Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DodoBot 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

Approved.

DodoBot 4

Operator: EdoDodo (talk · contribs)

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic, semi-supervised

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: Yes.

Function overview: This will be a one-off run, fixing the table of singles, per this request.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Bot Request

Edit period(s): One-time run

Estimated number of pages affected: Several hundred

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: Basically, the bot will be using a simple find and replace in AWB to fulfil this bot request, replacing all instances of |{{singlechart with {{singlechart. The regular expression that will be used is this:

Find: \|[ ]*\{\{[ ]*singlechart[ ]*(\||\}\})
Replace: {{singlechart$1

Discussion

Any idea how many instances it will change? MBisanz ^talk 04:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, several hundred articles. If I had to make an estimate I would say four or five hundred, but it could be as many as seven hundred. - EdoDodo ^talk 04:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz ^talk 05:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Edits are here. - EdoDodo ^talk 11:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've examined the output, and it looks good. As expected, the generated charts are completely unaffected. The bot encountered tables that had mixed usage (some calls preceded by a pipe, some not) and handled them correctly.—Kww(talk) 14:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest changing the edit summary to say "Removing unnecessary pipe before {{singlechart}} per http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bot_requests&oldid=378520000#singlechart_formatting_consistency" There really isn't something wrong with the pipe, and many of the examples people copied had it. I was actually surprised it worked without it.—Kww(talk) 14:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll provide a link to this BRFA for the rest of the runs, so the edit summary will be like this:

(Bot) Removing unnecessary pipe before {{singlechart}}

Would that edit summary be fine with everyone? I prefer providing a wikilink than an external link, and this BRFA should explain why it is being done, as well as show that the bot is approved. - EdoDodo ^talk 16:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me.—Kww(talk) 17:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. MBisanz ^talk 03:38, 16 August 2010 (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.