Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BlakesBot

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

Request Expired.

BlakesBot

Operator: Blake305 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 23:00, Friday August 9, 2013 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: No

Function overview: The bot will search through all templates on wikipedia, and looks for templates with the following subpages: /doc, /sandbox, and /testcase. If the talk page for these subpages does not exist, and the talk page for the main template does exist, a redirect will be created.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): This conversation

Edit period(s): One time run

Estimated number of pages affected: 15422, a list of the redirects created can be found here and here

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

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

Function details: This bot doesn't need to be exclusion compliant because there are no bot-exclusion tags on pages that haven't been created yet. This task was requested by Andy Mabbett. If source code is requested, it can be provided. Look at the relevant discussion for more details.

Discussion

Support as requester. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Has there been any further discussion about this other than the discussion linked to above? I am not entirely sure the community as a whole would agree with this task. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 16:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Why would they not? As I said in the discussion on BOTREQ: "This prevents fragmentation of discussion between the various talk pages; particularly as documentation pages seem to be under-watched."; I've been making edits like this manually for five years or more; I don't think I've ever been reverted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:34, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
May we now proceed with this useful but unexciting task? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would be willing to trial this if a notice/discussion about this is posted somewhere first. Otherwise, I share Addshore's sentiment. No one having opposed doesn't imply there is wide consensus (especially this being poorly watched area). How often do users actually post on doc/sandbox/test talk pages by accident? By the way, those lists have tons of redirected templates and a bunch of double redirects. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 43#Redirecting talk pages of template sub-pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:45, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused on where you see double redirects. Could you please give me an example? Blake305 (talk) 13:44, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For example, the very first entry Template Talk:1911/doc --> Template Talk:1911. Template Talk:1911 is a redirect to Template talk:EB1911, because the template isn't called "1911", but "EB1911". So firstly, these are not template's subpages, they are redirect's subpages. And redirecting the talk page to the listed targets would cause a double redirect. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 15:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the note at VPM, and I think this is a good idea. It'll be briefly irritating on my watchlist, but it will solve this problem for many, many templates in the long-run. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto, WhatamIdoing. Additionally, I'd suggest adding /TemplateData talkpages to the list (only 12 of them). –Quiddity (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My initial thought is that this seems like a good idea. I'll also note that we do this in other areas that have multiple subpages—such as WP:RFPERM—in order to keep discussions centralized and more visible. 64.40.54.157 (talk) 03:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. No opposition to the task, largely silent consensus and some support, so I'm fine to go ahead with a trial. Also, as I mentioned, those lists have tons of redirected templates and a bunch of double redirects. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A user has requested the attention of the operator. Once the operator has seen this message and replied, please deactivate this tag. (user notified) Any idea when the trial will run? Hasteur (talk) 01:18, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request Expired. Operator seems to have disappeared. Anomie ⚔ 12:51, 21 October 2013 (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.