This page has archives.Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot IIIif there are more than 3.
This page is for requests that can be resolved by editors with AutoWikiBrowser permissions.
Note: If the request involves changing URLs, notify Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests for specialized bots designed to handle dead link templates, archive URLs, link verification etc.
Spaces before <ref> tags
This search (insource:/\. \<ref\>/; which only searches for spaces after a full stop) returns almost 60,000 pages. The spaces before the <ref> tags should be removed per MOS:REFSPACE. (sample diff) – a wondrous raven (talk) 21:55, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
Could someone still do a run to fix all of them at once? – a wondrous raven (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
Not really, this would be a cosmetic edit. They get sorted, along with other stuff, when general fixes are applied. Neils51 (talk) 05:23, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
Removing a rendered space between a full stop and a ref tag is definitely not a cosmetic edit. It changes the rendered page. I don't know why there is not a bot that fixes these; maybe there is an edge-case context issue. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:01, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
Sorry, yes, you are correct. I was looking at some where the space was removed at the end of a line. I would expect pushback if there was a bot attempt. Maybe the rule could be AWB intrinsic as I think many users turn general fixes off, based on historical comment. Neils51 (talk) 14:03, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
This is one of AWB's genfixes, but 60k is a ton for a single person to do. It's not a cosmetic edit but is still considered an issue, so I could probably put in a bot run to fix these. Primefac (talk) 11:23, 19 September 2026 (UTC)
I know @Sdkb had a similar bot task, probably for a different subset. Also, you should account for other punctuation, named references, and multiple spaces. Linebreaks also cause spaces to appear.
insource:/[.,;]( |\n)\<ref/ returns 115,000 pages
insource:/[.,;] +\<ref/ (with two spaces, though I had to replace one with an nbsp for display) returns another 1000 (you can combine the two but the search times out)
insource:/[.,;] +\n\<ref/ returns another 6500 (again, combining the two leads to a timeout)
insource:/\<\/ref\>( |\n)\<ref/ returns 80,700 pages, plus more for the same variations as above.
Slightly unrelated but insource:/\<\/ref\>[A-Za-z]/ times out at over 1000 results. I've seen spaces being added before references without adding another one after them, so maybe just add this fix to the same task. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:40, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
Yes, this is SdkbBot task 1. If there is desire to expand the task to cover the instances it's not currently catching, I could look into why and expand the query if safe to do so. Sdkbtalk 16:48, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
I'd be in support of this; I fix these manually whenever I run across them (they bother me more than they should), and it would nice not to have to. LittlePuppers (talk) 16:55, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
AWB's genfix uses (?<=[a-z\.,;]) \<ref so I'm basically searching for that. Sdkb, genuinely curious how we have this many hits if the bot's running - is it a search issue or is it just that the bot doesn't run this task often (I see it uses AWB)? If the latter is the case it might be worth having a second bot of only to cut down the number of hits at any given point. Primefac (talk) 18:10, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
From the BRFA and recent edits, it currently only searches for refs after quotation marks and brackets. LittlePuppers (talk) 18:16, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
Oh! Right, I misread the ." with the " being part of a quote not the parameter. Shows you what I get for skimming. Primefac (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, if I recall correctly that was just a provision to reduce the chance it encountered any errors. But if the broader query has long part of GENFIX then it's presumably safe to use it.
Is there a specific place I should post or process to follow to affirm that it's permissable for me to use the broader query, or is this discussion sufficient? Sdkbtalk 18:35, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
I would file a BRFA since it's a fair bit of an expansion of the existing task, but yes this would be the place to point to indicate that there is a need/consensus for one to be run. Primefac (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
@Primefac, is it correct that the genfix replacement does not account for multiple spaces or linebreaks? 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:11, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
Looks like. Primefac (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
Unless multiple spaces are replaced by single ones somewhere else in genfixes. I realise now that in the case of a linebreak, the regexp should also check that the previous line does not start with *, #,; or:, since
* text
<ref>citation</ref>
will render differently from
* text<ref>citation</ref>
and while a paragraph should not start with a citation, there could be text after the citation in the same line that was not intended to be a list element. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:10, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
There are some situations where I think removing a space between a word and a ref could be less helpful. insource:/[^a-z]see \<ref/ has 319 results, for instance, and removing the space does not look like the correct fix–while there are also 245 for insource:/[^a-z]see\<ref/ without a space, that is most likely due to genfixes being applied on those pages by other users. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:14, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
I also noticed that this exact problem extends to spaces between a comma and a ref tag in "lists" of references. @Sdkb, would you consider extending your bot task to (single or multiple) spaces after a full stop, a closing parenthesis or a preceding closing ref tag as a start? 1234qwer1234qwer4 04:17, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
Just an unrelated note to most of the discussion above, but with the number of pages needing to be edited does it make sense to have multiple bots editing? I ask only because last weekend I filed a BRFA... (yes, I didn't think about the fact that it was the weekend and filed about an hour before the above conversation really kicked off) The bot has finished its trial for . and ,, so that would knock out about half of the possible targets if Skdb wants to take the others. Totally not fussed otherwise, just going through BRFAs and remembered I put it on hold pending me bringing it up here. Primefac (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
Related but considerably less common: I stumbled across a case of this today with a {{cn}} tag. Presumably something similar could be done with those (and perhaps other inline tags). insource:/\. \{\{citation needed/ times out with 7100 results. LittlePuppers (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
Already Done. Only about 20 edits, with the rest being transclusions of a template or incorrect links. FlammablePizza (talk / contrib) 23:35, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
Tm:reqphoto
Hello,
I was editing Rubinstein–Taybi syndrome recently and noticed that the talk page had Template:Reqphoto while the article actually had a photo (multiple, in fact, including one at the lead). I was wondering if someone with AWB knowledge could look for all talk pages with the relevant template and then check to see if the article has an image already, and then if so remove the template from the talk page? Thanks!
JuxtaposedJacob (talk) |:) | he/him | 10:02, 6 October 2026 (UTC)
With around 108K of this template used I can understand the request. The template in this case was placed in 2010 by a now retired editor. The person who placed photos may or may not have been aware of the Talk page request however similarly with many subjective type templates may not have been sure if the 'criteria' that the originator intended had been met. You can see this with templates that relate say to 'grammar'. It can sometimes be subjective as to whether grammar is good/ok/so-so/ugly in some pages. Generally if such a template is in place and I believe the grammar is reasonable (often a number of editors have made improvements) then I can take the 'bold' action of removing it and if disputed then discuss the specifics. I suspect this would be similar with photos. Someone adding a photo may not be sure that it meets the desired response and leaves the template, though technically the requirements of the template request may have been met. I think that this is a common situation that Foundation staff can assist with. Processes that find the template, determine if photo object types exist and then notify the template originator that the template requirement appears to have been met, taking an objective approach. The originator can either indicate why not or subsequently the template is removed. Some editors may suggest that nah, process a dump and sort it, however we haven't heard from them........Neils51 (talk) 05:06, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
I have a better idea - go through any article that has {{reqphoto}}and an image in the article and doesn't have the |of= parameter, and just remove it. I suspect you'll take care of 90% of transclusions that way. Primefac (talk) 22:47, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
I thought that might involve a bit of work, then came upon this, the Image Existence Checker. Despite the suggestion from the {{reqphoto}} template, "it is strongly advised that you add at least one category parameter.", there are many that don't, a subset of the close to 7K listed by the tool. Good job for a bot perhaps. Neils51 (talk) 23:19, 10 October 2026 (UTC)
I have been working on a Transclusing a 1662 English songbook called Rump Songs on Wikisource but I recently discovered two errors that require semi-automatic edits to fix.
First, previously the author has been marked as Anonymous but I have discovered that the author is actually known to be a certain Alexander Brome so all the various sub-pages of this work will have to be corrected.
Second I have found the second volume of this work and uploaded it but that means that the main page and its sub-pages will have to be renamed to indicate that it is only the first volume.
If this tool is only meant to be used on Wikipedia I apologize and would appreciate it if I could be pointed to where I am meant to ask. PharaohCrabspeak𓀁works𓀨 15:56, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
@PharaohCrab I'm not a Wikisource editor, so I am not familiar with the policies over there on moving pages. You might be able to ask at the Scriptorium. However, I can make the changes to the template to reflect the author. You just want |section-author=anon replaced with |section-author=Alexander Brome, correct? phuzion (talk) 12:13, 15 October 2026 (UTC)
@PharaohCrab I've finished changing the author, which is all that I'm able to do with AWB. Moving the base page will move all of the associated subpages, as well, so assuming you have adequate rights over there, that's something you should be able to do in a single action. With that, I'm going to mark this request as done. phuzion (talk) 13:53, 15 October 2026 (UTC)
Well yesterday I did a similar thing with another project (A General History of the Pyrates/Volume 1) and in that case I had to manually move all the sub-pages. I'm pretty sure I would have to do the same thing here which would be extremely tedious. PharaohCrabspeak𓀁works𓀨 14:03, 15 October 2026 (UTC)
Ok, since the move isn't completed, I'm un-marking this as completed. I don't have the ability to move pages on Wikisource, so maybe someone there might be able to do that for you. Hopefully someone else can help you with that part of your request. phuzion (talk) 14:31, 15 October 2026 (UTC)
We have at least 90 links to https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=nameregs/nameregs_$1.xml and, while they still redirect, the site now gives primacy to links in the form: https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/view/nameregs/nameregs_$1, where "$1" is a numeric identifier.
Done @Pigsonthewing I edited 68 pages with the old version of the URL.
Let me know if I missed any that you were looking at. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
Thank you. Apart from this one, which I just fixed manually, any remaining links seem to be in talk page archives. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits; 20:12, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
@Philipnelson99 I found some similar patterns, if you don't mind:
Also, my recent cleanup work on bilateral sports relations and ambassadors likely created a lot of empty category that have not yet been tagged for {{db-c1}}. Can you do that for me? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:49, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
Labor Day retargeted to Labour Day; US holiday now at Labor Day (United States)
Pinging NomanPK44, who was supposed to do the WP:POSTMOVE steps after closing this move. There are still templates linking to the redirect, which would be a good place to start. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
??? There are 1,454 incoming links to Labor Day at this writing. I fixed 190 of those by fixing the three navbox templates that linked to this redirect. The rest are still out there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:48, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Sorry, my comment came earlier than the result, but I am working on it. Also, thanks for helping me out NomanPK44 (talk) 23:51, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Done. Only about 20 edits, with the rest being transclusions of a template or incorrect links. FlammablePizza (talk / contrib) 23:35, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
Doing... Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2026 (UTC)