Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard

Bots noticeboard

Here we coordinate and discuss Wikipedia issues related to bots and other programs interacting with the MediaWiki software. Bot operators are the main users of this noticeboard, but even if you are not one, your comments will be welcome. Just make sure you are aware about our bot policy and know where to post your issue.

Do not post here if you came to

• discuss non-urgent bot issues, bugs and suggestions for improvement. Do that at the bot operator's talk page
• discuss urgent/major bot issues. Do that according to instructions at WP:BOTISSUE
• discuss general questions about the MediaWiki software and syntax. We have the village pump's technical section for that
• request approval for your new bot. Here is where you should do it
• request new functionality for bots. Share your ideas at the dedicated page

Copy attribution bot question or proposal

Does anyone know if there is a bot available that could process a list of articles and make one edit each, in order to add a copy attribution edit summary to the history based on a couple of parameters?

Editors are welcome to copy or translate material from other Wikipedias (or wikis with compatible licenses) as long as they comply with our licensing requirements, which specifies the wording to be added to the edit summary. (This is not optional, and is per our Terms of use.) When an editor is not aware of the requirement or forgets to do it, the required attribution can still be added after the fact, per WP:CWW#Repairing insufficient attribution.

The bot's task would be to add the proper attribution wording to the article history. Input to the bot would be a list of articles, where each article would be accompanied by one parameter containing the name of the article from which content was copied or translated. There would be a second param, which specifies |type=copy- or |type=translate-attribution, and which could either be a single, run-time param, or per article. The output would be a dummy edit to each article, along with an edit summary using the wording given at WP:RIA, substituting in the correct wording per the parameters.

Does something like this exist, and if not, how hard would it be to create one? Inspiration for this is a (good-faith) situation I have become aware of involving possibly hundreds of unattributed translations; prior user discussion with User:JeyReydar97 here. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I am not sure if any bots currently handle attribution dummy edits, but it is technically possible to run one. While I am not planning to run a bot, I can assist with this specific task if you provide more details, such as how many articles require attribution. If it's a one-time task involving 100 to 250 articles, I can handle it using PAWS with my alt account in supervised mode. I won't be able to help with larger numbers of articles due to time constraints. Could you email me the list of articles needing dummy edits, including how many are copied and how many are translated? Also, are all of them translated from the German Wikipedia, or do they include translations from other projects as well? – DreamRimmer (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, thank you for this. Hadn't heard of PAWS before, I'll have to look into it myself at some point. I don't know the number of copied and translated articles, but User:JeyReydar97 will be able to figure that out. I'll work with them to get a couple of lists for you. Many thanks, Mathglot (talk) 11:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

If it's a small number then an WP:AWBTASKS request might be an option as well. Primefac (talk) 14:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, in an attempt to come up with a simple input file interface that people could use to provide input to a bot or [semi-]automated procedure, I have come up with this /Attribution bot proposal so we could have a starting point with something we could discuss. Let me know if this is anything you could work with. If so, we could use the Talk page there to hash out details, and keep this page just for higher level stuff when there is some major decision point, or if that proposal doesn't work at all. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Bot & I'm curious to know that how bots edit The2KKidRulez (talk) 13:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

See Help:Creating a bot#How does a Wikipedia bot work? – SD0001 (talk) 15:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Bot not running - creator inactive

Hi! I noticed that the Rick Bot is not running correctly and has not been active since November 30th. Its creator, Rick Block is also largely inactive and hasn't stopped by since November 4th (or responded to a message on his talk). He's had long periods of inactivity before, which ordinarily isn't a problem since the bot keeps on trucking. The bot normally runs daily and does some useful tasks, including updating the count of admins and CFD archives. Is there an established procedure to step in and fix a bot or duplicate its functions if an operator isn't available? Thanks! —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Anyone is welcome to create a "backup" bot or similar if a bot operator is AFK and otherwise not responding. If the source code is freely available then this can be as simple as using the code and filing a new BRFA, or it could mean needing to re-write it all from scratch before filing a BRFA. Either way, unless the bot is directly handed off to someone (unlikely if the operator is away) then you'll need a BRFA to take over the task, even if only temporarily. Primefac (talk) 13:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

The code is availabe at User:Rick Bot/scripts. It doesn't look too hard to set up. — Qwerfjkltalk 13:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to you both for the answers. Hopefully Rick will be back soon, but if he isn't, I think it makes sense for another bot operator to set up duplicative functions and get approval so these tasks can be handled. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I can help with the admin activity updates. I can write new code and file a BRFA if that works for you. I am temporarily taking on this task, so if anyone is interested in taking over, feel free to contact me for the source code. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Apology to the community (MolecularPilot)

• MolecularBot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I am very sorry for answering requests on WP:BOTREQ for small one-off tasks without seeking a BRFA. After reading somewhere that tasks with less than 700 edits could be just done if there is consensus, I was confused but now realise this is an AWB only rule. However, this is no excuse.

After the requested minor planet task (500 edits approx, RM consensus) and requested school SVG logo categorisation (300 edits approx, general rules of subcats consensus), DreamRimmer clarified to me on Talk that tasks with Python or a bot script outside of bot userspace always require a BRFA, even if supervised and that I was getting confused with the AWB rule. I then promised to file BRFAs for all my scripts.

When moving a botreq thread to awbreq, I saw Whatamidoing (not pinged as uninvolved in this) had made a request that I could fufil, as I know about psychology so could assemble the list of pages, 227 to be exact. I'm on mac so I can't use AWB, so I made a script to fufil this task and filed a BRFA as requested by DR for all my scripts. (Note that this one was automatic, unlike the other edits which were done with supervised scripts).

However, Primefac declined this as it was too small a task and is best done with AWB, not a script, and then promptly blocked the bot for the unapproved minor planet and school logo tasks, also disabling requested WP:EXEMPTBOT AfC and SPI reporting tasks.

So i am here to sincerely apoloigise for running scripts to try and help people (still, not an excuse) without a WP:BRFA, and for then opening a BRfA when AWB would have been needed. If wanted by the community for an unblock, I agree to a 3 month topic ban from helping people with nom-exempt tasks on botreq or awbreq. If I have lost the communities trust as a botop, I will also stop all tasks on toolforge and send the code to someone else. I am very sorry again. 2001:8003:4A10:601:7A7B:9C3B:3071:213D (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Aso noting that I'm not blocked, but my bot MolecularBot is. I'm not logged out for block evasion, it's just that I cant log in right now but wanted to get an apology out for my poor behavouir to the community as soon as posible. Thank you to everyone who helped me on my Talk, and to the wider community for your understanding. 2001:8003:4A10:601:7A7B:9C3B:3071:213D (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Please use your account to communicate. Regarding the bot block, you can file a BRFA once you have a better task for your bot. If BAG approves it, your bot will be unblocked. Just make sure to file BRFAs if you plan to run it outside your user page. – DreamRimmer (talk) 02:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi DreamRimmer, sorry I was at the library so didn't feel comfortable logging in! Can it be unblocked to run the AfC and SPI WP:EXEMPT tasks, if that's okay? Or should I file a BRFA even though they are exempt! Thank you and sorry for causing all this drama by not realizing that AWB had special rules for BRFA exemption and it didn't apply to all semi-automated/supervised scripts. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Also 100% okay with the block being modified to a p-block from mainspace, as all the tasks only need to be within userspace! Thank you! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 02:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

AWB edits are "semi-automated", meaning that the operator glances at each suggested edit and approves it. Semi-automated edits are allowed. Bots are, by their nature, "fully automated". Anything fully automated, even when supervised, needs a BRFA, I think, except for userspace editing.

When Primefac sees your post, I think your bot is likely to get unblocked. You seem like you understand now so should be all good :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I just had a little setup like it was a pywikibot script and it would tell me "do you want to make this change" for each page and I could press Y or N in the terminal, but now I understand why it is wrong. MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 03:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

You can use Pywikibot scripts on WP:PAWS with your main account at a slow edit rate, similar to AWB, if only a few pages are affected. It must be properly supervised. Please be aware that you are responsible for any mistakes that might occur. I don't recommend using PAWS due to the recent block and related issues, but I just wanted to share this. – DreamRimmer (talk) 04:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Ohh PAWS looks cool, thank you for showing me, it's basically what I was doing but on Jupyter instead of my laptop. Using PAWS, do I have to configure the Y/N prompt for each edit as I did when using the script on my laptop, and because that still caused people to get upset is there any other prompts/code I need to add to make it "supervised". Also why don't you recommend it, do you prefer AWB/JWB? Thank you! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 04:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Depending on the task, to fall under WP:SEMIAUTOMATED you should probably be looking at a diff or preview of some sort, not just answering "Y" (it's unclear to me what exactly what your process was). The edits should also indicate in some manner that they're semi-automated; usually this is by including mention of that in the edit summary, although tags might serve in some cases too. You should also code it to abort or notify you if anyone posts on your talk page, so you can react immediately if someone complains, and you should limit your rate both to avoid flooding watchlists and to give people time to react. Anomie⚔ 04:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! I had it like it showed a diff, but only the lines changed (or for moves old title -> new title) and used the +bot flagged account to prevent flooding, but the talk page notification, rate limiting to give people time to respond and mentioning it in the edit summary are super smart ideas, thanks again! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 05:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Do remember that the bot-flagged account may only be used to make BRFA-approved (or WP:BOTEXEMPT) edits, no matter if semi-automated or not. Anomie⚔ 05:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, and helping me figure out all the policies! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 05:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like you understand the issues around this situation. I would suggest -- if you want an AWB-specific account used for semi-automated editing that doesn't clog your own contribution history -- that you create an AWB-specific account (see e.g. Usernamekiran (AWB)). If we are otherwise all in agreement that your bot will only be used for BRFA-approved tasks (and the usual user-space edits which are exempt) then I am fine with unblocking the bot. Please let me know. Primefac (talk) 08:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your time and understanding Primefac, I know now to not use the bot account for semi-automated edits (only for fully-automated, BRFA approved or exempt edits). :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 09:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. If you do have any questions in the future please feel free to ask a botop/BAG member or post here. Primefac (talk) 09:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)