Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PrimeBOT 30

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Previous bot tasks

Edit period(s): As needed/requested, but each request will be a OTR

Estimated number of pages affected: 1000-8000 pages, depending on transclusion count and size of category

Namespace(s): Main

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: As seen in my previous bot runs, I have a lot of past experience with removing deprecated/unnecessary/etc parameters from templates. With this number seemingly increasing (4 of the last 5 BRFAs were for this purpose) I thought I would get an open-ended approval for this task. The general criteria for running this bot would be something along the lines of the following:

1. Template must have 1000+ pages in a "bad parameters" category and/or be a template merger with 1000+ transclusions (anything smaller can really be cleaned up manually)
2. Discussion must be present and consensus agrees that a bot run will be necessary to remove the bad params (e.g. see discussions for bot runs 28 and 29)
3. A list (ideally created by the requesters and not myself, but I will do it if necessary) will be created for the parameters to be removed/changed/updated/etc
4. The specific task will be added to a "records page" (likely User:PrimeBOT/Parameter removal records or some such location) fully documenting the previous three steps (i.e. CYA)
5. The parameters will be updated as dictated in the discussion.

As a result of the last two bot runs (28/29) I also worked out most of the kinks in Headbomb's proposed logic for infobox cleanup, which basically involves one-param-per-line and piping fixes. Specifically, 1.a, b, c, and 2.d - I never did get around to investigating the others. This logic makes the actual task of tweaking params a lot easier, hence my interest in including it.

Discussion

As a note/thought, this would also be used/useful for when TFD mergers are implemented, which is really what motivated me to file this BRFA as I might have been stretching Task 24 a little farther than it should have been stretched on a couple of occasions. Primefac (talk) 22:18, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support your methodology. Getting a list of parameters from the editor(s) leading the merge effort will be useful to show that the bot is performing a consensus-based task. With regard to your first criterion, it might need to be tweaked a bit to be applicable to the Infobox UK school to Infobox school merger: the bot's work will migrate current parameters in a TfD'd infobox to supported parameters in the merge target, thereby avoiding the creation of 1000+ unsupported parameters when the TfD'd infobox is turned into a redirect. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Updated. Primefac (talk) 11:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support the running of this bot, Primefac does have a lot of past experience with removing deprecated/unnecessary/etc parameters from templates as noted above and has done bot runs for me in the past for Infobox school which was excellent and really helpful. Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:03, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• This is not RFA. "Voting" here is not needed. As far as the task - the criteria are very clear, and well thought out. Approved for trial (250 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. SQL^{Query me!} 09:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Trial complete. - Edits, as well as documentation. As a note, I was informed of the one edit that blanked the page (I had forgotten to add in GreenC's fix), so that's taken care of. Primefac (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I checked about 50 of the 250 edits, and they all looked fine to me. Except for a page blanking that Primefac will implement a fix for, none of the templates were broken or degraded in any way. (I put a note on Primefac's talk page requesting a minor enhancement, but implementation of that enhancement should not block this bot's approval.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  SQL, is this ready for approval? Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Primefac: can you explain more what you are throwing in with this task ("infobox genfixes")? I'm seeing changes in your trial that are not about the infobox (ex1, ex2). — xaosflux ^Talk 20:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  The genfixes were thrown in during tasks 28 and 29, and are just AWB's standard genfixes. I have no issues disabling them if that's a concern. I will note, however, that the addendum is (+genfixes) which is not the same as infobox genfixes. Primefac (talk) 21:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Primefac: this task overview says Function overview: Remove deprecated/invalid parameters from templates as well as "infobox genfixes", I understand you want it to also be "+AWB genfixes" which overall isn't an issue if that is what it is supposed to be doing. Can you talk more about what the special added "infobox genfixes" are? — xaosflux ^Talk 03:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, right, forgot I wrote that. I mentioned it briefly in the Function details, but I'll elaborate. It is based on Headbomb's proposed logic for infobox cleanup, which basically involves one-param-per-line and piping fixes. Specifically, I'd be fixing 1.a (moving pipes to the left of params), 1.b (one param per line), 1.c (extra pipe removal), and 2.d (empty line removal). This isn't critical to the running of the task, but since it seems to be working pretty well I figured I'd do some cleanup while I was at it. Primefac (talk) 21:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{

 Approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:21, 30 November 2018 (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

.