Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Tom.Bot 6

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.

Tom.Bot 6[edit]

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

Time filed: 13:17, Friday, May 4, 2018 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): C# & AWB

Source code available: User:Tom.Bot/Task6 code

Function overview: Add {{Authority control}} to all pages with {{Infobox person}}

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Template:Authority control/doc#Description ("An empty instance of this template stays dormant in an article, until values are added to Wikidata, when it will then display them, so this template should be added to all biographies, whether or not there are authority control identifiers in Wikidata already.") & Template talk:Authority control#Bot request to place template on all biographies

Edit period(s): One-time bulk run with sparse checks in the future

Estimated number of pages affected: ~91,000

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: IIf {{Authority control}} is added, the following cosmetic changes are piggybacked:

{{DEFAULTSORT}}, {{AllMovie name}}, {{Clear}}, {{Commons category}}, {{IMDb name}}, and {{Reflist}} names are all standardized as shown
if DNE, a blank line is added between the end of the infobox & the first line of body-text
1 blank line is added before {{Authority control}} when appropriate
Remove {{Clear}}s below and immediately above {{Authority control}}, as it effectively self-clears as a navbox
WP:JR/SR applied for commas
WP:GenFixes on

Discussion[edit]

Strong support: I see too many biographies, where there are identifiers on Wikidata, but they are not displayed in this Wikipedia, because the {{Authority control}} template is missing. And please do this for other biographical infoboxes, also. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can/will do. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 22:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - better to have human review, also suggest a Village Pump RfC would be warranted given the scale. Further discussion here. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Being displayed on the page would facilitate human review. I don't have too much desire to advocate for {{Authority control}} as it seems decided, especially since it's been on 500k+ articles for a while and given the wording on the /doc. Will likely leave an RfC for others to start/spearhead, and I can chime in. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 04:08, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Desirable when there are relevant identifiers on Wikidata; harmless (because invisible) when there aren't. — Stanning (talk) 07:39, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But: not sure what's meant by "{{DEFAULTSORT}}, {{AllMovie name}}, {{Clear}}, {{Commons category}}, {{IMDb name}}, {{Reflist}} are all standardized as shown"
As shown? Does this mean that the bot is to standardize the capitalization of the magic word or template names (good, uncontroversial), or is it to standardize the parameters (bad, or at least debatable)? — Stanning (talk) 07:39, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stanning, name only. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 11:54, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (25 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Let's approve this for a trial to see if it works (technically). I'll need to ponder about consensus here, but we can go to trial at least to help people see what exactly is being proposed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:07, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Edits. The first (newest) 13 had no Wikidata sources available, and the remaining 12 (oldest) contain at least 1 Wikidata source as described in the edit summary. The edit summary's link back to this discussion erroneously points back to Tom.Bot 5's BRFA, and has been corrected in the code. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 14:54, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. The bot is approved to add the template when there is something to display, which could be run as a continuous task (e.g. daily, hourly, whateverly). For adding the template when there is nothing to display, I think that needs a wider discussion. (I'll also point out this is something that could be added as a minor AWB genfix without much fuss.) You can file another BRFA for that task after such a discussion occurs. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:07, 26 May 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.