Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AAlertBot 2


 * The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was

AAlertBot 2
Operators:
 * (implementation)
 * (runs the bot)

Time filed: 14:17, Tuesday, March 14, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): C#

Source code available: Private, shared with User:Headbomb

Function overview: Replace find sources template in AfD discussion with a project-specific version, such as find video game sources

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games (permalink)

Edit period(s): During the daily run of the main task

Estimated number of pages affected: Depends on the amount of AfDs and projects that have a search template; currently ~0–2/day. Initial run would update all the open ones, a dozen or so.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes for AfD pages (which would mean the AfD page is tagged with bots); subscription-based for projects

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details:

This replaces the find sources template or its redirects in AfD discussions with a project-specific version, such as find video game sources, which have additional search links for the topic. In short:



becomes



An example would be this edit done manually.

At worst, it's extra links that don't lead to any results. At best, it adds easy way to search specialized source-locating searches. The false positives would be the same as for the main task -- almost always user error (incorrectly tagging or listing articles). Same with false negatives -- the bot can't detect pages that aren't explicitly linked to the project.

A project can request this by adding a afdsearchtemplate parameter to their ArticleAlertSubscription subscription at the /Subscription list.

Currently, this would only apply to: That's the only custom template version that exists. Perhaps other projects will adopt a similar approach, perhaps not. May be something like searches in Reliable sources for medical articles can be used. I might inquire with individual projects if this is useful.
 * Replace find sources with find video game sources for WikiProject Video games

The bot will attempt to only replace the template found as part of AfD syntax (currently, just the template on a new line with an indent or whatever syntax AfD may use now or in future). If the bot doesn't find a compatible find sources template, then it will skip the page. The bot won't try to insert/add it, if missing. If the page already has a different project-specific template somewhere else, then it will skip the page. It will assume not to mess with multiple templates if editors are linking them manually.

If the AfD page belongs to multiple projects that want their custom search template, then the bot will replace the base template with all the project-specific templates, each on the new line matching the same AfD syntax. I don't know if this is the best solution, but there isn't any nice way to "merge" the templates.

Discussion

 * Sounds good, though looking at Article alerts/Subscription list I don't see afdsearchtemplate on any of the templates. Is the bot hard-coded to use find video game sources for WP:GAMES, while other WikiProjects will have to opt-in? Or maybe we just haven't added the configuration for GAMES yet? &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  17:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The parameter doesn't exist yet. I'll add it to VG subscription when I implement this. It would be the only project for now. Before I made the video game specific template, none existed for specific projects/topic. At this point, no one else can subscribe ( well, technically, they could, but they could only ask for video games template ). — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:32, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

This is interesting. I can imagine other projects/topics with dedicated "find sources" templates. It would certainly be handy for WP:JOURNALS. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering how the community would feel about reworking find sources to handle something like /, and present custom options... Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, be my guest. That whole template/module group is pretty involved. It makes little difference to the bot which syntax we use. I made the template to match what the docs said and it was like a dozen different places to edit. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I tried to attempt something, but modules blew up the whole thing. I ain't figuring this mess, so I'll likely just code a template that does the same thing and let someone else bother with the conversion to LUA. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, the whole point is to use find sources-based template instead of a custom template. We had a custom template already and it was out of date and needed syncing with the main one for every change. So I converted it to use the syntax of the main one, with all the extra module stuff and such. So now it's fully integrated and using LUA as backend. We probably shouldn't go back to custom template. —  HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * OK to trial, please post results here. — xaosflux  Talk 15:26, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * OperatorAssistanceNeeded How was the trial? — xaosflux  Talk 03:09, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't have the time right now; I had some when I filed this :P I'm moving right now, but I should have some time later. If you want to expire the BRFA for now, I can reopen it later. But I haven't forgotten, just very busy. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * May be reopened at a later time. — xaosflux  Talk 23:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.