Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PkbwcgsBot 21

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 Denied.

Operator: Pkbwcgs (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 21:39, Thursday, January 17, 2019 (

)

Function overview: The bot is going to fix high-priority

switched on.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Supervised

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Once a week

Estimated number of pages affected: 50 a week for error 46 (over 300 pages in this error at the moment) and 100-200 a week for error 10 (over 1,500 pages in this error at the moment)

Namespace(s): Mainspace

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: The bot will fix cases of

will be turned on but spell-checking/typo fixing will be turned off.

Discussion

I am very much concerned this falls afoul of CONTEXT issues, as well as "history of the page" issues. For example, the second page on the list is Adam Burke, which got messed up in one edit and then horribly mangled three edits later. Even supervised, what would be your method for fixing this issue if all you saw was this version of the page? Primefac (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Third entry is Adlerhorst - I know you're doing it supervised, but how would WCW/AWB attempt to edit this page and "fix" the (non-existent) issue? I'm noticing that there are actually quite a few pages that are "wrong" when it's just a wikilink inside of a [[File:...]] image syntax. Primefac (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: I am going to run WPCleaner to eliminate any pages that have already been fixed or don't contain this error (this is possible without making a single edit). Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is done. 35 pages were marked as fixed for error 10 and 15 pages were marked as fixed for error 46. The bot is going to skip any pages that have been affected by vandalism and I revert those with my user account afterwards. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: ^^ --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 07:12, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Might be worth running again, given that 3/4 of the list still look to be false positives. But, you do have a point in that saving a page with no changes isn't really an issue.

However, I'm still looking for answers on how you'd solve the Adam Burke issue, because this seems like one of the main reasons these errors would be tripped. Primefac (talk) 19:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:WCW as a bug. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Still curious how you'll deal with situations like Burke. Primefac (talk) 04:08, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping Pkbwcgs --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 15:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: I have run AWB on my user account for fixing broken template brackets (with general fixes). I have found a lot of pages affected by vandalism so I have reverted the vandalism. In the bot run, I will revert the vandalism and skip the page edit. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Denied. There are just too many CONTEXT issues to blindly attack this with AWB. Primefac (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

.