Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SXT-404Bot

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was

Approved.

SXT-404Bot

Operator: SXT40

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic, unsupervised.

Programming Language(s): pywikipedia, php, sh

Function Summary: To scan Special:BrokenRedirects for actual broken redirects, and transfer the output to User:SXT40/BRedir.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily via crontab

Edit rate requested: 1 edit per day

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): N

Function Details: Source can be found at User:SXT-404Bot

It seems like a useful function, I'm learning python, and, ~~will eventually be making my own~~. Everyone's gotta start somewhere! --SXT40 09:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

If you haven't already, you may wish to look at this bot request. --S ^up? 12:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I see... valid concerns, too... Hmm. Do I need bot flags, to test and experiment, on a specific sub-page of my own userspace? (I.e. User:SXT40/BotTest123) --SXT40 19:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need a bot flag (those are only set for approved bots) but, technically, you need the go-ahead for running a bot even in your own user space (all unapproved bots are subject to blocking per the blocking policy). As long as you're keeping your bots edit rate under 2 edits per minute and only editing a test page in your own user space, you should be fine but, technically, the above requirement still applies. -- S ^up? 22:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, in that case, I think I'd like to drop this request, and, work on something of my own... Can I simply modify this one, for approval, or, do I have to start a new one? ~~(I'd rather be above-board... If it's technically required, then, I should probably go ahead and do it...)~~ Meh, nm, it was implied that it didn't matter... --SXT40 04:58, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you can update this request.

Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. for any edits necessary within your own userspace for testing purposes. --ST47Talk 11:24, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-tooled bot, IDK if I need to re-request permission, again, but, here goes. (re-wrote above) --SXT40 08:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any purpose to this, or do you just fancy running a bot? --kingboyk 15:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does have some purpose, it aids me in finding the broken redirects to either fix, or, CSD... Special:Brokenredirects is a tad unweildy, and, a pain to navigate, at least for me. Anyhow, thanks for the input! --SXT4^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 09:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you not just fix the broken redirects? (Even though I think we have other bots doing that now) Martinp23 16:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do :) Manually, using the list generated, to help me find them a lot more easily. --SXT4^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 09:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be good, and as long as its userspace the original trial stll stands. To make it official,

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 22:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good - the main trial is not complete but it will take several months, and all the edits look good.

Approved. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.