Wikipedia talk:Database reports

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, talk pages for some individual database reports are either redirected here, or shown a notice to start future conversations here.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Much of what shows up in Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations is due to piped links that have no affect on the article appearance, and I spend a lot of time fixing them so that I can get down to what matters in the report. And I take a certain amount of flak for fixing things that don't affect the article appearance. If those piped links were simply skipped, the report might be a more useful list of what to fix.

On the other hand, quite a few of those piped links also have miscapitalized link text in the article, so are still worth looking at sometimes. Maybe we could have reports both ways? Or separate counts of piped and not? Other ideas? Dicklyon (talk) 17:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone interested? Dicklyon (talk) 03:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the text of the piped links aren't stored in the database, just the links themselves. I'll think a bit about this, maybe a separate tool that did further processing would do the trick. Legoktm (talk) 17:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A short description is usually seen in the search bar, and gets cut off after around 40 characters. But it's not hard to find SD's about twice that long,[1][2] and perhaps even longer than that. I wonder what is the longest short description. Wizmut (talk) 06:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After some digging and learning I found that it is possible to do a Quarry search for these.[3] But it might still be nice to have a page dedicated to these cases. Wizmut (talk) 10:14, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your first link for you. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions and the associated talk pages for links to categories and a lot of discussion about the length of short descriptions. Wikipedia talk:Short description/Archive 12 and Wikipedia talk:Short description/Archive 14 have particularly good discussions with actual data. The truncation of the second line of text in the search results in the Vector 2022 skin is a bug, submitted as T311277 in 2022, which has not yet been fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:39, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links. There's a bunch of people who are passionate about short descriptions, and I like it :) Wizmut (talk) 13:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizmut: I didn't see that anyone tackled this yet, so I turned that Quarry link into Wikipedia:Database reports/Long short descriptions. Let me know if you want other changes or tweaks. Legoktm (talk) 18:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Perhaps add a link to the project page for short descriptions, which has a bellyful of useful advice. Wizmut (talk) 05:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this needed? We have a tracking category, Category:Articles with long short description. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why but the category is empty and the report is not. Wizmut (talk) 23:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The category is populated by short descriptions with length greater than 100; the report is apparently greater than or equal to 100. The only page that would have appeared in both was Cuaderno, whose description has been shortened since the report was last generated. —Cryptic 00:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh awesome, I wasn't able to find the category earlier. I'll delete the report then. Legoktm (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, Wikipedia:Database reports/Most-watched users is pretty out of date at this point and I would be interested to know if the data has changed. Can we run it again? Tykeshay (talk) 23:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's blocked on a redacted version of the database table being made available again, see T59617. Legoktm (talk) 23:17, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The last update on this page was on 10 June. Has something gone wrong with the bot? Thanks Dupont Circle (talk) 12:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That report is maintained by @Community Tech bot, so pinging @MusikAnimal (WMF) (per the bot's user page). Legoktm (talk) 15:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The untagged stubs report is backlogged with a lot of soft redirects to Wikiquote, Wikispecies, etc and lists of lists. It would be useful if these were ignored. The majority of the list is currently false positives which prevents new entries from being added. C F A 💬 19:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply)[reply]

Hi @CFA, I've done the first part by excluding more soft redirects. Can you give an example of the lists of lists you're seeing? The report should already exclude articles that start with "List of" and "Lists of". Legoktm (talk) 06:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm: Thank you. This has already freed up a bunch of slots. For the lists of lists, see Siege of Suffolk order of battle, Battle of Piedmont order of battle, Fauna of Denmark, etc. I also forgot to mention it does not exclude redirects currently at RfD (e.g. [4][5] etc.) Thanks again. C F A 💬 03:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! And, thanks for the examples, I've added some more filtering conditions that should exclude those in the next run. Legoktm (talk) 04:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think pages in Category:Temporary maintenance holdings should also be excluded from this report. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, the bot updated the date, but didn't otherwise update the report, which I know should have a ton of changes reflecting my hundreds of case-fixing edits yesterday. Never seen that before... Dicklyon (talk) 15:41, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High replag means that all sorts of stuff that should update will not update until the replication lag goes back to zero. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it recovers eventually. Dicklyon (talk) 14:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this process] has been stalled for about a week. I expect someone is trying to figure it out, but I don't know any more visibility into that. Dicklyon (talk) 03:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Database reports/Unusually long IP blocks - the only thing that shows on the page is an LUA error. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:24B4:D100:18CB:DB92 (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed in the next update, thanks for flagging. Legoktm (talk) 06:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing some file cleanup lately and have come across a significant number of files which are tagged with a non-free use rationale (such as with {{Non-free use rationale}}) but which are missing an actual file copyright tag (such as those listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags/All. Per the section on that page regarding non-free content, non-free files are required to have both a rationale and a copyright tag. Currently, the report at Wikipedia:Database reports/Files without a license tag does not seem to include files which do have a rationale but which do not have an actual license/copyright tag; for instance, File:Esther Applin 1944.jpg (which should presumably get tagged with {{non-free biog-pic}} unless it is found to be public domain or similar), among many others I've seen in the course of my recent cleanup work. Would it be possible to add files in this situation to the report, or else create a separate report for them? 🔹Blue (talk/contribs) 21:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think templates in Category:Template disambiguation pages should be excluded from Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates (filtered), since it's a subcategory of Category:Wikipedia transclusionless templates. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I might be useful, if we're going to change that page, to convert it to use the format at User:Jonesey95/self-transcluded-templates so that regular editors (or template editors, if we want to protect the report a bit) can make changes like the above after discussion. That way, nobody has to mess with off-wiki code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised a PR (https://github.com/mzmcbride/database-reports/pull/141) to get HaleBot to stop updating pages containing {{nobots}}. This would enable usurping reports following on-wiki discussions without getting the two bots to overwrite each others' reports. @0xDeadbeef Can you review it? – SD0001 (talk) 19:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to follow up, the PR has been merged and deployed. Please go ahead with {{database reports}}-ification! Legoktm (talk) 16:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm since the report already excludes hard redirects, it should exclude soft redirects, which is currently does not do, for example, various wiktionary redirects like Technical tap, this could probablly be resolved by excluding pages found in Category:Wikipedia soft redirects and it's subcategories.

Another issue is Set index articles, which are functionally another disambiguation page and often do not need edits for long periods of time, such as some surnames, geographic details, etc. I'd propose excluding these from Dusty Articles and perhaps have it be a sub report exclusive to set indexes, maybe for particular categories of sex indexes, as sometimes they can be genuinely overlooked(i.e. an article was created for a person with an obscure surname that does indeed already have SIA). Anyway I understand this to likely be a much more nuanced issue to resolve than the soft redirects so more disccusion is likely needed on that matter. Akaibu (talk) 21:40, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could we get a database report on TV show articles that have "was" in the first sentence (i.e., Name of Show was...) MOS:TV has dicated use of "is" since forever, but I'm still finding "was"es all over the place. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fastily: Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of non-existent templates hasn't updated in ~two days; in fact, if you look at Special:Contributions/FastilyBot this was the very last page the bot edited before it went on hiatus (usually it makes several edits per day). Can someone restart the bot? Duckmather (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fastily is no longer running a bot that updates reports. I have updated that report to use the quarry query that the bot was using. It should update daily. Improvements to that page are welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm and 0xDeadbeef: please update the SQL for Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings to exclude AnomieBOT-created en-dash redirects (per this discussion on my talk), as I modified my similar personal report HERE. For example, because the bot created 1941-42 Subsitute Gold Cup, your report includes one incoming link to 1941–42 Subsitute Gold Cup but that can be ignored because it was caused by that bot's edit which created more problems than it solved. Note that my report excludes it. Sorry to bother you with this work-around request, but I trust I'll have better luck asking you than I did asking the bot operator to tweak their bot code to avoid this issue. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 22:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can just take it over with {{database report}}; see a couple sections up. —Cryptic 23:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that back in June, and it worked for a few days, until HaleBot woke up and started working again. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per that section, the change to ignore pages matching /\{\{[Dd]atabase report\s*\|/ was merged in September (commit). —Cryptic 14:30, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done – taken over with {{database report}} – wbm1058 (talk) 11:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]