Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Luke081515Bot 2

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

Request Expired.

Luke081515Bot 2 edit

Operator: Luke081515 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 17:26, Friday, August 14, 2015 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): PHP

Source code available: No

Function overview: Bot moves pages without leaving a redirect per user request

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Special:PermaLink/676087384

Edit period(s): per user request

Estimated number of pages affected: unknown

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

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

Function details: This bot works on a queue. Users can schedule there a page move, the bot will complete this move after 10 seconds (sometimes 20, when tool labs is a bit slower) To avoid vandalism, the following features are enabled:

Don't set a botflag when moving a page (Mark a request as done uses a botflag)
Only move pages from own userspace, the bot controls the author of every request)
Don't move talk or main userpages
If existant, the bot moves the talk page also (if talk page is move protected, the bot will abort the request)
If wished by members of BAG, I can enable, that the bot moves pages only to article namespaces
Bot can be deactivated without a block (simple site which have to set from true => false, to abort this task)
If wished by a sysop or the Arbitration Committee (for example a user should not move pages, or so on, I didn't read decisions from then yet, users can set on a blacklist, the bot will abort all request form that user

Additional details:

This script runs already succesfully at the german wikipedia since May 2015, I just have to fix the namespaces and page names, then I can start.
As you can see here, there were no user opposing that since now, and I also don't know reasons to oppose this. The only thing is, that the request page have to be semi protected by a sysop.
This bot needs no adminflag, because bots got the right suppressredirect by default.

So if you have any questions to the details, please ask. Sincerely, Luke 081515 17:26, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Luke 081515 09:16, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. @Magioladitis: I need some time to prepare the trial, I will tell you, when I'm ready. Grettings, Luke 081515 09:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Luke081515 OK. No problem. You requested BAG assistance :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, YES this should be limited to ARTICLES and corresponding talk pages. No templates, categories, etc. We already have a bot for categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no problem, this is also enabled at dewiki, so this is no problem. But I need time to fix namespace names etc form german to english, so I will test this at beta enwiki first, before I will start the trial. Greetings, Luke 081515 09:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, there are only a few tests to do, so I guess that I can start this week. @Magioladitis: Can you protect this page with edit=autoconfirmed and move=sysop? A move will be the reason of errors, and only users that have the right move should request a move, that's my view, it also prevents vandalism. Also this page needs protection, in this case full protection, because user can edit this site via buttons (they will write at the first page), so it's better if nobody will edit this page. Thank you, Luke 081515 17:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Protected. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded|D}} @Luke081515: What's the status of this? — Earwig ^talk 20:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm very busy at the moment. I guess that I can start next Sutaruday (not this week, but the week after that, so the only thing to do is, that we got users at this 7 days, who use the bot, I don't know, there here (enwiki) is a good place, to talk about that, but I will prepare the last things to next week saturday, I hope this is ok. Greetings, Luke 081515 09:38, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the bot is now running for the next 7 days, I will stop it, after these days. If I forget it, please just press the stop button (at the userpage of the bot). The only thing that I need now, are people, who want to move a page. Greetings, Luke 081515 18:33, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Luke081515: Don't worry about the trial length; let's just make sure it's long enough to guarantee that people use the bot and it works correctly. How does the German bot "advertise" itself so users know it exists? I was considering that we could mention it when users go to Special:MovePage, but I don't know if that's a good idea. — Earwig ^talk 15:36, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At the german wiki there was a big controversal discussion about that bot, so there are people which know it. At Special:MovePage could be a good idea, but I guess it's better, if the user can only see this, if he tries to move a page from his userspace. Greetings, Luke 081515 20:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Luke081515: It doesn't seem to work on either the invalid or valid requests in its queue. --slakr^\ talk / 02:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T71162

I've been ruminating on this for a bit with slakr, and we're not sure how much effort this really saves. Instead of the familiar interface, a user needs to go over to your requests page, learn how to fill out a form (and actually fill it out), and then wait. Moving a page normally and then Twinkle to U1-tag the redirect is easier, and (for what it's worth) I doubt the admin burden is all that significant. A tool on Labs would be more user-friendly (where OAuth can be used to verify the user is real, I believe?), but I don't think it's worth the development time and maintenance. I also noticed T71162. — Earwig ^talk 02:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A user has requested the attention of the operator. Once the operator has seen this message and replied, please deactivate this tag. (user notified) Ping --slakr^\ talk / 17:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request Expired. At this time, there does not seem to be a strong need for this bot. Given the above concerns, the general lack of a backlog of U1 deletions, and the difficulty finding users to actually test the bot, I am closing this request for now. If we decide to revisit this in the future, we should come up with a clearer way to advertise the bot and have users actively interested in using it. — Earwig ^talk 03:30, 2 December 2015 (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.