Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/brest-bot

brest-bot

Operator: Brest (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 01:31, Sunday January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manually assisted: Manually assisted

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Standard pywikipedia

Function overview: Redirects from Macedonian language

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): periodicaly

Estimated number of pages affected: about 10.000 new redirects from Macedonian terms

Exclusion compliant (Y/N):

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function details:

1. The bot will read articles from mk.wiki belongs to some categories, like biography, capitals, countries, ...

2. Article title should pass name-filter, like short titles, titles with few words, ...

3. If en interwiki link exist, create redirect page at en.wiki, categorize this redirect with {{R from Macedonian}} template.

Discussion

I made less then 100 new redirects with my normal account just for test purposes, until I was blocked. I think is usefull to have redirects pages of this kind, especialy for macedonian users, they will easily find the right articles.

Note:I've unblocked your main account now, since you've resolved the problem by stopping the trial editing. —Soap— 01:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hope I didn't destroy anything.--Brest (talk) 02:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia. Is there any consensus at all that we need redirects from foreign language titles for topics such as "25 Април" to "April 25"? Anomie ⚔ 03:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think really it has been discussed at all, but WP:CSD does make mention that "redirects in other languages [are generally useful]" (R3). But that is by no means a statement that they should be made, only a disqualifier for speedy deletion. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 04:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, it's just a disqualifier for CSD. And IMO it's meant for the foreign-language name of a topic related to that language, not that we want a redirect from every language for every title. Anyway, we can see how Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 30#13 Април goes. Anomie ⚔ 05:01, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As Shirik comment, WP:CSD does make mention that "redirects in other languages [are generally useful]". Realy we should see how Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 30#13 Април goes. I made few sets of redirects, just to see how the discusion will goes. One set of redirects is "25 Април" to "April 25". Other set is biography articles. Then capitals (Belgrade, Zagreb, Sofija, ...), ... and so on. --Brest (talk) 12:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think creating these types of redirects en masse is a good precedent to set. –xeno^talk 15:35, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I second xeno's sentiment and would point to this now-archived discussion at Wikipedia talk:Redirect. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 19:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It has been suggested at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 30#13 Април that a good test for whether we should have a foreign language redirect is that someone has found it useful enough to create it manually. With few exceptions (which should be proposed and discussed individually at WP:RFD I think that's a perfectly good criteria to apply in the majority of cases. This would by definition exclude their creation by bot. The only exceptions to this rule in my opinion should be:
1. Redirects from the official name of a ~~settlement~~ place in the official language(s) of that place or the state (or higher) political entity it is in, iff this official name is bolded in the first paragraph of the target article. [note: slightly expanded scope Thryduulf (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)][reply]
2. Redirects from the names of people in their native language, iff this name is bolded in the first paragraph of the target article.

Any redirects that do not meet these strict criteria can be created manually if someone thinks it would be useful (and ideally they should be prepared to explain their usefulness if asked). Thryduulf (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Thryduulf. Mass-creating redirects that no one will use is just a waste of resources. This is the English Wikipedia; it is expected that if someone is here, they probably do know at least some English. If a Macedonian user doesn't know the English word for Април, the article at April will likely be completely unintelligible for them. Mr.Z-man 19:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also if it would be ineligible but they don't know the name, then they can look for Април at wikt:Април (for a definition in English), wikt:mk:Април (for the English translation) and/or mk:Април (for an interwiki link to the English article). Note that I've expanded my first criterion above to include places other than settlements as the Macedonian name for Mavrovo and Rostuša Municipality (Маврово и Ростуша) is just as useful as the Macedonian name for Rostuša (Ростуша) a settlement in the municpality. Thryduulf (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Z-man/Thryduulf we assume that large number of users will use these redirects, at least I know some of them who like to use these redirects, at least I'm one of them. We should look at these redirects as a tool to help those users to reach the appropriate content at English Wikipedia, i.e. as a shortcut to the target article. We shouldn't look at these redirects as a waste of resources but as a useful properties of mediawiki software which help people to improve their knowledge of English, the host wiki language in this case.--Brest (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The definion of the rules is very strong. Existens of article for some place or name at appropriate language edition of Wikipedia should be enough. If there is no such article at the foreign language edition of Wikipedia then the second condition of your rules should be valid: iff this name is bolded in the first paragraph of the target article.--Brest (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]