Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DASHBot 12


 * 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 Symbol keep vote.svg Approved.

DASHBot 12
Operator:

Automatic or Manually assisted: Auto

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Not unless someone wants it

Function overview: Solve redirects on templates that use navbox.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): MOS: Redirect :"*   It is preferable to change redirected links in navigational templates, such as those found at the bottom of many articles (e.g. US Presidents at the end of George Washington). In this case, when the template is placed on an article, and contains a direct link to that article (not a redirect), the direct link will display in bold (and not as a link), making it easier to navigate through a series of articles using the template."

Edit period(s): Monthly

Estimated number of pages affected: On first run: 113302 replacements on 32619 pages.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Yes

Function details: Using a database query, find redirects in templates that transclude Navbox. Replace those redirects with their target. The bot will preserve the title of the link, so the name of the link will not change after the bot's edit.

Discussion
given the lack of objections. Josh Parris 09:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * done Tim  1357  talk  14:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer to see a more explanatory edit summary than "Solving redirects in a Navbox"; perhaps "Use direct link so it will display in bold (and not as a link), making it easier to navigate through a series of articles". Josh Parris 10:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * With regards to the edit summary, what about something along the lines of:
 * "Bot: Solving redirects in navboxes per WP:R."
 * Tim 1357  talk  13:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I find that too brief; I'd like to see an edit summary that reassures me that the bot has done nothing interesting and that I need not inspect the edit. Perhaps "Bypass redirect in navigation template, making navigation through the series of articles clearer" Josh Parris 05:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Having seen all the edits, are there any circumstances where changing the display text would be appropriate? I'm specifically thinking about en- to em-dashes (or vice versa), but there might be a general case that's applicable? Josh Parris 11:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, there were some instances where the link name should have been changed. However, I do not think that'd be an appropriate job. I think it is not the bot's place to determine when it is OK to change the name. It is a job best left for humans. Tim  1357  talk  13:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree; at the same time, I found the bypasses from one dash-version to another dash-version seemed on first inspection to have no effect; it was only after some head scratching that I figured out what had happened. If the redirect was marked R from modification I think you might have reason to change the text in the navbox - I'd personally find that less confusing, and presume others would. Josh Parris 05:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if we are only looking at the en/em dash link thing:I could run the bot-safe general-fixes on the navboxes which I believe covers converting spaced hyphens to em-dashes. Tim  1357  talk  10:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If you're willing to add that functionality, please go ahead. If you'd prefer not, I think I'm ready to run with this once everyone's happy with the edit sumary. Josh Parris 05:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Where are we at Tim1357? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Parris (talk • contribs)


 * I am pretty much ready to go, but I need to come up with a better edit summary. How about:

Bot: Bypassing redirects in navboxes in order to improve article navigability;details/shutoff
 * Tim 1357  talk  23:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Or:

Bypassing redirects in navboxes, in order to improve article navigability;details/shutoff
 * Because redirects and navbox don't need links, but the reasoning for the bypass does. Josh Parris 04:01, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I like that one. Tim  1357  talk  02:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Josh Parris 02:12, 31 May 2010 (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.