Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot II

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

Withdrawn by operator.

SoxBot II

Operator: Soxred93 has a boring sig

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): Python

Function Summary: Remove protection templates from non protected pages

Edit period(s): Continuous while I'm online (may move to the toolserver if I get an account, and then be fully continuous)

Edit rate requested: 5 edits per minute.

Already has a bot flag: N

Function Details: If there is a protection template on a non protected page, it will remove it. Using this script.

Discussion

I take it you mean it will remove it? :-p--Phoenix-wiki ^{talk · contribs} 21:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DumbBOT is not enough? MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 21:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, never knew about that. But what's wrong with a clone? Soxred93 has a boring sig 21:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I suppose, it wll get stuff done faster. Are you sure it'll work? I can approve you for a week long trial if you like--Phoenix-wiki ^{talk · contribs} 22:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trial, er BotTrial away. Soxred93 has a boring sig 22:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.--Phoenix-wiki ^{talk · contribs} 22:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the bot running the same software is dumbbot (I'm guessing not). If this isn't the case, then I'm going to suggest that the trial be withheld until we can further discuss the bot's actions and offer a short term trial. I'm doubtful of the need, given that DumbBOT is pretty quick anyway. Martinp23 22:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed a shorter trial is all that is needed. Ive no problem with clones because it increases reliability. Just looking at DumbBot's user page, it doesn't look like it is run in python. -- maelgwn - talk 23:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boy, this is going to be a long week. It looks as though it is going good already, I'll continue. Soxred93 has a boring sig 02:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First edit, first concern: it's not deleting the template, it's removing. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 07:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When did I say it would delete it? Anyway, there seems to be an error I am trying to fix, it's only removing full protection templates. Soxred93 has a boring sig 15:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the edit summary. It would be good if you include a link to a page explaining protection template in the edit summary as well. Im changing this to

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. How often will you run it? -- maelgwn - talk 08:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that was the automated summary. I'm still trying to fix that semi protection one, still. The problem is being able to remove both in the same script, I might make a SoxBot III, and make that one work for semi protection. Maelgwn, to answer your question, I am on pretty much all the time from 4 till 10 PM EST, and aty random times, a combined total of about 4-6 hours on weekends. Soxred93 has a boring sig 21:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through this a bit more, it looks like it doesn't consider nowiki tags, nor protection templates with options (eg the small option or w ever) nor does it 'know' of the the protection templates. Oh and it only looks in Category:Protected not its subcats. -- maelgwn - talk 02:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this is really buggy right now, and I am unsure it if will be fixed.

Withdrawn by operator. Soxred93 has a boring sig 03:10, 20 December 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.