Talk:Community Wishlist/W115

Isn't there a bot?

Isn't there a bot that checks for and corrects broken section links? Prototyperspective (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I meant to say that if a bot does this (and it could well be that it only does this in ENWP) then marking the broken section links in some visible color for editors to fix wouldn't make much sense. Maybe it would be better to improve the bot or build something like it instead of just coloring the wikilinks and having editors fix these. Prototyperspective (talk) 10:53, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

There have been various bots for broken section links at various times. I'm not sure if any are still operating, but I think highlighting broken links is good even if a bot is also reporting them somewhere - it draws attention to individual editors working on that specific page which is more scalable than a bot report. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 06:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

I think originally I just said this as relevant info and because info on the current solution/methods should probably be included/considered in the wish text which may need (and still needs imo) an edit.

Then later I think I came to the conclusion that if these bots were or are functional, then marking the broken section links in some visible color for editors to fix wouldn't make much sense because then scarce editors puts lots of time and effort into manually fixing the broken section links when the bot would have done it just a few days later. By that logic,

• it makes sense to display the coloring for links that the bot could not fix (e.g. marked by the bot or that stayed there for a duration that implies the bot could not fix it)
• to improve the bot so it fixes more broken section links more quickly
• to expand the bot's adoption if it isn't yet widely used across the projects

more scalable than a bot report agree but it's not a bot report but the bot fixing the section links directly.

• If you still think it would be good to display the wikilink colorings for all broken section links and to do so e.g. instead of improving the bot accordingly, then please address the specific points/explanations made.

Prototyperspective (talk) 13:08, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

My point is that fixing broken section links is not a task that a bot can do - it's w:WP:CONTEXTBOT in many cases. And the bot I was thinking of which does this on enwiki is w:user:Cewbot. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 17:06, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Didn't you contradict yourself in the same comment? At en:User:Cewbot#Fix broken anchor one can see that this bot is currently doing this task. From what I can remember it does it accurately and uses the page revision history to know the section target. Thanks for the link. Regarding links it can't or couldn't fix see my prior comment. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

No, I didn't. Obviously some are bottable, but many others can be context dependent so I still think highlighting them makes sense. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 21:45, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Well you wrote in absolute terms at "fixing broken section links is not a task". As for the ones that the bot can't do, as in the first bullet point above, I also find highlighting these would make sense. However, taking the things you said into account imo it 1) would probably be better if it was only these wikilinks (that the bot can't fix) and 2) the info on the functional bot is kind of missing in the wish content. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:08, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Response to the wish

@Alva2004 Thank you for submitting your wish! We are working with internal stakeholders to figure out next steps, such as feasibility and prioritization. We’ll keep you posted about it. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:18, 27 November 2025 (UTC)