Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/D'ohBot

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

Speedily Approved.

D'ohBot edit

Operator: Dnikitin

Automatic or Manually Assisted: some tasks auto, some manual

Programming Language(s): python (pywikipedia) and AWB

Function Overview: mostly interwiki.py and standard pywikipedia functions.

Edit period(s): from time to time

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

Function Details: Mainly, bot flag is needed for interwiki purpose.

Discussion edit

Standard interwiki.py (limited to non-template pages) can be approved trivially, but "standard pywikipedia functions" is far too vague, as is the large loophole left by "mostly". It would probably be best to revise this request to cover interwiki.py only, and make additional requests in the future when you determine other specific tasks you want to have the bot do. Anomie ⚔ 14:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. If you want just interwiki, say so, and we'll approve the bot to just do that. If you want it to do more, let us know what it is. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to get approval for small changes, for example, as the following diff which I've made in fr-wiki. I made this using replace.py and small user-fixes.py

fixes['custom'] = {
    'regex': True,
    'msg': {
        'en':u'Bot:Replace images by the same ones but w/ transparent background',
    },
    'replacements': [
       (ur'Orden[ _]Ot[ _]voine.jpeg', ur'Order of the Patriotic War (1st class).png'),
       (ur'OPatWar[ _]2nd.jpg', ur'Order Of The Patriotic War (2st Class).png'),
    ],
}

Under "standard pywikipedia function" I mean just small replacements as above. --Dnikitin (talk) 15:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

or something like this: diff1 or diff2 --Dnikitin (talk) 19:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily Approved. But only run unambiguously uncontroversial edits. For instance, adding categories to living people, or changing date formats, are not uncontroversial. If you are unsure, please ask. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:35, 24 May 2009 (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.