Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HasteurBot 7
- 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 Approved.
Operator: Hasteur (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 19:31, Sunday January 19, 2014 (UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic
Programming language(s): Python/Pywikipedia
Source code available: Customized version of templatecount.py from Pywikipedia compat. Link to source [1]
Function overview: To tag a set of Talkpages bearing the WikiProject Medicine banner (or any of the redirects pointing to it) with the Society task force identifier when matched by a set of criteria.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_57#Tagging_pages_for_a_new_Taskforce and User_talk:Hasteur#Society_and_Medicine_bot
Edit period(s): 1x per month
Estimated number of pages affected: Dependent on how many pages are discovered that meet the criteria.
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes
Function details: This bot will traverse all the Article Talkspace transclusions of the WikiProject Medicine banner to potentially add the Society task force parameter to the WikiProject Medicine banner based on
- The talk page also having a WikiProject
BiologyBiography, WikiProject Companies, or WikiProject Organizations banner - The talk page having the word Charity (case insensitive) in it's title
- The Society parameter not already in the WikiProject Medicine banner
- The talk page also having a WikiProject
The bot will at the end of it's run post a new talk page message at the WikiProject Medicine talk page letting interested editors know that a new set of society articles has been tagged and needs evaluation as to importance and appropriateness for the society task force.
Discussion edit
@LT910001, Bluerasberry, and Jinkinson: Here's the BRFA for your bot task. Please feel free to weigh in and let me know if I did something wrong. Hasteur (talk) 19:40, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hasteur, thanks a lot for putting this proposal together, if approved this is exactly what we were hoping for. Only one small note, "WP:BIOLOGY" above should be "WP:BIOGRAPHY". --LT910001 (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Urm... You hit on an interesting question. Since you say
{{WikiProject Biography}}
does that also include{{BLP}}
and{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
when the BLP banner is triggered? Hasteur (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]- Am happy if we miss a few articles by not complicating matters*, as I believe a simpler bot will be more effective and adding more and more clauses may end up adding too many false positives. Have included the keyword 'charity' in my request as I find these articles are haphazardly wikiproject-ed, whereas biographical articles seem to be universally under the aegis of WP:BIOGRAPHY. A more complicated way of identifying biographies may include transcluding
{{BLP}}
articles, articles with 'physician', 'MD', 'nurse', 'doctor' or a speciality in the infobox. With regards to{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}
, do you mean that articles with Wikiproject in the banner shell may not be detected? I am not sure how this bot will be programmed, but I feel if you are just doing a search of the text of the top parts of the talk pages, then this won't be a problem. I will however defer to your more expert opinion on this! --LT910001 (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Am happy if we miss a few articles by not complicating matters*, as I believe a simpler bot will be more effective and adding more and more clauses may end up adding too many false positives. Have included the keyword 'charity' in my request as I find these articles are haphazardly wikiproject-ed, whereas biographical articles seem to be universally under the aegis of WP:BIOGRAPHY. A more complicated way of identifying biographies may include transcluding
- Urm... You hit on an interesting question. Since you say
{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Ok, finished writing the BLP checks this past week, so this is ready to have it's roll down the driveway. Hasteur (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Any Bot Approval Group members active? This project has been waiting for a while and the BAG assistance flag was thrown over a week ago. Urgent is now equivilent to "Whenever we think about it"?
Approved for trial (30 edits) Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. for tagging only. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 12:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The bot will at the end of it's run post a new talk page message at the WikiProject Medicine talk page" -- how often? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 12:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hellknowz How often: Once a month (along with the tagging). Obviously per your trial authorization, I won't be doing the notification to the project page by bot. Hasteur (talk) 13:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Trial complete. [2] is the set of 21 edits that I made with the process. The first edit had 2 defects, The square brackets weren't ballanced in the edit summary and the regex ate too much of the end of the line. I manually corrected the first edit. The message to WPMedicine is here that I manually typed in. It indicated what happened, where the authorization for it was granted, and how to resolve the message. Hellknowz Please let me know if you have questions. Sorry I left this kinda on the back back back burner. Hasteur (talk) 00:21, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} I waited the obligatory time. Could one of the BAG memebers please review? Hasteur (talk) 13:28, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks Hasteur. I have finished my categorisation. I can report that this captured everything that it should have. This is a very useful tool and I hope it makes it through. --LT910001 (talk) 06:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Approved. Looks good. Very sorry about the delay. — Earwig talk 03:30, 31 May 2014 (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.