Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 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 Symbol keep vote.svg Approved.

FrescoBot 4
Operator:

Automatic or Manually assisted: automatic

Programming language(s): python

Source code available: ask me

Function overview: checking and fixing broken section wikilinks

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): few times per year

Estimated number of pages affected: not much

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: wikilinks to sections are case sensitive (eg. vs. ). This task is actually an extension of FrescoBot Task 3. It is going to:
 * 1) check selected pages for broken section wikilinks
 * 2) generate a list of possible section name variants
 * 3) check for the existence of one of the above variants
 * 4) fix the wikilink or mark the talk page with the WildBot tag.

Discussion
I will start for example checking pages that link articles with anchor. -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 10:03, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you just clarify how this is any different from Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 3 please (or is it just the way it identifies/fixes the links, rather than the actual edits)? Thanks, - Kingpin13 (talk) 11:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, both scripts fix section wikilinks and they are actually pretty similar. For this reason I was not sure that a new BRFA was needed... however there are also some differences: Basilicofresco (msg) 14:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Task 3 checks the whole dump for any lowcase section wikilink with case errors on the first letter of the section name. This is a common mistake and the script does not have to check a very large number of pages.
 * Task 4 is much slower so it is going to check only selected groups of pages. Within these pages it is going to check any section wikilink for problems. If a broken link is found it will try a good number of alternative spellings/variants.


 * Very well, let's see if it works . - Kingpin13 (talk) 14:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * . -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 17:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The trial edits were successful. Josh Parris 03:57, 16 March 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.