Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/WikiCleanerBot 8

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

Approved.

WikiCleanerBot 8

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

Time filed: 10:11, Saturday, June 22, 2019 (UTC)

Function overview: Do cosmetic edits for CW Error #64 (Link equal to linktext) in complement to other non-cosmetic fixes.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java (WPCleaner)

Source code available: On GitHub (especially algorithm 64)

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): With other tasks that I already perform (currently, all are being done twice a month with the dump analysis).

Estimated number of pages affected: A few thousands at most (24393 articles on CW, 24121 articles on dump analysis).

Namespace(s): Main

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: The idea is to do some cosmetic fixes for CW Error #64 alongside other more significant edits. I already have several approved tasks (Task 2 for CW Error #106, Task 3 for CW Error #46, Task 4 for CW Error #543), and other tasks pending approval (Task 5 for CW Error #2, CW Error #16, CW Error #17, CW Error #85, CW Error #88, CW Error #90, CW Error #91, Task 6 for CW Error #1 (cosmetic also), Task 7 for Special:LintErrors/missing-end-tag). I want to combine fixing CW Error #64 with all others non-cosmetic approved tasks (current or future). Of course, the bot won't do edits with only cosmetic fixes.

Discussion

Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Primefac (talk) 13:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I didn't find enough articles to test with other automatic tasks performed by my bot, I did the following edits manually (fixing of CW Error #64 is done automatically, I'm doing manually or automatically other modifications to avoid cosmetic edits):
1. 14 cm/40 11th Year Type naval gun: no problem.
2. 1902–03 FA Cup qualifying rounds: no problem.
3. 1967 Thailand National Games: no problem
4. 1995–96 Inverness Caledonian Thistle F.C. season: no problem
5. 32-pounder gun: no problem
6. 33rd Midsouth Emmy Awards: no problem
7. 4-Bromofluorobenzene: no problem
8. 46th Golden Globe Awards: no problem
9. 49th GMA Dove Awards: no problem
10. 500 yen coin (commemorative): no problem
11. 99 Songs: no problem
12. A Mero Hajur 3: no problem
13. A Night in New Arabia: no problem
14. A. R. Bernard: no problem
15. A.C. Milan: no problem
16. A1 Telekom Austria Group: no problem
17. AFWERX: no problem
18. AIM-9 Sidewinder: no problem
19. AMG Sebastiani Basket: no problem
20. ANIMUS (graphic novel): no problem
21. APS-C: no problem
22. Aamaj Castle: no problem
23. Abdelaziz bin Rashid Al Nuaimi: no problem
24. Abdol Hossein Hamzavi: no problem
25. Abdul Latif Jameel: no problem
26. Abdullah ibn Abd al-Muttalib: no problem
27. Abel Ruiz: no problem
28. Abhijit Banerjee: no problem
29. Ableism: no problem
30. About a Girl (Nirvana song): no problem
Trial complete.. --NicoV ^{(Talk on frwiki)} 17:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have a question about the removal of the br tag in [1][2][3], are these edits correct? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
All these modifications were done manually. Jo-Jo Eumerus, why would they not be correct? The display is not modified by the removal of the tags, so the tags are useless. --NicoV ^{(Talk on frwiki)} 13:26, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was just wondering. I've seen these lone br tags on other articles and never understood what their point was; I wanted to make sure that they don't actually have some valid purpose. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Jo-Jo Eumerus. For list items, I don't see any reason for adding them, the list item implies a line break at the end. For template parameters, I think it's probably because people use some list, elements being separated by line breaks and they add an extra line break at the end: I think most of the time they are useless, but you should check the result. --NicoV ^{(Talk on frwiki)} 09:22, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAG assistance needed}} --NicoV ^{(Talk on frwiki)} 11:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Approved., as long as it's done alongside a more substantial task. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:15, 6 August 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.