Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MenoBot II

< Wikipedia:Bots | Requests for approval
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.

MenoBot II

edit

Operator: Meno25 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 12:15, Saturday December 1, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: Standard AWB

Function overview: Mass maintenance templates tagging of newly created articles and doing general fixes on the fly

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: Several hundred articles per day.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: Mass maintenance templates tagging of articles (working on Special:NewPages) using AWB auto mode. I have been doing such edits for a while using my main account. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] I am waiting for permission to make a trial run. --Meno25 (talk) 12:15, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

edit

 Comment. Doesn't the function fall under WP:CONTEXTBOT or WP:COSMETICBOT. --Ankit MaityTalkContribs 08:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{orphan}}, {{underlinked}}, {{uncategorized}}, {{dead end}}, {{ibid}}, {{empty section}}, {{uncategorized stub}}, {{stub}}. See full details here. --Meno25 (talk) 09:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, damn it. I forgot the categories. --Ankit MaityTalkContribs 15:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Question: I plan to work every day on the articles created the day before. Also, I will use the Toolserver to generate lists of pages to work on.
@Suggestion: That's not a problem. I will compile and use the HEAD revision of AWB. --Meno25 (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding! GoingBatty (talk) 01:40, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support the bot request. Meno25 compiles AWB's latest revision by themselves so they will always be up-to-date. They are a regular bug reporter too. Also to remind that similar tasks have been approved in the past: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 11, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 13. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz talk 14:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added a request for my bot to use AWB. --Meno25 (talk) 15:13, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done MBisanz talk 16:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. First 50 edits. Since the trial is limited by number of days and not edits, I will keep doing more edits in the next days. Tell me if you want me to stop. --Meno25 (talk) 17:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to transfer this note to the talk page. Yesterday or today MenoBot II tagged a fair number of our new gastropod species stubs as orphans, when in fact all of the species were already linked from the genus page. Can this be fixed? Invertzoo (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean articles such as Cyclostrema prominulum, the links were added to Cyclostrema after my bot's edit. At the time of tagging there was zero incoming links to the page, so tagging is correct. --Meno25 (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, now I see what you mean. The editor who added all the extra species to that genus article did not say that in the edit history, so I misunderstood the history of the article. Invertzoo (talk) 14:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: Does it really have to tag a page that's already been tagged for speedy deletion (in this case G7)? Also, request above states that the bot will be tagging a day old articles so as not to bite new editors but the (now deleted) article from my diff was created only a few hours ago today. -- KTC (talk) 13:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was test running it on all new pages. Sorry about that. I will also set it to bypass all pages tagged with CSD templates. --Meno25 (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think CSD should be tagged as well. A CSD can be declined and the stubs can stay. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible for the bot to ignore speedy tagged article but revisit it the next run/day and tag(s) if speedy were declined? -- KTC (talk) 00:46, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer to run the bot on every page only once. This is to avoid engaging in an edit war in case an edit was wrong and another user had to revert it. --Meno25 (talk) 09:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I reported this bug already yesterday. Please see Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#Don't add underlinked template if dead end is there. Waiting for AWB devs to solve this. --Meno25 (talk) 15:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question: Are you planning to use your bot to replace {{end box}} → {{s-end}} (or bypass any other template-redirect which AWB sometimes asks you to do)? There is currently no consensus on that issue. How are you planning on circumventing that problem? If you don't your bot will be blocked within one week or less. Thank you. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 15:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're a bit overreacting on that issue IMO. If there is no consensus on that issue (I haven't bothered reading that monster yet, probably should), wouldn't the status quo be to continue bypassing template redirects as long as a substantial edit was being made (in this case adding tags)? Legoktm (talk) 15:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree I am reacting to anything here, Legoktm. I simply asked a question. The amazing fact to note here is that you took part in a discussion (where you're not so clearly in favor of bypassing ether) where CBM (admin) quite explicitly warned me against such bypassing and indicated one might have to undergo disciplinary measures. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 16:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologizes if I overspoke. Actually that's not what I said/meant/believed. I said (on your talk) that making an edit solely to bypass a redirect (template or link) was a bad idea. If the bot/human/sentient life-form is making a substantial edit at the same time (as this bot is) then bypassing template redirects at the same time should be fine. Legoktm (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If requested, I can disable general fixes and do only tagging. I am just waiting for the resolution of the bug I reported above and I will make another test run taking into account all the comments above. Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 15:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other bots do general fixes too. The only issue to solve is the underlinked/deadend taging. You must always have the latest revision of AWB available. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bug fixed. Since rev 8782 underlinked/dead end tags are mutually excluded. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to run another trial. MBisanz talk 01:48, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Second run. working today (7 December) on artciles created on 5 December. The bot was set to bypass CSD templates. Regarding general fixes, I kept them because I think they are useful. --Meno25 (talk) 09:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC) Trial complete.[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} I believe that all points mentioned above have been addressed, so, can I have this BRFA approved? --Meno25 (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. MBisanz talk 06:25, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/MenoBot_II&oldid=1140157643"