Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

This page is for tasks that involve changing the same code in multiple articles. This is a great fit for editors with AutoWikiBrowser permissions.

Please note that Wikipedia:Bot requests are sometimes one-time tasks which can be done easily using AWB. Requesting modifications to URLs, such as marking dead or changing to a new domain, use WP:URLREQ. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia.

I seek to create a large number of redirects to the lists of isotopes. I compiled User:LaundryPizza03/Isotope_redirects#Isotope_names from NUBASE2020 and post-2020 discoveries in a database of isotope discoveries maintained by FRIB, including instructions for each of four categories of redirects. There are a few isomers that aren't included because they were discovered more recently than NUBASE2020, but to date nobody has systematically tracked these discoveries as FRIB has done for the ground states.

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_September_4#Flerovium-283 voted keep for an isotope that is not in the table, which justifies creation for entries that might not be in the tables. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Working. @LaundryPizza03: a few questions first:

1. What is the appropriate redirect categorization for these, and does it vary depending on whether or not it's a ground state, isomer, and using the various notations? The only chemistry-related one I see is {{R from systematic name}}, for example. Are some or all of these {{R printworthy}} or {{R unprintworthy}}? Paging Paine Ellsworth for comment.
2. Just to be explicit, under User:LaundryPizza03/Isotope redirects#With isomers and "g" suffix, when you say These should redirect to wherever the non-prefixed version points, are you referring to the #R target at the top of User:LaundryPizza03/Isotope redirects#Ground states?

~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We use the element subcategories of Category:Isotopes for the suffix-less ground states and Category:Metastable isotopes for the "mx"-suffixed isomers. I'm not sure which ones are printworthy or not. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, corrected. Also, I got some non-IUPAC spellings of the element names. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked through all the existing isotope #Rs. The vast majority had {{R with Wikidata item}} only, while the vast minority had some combination of {{R to list entry}}/section/anchor/subtopic/from merge/etc., so I'll just use {{R to list entry}} by default & test for {{R to section}}. Only ~1 #R was printworthy (Caesium-134), and ~0 were explicitly unprintworthy, so I won't place either of those tags.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notie, editor Tom.Reding! The essay WP:Printability is perhaps a little dated but might give some insights. With little else to guide editors, the sorting of mainspace redirects to printworthy or unprintworthy is still very often a judgement call. My best advice is to start off asking yourself if these redirects would be helpful in a printed-type version of WP, and then applying the printability as consistently as possible across the various types of redirects. Ya'll seem to have an excellent handle on the other categorizations. Best to you and thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 12:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My assumption is that the vast majority of these #Rs would be considered unprintworthy, but I'd need a vocal (not WP:SILENT) consensus before placing the appropriate un/printworthy tag.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:47, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: MPGuy2824 brought up missing anchors on these article targets, so I'm thinking about making anchors for all isotopes listed on each "Isotopes of <element>" page, then going back to working on the next set of #Rs (hopefully with autopatrolled).   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you would need to attach the anchor header at the beginning of each element table, like at Isotopes of barium, skipping isotopes that already have standalone sections. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: regarding User:LaundryPizza03/Isotope redirects#mx notation, should Beryllium-12m target Isotopes of beryllium#Beryllium-12 or Isotopes of beryllium#Beryllium-12m? The instructions say to use the same format as the ground states, which implies Isotopes of beryllium#Beryllium-12, but 87 out of 93 existing #Rs that target an Isotopes-of page include the "m", implying Isotopes of beryllium#Beryllium-12m. (The 6 whose targets omit the "m" are Iron-54m, Neptunium-236m, Rhodium-103m, Sodium-24m, Technetium-95m, Tellurium-125m)   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ask WT:ELEM for feedback. I'd prefer the "m" anchor, since Technetium-99 an dTechnetium-99m are separate articles and it's likely that some isomers will need separate sections from the ground states. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:58, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"m" it is then, since that's the status quo. Tweaks can be made later if/as needed.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When fully complete, I'll go through each "Isotopes of <element>" page, check each "#<Element>-<x>" #R anchor pointing to it, and pile all orphaned anchors into an 'anchor bank' above each list, like what there was on Isotopes of barium before they were migrated to list anchors.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  18:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done!   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Progress

 Ground states

 With isomers and "g" suffix

• 43 {{R to section}}
• 26 #R to article
• 1 non-standard anchor: Rutherfordium-261g -> Isotopes of rutherfordium#261Rf due to Rutherfordium-261   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 2545 3213 3223 ground state list anchors added (Isotopes of hydrogen & Isotopes of sodium were already ~fully anchored).   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 1629 1692 mx notation isomer list anchors added (Isotopes of antimony#Antimony-126m3 was the only might-be dup encountered)   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  01:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• another probable typo found for Isotopes of tantalum#Tantalum-183m2   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  22:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 mx notation   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  18:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Single-letter notation   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  23:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Isotopes of <element> removed from: Americium-242m, Tantalum-180m, Holmium-166m, Tin-121m, Niobium-93m, Cobalt-68m, Iron-67m, Iron-65m, Vanadium-44m
• other cats still remain on: Americium-242m, Tantalum-180m, Niobium-93m, Cobalt-68m, Iron-67m, Iron-65m, Vanadium-44m   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Non-IUPAC spellings   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 unorphan 658 anchors   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done!   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  13:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

I restored Layover to mainspace since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Layover was closed as "soft delete", which says:

Soft deletion is a special kind of deletion which may be used after an article's deletion discussion. If a deletion discussion receives minimal participation, the article may be deleted. However, in this case, the article can be restored for any reason on request.

See also my discussion with the closing admin. 169 links to Layover were removed as part of the close. Please restore these links. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 22:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cunard, it looks like I can just revert the edits, but I don't really want to ping Asilvering 169 times. — Qwerfjkltalk 18:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerfjkl eh, go for it, I'll live. -- asilvering (talk) 20:00, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for everything that was still the current version. Primefac (talk) 20:02, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, which weren't on the current version. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all getting nearly all of the links restored. For the remaining 15 links that aren't on the current version, would AWB be able to restore the links? Cunard (talk) 10:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restored links on the remaining 15 pages. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Cunard (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Hi folks, I just closed a big TFD. I don't have access to AWB at the moment but it's somewhat time-sensitive (i.e. the people are bitching about the TFD notices) - could someone please replace the {{Template for discussion/dated}} call with {{Being deleted|2024 September 27|Replace and delete lang-?? templates}}. The pages in question are listed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 September 27/lang-?? templates. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doing – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see User talk:DreamRimmer#lang-?? templates – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Hi, could someone go replace |website=watson.ch with |website=[[Watson (newspaper)|Watson]] on the articles of this search. Also the same thing on the |publisher=watson.ch ones on this search and |work=watson.ch on this search. Thanks Nobody (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doing – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Edits – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

|ARWU_NU= and |ARWU_W = were recently removed from {{Infobox US university ranking}} and thus need to be removed from transclusions to remove them from the tracking category; at the moment there are just under 200 pages. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 12:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doing – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I have removed these two parameters from all the articles, along with a few other unknown parameters from the infobox. I didn’t realise there were more unknown parameters at first, so I only used regex to tackle these two. As a result, I might have ended up editing around 10 to 15 pages twice while removing the other unknown parameters. Edits. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much every template listed in Category:South Korea pop music group navigational boxes, Category:Girl group navigational boxes and Category:Boy band navigational boxes is also included in its group's eponymous category (example: Template:Aespa is included in Category:Aespa).

Guideline at WP:CAT#T says that "templates are not articles, and thus do not belong in content categories." - Is it possible for an AWB wizard remove these templates from their eponymous categories?RachelTensions (talk) 02:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RachelTensions yeah I'll take a look at it for you. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All list-class cricket articles should be assigned as low-importance only. As per WP:CRICIS and this discussion and this CfD.

• Category:List-Class cricket articles of Mid-importance - these 157 pages should be re-assessed by setting |importance=Low in {{WikiProject Cricket}}.

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 11:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio I can do that for you ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio  Done Cat empty. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

A WMF researcher mass-messaged a bunch of users with the wrong link, which is currently at RfD. Would someone with a bot account kindly generate a list from the WhatLinksHere (all NS) of User talk:BGerdemann (WMF) and replace [[Special:MyLanguage/Research: with [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Research:? Thanks. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Half done @Aaron Liu: VanIsaac, GHTV ^contr_about 02:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) There is only one bot approved to fix mass message errors, but the operator of that bot has been inactive for the last two months. Since there are 2,390 pages needing correction, I am filing a new BRFA. – DreamRimmer (talk) 02:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanisaac, doing this with AWB will trigger a new message notification for all 2,390 users. – DreamRimmer (talk) 02:25, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just got one for this exact reason; can confirm. Graham87 (talk) 02:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I filed a BRFA for this at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AaBott myself, but I can cancel that and defer the bot stuff to you if you want since you seem much more experienced at this. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want me to stop? I'm 584 in, with 1810 to go. VanIsaac, GHTV ^contr_about 02:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanisaac stop please. Commander Keane (talk) 03:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. VanIsaac, GHTV ^contr_about 03:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu, Are you okay with me filing a new BRFA? – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:08, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can do it in 8 hours, sure, but I'm feeling like there's a queue thing here and would prefer to retain the old request. Aaron Liu (talk) 10:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this can be speedily approved. – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:57, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me, then. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is no active bot doing this, I would like to take it on as a generic task for my bot. I have done this before and am available most of the time to address any issues that may arise with mass messages. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:03, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I meant that I'm okay with you filing a new BRFA if you can get it speedily approved. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got the repeat notification too. Not sure you should worry too much – the repeat will just help to remind people to respond to the survey — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 07:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac, would it be possible for you to speedily approve it? I am available and can complete the trial immediately. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are only seven incoming links. Primefac (talk) 15:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are 1802. Please search for insource:/\[\[Special:MyLanguage\/Research:Wikipedia Administrator Recruitment, Retention, and Attrition/. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, right, because it's not directly linking. Jeez. I don't see anything at BRFA, what am I speedy approving? Primefac (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BRFA filed at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BaranBOT 8. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appears  Done by DreamRimmer, thanks. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Primefac for speedy approval :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 19:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Liu  Done; only 32 pages are left where the bot couldn't edit because of 'nobots' templates. – DreamRimmer (talk) 01:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm assuming we shouldn't manually AWB them either? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the remaining 32 pages. I always respect 'nobots' templates, but this was the best approach, as fixing them manually without a bot account would have triggered new message notifications. – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remind people of getting their watchlists spammed into the stone age... SerialNumber54129 16:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've just deleted Category:Worst Picture Golden Raspberry Award winners under speedy criterion G4, repost of deleted content. Could someone remove the 48 articles that are in the category? Nyttend (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  19:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]