Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MelonBot 7
- 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
Withdrawn by operator.
Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic
Programming Language(s): pywiki
Function Summary: initialise Category:C-Class articles
Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function Details: For each Category:B-Class foo articles in Category:B-Class articles, create a corresponding Category:C-Class foo articles in Category:C-Class articles. Other categorisation and code (where readable) to be maintained: ie, if Category:B-Class foo articles is also in Category:Foo articles by quality, then the new category will be as well. Categories with interesting page content (ie more than just categories or the navigation template {{cat class}} will initially be skipped, and eventually done by hand.
Discussion
[edit]- When I commented on the C-class proposal (oppose, I believe), it seemed it wouldn't reach consensus. For the benefit of, well, me, can we have links and stuff to relevant discussions? giggy (:O) 09:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Nope, it's full steam ahead: Walkerma closed the poll with a very insightful analysis here, and it's been gathering momentum as we build the infrastructure: WP 1.0 bot is updated, and it's in the grading scheme: the categories is the next stage. Rollout is being co-ordinated here. We're basically saying: "if you don't want it, we're not going to force it on you" - I should have mentioned above that I plan to check the deletion logs for each category prior to creation: if a project doesn't want C-Class, they just need to delete the category; the bot won't recreate it. Happy‑melon 09:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Cool, I can live with that result (and it was a thoughtful close, so thanks Walkerma if you're reading this!). With that deletion clause built in (will your edit summary point to this page so people know about it?) it seems mostly good. What content will it create the categories with? giggy (:O) 09:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Nope, it's full steam ahead: Walkerma closed the poll with a very insightful analysis here, and it's been gathering momentum as we build the infrastructure: WP 1.0 bot is updated, and it's in the grading scheme: the categories is the next stage. Rollout is being co-ordinated here. We're basically saying: "if you don't want it, we're not going to force it on you" - I should have mentioned above that I plan to check the deletion logs for each category prior to creation: if a project doesn't want C-Class, they just need to delete the category; the bot won't recreate it. Happy‑melon 09:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
It'll depend on what's in Category:B-Class foo articles. With Category:B-Class .NET articles, for instance, it will keep the "-by quality" categorisation and create the new cat with
[[Category:.NET articles by quality]] [[Category:C-Class articles|.NET articles]]
Ones like Category:B-Class 19th century novels task force articles can also be handled fairly easily: it'll create with
{{catmore1|[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/19th century task force]]}}
{{Cat class|topic=19th century novels task force|sort=19th century novels task force|class=C}}
[[Category:C-Class articles|19th century novels task force articles]]
Anything more complicated (like Category:B-Class A-League player articles) will be skipped in the first run. Depending on how many are left, I might just create them empty with the necessary cats, or I might do them by hand if there aren't too many. Happy‑melon 09:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Category:B-Class A-League player articles (for instance) could be done by just replacing "B-Class" with "C-Class" everywhere, I think it'd still work. But I don't blame you for not wanting to try it automatically. :-) Anyway,
Approved for trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. - let's see how it rolls. giggy (:O) 09:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- What, you mean I now have to actually write it?? :D I was expecting the bureaucracy to take much longer than that... off to find a computer with python on it, I think.... Happy‑melon 10:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, I've got a script running in supervised mode: there are about 20 edits at the top of MelonBot's contributions at the moment. It currently asks for confirmation where the text doesn't consist only of categories and a few 'trusted' templates (
{{catmore}},{{cat class}},{{categoryTOC}}, etc). Comments? Happy‑melon 19:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)- Yep, that looks good. Are you going to always run in supervised mode? —Giggy 01:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to try to expand the range of 'safe' options that bypass the manual check, but yes, the easiest way seems to be to do manual changes as I go along. Happy‑melon 09:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yep, that looks good. Are you going to always run in supervised mode? —Giggy 01:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, I've got a script running in supervised mode: there are about 20 edits at the top of MelonBot's contributions at the moment. It currently asks for confirmation where the text doesn't consist only of categories and a few 'trusted' templates (
- What, you mean I now have to actually write it?? :D I was expecting the bureaucracy to take much longer than that... off to find a computer with python on it, I think.... Happy‑melon 10:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Category population is done for now, so I guess this could be marked as "withdrawn". But I might also one day run this script on the other categories in Category:Articles by quality - you note that they all have slightly different numbers of subcats? Happy‑melon 17:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Withdrawn by operator. BJTalk 05:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- 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.