Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/WikiCleanerBot 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.

WikiCleanerBot 13

[edit]

Operator: NicoV (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 15:44, Sunday, March 22, 2020 (UTC)

Function overview: Do edit for fixing CW Error #549 (Split link).

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java (WPCleaner)

Source code available: On GitHub (especially algorithm 549)

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Twice a month

Estimated number of pages affected: A few hundreds (a dry run on Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/WPC 549 dump results in 242 modified pages out of the 353 pages found in the dump analysis)

Namespace(s): Main

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: The bot will group links that have been split into several links (like [[Test|To]][[Test|to]] converted to [[Test|toto]]).

Special considerations in the current implementation (may change along time if improvements are found):

  • <nowiki /> tags between consecutive links will be removed also.
  • If text is the same between two consecutive links, it won't be fixed automatically (can't know if both texts should be kept)
  • If text of a link contains a <nowiki />:
    • If it's the only text in the link, it will be removed
    • If there's other text in the link, it won't be fixed automatically
  • If text of a link is only punctuation, it won't be fixed automatically

Discussion

[edit]
Needs wider discussion. Not really sure this is a super great idea, given that in a lot of those cases, the actually solution would be [[test|to]][[test|to]] → [[test|to]]. An AWB run might be better instead. Opinions welcomed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Headbomb. Those cases are a minority, and they are currently ignored by my bot (2nd bullet above in the special considerations). I agree that the solution would usually be to keep only one text (that's what WPCleaner gives as suggestion when used in manual mode), but I'm not ready yet to do it automatically (I'm not sure there are no cases where the 2 texts should be kept). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 06:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Headbomb. To support my remark, there's for example Telomere, where the modification to [[Thymine|T]][[Thymine|T]] and [[Guanine|G]][[Guanine|G]][[Guanine|G]] should keep all the text and not remove doubled text. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 06:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Headbomb: Is my answer enough? Or do you want me to advertise this modification (personally, I don't see problems with my request) somewhere else, but where? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:29, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just out of curiosity, NicoV, I notice that the last two hits (İZBAN and Śūnyatā) involve double-links where the second is also a punctuation. Were this task and Task 12 be approved, would the fix be done in one edit or would it require two? Primefac (talk) 22:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Primefac. Currently, my bot ignore the cases where there's only a punctuation in one of the texts (last bullet above in the special considerations): I will see afterwards if I can extend this fix for some cases of punctuations. When tasks are approved, I always combine them together so that all approved fixes are done in one edit when possible: so if both tasks would result in a modification, the modifications would be combined in one edit (like this edit). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 06:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
{{BAG assistance needed}}. Hello, any decision or answer about my request? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 18:52, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Headbomb wanted wider discussion, and it does look like you answered one of their questions above. I guess I'll wait until they reply. Primefac (talk) 00:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: no particular objections against trialling at this time since the cases I pointed out are ignored by the bot. I don't have time to review anything in particular however, so proceed at your discretion. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:25, 13 April 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/WikiCleanerBot_13&oldid=951966122"