Talk:MassRename

Magic words

Why can we not use magic words? For instace, the following fails:

Spongebob/102_Dalmatians SpongeBob_SquarePants/{{PAGENAME}}

Thanks! — SpikeToronto 04:20, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

Mass Rename pages have comment section

When i was using script to mass rename pages, i noticed those pages doesn't have any comment like before. I checked and seem those comments still there but they can't show up on newly named pages. Can you fix this issue? Dai ca superman (talk) 09:04, April 14, 2016 (UTC)

Script is broken

Hi Ozuzanna,
I guess, your script does not work. I imported it in my common.js but the link to open the modal was not shown in the toolbar. Maybe you have to change #my-tools-menu to .tools.
Agent Zuri Profile Message Wall Blog 16:07, September 15, 2017 (UTC)

Strange. For me it works as it should. You need something in your toolbox that is displayed always (like "follow" or something else) and not only things like "edit", "move" etc. -- Barbar (talk) 16:55, September 15, 2017 (UTC)

I think FANDOM have been modifying the "Wikia Bar" lately - it still works fine for me, and I've heard similar comments by users on similar scripts. May have to consider relocating them all altogether. — KnazO 17:18, September 15, 2017 (UTC)

Used this script heavily yesterday, it's working fine. - Standardbotarmy (talk) 17:39, September 15, 2017 (UTC)

Hi there! I've been a heavy user of a similar script (at least in appearance,) the MassCategorization, and it works fine for me on wikis regardless of my user status; however I've just tried using MassRename and I cannot say the same. It is not "Mass" if only maximum of three can go through, sometimes less! I have 19 pages set to be renamed, and when first running the script, only the first 3 was renamed successfully, with the rest showing the message: Failed to rename [...] to [...]: ratelimited I'm confused about the "ratelimited" statement, because for MassCategorization, I've been able to process a larger number without ever encountering a problem on the same wiki, and surely, being limited to only renaming 3 pages at once is a tad bit too restricted?

But most of all, I find the unexplained inconsistencies the reason to bring it up. The first time, the first 3 of the to-be-renamed pages were done; the second time, the last 2 were done instead; the third time, only the first one got through; the fourth time, it was the first 3 going through again. If the script always only process 3 from the top listing, I might not have raised the question, but the fact that it looked random, and what previously failed to be renamed due to the weird "ratelimited" explanation, could run fine after the eventual tries. Nothing has changed, yet the script failed and then not failed.

I know nothing about codes or scripts, but I don't believe the occurrence should happen to a completely perfect script. And before you ask, no, none of the intended-to-be-renamed-as article titles were taken. Like I said, what "failed" could be ran fine on later tries, but it makes no sense that for some reason, the script isn't really doing the "Mass" rename when only a few could go through, having to manually run it multiple times.

I performed it on w:c:harrypotter. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 18:56, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

Wikia relatively recently added edit and move ratelimiting. Set the move interval to something bigger. 20 moves per minute are allowed for administrators and 80 moves per minute for bots. For regular users, only two moves per four minutes are allowed, so you should really be asking the administrators of that wiki to run the script on their accounts or, even better, accounts of their bots, to make the move much faster. -- Cube-shaped garbage can 19:03, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

Ahh... Thank you for the timely response! But wow... the difference between regular users and admins... Not even 5 moves per 4 mins (still only 1/16 of admins capability) or 4 moves per 2 mins (still only 1/10 of admins capability)... 2 moves per 4 mins... I really might as well not use the script and do it by hand. Do you know what Content Moderators are able to perform? Can I assume they get the admin's range? (at least one active admin has given the go ahead to make those changes; given they were improperly named for quite some time, it is obvious that, renaming, while better suited, is not close to being a priority for them. I will keep in mind that in the future if there's an even larger amount to be renamed, will go ask for bot help. Thanks!) --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:10, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

I'm reading the ratelimits from here. There are no additional ratelimits on any other user groups, so Content Moderators also apparently fall under the 0.5 move/minute ratelimit. It would make sense they have a higher ratelimit than normal users, so you could ask about that through Special:Contact/general. -- Cube-shaped garbage can 20:15, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

Again thanks for the super timely response and providing the info and source! While inconvenient, I think I can live with it for the time being, but I'll keep the option of contacting Wikia in mind. Thanks for the help! =D --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:30, August 24, 2018 (UTC)

Renaming Images

What's crackin! I realize that this script is intended for renaming pages, but it's also helpful in renaming images, which is what I need it for. However, I noticed when renaming images, it doesn't automatically rename the image on all the pages it can be found on. Instead, it'll just leave a dead link. Is there any way to modify or fix that so that when the images are renamed that they are also renamed on the pages they appear on? Also, I'm completely aware of the FileUsageAuto-update script. However, I need to rename literally hundreds of images. So I don't have the time to click on each image, one by one, and "Rename and update" them. That would take far too long. Killer kev (talk) 15:19, July 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I'd suggest creating a Bot to deal with this problem. From there you could easily use MassNullEdit while in Whatlinkshere to get a list of all the pages the file is ued on. Then just copy the list into MassEdit and use that to replace the old file name with the new one. Hope that helps! Patrik 14:46, July 5, 2018 (UTC)

I have a bot already, and thanks for the suggestion. I'll definitely look into it. Killer kev (talk) 01:43, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

Awesome. Patrik 14:42, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

┌────┘

Updated for the below in case someone actually read through all that to find out the problem seemed to have miraculously disappeared. To not sound like a complete moron, I reported in after the situation was still as described below, over a full day after the act was performed, and still was last I check. (up til 12hr prior to the timestamp of this message)

I have no idea what happened, as this script hasn't been changed (from what I'm able to see, anyways) between my two messages, but the "No file by [...]" mentioned below is now no longer present. The un-working redirects are now working and capable of displaying images. I will do another 3 rename to see if it was just some unfortunate temporary madness, or something else. I now feel like it's probably not because of this script, though the other script never has this kind of delay (that I noticed) when leaving redirects behind. How odd. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 22:45, February 11, 2019 (UTC)

Hi, since this is somewhat relevant, I'm leaving this under the existing subsection. Sorry in advance for the super long message; to sum it up in case it's too overwhelming to read the entire thing: For files, the redirects left behind by this script failed to actually be capable of displaying their respective renamed images; as links, the redirects do work, but not when trying to use them as filenames. (Full details below)

I also use FileUsageAuto-update, but like Killer kev mentioned, sometimes I'd like to not having to go into files individually to set them up then queue to process, (I however forgot there's at least the option for manually queuing in one place for that script, so if the problem I'm encountering can't be fixed, I'll fall back to that) so I used this script, also specifically selecting "Leave a redirect behind?", for, while I don't prefer keeping the redirects, in this case, I don't see too much harm since I don't care for solving the scenario with the solution as discussed above, having to then run another script and all.

The latest 17 items on this log are actions performed back-to-back; (a Content Mod, still restricted by the painful rate-limit) I didn't pick up the problem immediately, because, from the log, it does appear that redirects were left behind, with no "without leaving a redirect" message showing, with the file links themselves not being redlinks. However, take this image for example, "No file by this name exists, but you can upload it." is shown, indicating that, for some reason, it was registered that there was no file, despite the fact there is and that's what the redirect is for. Whereas this image, performed with FileUsageAuto-update with the intention of leaving a redirect behind, is formed correctly, without the "No file by [...]" message and with the file still able to be displayed if choosing to use the original filename. Same cannot be said for the 17 items mentioned above, as seen in this old revision, (go to section "From films 1-4" and scroll through a bit, you'd encounter some broken files) even though redirects are left, the images failed to display with the way the redirects were generated?

The conclusion was that, in the current situation, I might as well not select "Leave a redirect behind?" as it does not work for files, not properly anyways. (Or just not use this script and stick with FileUsageAuto-update) I figured I should still bring it up in case there was a quick fix for the situation. Sorry for the long message, but I just thought the more detailed, the better. (And believe me, I think this was shortened, for my laptop crashed when I was about to send it out the first time lmao. Had to start all over again.)

Thanks for reading this. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 20:25, February 10, 2019 (UTC)

Script doesn't have options to rename talk pages or subpages of the target pages

I was going to try this script, but realised that there's no option to rename the talk pages with the intended pages, or the subpages of the intended pages. Also looking at one of the comments above - and the fact that no one answered - apparently there's been some past issues with this script where it doesn't automatically move article comments with the articles either. I don't want any funny accidents to happen, so I'm hesitant to use the script until I'm sure no side effects will occur. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 03:43, August 23, 2019 (UTC)

The message about it not moving article comments is from 2016, and only the sections from 2015 and 2016 don't have replies, the other two sections have replies from Kocka and Patrik. --Sharkie 04:09, August 23, 2019 (UTC)

I know. But I haven't seen anyone explicitly state that those issues have been addressed. Turns out I actually have used this script before, but I think I've only ever used it for moving content that's in the template and file namespaces. So I'm still hesitant to try using it on article pages. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 06:15, August 23, 2019 (UTC)

UCP

I don't see the option for MassRename in MyTools on UCP platform, but I do see MassEdit script. Is there something I should do first? {{SUBST:Signature/Energy X}} 23:44, October 31, 2020 (UTC)

Unexplained failures and the failure log

Is there a way to clear out the failure log after a run? It's been building up pretty steadily for me.

Also, I've noticed that I have to rerun the tool 7-8 times to get it to actually finish renaming all the files, and that's without any actual changes to the input list. Any idea why that is?{{SUBST:KrytenKoroSig}} 14:21, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, what does the error log say? -- Cube-shaped garbage can 14:27, 9 March 2022 (UTC)