Template talk:R:FEW

The 0 in |volume=

Why does this need to be written by the template caller? Can't we substitute the

pageurl=https://apps.atilf.fr/lecteurFEW/lire/{{{volume|{{{vol|{{{1|}}}}}}}}}/{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}

with

pageurl=https://apps.atilf.fr/lecteurFEW/lire/{{{volume|{{{vol|{{{1|}}}}}}}}}0/{{{page|{{{2|}}}}}}

? This way the volume parameter will actually be correct (i.e. it will say "volume 3" instead of "volume 30" etc.). All reference to the template would need to be corrected though, possibly by a bot. Catonif (talk) 11:20, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

You're right, this is an "implementation detail" of the way the website works, and could also change in the future. Having tripped over it a few times, I'm all for changing it. – Jberkel 14:09, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

That would be a godsend. Would it be difficult to have a bot subtract the extra 0 in existing usages of this template, @Benwing2? As in {{R:FEW|30|912|fŭrŭnculus}} > {{R:FEW|3|912|fŭrŭnculus}}. Nicodene (talk) 22:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

@Benwing2, DCDuring I have prepared a script to fix this. Could I get the flood flag pls? – Jberkel 11:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Why am I mentioned in this? DCDuring (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@DCDuring: You told me to ask for a flood flag last time I was doing an automated run. (User talk:Jberkel/2022#Flood flag) – Jberkel 14:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jberkel Are 61, 132, etc. going to be called 6/1, 13/2? Catonif (talk) 14:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Catonif: My idea was to add another parameter |vol_part=, it is easier to construct the URL this way, so it would look like {{R:FEW|6|vol_part=1}}. What do you think? Are these actually sub-volumes, or is it just the way they are arranged on the website?– Jberkel 14:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jberkel Ah, good idea. Yes, they do seem to have been printed separately, given the page number at the top restarts. Catonif (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Migration done. No more 0s needed. – Jberkel 01:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jberkel Sorry, I'm late to the party here. When you ask for the flood flag, are you running a bot out of your own account? In general you shouldn't do that; instead, submit a request to get a bot account and run the script out of that. That has several benefits, one of which is it separates out the automated changes and also that it's a lot more obvious when reading the history that the change was made by a bot. Benwing2 (talk) 08:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Benwing2: OK, I've been running a few cleanup tasks recently, maybe it's time to create a separate account. A bot account which gets the flood flag is not a "real" bot, though? – Jberkel 09:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jberkel Hmm, it looks like bots get a bot flag, which is similar to the flood flag. But IMO if you're actually running scripts from the account and not just using AWB or similar to do semi-automated edits, you should go through the voting process to get a proper bot account (it takes about two weeks I think). I will happily nominate your bot account for this process. Benwing2 (talk) 09:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC)