Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DASHBot 13


 * 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 The result of the discussion was Symbol oppose vote.svg Withdrawn by operator.

DASHBot 13
Operator:

Automatic or Manually assisted: Auto

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Not written yet

Function overview: Tag shortcuts with r from shortcut

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Monthly

Estimated number of pages affected: On first run, 4327 redirects.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: The page is tagged if:
 * It is a redirect;
 * It starts with at least two letters (A-Z);
 * It is in all CAPS;
 * It is not already tagged;
 * It has no spaces; and
 * It is in the Wikipedia: namespace.

Discussion
To see a pre-generated list, click here. Tim 1357  talk  01:00, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * How do you distinguish between a shortcut and an abbreviation? Josh Parris 01:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the template: "Shortcuts are generally reserved for Wikipedia project pages" Abbreviations, rather, are used in the article namespace. That is what is apparent from the What links here pages for both r from shortcut and r from abbreviation
 * The stated conditions should be joined by "and" or "or". Otherwise they cannot be interpreted. Jc3s5h (talk) 02:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Im not sure what you are suggesting. I had to use those logical connectors when I made the list. Tim  1357  talk  02:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The "Function details" section above lists many conditions that will control whether the bot does anything, but it does not say if all the conditions must be satisfied, or any one of them. Jc3s5h (talk) 03:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

All pages must meet all of the conditions listed. I'm sorry I was unclear about that. :-) Tim  1357  talk  03:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * So, what's the 'win' here? Why run this task? Josh Parris 09:43, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Categorizing a whole list of redirects who are otherwise un-categorized. Tim  1357  talk  14:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And once they're categorized... then what? Josh Parris 12:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I have no big picture goal for this task. In my experience, the more we can categorize things, the easier (and more efficient) it is to manage our information in the future. That is why this task is a win in and of itself. Tim  1357  talk  13:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess the question is, does anyone actually use redirect categories for anything except determining which redirects are categorized? Mr.Z-man 22:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Originally WildBot used a redirect catagory to determine what redirects linked to disambiguation pages. Josh Parris 02:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Out of the 4779626 redirects that exist on wikipedia, 750371 are categorized using some sort of redirect template. Of those, 11718 are categorized using r from shortcut. So yes, it seems that the community has some commitment to categorizing redirects. Tim 1357  talk  22:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, so 15% of redirects are categorized. That doesn't really answer my question. Is anyone actually using this information? Did someone request this bot to be run so that they can do something with the information, or is it just categorizing for the sake of categorizing? Mr.Z-man 03:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it'd be best to ask the community if this task is worthwhile. Therefore, I left a message at the redirect wikiproject. If there is no response there, Ill bring it to village pump. Tim  1357  talk  11:20, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just thought I'd chip in to say that I agree with those above who have doubts about the usefulness of this task. Categorizing articles is important, as it makes finding related information easier, and allows for easier management (cleanup cats, etc.). However, categorizing redirects, especially WP:FOO redirects seems rather pointless. It's quite obvious what they are, and I doubt there'll ever be a need to process them all in a batch for some reason (and even if there is, we can pull a list then). - Mobius Clock  17:51, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Clarifying_WP:_shortcuts_and_Wikipedia:_page_titles may benefit from this Josh Parris 07:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This is one of those tricky arguments. Basically there was a lot of "categorising redirects for the sake of it", I am sure  - but some of the categorisation IS useful: most important is "redirects with possibilities" - also distinguishing "redirects from  alternative names" from "redirects from typos" - the latter class should never be linked to.  Having established that some categories are useful we realise that if we can cat all redirects, we will not have putative members of "redirects from typos" sitting uncatted. I do wish we used "Redirect from" rather than "R from"  though. Rich Farmbrough, 21:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC).
 * Status report?  MBisanz  talk 02:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Because of the lack of response at the Redirect wikiproject's talk page, I think this task is pretty much a dud. Tim  1357  talk  04:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Tim 1357  talk  04:57, 15 June 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.