Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/Feature requests/Archive/New/Other

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2011

Cover WP:FSC.

light bulb New proposal

Filled by: Headbomb

Time filed: 05:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Description: Cover WP:FSC.

Comments:

Will do together (at same priority) with WP:FP and WP:PPR. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Workflow is inactive and marked as historical. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

SfD detection

light bulb New proposal

Filled by: Od Mishehu (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 07:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Description: Alert for {{sfd-c}} and {{sfd-t}}, which refer to the Stub types for deletion process. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments:

Will add this when implementing more workflows in the futurish time. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Historical workflow. No longer used. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

MerlBot

Filled by: Leyo (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 00:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Description: MerlBot does a lot of good work over in de.wikipedia. You might want to take a look at the examples chemistry or Canada. The content is configurable. Maybe these lists provide you some new ideas to you. And if not, that is OK, too. --Leyo 00:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments:

Thanks for info, I'll check out if there are any cool ideas. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, one idea I got is to call workflows "worklists", which seems to make more sense and is a bit more intuitive. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Russian version

Hello, I would like to know how can one apply this bot to Russian wiki? Is there a template to translate? I could do this.Rubikonchik (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

There are no templates, it's all hard-coded right now. It also relies very heavily on the particulars of enWP workflows. I haven't looked at the ruWP workflows before, they look similar though. Anyway, I speak Russian, so I guess I could check them out. But that would really need a major code rewrite, which I don't have that much time for. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Article Alerts for individuals

I had this crazy idea recently and thought I would present it for consideration. If a user copied their watchlist to a user subpage (or maybe multiple subpages) with a certain naming convention (like User:Kumioko/ArticleAlerts) would it be possible for Article Alert bot to notify an individual of pending things in the same way it does for projects? Since many of us have different articles on our watchlists, belong to multiple projects, work on articles that don't fall into a project at all, etc. I realize that there would be some programming effort involved and not knowing how the bot is programmed I don't know if its even possible but it seems like this would be a great benefit to a lot of us with a relatively low level of effort. --Kumioko (talk) 18:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The main issue is that the bot is run as an .exe by mostly Headbomb or sometimes me. It's written in C#, so toolserver doesn't accept it. This means the PC has to be on and running and is a bit processing/network intensive. This wouldn't be a problem with a dedicated box. If too many users subscribe to this, then it will make processing very lengthy. Though it may not be that much worse. I'm afraid of it going out of control with everyone subscribing, that's why it's in Wikipedia: namespace :) I also assume you mean a general list of pages, and not just the actual watchlist. The bot's purpose is to inform of articles you didn't know (haven't watchlisted) are under some discussion. But it is possible without too much work. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I suppose it's doable... but that's sort of what watchlists are for already... And then you'd have to update your personal /Article alerts page every time you make a change to your watchlist, and you lose the benefits of other people adding/tagging/categorizing stuff. And then there's the issue of users retiring, being blocked, etc... Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Well from the comments from H3llkn0wz about it being a manually run .exe file I don't think its really a good idea. I had thought it was a toolserver task or something. As for the watchlist I think if you have a couple hundred articles its easy to know what pops up and when but when you have a few thousand its much more of a challenge (even though most of them never come up and its usually the same couple hundred all the time. --Kumioko (talk) 19:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

2012

New pages in WikiProject bot

Hi Hellknowz, recently I requested a new bot to monitor for new pages added to a WikiProject and you said you might be able to help out if you had some time. If you do get a spare moment, it would be great if you could have a look into creating something like this? Cheers, Jack (talk) 17:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't mean to interupt but I thought Tedderbot was already doing this in replacement of AlexNewarticlealertbot -Kumioko
He is, but it's detecting all pages and with false positives (depending on rules), whereas this request is for tagged pages. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Expert-subject

light bulb New proposal

Filled by: Czarkoff (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 00:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Description: The reports should include the content and changes in categories, populated with {{expert-subject}} and {{expert-subject-multiple}}.

Comments:

Sorry for late reply, I completely missed the message. The Category:All articles needing expert attention category includes 5400+ pages, which is more that the total number of pages across all the other workflows. Since pages here don't have strict closure times, this category is more suitable for cleanup listings, that doesn't do extensive parsing for reports and runs less frequently. I might come up with something myself, but I doubt I will implement this for the main report since I'm short on time and this is a resource intensive task. I'll keep it in mind though. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Post single events onto talk pages

shuffling arrows Proposal out of scope

Filled by: Ahnoneemoos (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 03:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Description: ability to post a single change into a talk page.

Comments: the bot would post in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Puerto Rico every single change as a new section. For example, the bot would post the following wiki code on the project talk page: 

==Article nominated for deletion: name_of_article==
The article [[name_of_article]] has been nominated for deletion. This is a post by a bot. ~~~~

We could also specify which changes we would like to be posted; something like: 

| afd = yes
| rfc = no
I don't know if that's in the scope of the bot. I don't see why the alert page needs to be duplicated on the project talk page. That is usually for pressing matters and non-routine nomination, and the bot can't make that distinction. Surely anyone wanting those notifications can just follow the alerts page. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I didn't mean the whole alert page. I meant individual changes to be posted on a talk page. That way I can be notified through MediaWiki's New Talk message functionality rather than through a Watchlist (since I don't use the Watchlist feature). It's equivalent to receiving an email but within Wikipedia's system. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 15:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Oh, you mean like on a user (e.g. your) talk page? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, a User talk page or a Project talk page. We can test it on User talk pages first (mine) if you want. We can also add thresholds so that the bot doesn't massive spam. Kinda like how MiszaBot works. See User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo#Parameters explained; re: parameters minthreadsleft and minthreadstoarchive but within AAlertBot's context. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 16:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
By the way, so that you understand the rationale behind this: we have had a historic problem at WikiProject Puerto Rico where people nominate articles for deletion and don't notify the Project, its contributors, nor the person that created the article (see [1] [2] [3] and [4] for examples). Notifying people is not required but nominators usually do it. This requested feature would help alleviate this issue and allow us to participate in AfDs and RFCs promptly. We are only interested in AfDs, proposed deletions, categories for discussion, templates for discussion, files for deletions, and requested moves. Featured candidates, Good article candidates, and Peer reviews are irrelevant for us. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
But that ("people nominate articles for deletion and don't notify") is exactly why AAB exists -- so that there is a centralized page with only the relevant notices that everyone can watch. Also, you can filter which workflows you want (AfD, PROD, not FAC, etc.). See Wikipedia:Article_alerts/Subscribing#Choosing_workflows, you don't need to receive stuff you don't want. You can even set up multiple pages, each for different purposes. Also, I don't quite understand how you can get a new talk page message from project talk pages, I thought that ever only works with user talk pages? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
No no no, what I'm requesting is that the bot posts on your User talk page in order to leverage the New Talk message feature. The configuration can be done on the User Talk page so that we know that the user itself chose to be notified on his talk page. Remember, the way the bot works today is through the Watchlist feature, which I'm trying to avoid. People have to watch a page so that they can see it changes. However, by allowing the bot to notify on a User talk page we avoid the watchlist feature. It is more intrusive, but it's setup by the user itself, knowing that he will be spammed. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


2013

Check please

I tried to create Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Article alerts from copying the Poland alerts and altering it. Did this once before years ago and it worked, but think I've forgotten/missed something this time. Can someone take a look please. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Added [5]. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks Hellknowz, can I make the same request for Wikipedia:WikiProject Armenia/Article alerts, or is it okay to make the bot edit myself (probably better not). In ictu oculi (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Added [6]. You can change to subscription list yourself. The actual delivery page will be made by bot, you don't need to do that. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:48, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks, unfortunately I'm getting a misload on the page (related to my own unstable firewall) would you please also add WikiProject Writing systems. Many thanks again. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Same firewall problem. Any chance of adding Wikipedia:WikiProject Portugal/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Belgium/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Austria/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Mexico/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Colombia/Article alerts. These national projects are evidently lamentably semi-dormant. But all the same a good tool like Alerts will do nothing but help. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Add a talk page link

Filled by: Alan Liefting (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 05:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Description: For the Popular pages listing add a talk page link next to the article name. The link need only be piped as "(talk)". This will allow reader to go directly to the talk page to update WikiProject parameters.

Comments: Sorry, I'm not even sure which "popular pages" this refers to, but I have a feeling this isn't related to Article Alerts. As far as I know, all AA reports have talk page links. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Ooops. Got the wrong bot. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Withdraw. Wrong forum. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Categories for speedy deletion and renaming

shuffling arrows Proposal out of scope


I may be mistaken, but it appears that the bot does not send alerts for categories tagged with {{Db-c1}} (deletion) or {{Cfr-speedy}} (renaming). I assumed that these were listed under the Article Alerts section: Categories for discussion, but I think I was mistaken. If they are not listed I would like to request that the bot add these category flags to the alerts. Since some at CFD already believe as I did that Article Alerts already does this 1, 2 3, I think it would be a good idea. 71.93.195.143 (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for request. The bot does not list any speedy deletions, because they are just that - speedy. They can be gone in minutes. The bot only deals with workflows that are fairly long and/or require community input. Speedies should do not require discussion, just a sanity check from the admin before deleting. And, more importantly, they are placed/removed way too often to have a reliable report once a day. It will clog the history/watchlist with changes that basically don't need any input (except for some rare controversial cases, but those shouldn't have been speedied to begin with). Most of the time, they will become redlinks, that non-admins cannot check in any way. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I completely understand the concern that the the reports should not be clogged with unnecessary and uncontroversial deletions and renames. So leaving out the speedy renames makes sense in that regard. The {{Db-c1}}, however, seems more akin to the {{Prod}} flag used on articles which is listed in the article alerts. It requires 4 days on the category and requests that anyone that opposes the deletion remove the flag or populate the category, much like {{Prod}}s requirement that the flag be removed or the issues fixed or it will be deleted. This of course requires that people be aware that it was {{Db-C1}}'d in the first place. This flag is not used for vandalism and such just empty categories. I would like to request that at least this one be added to the article alerts. Thanks for your help. 71.93.195.143 (talk) 20:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure I see how db-c1 needs more attention than other cases. Empty categories that are not used for anything seem like a very straight-forward case where there shouldn't be any need to notify a broad community. PRODs are very commonly contested, speedies aren't meant to be. In fact, there was consideration initially whether PRODs should even be reported. So the only factor I see is that it is supposed to be tagged for 4 days. That's a quite arbitrary case, and I still don't think it's in the scope of AA. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 22:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention to this. While it is of coarse true that unused categories that aren't needed is a straight-forward case for deletion. Categories are often emptied out, not because they are not needed but because a user intentionally or more likely unintentionally emptied the category by removing or changing categories on pages. Unlike pages, categories are not emptied by going to them but by changes to its member pages. I'll respect your decision either way. I originally thought I was just reporting an oversight but apparently not.
Since editors at CFD cite article alerts as a reason not to notify creators and other interested parties (i.e. wikiprojects) when categories are deleted, 1, 2 3 it may be beneficial to inform them that this is not always true. Thanks again for your help. 71.93.195.143 (talk) 01:23, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


Expiration of inactive items?

For larger projects (in this case Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine) the generated list is often large and cluttered with inactive items. It seems like all items are currently kept for a whole six months. Could a (optional?) time limit be set, so we could specify all items inactive for more than e.g. one month to be removed? That would give a much clearer overview of current events. --WS (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Or is there anything wrong with the way it has been set-up for medicine? Looking through them, it doesn't seem like any of the other large projects have so many expired items listed.--WS (talk) 12:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
This is because the subscription was {{ArticleAlertSubscription |project = WikiProject Medicine |archivetime = 90 }} with 90 day archive time. I cleared it to the default. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:23, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah Thanks! That will help a lot. Just curious, what is the default? --WS (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I think it was a week or two after being closed. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:32, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

DePROD talk page

When things get WP:PRODded and dePRODded, only a small fraction of the time the talk page gets properly tagged with a T:AH. Could you develop a second bot or add a feature to the current bot to assist with T:AH updates, especially for dePRODs.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

This would fall outside the scope of AAB, and I don't want to add that to the current bot, as it already takes ages to run. But I have actually considered making article history parsing bot (I think AnomieBot was doing this at one point?) —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I did think it would probably be better as a second bot, but basically AAB is noting all these dePRODs that no one is archiving correctly on talk pages. A 2nd bot that works inconjunction with AAB in this regard is about the only way to handle this issue. Keep in mind that PRODed articles are often by novice users. When they dePROD they make no record of it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
WP:DEPROD doesn't require any action other than the removal of the {{proposed deletion/dated}} Several other actions are listed, but the text "you are encouraged, but not required, to ..." is very much not binding. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

2014

Page curation

shuffling arrows Proposal out of scope

Filled by: Schwede66 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 17:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Description: I was wondering why Wikipedia:Page Curation isn't showing up in article alerts. Ok, I appreciate that new articles are generally lacking project tags, but some new pages do get tagged without the reviewer noticing the page curation link on the article page. I'm sure that editors who keep an eye on a Wikiproject would be interested in new pages. Schwede66 17:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Comments:

@Schwede66: Sorry, when I first saw the request, I didn't quite understand it, and then I totally forgot about it.

Can you explain, please, what exactly related to page curation are you saying should show up in article alerts? I know new pages often get tagged and deleted before projects even see them, but there aren't any good ways to reliably determine that projects want to see them. That's pretty much new article bot (don't remember it's latest incarnation's name). I already detect infoboxes for some projects and even parse manual delsorts, but most new pages still need manual banner tagging before can pick them up among all the other pages. What do you suggest? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 22:25, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes, there is the new article bot. What I'm thinking of is slightly different, though. I'm suggesting that articles be included in article alerts when the following conditions have been met:
  1. The article appears in Special:NewPages. I believe that feed includes pages created in the last month.
  2. The article is unreviewed, i.e. it is highlighted in yellow on that page, and has the link [Mark this page as patrolled] on the article page.
  3. The talk page has been tagged as belonging to the project that warrants its inclusion in article alerts.
This will create a much shorter list for editors than what the new article bot produces, as it requires project tagging. I for one don't bother with the new article bot as that bot just guesses which articles belong to a project based on key words, and depending on the key words chosen, there may be many false entries that do not belong to a project. So what I'm suggesting is to simply include the pages where all three conditions listed above are met. The heading could be 'Page curation', and the text could be: "The following new pages are unreviewed:" Schwede66 18:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


RSS/Atom feeds for additions

light bulb New proposal

Filled by: Stevietheman (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 15:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Description: It would be nice to have a feed with entries based on items added to the alerts page (e.g., an entry for an AfD and another one for a featured article nomination, all as they are added). I would guess that the most economical approach would be to show the entry as plain text and provide one link to where the related discussion is.

Comments: A feed like this would help for sending out alerts in other formats, such as tweets or Facebook posts.

See Wikipedia:Article_alerts#Tips and tricks, 2nd item. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


2015

Monitor {{prod blp}} as well as {{prod}}

copy   Duplicate proposal

Filled by: David Gerard (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 09:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Description: monitor {{prod blp}} as well as {{prod}}.

Comments:

AAlertBot monitors new {{prod}}s - but I notice it doesn't monitor {{prod blp}}. I suggest this would be useful, as dubious BLPs are a matter of great importance.

BLP PRODs are already reported, because they are sorted into the same overall category (Category:All articles proposed for deletion). For example Farooq Umar as part of WikiProject Articles for creation reported with other PRODs. Can you give me an example where the bot missed the page? There's probably another reason. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Draft namespace

 Not done

Filled by: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 08:50, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Description: Provide a mechanism to list all draft pages whose talk page is tagged as belonging to a specific project.

The motivation for this feature is a report here written by Jodi.a.schneider (talk · contribs) that discusses the failings of Articles for creation. Adding alerts for new drafts in projects would help bring awareness of expert subject knowledge to potential new articles and satisfy the report's proposed design implications of Determine which drafts need collaboration and Recommend drafts to potential collaborators, based on both user interest and the likelihood of creating an encyclopedia article from a given draft.

Related discussions :

Comments:

I could theoretically list pages, but most pages without any workflows are never accessed/retrieved. The bot uses an API similar to that, but joins a bunch more stuff together (it would take 1000s of queries otherwise). Nothing happens on pages without workflows, so all the logic ignores them for now (I don't even retrieve those page names). There are probably easier ways to generate a bare list.
A bigger question is what is "recommended"? AAB tries to be as objective as it can, as it deals with pretty contested areas. So it tries not to guess or make (many) assumptions. "All" pages is probably not a good list, and I am not aware of any other way drafts are tagged for special attention (that would also be more important than a bunch of yet-unimplemented workflow in mainspace). —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

2017

Pages or files listed at WP:NFCR

☒N Stale

Filled by: Redrose64 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 11:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Description: Pages or files that get listed at WP:NFCR don't get a mention on Article Alerts. For example, File:Sensorites.jpg is listed at WP:NFCR#File:Sensorites.jpg, and File talk:Sensorites.jpg bears {{WikiProject Doctor Who}}, but the page is not listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Article alerts. Similarly, An Unearthly Child is shown at WP:NFCR#An Unearthly Child but is not listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Article alerts; however, File:Doctor Who and an Unearthly Child.jpg, which is one of the three images under discussion at WP:NFCR#An Unearthly Child, is listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Article alerts - but that's only because it's going through WP:FFD as well as WP:NFCR.

Comments:

Yeah, NFCR doesn't get reported to AA. I guess I could add it alongside FFD. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

No longer an issue - NFCR is no longer active, and users are instructed to use FFD in stead. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:10, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Mail

 Not done

Filled by: Resident Mario (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 21:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Description: Would it be possible to implement some sort of mail client on specific article alerts? I don't always have time for Wikipedia, but I do want to keep track of what's going on with my project, and I check my e-mail very often. Thanks, ResMar 21:33, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments: @Resident Mario: This isn't possible, but RSS/Atom notifications are available for all pages on Wikipedia. Would that work? Sorry for the late reply, btw. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: This edit won't have notified Resident Mario (talk · contribs) because it's not a new post, but a modification to an existing post - even if that consisted of a single word. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Eep, a response after five years! I, uh, have no opinion on this anymore because I don't actively edit anymore... ResMar 21:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Monitor articles needing expert attention

 Not done

Filled by: Amatulic (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 15:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Description: Monitor categories that request attention from an expert, update alert notice when there is a change.

Comments: A new Category:Wine articles needing expert attention has recently been created. It would be nice if the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Article alerts currently being maintained by AAlertBot would be updated when articles appear in this category, which should happen when {{Expert-subject}} is added to a page with the parameter "wine".

@Amatulic: This is maintenance, so you'll want to look into Cleanup listings instead. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:10, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

2018

Notification of that a Project article was posted in the WP:DYK section of the Main Page

 Not done

Filled by: Gonzo fan2007 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 16:12, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Description: It would be great if the Bot could provide a WP:DYK update whenever a Project article has appeared in the DYK section of the main page. I believe that each talk page is edited with {{DYK talk}} or {{ArticleHistory}} indicating it has been on the main page. If the bot could search for this and provide an alert, WikiProjects would be better able to capture this recognition and display it on their project page (something most WikiProjects try to do). Thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:12, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Comments:

I'm following the page, I just have lots of real-world stuff I need to do and the feature requests is on a long backlog. DYK was requested before, but it's syntax did not follow other workflows. Just getting TFAs working was a major pain. I honestly don't know if I will get to this any time soon unless I win the lottery. Hopefully, WMF can get on it soon. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: you want to look at WP:RECOG, not WP:AALERTS for this. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
@Headbomb: thank you! That is perfect! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Keyword-based subscriptions

shuffling arrows Proposal out of scope

Filled by: Headbomb (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 14:34, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Description: It would be neat if we also have keyword-based subscriptions, e.g. for WP:JOURNALS, 

|keywords = abhandlungen; bulletin; comptes rendus; journal; letters; notices; proceedings; publications of; review; transactions; zeitschrift

Where the bot would check for those keywords in the title of the page [t]/ main text [m] / categories on the page [c] / relevant discussions [d]. 

|keywords = journal[dmt]

would look for 'journal' in discussions, main text, titles. Because searching in the main text would lead to a lot of crap results, I suggest making [cdt] the default setting when unspecified, so 

|keywords = journal

is the same as 

|keywords = journal[cdt]

Default settings could be overidden 

|keywords = journal[ct]

which would look for 'journal' only in categories and titles. And you could combine options to have something like 

|keyword = journal; impact factor[mctd]; WP:AJ[d]; WP:JOURNALS[d]; WP:JCW[d]

Comments:

I don't know how I feel about non-deterministic approach for detecting pages. I rather we focus on projects and banners than try to struggle between false positives. Using main-space category and infobox is already going beyond maintenance-based project scope and is trying to guess projects. I'd rather see a bot that finds these and makes a list of "potential project pages that are untagged by the project", so that project can tag the page. I know new pages in workflow is an issue because they don't get tagged a lot. But I don't think making it part of AAB is quite the way to go. Also this means reading every single page and talk page. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree it might be too costly in terms of the number of queries that need to be made if we deal with the maintext. Maybe if it's restricted to titles/categories, since those can likely be mass queried via API for pretty cheap, but it might be a task more suitable for other bots. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:02, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Change delsort subscription

copy   Duplicate proposal

Filled by: Headbomb (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 12:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Description: Change it so |delsort=WikiProject Deletion sorting/Foobar is just |delsort=Foobar

Comments:

  • As I said above, "Next revision, the subscriptions page needs to be updated to only specify this "Whatever" value". —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@Hellknowz: Well that's not quite a duplicate. E.g.

Currently, you'd need |delsort=Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation. But this would be simpler to have |delsort=Comics and animation. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that is what is implemented in the next revision (once it's released). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:01, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Stub subscriptions

copy   Duplicate proposal, see this FR.

Filled by: Headbomb (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 23:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Description: Subscribe via stubs

Comments: Would be useful for when something like {{physics-stub}} is added, but nothing else. However, see below. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Prioritize DYK workflow

copy   Duplicate proposal  (#DYK workflow)

Filed by: Krelnik (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 23:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Description: Recently a DYK ran on the main page which used a 'hook' that a number of editors found offensive. Editors in the WikiProjects relevant to the article were appalled when they saw it, and would have intervened during the nomination if they had known about it. But as you know, the DYK process is a bit arcane and out of the normal travels of most editors. It is also not at all solvable using normal tools like watchlists, because the DYK work doesn't take place on the page itself or its talk page.

Including the DYK process in Article Alerts was proposed over 8 years ago. Can this be prioritized for future work, so we can prevent this happening again? Thank you. --Krelnik (talk) 03:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@Redrose64: I was assuming that the bot could monitor the part of the namespace that all those templates you cite above reside in. That is, look for new article creations below Template:Did you know nominations. Then, chase the nomination back to its article, and pick up the monitoring criteria from there. Seems straightforward to me, but there's still a problem with new articles (and therefore DYK fodder) themselves not having talk pages. I see this happen all the time. However the DYK rules say that articles promoted in DYK should be "within policy" (rule 4). Isn't it good practice for all articles to be put in at least one WikiProject via their talk page? I think perhaps a little pressure on the DYK regulars to start enforcing this when they are reviewing the articles might be enough. But the gotcha is: would it be a problem for the article alert software if the talk page was corrected during the DYK nomination process after the nomination was created? Is that too late for the nomination to be picked up via the template? --Krelnik (talk) 22:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Krelnik I put a link to this request at WT:DYK. Reading your immediate above comments, it's time the DYK people had some input on what is reasonably possible and what isn't. Regarding your suggestion of DYK regulars enforcing Project banners in the review process, those banners are not under the authority of DYK. We're doing good if reviewers just check the existing basic review requirements. The individual WikiProjects decide the criteria on whether or not their banner should be on the talk page.— Maile (talk) 22:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) "would it be a problem for the article alert software if the talk page was corrected during the DYK nomination process after the nomination was created" -- no, the bot already has to do this all the time. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
"the bot would need to follow from the DYK template page to the article that it links to, and then test the triggers against the article and its talk page" -- this is correct. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
|@Maile66:: I suppose that's a good point, that it's not the job of DYK to put things into WikiProjects. Here's an idea then - given Hellknowz comments above that seem to indicate what I proposed was workable, would it be possible to set up an Article Alert configuration that triggers on articles that are in absolutely no WikiProjects? Then those of us who are interested could monitor that article alert in order to keep an eye out for DYKs that might be slipping through the cracks. --Krelnik (talk) 23:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Krelnik - I don't know right off hand, but perhaps Wugapodes who programmed Wugbot to move the approved noms to their own page, and Shubinator who oversees the DYKUpdateBot, might have some practical suggestions of how to make this work smoothly. — Maile (talk) 23:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Hellknowz My most practical suggestion would be that WugBot could be modified so that whenever it moves a hook from the nomination page to the approved page, it prints out needed data to some log page that AArticleBot could read and report on. My thought would be a subpage of either DYK or the bot's userspace and it would list the article name, the relevant wikiprojects, and perhaps a hook but given how DYK discussion work I'm not sure I can guarantee that last one all the time. If there's consensus for this, what would you want that data to look like? Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 23:46, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
I think I can collect the pages myself from the main DYK template. I sort of do manual collection like that for TFA and TFAR. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 23:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
That seems like a better option, long term. This sounds like a good idea, thanks for maintaining this bot! Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 03:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in general. If article alerts can be incorporated somehow, it can only benefit the process. Alex Shih (talk) 06:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Question and tentative Oppose: I would like to ask what exactly is being proposed here beyond the vague "prioritise DYK article alerts"? I will say that if this is just being brought up just because there was an "offensive" hook and designed as a way to stop so-called "offensive" hooks, then I must oppose on the grounds of WP:NOTCENSORED. Causing offence is a very subjective issue and often we do find that articles such as Oscar Wilde Memorial Sculpture often benefit from being in controversial hooks and are greatly improved by the community as a result. I'm happy to withdraw my tentative oppose if people can assure that this is not what this proposal is about. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 10:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
    • DYK has been on the wishlist forever. I just never have time to work on this, because DYK have drastically different syntax/use from pretty much all other workflows. Telling projects about upcoming DYKs seems reasonable, same as TFAs. I don't know what the recent DYK fail was, but I can imagine part of the problem is "not enough eyes" on "something too broad", which is what this bot tries to solve. As for priorities, there's a couple pressing bugs, but everything else is the same "wishlist priority". —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
      Let me echo that. Article Alerts are designed to call attention to important things WikiProjects know about their articles. If one of their articles is about to appear on the front page, that certainly falls in that category, even if its just a nice piece of news that requires no action. But those who care can then participate in the DYK discussion regarding the hook, help clean up the article for the attention it is about to get, and so on. That's why we'd like it added to the Article Alert bot. --Krelnik (talk) 12:47, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
      The C of E The origins of this request are at WT:WIR Lady_Angela_Forbes This is meant to be a means to help WIR keep track of their project articles on DYK. Because of the volume of activity on DYK, they feel it is too time consuming and confusing to keep track of any and all DYK nominations related to their project. Krelnik is searching for a viable alert system for them. It's not meant to make judgement calls about articles/hook, but to track what WIR has at DYK. — Maile (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
      @Hellknowz: it wasn't a DYK fail: it was a DYK that went through the process as normal during late October/early November, without raising any kind of fuss; it made it to the main page at 00:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC) - within two hours, all hell broke loose. TL,DR: the DYK included a quotation that somebody decided was offensive, and as a consequence, the DYK was later pulled. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. The more tools available to editors and projects to track a DYK nomination, the better. — Maile (talk) 14:14, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Next version will report DYK nominations (pending (Template talk:Did you know) and approved (Template talk:Did you know/Approved) but not queued (Template:Did you know/Queue)) similar to how it reports TFARs. It will look like this. I have not yet implemented closure and queued DYKs, because I need some time to pass with active DYKs running so I can test it properly. (There are a few known issues, but there's also so much non-standard stuff going on with DYK; I will need to fix and adjust one thing at a time.) —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:47, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

2019

Portal prods

Workflow not established

Extending prods to pages in the portal namespace has just been proposed (see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Proposal 6: Proposed Deletion for portals). Would showing prodded portals in article alerts need any adjustment to the bot, and if so would that be a difficult and/or time consuming task for you? Thryduulf (talk) 22:28, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Depends how it is implemented. I would probably need the workflow to go live before I can add it. And I would likely show it with other PRODs, since I don't imagine there are that many pages. One question I would have is how many portals are actually tagged with WikiProject banners or categories? Otherwise, the bot wouldn't know who to report them to. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 23:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Those details are still being discussed (see the link above), but I believe the intention is to have it work like article prods - someone tags, it gets deleted if nobody untags it within 7 days. How many would be tagged - lots (thousands potentially) but after that not many I wouldn't have thought, but it's difficult to say. Almost all of them seem to be tagged for WikiProject Portals, a handful for other projects too - I started tagging many of the ones currently at MfD but that was regarded as disruptive (I don't understand why). Thryduulf (talk) 00:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Looks like a whole lot of portals are going through MfD, so that seems to be the current conclusion on how to handle them. There are so many entries at the moment that the Portals article alerts page fails to upload due to page size limits. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:48, 18 April 2019 (UTC)


Is there a way to see articles newly tagged with a specific Wikiproject template?

shuffling arrows Proposal out of scope

Filled by: Philepitta (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 23:57, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Description: I was wondering if there is a way to list articles newly tagged with a template for a specific project? If not, would you consider adding this as a feature for this bot (perhaps as an extra tab on the existing alerts page for each Wikiproject)? I was hunting around and didn't see a way to do this. I think that it would be useful for interested editors to be able to see a list of new articles in the scope of a project, as it may bring to their attention articles that they are interested in helping to improve. This may be especially useful for smaller wikiprojects, which are likely to have only a small number of new articles at any given time. Such a feature might also help connect editors interested in related topics, and allow wikiprojects to reach out to new editors who have begun to edit in a particular area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philepitta (talk • contribs) 23:57, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Seconding this, it would be a very useful feature. – Þjarkur (talk) 01:41, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

As much as I'd love to extend the bot to provide different lists, like new articles, I'm afraid this is out of scope for the bot at the moment. I recognize the usefulness, but I am already very short on time to actively work on it and there are a lot of other features to implemented and bugs to squash. However, see User:InceptionBot that makes reports like this. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 08:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

@Philepitta and Þjarkur: Tagging and assessment reports are handled by User:WP 1.0 bot. See e.g. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Academic Journal articles by quality log. However, this functionality has been down for a few months now. I suggest contacting the User:WP 1.0 bot maintainers to have an update on where things are with that. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Mergers and Splits (2019)

copy   Duplicate proposal

Filled by: Trialpears (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 21:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Description: Add alerts for merger and split discussions

Comments: This has been suggested several times before most notably in 2009. The previous discussions brought up a few concerns which I will address here:

  • Mergers are important enough to be included here as they require discussion, this clearly seperates them from cleanup templates that should not be reported here.
  • WolterBot who used to provide this information to relevant WikiProjects is no longer running.
  • While the full backlog probably is too large to be included with over 4000 articles, this can be solved by only including proposals made in the last 2 months.

I also want to mention that it's more important for merger discussions to be finished in a timely manner than most other discussion since the proposer often times will perform the actual merger if they're still active and working on the article while the burden for merging proposals thate were stale for several months often fall on WikiProject Merge which barely can cope with the backlog as is. Adding mergers to article alerts would likley lead to significant decreases in the merge and split backlogs which would be of large interest to the project as a whole. Trialpears (talk) 21:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Seconding this; more expert eyes on merge proposals would allow a speedy resolution one way or the other and save the long tail of weakly-discussed proposals. Klbrain (talk) 16:54, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Custom categories

copy   Duplicate proposal

Filled by: Headbomb

Time filed: 04:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Description: Could the bot be extended include custom categories? For example say WP Chemistry is interested in monitoring a hypothetical what is covered by the "Chemist biography taskforce" (from the Biography banner) and "History of Chemistry taskforce" (from the History of Science banner). It would then add something like |extracats=Chemist biography articles, History of Chemistry taskforce articles" to the subscription template.

Comments:

De-archived. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

  • This is more or less superseded by this FR. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:26, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Article_alerts/Feature_requests/Archive/New/Other&oldid=1085469648"