Wikisource:Bot requests

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
←
Community pages
Bot requests
archives (current)
→

This page allows users to request that an existing bot accomplish a given task. Note that some tasks may require that an entirely new bot or script be written. This is not the place to ask for help running or writing a bot.

A bot operating performing a task should make note of it so that other bots don't attempt to do the same. Tasks that are permanently assigned or scheduled for long-term execution are listed on Persistent tasks. See also Wikisource:Bots.

Move all subpages of Who's Who in the Far East to use title case

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 year ago6 comments3 people in discussion

I was informed by User:Beeswaxcandle that I should use title case instead of all caps in article names. So I request to move all subpages of Who's Who in the Far East to use title case. Although I can use a bot to move it myself, that would leave tons of redirects for admins to delete. But if an admin can easily batch-delete a list of pages, I can move it myself and then provide the list of pages to delete. I'm sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks, --Stevenliuyi (talk) 08:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Stevenliuyi: Please review the list at Wikisource:Bot requests/sandbox. I notice that there is at least one English name that needs to be fixed, and the Chinese names didn't convert on the regex that I used. Would you fix or create the target (only) in the list in the pair list, and I will get it done. No need to fix those that are broken though you should fix the previous/next links of the articles either side. To note that as I did for your other work, I will look to get a work specific template in place, though will do that afterwards. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
I suppose that I really to want to ensure that the Chinese names are capitalised properly. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Stevenliuyi and @Billinghurst: Has this request been actioned (i.e. can it be closed as resolved)? Xover (talk) 10:34, 10 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Stevenliuyi: Please see Billinghurst's request (above) for quality control of the list of targets in Wikisource:Bot requests/sandbox. They have done the legwork to prepare for the move, but it is unable to progress until you've checked and corrected the target page names. Xover (talk) 05:33, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Stevenliuyi: This is blocked on your input here. Xover (talk) 10:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata bulk edit

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 year ago8 comments4 people in discussion

I made a query for works on enWS that have WD items with no "instance of" statement. The criteria I used are:

  • Pages in mainspace
  • No redirects or disambiguation pages (this includes Versions and Translations btw)
  • Does not contain a forward slash in the page name (in order to exclude subpages)
  • Is linked to Wikidata, and linked Wikidata item does not have a P31 statement

This query returns 13889 results, which is more than even QuickStatements can handle. Would it be possible for a bot to update these Wikidata items with P31=Q3331189 (instance of = version, edition, or translation)?

Thanks :) —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I think we could be more specific for certain groups, e.g I have addressed "Presidential Radio Address" articles as "instance of speech". There are several groups of articles that can be identified and then addressed with QuickStatements. After that, the bot can be run on what is left. Mpaa (talk) 23:13, 1 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Mpaa: Except they are editions as we host them, the speech would be the parent to the item, per d:WD:Books as there may be other published editions of the same speech. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Billinghurst I see. I saw other were linked that way and I followed along. If it is not correct, it should be cleaned up but I do not master wikidata tools enough to write a bot for it. Mpaa (talk) 21:34, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
We desperately need better Wikidata tools (so we're not dependent on Billinghurst to be on eternal vigilance here). But the current gadget we have for this is loaded from some user's personal page on Russian Wikisource (which is kinda iffy in itself these days), and its code is completely incomprehensible. If anybody knows of or runs across good API docs for how to talk to Wikidata I'd be very interested. As far as I can tell, the only existing API is the main MW:API with some very minor additions for WD, and that's way way too painful to use for our purposes. Xover (talk) 06:15, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: Maybe we should just be bold and create a phabricator task and see where we go. We probably should have put this into the desired toys to be built for 2023, though we have missed that boat as it is currently in final stages of voting (I think). — billinghurst sDrewth 05:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
User:Beleg Tâl why not just do it with Petscan itself, from memory it could additions. Also note that there is the interwiki Petscan: for these. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Comment wondering whether we need to chip out components of this task. For example, something like petscan:23959659 shows works using {{Act of Congress}} which would not be edition, and would instead by another item, and they also have components that could have other elements added through QuickStatements. Yes, this will still need a large slab of works that need version, edition or translation (Q3331189) added, though at least it will allow for something less than the blunderbuss approach. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Copy the proofread text from Index: The last man (Second Edition 1826 Volume 1).djvu to Index:The last man vol 1.djvu

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The three volumes of The Last Man only have a different title page between the first and second edition, could the proofread text of the three-volumes of the second edition be copied to the scans of the first edition. Languageseeker (talk) 23:29, 16 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mpaa If it is OK to copy also the Page status, better wait for all 3 vols to be validated. Mpaa (talk) 13:53, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Makes Sense. Languageseeker (talk) 13:49, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Migrate more one- and two-parameter invocations of Template:RunningHeader

[edit]
Latest comment: 6 months ago30 comments5 people in discussion

Replacements:

  • {{[running header]|[text]}} to {{rh|[text]||}}
  • {{[running header]||[text]}} to {{rh||[text]|}}
  • {{[running header]|[text]|}} to {{[running header|[text]||}}
  • {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]}} to {{rh|[left text]|[center text]|}}
  • {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|{{[template]|[space or nothing]}}}} to {{rh|[left text]|[center text]|}}
  • {{[running header]|{{[template]|[space or nothing]}}|[center text]|[right text]}} to {{rh||[center text]|[right text]}}
  • {{[running header]|{{[template]|[space or nothing]}}|[text]|{{[template]|[space or nothing]}}}} to {{rh||[text]|}}
  • delete {{rh|| }}
Indexes:
  • EB9:

—CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 03:38, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Just to note... Since there's no pre-made page generator to give pywikibot all these pages to work on I am going to have to make custom bot to loop over them, and since I don't have any similar code lying around that's going to have to wait until I have the time to sit down to figure out how to do that. Pywikibot also at some point seems to have dropped the ReplaceBot class, so I may have to reimplement a lot of the basic logic for that too. @Mpaa: you wouldn't happen to have any code like this handy that you could share? Or any advice on how to approach this? Xover (talk) 07:02, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Xover it's called ReplaceRobot it this what you mean. I would use replace.py and make it in chunks; note that you can feed several -prefixindex:<prefix> at at time.

As a side comment, it seems you are changing the signature for {{rh}}, isn't it? If so, I haven't followed the discussion and the rational, but given the wide and long established use of the template, I am a bit skeptical (e.g. I have never specified the last | in {{rh|10|SOME WORK}}, so I expect a learning time, with more of this kind of replacement to be done. Mpaa (talk) 11:52, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Mpaa: Isn't that an internal class for the replace.py script? There used to be a base pywikibot ReplaceBot class for making custom replace bots, but it got dropped at some point (or at least I wasn't able to find it). My Python-fu is pretty weak sauce so I could just be confused.
I've been using stock replace.py with options, but the list of indexes above is going to be a bear to do that way so I was looking for some way to do it in a foreach (and wrapping replace.py in perl, natch, failed due to PAWS' funky handling of stdin).
And, yes, the bot runs are part of changing the call signature of {{rh}} such that the number of args determines how many cells you get. The change should (I think) be immediately obvious so the learning curve might not be so bad. The most tricky case is when rh only gets two params, because that used to give you left+center and will now give you left+right. Xover (talk) 18:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: Would it be easier for you to work with a tracking category? If so, we should talk in more detail about the tracking categories I've added to Module:Running header and my thoughts on a two-stage migration. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 01:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@CalendulaAsteraceae: Yes. Any list of pages I can reliably get from one of the Page Generators is much easier to work with because then I can just fire off the stock replace.py script. Getting the regexen right still requires some tweaking, but I speak regex natively so that's usually not a big problem.
Making a custom script for stuff like this isn't really that hard either, it's just that I have never done it—or worked with other custom pywikibot code—and combined with not being a Python coder it means it takes sustained attention and effort to learn first (which is the kind of time I have trouble finding).
Incidentally, Mpaa, being able to specify an Index: page in order to work on all the Page:es associated with it, might be a nice convenience for pywikibot. -pagesinindex:"Foo.djvu" or something. -prefixindex:"Page:Foo.djvu/" with manual fiddling works fine, but it is a couple of extra steps. Xover (talk) 07:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@CalendulaAsteraceae: How did you come up with this list of indexes? Is it something we can automate adding a tracking category to? Or maybe just list all the pages somewhere? It's going to take a while for me to get around to figuring out how to do a custom PWB bot for this, and I have several higher-priority projects. If we can find some way to make the page selection in a way the pywikibot's standard generators can consume it'd be much easier (read: faster). Xover (talk) 09:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: I came up with this list of indexes by doing a regex insource search and checking the results manually, but if we switch to using Module:Running header (in its current form, which doesn't change functionality) it will add tracking categories automatically. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 15:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: The category's still filling up, but here you go!
—CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 00:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: Updated request now that there are tracking categories:
  • Category:Running headers with one entry I took care of these manually!
  • Category:Running headers with two entries
    • {{[running header]|left=[left text]|center=[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|center=[center text]|left=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|left=[left text]|right=[right text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|right=[right text]|left=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|center=[center text]|right=[right text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|right=[right text]|center=[center text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|1=[left text]|2=[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|2=[center text]|1=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|1=[left text]|3=[right text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|3=[right text]|1=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|2=[center text]|3=[right text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|3=[right text]|2=[center text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
—CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 18:04, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@CalendulaAsteraceae this is a huge backlog. To make things easier with regexes, is it possible to create different tracking categories: no named parameters, left-center-right parameters, 1-2-3 parameters) Mpaa (talk) 15:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Mpaa, I've created Category:Running headers using explicit parameter names, but I'm not aware of any way to distinguish explicit versus implicit numbered parameters. Breaking these down a bit:
  • Category:Running headers with two entries and Category:Running headers using explicit parameter names: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=28015778
    • {{[running header]|left=[left text]|center=[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|center=[center text]|left=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|left=[left text]|right=[right text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|right=[right text]|left=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|center=[center text]|right=[right text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|right=[right text]|center=[center text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
  • Category:Running headers with two entries and not Category:Running headers using explicit parameter names: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=28015774
    • {{[running header]|1=[left text]|2=[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|2=[center text]|1=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
    • {{[running header]|1=[left text]|3=[right text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|3=[right text]|1=[left text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]||[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|2=[center text]|3=[right text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|3=[right text]|2=[center text]}} → {{[running header]||[center text]|[right text]}}
    • {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]}} → {{[running header]|[left text]|[center text]|}}
—CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 22:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Xover: This should not be done; it goes against the consensus stated here. This is especially so as, if I remember correctly, only you and the bot action requestor were the only editors who expressed support of the proposal. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

CalendulaAsteraceae, Xover could you remind me what happens to explicit params (left=|center=|right=)? Are they going to be phased out and so Category:Running_headers_using_explicit_parameter_names shall be emptied? Mpaa (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mpaa: left is an alias of 1, center/centre is an alias of 2, and right is an alias of 3. I would like to phase these parameters out, since their use is prone to cause errors with duplicate parameters, but it's not a high priority. —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 20:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
cf. this edit. Why are we converting these to {{c}}? These should be perfectly fine running headers both before and after the migration, no? Xover (talk) 05:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
In any case rh/1 behaviour was planned in the new version. It generates a single centered field IIRC. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@ShakespeareFan00 which in my opinion is a bad idea. What does it achieve vs. having {{rh|xxx}}? It will only generate one more template, we will have works that on one page will use rh, on the next rv/1, then rh again ... I thought you valued consistency. Mpaa (talk) 08:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps someone can site down and decide on ONE approach then? and then make all existing usage consistent? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps someone should do that and DOCUMENT it so tightly there cannot be arguments BEFORE any futher conversions or "repairs" are undertaken? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
The eventual goal is to have {{rh|<centered heading>}}, so that it's possible to have single field headings, albiet with a stylesheet to set the 'style' of that heading, something that's not possible with {{c}}. {{rh/1}} has a class param, and my understanding was that once current uses are standardised. {{rh/1}} get the /1 dropped.
The need to expand 2 param calls to 3 param calls, is because the deign intent was to make 2 param calls behave as {{rh|<left heading>|<right aligned heading>}}) which is different from the current implied 2 param usage of {{rh|<left aligned heading>|<center aligned heading>}} (and hence what causes the creation of {{rh/1}}{{rh/2}}, {{rh/3}} etc.. It's to do with CSS hooks for IndexStyles as well..
Once current use is consistently more than 3 params, rh/3, rh/2 , rh/1 (with their different behadviours etc can be re-merged.
As I said it needs someone else to sit down and look at all the variants.
(Aside: It would also be a LOT simply if RH wasn't supplied with formatting templates in it's input, The 'styles' applied should be set in Indexstyles, with the params being pure content. The styles are then set via IndexStyles and appropriate CSS selectors.)
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@ShakespeareFan00 I 100% support your last point! I can't stand templates in rh, they make parsing much more complex. Mpaa (talk) 22:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover sure it would work; I was going through recent changes and it seemed to me that {{c}}<nowiki>}} is the right template in that case. It is not that we need rh everywhere just because it exists.
Anyhow, some of my edits were reverted e.g. this, so it seems @TE(æ)A,ea. is not happy with this rh migration; I am going to stop until people are happy with it. Mpaa (talk) 20:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hmm. Well, for the diff linked I'd used {{rh}} deliberately because it is a running header, and using {{c}} doesn't seem to provide any additional benefit or prevent any problem. {{rh||pageno|}} works fine and is, AIUI, supposed to keep working. So unless I'm missing something I don't think that particular case needs (or should) be changed.
As for the reverts, TE(æ)A,ea. is objecting to {{rh}} (or any other template) being implemented in Lua, because they are somehow under the impression that any random contributor can maintain and modify templates like this if they are implemented in MediaWiki template syntax; and that a mainstream programming language like Lua is somehow harder to maintain. This is of course entirely unrelated to the functionality of the template, which is what we're discussing here. Xover (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover It is not a big deal, I can revert them back if you prefer that. My line of thinking is that up to yesterday also {{rh||pageno}} was supposed to be OK until it was not ... and I am sure tomorrow someone will like to replace {{rh||pageno|}} with {{rh/1|pageno}} and so on. If we already had support for {{rh|pageno}} keeping consitency between 'name' and'function' would probably be OK. Mpaa (talk) 08:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Mpaa: No no, no need to revert anything. Right now it doesn't matter whether it uses {{c}} or {{rh}}. It's just that it seemed unnecessary, and longer term I have some ideas for how the difference in semantics might be employed for actual functionality (hence why I've elsewhere recommended that we avoid (ab)using {{rh}} for columns or margins in the page body). For example, a Gadget that manages the running headers (that would get confused by {{rh}} in the body, and unable to detect a running header using {{c}}) or a "reader mode" that gives you a book-like view for reading page-by-page that also fetches the running headers and displays them even though it operates in mainspace. Just loose thoughts, so nothing that matters near-term, but that's the context. Xover (talk) 09:00, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@TE(æ)A,ea. are you ok with these changes or not? Because your reverted something that is not related to how the template is implemented, but more to the idea behind it. My edit would be acceptable also with the old implementation. Mpaa (talk) 08:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Mpaa: As I mentioned earlier in this discussion, I do not believe that the running header conversion scheme (particularly the one where using unnamed parameters 1 and 2 becomes left and right, as opposed to the long-running standard practice of left and center) is justified by community consensus. Bots cannot operate without justification, and here that justification is explicitly lacking. When the changes currently being made were brought up at the Scriptorium, widespread objection was held in regard to the change in unnamed parameters 1 and 2. Despite this, the users who proposed the change are continuing to enact it in the face of community consensus—no new feat for at least one of them. In any case, I vehemently object to any such change to any project in which I am involved and in which I am working, such as Kojiki (by your example). TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Okay let me blunt, What is your "actual" concern with expanding all current usages of rh to 3 or more parameters?
    ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
    • ShakespeareFan00: It’s completely pointless and a massive waste of resources. People who deal with coding and other Wikisource backend (the above contributors) could do something productive; instead they spend days and weeks trying to change this template, which will require 165,000+ pages to be edited, and will produce absolutely no benefit. This isn’t even about the Lua change, at this point; the two-parameter system currently in place could be carried over. It’s basically two users, without (if not against) consensus, undertaking to make hundreds of thousands of edits and break workflow for, I would say, most active editors, for no benefit to the project. I do, also, object to the change to Lua, for the reasons I have stated before (and which Xover mocked above). The use of modules should be avoided as much as possible, and templates should certainly not be changed to modules when there is no need to do so, as here. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Replace illustrator header parameter with section_illustrator in subpages of works

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago5 comments2 people in discussion

The deprecated {{Illustrator}} template was replaced by the built-in parameter "illustrator" per bot request. However, when the parameter was used for a specific subpage only and not for other subpages of the work, such as here, then the parameter "section_illustrator" should be used instead. Would it be possible to find and correct all other cases and change the parameter? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 12:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Jan.Kamenicek: I've changed all the |illustrator= that can be converted (semi-)automatically to |section-illustrator=. For the remaining ones the illustrator specified in |illustrator= is the illustrator for the text as a whole (i.e. it appears on the subpage as a duplication of the top-level page header, the same way they repeat the |author=). Changing these to |section-illustrator= would actually change the meaning, so I'm not comfortable doing that without wider discussion. If you have some of your own texts you'd like changed I can do that as (the equivalent of) "author's request".
That being said, I am increasingly uncertain about whether it makes sense to repeat the illustrator for the work on the subpages of the work. For something like Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (Rackham), where the whole point of the edition is that it's illustrated by Rackham, I can kinda see the point (and in that case it can appear even on subpages without illustrations, like and author or editor)). But for most other things, what makes sense is |section-illustrator= or nothing. I think maybe we ought to bring this to the Scriptorium for wider discussion. Thoughts? Xover (talk) 12:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Xover: Thanks!
As for repeating the illustrator in the chapters, I do not really have a strong opinion on that (supposing we talk only about cases where all the chapters have the same illustrators as those mentioned in the header of the title page). Just a quick thought: If other authors are repeated (and I believe they should be), why should illustrators be an exception? There are works where the importance of their illustrators is nearing the importance of the text authors, typically with children books. Maybe it makes even a little more sense for non-fiction works, where a reader might google out and read a specific chapter without looking at the rest of the edition. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 21:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jan.Kamenicek: Well, it's based on the observation that for most texts the illustrators are like in Index:Options (1909).djvu, a grab-bag of illustrators that each have contributed to only one part. Things like Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (Rackham), where the whole point of the edition is that it's illustrated by Rackham, tend to be the exceptions. Right now we do not have any direct guidance on this, and that kinda-sorta works when it's up to human judgement and nobody fights about it. You get very inconsistent application of it (cf. all the |illustrator= parameters on subpages I had to skip), and you risk people fighting about it (cf. the rather heated revert wars about whether |year= should be used on subpages). It also means I can't make things like the automatically generated headers created by Proofread Page behave sensibly by default (i.e. should it include the year in subpages by default and require people to override it, or omit it by default and require people to specify it when needed). Xover (talk) 10:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
I have just offered a thought that came to my mind, but if not repeating the illustrator on subpages makes things easier for you, I am OK with that. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Collected works of Ibsen moves

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Each Index above needs to have (a) the File on Commons renamed; (b) the Index on Wikisource moved; (c) all Page(s) moved. The issue is that we have an incomplete (UK) Heinemann edition set and a partial (US) Scribner's edition set, with further scans from the Scribner's on Commons, and the two sets of editions ought to be disambiguated before any further confusion or ensues.

Each File / Index / Page should be renamed so that "Heinamann: is added in the position to make the following change:

  • "The collected works of Henrik Ibsen (Volume 5).djvu" --> "The collected works of Henrik Ibsen (Heinemann Volume 5).djvu"

The template {{The collected works of Henrik Ibsen}} is the only item linked to these Indices right now, and therefore it should be updated following the change(s). None of the Pages seem to be transcluded, so no mainspace editing should be required. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@EncycloPetey: Sigh. I went to move the files and found the following:
That is, Languageseeker apparently uploaded different scans of vols. 5, 6, 8, and 9—but not vols. 7, 10, and 11—using that naming schema. And since Commons policy doesn't permit overwriting these we're kind of stuck on that.
Maybe we could put these at…
… possibly along with moving vols. 1–4 to the same schema? --Xover (talk) 11:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Gah, this is an even bigger mess than I thought. Can we not request an admin to move the low-quality scans for 5, 6, 8, 9 out of the way, and then move the good scans into the now vacant names? We've had to deal with complex moves like that before, and from what I can see, none of those four files have an Index page or other bits associated with them requiring a move. Otherwise, we'd not only have to make the move you suggest but also move our current scans on volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, and 12, as well as all their pages, to make the naming convention consistent. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
You'd need to make a move request on Commons, and hope you get an admin to look at it within a reasonable time plus to understand the point of the request (I am not certain they would accept this move reason without a lot of explanation). Most file moves are made by file movers, not admins, but they don't have the permissions for this kind of thing (they can technically suppress redirects, but aren't allowed to use the permission for this kind of move).
BTW, while not trivial, bulk moving pages from one index to another isn't too bad with the pywikibot script Inductiveload made, and usually you can just run a search&replace by bot in mainspace to fix the transclusions. If you decide to go that route it should be fine (even if annoying). Xover (talk) 17:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ibsen duplicate vol4 deletion

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please delete all the Page: and the Index:. This is a duplicate Index already transcribed more accurately elsewhere. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@EncycloPetey: Done Xover (talk) 11:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Remove Template:Expand list from the Author namespace

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Based on the Wikisource:Scriptorium discussion regarding use of {{expand list}} in the Author namespace, where everyone agrees it should not be used there, could someone please use a bot to remove all instances of {{expand list}} and its redirect {{incomplete list}} from the Author namespace? --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please upgrade page status of not proofread pages in From Poverty to Power and in The Crimson Fairy Book

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 months ago5 comments2 people in discussion

More work from unregistered user(s). Please upgrade the pages to proofread. While I might still apply a couple of minor formatting changes, they are otherwise both ready. As an aside, if you have any simple clean up tools that you could run over Index:Microscopicial researchers - Theodor Schwann - English Translation - 1947.pdf while you are at it, that would be much appreciated. Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Also the not-proofread pages in Beethoven please, excluding the pages marked problematic. Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 21:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
 Oppose Those pages have a lot of formatting needed to bring them in line with the rest of the work, including multiple misuses of the <br> tag where a line break should be used instead (and is so used through the rest of the work). --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
P.P.S. And Index:All these things added .. (IA allthesethingsa00alle).pdf. Thanks again, TeysaKarlov (talk) 20:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
 Oppose I am finding blank pages marked as "Not proofread", which the bot would mark as "Proofread". This Index should first be checked page by page manually. I'm also finding that the work's title and section titles are self-linked, which they should not do. That is, the half-title page bears the work's title, which is linked to the work that it is part of. And the interior titles for the Parts of the work were self-linked. I have not fully sorted this out because I have also had to move the parts of the work together under the work's main title, since Part 1 and Part 2 were originally created as separate works in their own right, rather than being subpages of the containing work. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Index:Indian Medicinal Plants (Plates Vol 4).djvu and Index:Indian Medicinal Plants (Plates Vol 5).djvu

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Following page moves, the raw image templates are misaligned. In vol. 4, every page with an image from Page:Indian Medicinal Plants (Plates Vol 4).djvu/377 on needs to have raw image set back two pages. The same is true for vol. 5, raw image being set back two pages for every image on or after Page:Indian Medicinal Plants (Plates Vol 5).djvu/93. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@TE(æ)A,ea.: Done. I assumed you meant the page number in the {{raw image}} template needed to be increased by two on these pages (since that was what was needed to align them with the actual page number after the source file update). Please check and confirm that the results appear ok. Xover (talk) 15:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please upgrade page status of not proofread pages in The Crimson Fairy Book

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Separating this request from the above, as I believe it is at least safe to upgrade these pages. There is also the chance (however small) that I get back to validating this, and so I would rather not manually mark the pages proofread. Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Have you personally verified that each of these pages is proofread? If not, I believe this would be inappropriate. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please upgrade page status of not proofread pages in The Power of Thought

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

More work of an unregistered user. Seems safe to upgrade from a cursory check. Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 21:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

As above, this would be inappropriate unless you have yourself verified that each of these pages is fully proofread. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:24, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Autocreate pages in Index:Concordia Triglotta.pdf

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Would it be possible to script the creation of some pages in this index as follows:

All of these pages contain only German and/or Latin text, which is to be interwikied from deWS and laWS, rather than proofread here on enWS.

Thanks! —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Question: Would page creation use the existing text layer? Because that layer looks like garbage to me. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
No! you're right, existing layer is garbage, and should be replaced by the content listed in my initial request (I've updated the request to clarify). —Beleg Tâl (talk) 19:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Delete pages in Index:Dick Sands the Boy Captain.djvu

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please delete all the Page:(s) associated with this Index. The Index was nominated one month ago for deletion at WS:PD because the scan is near illegible in places and is missing pages. It is also redundant to two other copies of this novel. The large number of pages involved in deletion means that this deletion should be handled by bot rather than manually. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Replace simple uses of override-contributor

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please make the following replacements in Category:Pages with override contributor:

<override contributor pattern> is (\|\s*(contributor|section(\-|_|\s)author)\s*=\s*)?\|\s*override(\-|_|\s)(contributor|section(\-|_|\s)author)\s*=\s*.
Assume patterns are on a single line which otherwise contains only whitespace.
  • <override contributor pattern>\[\[Author:<author pattern>\|<author display pattern>\]\] → \| section\-author = <author pattern> \| section\-author\-display = <author display pattern>
  • <override contributor pattern>\[\[Author:<author 1 pattern>\|<author 1 display pattern>\]\]\s+and\s+\[\[Author:<author 2 pattern>\|<author 2 display pattern>\]\] → \| section\-author1 = <author 1 pattern> \| section\-author1\-display = <author 1 display pattern> \| section\-author2 = <author 2 pattern> \| section\-author2\-display = <author 2 display pattern>
  • <override contributor pattern>\[\[Author:<author pattern>\|<author display pattern>\]\], translated by \[\[Author:<translator pattern>\|<translator display pattern>\]\] → \| section\-author = <author pattern> \| section\-author\-display = <author display pattern> \| section\-translator = <translator pattern> \| <translator display pattern>
  • <override contributor pattern>\{\{anon\}\} → \| section\-author = anon

—CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 08:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Clean up of A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments1 person in discussion

To attempt to improve consistency (both with the source text and just in general), could the following changes please be made to Index:A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism - Volume 1.djvu

  • <h3 align=center>''Some heading text.''</h3> to {{c|''Some heading text.''}} (They should be two single quotes so as to have italicized text, not straight double quotes as they look to me)
  • {{numb form|Some equation in math environment|Empty}} to {{c|Some equation in math environment}}
  • {{numb form|Some equation in math environment|(Some number)}} to {{MathForm2|(Some number)|Some equation in math environment}}

If curious, both MathForm2 and numb form have been used throughout the text, but each has a different right-indent on the equation number, and different line break characteristics after the equation, where MathForm2 is preferred in both cases.

Thanks, TeysaKarlov (talk) 02:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Actually, if anyone has a better alternative to both MathForm2 and numb form that might also be fine, as I don't love how MathForm2 doesn't seem to right-align all the equation numbers, e.g. Page:A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism - Volume 1.djvu/156. TeysaKarlov (talk) 02:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Move pages of Index:1968 tomorrows transportation new systems for the urban future.pdf

[edit]
Latest comment: 22 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The pdf file havig been changed, and pages reordered, is it possible to move:

  • djvu pages 35 to 22 -> 56 to 43 (+21)
  • djvu pages 21 to 19 -> 23 to 21 (+2)
  • djvu pages 15 to 5 -> 19 to 9 (+4)

Thanks in advance. // M-le-mot-dit (talk) 12:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Move subpages of Index:Handbook of Western Australia.djvu

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could some bot move subpages of Index:Handbook of Western Australia.djvu. Missing pages of the djvu files have been added. Pages to be moved (without redirect):

  • djvu pages 220 to 78 -> 228 to 86 (+8)
  • djvu pages 77 to 1 -> 83 to 7 (+6)

Thanks in advance. // M-le-mot-dit (talk) 13:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Year parameter in subpages of Castes and Tribes of Southern India

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There are frequent attempts to edit many subpages of Castes and Tribes of Southern India, because people consider the information wrong/false/fake etc. Imo it might help – not much, but at least a very little bit – if | year = 1909 parameter was added into the header of each of the subpages. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 17:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Bot_requests&oldid=14622030"