Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 36
- The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was
Approved.
Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic, unsupervised
Programming language(s): Perl
Source code available: User:AnomieBOT/source/tasks/CategoryCleaner.pm
Function overview: Clean up miscategorized pages
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): WP:VPT#Category:Redirects
Edit period(s): periodically
Estimated number of pages affected: 956 to start, then depending on the rate of pages mis-added.
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function details: Certain categories have easily machine-testable bright-line criteria for excluding certain classes of pages. For example, Category:Redirects should contain only pages and categories about redirects; it explicitly states that it should not contain any actual redirects. But due to people not reading the category header text, it currently contains 956 redirects. This task will periodically check that category for redirects and remove any that are found. If any similar situations are brought to my attention, I intend to do the same for them.
Discussion
editLooks useful and straightforward for this particular miscategorization. Will you be explaining the to the misactegorizing editor what was done to prevent the bot being reverted? --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 08:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- For the initial run at least, posting to users' talk pages wouldn't likely be all that useful as some of them date back to early 2008 (others may be even earlier). Do you think a sufficiently detailed edit summary would be sufficient? For example, "Removing Category:Redirects: That category contains pages and categories ''about'' redirects. It should not contain any ''actual'' redirects, as there are so many of them that a category of them all would be unmanageable." Anomie⚔ 00:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- I can see not notifying for the initial run, then notifying to maybe limit the number of users miscatgorizing. The summary may not need to be that detailed, but, imo, yes, using the edit summary would work. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- There are only about 970 redirects in this category, it's not like there were thousands. Most of those were added by bots anyway, and users don't seem to use it regularly, so a notification seems unecessary. A rename has been suggested at VPT and when the category is cleared, I'd like to open a CFD. Cenarium (talk) 22:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- That sounds okay by me. I'm not too familiar with categorizing, and you've answered my concerns. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- There are only about 970 redirects in this category, it's not like there were thousands. Most of those were added by bots anyway, and users don't seem to use it regularly, so a notification seems unecessary. A rename has been suggested at VPT and when the category is cleared, I'd like to open a CFD. Cenarium (talk) 22:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- I can see not notifying for the initial run, then notifying to maybe limit the number of users miscatgorizing. The summary may not need to be that detailed, but, imo, yes, using the edit summary would work. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Anyone? Anomie⚔ 03:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Done MBisanz talk 07:11, 13 December 2009 (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 WT:BRFA.
