This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I was a frequent user of AWB for a while, but my Windows PC gave up on me and I switched to a Mac, where AWB isn't supported. I know my way around a computer and very basic coding but I never experimented with virtual machines or boot camp or anything of the sort. AWB apparently works on Mac through using some form of virtualization software and since the ones recommended on the FAQ are paid I decided to try VirtualBox, but as I feared I didn't have a clear idea on how to proceed and I didn't want to screw anything up so I would unbelievably appreciate it if anyone with a little bit more computing intellect than me can guide me through not doing anything dumb and still successfully getting AWB again, thanks! GN-z11☎★21:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
@GN-z11: Still need help? Here's a How-To Geek article on how to set up a Windows virtual machine on a Mac using VirtualBox. I've done this successfully (not too difficult), although I haven't actually tried running AWB on it (I use it for other purposes). If you're willing to pay for a more user-friendly experience, Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion are also viable alternatives. —k6ka🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:38, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Replacing text
I need this to replace all instances of English: (translation) with transl. (translation). That is because B.Bhargava Teja has been making many disruptive IP edits such as this, and many have been overlooked. What I want to do for example is, replace (English:Travellers) with (transl.Travellers). That has already been manually done for Caravan, but I used it here to show what I mean. Hope somebody can help. --Kailash29792(talk)05:27, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
If they are all listed like your example, you will want to replace
Hi. My request for AWB was approved today. I downloaded AWB and tried to test it out. I set all the options and selected the only page as COVID-19 pandemic in Boston. When I hit Start, it said "No pages in list. Please press 'make list' to add pages." Please help me solve this. Qwerty325 (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Qwerty325: How did you "select" the page? The easiest way for one page is to type the title into the box just below Make List, then click the + button to the right of that box to add the article to the empty list. Certes (talk) 21:08, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
@Certes: I added a page using the + to the list then hit Start. I tried this again but this time I had noticed that the Skipped value was increasing every time I tried this. I went to the Skip page and unchecked the things that were checked. Then I tried again and it worked. What was in the page that resulted in it skipping it the first few times? Qwerty325 (talk) 21:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Each box on the Skip tab can be a reason for skipping. For example, suppose you haven't set up anything that would change this article. (Maybe you're replacing "sppeling" by "spelling", but "sppeling" doesn't occur in that article.) If "No changes are made" are checked then AWB quietly moves on to the next page in the list, or stops if it has reached the end of the list (as it will here because only one article is listed). If you uncheck that box then you'll get a "No changes" message in the diff area and AWB will wait for you to click Skip manually. If you have set up something which you expected to change that article but it didn't, please post the details here and someone may be able to identify the problem. For example, you may have used a regular expression which does not do exactly what you intended. Certes (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
That's short for "general fixes". It means miscellaneous tidying like removing spaces at ends of lines. These are often cosmetic edits and their value is a matter of opinion. Many editors feel that they are worth making when already editing the page to make more substantive changes, but refrain from saving an edit with only cosmetic changes to avoid cluttering the edit history. For this reason, AWB has an option to skip saving pages in which only genfixes were made. Certes (talk) 15:36, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense. One last question: Is it better to have that box (Skip genfixes) checked or unchecked in the Skip tab? -- Qwerty325 (talk) 15:53, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Typically better to have it checked. Even if you don't care about whether you make cosmetic edits alone or not (you should care per general bot policy and AWB rules), usually you have some task with AWB you want to do. When you are trying to do that task, making changes to pages which are general fixes only is a waste of your personal time. --Izno (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Element ordering
AWB moves redirects before short descriptions even though WP:ORDER states that short description should be first.
AWB converts hyphen-minus (-) to endash (−), as you can see here. However, we only use it (-) in Turkish. So this change is wrong. Is there a way to turn off dash->en dash edits in the trwiki? --ToprakM✉21:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Is there a way to merge rules
Hello, so I ignorantly thought that my find/replace rules were stored in a central settings file. I've created other settings files and have since added new find/replace rules to those settings files, and now I realise that they did not propagate to my default list. Soooo, does anyone know of a simple way to merge rules from one file to another and pull out duplicates? I figured I'd see if there was an easy way to do this before I copy/paste the content from one XML file to another. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
Skipping recently edited pages
There are sometimes errors that I search for that are often a component of text that in the short term is likely to be removed/reverted. Is there any way to, say, skip pages that have been edited within the last 36 hours? Neils51 (talk) 02:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
adding wikiproject banners
I have been adding wikiproject banners on talkpages using a module (given below). I've added more than 2000 banners with that module, an I am having only one issue: when there is {{WikiProject Banner Shell| present, sometimes the banner is added outside that shell: special:diff/843217671. But this is not always the case. Most of the times, it is added inside the shell. Sometimes if the banner shell is missing the parameter |1= in it, then it is added successfully: special:diff/969699784. I am not sure whats causing the issue. I looked through the source code of pages (with successful, and problematic edits); but I couldnt find anything. I mean, I looked in the code of pages which had banner shells and yet the project banner was placed outside the shell. Code of both the pages looked similar to me.
Here is the regex/module I've been using:
public string ProcessArticle(string ArticleText, string ArticleTitle, int wikiNamespace, out string Summary, out bool Skip)
{
Regex header = new Regex(@"\{\{{WikiProject Organized crime|{{WikiProject Organized Crime|{{WikiProject Fictional characters|{{Comicsproj|{{WikiProject Film|{{Film|{{WikiProject Video games|{{WikiProject Television|{{WPTV|{{WP Fictional|{{WikiProject Novels|{{WikiProject Anime|{{TelevisionWikiProject|{{WPFILM|{{WikiProject Songs|{{WP film|{{WPBooks|{{WikiProject Cities|{{NovelsWikiProject", RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
Summary = "Added banner for [[WP:WikiProject Organized Crime]]";
Skip = (header.Match(ArticleText).Success || !Namespace.IsTalk(ArticleTitle));
if (!Skip)
ArticleText = "{{WikiProject Organized Crime}} \r" + ArticleText;
return ArticleText;
}
Is there any way to tell/force the AWB to place the banner inside the shell if the shell is already present? I skimmed through Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Regular expression, but couldn't find a solution.
I am trying to get a bot approved for adding wikiproject banners. Is there any method through which I can successfully create an AWB bot to add wikiproject banners? Any method is welcome as long as it can used with bot flag. While I was looking for a solution, I came across User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects. There I found this:
Is there any way to use above code to find a solution? Also pinging @Koavf, Primefac, Xaosflux, and Cabayi: as they have experience with AWB, and coding in general. Anybody's help would be appriciated a lot. —usernamekiran (talk)08:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: thanks for the speedy response. Can you think of any other way than regex? I will surely try VPT if I dont get a solution here. Thanks, —usernamekiran (talk)08:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
I know (again) I'm late to the party, but if you're just adding a header, why not just use a simple find/replace to put it inside WPBS? No need for a module. Primefac (talk) 22:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Software translation
Hello. Can I translate the software into Hebrew? Get the source code and translate the words? Thank you! עמד (talk) 20:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that the download binary version 6.1.0.1 (12353) is almost a year old. Is there a logic to when you release a new version for binary-only users? I merged the short description ordering fix from a later version and having no problems otherwise, so I'm just curious. Also I think it'd be helpful for nosy people like me to label the actual released version somehow in addition to (apparently) labeling the start of the new sequence of updates. David Brooks (talk) 14:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Open text selection in browser
Moved from /Bugs per discussion above.
Usually when i do this to open a site and verify a ref title or some such it works perfectly; about once out of each six or eight times, however, it opens a tab of my browser (Firefox 74.0.1 currently, though it's done this for absolutely ages) in WP and tries to open the page there. Obviously this create an error, as we don't have a page at "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714165900/http://www.tempomilwaukee.org/assets/documents/upbeat%7carchive-date%3d2014-07-14". But why did AWB do this, instead of trying to open "https://web.archive.org/web/20140714165900/http://www.tempomilwaukee.org/assets/documents/upbeat%7carchive-date%3d2014-07-14" which is what the selected text was? It's a minor inconvenience, but it annoys me and i can't see what (if anything) i have done or should be doing differently. As i say, it only happens sometimes, but there is no difference at all in mine actions between the correct result and the incorrect; happy days, LindsayHello 10:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
@LindsayH: I am not sure this is a bug or even if it is whether there is anything that can be done with it. Please take a note of the pages and text you have found this issue with (and possibly the pages you have not). --Izno (talk) 17:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Izno; sorry for the small delay in coming back here ~ i've been dealing with a broken heart issue (hospital-type, not romantic-type) and haven't edited at all. I anticipate editing with AWB tomorrow; if the error happens i will return here with a report. Thanks, happy days, LindsayHello19:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Your corrected link leads to a "page not found" error on the university website, so is that what you think the correct URL is? In the revision of the article yesterday the page reports a URL error for that citation (an editor has since corrected it). Sounds to me like the error is that when the URL is invalid AWB doesn't open it correctly, which is hardly surprising? Thanks Rjwilmsi08:44, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, i agree, it does go to a "page not found", which is why i corrected it in the same edit in which i found the issue (Kahtar is an alternate account of mine). I reported it here because it is the first time i have had this error since i was asked to note it. And, no, the "page not found" is not why AWB didn't open it correctly, because the very first time i mentioned this, the link i gave was an accurate one, which i was able to manually open by deleting the extraneous "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=" it had added to the URL it tried to open (see mine opening post, above). Hope i'm being clearer; happy days, LindsayHello09:10, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
OK, the AWB logic is that if the text isn't a valid URL then it's assumed to be a wiki page. In rev 12425 I've changed that to always treat the text as a URL if it starts with HTTP (case insensitive). However, how/whether the browser will open an invalid URL (in this instance: with a space in it) will depend on your browser's behaviour, so while we won't treat HTTP links as wiki pages, they may still not open as expected. Rjwilmsi10:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Great, thanks, Rjwilmsi; that (not treating HTTP links as wiki pages) is all i was asking about. 'Twas just chance that the example i gave the other day was an invalid URL; usually it was a valid one, so if it doesn't happen any longer...i'm happy ; happy days, LindsayHello06:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Um, a little late to this, but the fix in 12425 means that opening a text selection of http, or http 404, or... (you get the idea) will silently fail instead of displaying the desired article - Process.Start() throws an exception that gets swallowed. Not often encountered, I know, but easy to correct by RE-matching ^\s*https?:// or the equivalent string comparisons. David Brooks (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
If you mean the "Start" button, the reason isn't because of your OS but rather because you need to apply for permission first in order to use the program to actually make changes. This requires making an account to give said permission to, and even then you probably won't be accepted until you have at least a few hundred edits. Ionmars10 (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Often see edit-summaries that look like they are doing nothing
Perhaps this is just annoying to me but on the watchlist, I often see AWB summaries that look like they are doing nothing (eg. [1] "(clean up, replaced: 9 million → 9 million))" Is not 9 million the same as 9 million.). Can that be bettered? Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
In that example, a simple space is being replaced by a non-breaking space for good reason, but I agree that's not too obvious from the summary. David Brooks (talk) 19:47, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
I am often coming across articles which are making AWB go "restarting in <countdown timer>". For example: Hans Langsdorff, and Nalbari district. AWB is successfully processing the pages, it gets "ready to save", and then upon hitting "save"/ctrl+S, it says "restarting in 30 seconds". That timer increases with every attempt, but the edit never gets saved. Is anybody facing similar problem? These articles have URLs without http by the way. —usernamekiran (talk)07:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Institute
I have just had 'Institute' become 'ie'. The intention was probably to remove the cap. Need to report this in Phabricator, my regex skills are a little rusty? Neils51 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
That looks like "the institute" rule from Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos. I've made a basic fix but the intention may have been more subtle. Certes (talk) 14:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
@Neils51: I can see the problem and have probably fixed it but am having difficulty testing the fix. Can you name a page where the problem occurred? Certes (talk) 14:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The linktrail on English Wikipedia is apparently lower case ASCII letters a through z. AWB attempts to simplify links without taking this into account. For example, process Cleavage (breasts) with general fixes, and it attempts to change [[bra|brassières]] to [[bra]]ssières. Instead of displaying as "brassières", this change would cause the incorrect "brassières". (AWB version 6.1.0.1, SVN 12353) MANdARAX•XAЯAbИAM21:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Oops! They're going to be hard to find without searching a dump. A quick sample check reveals quite a few cases but not resulting from AWB. There was a brief discussion at VPT in 2013 on changing $linkTrail. Certes (talk) 22:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Please bump the released version
To emphasize a comment above: some (very) experienced editors using AWB genfixes are still pushing short description under hatnotes without noticing. Not all of the users are source-capable, I think. Can you bump the downloaded binary? David Brooks (talk) 21:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Just to put some meat on this: I reviewed the most recent 1,000 AWB-tagged edits. Of them, 35 of the edited articles had a short description out-of-order; of those 35, there were 5 that seemed to have been pushed down by a genfix during that edit, and 2 that seemed to have been re-ordered manually. The remaining 28 have the potential to be auto-fixed by the unreleased genfix code. In addition, there were 144 where the short description was kept on top, usually because there were no subsequent hatnotes to be flipped upwards.
I usually remember to double-click the short description in the left and right diff panels to restore it to the top, but I expect I've forgotten more than once. Certes (talk) 17:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I usually restore it as well, but have noticed later I've missed it on occasion. It also slows me down by having to Skip because that is the ONLY change. MB20:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Talk about a cosmetic, unnecessary edit. If and when the issue is resolved, it can be dealt with in the course of dealing with more pertinent issues. This is hardly worth a specific run. Primefac (talk) 19:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
We may have different ideas of what's "cosmetic": if an editor makes an article conform to the Manual of Style with respect to Short Description and hatnotes ordering, then later it's edited with AWB and genfixes on, the article will no longer conform. I think MOS goes a little beyond cosmetic. And I wasn't clear in the above: the issue was resolved last November (change 12363); it just hasn't been prop'd. I've been making a private build of 12426 available to some active AWB users, which isn't an ideal choice. David Brooks (talk) 20:21, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Likely; I'm coming at it from a bot/BAG perspective (see WP:COSMETIC), wherein the changes mentioned above do not alter the "reader-facing" side of the page, do not change any categorization on the backend, and only changes the wikitext. I'm not saying it cannot be fixed by the patched/new release of AWB, I'm saying that going through purely to change the order of the templates will be problematic if done at a high rate. Primefac (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the formal definition of cosmetic; I understand your reluctance better now. Still, given the manual's invitation for technically-adept users to sync with source daily, I still feel comfortable making a private build available to some less-technical users (if they trust me to dispense binaries). David Brooks (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Would a temporary regex rule to replace (.*)(\{\{short description\|.*?\}\}) by $2$1 after fixes be useful? (Not tested; actual working regex may differ.) Certes (talk) 17:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Nice idea. I think (.+)(\{\{short.?description\|.*?}}\n) would work, with the SingleLine option. I started with (.+) to avoid a null edit, and the .? covers some redirects. Note this would (properly) lift the SD from anywhere in the article, while AWB just re-orders Section 0 -- I do the same in a module anyway. David Brooks (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Just to hop in here - it is not just the ordering that is required but the change to handle date fixes in 2020 which are not happening at the moment. (T242103). Keith D (talk) 12:47, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
whenever I am trying to start AWB, first I am getting error "the operation has timed out" under window title "network access error". After clicking ok, I get "Object reference not set to an instance of an object." followed by following this in the same dialogue box:
**description**:
**workaround**:
--------------------------
<table><tr><th>Exception:</th><td>`NullReferenceException`</td></tr>
<tr><th>Message:</th><td>`Object reference not set to an instance of an object.`</td></tr>
<tr><th>Call stack:</th><td><pre> at AutoWikiBrowser.MainForm.SetProject(String code, ProjectEnum project, String customProject, String protocol)
at AutoWikiBrowser.MainForm.LoadPrefs(UserPrefs p)
at AutoWikiBrowser.MainForm.LoadPrefs(String path)</td></tr>
</table>
**OS**: Microsoft Windows NT 6.2.9200.0
**version**: AutoWikiBrowser (6.1.0.1), WikiFunctions (6.1.0.1), revision 12353 (2019-09-17 21:16:42)
**net**: 4.0.30319.42000
**duplicate**:
**site**: https://en.wikipedia.org
```
AWBPlugins
- Kingbotk Plugin
AWBBasePlugins
ListMakerPlugins
```
I hate to admit that as someone who used to own a machine running Windows NT (4.0, apparently) I did not realize they kept the name but dropped the marketing. Primefac (talk) 16:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
According to the Phab task which implemented AWB 6.0, the required .NET version is 4.5. You may need to update that first. --Izno (talk) 12:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
I got this error on windows 10, and the .NET version is above 4.5. It was working fine till a couple days ago, and I got this error without any changes in my computer system. —usernamekiran (talk)18:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
update: I successfully logged in, and made two edits; without making any changes to the system. —usernamekiran (talk)17:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Just a weird observation: whenever I am trying to use AWB without enabling VPN, I am getting this error. Maybe an issue with my ISP? —usernamekiran (talk)20:19, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Misplaced sign when space is used as the thousands separator
Thanks for clarifying. According to the following regex search, it may still happen in some articles: [5] That search takes some time and gives the "timed out" warning but manages to give a few results. That search is for the € sign, but there're probably more similar signs that have the same problem. Maybe disable the sign repositioning for the [0-9] [0-9][0-9][0-9]€'s and leave it on for the [^0-9] [0-9][0-9][0-9]€'s or something. 85.76.16.175 (talk) 22:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I'd like go through a list of pages categorized as essays but missing {{essaysort}} on their talk page. I don't know how to set this up in AWB, but it's reflected in the PetScan queries linked here. Is there any way to import those to AWB? {{u|Sdkb}}talk00:16, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Sdkb, if you have a way of converting the list into plaintext (i.e. each line contains *just* the page name), you should be able to just copy-paste it into AWB's page list area. If not, you could set the output format in PetScan to "Wiki", copy that and paste it into some page in your userspace, and then use the "Links on page" search type in AWB. Ionmars10 (talk) 00:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
It might be worth asking for a "simple list" option to be added to PetScan's output formats. I'm sure that would be a trivial enhancement, which I would also find useful. I currently request a .tsv then use a pre-canned regex to have my text editor remove all but the second column. Certes (talk) 11:12, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Is that have any method to make a list to Special:UnconnectedPages with the namespace available to select, recently an user created some article then connects to Wikidata which leaves those pages in the list. If is's possible it will be better to create a list and do a null edit for those pages to clean up those items. Shinjiman ⇔ ♨04:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Connection errors
A few days ago I was able to connect via AWB and work with it in a private wiki (a few thousand changes). Only one day later I get another error, so no connection.
The wiki is a 1.34.0 i tested AWB 6.1.0.1, 5.10.1.0 both give the same error. The error text varies depending on the protocol and IE access: http://cloud.go-designs.de/s/A2CHPiwM3PrGmG7.
I also tested different workstations with different operating systems to avoid having a misdirected firewall rule causing this.
I'm not sure if it's a common mistake and how to fix it. I've always had mistakes before, but as I said I was able to work with them that day without any problems. I only had some problems with the user before, that was solvable by creating a new one for tests.
I created an internal rebuild of the wiki by just using the database. it uses the default settings in LocalSettings. It doesn't workes either. On a later test it could login, as long the application was open it works several hundred changes. after restarting AWB, the error comes back. So i would like to reask, any ideas which setting could force this or any way how i could skip the tests? An older version (1.33) seems to work always. -- Gunnar.offel (talk) 06:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
I have the same issue on an independent wiki. This happened suddenly, with no changes made to the wiki's or AWB's settings. I'm surprised this is barely reported. And even though I'm using the latest version, the "Check for updates" option literally tells me it fails even though it should just tell me I'm up-to-date. Klow (talk) 19:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
List generator: feature request
Can be usefule a list generator tool to generate list of pages:
The tool must generate 2 indipendent lists, generated with the usual source of AWB (List 1 and List 2) then the output must be:
Problem using CheckWiki error numbers to build page list
Using AWB with Simple English Wikipedia, I'm unable to load a list of pages via the "CheckWiki error (number)" option. When I try, I get the following message:
Network access error
The remote server returned an error: (308) Permanent Redirect.
I've had the same error with two different CheckWiki error ID numbers. Do I need to open something on Phabricator, or does anyone know what is causing this? It does look like task T257689, but I don't see how to apply that fix to what I'm seeing. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Auntof6: That fix will be released whenever Reedy does a release of AWB. Reedy Would it be possible to have a slightly more-regular timeline on releases in general? Like, once every 1/2/3/4/6 months or something? --Izno (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Author's response - Yep. I am logged in with a bot account. I feel like I also should mention that this is on a Fandom wiki (which I properly linked, as I was able to save pages manually). 62.122.233.124 (talk) 18:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I think AWB tags an article as an orhpan if there are three, or less incoming links. The definition/criteria has been changed now to zero links. Is there a way to change this in installed AWB, or is the definition controlled by the devs, and not by end user/installation? —usernamekiran (talk)04:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I am completely unfamiliar with the use of any automated tools, but an orphan article is an article with zero incoming links. So, any automated tool that encourages tagging articles with one, two or three incoming links as "orphans" should be modified or disabled. Cullen328Let's discuss it05:02, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The AWB setting "Options > Restrict orphan tag addition to linkless pages" should be ticked by all editors using AWB on the English-language Wikipedia. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:26, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
@John of Reading: But that restricts the addition entirely. I think if an article is orphan, then it should be tagged as an orphan. Otherwise there is a very high chances of these article literally being forgotten, and ending up at WP:Forgotten Articles. We should tag them to integrate in the encyclopaedia :) —usernamekiran (talk)10:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran and John of Reading: Looking at the code (Taggers.cs line 766 ff), the above inferences seem correct, except that the default is <3 (not <=3). And, yes, it's 0 if the option is set. And no action if you're Swedish. And it tries to remove an orphan tag if there are 3 or more links. David Brooks (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
reading an external file on a local drive
Possible?
I want to have awb ingest a local copy of the IANA language-subtag-registry file, parse that apart, format appropriate data, and then replace the content of the several lua modules:
The registry file is periodically updated so the process now is to fetch a copy, put it in a sandbox, and then run Module:Language/data/iana languages/make. Then it's copy pasta to update the various modules. Would be nice to automate that more. Can awb open and read that external file? If so, tips on how to accomplish this?
Got it working (User:Trappist the monk/IANA subtag registry file update); now to wait for the next update. While writing this script, and because my ignorance of c# is profound, I spent a bit of time on the internets for tips about how to do this or about how to do that. On one such visit I stumbled upon WebClient with which it is apparently possible to read the content of a webpage. This seems a better solution than using my browser to download and save the language-subtag-registry file. Is it possible for a custom module to read the IANA language-subtag-registry file directly from the web? Any working examples that I can adapt to this use?
The simplified (modern) way is string buffer = (new HttpClient()).GetStringAsync(url).Result; But you need additional lines if you want to set a UserAgent. And you may need to precede that with ServicePointManager.SecurityProtocol = SecurityProtocolType.Tls12; because AWB uses framework 4.5 which defaults to TLS 1.1, although I think AWB will have already set the protocol globally. Don't be confused by the "Async" part of the name; the Result property forces a synchronous wait. One could also use the older HttpWebRequest mechanism, but I don't think you can do that in one line. David Brooks (talk) 16:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
ETA: Oh, smacking my head for not testing in situ. It looks like an AWB module can't handle System.Net.Http.HttpClient() because AWB didn't include the DLL reference. You'll have to use WebClient after all. Working up some code. David Brooks (talk) 16:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
You are most welcome. There are a couple of ways it could have been more elegant, but I had to get to an appointment as soon as I got it working. Obviously the User Agent can be any string; that depends on what IANA would prefer you do. David Brooks (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
And just now, IANA updated the language-subtag-registry file so I have used the script to update the Lua modules. So much easier, thanks. Apparently webRequest.UserAgent has to be set to something (either for c# or for IANA, don't know which). According to our article about the user-agent header, Google will be deprecating the header in their browsers; I had hoped that an empty string or space character would suffice. Alas, no. So I'll give it a bot-like user-agent header (or I could, maybe, spoof an old Netscape 1.2 on Windows 3.1 as user agent ...)
Yes; if you don't set the UserAgent, IANA returns a 403 error with content "Status 403 Forbidden: User-Agent required. Contact iana@iana.org with questions". Given that "please set the string to something that suggests who you are and what you are doing" is in the MW API, I guess that's what IANA wants too. It should probably be more informative, and sorry I didn't explain that. David Brooks (talk) 15:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Full time
I am not reporting this as a bug because I am not certain whether it is a problem with AWB or a problem with the users editing it, but I have now had to revert two different editors, one claiming to use AWB, who are automatically changing the phrase "full time" into "full-time" even in situations where it is inappropriate, and together have made three times the same bad edit to the same article. This change should only be made when the next word after the phrase is a noun, as part of a noun adjunct phrase. When "full time" is used as a standalone adjective-noun phrase, for instance as the subject or object of a sentence or the object of a preposition, it should not be hyphenated. If the software cannot understand such distinctions in grammar it should not be making this change. If it is indeed a bug in AWB itself, I would appreciate it if someone would report it in the appropriate channels.
Meanwhile, is there some way of locking out all AWB changes to an article until an issue like this is fixed? I don't see instructions for that on WP:AWB and it seems like an important capability to have. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
You might try {{bots|deny=AWB}}. I don't know if that works for awb users who are not bots but I suspect that you'll find out soon enough.
Thanks, I've added that. We should at least find out if it doesn't work. Harder to tell whether it works or whether the people who troll recent changes for AWB-worthy gnomery have moved on to new ground. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:16, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
David Eppstein, As an editor who has watched your page for 3 years plus now, I don’t think I have ever seen you this upset. I’d say the problem is partly both with AWB software itself & AWB users blindly trusting the software to a fault. You have made this point & as I said earlier I appreciate your frustration, as an English tutor myself i totally understand your point, which is grammatically absolutely correct. In the end I think AWB users shouldn’t 100% trust the software & clearly we have to double check before saving the edits. I saw your post on Captain Raju’s tp & I concur with you that blindly trusting the software isn’t a good idea. I too am guilty of this & moving forward I won’t be so blindly trusting anymore. Don’t get yourself worked up David, from your tone I sense frustration and rightfully so, but like I said please do calm down. Celestina007 (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
I just tried to use awb to delete all text in Lisa Lix but awb saw the {{bots|deny=AWB}} and skipped the article.
David Eppstein, wrap phrases you know to be correct in {{not a typo}}, which AWB will respect by default (and friends such as {{sic}}). Whether editors on a mission with their own handwritten changes will is a different story (and it's generally hard to tell if users are rolling their own or using the AWB typo fixer). You should be able to remove the bots template accordingly. --Izno (talk) 22:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the more targeted workaround. Regardless of the ability to work around this issue in isolated cases, it still should be the case that software does not change that which it does not understand. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
This isn't really the software's fault. The rules of use for AWB clearly state that users are responsible for all edits and all parts of each edit. If you're catching people making an incorrect typo-fix, either they didn't know it was wrong (in which case they need education regardless of tool use) or didn't check the edit fully (which means they need to slow down). The AWB typo module in particular defaults to off and, if I recall correctly, when enabled it tells people that they need to be super careful because likely typos are context-sensitive. (I never run with it on as a matter of fact because it can be so distracting to check every part of every edit. Probably the wiki's loss, but I have other stuff to do, which is why I'm using AWB I'm the first place myself.)
If you really think this is not a change the module should ever recommend at all when turned on, the list of typo fixes is at WP:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos (where indeed a regex pattern for this change appears, leading me to believe the user in question was using the typos module), which is subject to the consensus process of course. That said, I think this is not a case which should be removed from there. --Izno (talk) 00:54, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
The change code in .../Typos in question, as far as I can tell, is this:
<Typo word="(Full/Part)-time" find="\b([fF]ull|[pP]art)\s?time\b(?![−―–—\s]limit)(?<!at full time)" replace="$1-time"/><!--avoid "at full time" in association football articles-->
It looks like it avoids "at full time" but needs more limits on when it does a replacement. David Eppstein, do you have links to any inappropriate edits that changed "full time" to "full-time"? – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
It is obviously not reasonable to say that it's not AWB's fault and that users should be carefully checking all of their edits, because obviously the users are not and have not been checking all their edits. As for diffs: the three from today that frustrated me so much by wasting my time undoing repeated automated mistakes: Lix 1Lix 2Lix 3, and two more that I found from much earlier by searching for similar strings that were incorrectly hyphenated: Curb Racing from July 2016 and Daytona from March 2016. Also note that none of these articles has anything to do with association football, that association football's use of "full-time" rather than "full time" when this phrase is used as a noun appears rather grammatically idiosyncratic to me (I can't say whether it is correct for football but it is too far removed from mainstream hyphenation rules to be incorporated into AWB without safeguards that it only apply to football articles) and that these are four different people supposedly responsible for the same mistake. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:28, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Don't know what to tell you then, as I've already told you how to resolve this. The rules of use are clear on the point on who/what is responsible for each change. --Izno (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I have removed the regex pending a more specific replacement pattern. I think that it would be reasonable to have a replacement that targeted specific phrases like "full time work" and "full time students", but a search for "full time" in article space shows too many potential incorrect replacements and judgement calls. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
And as for this, a search now is survivor bias, not an indication that a change like this is needed. --Izno (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I have no way of knowing. There are still many instances of "full time" being used incorrectly, but too many of them require significant evaluation of the context, a strong grammatical mind, or both. Someone with those qualities could make it a pet project, just as editors have adopted the phrase "comprised of" and similar bugbears. I do not see this as a case for a general-purpose typo script that shows evidence of careless use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
@Izno: The rules certainly do not make me, as a non-user of AWB, the responsible party for dealing with repeated problems on the part of AWB users. Your position would lead to the conclusion that, when AWB users have been demonstrated to have failed in their responsibility for checking edits, they should have their AWB privileges rescinded. Would you like to propose doing so for the four editors whose diffs are listed above? Or perhaps would you think it a better alternative for AWB not to include regexps likely to become problematic in this way? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
undent: when AWB users have been demonstrated to have failed in their responsibility for checking edits, they should have their AWB privileges rescinded. Yes, that's how it works, after there is sufficient cause for it. Have they been informed they made errors as expected on a collaborative project and have they continued to do so? No? Move along then. You got what you wanted, and I have no taste for reverting, even though I think it was wrong to do so. --Izno (talk) 01:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
AWB marking "middle ages" (not head-capped) as a "typo"?
Hi! Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this. (I'll take it elsewhere if so.)
I don't use this tool myself, but I just now noticed that a number of edits I've had to revert over and over again were apparently tagged as having been performed with AWB.[6][7][8][9][10] The two times I can recall taking this issue to a talk page (the first and second times it happened) it was not explained to me that the edit and the edit summary had been generated semi-automatically despite my actually demonstrating my own ignorance of automatically-generated edit summaries several times. (I should probably apologize for assuming back then that I was dealing with disruptive IDHT behaviour by someone who had already been told to stop, but in my defense I didn't know a semi-automated tool was directing these edits to be made, and again no one seems to have told me that this was the case.)
Given that, even with the European Middle Ages, capitalization is apparently not universal, if AWB is directing people to fix the "typo", it should probably be amended not to do so...
I tried to edit using AWB, but a window saying Restarting in (seconds) pops up, and I can't edit any more. How can I fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.239.25.66 (talk) 05:43, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I am not an AWB user, so please forgive my ignorance of it. However, I have been an editor since 2007 and have been actively working to reduce the number of articles with Too Few Winkilinks tags. The list in Community Portal used to have 20,000 articles, but is down now to 4500 articles thanks to everyone's efforts.
What I have noticed is that a sizeable percentage of articles on this list have been one or two sentence stubs that have tagged by someone using AWB. The majority of these articles have one or two Wikilinks already, but do not need anymore. People are not taking the time to view each article objectively. If you look at Category:Articles with too few wikilinks from October 2020 you will find dozens of one-sentence stub articles on different species of beetles. I have encountered ever more of these tagged beetle stubs in the past, along with ones on crayfish, spiders, and other categories.
Could the logic for adding the tag be changed to a apply a threshhold of wikilinks per kilobyte rather than (or as well as) a simple count? Certes (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Certes's approach. But then we need to define the "content of article" which should exclude (the size of) categories, def sort, auth ctrl, and other templates/stuff, AWB can readily identify refs. —usernamekiran (talk)11:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I think it's useful as-is. Not only does this tagging promote linking, it also promotes expansion of the article (which might be more than you're used to doing, working on Category:All articles with too few wikilinks (1)). By diluting the {{Underlinked}} pool with some per-size denominator, or some other mechanism, you're also suggesting that 1-2 sentence stubs can't ever be expanded beyond that.
Last time I checked, AWB did not consider links in {{Automatic Taxobox}} and {{Speciesbox}} templates in its calculations like it does with {{Taxobox}}. If it did that, many of the unnecessary {{Underlinked}} tags would be prevented. Changing from {{Taxobox}} to {{Automatic Taxobox}} in an article can result in an underlinked tag, even if the change does not affect the appearance of the article. As it is now, editors sometimes add links to common terms such as "North America" in order to remove the underlinked tag. Bob Webster (talk) 14:16, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Agree that some improvement should be made. The underlinked tag is the only one I frequently remove before saving, when it is applied to a one or two line stub. MB15:45, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't disagree with something like a "Restrict {{Underlinked}} tag addition to larger pages" option, though, similar to the currently-used "Restrict orphan tag addition to linkless pages". ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)12:20, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Searching for precise wikitext
I'd like to make an AWB list of all article pages that contain the exact string {{abbr|Ref.|Reference(s)}}, but using the search function doesn't seem to be working for that. Could anyone help? Much appreciated, {{u|Sdkb}}talk03:24, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
@Sdkb: If you do "Wiki search (text)" for insource:"abbr Ref Reference s", I think that gets you what you want. SchreiberBike | ⌨
I would do insource:/\{\{[Aa]bbr *\| *[Rr]ef\. *\| *[Rr]eference\(s\) *\}\}/
If you want exactly that, and not spacing/caps variations, then insource:/\{\{abbr\|ref\.|reference\(s\)\}\}/
In March of 2018 there was this discussion. More than two years on, is it true that awb does not allow edit summaries to be longer than 247 characters?
I'm now working on category pages on zh.wiktionary. I want to remove all the categories in a page, then add a single template on it. Can this be achieved with AWB? --TongcyDai (talk) 05:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Are custom typo lists possible?
Is there any way I can set it to use a custom typo list rather than the standard WP:AWB/T list? I periodically use AWB to clean up the typos and malformattings that have crept into London-related articles. Because the City and the Corporation are both heavily-used proper names when it comes to London (the City is a district, the Corporation is a local government body, and as such there are literally thousands of articles including phrases like "he worked in the City" where the capitalization is correct), the current capitalization rule is generating huge numbers of false positives. I don't want to edit it out of the main list as in almost every other context this fix is going to be correct, but it would be really convenient if it were possible to use a custom regex list from which I could remove the rule(s) that are causing issues, without having to edit the main list and mess up everybody else's workflow. ‑ Iridescent11:27, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
@Iridescent: Shorter answer: No, I'm not aware of any way to use a custom list in place of the WP:AWB/T list.
Longer answer: If this rule is going to damage thousands of articles, it should be corrected or disabled. Even if you were able to switch to a different typo list, everyone else will still be using the standard list. They may not be aware of the exceptions, and, dare I say it, not all AWB users are sufficiently careful. For example, I've watchlisted every article that uses the term "Kampfgeschwader" because its abbreviation "KG" is damaged by the AWB/T kilogram rule. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
@John of Reading: all pages containing "Kampfgeschwader" should no longer be under threat of mis-typoing KG, mostly due to rule changes, making it more robust against false positives. Only 1 instance of {{not a typo}} was necessary (for 1940. {{not a typo|KG 51}} on Kampfgeschwader 51); no other FPs at this time. We can sleep easier at night now (I have several obscure minor planets on my watchlist for this and other SI rules). ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)00:57, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I would love to use a custom typo list. Amongst other uses, it would be a great way to test a typo before adding it to the official list. Certes (talk) 12:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
@Certes: The AWB Find+Replace dialog can be used to configure personal typo rules; I have several thousand. If you use it to test a possible addition to WP:AWB/T, AWB makes it easy to reformat the rule as required: Select the rule in the Find+Replace dialog, right click, and choose "Copy as RETF rule". AWB will copy to your clipboard the text that you'd need to add to the shared WP:AWB/T list. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
@Iridescent: Under "Normal Settings" in the AWB Find+Replace dialog you can create your entry and select "After Fixes". This means an entry can become an override to the supplied list, achieving what you are after unless I have misread your requirement. Of course there is a tick box to enable/disable as desired. John of Reading has alluded to this, however thought i would 'spell it out'. Neils51 (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
What I want is a way to temporarily disable the rule that attempts to replace "the City" with "the city". If I'm understanding you correctly, you're suggesting adding an additional rule to F&R to run afterwards replacing "the city" with "the City" thus cancelling it out and meaning no change—however, this would change instances that are correctly in lower-case and create even more false positives. Because the City is a centre (arguably the centre) of the global economy, there are literally thousands and probably tens of thousands of variations on "she worked in the City", "the road led to the City" etc—far too many to manually {{notatypo}} all of them. Under normal circumstances I'd just remove the regex in question from the list, but in this case I see that as a last resort as it would mean vast numbers of correct fixes being missed given that in any article that isn't about the City the replacement is likely to be correct. (The similar rule for "the Corporation" is also problematic—the Corporation is the body that governs the City—but isn't used as often so isn't generating as many false positives.) ‑ Iridescent08:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC):
@Iridescent: To 'temporarily disable' we can say 'have nil effect'. To to do that you could have a rule that runs pre-genfixes that converts "the City" to say "the CCIITTYY" then a rule that runs "After Fixes" that converts "the CCIITTYY" to "the City". This though only creates a global nil effect and you are preferably wanting to be selective, and without absolute criteria then that may not be possible without manual intervention. If undesired changes are regularly being made by AWB users then despite the numbers it may be worth creating a rule that moves "the City" to the template " the {{not a typo|Ci|ty|reason=cap is required}}" for AWB to ignore. Some mods may be a percentage game (and a long game) and sometimes you will get 80% of what you want and the remainder you may need to double-click to remove, which is easier than manually keying a correction. If many of the articles belong to particular categories then it may be worth asking for assistance with such a project's donkey work? - Neils51 (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Windows XP?
"AutoWikiBrowser requires Windows Vista or newer to edit on Wikimedia wikis. AutoWikiBrowser does not work on Windows XP as XP does not meet Wikimedia's security standards."
What's wrong with Windows XP? I am just asking before I download the AWB for another non-Wikimedia wiki.
For Wikimedia wikis there is a requirement for TLS 1.2 to be supported for the HTTPS connection and XP doesn't support it. Rjwilmsi14:44, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@Ionmars10: actually I'm using this AWB on Malay Wikipedia. I'd like to put stub category in all uncategorized stub so it'll be easier for us to expand bit by bit when we have the all of them in list. I'm not pretty familiar with all source code including regex things because I'm not major in it but would gladly accept if anyone would guide me about the stub. I'm currently using AWB for fixing grammar errors and and replace template only. CyberTroopers (talk) 04:56, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
CyberTroopers, so ms:Kategori:Tunas, correct? Well, what I'd recommend as a general strategy is finding groups of articles in a certain category, and applying a specific stub template. Over time, the size of the category (currently 66,660) can hopefully be whittled down to something less daunting through this method. I immediately see a lot of integer stubs, which should probably be moved over to ms:Kategori:Tunas_nombor. I suggest starting out with these just to get a feel for everything:
In the bottom left panel, set the source to "Wiki search (text)" and the query to: hastemplate:"tunas" incategory:"Integer" (If you're not familiar with these already, these search filters are part of CirrusSearch and return articles that have both the ordinary "tunas" template (or a redirect to it) and the "Integer" category)
In the panel to the right of that, go to Options -> Find and replace -> Normal settings
Select a row in the table and set the following options:
Find: {{(stub|tunas)}}
Replace with: {{tunas-nombor}}
Disable CaseSensitive, and enable Regex
What this particular regex does is that it catches either "stub" or "tunas" (which AFAIK are the only two common names for this template), surrounded by double curly brackets, and replaces it with ms:Templat:Tunas-nombor. If you want to experiment with regex there are tons of "regex tester" sites out there, all of which are easy to find with a quick web search.
Click OK, go to the start tab, and start processing!
This should knock out about 500 articles fairly quickly. For future runs, or if you're just not in the mood for cookie-cutter "number" articles at the moment, you can simply change the category name and the desired template, or you can try experimenting with some of the other options if necessary. Feel free to ask here if you have any more questions. Ionmars10 (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Random addition of "underlinked" cleanup tags
This needs to be stopped. I create many well sourced stubs on notable academics and many AWB users will dump an "underlinked" tag on such articles, even though it is not underlinked. See Raz Segal for an egregious example, just today an editor using AWB placed an underlinked tag, a third editor removed it, and [11]I dream of horses put it back. (t · c) buidhe03:18, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
I dream of horses, I know what underlinked is. But the article is not underlinked, there are no reasonable links to add to the prose (and the tag documentation itself states "there is no consensus on what constitutes "too few" links"). How does the tag on this article, or many others like it,[12][13][14][15][16] benefit the encyclopedia? (t · c) buidhe03:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Buidhe, ultimately, we need to have a consensus over what constitutes "too few links". Until then, I'm forced to be, on ocassion, borderline bold when deciding to tag an article with {{underlinked}}.
This isn't something that can be fixed by adding or removing code from AWB, but with a lack of communication within the community. Indeed, just removing the ability for AWB to automatically add {{underlinked}} could remove the motivation to start a discussion around consensus. I'm also a bit cynical about recruiting enough people to actually get a consensus. After all, this is a boring discussion. That's probably why there's no consensus.
Shall I say consensus one more time? Yes. Consensus. [Joke]
I would say this is underlinked, in a broader sense. There is no link to his place of birth or his nationality, because this information is not found in the article. There is no link to the institution(s) from which he received his education and degrees, because this information is also not found in the article. BD2412T07:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Citation parameter renaming
Hello User:Trappist the monk, User:John of Reading, I have had some pushback on the AWB general-fix to the renaming of citation parameters such as ‘accessdate’. A comment made (archived I think) was that the renaming was a long-term project to update citation parameter names. I feel that if the end-game intention is to have all citation styles use the revised parameter names then it would be worth documenting that the older ones are deprecated and that the desired use is the currently documented names. If the older names are merely documented as aliases then there will no impetus for change and the ‘long-term project’ will be decades. Defending the general-fix renaming is not an effective use of my time so unless this is addressed I will be one of possibly a number who will likely turn off general-fixes when using AWB, which I would prefer not to do. There appear to be two options, document that the previous names are deprecated, and therefore renaming is defensible, or remove citation parameter name renaming from AWB. Neils51 (talk) 04:06, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm afraid I've been one of the people pushing back. I turned off genfixes when unable to see the simple edit I was attempting in a diff with 281 accessdate changes. If the unhyphenated version is deprecated, would it be possible to remove accessdate from genfixes temporarily whilst a bot makes the bulk of the changes, or would WP:COSMETICBOT apply? Certes (talk) 11:49, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, WP:COSMETICBOT applies. There is a discussion that may be of interest. I am in the process of composing a cosmetic bot that would deal with the |accessdate= → |access-date= replacements among other cosmetic fixes to cs1|2 templates. I may attempt a WP:BRFA for that regardless of the WP:VPR outcome.
If non-hyphenated aliases of parameters with hyphens are defined, they exist only for legacy support (and are subject to become unsupported in the future); therefore, to streamline the appearance and improve consistency, select the hyphenated variant when adding parameters to a citation template and also consider switching already present non-hyphenated parameters to their hyphenated equivalents at the same time.
|accessdate= exists in about 2.8 million articles. There was an adverse reaction when we deprecated |deadurl= and |dead-url= in favor of |url-status= – a much much smaller cohort. I don't need that kind of drama in my life so I added the non-hyphenated parameters to genfixes so that editors using awb with genfixes enabled could whittle away at the backlog before we actually deprecate and subsequently remove support for the non-hyphenated parameter names.
I agree that this change should not be in genfixes at this time. There are too many changes in too many articles to be able to manually look at the diffs and confirm other AWB changes are correct. Please remove it. Changing to hyphenated parameters is more suited to a bot. I still have genfixes on, but often skip saving the edit when there are many of these parameter changes making the diff too difficult to scan quickly. MB15:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Have to agree with MB on this one the diffs are too much to check and I have turned off genfixes so that I can check the changes made. May be we should forget the change altogether as it is a pointless change. Keith D (talk) 21:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
When I add new citations via the dropdown labelled "Templates" in the editor window, I note that it uses the parameter accessdate. Shouldn't that be amended so that we don't add to the supposed problem? Schwede6622:03, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
For the same reason as others, I've found the hyphen insertion too distracting for now. But I've kept genfixes on, because you can use Normal Settings to mask the unhyphenated words before genfixes and unmask them after (by "mask", I mean temporarily replace with a very weird string). Authorlink is another, by the way. David Brooks (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Can renaming |authorlink= also be suspended? {{Cite book}} doc still uses it in examples, and doesn't mention its being deprecated, only that |author-link= is the primary version. David Brooks (talk) 22:13, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Oppose There are many fewer (~88% fewer) instances of |authorlink= (~325k, rounding up from after summing all variants up to author5link/authorlink5 (309k)) than |accessdate= (~2.8m), and I suspect, from my intense gnomishness in this area, many fewer instances on a per-page basis as well. The number of |accessdate=s per page is too damn high (sometimes), but continuing down this slippery slope will erode the benefits of including these pre-updates in WP:GenFixes, at what I think is a very reasonable cost. ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)22:47, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, sure, I'm not very passionate about it. But if you are going to swing the needle in that direction, shouldn't the many examples be fixed, starting with {{Cite book/doc}}, Basic usage examples? Or {{Cite web/doc}}, where author-link is indeed preferred but authorlink is used in the TemplateData descriptions. I call these out because they are likely to be used as building blocks by non-gnomes: more special-interest templates are probably less urgent (e.g. {{EB1911/doc}} doesn't even mention the hyphenated version but as one of its few users I know now). David Brooks (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Done for all CS1 template doc examples & §TemplateData. It looked as if that was the last of the unhyphenateds that needed updating too, though I only looked visually and not programatically. ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)18:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
I realize this page is not the right place for where the conversation has moved on to - where is? But while I'm here, can I ask just how much of a deep-clean the deprecation of |authorlink= is intended to be? I dove into a very few potentially problematic templates.
Some of the primary templates still have slightly off TemplateData: {{Cite web}} has |authorlink= listed first among equals; {{Citation}} uses |authorlink= in its Description column. As to user-directed documentation among those in Category:Citation Style 1 specific-source templates, {{Cite IETF}} for example only lists |authorlinkn= (except for one example).
Beyond the templates listed in Category:Citation Style 1 templates, there are many (5000+?) templates that transclude {{Cite book}}, although very few (about 12, I think) use |authorlink= in docs. In many cases they are simply directly citing a specific book, and others may also use it in their wrapping code (which is OK because editors generally don't see that) but there are others that pass the parameter through. In addition over 500 templates transclude {{Cite encyclopedia}}.
A small number of these templates only accept |authorlink= and ignore |author-link=. Example {{Cambridge Ancient History}}, which is why the current Arab–Byzantine wars mistakenly uses the hyphenated version and doesn't link that author (admittedly the only example I could find). {{New Cambridge History of Islam}} has a similar shortcoming.
And, I guess, all the same questions could be asked for |accessdate=.
Finally, is there an intention to eventually bot-update all articles from |authorlink=? Not only in the "primary" templates, but all those that transclude them. David Brooks (talk) 21:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
I boldly suggest that genfixes is the wrong tool for implementing changes. It's perfect for fixing errors – if we had a few hundred |axes-date= typos then here would be a great place to remedy them – but not for making the sort of bulk changeover we see after a TfD close. Certes (talk) 22:45, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
And thanks to User:Tom.Reding for making some of the CS1 template code fixes I noted above. There are still archaic doc files, for example Template:Citation/doc in its TemplateData Description column. Is it OK for a humble but experienced editor to fix those (I understand json) or should that be done by an expert? And is there a better page for these discussions? David Brooks (talk) 01:20, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
In the "normal settings" find/replace, there's an option to "ignore templates, refs...[etc]", which should take care of that issue. Primefac (talk) 23:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, so I kind of never really got a response the last time I asked about this, and it might be a different problem(s), so here we go.
I was running some cleanup on {{infobox person}}, removing deprecated or invalid parameters etc, along with some "standardization" genfixes (see here). There were two main issues that came up (and one minor one), which were quickly pointed out on my talk page:
When $1 is present in a template's parameter, it is removed for some reason.
If a reference isn't written "perfectly" (see this diff but also the others listed by Isaidnoway) it gets trimmed/removed
If a named reference call is removed (and the named reference is now unused) it throws the usual "ref not used" error.
As near as I can tell (aside from #3, which is a "not my problem" issue for me), this is coming as a result of my "genfixes" code in my bot's module, which I will paste below. If I'm doing something bonkers, and/or I'm a numpty and have missed something obvious, or if there's a better way to do what I'm intending, I would love to know, because as near as I can tell, this is an issue with AWB's GetTemplateParameterValues.
My module code
/// "Infobox genfixes"/// 1a. move pipes to left of parameters/// 1b. one parameter per line/// 1c. excess pipe removal/// 2a/b/c. normalize pipe/equal space (one space after |, = lined up)/// 2f. final }} is on its own linepublicstaticstringinfoboxCleanup(stringtemplatecall){///System.IO.StreamWriter sw = System.IO.File.AppendText("E:/ib person 17 Ocy 2020.txt");///sw.WriteLine(templatecall);stringtempTC="";tempTC=templatecall;if(true){List<string>paramsToReplace=newList<string>();List<string>paramReplacements=newList<string>();string[]array3=newstring[]{"spouse(s)","Spouse","Children","Height"};paramsToReplace.AddRange(array3);string[]array4=newstring[]{"spouses","spouse","children","height"};paramReplacements.AddRange(array4);for(intx=0;x<paramsToReplace.Count;x++){templatecall=WikiFunctions.Tools.RenameTemplateParameter(templatecall,paramsToReplace[x],paramReplacements[x]);}}if(tempTC==templatecall){skipRename=true;}/// Initialize container, pull out named params from templatestringnewTemplate="{{"+Tools.GetTemplateName(templatecall)+"\r\n}}";Dictionary<string,string>allParams=Tools.GetTemplateParameterValues(templatecall);/// Find longest parameter (for setting spaces before equals)intlongestParam=0;intparamLen;foreach(KeyValuePair<string,string>kvpinallParams){paramLen=kvp.Key.Length;if(paramLen>longestParam)longestParam=paramLen;}/// Put each param/value pair into the templateforeach(KeyValuePair<string,string>kvpinallParams){stringseparatorBefore="\r\n",separatorAfter=" ",equalsFormat=" = ",numSpaces=newString(' ',longestParam-kvp.Key.Length);newTemplate=WikiRegexes.TemplateEnd.Replace(newTemplate,separatorBefore+@"|"+separatorAfter+kvp.Key+numSpaces+equalsFormat+kvp.Value+@"$1}}");}///sw.WriteLine(newTemplate);///sw.WriteLine("----");///sw.Close();returnnewTemplate;}
For first one you need to Regex.Escape all the text you pass into the replace input of WikiRegexes.TemplateEnd.Replace otherwise $1 in any text is interpreted as the regex group. Not an AWB problem. Rjwilmsi14:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I'll be honest but I'm not quite sure where to place that. Is it just going to be Regex.Escape(kvp.Value) in the newTemplate = WikiRegexes... line? Primefac (talk) 16:51, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
I put a check string after Dictionary<string, string> allParams = Tools.GetTemplateParameterValues(templatecall);, and the output was already cut off (for example, the |airdate= param in the first infobox at Special:PermaLink/991016039). So, it would seem the issue lies further up the code. Primefac (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Just completely guessing (I don't use AWB but I've looked into this part recently, borrowing some of AWB's regexes) this may have something to do with PipeCleanedTemplate, given that Special:Diff/972882617 contains a non-ending pipe along with a tag (<).
This part doesn't touch ref tags [17]). So pipe isn't removed there. So when it's processed by GetTemplateParameterValues it splits at the pipe. To AWB, it will look something like this [18]. Which explains why it's cut off. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:35, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. It seems the current code for RegExTypoFix can only handle a defined set of attributes in <Typo>...</Typo> tag, and in a given order. Because it's based on a regular expression to parse the <Typo>...</Typo> tag. I'd like to be able to add other attributes, like an "id" attribute (to have a unique ID for the typo) or an "automatic" attribute (when the suggestion can be applied automatically) : AWB probably probably won't use it for the moment, but it will allow other tools to use such extra attributes. For example, WPCleaner could easily use both attributes. I've submitted a Phabricator ticket a few months ago, but no answer. If need be, I'm OK to do the modification myself in AWB code and submit a patch: what's the best way to do this? If that works, I will also do the improvements on WPCleaner to use the new attributes. --NicoV(Talk on frwiki)17:06, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
I've added 2 solutions to the Phabricator ticket: one that only requires to change the regular expression (one line change), one that also requires changing the code (I only gave the change to the regular expression, but I can also provide the whole code if this solution is preferred). --NicoV(Talk on frwiki)09:06, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Page notice on this page advises me to report all things on Phabricator, and I did report what I had, and I hate to come back and complain, and to ping random people. So please, can someone reassure me that Phabricator tag actually gets read once in a while? Many thanks -- Ата(talk)18:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, hope you have had happy holidays so far. I'm in the process of moving a wiki at the moment and would like to use a grabber to get all articles. However, those that are commonly used are too confusing for me. I'm familiar with AWB though and was wondering if it's possible to somehow use it as a grabber? Seelentau (talk) 13:16, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey I had an edit reverted by a user where AWB moved the short description tag beneath other tags (something i've been noticing it doing). The user revert description was:
(Undid revision 998958484 by Dillard421 (talk) - 1. Short desc is first per WP:ORDER. 2. There is no community consensus to deprecate the hyphenated forms and that is the longstanding convention at this article.
The page the referenced is WP:ORDER. On that page it states that the short description goes first before any hat notes. Isn't {{other uses}} a hat note? I'm likely wrong, can someone educate me if I am? Dillard421♂♂(talk to me)
This is a well-known issue with the latest officially released version. There is, however, a newer snapshot here that fixes this issue. If the snapshot doesn't work for whatever reason, or you're just too lazy to download it, just double click on the short description changes in the diff display to undo them manually each time they appear. Ionmars10 (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Technically, the SD template does not need to be the first template, but it must be the first template that does or could at some point itself generate a short description. So it is important, for example, that the SD template is always above any infoboxes. Currently, the various hatnote templates do not set the SD, but they could at some point. — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me10:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Off topic here, but I don't recognize that bot approval as a consensus to deprecate. Such things need higher visibility and more participation than eight editors out of tens of thousands. I for one never watch bot approval discussions, but I care about citation coding issues and I think allowing parameter names to break between lines was a terrible idea from a usability standpoint. The RfC you linked before you removed that stated: "Reworded to make it more clear that this proposal is not to eliminate any current version of a parameter." So Monkbot will have to tolerate the rare reversion when it comes across an article where I'm heavily invested in maintaining citation code (currently just the one). ―Mandruss☎07:14, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
This predictably keeps coming up—even though the issue is purely WP:COSMETIC, I hope it can be fixed soon, since AWB edits happen at scale, and the discussion around it is needlessly consuming oxygen. @Mandruss: I don't mind you reverting to fix things on one or two pages you particularly care about, as we're all allowed a degree of pickiness, but please note that it's discouraged to make edits that do not effect any rendered display for readers. {{u|Sdkb}}talk09:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
@Sdkb: Yeah, I think that's talking about things like removing (or inserting) unnecessary spaces in section heading code, not things that substantially make things easier and less error-prone for editors who aren't using VE. OCD kind of stuff. I occasionally see an editor removing - horror! - unnecessary blanks at the end of lines, apparently to reduce the file size by a few bytes (I can't imagine any other reason). Anyway I've never had an editor complain about my cite cleanups, and one admin has spoken favorably about them. So I guess I'll continue. Also note that hyphenating parameter names does not effect any rendered display for readers, so by your literal reading both AWB and Monkbot are performing "discouraged" edits, and on a far wider scale than I am. ―Mandruss☎10:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
You are correct it is just cosmetic, but it makes a lot of noises in the diffs when its moved forth and back by different users/bots (typically together with other edits...) Christian75 (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Compiler executable file csc.exe cannot be found
I'm using a new Windows 10 PC, and creating a simple new module in AWB (see this thread). When I do, I receive an error stating "Compiler executable file csc.exe cannot be found" (similar to this previous thread). I followed the suggestion there to disable the custom module settings and ensured that my settings file has <Module><Enabled>false</Enabled>, but restarting and trying again generated the same error. I then tried downloading .NET Desktop Runtime 5.0.1 x64 from https://dotnet.microsoft.com/download/dotnet/5.0 and restarted my PC, but still get the same error. Could someone please help me figure out what I'm doing wrong? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:05, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
That original discussion suggests that .NET v4 is required. Looking at the basics, if you do the following C:\> dir csc.exe /s what sort of results do you get? Neils51 (talk) 00:54, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
@Rjwilmsi: Hi there! I only get the csc.exe error when I try to load a custom module and click the Make Module button. I am able to use AWB perfectly without a custom module. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
OK, in the custom modules windows what options do you have in the Language picklist (should be something like C# 4.0 and VB NET 2) and which are you using? Rjwilmsi15:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
OK, something doesn't add up if you say you installed .NET v5, have .NET v4 reported above, but only have .NET 3.5 available as a custom module. If you look in Windows features (see screenshot in the first answer here) what options do you get for .NET? I would say .NET 5 is too new so you are missing a relevant version of .NET 4, probably version 4.5 or higher up to 4.8. Rjwilmsi15:58, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
@Rjwilmsi:File:GoingBatty Windows Features.JPGWindows Features screenshot I have .NET Framework 3.5 unchecked, and .NET Framework 4.8 Advanced Services partially checked - see screenshot. I may have installed the wrong .NET v5 file or installed it incorrectly. I have not changed these settings. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:18, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
(raises hand) I think there's a confusion between C# 3.5 and .NET 3.5 above. I have .NET 3.5 and various .NET 4.x versions, VS 2019 which probably means C# 7.3 (I lost track of the available Fx/csc combinations) but the Module dropdown only says C# 3.5, which restricts the language features I can use. That's OK; newer compilers respect the older language version, and I can still speak classic C#. Or did I need to tweak my AWB config somehow? David Brooks (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
This is the same build as I've sent to a few folks who might be watching. It also stops pushing the Short Description down below hatnotes. I recommend it!
That said, rev 12427 got pushed a few hours ago: "Add 'Number disambiguation' to known Disambigs" (if that's interesting to anyone). David Brooks (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
New version?
Could we get a new full version soon? It's been over a year since the last release.
@Rjwilmsi:, on that build, I don't seem able to enable typo fixing. It gives me a popup when I select the checkbox, but when I click 'OK', the box never gets enabled. Headbomb {t · c · p · b}02:05, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Ah thanks for mentioning that. Thought I was the only one. I'm using one of David Brooks' versions that I obtained in August. Dawnseeker200002:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
I did notice intermittent issues getting the typos to load, but they did load for me just now with that snapshot build, so I don't think it's the build. Rjwilmsi14:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Very intermittent for me too. Once (actually with a debug build), AWB emitted an incorrect GET request, which is a little crazy. I'll keep an eye on it. David Brooks (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
OK, I got a consistent repro. It fails when logged in, and even when subsequently logged out. It succeeds initially before logging in. Investigating. David Brooks (talk) 19:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
What's happening: before you log in, the path used to download typos is the default. During log in, various parameters are updated from the json file Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Config. In that file, the "typolink" parameter is an empty string, which would make me say eureka, except the config file hasn't been updated since 2018. Maybe there has been a recent code change - I can look. Also if you log in and load a settings file that already has typos enabled, you're good too (it's easy to edit the xml by hand). Developers, if you're listening, I'm looking at Session.cs:368. David Brooks (talk) 20:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Finally had time and installed the 6.1.0.2 snapshot from above. It starts up fine, searches OK and has the old config correctly, but will not let me log in – says I am not allowed. The old 6.1.0.1 version does still let me log in OK. Thoughts? — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me17:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Wireshark is a monster. It did tell me all sorts of exciting things, but nothing useful here. My copy of AWB 6.1.0.1 is fine – it lets me log in and then agrees that I am allowed to change articles. My copy of AWB 6.1.0.2 is configured in the same way. It finds the same articles for me to work on. It does let me log in, but then complains that I am not enabled to use AWB. — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me19:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
The stranger looks up into the glare of the desert sun and watches a condor as it floats lazily far above in the thermals. A ragged tumbleweed rolls past lethargically in the sluggish breeze. He slowly takes the unlit cigar from his parched lips and softly utters the word ... "Here" — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me09:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Right, I'm not following your sense of humour. Anyway, I can log in with the snapshot version as myself and my bot's account, and on Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage/Version 6.1.0.2 is listed as enabled. So the only thing I can think of is that in the settings file you are using the wiki is something other than en-wp, and the wiki you are trying to log in against doesn't have 6.1.0.2 enabled. If that's not it, then I don't know what the problem is. Rjwilmsi12:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I tried again with the December snapshot (AutoWikiBrowser6102-12432). I first removed all evidence of the two old versions, including scanning the registry and pruning any references to AWB/AutoWikiBrowser. Same result. AWB logs in but reports that I do not have access. Re-installing 6101 works again. BTW — I am using a fully updated Windows 10 machine and trying to access and edit this site using my standard username. Please could I ask for a short-term "test" snapshot with some sort of debug logging enabled so that I can see the request for the login and access test and the response data that causes the "No access". — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me12:22, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
@GhostInTheMachine: From this, it sounds like you're able to understand the HTTP conversation. Have you tried a debugging proxy? I use Fiddler 4. After installation you just run it and it will trace all your HTTP traffic. You'll probably have to unlock SSL decryption (Tools/Options/HTTPS). Select the interactions on the left, and Inspectors/Headers on the right and go from there. David Brooks (talk) 15:24, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Y Nature will, indeed, find a way. Fiddler is much nicer than Wireshark . Thanks DavidBrooks. The diagnosis turns out to be very simple — as the best errors often do — Project:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage does include me — Project:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPageJSON does not include me . The 6101 build uses the plain page for checking access rights. Build 12365 switched to checking for the JSON page before falling back to the plain page. The JSON page has not been updated since 2019-12-20. In passing — having rejected access, AWB 6102 opens Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage rather than the JSON version. Also, Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/History talks about this change, but there are otherwise no references anywhere to the existence of the JSON access control page or the need to update it . — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me17:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I got on this ping list, but it seems to me that we should pick either the wikitext checkpage or the JSON one, and delete the other one. JSON is checked on save, but wikitext allows extra comments and info. I suppose that's why the switch was made. Any administrator can update the JSON page, but I don't know what format it expects. Enterprisey (talk!) 23:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
@GhostInTheMachine: Presumably the same applies to me - what is this "checkpage" of which you speak? Several pages mentioned above have the word "checkpage" in their names - which one do you refer to, and why do you think that I can assist in any capacity at all? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:39, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
The "old" AWB (v6101 – dated 2019-09-17) uses the (plain) wikitext checkpage — Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage — to confirm who may use AWB for edits. Any newer versions of AWB (after build 12365 – 2019-12-19 – all called v6102) instead use the JSON checkpage — Project:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPageJSON — to make this same check. New AWB users (such as myself and approx 206 others) were added to the wikitext checkpage but have not been added to the JSON checkpage. This means that editors added after 2019-12-19 cannot use the latest version of AWB and have to use the 2019-09-17 version — that is now 15 months old and does not have known problems resolved. So ... The JSON checkpage needs to be updated to include the same users as listed in the wikitext checkpage and the two lists need to be kept in sync from now on or ... Delete the JSON checkpage — so that the new AWB will fail to find it and instead will switch back to use the old wikitext checkpage — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me23:06, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
I don't know why you keep pinging me, I have nothing to do with AWB development. And the one person you should be pinging, MusikAnimal, has not been pinged. That being said: MusikAnimal, would you mind shifting your bot over from Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage so I can shift all of the related templates and scripts there as well? Primefac (talk) 20:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Since you edited the wikitext checkpage recently, I had assumed that you also had the access to edit the JSON checkpage. Sorry if there is different access to the two pages. Now pinging MusikAnimal as you advise — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me20:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
@Primefac: There are two tasks effected here: MusikBot's PermClerk and MusikBot II's AWBListMan. It's not a trivial amount of work to make them use the JSON page. Do I understand correctly that the old wikitext page still needs to be supported, too? How long will we have to support both?
I know the wikitext-based config page was a peculiar format for this sort of thing, but it worked just fine. Is it really worth having to maintain two configs, plus make all the necessary updates to the bots, templates and whatever else is still points to the old CheckPage? If we have the option to continue using the old one, I might recommend that just to save us the hassle. — MusikAnimaltalk20:48, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
GhostInTheMachine, I added you manually. We still need an actual solution to this, though. The joys of desktop applications: because people will keep using the old version indefinitely, we'll never be able to delete the wikitext checkpage (unless we want to break all the old installs, which I'm not enthusiastic about). But I think we can move the bot tasks over and otherwise forget the wikitext checkpage exists, so MusikAnimal I think we'll just need to maintain one config (JSON). Rjwilmsi, is there any sort of schedule or planned release date for 6.1.0.2? (Apologies if you've already addressed that elsewhere.) Enterprisey (talk!) 22:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
While we're in the "new build" phase, the issue below finally has an outcome, and it seems like a quick fix would solve problems for module-makers... Primefac (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
OK, r12430 don't update Variables.RetfPath if typolink is empty (as we lose the default path). In next snapshot/release that will allow fetching typos on en-wiki after being logged in as well as before. Rjwilmsi11:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Adding underlinked tag to articles using AWB
I would like to discuss the elimination of the AWB feature that adds Underlinked tags to articles. An active editor since 2007, I have never used AWB. In recent times, I have been working to reduce the list of underlinked articles that appears in the community portal. Thanks to the efforts of many people, this list has gone from 21,000 articles to around 3,000 articles.
Having worked on hundreds of articles, I have seen a huge number of stubs that have been incorrectly tagged as underlinked - maybe 25% of the total number of articles. For example, there were dozens and dozens of one-sentence articles on beetles that were marked as underlinked, but fully met the Wikipedia criteria for Wikilinks. Also well over a hundred articles on gene proteins, same problem. In these cases, the users accepted the judgment of AWB bots to make insignificant edits, which violates AWB policies. To fix all these articles, editors have to open and correct them manually - we not have a bot to assist us.
I find it ridiculous to expect any AWB algorithm to make an intelligent judgement on the needs for wikilinks in any article - it is always a subjective judgment. I therefore suggest we get rid of this feature entirely. Thank you for listening. I welcome any factual corrections to statements I have made here. Rogermx (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Rogermx. Do you have any examples to hand? I use AWB quite a lot (in my other self as user:Kahtar), and i would hate to think that i've been generating extra work for anyone. If you can show an example or two, i can take a look at your point and ensure i try and act responsibly and not leave that tag unnecessarily going forward.
Forgive me, but i think both your links, Muhandes, go to the same place. And i'm interested to see that Rogermx started that conversation, too.
My thought, for what it's worth, Rogermx, is that in the linked discussion from last October/November there probably isn't sufficient consensus to mandate a change in AWB. Certainly, those of us who use it can be careful as we do so ~ i'd like to think we already are; i have to say, however, that of the random articles i clicked in your list, yeah, the tag isn't out of place: One, i didn't see any links, another had five, but three went to the same target, and three more had but one each; happy days, LindsayHello20:16, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Lindsay, I was unaware that a discussion actually took place last fall. I respectfully disagree with with your judgment on the examples I provided. In all these cases, I think that adding wikilinks would be considered as insignificant edits to be avoided.
There are some people using AWB who seem totally oblivious to checking if underlinked tags are needed. My opinion is that they are too consumed with racking up statistics on the number of articles they edit in a given period of time. However, if this is a dead issue with the community, I will not pursue it any further. Thank you for reading and responding to my comments, I really do appreciate it. Rogermx (talk) 20:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
The original text consists of a combining character followed by a main character. Most browsers handle this case by pairing them, but the Unicode specification requires the main character to come first. Strictly speaking, the text consists of an illegally placed combining character followed by a main character with no following modifiers, and any software based on that view will simply discard the stray diacritic. Certes (talk) 11:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
If the talk page needs to preserve the use of UTF-8 characters contrary to the UTF specification then this is an example of where I think the pragmatic answer is to use the {{bots|deny=AWB}} template on the page. I suspect that the UTF-8 change is within the core .NET libraries parsing UTF-8, so the other option may well be to have AWB skip pages containing such characters, which is more effort but the same result of putting the template on the page. Rjwilmsi12:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
It may be that that wiki has a very old version of mediawiki on it, it will be end-of-life in a few months. You could try using an old AWB version (perhaps from 2018). — xaosfluxTalk20:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
I know the wikitext-based config page was a peculiar format for this sort of thing, but it worked just fine. Is it really worth having to maintain two configs, plus make all the necessary updates to the bots, templates and whatever else is still points to the old CheckPage? If we have the option to continue using the old one, I might recommend that just to save us the hassle. — MusikAnimaltalk 20:48, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
To be honest, I agree with their assessment of the situation; if we're going to have two versions out at the same time, and not require people to upgrade, then it makes little sense to try and force admins like me who clerk WP:PERM/AWB to remember to add a user to both check pages, never mind the maintenance overhead for the bot operator, who now has to make sure two pages are in sync with the two bot-clerking tasks. Primefac (talk) 12:55, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Is this really needed? Assuming this is going to be a much larger problem then our problem too - does EVERY project need to change to a new page too?? — xaosfluxTalk15:58, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
The intention is to move over to the JSON one. And when there is a formal release of a version that uses that page by default... We can drop older releases, and mostly stop maintaining those older pages. There's literally no way to transition from one format to the other, without some overlap for some tiem. Obviously this has only been widely noticed after the more wider usage of the snapshot release, and people who are newer to AWB. Noting, a snapshot is not a format release. 2020 has been a stressful and busy year for many reasons, so I've not had the time to work on it that I expected. The JSON format makes it a lot easier to move configuration etc onwiki (later), rather than hacking around with HTML comments and wikitext on the checkpage like we have currently. I created (most) of the pages automatically on Wikimedia wikis around the time I was working on it. Reedy (talk) 04:08, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I'll do a round of updating the pages where applicable "tomorrow" (ie after I've had some sleep). Reedy (talk) 04:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC
And/or.. It's possible to just disable the use of the JSON checkpage in another snapshot, and/or only use them in DEBUG builds of the software. Both are trivial enough to do. But a proper release is overdue. Reedy (talk) 04:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I use Kingbotk Plugin and it is very useful but it has one annoying feature. It keeps on adding this: {{WikiProject Nepal|class=
}} instead of being in the same line like this {{WikiProject Nepal|class=}}. Does anyone know how to fix this? ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk18:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
This seems like a fairly trivial issue, I feel a little embarrassed making a talk page heading about it. Currently there is a 2 (Tom.Reding & me) to 1 (Silikonz) consensus to keep the old caption of the double monitor photo. But it got reverted to the new caption again today. Can we get a couple more opinions on this so that we can prevent more reverting?
Old caption: "A good screen arrangement for more complex AWB diffs"
New caption: "A double monitor screen arrangement for viewing AWB diff pages"
I am in favor of the old caption. The photo and caption seem witty and humorous to me. Since this is not mainspace, I think humor and wit are fine here.
A) I don't see the humour here. B) The new caption is more descriptive (I personally don't think that's a good screen arrangement). I do realize that since we're not in the article space we don't necessarily have to be "true neutral", but even then personal preference should be left out of it. Primefac (talk) 11:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Problems with the new: 1) it's pretty overkill for simple diffs, 2) 'monitor screen' is redundant, 3) I'm ok, I guess, with just removing the word 'good' from the old caption and/or replacing it with something other than 'valid'. Courtesy ping to Rich Farmbrough (sorry). ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)12:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Remove "good". It is not so good — the coffee cup Fellowship of the Rings coffee mug is in the way. Maybe "An arrangement of two screens for more complex AWB diffs". Maybe "A possible arrangement ..." — GhostInTheMachinetalk to me12:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
As a 44-year alum of the computer industry and proud owner of one laptop and one old all-in-one, I hate the picture, because it's quite frankly bragging. I suggest (a) a formal survey of AWB users to see how many have the double-tall setup (b) clarity in the caption that it's meant to be humor. (a) is meant to be humor. David Brooks (talk) 14:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
How about instead of going back and forth between humorous and descriptive, we make it instructive instead? Something like "By using X setting, AWB can be configured to utilize a double monitor setup when undertaking a run of complex edits that may require manual adjusting". VanIsaacWScont15:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
That's a fair point, though I'll note that this is really just stretching the window so that it covers both screens. I've got a more traditional dual-monitor setup (side-by-side) and I could drag it horizontally to fill both screens if I wanted to (which I don't, though I'll often have my Module on the second monitor so that I can see the diffs and edit the code more easily). Primefac (talk) 15:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for being so late! For some reason, the ping didn't work correctly, and I didn't receive a notification about your thread here. I was just wondering if any of you've started one, so I came over to check. And here we are!
I'm just fine with anything that doesn't contain a personal opinion (good and complex were the words that led me to change the caption). If it's informative, that's fine. But just without the opinion.
Restating here, I just don't want a caption that expresses a personal opinion, since this information here is for everybody who's using AWB.
You called? I personally have no problem with a little levity, but if the caption is humorous I find it a little...dry. It's also a great illustration of how bad AWB looks on a super-tall monitor - there would be room for a much larger edit/actions area! David Brooks (talk) 00:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, of course. Agreed. And though I don't use AWB, I echo your thoughts of 'how bad AWB looks on a super tall monitor' based on what's displayed in the image. Hmm. What was the original intention? I have yet to know. Silikonz (alternate account) (💬│🖋) 01:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I've just looked at the image more closely; I now notice it's just one big AWB window stretched across two displays. I think what this means is that it isn't a native setting on AutoWikiBrowser to make use of double displays but rather someone bragging to show they can make it possible. Though I don't use AWB, I have a strong suspicion this is the case. Thoughts, @Rich Farmbrough, DavidBrooks, and Novem Linguae?Silikonz (alternate account) (💬│🖋) 01:07, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
You can use any caption you like, the arrangement is one I use primarily for editing code in separate monitor width windows, which struck me as useful for AWB (less scrolling required than the normal arrangements). Bragging was mentioned three times, so I should point out there's nothing particularly clever about it, the monitors don't belong to me and the LOTR mug has a punctuation error, which AWB can't correct.
Hi @Rich Farmbrough: since you're already here and you use AWB, could you just state if there's a native setting to configure double monitors? If not, I really don't think there's any point in putting the image there. Thanks. Silikonz (💬 | 🖋) 05:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
There is no setting that I'm aware of. I do think that screen layout is useful, if you have two monitors on arms, as is often the case these days, you will find a side-by-side portrait mode more useful than a side-by-side landscape mode for examining diffs. This no longer works for me as my screens are not a matched pair and one is not rotatable.
If you are or want to be serious about AWB time efficiency, or you just don't like scrolling many/most/all of your diffs, depending on the task, then this is indeed a useful arrangement & a good suggestion. ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)11:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm neutral on both the Farmbrough photo and the infobox micro-image, but I strongly feel there should be an additional or replacement image—photo or screenshot—that shows a typical fullscreen editing session on a single landscape screen with the resolution of a fairly modern laptop or desktop. I may be extrapolating from a sample of one, but I feel that would resonate with most new users; aren't they the audience here? David Brooks (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Novem Linguae and Tom.Reding, what do you think the image would be useful for if it was kept on the AWB page? Just a small question; I can't think of any reason if spreading AWB across two monitors isn't a native feature. Silikonz (💬 | 🖋) 02:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
I think it's useful as-is; and not in spite of it being non-native, but because of that, showing editors how it can be used if the editor "thinks outside the box". ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)02:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
In my experience and opinion, that can be applied nearly everywhere. This AWB page maybe doesn't have to explicitly state this by putting an image here. Silikonz (💬 | 🖋) 04:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I haven't made myself clear. I mean my earlier comment - the
Novem Linguae and Tom.Reding, what do you think the image would be useful for if it was kept on the AWB page? Just a small question; I can't think of any reason if spreading AWB across two monitors isn't a native feature. Silikonz (💬 | 🖋) 02:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
@Silikonz-alt: It neither is nor isn't a feature of AWB. It's how Windows renders any Win32 app when stretched across multiple monitors. Because the AWB "diffs" window is designed with a 50% split, it gives the impression of separate frames in this case, but I bet the Preview looks unpleasant. I still think a typical novice's single-window view would be better. David Brooks (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Is there any community support for having AWB acknowledge {{bots|deny|GenFixes}}, in addition to the currently-acknowledged, but more aggressive, {{bots|deny|AWB}}? There are some problems with WP:GenFixes, i.e. T236729, and possibly others, that are hard to spot. Also, there are some legitimate changes WP:GenFixes makes that some object to (mostly WP:LISTGAP-associated reversions from my experience). All of these circumstances would be served by allowing AWB, but with WP:GenFixes turned off. If anyone can add to this list of circumstances, please do. ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)13:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Is the guide "Customised General Fixes" still up to date?
Is this "Customised General Fixes" guide still up to date? At least the instruction "Leave language at C# 2.0" should probably be updated to "C# 3.5". But is that guide's code of "AWB version 5.4.0.1 / SVN" still up to date and safe to use? Just making sure before using it because it seems that last time it got an update was in 2016. 87.95.206.253 (talk) 13:32, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Just noticed that this "Customised General Fixes" seems to interrupt your own advanced/normal "search and replace" edits whereas the normal "Apply general fixes" setting doesn't. Ping User:Reedy (who added the guide a decade ago) if they have time to take a look at this. 87.95.206.253 (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Not able to log in despite providing 100% correct username/password
Hello, I am trying to log in to AWB and am not able to. The username/password I type in are 100% correct, as I am copying them directly from the web login screen, where I have the password saved. The error that appears: "Login failed" "Failed" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joker876PL (talk • contribs) 09:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
@Joker876PL: I'm not sure that you can copy text out of the password box of the web login screen - it didn't work for me. Have you tried pasting from there into a text document to see if it looks like your password? -- John of Reading (talk) 09:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
@Joker876PL: If you are trying to use AWB on this wiki, the problem may be that you are not listed on Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. The manual approval process is here but normally requires a longer editing history than yours. If you are trying to use AWB on some other wiki, is AWB trying to log you in to the right wiki, i.e. the same one as the web login screen? It may be trying to log you in to this wiki instead. Certes (talk) 11:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Is my rule/subrule bad, or do subrules not actually act as subrules?
I have the following rule: Find (NavContent[^\>]+?) ?display *: *none;? *, Replace: $1; and subrule: Find: NavFrame, Replace NavFrame collapsed. Yet in this revision of User:49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, the subrule triggers without the rule obviously triggering. Am I missing something? I'm using the recent release snapshot that fixed the short description handling on Win 10. --Izno (talk) 03:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
I have to be honest, I don't see the word NavContent in this revision (it was there briefly in December 2013). Did you mean to put the "?" after the ")". Done that myself sometimes. David Brooks (talk) 04:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
No, that made the + metacharacter not-greedy in the same way as the * meta character. (Which I was somewhat surprised by.)
I only just got around to using Advanced settings for the first time, and indeed in a simple case the subrule triggers even if its parent rule doesn't. I guess the workaround for now would be to put something appropriate in the Not Contains section of the "If" tab of the subrule. David Brooks (talk) 21:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Making alerts more visible?
Is there any way I can make the alerts more visible, like by having a popup alerts window to pop up somewhere on top of the diff/preview area as an alert is triggered? Or have the same "highlight errors" feature also available on the diff/preview area. Or something similar - tips are welcome. When editing with AWB, my eyes are focused on the diff/preview area. Now I miss 99.9% of the alerts due to my way editing with AWB, because when making hundreds of edits in a row, it gets exhausting fast to first keep your sight focused on the alerts area, and then move your sight to diff/preview area, or vice versa. 85.76.140.34 (talk) 20:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Can't get past error
I'm currently trying to use AutoWikiBrowser to edit a fandom but cannot get it to link up with my fandom via the site preferences. Someone please help me figure out what I'm doing wrong. I am swapping it over to fandom and putting a valid url in (harvestmoon.fandom.com).
"An error occured while connecting to the server or loading X project information from it. Please make sure that your internet connection works and such combination of project/language exist. Enter the URL in the format "en.wikipedia.org/w/" (including path where index.php and api.php reside). Error description: Root element is missing." 24.154.206.237 (talk) 06:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
How do I filter out pages that contain a specific thing? For example, if I wanted to add a template to a page that doesn't have a template, how would I remove all instances of the page that have the template in the list? Noah💬17:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't know if you can do it within AWB, but you can generate an article list using Petscan. Here's a sample search that finds articles in both of two categories. You can click on the "Templates&links" tab to include or exclude specific templates, then run the search again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
As reported on User talk:BattyBot, BattyBot started blanking talk pages today before it was stopped. I'm using Version 6.1.0.2 SVN 12432, module User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects, general fixes, and a few find/replace rules. I was sleeping when the issue started, so there wasn't any changes in the configuration. I closed AWB, reopened it, and ran it against the same pages, and it's working fine. Any clue what could have caused the issue, or any ideas on how to prevent it from happening in the future? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:33, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
My bot has run into that before, I think it has to do with lag on the server or something. GreenC set me straight. Couldn't tell you if the discussion is here, at BOTN, or at my talk page archives (most likely the latter). I'm about ten seconds from sleep but if I don't return to this in a day or two (or someone else doesn't reply in more detail) ping me. Primefac (talk) 01:12, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello? I'm trying to remove non-existent template with a bot in bulk. I checked the list of non-existent template with Special:Wantedtemplates of the wiki, and added the non-existent frames to AWB's Find and replace.
I set it as above with the Normal settings function of Find and Replace. For testing, I added a document containing {{꼴칰의현실}}, {{씹솩}}, and {{헬조선그자체}}, a template that doesn't exist in the 디시위키:연습장. The upper template has been added to the 'Find' part. And when I clicked the 'Start' button, the upper template were not removed.
I set the same with the Advanced settings function. Didn't work.
In my memory, apparently in October 2020, with the Advanced settings feature, I did the template removal with the same settings I had previously, and it worked without any problems. I've been building bots since Monday, and a few days ago, even yesterday, I deleted a few template with the Normal settings feature. However, only some of the template were deleted at that time. But today none of the uninstall functions work.
What should I do? Is this a bug or am I not sure how to use AWB? please answer about my question. Thank you. GTX1060 (talk) 06:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
AWB removes sort key
Using AWB 6.1.0.1, it broke the sort key in these three edits ([20], [21], [22]), changing the sort key from "/" to a space.
I'm redirecting Turkish village/neighborhood stubs to a list at the district page (Balâ, Ankara for example). The redirect itself is a straightforward find-and-replace, and I've been creating the lists by exporting to a text file and copy-pasting to the district article which is clunky but workable. However, editors have asked me to include coordinates as well, which some (but not all) of the stubs have. Is there a way to pull the {{coord}} template from multiple stubs and add them to the list? –dlthewave☎12:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I was wondering if there was a way to create a list of specifically uncategorized files in order to get them properly categorized? I'm aware of the page Special:UncategorizedFiles but was hoping there was a way the bot could do that?
If not, is there a way to create a list of all files? Special -> AllFiles seems to just be bringing up a list of pages for me for some reason.
24.154.206.237 (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this out, GITM. The bug was reported here, all versions since rev 12363 have had the fix. I downloaded the development version (v6.1.0.2 rev 12432) and confirmed it no longer has the bug. I've used the newer version to clean up my recent AWB activity that did not obey MOS:ORDER. I estimate about 10% of my edits were affected. — hike395 (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Can the replacement text have newline (line break) characters?
I can make a rule to create a flat list like this: {{flatlist|* Butcher* baker* candlestick maker}}, but then I need to manually break before each asterisk to make new lines. Is there a way for the replacement text to make the breaks? Christhe spelleryack21:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
If you're talking about the "Find and Replace"/"Normal Settings" dialog, then just use \n in the replacement text. Or am I missing a complication? David Brooks (talk) 03:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Resolved
Thanks for that answer, which I thought I had tried without success, along with CHAR(10) and U+ codes. Yes it's working 100% now, which is more than I can say for my brain. Christhe spelleryack13:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Glad it worked for you. On Windows, my brain can never remember where to put \n and where \r\n, so I always have to experiment (and please don't mention the git interface). Sadly I'm old enough to remember when line-feed and carriage-return actually meant two different rows in the paper tape and two different noises. David Brooks (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
do not duplicate templates added from other templates
@TRANSviada: This edit was not a built-in function of the software, so you should discuss the matter with the editor who made the edit. (Courtesy ping @Tom.Reding:). In general, moving standard article content into templates will confuse many editors and processes. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Hola. I just got AWB access. What are some good tasks for me to work on? Are there any reports or queues I should be aware of / get ideas from? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:19, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Could it please be confirmed to me (as non-AWB knowledgeable) if in this edit the AWB function is set to add {{flag|GBR|name=British}}? Or would this be a manual addition? Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
@Rocknrollmancer: I've never seen AWB suggest a change like that when I've been using it, so this must have been a manual edit or part of that editor's own AWB configuration. The edit was made in 2015, so perhaps not worth worrying about now? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Is there a way to find text / jump around within the wikicode of the single page currently loaded?
Is there MOS:ORDER detection somewhere? For example, easily adding a navbox in the right place.
I prepended a CFD notice to a couple hundred pages and it got a little repetitive. What are the rules for automating submission of simple edits like that? Do you need a bot flag? Can you write a script? I wouldn't mind sitting there watching it so that it remains "semi-automated", but it gets tiring to keep clicking / typing ctrl-s.
GoingBatty, very helpful, thank you. Quick follow up to answer #2. Let's say I want to insert a navbox into an article in the correct spot (after external links section but before authority control). Is there a way to configure AWB to do this? I read your link on GenFixes, but if I'm reading it correctly, that is something slightly different. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:56, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
If I understand your workflow right, genfixes only come into action when a page is loaded; there's nothing it can do dynamically with the text being edited. You might want to bring up MOS:ORDER in a separate window. David Brooks (talk) 15:41, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
If you select "More...", "Append", "Sort meta data after" to add a navbox like {{Indian Air Force}} with AWB then it's placed after {{Portal bar}}[23] and after {{Authority control}}[24]. They are used in 90,000 and 1,8 million articles so {{Authority control}} is more important. Could something be done to add navboxes earlier, either automatically or if the user selects one more option? {{Navboxes}} is in 47,000 articles. It would be ideal if a navbox could also automatically be added inside an existing {{Navboxes}} in the list or list1 parameter. Pinging BrownHairedGirl who made the diffs. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
I tried adding some extra regexes to my AWB to achieve some of this, but that didn't work because the replacements are done later in AWB's cycle of tasks.
I agree with @PrimeHunter that it would be great if AWB could have built-functionality to handle this per the MOS.
Meanwhile, I intend that when I have finished this navbox work I will take another AWB pass over these articles with a custom module which will ensure that portalbar, taxonbar, Authority control, Coord and Defaultsort are immediately above the categories. I can't see any reliable way in which AWB can identify a navbox, so I'm not going to try putting them inside {{navbox}}.
BTW, the reason I am doing these edits is that I found that on Indian articles, there was widespread deviation from the bidirectionality principle of WP:NAVBOX, which I am trying to fix. The worst so far was {{Indian National Congress}}, which has links to 147 articles. About half those articles did not transclude the navbox, while over 1200 articles did transclude the navbox despite not being linked from it. I have some ideas for how a bot could help identify such cases. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 15:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I saw that you posted a template on the 'Romani people in Poland' article, I took note of the incomplete references and fixed everything up! I consequently deleted the hatnote as I complied with the required changes is that ok? RimaB99 (talk) 17:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Does anyone wish to comment on this? If not, I am going to move per WP:SILENCE to have AWB stop adding this tag. It is unacceptable to have AWB be suggesting inappropriate tags at mass scale. {{u|Sdkb}}talk20:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm just a user of AWB, not a maintainer, but I agree with removal of Underlinked. It's also an issue with certain animal/plant taxonomy articles, where links may not be useful.--Rsjaffe (talk) 20:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: I'd likely be open to that if we figure out what the code is that's being used to determine when an underlinked template is suggested and confirm that it's an issue that only affects stubs. Until then, though, we can't be sure, and the safer course of action is to turn it off for all pages. {{u|Sdkb}}talk01:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hmm, it looks like any page with less than three links is automatically tagged, which is definitely not an ideal algorithm. I'll go ahead and file a phab ticket requesting it be deactivated based on the consensus here. One potential issue with relying on the stub tag is that I'm not sure all stub pages are properly tagged as such. {{u|Sdkb}}talk02:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Well, there are a number of exceptions to the "less than three and not a dab" rules in the code that GoingBatty cited, including a page length <= 400 and various categories of page (notably many specific index pages), but the general comment is still true. It'd be good to have a smarter algorithm. David Brooks (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Today, I installed AWB v6.1.0.1 SVN 12353 (2019-09-17 21:16:42), and it reports that it is working with "Internet Explorer version: 11.0.19041.985, .NET version: 4.0.30319.42000, Windows version: 6.2". When I run AWB Updater v2.3.0.0, after "Getting current AWB and Updater versions", it reports "Retrieving current version...FAILED". See the thumbnail at right. — JeffG. ツ00:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Yep, that's a known issue; I and others have reported it here before. I know there's a limited number of AWB maintainers who are all volunteers, but I really hope this gets fixed soon so that the community doesn't continue expending our energy reporting the same bugs over and over. {{u|Sdkb}}talk02:49, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
I'd guess probably, but I'm not really sure. If there is, it'd be good to comment on it to give whoever might want to work on it a nudge. {{u|Sdkb}}talk03:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
It's not a known issue if no one has actually reported a bug in the proper place for bugs. A quick look at the last 500 changes to this page (for example), doesn't show any obvious discussion title to this extent. Reedy (talk) 13:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Something else has changed between yesterday (June 7) and today. I've been running a 6.1.0.2 SVN version 12465 (from February). On startup, it now says "this version of AWB is not enabled, please download the latest version", resulting in the error dialog shown here. Then I noticed this morning's bunch of edits; I updated to SVN 12474 and rebuilt resulting in a working AWB version 6.2.0.1 (thanks!) but the download page still offers 6.1.0.1. Is that in the process of being updated? Of course, this is the programmer-with-VS way of updating; I agree the updater itself is broken. David Brooks (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
(sorry, just saw the ping) As the new version (the blue link, not the green button) is advertised as 6.2.0.0 I assume it's from SVN 12469, and the 6.2.0.1 changes up to 12474, to the CheckPage mechanism, aren't critical. So I'll just leave it at that. David Brooks (talk) 03:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
6.2.0.0 went up yesterday. It was available under the list of downloads on [25] (as per GoingBatty's link), but I forgot to mark it as the default download for all OS, which meant on the other pages it said "Looking for the latest version? Download AutoWikiBrowser6101.zip (1.1 MB)" rather than "Looking for the latest version? Download AutoWikiBrowser6200.zip (1.1 MB)". GitHub does similar, you can publish a release, but unless you poke the right things, it's not always obvious its the latest. But if you click around a little, you can find out.
As for 6.1.0.2 being marked disable, well, that's standard practice when a newer release is made and the dev version bumped. If you've built one release (or are using snapshots), you're probably more than able to build a newer release.
The CheckPage stuff isn't in AWB itself (other than the ApiEdit addition), and was me just trying to optimise my script to try and make sure all JSON checkpages were up to date on all wikis.
It's been talked on and off for a while. I've been maintaining a mirror on GitHub at [26] for years, but never got enough traction to make it the canonical. I do informally take PR from there and turn them into svn commit (obviously losing proper ownership info). It really should be re-visited though. See also T101053Reedy (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
New version out
I just noticed the stable release version is updated—hurrah! I look forward to being able to use GENFIXes again if this resolves the short description bug. It looks like @Reedy changed the page here, so thanks for that and thanks to everyone who got it done.
Yep, I already have, but just looking to make sure it gets distributed as widely as possible. That's going to be a challenge, given that the updater is broken in 6.1. But we don't want to get in a situation where an article's short description was moved from below to the top in 2019 after the policy change, then back below due to 6.1, then back above from someone with 6.2, then back below again from someone who hasn't updated, then back above again, etc. {{u|Sdkb}}talk05:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Disabling old versions always results in complaining, it just does. Which is one reason I left the older version enabled, and added specific targetted messages to those versions (yay for past me for improving that feature) If people are running 6.2.0.0 and it seems to mostly work fine, I'm happy to disable the old version; it's probably well overdue. The "worst" that happens is that people will have to manually grab it from SF. Should be a little easier now I've also updated the default release, so you don't need to click around to find it. Reedy (talk) 12:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
@Reedy: If a bot were making the short description layout error, it would be blocked, so I see no issue with disabling the old version (maybe wait a week or so). That's a little different than changing the green button, though. The primary download link should always guide people to the latest stable release. {{u|Sdkb}}talk14:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
As I say, the amount of times I've had people complain (quite angrily) when I disable old versions, for various reason over the last 10+ years. The GUI of SF sucks, so it was an oversight when I made a release (whilst busy in a training session for multiple hours) and uploaded the zip. I'm not sure why you're continuing to make reference to this, it is helping no one. The download was available. Reedy (talk) 22:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I was on mobile this morning and didn't realize you had already updated the green button. I'm also still a little confused about some of the technical parts of this, so apologies if there's some miscommunication happening from that. Overall, thank you for implementing the desperately needed update—myself (and I'm sure many others) are grateful to see it. {{u|Sdkb}}talk22:31, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Trying to launch the updater on Windows 10 that was originally installed only about a year old and I got "An app on your PC needs the following Windows feature: .NET Framework 3.5 (includes .NET 2.0 and 3.0)". Maybe along with updating the updater we should require (or at least allow for) a new version of .NET for the updater (AWB.exe already requires .NET [Framework?] 4.5)... Izno (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Is it possible to search the rendered text instead of the wikitext? My AWB settings are currently on the conservative side to avoid dealing with that problem, but I fear that some fixes are slipping through the cracks as a result. Sdrqaz (talk) 19:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Language management for Fandom wikis
Hello,
Currently, the "fandom" project option only allow to create a connection to English communities, for example by setting "jojo" to create a connection to jojo.fandom.com. But, if you want to create a connection to the French counterpart of this project, you can't define the language code "fr", and you have to create a "custom" connection and then set "jjba.fandom.com/fr".
Additionally, when activating the option "Regex typo fixing", the warning message indicates "The newest typos will now be downloaded from https://jjba.fandom.com/wiki/Wiki_Jojo's_Bizarre_Encyclopédie:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos when you press OK", the language code "fr" is missing in the URL, which may confuse users wanting to activate some TypoFixes.
The latest version of AWB uses the JSON checkpage to verify if users have access which has caused issues with the lists being out of sync. I would suggest that we work towards moving away from the old checklist to avoid this issue in the future. Before this can happen though MusikBot, User:MusikAnimal/userRightsManager and {{Rfplinks}} has to be updated to work with the new page (ping to MusikAnimal). Dropping the old checkpage would mean that older versions of AWB would not be usable. I don't think this should be a major concern though as we want the latest version to be used anyway. I would expect we get a decent amount of people asking why it has stopped working if we do it though. --Trialpears (talk) 08:35, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Trialpears I suppose the time has come. I should be able to get MusikBot up to snuff very soon, if we're ready. Quite frankly, I think the easiest solution on my end is to let the bot continue to patrol the old checkpage, then copy over the list to the new JSON checkpage. So admins would have to continue to manage the old one, and let MusikBot handle the new one. That would also give people more time to upgrade to the new version before we do a full migration. How does that sound?
As for userRightsManager, I don't think it has proper support for the AWB checkpage, does it? However, if/when we do a full migration to the JSON page, it would be much simpler to make userRightsManager support it :) — MusikAnimaltalk03:49, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
MusikAnimal Sounds good! Admins will have to update both check pages when adding new users but that isn't a major issue though assuming the bot is quick enough. Will add so we have both links in the template as well. Perhaps the script would be completely unaffected as well the check page support is definitely not finished in any case. --Trialpears (talk) 06:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
With the latest Windows updates, and MS trying hard to get everyone off Internet Explorer, opening links from the Preview function (right click, open in new window) is even more annoying. Now, IE opens, reloads the page in Edge, and blasts out various "Hey, upgrade" messages even when Edge is my default browser. I understand that the HTML viewer under Windows Forms is restricted to the IE engine (still Trident?); is there any other way of getting it to use Chromium? David Brooks (talk) 14:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Preview etc should open your default browser though.... I think. I've not looked at that code in a while, maybe we should look at it. It does look like newer .NET and such may have something in it we can use, and it's mostly a drop in repalcement - [27]. Unfortunately it looks like it means more install dependancies, which may be a necessary downside. I don't know if this will cause more (or less?) problems for non Windows users. Reedy (talk) 15:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
@Reedy: I was just looking if any discussion on this topic existed... And here it is. Clicking the external link from preview curently does nothing except for coloring the link as 'visited' (tested on Win8 and Win10 machines with different default browser settings.) Would you suggest reporting this as a bug? --BlameRuiner (talk) 13:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@BlameRuiner and Reedy: The procedure is right-click (or long-press) on the link, and select "Open in New Window". And the annoying popups seem to have died down; perhaps it only happens immediately after each significant Windows update? As to bug reporting, MS is no longer actively supporting Windows.Forms - there are two newer technologies since. Yes, there is a replacement that helps Forms use Chromium, but it is a big life in terms of using a separate module. David Brooks (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@DavidBrooks: But "Open in New Window" action uses IE. I don't see any option to use Chrome or FF (I'm speaking only about opening external links, not the preview itself). --BlameRuiner (talk) 14:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
@BlameRuiner: Exactly my point. The Windows Forms web viewer uses the IE engine internally (Trident if I'm not mistaken) with no alternative offered. There's an add-on that Reedy referred to but it's a hack as Forms isn't being maintained. BTW he reason I use the popup feature, just occasionally, to check my edit is wikilinking to the right page. David Brooks (talk) 15:51, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Non-Windows users may not be using Preview much anyway. For me at least (Ubuntu 16.04, Wine 5.0.3), Preview crashes AWB on about 50% of pages. However, the rest of AWB works well and I upgraded to 6.2.0.0 with no problems. Thanks for making the new version available. Certes (talk) 15:25, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
It occurred to me later that the question would be more apprporiately addressed to [my ex-colleagues] the .NET developers. I think they're not maintaining Windows Forms much today, but it is open-source... David Brooks (talk) 16:40, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
rev 12501 For right-click 'open in new window' in Preview, override newWindow event to open URL in system default browser (rather than always IE). Note this doesn't work under Wine, as before this change the 'open in new window' didn't do anything. Rjwilmsi10:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps that's my problem: I'm trying to open a page in IE, which I don't have on Linux. Sorry to be stupid, but what exactly do I right click on to change this? Certes (talk) 17:58, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
You can't change it and I don't know what happens on Linux. To rewind in case the context has been lost: this is solely about the Preview function, which on Windows (because it uses the legacy Windows Forms toolset) renders the page in the top pane using the obsolete Trident rendering engine, originally designed for Internet Explorer in 1997. It'd be nice to switch to Chromium, the modern rendering engine in Edge and Chrome, but Forms can't do that natively and the new add-on that inserts itself into Forms is a complex deploy. If you right-click on the Preview text, Trident captures the click and pops up its context menu. If you're on a hyperlink, "Open in new window" is an option in that menu; if you select that, Trident thinks "I need to open the link using the only browser I know about, which is IE."
There's nothing you could do with any kind of click to change that behavior. But in build 12501 Rjwilmsi has cleverly intercepted the "Open in new window" selection to pop up your default browser instead. The preview itself is still rendered with Trident. None of this should be confused with the "Open page in browser" feature in the editor pane, which also uses your default browser. David Brooks (talk) 01:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
In the page list in AWB (version 6.2.0.0, Windows) I inserted the page ϗ (as in the Dutch Wikipedia we have a page about this character at ϗ), but the page list of AWB sees this character as Ϗ, which is a completely different character. The result is that the article of ϗ can't be visited with AWB. Romaine (talk) 22:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
ϗ is Unicode 03D7 GREEK KAI SYMBOL and Ϗ is 03CF GREEK CAPITAL KAI SYMBOL. They are lower and upper case versions of the same character. Something is odd though: ϗ is a redlink on enwp but a search for it takes me straight to Ϗ, which redirects to Kai (conjunction). Typing Ϗ in the nlwp search box suggests ϗ and takes me straight to ϗ if I ignore the suggestion and try the search. Certes (talk) 08:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Help a user to upgrade
I'm in conversation with a very experienced Wikipedian who is running 6.1.0.1 (and therefore mis-ordering Short Descriptions) but the updater is not prompting him to move to 6.2.x. He says the download from Sourceforge is a "complicated thing to do". I didn't really follow the discussion above, but - is the 6.1.0.1 updater not going to help such a user? Or is it possible he didn't update the updater itself in the past? Would it be best to guide him through the Sourceforge download; presumably he did an ab initio download in the first place, but I don't know how he is configured, or indeed whether he's on Windows or another platform. David Brooks (talk) 19:16, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
@DavidBrooks: One has to be careful at Sourceforge that they click the right link. I suggest they do the following:
Yes, that worked for me. I renamed my AWB directory (folder) and reused its name for a new empty directory into which I unzipped the files. That way there's a backup if things don't work, and any files which are no longer needed disappear. Certes (talk) 08:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
The user followed my directions and it worked. There's another step before running the exe: you have to unblock the "unsafe" downloads either using the Properties page or clicking the Advanced link when the OS yells at you trying to execute. OK to add this to the instructions? David Brooks (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC) ETA: at least on some versions and configurations of Windows, I guess. David Brooks (talk) 16:35, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
@DavidBrooks: There are lots of mini-steps within #4 before, depending on your operating system and unzip tool. I tried to keep it general because I didn't know what your Wikipedian was using. GoingBatty (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Guidance on the /config for non-WPs?
For those of us who need to set up AWB configuration on other wikis, especially those NOT in the Wikipedia sister group ...
Is there guidance on setting up a config file?
Is there a a complete list of the parameters, or is WYSWYG?
Hi again. I am using AWB 6.2.0.0 with Internet Explorer version: 11.0.19041.1052, .NET version: 4.0.30319.42000, and Windows version: 6.2. On Commons, I am using it to make a list of what embeds c:Template:Flickr-change-of-license. The list (from "What transcludes page (all NS)") comes to exactly "25000 pages", while templatecount shows "39814 transclusion(s) found." How may I access all those transcluding pages? The underlying problem is that c:Category:Files from Flickr with changed licenses only has 24,378 files after 10 days, while I think it should have nearly 39,814 files. If that is a hard limit, may I have a volunteer to touch those transcluding pages, perhaps with touch.py? — JeffG. ツ20:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Thanks, but the NL sources aren't showing up. I have AWB logged in to Commons as JeffGBot. Plugin Manager lists that one plugin (in my AWB directory) under "Assemblies that failed to load", and clicking "Load Selected Plugin" appears to do nothing, as does trying to load it from the Plugins\NoLimitsPlugin directory (except adding another one of the "Assemblies that failed to load"). — JeffG. ツ20:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Yes, created that day, and installed/modified on June 12th when I unzipped AutoWikiBrowser6200.zip. It is 12,288 bytes stored in 9,728 bytes with checksums as follows. Rebooting had no effect on the problem. — JeffG. ツ22:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
I've just released 6.2.1.0... Doesn't change anything with that plugin, but is a clean build of the assembly. Reedy (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
The no-limits plugin does have a limit of 1M pages, though, and the number of templates transcluding > 1M pages is ever-growing. Are there any plans to raise the limit, or remove it for true no-limits? ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)19:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
I think we'd struggle for unlimited; but 2,147,483,647 as per the C# "Signed 32-bit integer" limit should be doable with minimal work. 2 billion would presumably keep people going for a few minutes, right? Reedy (talk) 01:10, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
[You risked triggering my decades-old rant about using signed integers to represent numbers that can only be ordinals. I blame Kernighan and Ritchie's first edition. Sorry. Back to your regularly-scheduled.] David Brooks (talk) 14:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
And String.Length, and String.IndexOf having an ambiguous return type...same in Java...Like I said, there's a full rant. David Brooks (talk) 17:35, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
@Reedy: Actually, that did fix the problem, now using NoLimitsPlugin.dll created 7 July 2021 I have 10 ListMaker plugins. — JeffG. ツ00:37, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
RegEx
I'm not sure how to get this rule: Replace ?!https\:(/\/\*[\s\S]*?\*\/|\/\/.*/g) With: $1 to work (for stripping JavaScript comments). ―Qwerfjkltalk16:04, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Not clear to me what you are trying to do. regex101.com suggests that the regex is invalid.
That one works (sort of). /* ... */ can span multiple lines. Multiple, simple regexes are often easier to craft so perhaps you need two regexes: one for the multiline comment and one for the single line comment
/\/\*.*?\*\//gs – multiline
/\/\/.*/g – single line
I'm still not clear how https: fits in here are you saying:
https://example.com // comment here is retained
or
https://example.com // comment here is deleted
or
// https://example.com comment with url is retained
or
// https://example.com non-url portion of the comment is deleted
Possibly (and I'm just guessing) var myurl = "https://example.com"; // Assign the string to the variable, in which case it's the quoting rather than the https: prefix that marks // as not starting a comment. Writing a regex to parse JavaScript perfectly is hard and probably impossible. Certes (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Using your example one might write:
(https?:\/\/.*?)\s*\/\/.* replace with $1
Run this regex first then run the plain single-line comment removal regex then run the multiline.
But, I've got to ask, as one who believe wholeheartedly that most code is not anywhere near sufficiently commented, why remove comments? That just adds to obfuscation.
You can't just copy the one to the other as you did to create the alt? If not, edit the page and switch out of the code editor (the <> button). Then regex search and replace with the tool in the advanced menu of the toolbar:
'Search for': ^\s*\/\/[^\r\n]+[\r\n]+ leave the 'Replace with' box blank.
This will also work with a regex capable editor like Notepad++ but will not work in the js code editor (won't find \r or \n).
When I try to use the plugin to create a list, it gives the error The remote server returned an error: (308) Permanent Redirect. ―Qwerfjkltalk13:22, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
According to WP:SORTKEY, all punctuation in title must be removed except for hyphens apostrophes and periods. AWB does fine for ampersand (changed to 'and') and n-dashes (changed to hyphens) but doesn't remove other punctuation like parentheses and commas. Could it be updated to remove all standard (ASCII) punctuation that is not hyphens apostrophes and periods? Unrealistic to expect it to remove all punctuation in Unicode but taking care of the ASCII punctuation will take care of 98% of the issues. As a bonus, could it change Mr. to Mister? That's also in the standard. Thanks.--Rsjaffe (talk) 00:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
And the rule for removed punctuation (other than &, n-dash, and m-dash) should be that one space will be the replacement unless another space already immediately adjoins that location. Rsjaffe (talk) 00:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
@Rsjaffe: I suggest you follow the instructions in the Before you post above and file a new task. I also suggest you provide some examples of articles where AWB does not suggest the proper DEFAULTSORT changes. GoingBatty (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I cannot say how long this has been happening, so it may be old, or it may be new. However, the use of %%basepagename%% does not function the same way that {{BASEPAGENAME}} instead it is acting as {{ROOTPAGENAME}}.
<Typoword="<enter a name>"find="(%%basepagename%%)"replace=""$1""/>
Outside of enWP there can be the requirement to drop down three or four subpage levels. So it would be really good if we could align the magic words and the functionality of AWB with MW— billinghurstsDrewth03:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
@Reedy: The table was my attempt to show that %%basepagename%% does not give {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and that it delivers {{ROOTPAGENAME}}. I am needing AWB to deliver BASEPAGENAME. — billinghurstsDrewth15:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
@Reedy: I am not getting you here. I show that a AWB replacement of %%basepagename%% changes Billinghurst to "Billinghurst" at each level when I have a page sitting at the third level of subpage hierarchy. Emphasising that when I do a %%basepagename%% replacement that it does mediawiki ROOTPAGENAME replacement. Mediawiki at that point considers BASEPAGENAME to be Billinghurst/Sandbox/Sandbox2. So am I to understand that: AWB %%basepagename%% != mediawiki BASEPAGENAME. From your test example, Mediawiki BASEPAGENAME would give Foo/Bar not Foo => Mediawiki PAGENAME = BASEPAGENAME + SUBPAGENAME in mediawiki => AWB %%pagename%% DOES NOT EQUAL %%basepagename%% + %%subpagename%% => there is no equivalent AWB to mediawiki instead mediawiki ROOTPAGENAME is the equivalent to AWB %%basepagename%% — billinghurstsDrewth03:59, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
<unindent> - You can take that to mean that if you want. But I don't check these pages every day. It's clearly a bug, and my previous comment was showing the comparison of the MW docs and what AWB is apparently currently doing, as it wasn't particularly very obvious from your examples what was exactly wrong. Reedy (talk) 14:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, this is the pop-up I received after downloading the latest version of AWB (AutoWikiBrowser6210.zip (1.1 MB)). I haven't been able to use it for quite some time, like last year and when I could use it, it was primarily my go-to to edit on Wikia (now FANDOM). The site preference is correct and I even redid the username and pass, but the results are this popup that is not giving me much to go on. Bunai (talk) 03:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
I found a topic on FANDOM about this error. Apparently it requires users to log-in using a generated pass given by the site's Special:BotPasswords page. While it worked I am now stuck on why my main account is the one doing the editing instead of my bot which has its own account.Bunai (talk) 03:48, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Alright, I believe I figured everything out!
My mistake was not signing into the bot account and believe that the page wanted the name of the bot I used. Bunai (talk) 04:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
How can I contribute to the code?
Hi! I have expreiance with git but I have never used SVN or sourceforge before. Is there any guide how to make a commit? There are a lot of SVN tutorials on the internet, I can learn it from there. I just can't find the way to get write access to the project? Maybe there is a Pull request alternative here? --ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
I note that if an editor (unaware the first char is not case sensitive) has created a wiki link along the lines of [[Abcde|abcxde]] and the second entry is a typo that AWB moves to 'abcde' then the result is [[Abcde|abcde]] which is a candidate for [[abcde]], however AWB (general fixes) doesn't perform the two actions, only the first. Could this be resolved by script reordering? - Neils51 (talk) 12:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @GoingBatty:, that's pretty much it. I did initially have a look at Phabricator however my search terms gave me hundreds of results. Looks like it's the workaround for now :-) - Neils51 (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Two questions, AWB not opening and typos list
I have the latest version of AWB and it's not opening on my computer. I pressed "run anyway" when presented with the option. Also, where is the list of common typos and how do I use it? Been mostly away for over a year. Cheers, Rubbish computerPing me or leave a message on my talk page15:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
—usernamekiran (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
; happy days, LindsayHello 06:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Done for all CS1 template doc examples & §TemplateData. It looked as if that was the last of the unhyphenateds that needed updating too, though I only looked visually and not programatically. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 18:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Nature will, indeed, find a way. Fiddler is much nicer 
than Wireshark 
. Thanks DavidBrooks.
— Project:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPageJSON does not include me 
.
. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 17:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
Moved to WT:AWB/T § False positive
Resolved
