Template talk:Bots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Syntax

It could have parameters except= or theseones=

e.g.

{nobots|except=werdnabot, RamBot}

or

{nobots|theseones=hangermanBot, smackBot}

Rich Farmbrough, 20:58 12 December 2006 (GMT).

Better idea from Hagerman on template page. Rich Farmbrough, 00:03 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] HagermanBot is NoBots Aware!

I'm pleased to announce that HagermanBot now recognizes the syntax for this template. Although the previous <!--Disable HagermanBot--> tag is still supported for legacy talk pages, the preferred and documented method to disable the bot for a specific page is to use this template. Thanks! Hagerman(talk) 04:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name Change?

I like the changes RM made to the syntax with the "all" and "none" settings. However, looking at the code {{nobots|allow=all}} in plain english seems like it might confuse an end-user. Your average Wikipedian will see "don't let any bots make changes except everything." Maybe we should call the template "bots" and drop the support for a null parameter to mean deny all bots? Then the code would be {{bots|allow=all}} which looks a bit better to me. What do you think? Hagerman(talk) 17:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

This change has already been made. -- RM 13:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where can these be used?

Is there any consensus on the appropriate use of these templates? If someone wants to put them on their User: or User talk: page, fine, since that's a personal page. I would propose, however, that they should not be allowed at all on main namespace pages -- no Wikipedia editor has the right to dictate who else may or may not edit an article. And their use should be highly discouraged in any other namespace, unless a consensus is first developed that they are appropriate in a particular context. --Russ (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

We're not telling a specific user whether or not they can edit a page. What we are doing is using it to manage bots more efficiently. We don't allow bots to edit every type of page, and using these tags is no different than another efficient control mechanism. If it were abused, that'd be one thing. Currently the Wikipedia:Reference_desk/guidelines page has a {{nobots}} tag to keep HagermanBot (only) from taking messages as "unsigned" on that page. Frankly, i'm not even sure why the bot was editing that page, but that's another issue altogether. Ignoring that point, the use of the tag was appropriate in that case. Also, since this is effectively a fine-tune bot control mechanism, this makes it easier to maintain black and white lists for ALL bots for certain specific pages. If the bot approvals process wanted to approve a bot that could/should ignore the template, it would do so. The template is not a hard and fast rule, so it doesn't do more than ask that a bot refuse to edit the page, not that it can't. -- RM 20:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
There are specific cases where a general "good" edit would be bad, for example the article on common misspellings, which may be a main space candidate for this template. Rich Farmbrough, 22:32 20 December 2006 (GMT).
Also, a compliant bot doesn't need to just ignore the page. It can spit back warning messages so that the bot operator can manually check a page. In cases like the above example, I can't think of any harm that would be caused by "forcing" the bot to skip the page because it is "high risk" for bot mistakes. Of course the intention is that every user would place these templates on their user and user talk pages to explicitly state their intentions regarding bots. -- RM 14:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
It looks like the reason the bot was editing the guidelines page is because the Wikipedia:Reference desk page has a Category:Non-talk pages with subpages automatically signed by HagermanBot category applied to it. That means that any sub page of the Reference Desk will be monitored for unsigned comments. The original implementation I made had a Category:Non-talk pages automatically signed by HagermanBot category on each of the individual reference pages, however, it looks like the format has been changed. Nonetheless, with the {{bots}} tag it's still just as effective. Best, Hagerman(talk) 05:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sectional?

Is there a sectional form of these tags? I would love to be able to tag just a single section to be ignored, not the entire page. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 18:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I too would like a {{nobots begin}} + {{nobots end}} so I can mark the part of a page that bots may not edit.
I am currently working on a Wikipedia help page where I show errors on purpose. But I would still like bots to correct errors in the rest of that page such as fixing redirects, update interwiki links and update categories etc.
Oh, I just realised there is a simple workaround we can use: We can put the part of the page we don't want bots to touch on a separate subpage, then mark that subpage with {{nobots}} and then transclude that subpage into the "main" page. But this will make editing that part of the page harder for inexperienced editors so I will only resort to this workaround if "my" page gets really trashed by the bots. (And I will of course add easy to follow links to that subpage at least from the talk page of the "main" page.)
--David Göthberg (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How bots uses this template

I just want to clarify how I believe bots uses this template. The bot downloads the wiki source to each page it wants to edit. The bot then checks if the source has this template in the source. If so, it checks the parameters passed to the template. The template does not generate anything on the resulting html page of the pages it is included in. To summarize, the presence of the template include is what makes it work.--Henke37 18:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BetacommandBot

Can someone tell me why User:BetacommandBot was able to make this edit to my talkpage even though I had both {{bots|deny=BetacommandBot}} and {{nobots}} on the page? Skomorokh incite 21:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. If it is still of any interest to you, it is because BetacommandBot is not exclusion compliant. Any bot which is not in will ignore this template. Puchiko (Talk-email) 23:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Moreover, you can't opt out of automated warnings, per Template:Bots#Restrictions_of_messages_that_can_be_opted_out. Superm401 - Talk 08:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
The restrictions were added after this comment. I'm not aware of any bot or script that is fully compliant with all of Template:Bots. MECU≈talk 12:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expanded to include opt out of messages

I have just expanded the template to include the capability for users to select to opt out of specific types of messages (or all available types). Bot and script owners are encouraged to implement this feature as well as all of Template:Bots features if they had not previously done so. This will eliminate users needing to know what bots are leaving them messages, and just select not to receive messages in general (at least from bots/scripts). If you have any questions or comments (or a item that should be included on the opt out list (excluding the limitations)), then let me know or post on the talk page. MECU≈talk 16:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It needs to be made clearer that editors can only opt out of bot-delivered messages. I've just added a prodwarning to an editor's page and am surprised to see that it offers him the chance to opt out of such messages. But as a person, rather than a bot, I won't know whether he's opted out, AFAIK. PamD (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The opt-out section states By adding this to a user's talk page, a user may still receive these messages by non-compliant bots or scripts, or humans who add the tag manually. Would bolding this in the page help? MECU≈talk 21:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
No. The problem is that the recipient of the message on their talk page thinks inaccurately that he can avoid getting such messages in future. Actually, he can only avoid getting messages from Bots. This should be made clear at first sight, not subsequently in the process. --Dweller (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I can't help what people think unless they fully read what something does. If you think you can make this more clear and should be made earlier in the page, go ahead and make the changes. I think anyone that reads and assumes how something works without fully investigating or reading the information page is setting themselves up for failure. It's like reading steps 1-5 of a 20 step instruction booklet and then getting upset that you misunderstood how it worked because step 7 explains in detail how it works. But again, go ahead and make changes if you think it's better (aka be bold, I was). I don't claim to be an expert in writing (see below). MECU≈talk 18:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What does this mean?

"Another option is to opt out of specific types of messages for users that do not wish to be notified of certain problems, but perhaps still other problems." ? --Dweller (talk) 14:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

See this section: you can choose to be notified for some types of problems (e.g. images with no source information) and not for others (e.g. prod warnings). Skomorokh 14:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I think the English needs some work, as it doesn't currently make sense. Perhaps I can suggest ..."for users that wish to be notified of certain problems, but not others." --Dweller (talk) 14:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Much clearer, go for it. Skomorokh 14:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] feature request: interwikibot opt-out

List of some interwiki bots: SieBot,A4Bot,AlleborgoBot,Thijs!bot,YurikBot,Tsca.bot,Eskimbot – if this is intended as a help to disallow interwikibots, its not much use - there's just too many of them. Instead, interwiki.py should be taught to respect an "interwiki" opt-out switch. (Or, even better, another template that directs it to the right place – usually the problem with interwiki bots is that they make a mess of pages which have iw-links transcluded from another page, eg. a template documentation subpage.) --Tgr (talk) 13:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] interwiki request

{{editprotected}}

Please add interwiki link [[ja:Template:Bots]], thanks. --219.164.57.180 (talk) 21:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Y Done —αlεx•mullεr 11:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)