Information About Existing Inter-language Bots
I'm looking for information about:
- which bots are active in Wikipedia for correcting inter-language links
- what those bots actually do
I've searched around but could only find the list of registered bots, the help section about bots and interlanguage links and various other not really useful results. I could NOT find any information about what each of the listed bots actually does. Does that information exist anywhere, and if so where?
--Robert (talk) 04:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I think they often use the same Pywikipedia code. See mw:Manual:Pywikipediabot/interwiki.py. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- By the way, Wikidata will soon make interwiki links obsolete. --Rschen7754 05:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think that all the ILL bots use the same Pywikipedia code; some of them screw up ILLs on template doc pages, but most don't. This suggests to me that more than one algorithm exists. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I think the question on top is asking which bot can repair the problem inter-language links but not how to make a bot. The problem inter-language links are include: if A links to B, B will be linked to A, and if A links to B and B to C, A will be linked to C.(help section about bots and interlanguage links) --Roiny88 (talk) 17:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think that all the ILL bots use the same Pywikipedia code; some of them screw up ILLs on template doc pages, but most don't. This suggests to me that more than one algorithm exists. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- By the way, Wikidata will soon make interwiki links obsolete. --Rschen7754 05:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Read more about this topic: Village Pump (technical)
Famous quotes containing the words information and/or existing:
“Information networks straddle the world. Nothing remains concealed. But the sheer volume of information dissolves the information. We are unable to take it all in.”
—Günther Grass (b. 1927)
“Webster never goes behind government, and so cannot speak with authority about it. His words are wisdom to those legislators who contemplate no essential reform in the existing government; but for thinkers, and those who legislate for all time, he never once glances at the subject.... Comparatively, he is always strong, original, and, above all, practical. Still, his quality is not wisdom, but prudence.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)