Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/Dexbot 4

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Approved Legoktm (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dexbot 4 edit

Dexbot (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: Ladsgroup (talk • contribs • logs)

Task/s: Making links of WMF projects a protocol-less link. Function details: e.g. [http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1 Q1] --> [//www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1 Q1] to make sure people who are using SSL, navigate safely all the time. This code has been ran in several big wikis m:User:Invadibot/scope/meta-2

--Amir (talk) 16:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support – but they could sometimes be converted into prefixed links. --Ricordi samoa 16:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The code does all of the necessary jobs see the replacements in user-fixes m:User:Invadibot/scope/meta-2/user-fixes.py Amir (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose In my opinion, this makes a lot of gnomish edits for little benefit. --Rs chen 7754 20:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I highly recommend you to see the replacements Amir (talk) 20:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a little benefit, it's a huge one. If you're trying to stay on HTTPS and can't use HTTPS-everywhere for some reason, accidentally clicking on an HTTP link opens yourself up to a loss of privacy. Legoktm (talk) 21:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support HTTP links are annoying if one tries to stay on HTTPS. Vogone talk 20:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Amir, can you do a quick trial, ~50 edits maybe? Legoktm (talk) 21:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
sure. I checked the whole ns=1 and there was 36 changes [1]. If you think It's not enough I'll do on another ns too Amir (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taking Rschen's concern into consideration while I myself do not think the bot is going to all that useful with this specific task, {{approved}}. John F. Lewis (talk) 22:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's clear you didn't check all the edits otherwise you would have found some issues. [2] for example should not have ":d" in front. Please don't rush things. Legoktm (talk) 22:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that this is an issue. Normal weblinks do not show up on WhatLinksHere, neither do ":d:" prefixed links. Not using this prefix would in fact change some of the link's properties. Vogone talk 23:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a bug, not a feature. We want these links to be seen on WhatLinksHere, in the links table, etc. There's no reason they shouldn't be. You could make the claim that switching them to urls is bad since you lose them from the externallinks table (which is totally false). Legoktm (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[3] broke some stuff as well. Legoktm (talk) 23:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this "External link-->Wikilink" It's a feature in certain situations and It's a bug in other places. It's a feature in content namespaces specially in Wikipedia articles (It's wrong to use a WMF project link as an external one, specially HTML marks internal links as "plainlink" and We use this in some JS tools for example I installed a tool that opens external links in a new tab) but in talks and non-content namespaces we don't need to make an external link internal and remove it from external link table (what legoktm said) Best Amir (talk) 23:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to say the main thing: I can set my bot to do this feature/bug in just content namespaces and not more. actually I'm thinking It's ok to run this f/b in template namespace or not. Amir (talk) 23:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway: I disabled all of replacements related to the f/b Amir (talk) 12:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC) {{dbot}}[reply]

Also, "ru:%D0%97%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE" should be converted into "ru:Зубило". --Ricordi samoa 12:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a code for that, if you want I can run it too Amir (talk) 12:32, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support, as the author of the script. It is safe to run the bot, especially only applying protocol-relative URLs (like Amir has proposed). This task is needed, so thank you for carrying it out. --abi án 14:07, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support I don't want to be http while I am using https. by Revi^{^Discuss}_{SUL Info} at 14:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.