible to implement. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Weird double-listing...

The journal Sex Roles is listed both in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Popular4 and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/Popular5. I don't know what causes this, but it's a bug. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

It caused by the previous section. The bot only updated 4 popular pages (hence it didn't link to the 5th page). The 5th page is left over from last time. Not sure why there was only 4 pages in this run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see... Probably because the ties end at 1000 entries exactly. Which would also explain the bug from the above section. The bot could blank such pages in the future, or mark them as 'historical'. Or possibly delete tag them with {{db-g6}}, to prevent them from showing up in the navbox. We'd lose the history though. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Columns

Does JL-bot support |columns=30em instead of |columns=3 ? This would be useful. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:54, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Should be pretty easy to add. May be a bit before I get to it though. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:30, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Implemented. You can now specify |columns = #em in addition to |columns = #. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK idea

For DYK listings, it would be nice if you could have the option of fetching what the DYK was. Having a |content-did-you-know-articles-with-blurb instead of |content-did-you-know-articles that would give something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals#DYK, would be really nice. Possibly with a |content-did-you-know-articles-with-blurb=Show ##, so only the most recent ## would be transcluded. The others being listed, but wrapped in <noinclude></noinclude>.

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:04, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

I will add it to the "to do" list. It may be a bit before I get to it. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:30, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Added a 'dyk-blurb' option which allows a transclusion limit. See the documentation for details. While I've tested it, parsing the blurbs is a bit complex. If you see any pages that don't display quite right, please let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:15, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Journal Updates

@Headbomb: The journal processing has been updated to add the DEFAULTSORT (request) and handle cases where "TITLE (journal)" is a redirect (request). I have updated the listings with the Sep database dump. Let me know if you see any issues. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Looks mostly good. Just not sure about

Journal	Target	Citations		Search
AACN Advanced Critical Care (journal)	?	AACN Advanced Critical Care	?	7	7	1.000	Wikipedia (J·M·T) Google (J·M·T)

as in Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/A1. Pretty sure that should just be

Journal	Target	Citations		Search
AACN Advanced Critical Care	?	AACN Advanced Critical Care	?	7	7	1.000	Wikipedia (J·M·T) Google (J·M·T)

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Updated such that if the citation is "ARTICLE" and "ARTICLE (journal)" exists, but it is a redirect to "ARTICLE", it will just use "ARTICLE". -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Also isn't the October dump out? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

It (enwiki-20151002-pages-articles.xml.bz2) is showing up as failed [4]. When the next successful one occurs, I will update. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

There is now a successful Oct dump so I processed that. It includes the fix described above. However, I also re-did the entire link formatting logic to make it easier to maintain. The results look correct to me, but if you see something odd, let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Will do! Many thanks! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:15, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Why doesn't this work?

[5] Am I missing something here? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:08, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, not sure how I missed this until now. It didn't have a content type specified. There always needs to be a content parameter and then the output specifications. While the dyk-blurb parameter is only applicable to DYK content, the way the code was originally laid out means it was much easier to keep the need to specify the content parameter explicitly. I've added it to that project and ran the bot against that page so it's been updated. There is one case (Epigraphia Carnatica, which has an extraneous '|small=no') that I will need to update the parsing for. Let me know if you see anything else. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:27, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Change made to remove the '|small=no' and link article titles when article does not have a blurb. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:20, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK no include tags malformed

I took a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Did_you_know&action=edit, and the <noinclude> tags aren't properly paired up. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:21, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. There should have only been one set. Thanks for letting me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

DYK not properly parsed?

Four entries in in [6] are not properly parsed. (Discrete Mathematics (journal), Annual Bulletin (Comparative Law Bureau), Edda. Scandinavian Journal of Literary Research, ORCID). A bug? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Those pages do not have a blurb provided on their respective talk pages (see Talk:Discrete Mathematics (journal) as an example). When a blurb is not provided, the bot falls back to listing the page name. If you wish to have the blurb, you would need to edit the applicable template ({{DYK talk}} or {{article history}}) on the articles' talk page and add the blurb. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I see... Maybe there could be a message telling projects that the blurb is malformed and that {{DYK talk}} or {{article history}} needs to be updated? Or maybe there could be a WP:BOTREQ to crawl through old DYK and make sure their blurbs are listed. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

I added a note to the output. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:33, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate entry?

The 4th and 5th entry in [7] are duplicated. A bug? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

The same DYK entry is given on both the Smith Breeden Prize & Brattle Prize entries. Since the bot is page title based, it would be hard to suppress such duplicate entries. I'll think about it how I could do it without too much turmoil. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:23, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

It could possibly be a matter of bolding Smith Breeden Prize in the first blurb, and Brattle Prize in the second blurb. Or detect it's a dual listing and only list it once. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:20, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Implemented. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:40, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Display date for DYK?

In Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Did you know, it would be quite nice to have the date of the DYK listed as well. Something like

• (YYYY-MM-DD) ... that Public Health Reports was established in 1878 to meet the requirements of the National Quarantine Act, which required American consulates abroad to report on epidemic diseases?

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 06:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The |dates option will add the date after the blurb the same as with the non-blurb option. I added it to that page and updated it so you can see how it looks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks for the quick response/support of this stuff! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Error updating recognized content

Hi. With this edit the bot removed a featured article from a list of recognized content. The article is still featured, still under the perview of the wikiproject in question, so I think that must have been some sort of malfunction on the bot's part. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

@ONUnicorn: This is quite likely due to [8] which removed the FA category on 13 January, which was restored on the 17th [9]. The report dates from the 16th, so reflected the status of the page as it was on the 16th. The next report should be fine. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:20, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Update for WP:JCW?

There's a new dump out. When could we expect an update to the compilation? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:29, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

This weekend. I should have time to run it then. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks good but... something really weird seems to be going on with Lloyd's List/New Lloyd's List. Currently, the compilation says they have 1331 citations across 28 articles for the former, and 2159 citations across 28 articles for the later. In the previous update those numbers were 1279 citations across 28, a seemingly reasonable increase of 52 cites for Lloyd's List. However, New Lloyd's List had 112 citations across 2 articles. That would be a really, really big jump. Do those numbers check out, or is this a bug? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thankfully, I keep intermediate results that make answering this easy. ;-)

Here are the actual articles with the number of references per article for New Lloyd's List:

• 1 - HMS Foudroyant (1758)
• 1 - HMS Howe
• 1 - HMS Stirling Castle (1775)
• 2 - HMS Actaeon (1775)
• 11 - List of shipwrecks in 1772
• 12 - List of shipwrecks in 1778
• 12 - List of shipwrecks in 1793
• 16 - List of shipwrecks in 1770
• 70 - List of shipwrecks in 1779
• 77 - List of shipwrecks in 1777
• 85 - List of shipwrecks in 1776
• 95 - List of shipwrecks in 1774
• 96 - List of shipwrecks in 1771
• 96 - List of shipwrecks in 1775
• 98 - List of shipwrecks in 1773
• 98 - List of shipwrecks in 1790
• 102 - List of shipwrecks in 1788
• 103 - List of shipwrecks in 1787
• 103 - List of shipwrecks in 1792
• 104 - List of shipwrecks in 1789
• 105 - List of shipwrecks in 1785
• 106 - List of shipwrecks in 1791
• 109 - List of shipwrecks in 1786
• 118 - List of shipwrecks in 1780
• 128 - List of shipwrecks in 1783
• 131 - List of shipwrecks in 1781
• 135 - List of shipwrecks in 1782
• 144 - List of shipwrecks in 1784

Looking at List of shipwrecks in 1792, the article was extensively expanded since the last bot run. However, yesterday, after the bot run, it was edited again to change the references from 'New Lloyd's List' to 'Lloyd's List' (so the numbers will go down next time). The other shipwreck articles show similar expansions since the last run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:36, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Alright, just wanted to be sure these were real numbers, and not the bot going crazy because of Bobby Tables/[10]. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Weird minor bug?

In Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/G2, if you go down the list to Gastroenterologia, it lists the target as "gastroenterology". Not sure why the character is not uppercased, but I thought I'd report it. Very minor in either case. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:25, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The redirect is entered as 'gastroenterology'[11]. It is currently reporting redirects as entered. It would be easy to uppercase the first letter for consistency if you wish. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK blurb issue

You may or may not be aware of it, since some IP has been cleaning some things up, but if you take a look at [12], several oddities are happening.

• Robert F. Christy (or the one after it). Has a template and a banner in it.
• Ideas of physics has a loose }
• Calutrons has a weird half convert template in it.
• Josef Schintlmeister has some banner parameters in it.
• Ernest Lawrence has some banner parameters in it.
• POLYGON experiment has some garbage in it.

Also, all entries are duplicated. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:37, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Template processing is a pain. I made improvements that fixed the current issues. Hopefully, that will be it, but given the flexibility of the dykentry field, let me know if you see anything else in the future. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:34, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Will do! As always, I'm impressed at how fast you work! Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

New dump out!

I've been doing a lot of cleanup for the JCW, getting rid of crap and badly formatted entries. Would be nice to have a fresh compilation to work on when you have a chance to make a new one. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 04:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

New dump

New dump is out btw. Not sure if it's on your watchlist or not, but I figured I'd drop you a line. The number of journals entries starting with 'A' should be drastically cut down this time, so don't be surprised by that. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I follow it. I just not always able to update right away. I should be able to do it by this weekend. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:26, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Small JCW bug.

In [13], just below the 'Ararat Quarterly' entry, there is a blank line. This seems to be caused by |journal=AR: Arhitektura, raziskave [Architecture, Research] in Ljubljana and Hradecky Bridge. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

This is possibly something related to an interwiki namespace shortcut thing or whatever. AR: Arhitektura links to the AR: wiki. It's a corner case, and I'm not sure it's really worth fixing, but I figure I'd point it out. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:56, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, "AR:" is an interwiki link. I have added titles with that prefix to the ones that will not be linked. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

(de-archived)

Same/related bug in A3. Search for 'ACE (Advanced Computer Entertainment)' and see the above/below entries. Seems to be caused by |journal=ACE: Foobar. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:15, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

From a programming point of view, it is annoying that the wikimedia software uses ":" as a special character, but also allows it as a valid character in a page name. I've been addressing these piecemeal as they occur, but I think I'll just bite the bullet and update it to handle the whole bunch. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

This formatting didn't work

[14] broke the show/hide templates, please compare revisions before and after. Can this be undone? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:13, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

{{Collapsible list}} is for generating a collapsed list where the list items are defined in the template. That's not what the bot outputs so it's not the right template to use. I switched the page over to {{collapse top}}...{{collapse bottom}} which does what you want. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Colon bug in JCW

Hi, I think your fix for the interwiki links broke something. If you take a look at [15], the only change is considering Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences to be an invalid target, and nothing else in the page is updated. Same for [16] and [17]. And in [18], all entries with a : are ignored. But [19] has no : character in it, and updates properly. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 11:29, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Might as well @JLaTondre: on this. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 11:35, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't able to complete the change to handle all interwiki links (reference this issue). To allow processing of this month's dump, I simply escaped colons. Unfortunately, it turned out this month's database dump is messed up (it's missing almost 3 million articles which really skewed the stats). I reran last month's dump as it was too labor intensive to revert all the pages individually. Hopefully, I'll have the interwiki links sorted out in a week or two. Not sure if Mediawiki will fix the April dump or if they'll just wait until the next run in May. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:05, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

I think I misunderstood what you meant. If all you did was rerun on the old dump, with bypassing colons, how is that [20] has such a big difference in the output? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

That delta is from 9 February 2016 to 12 March 2016 which was from last months run. I figured out the dump file was bad & terminated the run prior to it completing all the pages. When I re-ran against last month's dump, it would have only updated pages that had been previously edited in the broken run or containing colons. Anything else, like that example, would have had the exact same output & so remain unchanged. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah I see now, didn't notice the time was different. That makes a lot more sense. Shame that we don't get valid links for some of the entries with a :, but it's a pretty minor thing all in all. I'll keep working off the March dump when doing AWB runs then. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

New dump is out

@JLaTondre: Can we expect an update to WP:JCW this week end, or will it have to wait a bit longer? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

It's already been updated. I found an error in the new interwiki links processing though so another update is in progress. It won't change most of the content; just fix a few of the interwiki links. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:02, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Plus sort order has changed. The Perl library I was using for natural sorting is having issues & the order was inconsistent from run to run. I went back to a standard alphabetical sort (though it still excludes leading "The"s in the comparison). That means this run will completely change the sort order, but should be consistent after this. If you have any tweaks you would like to see in the sort order, let me know and I will see what I can do. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:27, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering why sort orders always changed from run to run. I'll keep an eye out for weird things. Thanks!Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:29, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Num1 contains entries which start with things other than numbers. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Those pages are 'Number & symbols' & the entries all start with symbols so that is correct. That is how it's always worked. Though with the sort order change, symbols are coming before numbers now. I did make some updates yesterday to

1. handle a few templates that were not getting parsed (listed on Num6); and
2. handle cases were spaces or colons were at the start of the title (also on Num6).

I see that there are a couple of entries that are surrounded by single quotes (ex. 'entry'). I'll update it to remove those as it currently does double quotes. It's on my list to look at what I can do with the numeric sort order (i.e. have 1, 2, 10 vs. the current 1, 10, 2). I can look at placing symbols after numbers as well. But I'm not sure when I will get to that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Right, I thought they were in Non-latin characters, but you're right, they used to be at the butt end of /Num#. My bad. Numbers before symbols would be good, but for the number sorting of 1, 10, 100, etc., I wouldn't worry about it too much. I mean if you can implement a 0-padded sortkey, great, but I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:29, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Unexplained removal

In this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scuba_diving&diff=cur&oldid=713036933 Decompression practice was removed from the list of recognised content at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scuba diving • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 18:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

That is a result of your edit here. You deleted the '}}' from the {{GA|...}} template which is causing it to not render correctly and the page is no longer in the GA catgory. If you fix the template, it will pick it up at the next run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorting

I seem to recall that the bot used to sort articles differently, meaning that Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Michigan/Recognized content and similar other highway lists were in actual numerical order. Now they're in pure alphabetical order, meaning M-185 is listed before M-28, and Interstate 696 appears before Interstate 69 in Michigan. Any thoughts on how we might get the order of the articles to appear in numerical order again? Imzadi 1979 → 05:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Pretty sure it's based on the default sort key. It might simply be a matter of adding the default sort key to the articles. Looking at some of the articles, several are missing the sortkey, but some have it and the bot doesn't sort them correctly. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 09:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

The listing changed order a little over a year ago in this edit, yet to my knowledge, no one has been messing with the sort keys in the articles. Imzadi 1979 → 00:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

There was a bug in the Perl module that I used for natural sorting and I had to fall back to the default sort. I found a different sorting module which seems to be working correctly so I have implemented that. Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Michigan/Recognized content is updated as a test case. The others will be updated at the next run (this coming weekend). If nothing unexpected pops-up, I will leave it as the new sort. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:13, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

That edit fixed things for the Michigan list. :-) Imzadi 1979 → 02:12, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Weird dates

See Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Recognized content, first entries for DYK and Main Page Featured. Any idea why these don't have the correct dates? PC78 (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Template parsing issues. The variety of ways users can enter the date values makes the parsing more complicated than would be ideal. I fixed the main page featured one, but the DYK one will take a bit more work. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:17, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK is fixed also. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Automating a Book

Book:U.S. Roads quality articles was recently set up listing all of the FA-, FL-, A-, and GA-Class articles for the project. Another bot updates a book report on Book talk:U.S. Roads quality articles on a regular basis, so our hope was to use that as a single listing of any cleanup templates on the upper-tier articles in the project. I was hoping that we could automate the listings in the book using this bot, since it's essentially the same as WP:USRD/RC, but it appears in the directions that this bot won't operate in the Book: namespace. Are there any ideas to assist in this automation? Imzadi 1979 → 05:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Updated it so it will also work on the Book namespace. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:55, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Hopefully everything is set up properly for the next bot run next weekend. If not, we'll just customize it every week as needed. Imzadi 1979 → 00:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I ran it against that page so you can see how it looks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Canadian football

How can we get this bot working for WikiProject Canadian football. I started the page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian football/Recognized content. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 02:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

That task runs once a week. It will get picked up in today's run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, it says "No results were found". Does the bot not recognize things that were already "Recognized content" before the bot started with the specific WikiProject. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 16:04, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

The reason no content was found is because it's set to use Category:WikiProject Canadian football articles. However, there are no articles in that category so there is nothing to find. You need to provide a parameter that identifies all the articles within the scope of the project. Typically, the project template that is placed on article talk pages is used. If you want to use a category instead, you need to have one with all the articles in it. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, I never noticed that. I fixed it. The category is filling up now. Thanks. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 01:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Ran it against that page and now it picks up the content. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

If there were any "former" featured or good articles would the bot have recognized them? I know that the bot does that but I was just wondering if it can detect formerly featured things that became unfeatured before the bot started running on the specific page. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 16:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, if they are appropriately categorized. The bot does not maintain a history of articles. It queries the appropriate categories at each run. When an article is delisted, that state is supposed to be updated on the article talk page which will cause it to be moved from the 'current' category (ex. Category:Wikipedia good articles) to the 'former' category (ex. Category:Delisted good articles). So as long as people follow the recognized content process(es), they will be shown. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It's all up to date now. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Madonna/Recognized content

The User:JL-Bot/Project content page has provision for both |content-good-topics and |content-featured-topics however, in the Madonna content page, the bot has now twice failed to generate the list of the Good topics. Is it a malfunction of the bot? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:46, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Good topics are listed. They are the last section. Did you mean featured topics? If so, then it's likely there are none that for that WikiProject. If you know of one that is missing, let me know & I can look into it. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@JLaTondre:, good topics were not listed when bot updated the page. I personally added the good topic. So yeah, although there's no featured topics, but good topics are there and the bot is somehow ignoring it. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 11:04, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

None of those good topic pages are marked as belonging to the project. For the bot to list them, they need to marked as part of the project using the project's template ({{WikiProject Madonna}}). -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Again @JLaTondre:, for example if I add the banner to the talk page of supposed Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/True Blue. What should be the rating in this case? The WP:MADONNA does not have any specific page for Good topic. To clarify does it need a Category:GT-Class Madonna articles? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 15:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Ignore the above. I just added like this if you can see. It is coming as NA class though but the bot can pick it up right? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 16:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, all it cares about is the template (per the bot settings the project is using). I've re-ran it on that page and you can see that it is now picking them up. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help Jla. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 08:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

revert

[21]not sure why bot removes tag, article is being copyedited...thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

The article had not been edited in over 24 hours. As stated in the template documentation, the template is only for use when actively edited and is to be removed if it has been more than 24 hours since the last edit. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

was not aware of timeframe, well the ce shouldn't take too much longer, thanks :-)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:01, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Hmm

Should the bot have does this [22]. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Same thing here [23]. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 00:19, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Investigating. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Fixed. The VM I normally use started having network issues resulting in incomplete results. Switched to another machine and it resumed working. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Generating User-centric recognized content

Is it possible to generate a user-centric recognized content list similar to User:JL-Bot/Project content? For example, I can use it to list GA and DYK articles credited to me. HaEr48 (talk) 03:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The recognized content lists are built by comparing categories and template inclusions. When you say "list GA and DYK articles credited to me", how is that credit to be determined? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, JLaTondre. For DYK at least I know there is this tool: [24], do you know where it might be pulled from? For GA and FA, for a start we can go by the successful nominator (is it hard to parse that from the talk page), unless you know a better source. What do you think? HaEr48 (talk) 06:18, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

That would be new functionality. My bot currently doesn't support either of those. Sorry, I don't have the time to take on a new task at this point. You are better off asking at Wikipedia:Bot requests‎ and seeing if another editor is willing. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:JCW and comments

I noticed a few invalid entries which should not be considered invalid. For instance, in I25 you have "International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) <!--", which is from

• {{Cite journal | last1= Fish | first1= F. | last2= Waterman | first2= P. G. | year= 1973 | title= Chemosystematics in the Rutaceae II. The Chemosystematics of the ''Zanthoxylum''/''Fagara'' Complex | journal= International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) <!-- | volume= | issue= | pages= – not provided, they need looking up --> }}

JL-Bot should strip \s*<!--\s* (or similar) from such entries. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 13:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Yup. Template parsing is a pain given the multitude of ways people enter things. I'll fix this one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Superfluous parameter in WP:JCW

I just realized that |journal= does nothing in {{JCW-row}} since this edit. The bot should omit it in the next run to save on size (roughly 7–10KB per page). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Okay, that's an easy one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

WP:JCW talk pages

To prevent discussions from being made in places where no one watches them, would it be possible to make all talk subpages redirects to WT:JCW, creating them when appropriate, removing any existing stuff (banners). I've already moved existing discussions to WT:JCW.

The only exception being Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Typos. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure. That would be easy to add. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:03, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Done. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Next run?

When can we expect the next run for WP:JCW? Even without the new bells and whisles, it'd be helpful to have the updated data to work with. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

This weekend. I'm hoping to have the above items taken care of, but maybe not the new formatting. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Done. Took me a bit longer than I expected as I ended up rewriting some of the template parsing to make it less error prone and easier to maintain. I have also implemented the new formatting. Will post details for that at Wikipedia talk:JCW. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

The new dump is out btw

The new dump is out btw. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:40, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm subscribed to the RSS feed so I'm notified when they are completed. It's just a matter of when I have time. -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to remember that. I was especially eager this time to see the result with the new ISO logic since i did a lot of ISO related categorizing, plus I cleaned up several bad/typo'd entries and the compilation was getting a bit stale/outdated. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:15, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

No problem. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

HELP

Hey, anyone watching this page and that can answer my question, I've got a bit of a quandary. I've been trying to trick out the page(s) for WikiProject Germany, namely the one I made for Featured content, but the bot won't edit. From what I've read, it runs with a certain time but I'm not so sure. If I'm just being dumb, please let me know. —Vami_IV✠ 06:35, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

@Vami IV: It appears that JL-Bot (talk · contribs) hasn't made any "updating recognized content" edits for any WikiProjects since 13 March 2017. It normally does these once a week. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Well, that is pretty annoying. I wonder if its having more work done like the last time this happened. –Vami_IV✠ 23:54, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

That particular task runs typically once a week, but is manually initiated. Sometimes real-world scheduling gets in the way. It will run again not later than this weekend. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:07, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, that's something I guess. Thanks for getting back to me on this. –Vami_IV✠ 06:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Featured Content has been updated with the latest run. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I noticed and thank the Maker –Vami_IV✠ 21:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Featured Sounds

Why is the bot removing the Featured Sound in this edit? The sound is still tagged for the project, it's still tagged as an FS, and the RC page is still requesting the inclusion of FSs. Will I have to manually revert the removal every week from now until the end of time? Imzadi 1979 → 18:26, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

The featured sound template was updated last week and it is no longer placing a category on the file page (see [25] & [26]). I have updated the bot to use the template instead of category & it is finding them again. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Imzadi 1979 → 00:41, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases

JLaTondre, I set up the User:JL-Bot/Project content template on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases/Accomplishments a month ago, yet the bot has still failed to run. I had it checking against the SCOTUS template, but now I've switched it to trying to check against the category. --Elisfkc (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't handling an empty 'maximum =' parameter. I fixed that and re-ran against that page. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:JCW by target

Would it be possible to have an separate type of 'Popular' pages in WP:JCW?

Something like

Rank	Target	Entries (Citations, Articles)	Total Citations	Distinct Articles
1	Astronomy and Astrophysics	Astronomy and Astrophysics (441, 420) Astronomy and astrophysics (140, 20) Astronomy & Astrophysics (1251, 1200) Astronomy & astrophysics (120, 12) Astron. Astrophys. (1580, 1500) Astron Astrophys (420, 350) Astron. astrophys. (4, 4) Astron. astrophys (2, 2) Astron. astrophys. (2, 1) ...	3952	2230

The table would be would be populated by

• Parse and cleanup |journal=foobar as usual. Those are "entries"
• Determine target of foobar (e.g. follow redirects)
• Find variants of entries that only differ by punctuation (or at least by , . : -), whitespace, capitalization, "The", or "&" vs "and".
• Group everything that redirects or matches the target together

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:49, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Would this be a change to the current most popular or a new page? The blue links would be easy. The red links would be a bit more difficult (have to think through all the permutations). I'll give it a look... -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:57, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

This would be a new page Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/Target1, /Target2 etc. Since there will be a lot more entries per page, I suggested capping this at 100/page, and do the 1000 most popular targets. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:45, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

JLaTondre if this is a bit much to code at the moment, running the bot as is would be fine for now. It would be nice to have this running sometimes before August however, if only to help with [27]. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:46, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The May dump is still in progress. I probably will not be able to run it until end of next week. I plan on adding in the new functionality after that run. It will be before August. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@JLaTondre: Any update on this? It would be nice to have a chance to review the output so the logic can be tweaked in time for Wikimania. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

It is in progress. I hope to have it complete for the July dump. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: I have completed the initial version. I have not yet integrated it into the main bot run, but instead manually uploaded the top 100 results to Target1. Please review and let me know what you think. If it looks good, I'll integrate into the main bot. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Great! Will look into it tonight/over the next few days! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

First thing that would be useful, is a breakdown of links for <5 (diff [28]). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

That's an easy one. Example updated. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@JLaTondre: After toying with this a bit, I have a few ideas (e.g. color-coding the target/individual links like we do similar to Popular1), but it would require templatifying things and I have no time to do this right now. The logic seems surprisingly solid for a first pass. You can merge this in the bot and do the full run. I may discover logic tweaks when I really have time to sit down and look at things in more details, but I see nothing obviously wrong. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

What would be nice for this run would be to get the link formatting. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I haven't had a chance to do the merge yet so I manually saved the remaining output. When I do the merge, I should be able to apply the formatting w/o much trouble. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Date error

What happened to the date in this edit--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:24, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Template parsing issue. Fixed. Thanks for letting me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Thx for your prompt action.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:16, 13 August 2017 (UTC)