Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/LcawteBot

+Bot
I plan to use AWB to empty the UncategorizedPages list empty, also with Pywikipediabot, I'll fix double redirects. I dont really know what else to say with this as its fairly straight foward. Oh, I have experaince with this kinda thing over on various wikia projects. Brickipedia is one example. --Lcawte (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Symbol comment vote.svg Comment I've seen people use AWB in the past on pages. The problem is that they just add  to the pages, when you need to add BookCat instead to sort based on subpage name and not have everything show up under the book's first letter (a major difference with the procedure used at Wikipedia).  Additionally, there needs to be a distinction between root pages and subpages &mdash; the root page requires several different classifications (Subjects, Alphabetical, DDC, LOC).  I wouldn't have a problem with a bot doing subpages but I don't believe root pages can be automated. -- Adrignola talk contribs 17:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sticking to subpages would be fine with me, I could probally do it with add_text.py on pywikipediabot insted.. or AWB, either is fine with me (though I prefer pybot). --Lcawte (talk) 17:43, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * For the most part subpages should just have at the end of the page. Some books though use a navigation template so already include it by way of their navigation template. Also some books may use categories of the form  . If a book uses a navigation template and a page isn't categorized you ought to add the template rather than . You also shouldn't remove any of the book subcategories if there are any. You probably won't be able to bulk change more then one book at a time unless you happen to know that all the books don't use navigation templates. For books that do use navigation there is no standardized placement, so you would have to check what each book does and try to copy it. --dark  lama  18:07, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, of course I will check pages before I get the bot on them, and no, I'm not planning to remove anything. --Lcawte (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do one (reasonably sized) book for practice & debugging. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 22:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll try to do this tommorow, it seems all of the current ones have been done... :( --Lcawte (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I did a few books, small because there wasnt any big ones available. Hows that? --Lcawte (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * probably should of been added to the top of pages in the Transformative Applications in Education book instead of . Other changes the bot made look fine to me. That is 4 out of 7 changes were fine. --dark lama  16:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok kewl, I didnt really check the pages because last time I tried to trail it, I blinked and they had been done. Of course whem its approved, I'll take more care. --Lcawte (talk) 17:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While I welcome anyone offering their time for maintenance I don't see the need for a bot flag. There simply aren't that many uncategorised books and new page creations are fairly well monitored. The bot run actually tagged a page without meaningful content that has been deleted. It's fine to use semi-automatic tools like AWB but, as the initial test run shows categorising needs a human component. Furthermore, the test run is where users show how careful they are, not where they promise to be more careful in the future. Feel free to continue contributing to this area using semi-automatic tools, but fully automated tools aren't going to reduce the work-load sufficiently to warrant bot-flagged fully-automatic edits. --Swift (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)