Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ContinuityBot
- 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.
Operator: Piandcompany (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 20:12, Sunday January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic (see below for how this will be applied)
Programming language(s): Java
Source code available: Base framework (Wiki-Java framework @ http://code.google.com/p/wiki-java/) already open-source. Task specific code to be released on GitHub after testing complete.
Function overview: This is a copy of FBot task 2/Svenbot.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 2, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Svenbot, User talk:Sven Manguard#Svenbot
Edit period(s): Twice a month.
Estimated number of pages affected: Based off of Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 2, 20,000.
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No
Function details: See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 2. Note this bot will be run on Labs and may have output to IRC if requested for logging.
Background: I did a port of Svenbot to Labs during Wikimania 2012 but the original code had some flaws. I plan to do a re-write of the code to fix the flaws (essentially the bot seemed to be reversing its own actions). Sven's approval of the new bot can be found here.
Discussion
[edit]- Requesting speedy approval. Piandcompany (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Just noting that Piandcompany will be taking over the task. I have no intention of running any of the Fbot suite of bot tasks again, and have given my endorsement to Piandcompany for taking them all over. Piandcompany is as familiar as anyone with the tasks, as he worked with me on refining them at Wikimania last year in DC. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Am I to assume that this is the same code as yours Sven?—cyberpower ChatOnline 03:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- The code is going to be the same starting out when I left off in July, though the flaws in the code causing to reverse its own edits should be worked out, so slight changes. Piandcompany (talk) 03:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Am I to assume that this is the same code as yours Sven?—cyberpower ChatOnline 03:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Just noting that Piandcompany will be taking over the task. I have no intention of running any of the Fbot suite of bot tasks again, and have given my endorsement to Piandcompany for taking them all over. Piandcompany is as familiar as anyone with the tasks, as he worked with me on refining them at Wikimania last year in DC. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz talk 04:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Note - Total Amount of pages scanned using this task will be ~342k. Piandcompany (talk) 15:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sven, should images with the deletable file template be flagged for transfer or just passed? Also should users be notified when a file of theirs is flagged for transfer? Piandcompany (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Files with {{deletable file}}, or any active deletion template on them, should not be transferred. In fact, the converse task (that removes transfer tags) removes tags from files with active deletion templates on them (and this task then reinserts the move template after the deletion discussion ends, if the file survives). Users should not be notified, as its not something that is really going to effect people. Anyone with such a strong objection to their files being on Commons as to care is going to already be using the {{keeplocal}} template. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- I guess that was one of the flaws as it seems none of the deletion templates were in the task's blacklist. I've added them now. Piandcompany (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Files with {{deletable file}}, or any active deletion template on them, should not be transferred. In fact, the converse task (that removes transfer tags) removes tags from files with active deletion templates on them (and this task then reinserts the move template after the deletion discussion ends, if the file survives). Users should not be notified, as its not something that is really going to effect people. Anyone with such a strong objection to their files being on Commons as to care is going to already be using the {{keeplocal}} template. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sven, should images with the deletable file template be flagged for transfer or just passed? Also should users be notified when a file of theirs is flagged for transfer? Piandcompany (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Done - Other than the issue with the templates stated previously which have now been added, there seems to be no issues in the run that was completed. Piandcompany (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Let's do another trial, just given the size of request. MBisanz talk 20:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Doing... Piandcompany (talk) 20:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Trial complete. - Did a spot check of the 100, no issues found. Piandcompany (talk) 21:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Approved. MBisanz talk 01:24, 22 January 2013 (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.