MediaWiki talk:XTools-AutoEdits.json
Add topic| XTools AutoEdits configuration | |
|---|---|
| This page is used to request changes to configuration file that controls the XTools AutoEdits tool.
Only tools that are widely used should be included. Every tool added will slow down XTools a tiny bit more, so please be diligent and ensure the list doesn't become overly exhaustive.
| |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days.
|
Add afcrc-helper to English Wikipedia
[edit]- Wiki: enwiki
- Name of tool: afcrc-helper
- Links to example edits: [1]
- Link to the tool's documentation or homepage: en:User:Eejit43/scripts/afcrc-helper
I Am Andumé (talk) 02:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support but exclusion to tag
mw-new-redirectneeds to be added, as the script is mainly used for creating cats and redirects. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 11:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC) - To any admins that might be looking into this. Kindly keep it on hold till phab:T382773 is resolved. If added now, it will duplicate into the Redirect tool as well. Thanks! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 09:17, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Bunnypranav, we currently have the AFCRHS tool in the config already; maybe we can expand that to include this tool as well? (On that note, I think it should also include namespace 4, which I apparently missed here.) ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)- Yeah, should work. But again, it will in any case duplicate with Redirect tool. NS4 should also be there, yes. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:55, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- I don't understand what specific edits are being asked to mark automated here. Using a script to create one redirect with one button press isn't really automated per se, and it seems you want to exclude those anyway via the tag exclusions. Is it just marking requests as done? If so, does anyone actually care about whether edits are marked automated or not outside mainspace. Please elaborate. * Pppery * it has begun 03:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- (not the original request author) The script only creates redirects and marks the request as done. I do not think marking the handful edits to a single page even need to be automated, as you suggested. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 04:45, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- (also not the original request author, but the script author) The script can allow for the creation of many redirects at once (alongside corresponding non-redirect talk pages), which would count as automated. It doesn't seem particularly necessary to tag the edits to the request pages (en:WP:AFC/R and en:WP:AFC/C) themselves.
- I don't how how you'd modify the existing AFCRHS tagging, but this script is separate from that one (though it does perform effectively the same action), so I believe it should be marked separately. However, I'm not aware of precedent for that. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 05:26, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- The redirect creation is already marked as automatic, under the "Redirect" semi automated tool. So the only edits left are to creation of its talk page right? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 05:45, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- True, though would it not make sense to group them under afcrc-helper as well, or instead even? Again, I'm not sure of the precedent for all of this, so please correct me. But yes, the talk page of redirects and categories should be the only thing left that aren't tagged. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 05:57, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- I was actually thinking if this addition is even necessary, just for those talk page edits, like the last sentence by Pppery. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- I suppose it isn't totally necessary then though, no. It would just be nice to see what portion of redirects were created at the request of someone else, but that is only so important. I'll defer to those who are more familiar with this XTools feature. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 21:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- I was actually thinking if this addition is even necessary, just for those talk page edits, like the last sentence by Pppery. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 06:12, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- True, though would it not make sense to group them under afcrc-helper as well, or instead even? Again, I'm not sure of the precedent for all of this, so please correct me. But yes, the talk page of redirects and categories should be the only thing left that aren't tagged. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 05:57, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- The redirect creation is already marked as automatic, under the "Redirect" semi automated tool. So the only edits left are to creation of its talk page right? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 05:45, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- (not the original request author) The script only creates redirects and marks the request as done. I do not think marking the handful edits to a single page even need to be automated, as you suggested. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 04:45, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- I don't understand what specific edits are being asked to mark automated here. Using a script to create one redirect with one button press isn't really automated per se, and it seems you want to exclude those anyway via the tag exclusions. Is it just marking requests as done? If so, does anyone actually care about whether edits are marked automated or not outside mainspace. Please elaborate. * Pppery * it has begun 03:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, should work. But again, it will in any case duplicate with Redirect tool. NS4 should also be there, yes. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:55, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Bunnypranav, we currently have the AFCRHS tool in the config already; maybe we can expand that to include this tool as well? (On that note, I think it should also include namespace 4, which I apparently missed here.) ~~~~
Regex mistake for "bot revert"
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The regex currently reads:
"^Reverting possible (vandalism|test edit).*by.*\\(Bot|BOT( EDIT)?\\)$|^BOT (- )?(Reverted edits? by|rv)|^vandalism from \\[\\[.*?\\(\\d+\\) - reverted"
But it should be:
"^Reverting possible (vandalism|test edit).*by.*\\((Bot|BOT( EDIT)?)\\)$|^BOT (- )?(Reverted edits? by|rv)|^vandalism from \\[\\[.*?\\(\\d+\\) - reverted"
ie wrap Bot|BOT( EDIT)? in parentheses. Why:
The indented disjunction is
^Reverting possible (vandalism|test edit).*by.*\\(Bot|BOT( EDIT)?\\)$ |^BOT (- )?(Reverted edits? by|rv) |^vandalism from \\[\\[.*?\\(\\d+\\) - reverted
but since Bot|BOT( EDIT)? is not parenthesed (the \( \) are literal parentheses and not groups), it's in fact
^Reverting possible (vandalism|test edit).*by.*\\(Bot |BOT( EDIT)?\\)$ |^BOT (- )?(Reverted edits? by|rv) |^vandalism from \\[\\[.*?\\(\\d+\\) - reverted
Which is woefully too permissive because it catches any summary that ends with BOT), which makes XTools call reverts random bot edits. (phab:T424790/[2]) — Alien 3
3 3 12:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
Add CVPI to enwiki
[edit]- Wiki: en.wikipedia.org
- Name of tool: Interceptor
- Links to example edits: [3], [4]
- Link to the tool's documentation or homepage: en:w:WP:CVPI
The tag for the edits is CVPI. CVPI edits should also be excluded from generic rollback.
RandomPerson238 (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
wAwB
[edit]- Wiki: en.wikipedia.org
- Name of tool: wAwB
- Links to example edits: EN:Special:Diff/1352858609
- Link to the tool's documentation or homepage: EN:User:Ponor/wAwB
New web version of Auto Wiki Browser Asukite (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
