Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/NeuroLanguageBot

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard. The result of the discussion was Denied.

NeuroLanguageBot

New to bots on Wikipedia? Read these primers!

• Approval process – How this discussion works
• Overview/Policy – What bots are/What they can (or can't) do
• Dictionary – Explains bot-related jargon

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

Operator: Docmoates (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 01:10, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Function overview: Neutralises clearly stigmatizing disability and neurodiversity wording (for example "wheelchair bound", "suffers from autism", lowercase "deaf-mute") to neutral alternatives using a small set of explicit substitutions.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Supervised

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Implementation described at User:Docmoates/NeuroLanguageBot (Pywikibot based Python script).

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Initial discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disability and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Autism (notifications planned).

Edit period(s): Intermittent, as needed, subject to trial limits and later community agreement.

Estimated number of pages affected: Up to about 75 edits during the initial trial, then as approved.

Namespace(s): Mainspace (article namespace only)

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Adminbot (Yes/No): No

Function details: NeuroLanguageBot runs on mainspace pages only. It selects pages from specific disability and neurodiversity related categories and from searches for phrases such as "wheelchair bound", "deaf-mute", "suffers from autism", and "afflict

Discussion

Denied. This seems far too context-sensitive to be done by a bot. Even if you did manage to successfully identify quotes, you'd still have to identify things like text in articles describing why these terms shouldn't be used, articles reflecting terminology in a historical context, and such. You'd do better by having an automated process create a list (e.g. in your userspace) and then having each one examined by a human (not an AI) for any needed changes. Anomie⚔ 13:03, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard.