Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RussBot 5

{{Newbot|RussBot}}

Operator: {{User|R'n'B}}

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Standard pywikipedia (rewrite branch)

Function overview: Create redirects to disambiguation pages, for use as targets for intentional links to these pages

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Redirects in hatnotes

Edit period(s): Monthly

Estimated number of pages affected: Probably 30-40,000 on the first run, to clear backlog; in the hundreds in subsequent months

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: The bot will review all "disambiguation pages with links" as identified by [http://tools.wmflabs.org/dplbot/disambig_links.php this tool]. If the page title does not include the string "(disambiguation)", or any other parenthetical phrase "(foo)", it will construct a new title consisting of the disambiguation page title with the string " (disambiguation)" appended. (We don't want to create pages of the form "Topic (foo) (disambiguation)".) If no page exists using this new title, the bot will create it as a redirect to the disambiguation page, with the template {{tlx|R to disambiguation page}} in the wikitext. (To prevent edit conflicts, the bot will double-check that the page listed by the tool is still a disambiguation page, and if it has been redirected, will check that the redirect target is a disambiguation page.)

• Perfect. bd2412 T 18:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• Hmm... Why limit it to the pages provided by the tool (ones with links)? Wouldn't it be a good idea to create " (disambiguation)" redirects for all pages in :Category:Disambiguation pages, for future usage? - EdoDodo ^talk 21:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

:*If a disambiguation page has no links, it's unlikely to ever have any intentional links. So it would be creating pages for no good reason. –xeno^talk 22:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

::*Yeah, I see your point, but IMHO if it's a disambiguation page, it should be reachable by "Foo (disambiguation)", if only for consistency. Also, in my opinion, there's no harm in having a redirect from a title that makes sense. - EdoDodo ^talk 22:10, 10 August 2010 (U TC)

:::*You'd want to use :Category:All disambiguation pages instead, as the one you mentioned is more inclusive (set index articles, etc.) Personally, I'm fine with only doing the disambigs with links, since this is not a one-off job and newly linked dabs would get picked up later. But I certainly wouldn't oppose going the whole nine yards. --JaGa^talk 14:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

::::* I'm happy doing it either way; it just seemed to me that there was no reason to create redirects for links to pages that don't have any links anyway. And I'd probably use :Category:All article disambiguation pages if there were a consensus to create the redirects in advance of need. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::*Lol, this is starting to look like the Bugs Bunny cartoon where Bugs and Elmer pull out bigger and bigger guns. --JaGa^talk 15:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

::::::* The next step would be to propose having a "foo (disambiguation)" redirect for every article in Wikipedia, whether a disambig or not. I don't think we're going to go there. bd2412 T 01:38, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

{{outdent}}

• Okay, I see what you mean. Was just a thought :). - EdoDodo ^talk 02:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Ready for a trial? MBisanz ^talk 04:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

• Ready whenever you are, Captain. :-) R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

::Hah, beat ya to it. {{BotTrial|~50 creations}} 02:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

{{BotTrialComplete}} Contributions [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&offset=20100817135237&limit=51&target=RussBot here]. R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

:Nice, {{BotApproved}}. Tim1357 ^talk 14:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

: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.