Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DannyS712 bot 4


 * 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

DannyS712 bot 4
Operator:

Time filed: 02:39, Saturday, February 2, 2019 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Javascript

Source code available: User:DannyS712 test/bilateral.js

Function overview: Add short descriptions to pages for bilateral relations between countries

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Short descriptions

Edit period(s): One time run

Estimated number of pages affected: <5961

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

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

Function details: Go through Category:Bilateral relations by country and its subcategories, and for pages in the form of "Country-Country relations" add a short description if one is not already there. I calculated that there are ~6000 pages in these categories, not including duplicates, that may qualify, but I'm not sure. I posted about this at the short descriptions wikiproject, and received no comments (I also added a note about this at the international relations wikiproject page, with no comments there either).

Discussion
There's no issue with this sitting open, but I think that discussion should have some actual participation (i.e. there is currently no consensus for this) before we even think about going to trial. Editing 6k pages based on a reasonable-but-undiscussed idea isn't really a good thing. Primefac (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Should I leave messages on the talk pages of people involved in both wikiprojects? --DannyS712 (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've already pinged everyone, so I'm not sure of the best way to drum up a conversation. I do suppose if no one has anything to say it's a SILENT consensus, but again it's not like we want to have to undo 6k edits if someone does complain. Primefac (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I have my notifications set up to tell me if a ping goes through, or if it fails, and I wasn't alerted either way, so the pings might not have gone through. Can I suggest a limited trial, followed by me posting with a link to this discussion and to trial edits, to see if there is opposition? --DannyS712 (talk) 03:06, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I could also send a mass message to the users that were a part of WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force, which seems to be exactly what this task is about. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Why is this better than adding the short description to Template:Infobox bilateral relations. That should describe 3000 pages with only one edit. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Because its not build for it as far as I can tell. If you look at, eg, Mauritania–United States relations, the template call is . AFAIK you can't implement a dictionary within a template, so I don't think you can make the short-description of   from the infobox. Doing it for each one separately would also make it easier for different countries' pages to be tweaked a lot easier. --DannyS712 (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Might as well see if people have issue with this by doing it. Please make sure these edits are not marked as minor. Primefac (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * see the 49 edits made at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=DannyS712%20bot&start=2019-02-25&end=2019-02-25. I may need to add a few more entries to the dictionary (eg "Republic of Texas" -> "the Republic of Texas") for entries in Category:Bilateral relations by former country. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Code for this task is located at User:DannyS712 test/Bilateral bot.js. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * --DannyS712 (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * did you have a template-specific fix for this? If not I'm about to approve this task as the trial looks good and the edits are useful. —  xaosflux  Talk 18:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No, go ahead and approve it. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 18:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * task approved. — xaosflux  Talk 03:16, 13 March 2019 (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.