Wikipedia:Bot requests
| Commonly Requested Bots |  |
This is a page for requesting tasks to be done by bots per the bot policy. This is an appropriate place to put ideas for uncontroversial bot tasks, to get early feedback on ideas for bot tasks (controversial or not), and to seek bot operators for bot tasks. Consensus-building discussions requiring large community input (such as request for comments) should normally be held at WP:VPPROP or other relevant pages (such as a WikiProject's talk page).
You can check the "Commonly Requested Bots" box above to see if a suitable bot already exists for the task you have in mind. If you have a question about a particular bot, contact the bot operator directly via their talk page or the bot's talk page. If a bot is acting improperly, follow the guidance outlined in WP:BOTISSUE. For broader issues and general discussion about bots, see the bot noticeboard.
Before making a request, please see the list of frequently denied bots, either because they are too complicated to program, or do not have consensus from the Wikipedia community. If you are requesting that a template (such as a WikiProject banner) is added to all pages in a particular category, please be careful to check the category tree for any unwanted subcategories. It is best to give a complete list of categories that should be worked through individually, rather than one category to be analyzed recursively (see example difference).
Alternatives to bot requests
- WP:AWBREQ, for simple tasks that involve a handful of articles and/or only needs to be done once (e.g. adding a category to a few articles).
- WP:URLREQ, for tasks involving changing or updating URLs to prevent link rot (specialized bots deal with this).
- WP:USURPREQ, for reporting a domain be usurped eg.
|url-status=usurped - WP:SQLREQ, for tasks which might be solved with an SQL query (e.g. compiling a list of articles according to certain criteria).
- WP:TEMPREQ, to request a new template written in wiki code or Lua.
- WP:SCRIPTREQ, to request a new user script. Many useful scripts already exist, see Wikipedia:User scripts/List.
- WP:CITEBOTREQ, to request a new feature for WP:Citation bot, a user-initiated bot that fixes citations.
Note to bot operators: The {{BOTREQ}} template can be used to give common responses, and make it easier to keep track of the task's current status. If you complete a request, note that you did with {{BOTREQ|done}}, and archive the request after a few days (WP:1CA is useful here).
| Legend |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| Manual settings |
| When exceptions occur, please check the setting first. |
| Bot-related archives |
|---|
Request for bot to perform automated task related to MOS:POSLINK
[edit]I'm requesting that a task be created for a bot to perform the following action per MOS:POSLINK that has very little chance of having any false positives:
Replace
[[Foo|Foo's]]with[[Foo]]'s.
This can probably be a task that runs an indefinite amount of times, probably once every month or so. Steel1943 (talk) 21:38, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- Is there any consensus for a bot to mass replace these for MOS:POSLINK though? Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:43, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- WP:BOTREQUIRE doesn't require that, and the content of MOS:POSLINK was formed by a RfC. But, if that route needs to be taken, by all means, bureaucracy away! Steel1943 (talk) 21:48, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- This seems like a WP:COSMETICBOT to me. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:52, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Interesting, didn't know that existed. (But, then again, I don't read the bot policy page that much.) Whatever happens here happens, but either way, this policy was recently formed via consensus and this type of change has ... almost no false positive chance. Steel1943 (talk) 21:55, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- Technically not WP:COSMETICBOT, as it does make a difference to the rendering of the link. Anomie⚔ 00:22, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- It does not make a difference in the rendering of the link. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:38, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- It does, though. Foo's is different from Foo's. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 06:06, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Vanderwaalforces: It may be difficult to see, but notice the differences between how the "
's" is linked in both the links Myceteae made above. Steel1943 (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2026 (UTC)- Maybe I was understanding "rendering" differently. But why I said there's no difference is that both of them have the same href= and title= values, only the display text is different. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- COSMETICBOT rules are primarily about whether the rendered HTML differs between the two edits. Removing whitespace does not affect how the page is rendered. Changing the formatting of a URL from Foo's to Foo's does affect the HTML output of the page. In my opinion, this does not count as a cosmetic edit. phuzion (talk) 17:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
- Maybe I was understanding "rendering" differently. But why I said there's no difference is that both of them have the same href= and title= values, only the display text is different. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Vanderwaalforces: It may be difficult to see, but notice the differences between how the "
- It does, though. Foo's is different from Foo's. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 06:06, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- It does not make a difference in the rendering of the link. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:38, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I'm not objecting to this, was just wondering if there was or not. Tenshi! (Talk page) 21:53, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oh, I was thinking that your question was based off of it being some kind of prerequisite to perform such a task (as I would've expected from a place that has editors that are probably rather technical.) My apologies for the misunderstanding. Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- As I understand, there is no requirement that bot requests must have consensus beforehand, although for contentious tasks (e.g. an adminbot that deletes G13'd drafts) it would likely need a consensus to run such a bot. Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- I think for a task that is borderline COSMETICBOT like this one, even if not strictly required, it would be a good idea to get consensus beforehand. — Qwerfjkltalk 14:10, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- It looks like there was an RFC that created a subsection of the MOS that indicates that we shouldn't have the 's inside of links. I'd say that's a pretty good consensus. I'll see if I can come up with something. Primefac (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
I'd say that's a pretty good consensus.
Agreed. This bot would straightforwardly correct clear cut violations of MOS:POSLINK, a recent addition to the MOS which made following a well-attended and near-unanimous RFC. Thanks @Primefac for working on this and thank you to @Steel1943 for suggesting this fix. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 20:38, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- It looks like there was an RFC that created a subsection of the MOS that indicates that we shouldn't have the 's inside of links. I'd say that's a pretty good consensus. I'll see if I can come up with something. Primefac (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- I think for a task that is borderline COSMETICBOT like this one, even if not strictly required, it would be a good idea to get consensus beforehand. — Qwerfjkltalk 14:10, 1 February 2026 (UTC)
- As I understand, there is no requirement that bot requests must have consensus beforehand, although for contentious tasks (e.g. an adminbot that deletes G13'd drafts) it would likely need a consensus to run such a bot. Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- Oh, I was thinking that your question was based off of it being some kind of prerequisite to perform such a task (as I would've expected from a place that has editors that are probably rather technical.) My apologies for the misunderstanding. Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- This seems like a WP:COSMETICBOT to me. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:52, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- WP:BOTREQUIRE doesn't require that, and the content of MOS:POSLINK was formed by a RfC. But, if that route needs to be taken, by all means, bureaucracy away! Steel1943 (talk) 21:48, 31 January 2026 (UTC)
- Any updates on this? Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
- No. It's still on my list. Primefac (talk) 11:44, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
- Restoring thread from Archive 88. I had forgotten about this until I go the notification that this thread I subscribed to had been archived. @Primefac: is this still on your radar? —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 23:12, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
- Seems to have fallen off, but I can put it back on my list. (one of these days I'll actually write down said list...) Primefac (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks! I appreciate it. FYI @Steel1943 —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
- This could be added to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos, I believe. Not sure how to search for [[(...)|\1's]] or [[(...)|$1's]] using mw:Help:CirrusSearch TBH. Ponor (talk) 15:59, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
- Seems to have fallen off, but I can put it back on my list. (one of these days I'll actually write down said list...) Primefac (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
- There might be a bit of a CONTEXTBOT issue... I'm still refining my regex search but in the first 20 hits was
[[Moody's Ratings|Moody's]]which (correctly) shows up as Moody's but would be "incorrectly" shown as Moody's if the task were to run. I'm also pretty sure that Broca's is correct but not 100% confident on that one, but if it is then that's a 10% failure rate which is usually my cut-off for feeling comfortable with a bot run. Primefac (talk) 10:38, 9 May 2026 (UTC)- Interesting problems, thanks for sharing, and for working on this! Yes, Moody's is correct and Moody's is incorrect. Broca area (note the redirect) and Broca's area are both correct but "Broca's" is, I think, the more common rendering and regardless if that's the style being used it should be part of the link. Ideally this would only fix wikilinks like
[[Foo|Foo's]]and ignore[[Foo's bar|Foo's]]. In other words, only when the text on both sides of the pipe is identical except for the addition of the final'son the right side. This would miss things like[[Franklin D. Roosevelt|Roosevelt's]]but the goal is to pick up unambiguous MOS:POSLINK violations with a minimal error rate. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 18:48, 9 May 2026 (UTC)- Added a constraint and it seems to have levelled those out. I'll see about checking the first hundred or so. Primefac (talk) 20:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, all those will be excluded. If so, that part looks good! —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Wait... so you don't want everything that search picked up to be changed? Primefac (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- When I look at the first few results from the search you linked, I see things like
[[2001: A Space Odyssey (novel)|Arthur C. Clarke's]] and [[2001: A Space Odyssey|Stanley Kubrick's]]which should not be changed. The text on both side of the pipe should be identical except for the final's. I'm not sure how else to explain it. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2026 (UTC)- But yet
[[George Washington|Washington]]'sis given as an example of what should be changed at POSLINK. So we have some <foo|foo's> that obviously need to change, and <full name|surname's> that should be changed, but any other piped link should be kept... starting to get that context issue concern again. Primefac (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2026 (UTC)- To be clear, most of the examples *are* MOS:POSLINK violations. Maybe the Clarke–Kubrick examples (from Artificial intelligence) are an outlier but it caught my eye. There's also an example from Kazakhstan with
[[Kazakhstan national football team|men's]], [[Kazakhstan women's national football team|women's]]to refer to the men's and women's national football teams. That one could be argued either way but the way it appears in the article now is acceptable. I haven't looked at enough of these to get a sense of the true "error" rate. If we restrict it to only[[foo|foo's]]then the error rate should be very low but it will leave behind a lot of POSLINK violations. If it could get the full name–surname thing right that would be a big win, since this is very often used with personal names. Basically, the more distinct the two sides of the pipe are, the more likely it is to be an acceptable use. The vast majority will still be unacceptable. I can't say for certain that it's >90%. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2026 (UTC) - To put it another way, from the standpoint of the MOS, almost all of these need to change. I can't speak for Steel but my hope for this was to at least take care of the very lowest hanging fruit while accepting that it would still leave behind a large number of POSLINK violations. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Yep, all of this discussion is the exact reason why I'm only suggesting "
[[Foo|Foo's]]to[[Foo]]'s" and absolutely nothing else ... almost 0% chance of false positives. Steel1943 (talk) 11:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
- Yep, all of this discussion is the exact reason why I'm only suggesting "
- To be clear, most of the examples *are* MOS:POSLINK violations. Maybe the Clarke–Kubrick examples (from Artificial intelligence) are an outlier but it caught my eye. There's also an example from Kazakhstan with
- But yet
- When I look at the first few results from the search you linked, I see things like
- Wait... so you don't want everything that search picked up to be changed? Primefac (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, all those will be excluded. If so, that part looks good! —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Added a constraint and it seems to have levelled those out. I'll see about checking the first hundred or so. Primefac (talk) 20:18, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Interesting problems, thanks for sharing, and for working on this! Yes, Moody's is correct and Moody's is incorrect. Broca area (note the redirect) and Broca's area are both correct but "Broca's" is, I think, the more common rendering and regardless if that's the style being used it should be part of the link. Ideally this would only fix wikilinks like
- Any news? Steel1943 (talk) 06:27, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- Context issues threw me off, haven't really had a chance to find a good middle ground to propose for the BRFA (I think there is still a reasonable argument to be made for a slight expansion of your proposal immediately above). Primefac (talk) 12:39, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- Keep us posted. I remain in favor of sticking with the original, limited proposal though I acknowledge it will leave behind many POSLINK violations. —Myceteae🌈 (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- Context issues threw me off, haven't really had a chance to find a good middle ground to propose for the BRFA (I think there is still a reasonable argument to be made for a slight expansion of your proposal immediately above). Primefac (talk) 12:39, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement editnotices
[edit]I'm seeking comment on an idea for a bot to automatically create editnotices (including templates like Template:Contentious topics/Arab-Israeli editnotice when pages are edited) for pages that are protected as an arbitration enforcement action (for either/both pages that are protected in future & for those currently protected). User:ClerkBot automatically categorises such protections already, over at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/Protections, and it seems tedious to manually create editnotices for each page, which I believe is the status quo.
I'm not sure if there would be a more efficient way to implement such an idea, such as using a module(?), but if a bot is the right idea, I'd be willing to write it and carry it through consensus-seeking, BRFA, and operation. A couple of questions here:
- Is there a more efficient way to implement the idea?
- The bot would need to create many pages, in the format of this manual edit, meaning WP:MASSCREATE would apply. Is there any technical barrier here, or is it simply the consensus of the community?
- The bot would need pagemover or template editor permissions to override the title blacklist. Would this be a technical issue?
- On the non-technical side: does the community even want this bot...is it a good idea? Sysops, template editors, and pagemovers, would you find a task like this useful? (If this thread is encouraging, my plan is to go to WP:VPPROP for consensus for the task.)
Thanks for your input. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 13:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- While this is not an argument for opposing a bot, I would assume many such protection actions are done by Twinkle (I know not all admins prefer it). It might be possible to include this automation in Twinkle itself.
- @Staraction, regarding some of your questions, neither WP:MASSCREATE nor granting pagemover (which I think is technically enough and preferred for such a task) would be any problem, provided consensus for doing the task in the first place is there.
- Notified: Wikipedia talk:TW. ~~~~~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:52, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Editnotice § Creating editnotices lists the locations for namespace-specific edit notices. For instance, the one for mainspace is located at Template:Editnotices/Namespace/Main. Its implementation invokes Module:Mainspace editnotice, which could be modified to check for some suitable indicator (if one exists) that a page has been protected for a specific purpose. isaacl (talk) 22:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- I believe this is how Template:BLP editnotice works, where the indicator is "either Category:Living people or Category:Possibly living people". I don't think there's a similar category for the different protection reasons, and the {{ARBPIA}} template might not always be present on the article's talk page. Is there another indicator that might be relevant here, other than the category? Staraction (talk · contribs) 07:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'd love to see anything that can manage the tedious clerical tasks at AE. Valereee (talk) 12:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- Could the existing logger bot add these, maybe? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @ScottishFinnishRadish: I think that'd certainly be easiest, although it would be up to @L235 (courtesy ping!) of course. Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
I have began a thread at the village pump to seek consensus for this task. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 06:22, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
Pywikibot script to award barnstar automatically
[edit]Hi. Anyone can help me on creating pywikibot script to award barnstar automatically? Hope for positive response. Fade258 (talk) 16:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
- Which event do you want to distribute awards for? – DreamRimmer ■ 16:34, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Regarding this drive Fade258 (talk) 16:36, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer. Is it possible? Fade258 (talk) 06:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Please look at this code and help me on rectifying. Fade258 (talk) 06:43, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- It's possible. I will write one for you. – DreamRimmer ■ 09:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Thank you so much for your assistance. Fade258 (talk) 10:00, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- You can find the script here. Please set Run to true to award users and false to print messages. Parsing may not be fully reliable, as the GAN backlog drive pages are inconsistent across drives. You shouldn't have any issues with the February drive or future drives that follow the same format. I see that some users have already received their awards, so I have added a variable to skip them. In future, it would be better to keep a list of users and points on a separate page or txt file instead of taking data from drive pages, as that would be more reliable. – DreamRimmer ■ 11:43, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer. Thank You so much for providing the script. I will do it. Can you please provide me a script by adding list of users and points in txt file? Guide me I will do that. I hope for positive response. Fade258 (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- You can find the script here. Please set Run to true to award users and false to print messages. Parsing may not be fully reliable, as the GAN backlog drive pages are inconsistent across drives. You shouldn't have any issues with the February drive or future drives that follow the same format. I see that some users have already received their awards, so I have added a variable to skip them. In future, it would be better to keep a list of users and points on a separate page or txt file instead of taking data from drive pages, as that would be more reliable. – DreamRimmer ■ 11:43, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Thank you so much for your assistance. Fade258 (talk) 10:00, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- It's possible. I will write one for you. – DreamRimmer ■ 09:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Please look at this code and help me on rectifying. Fade258 (talk) 06:43, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer. Is it possible? Fade258 (talk) 06:07, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer, Regarding this drive Fade258 (talk) 16:36, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
Remove visible "double sentence spacing"
[edit]Per MOS:DOUBLESPACE, punctuation marks should be followed by a single (visible) space; however, currently we have ~2000 pages that use . occurrences. (Some of them are not related to double sentence spacing, but are still erroneous, so removing them should not make things worse. Other cases of MOS:DOUBLESPACE violation, such as using .{{nbsp}} , are much less common and will be easier to correct manually.) — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not 100% sure I read that discussion as indicating we need to fix these, but I also note that it has gone on at least three different tangents... I'm fine coding it up (simple find/replace) but I just want to make sure that the discussion in question really is giving approval for this task. Primefac (talk) 21:41, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
- Sure. It seems that nobody objects the intention but some people started warring on wording (unrelated to the actual problem), which I really did not expect when making this request. Let's wait until that discussion settles down... — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 01:56, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- @Primefac: that discussion has apparently settled down, also with a consensus to run the bot. When you find time to run the task, please also do the same with
, – there are several hundred pages with such occurrences, more or less all of which should be eliminated. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2026 (UTC) - Cool, I'll try to get a BRFA filed at some point this week. Primefac (talk) 08:09, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
BRFA filed Primefac (talk) 12:19, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
- Cool, I'll try to get a BRFA filed at some point this week. Primefac (talk) 08:09, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
Update locations in America with the 2020 census information
[edit]it has been over 6 years and many wikipedia articles still list the 2010 census as the most recent ~2026-26422-81 (talk) 10:39, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- Should we not have this data come from WikiData? Feels odd to have it native to en. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:54, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- Do you have any ideas on how a bot could help? Dw31415 (talk) 13:52, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- This is related to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1222#Automated_editing_in_census-designated_place_articles that began around the same time. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:21, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
- I agree with Vilenski's suggestion of implementing a Wikidata system including all United States Census data of an appropriate type (probably just population, gender, and race in the generic case). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:24, 18 May 2026 (UTC)
Main article links to non-English Wikipedias
[edit]Please could a bot-op (or other person who knows how) generate a list of articles that use the {{main}} template with a link to a non-English Wikipedia, e.g. {{main|:fr:Siège de Marseille (1524)}}, grouped by destination Wiki. If the list is short, please place it directly in the discussion at Template talk:Main#Main article link to non-English Wikipedia. If the list is (in your opinion) too long for there, please create it as a separate page somewhere suitable (my userspace is fine) and put a link to it there.
Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- I don't see that this would need a bot. Seems like a reasonably simple regex to get a list of articles in the {{main|: format. I suppose going through and listing them per Wikipedia would be the issue Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:03, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thryduulf, like this search? — Qwerfjkltalk 17:01, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't know you could do regex searches! Exporting the results to a list would be easier to work through, but that is certainly better than iterating through language codes 1 by 1 that was all I knew how to do. Thryduulf (talk) 17:22, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thryduulf, that's easy enough to do with AWB, JWB, or pagepile. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:30, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- I'm going to use https://petscan.wmcloud.org/?psid=46902942 for use on the linked discussion. Primefac (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thryduulf, that's easy enough to do with AWB, JWB, or pagepile. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:30, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
- I didn't know you could do regex searches! Exporting the results to a list would be easier to work through, but that is certainly better than iterating through language codes 1 by 1 that was all I knew how to do. Thryduulf (talk) 17:22, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Change "Yokohama" (template call) to "Yokohama Rubber Company"
[edit]I moved the template Template:Yokohama (an icon of a tire company) to Template:Yokohama Rubber Company to make room for a navigational template about the city of Yokohama.
However existing calls for "Yokohama" (which must be replaced before I can insert the city navigational template) number over 500. I need all instances of {{Yokohama}} changed to {{Yokohama Tire Company}} so no existing tire-related pages are affected by me inserting a navigational template in the "Yokohama" space.
Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 03:48, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good use for a bot indeed. Is the new template up and working? Can you share a diff where you have successfully changed it? Dw31415 (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
- The template does not yet exist.
- You could also just name the new template Template:Yokohama city or Template:Yokohama (city) per similar city names for navboxes you've created.
- For what it's worth I've been planning on nominating {{Yokohama}} and other tire templates for deletion, so give me a few days (and make your navbox!) to sort that out; it's been somewhat low on my priority list but I'll bump it up. Primefac (talk) 10:04, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks! I started it at Template:Yokohama (city) WhisperToMe (talk) 04:27, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
Replace all redirects of Israel-Hamas war with Gaza war
[edit]Link replacement: Israel–Hamas war → Gaza war
Task: Mass-replace text/wikilinks inside "Past/Current Events" portal pages and all article pages.
Find: Israel–Hamas war (and piped variations like [[Israel–Hamas war|). See Special:Whatlinkshere/Israel–Hamas war
Replace with: Gaza war
Reason: The primary page target was moved to Gaza war, and past event sub-pages need cleanup. ~2026-28818-51 (talk) 05:30, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
Not a good task for a bot. See WP:NOTBROKEN. Wikiwerner (talk) 11:34, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
Fixing link from location article to race track.
[edit]I need to replace all wikilinks from New York State Fairgrounds to Syracuse Mile in AAA/USAC/NASCAR championship season articles where the link specifically refers to the race track rather than the fairgrounds complex. Thx. Mark McWire (talk) 03:44, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
- Not a good task for a bot. Context issues, and only ~150 links anyway so would be better to be done manually or via WP:AWB. Primefac (talk) 09:22, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
- Okay, I will it change myself with manual edits. --Mark McWire (talk) 23:14, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
Bot to make Wikipedia a better place
[edit]Bot Name: InyaBot Inyamad (talk) 06:24, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
- This is a page for requesting tasks to be done by bots. What task would you like performed by a bot? Dw31415 (talk) 08:06, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
- Anti vandal? If not possible, a typo corrector. Inyamad (talk) 11:21, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
Mass text and link update: Sierra Leone Cricket Association → Cricket Sierra Leone
[edit]The governing body for cricket in Sierra Leone has officially rebranded from the 'Sierra Leone Cricket Association' to 'Cricket Sierra Leone' (the main article has already been updated). Could a bot please perform a find-and-replace across all articles to update both the links and the text from 'Sierra Leone Cricket Association' to 'Cricket Sierra Leone'? Thank you! Elison Pokhrel TALK 03:12, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
- Not a good task for a bot. See WP:NOTBROKEN. Primefac (talk) 10:26, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
- Rather than WP:NOTBROKEN, I'd point to WP:CONTEXTBOT and the fact that a search turns up only about 20 instances of the phrase. Someone could easily do this manually. Anomie⚔ 11:58, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
Correcting user GA count after user page moved
[edit]Not sure if this is the perfect place for this and please let me know if there's a better resource. I submitted a GA nomination a while back under my prior username User:RyanAl6. Between the time I submitted the GA and the time it got approved, I changed my username. Now, the new GA is not showing up in my GA count when nominating/reviewing other GAs. I was wondering if a bot could fix this? Thanks. VaguelyVogue (RyanAl6) (talk) 18:16, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
- Which article are you referring to? You seem to have one GA which is correctly attributed to your new username, and none to your old username. – SD0001 (talk) 11:46, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
Mass-removal of WikiProject categories added directly in wikicode to talk pages
[edit]I'm not sure I'm exactly in the right place here, but due to the number of articles involved, I thought this was the least bad place to post. It's just come to my attention that there are well over 4,000 talk pages that have the text Category:WikiProject Ice Hockey articles in their wikitext, which I would like to have removed by a bot/script. It's my understanding that categories (especially WikiProject categories) are never added to talk pages directly, but rather through templates, because they can easily get swamped by other wikitext added below them or get lost in archives like what happened at Talk:Arizona Coyotes/Archive 1. I'll notify Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey and User talk:Buffalkill, as this user appears to be responsible for quite a few of these. Thanks for any assistance. Graham87 (talk) 13:37, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- This would be a very simple bot run. I'd be happy to run this once consensus is established. phuzion (talk) 13:44, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. I also notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council for completeness. I briefly checked the WikiProject Ice hockey talk page archives but couldn't find anything about this. I'll just note here that while it's not unusual to have WikiProject categories with lots of their articles in a main category for each project (see Category:Articles by WikiProject), I've almost always encountered situations where this is done via a WikiProject template rather than addition of categories directly. Graham87 (talk) 14:06, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- Looking at a few and they had {{WikiProject Ice Hockey}} as well as the wikicode category. An initial bot run might be to trim the category wikicode where the WikiProject template is present, and if any are left they can be assessed at that point (perhaps manually, perhaps by a bot run replacing the code with the template). CMD (talk) 14:07, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- Agree with the task. I think the wikicode can just be removed from the page, without the need for any manual processing — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:21, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- Re those without the ice hockey WikiProject template: those can be filtered out using the hastemplate search keyword like so; all of the remainder (at time of writing) are in Category:Women's ice hockey task force articles. Those too can be filtered out with incategory and I've just dealt with those that I could find manually (see my relevant contribs). Graham87 (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- I think will just use all members of the category, and skip any that do not have the WikiProject template. No need for an insource search. phuzion (talk) 18:10, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- I saw the note at WT:COUNCIL. Graham is correct that these categories should be supplied by the WikiProject banner template and not added manually. If there's something wrong with the templates (such that it's not properly emitting the ordinary categories), then those templates should be fixed. Anyone who needs help with fixing one of those templates should ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- Agreed, but a more direct way to address a problem in a template is on its talk page with {{edit template-protected}} (or similar technical request if they are not protected). the Stefen 𝕋ower 19:10, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
- BRFA filed phuzion (talk) 00:49, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
- Bot run is underway! phuzion (talk) 23:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
B-bot suggestion/request.
[edit]Would someone enhance B-bot so the Orphaned non-free image notice grabs the Article the NFUR indicates the image was used on and mentions/links to it from within the notice? Original author is inactive. RememberOrwell (talk) 21:55, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
- Likely the only person who can do so is User:B, who you already asked. Anomie⚔ 22:39, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
Fix to USDA links that have predictably changed URLs
[edit]I noticed a fair number of plants that have external links to a USDA plant database in an old format that now links to an error page. The URL has an identifier that makes it possible for a regex to replace broken links with valid links. Here are some examples:
Wiki page: Arctostaphylos_nevadensis Old URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=ARNE Valid URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/plant-profile/ARNE
Wiki page: Agave_utahensis Old URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=AGUT Valid URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/plant-profile/AGUT
Wiki page: Acmispon_glaber Old URL: https://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=LOSC2 Valid URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/plant-profile/LOSC2
A search-and-replace seems like something a bot should do, but I have no idea how to find which pages need it. There are certainly categories that seem more likely than others (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Endemic_flora_of_the_United_States comes to mind) but Agave Utahensis wasn't in that category, so it's not a sure thing.
Here's a python regex that seems like it would work for detecting the bad links:
https://plants(?:\.sc\.egov)?\.usda\.gov/java/profile\?symbol=([A-Z1-9]+)
Literal match for most of it, with a non-capturing group for '.sc.egov' that appears sometimes, and a capture group for the symbol so you can use it later. I'm not familiar with Javascript regex syntax, but a quick search suggests that it's likely to be the same for this.
Here's a test I did in python to see if it was plausible:
Extended content
|
|---|
import re
def main():
test_urls = ["https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=ARNE",
"https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=AGUT",
"https://plants.usda.gov/java/profile?symbol=LOSC2",
"https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/plant-profile/ARNE"] # should not match this one
# (?:\.sc\.egov)? is a non-capturing group to match the .sc.egov that doesnt't always appear
pattern = re.compile(r'https://plants(?:\.sc\.egov)?\.usda\.gov/java/profile\?symbol=([A-Z1-9]+)')
for url in test_urls:
match = pattern.match(url)
if match:
print(match.group(0), "\t", "https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/plant-profile/" + match.group(1))
main() |
~2026-34986-55 (talk) 22:45, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- ~2026-34986-55, WP:URLREQ is the place for URL change requests. — Qwerfjkltalk 12:52, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
SimpleObjects-BOT: replacing archive .is/archive .today links with their archive.org ones (and more!)
[edit]Ah, what another cute and lovely time to create another account with my Wikimedia signature name, "SimpleObjects", and the most important part of the signature: a personalized "-9ei"!
I was finding out this yesterday. So here's the story: filter 1,402. (see also Special:Permalink/1339742649#Archive.is_Warning_on_addition). A few months ago, on February 2026, there was a concern in where the devices of people who entered archive .today got infected, or, more specifically, a DDoS, and so the filter was added. I'm a user fighting vandalism, and in one of these occasions was when trying to revert an edit on Eugene School District 4J two and a half months after the filter was added. The user had blanked content part of what contained archive .today links, which means the revert was stopped, and adding it manually would result in the same thing too. Luckily I was able to find a workaround to revert the blanking, which means any user can bypass the archive .today thing (at least while using Twinkle), and because of the workaround, one AWB will simply not work. Oh yeah, Wikipedia also no longer renders archive .today-archived links. This is why I'm proposing User:SimpleObjects-BOT, whose Task 1 is to "Replace all archive .is/ .today links". There are nearly 370,000 or 380,000 archive .today cites in encyclopedic articles, and so I must take justice. Just exclude the Wikipedia namespace, please...
How will the bot work for Task 1, then? Well, it has to access web.archive.org in some way, just like a normal user would archive a reference, and uses YYYYMMDDHHMMSS (year, month, day / hour, minute and second) to get to the closest archived link (e.g. an archive .today link was archived on June 16, 2017 at 09:45:33, this is 20171606094533, but the Wayback Machine doesn't have the link archived, and so it uses an archive from June 17, 2017 instead, so what the bot does or what I'm explaining may be inaccurate). If web.archive.org doesn't have the link archived, well archive.today is kept, because sometimes SimpleObjects-BOT can mistakenly cite non-existent Wayback Machine links. Then, here's the tasty part from filter 1,402: pattern := "(?i)\barcihve(?:\.(?:closed\.social|fo|is|li|md|ph|today|vn)\b|iya74codqgiixo33q62qlrqtkgmcitqx5u2oeqnmn5bpcbiyd\.onion)/\w+";. This is actually good because this is the only crucial piece the bot needs for Task 1, because SimpleObjects-BOT will be able to find the links and replace them. Here's one example of an archive .today link so the bot can test: http
Two other things I have in mind for SimpleObjects-BOT: (Task 2): fixing citation errors and (Task 3): fixing non-infobox templates. Are these two and the archive .today task possible? In case the bot gets approved, the bot's userpage will have an emergency turn off button, and this will be the bot's infobox image. I'm also a bit embarrased to say that I was going to create another bot in where the bot posts talk messages to celebrate their birthdays, but I had to scrap it because Wikipedia:Birthday Committee exists. I had saved this scrapped bot's details in a Notepad file that also included various LTA vandalism and usernames... silly me!
Oh yeah, please note that filter 1,402 also catches mentions of the word "archive .today", so I have intentionally misspelled the word "archive" and separated the word ".today" to avoid triggering the filter. – SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (🌎 CentralAuth) 22:57, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- I started working on a bot for some of the problem. Please lend your support at Wikipedia talk:Archive.today guidance#c-Dw31415-20260606205500-Wrap standalone, blacklisted link Dw31415 (talk) 01:18, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- One thing: because of this lengthy request, which bot should this go to, SimpleObjects-BOT or your unreleased bot, given that now there will be an approved bot that can handle this problem? Bot's edit summary on Task 1 (a.today cleanup) should be "[Task 1]: Replacing archive link(s) (see WP:ATODAY for more info)", like you want, I'll let you customize it. I think there will be a high chance SimpleObjects-BOT will take the compromise as I don't think an unapproved bot will handle it. – SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (🌎 CentralAuth) 01:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- I’m having a little trouble understanding. I intend to keep working on it and submit an approval request soon. I’m happy to divide and conquer if that’s what makes sense. Dw31415 (talk) 02:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- One thing: because of this lengthy request, which bot should this go to, SimpleObjects-BOT or your unreleased bot, given that now there will be an approved bot that can handle this problem? Bot's edit summary on Task 1 (a.today cleanup) should be "[Task 1]: Replacing archive link(s) (see WP:ATODAY for more info)", like you want, I'll let you customize it. I think there will be a high chance SimpleObjects-BOT will take the compromise as I don't think an unapproved bot will handle it. – SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (🌎 CentralAuth) 01:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
There were 3 Afd attempts for WP:Missing Wikipedians and it survived them. Rightly so, I think. But I have serious doubts about the quality of the hand edited data there. I think a rather simple bot can generate that page once a month, and a table that can be analyzed. There is a current discussion on Village Pump ideas and people are just guessing based on their personal experiences. Let us have real data please. It would be interesting to analyze that data. Let us stop guessing why users stop. Thanks in advance. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
Replace dead mojim.com external links with mojimlyrics.com (~100 articles)
[edit]mojim.com (魔鏡歌詞網) was a major Chinese/Japanese/English lyrics site that shut down in 2024. Its archive has been recovered and relaunched at mojimlyrics.com. Approximately 133 English Wikipedia articles contain external links to mojim.com that now return 404. All replacement URLs below have been verified live at mojimlyrics.com.
Request: Replace old mojim.com links with mojimlyrics.com equivalents per the table below. The URL structure maps cleanly (e.g. mojim.com/twh102460.htm → mojimlyrics.com/artist/102460; mojim.com/twy104149x4x7.htm → mojimlyrics.com/song/10414900040007).
Edit summary to use: Replace defunct mojim.com link with mojimlyrics.com successor (verified live)
Domains to replace: mojim.com, tw.mojim.com, httpwww.mojim.com — all http:// and https:// variants.
Replacement table
[edit]~2026-35133-34 (talk) 19:38, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- ~2026-35133-34, WP:URLREQ is the appropriate place for url change requests. — Qwerfjkltalk 14:47, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Request better suited for WP:URLREQ. (for the record/bot). Primefac (talk) 12:43, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
Moving PAM discussions into AfD
[edit]Context: since the March RfC, the historical PAM process is no longer used. Merge discussions are now held at AfD instead. But some people might not be aware of this and continue to open PAM requests (see WP:MERGEREQ).
Is it a good idea to have a bot automatically move discussions into AfD? (or at the least, notify or put a notice on the discussion.)
I am not sure if Merge bot can be modified to make this happen, or an entirely new bot created. (or the idea is just bad in the first place). Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 01:51, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
- It's not a bad idea, but the better idea would be editing the PAM page to make it a lot more obvious that the process has ended (which I will be doing as soon as I finish eating). Folk will figure it out when there is nowhere to put merge noms. Primefac (talk) 12:50, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- I would also note that "I want to merge A into B" is a perfectly normal thing to expect someone to do on an article's talk page, so they might even know that PAM existed. I'm not heavily invested in the process but I don't think we should be mandating that all merge discussions go through AFD. Primefac (talk) 13:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- It (may) be a better idea to have a notice pop up when trying to use the {{Merge to}} or {{Merge}} tags to strongly encourage the editor to use AfD. And I agree that it's fair enough for editors to assume and afd should not be mandated Jacksonvil (alt) (talk) (contribs) (Main account) 05:19, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
- I would also note that "I want to merge A into B" is a perfectly normal thing to expect someone to do on an article's talk page, so they might even know that PAM existed. I'm not heavily invested in the process but I don't think we should be mandating that all merge discussions go through AFD. Primefac (talk) 13:36, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
- Heya, note that all of this this is already being handled by the PAM maintainers at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Implementing the PAM–AfD merge. You're welcome to participate if you wish. The plan we are currently following is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/to do.In short (and this is a very condensed summary), talk page discussions become formal PAM discussion once any editor places any of the {{PAM templates}} on the article pointing to the discussion, so we have decided to turn these templates into AfD templates. For example, {{merge to}} will be an auto-substituted wrapper of {{AfD/dated}}. If an AfD discussion is not provided or the discussion page doesn't exist, it will display an error. You can see how the new templates will look at their various testcases subpages.We are waiting for the backlog to be cleared to implement these changes. In the meantime, we're manually moving all new PAM discussions to AfD. There are only a few new PAM discussion every week (created by editors who are accustomed to the old system), and they've been declining. Due to the way PAM was structured, a bot could never do this automatically, and there's no need: the templates will explain to the editors what they need to do. FaviFake (talk) 10:23, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
Bot to remove historical "begins" dates from airport destination lists
[edit]When new routes are added to airport destination tables, the starting date for said route is added if it's in the future - eg. [[Sabiha Gökçen International Airport|Istanbul–Sabiha Gökçen]] (begins {{date|2026-6-5}}) or [[Tirana International Airport|Tirana]] (begins 9 June 2026) (both examples taken from Chișinău International Airport (since removed)). It's a normal maintenance task to remove these dates once they have passed, so you are left with only the link, comma (if present) and the following reference (if there is one). I've tried using templates which substitute the text with null after the date has passed, but trying to persuade thousands of airport editors to use them is impossible... so we're left with the mishmash of plain text/partially templated formats we have today.
Ideally, this routine maintenance task could be automated, so that dates in these destination lists (always within an {{Airport destination list}}, or its redirect {{Airport-dest-list}} template) which have passed or are today are removed.
Note - the above copied from a post at WP:AWB/TASKS, where I initially asked for assistance and was directed here. Danners430 tweaks made 08:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Just for context on why a bot is desirable here... this is the volume of edits being made. It's currently 9:30 where I am, and these are the edits on my watchlist from this morning alone where the sole purpose is the removal of one of these dates... [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Note that not all are today's or yesterday's date, which is just an indicator that these often get missed, and they remain in lists for sometimes months when they should be removed. Danners430 tweaks made 08:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Processed 4,667 pages and fixed 22. I checked all possible date formats, and these were the only pages that needed fixing. – DreamRimmer ■ 11:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- It's possible most of them have already been caught - it's more the fact that this is a daily task that needs doing, I feel like although it's small in the grand scheme of things, it's almost ideal for a bot Danners430 tweaks made 11:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Yep, doing some quick regex searches it does look like the majority of the old ones (with two exceptions) have been blatted by a combination of the previous AWB run done when I asked the question at AWB/TASKS, and your run just now, so at least we're at "base zero" now. As I say though, I do still think it would be useful - if it's something that could run on a daily basis, and remove these dates, it would lessen the manual maintenance effort required Danners430 tweaks made 12:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I was very much wrong! Davgrx7646 is actively removing more dates as we speak...! [13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Danners430 tweaks made 12:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Processed 4,667 pages and fixed 22. I checked all possible date formats, and these were the only pages that needed fixing. – DreamRimmer ■ 11:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Should these dates be removed even if service hasn’t begun? I ask because one of the questions that helps determine if a bot can do the job is whether human judgment is required. Dw31415 (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- I think the answer is yes and no - if the service has been cancelled, the entire entry (link, start date and ref) will be removed by an editor... and that will be done regardless if it gets cancelled before the start date, or after. Removing the date also, in my opinion, won't prevent that from happening Danners430 tweaks made 11:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Ideally this would be done by humans, who would confirm that the scheduled start has actually occurred (and either delete the entry if the route is cancelled, or adjust the date if the start is postponed) but in practice I don't think that removing the start date automatically will do any harm. If anything, given that the editors who habitually update these destination lists almost certainly have the airport pages on their watchlists, seeing the bot's edit is likely to serve as a reminder for them to check whether service has actually started. Perhaps the question we should be asking is how often routes that have been announced as starting on a given date actually get cancelled or deferred at the last minute? (hopefully routes whose cancellation or deferral is announced in advance would be noticed and dealt with by humans before the proposed bot comes into action). Rosbif73 (talk) 15:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- I don't have hard and fast figures, but I only see a route get removed from a destination table, having never started as announced, once or twice a week at absolute most... which is a drop in the water compared to how many do actually start as planned. And as you say, the human editors will still be there, and indeed the regular watchlist updates will act as a reminder Danners430 tweaks made 17:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
- Just a quick note, because I forgot - "begins" isn't always the word used... sometimes it's "resumes", where a route previously operated and is being reinstated. Why? I have no idea... but I'm not arguing! Danners430 tweaks made 17:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)