Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Snotbot 12

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.

Snotbot 12 edit

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

Time filed: 20:58, Wednesday October 24, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Pywikipedia with custom code

Function overview: WP:RFPP archiving

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia talk:RFPP#Bot archiving

Edit period(s): Every 15-30 minutes or so

Estimated number of pages affected: 2

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): N/A

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

Function details: This is an archive bot for WP:RFPP. Currently, archiving on this page happens via a semi-automated js script that is used by many users. The bot will perform the following tasks:

Fulfilled/denied protection requests get moved to an archive subpage after a minimum amount of time has passed with no further comments in the section. (Default time = 2 hours for fulfilled requests, 6 hours for denied requests)
Archived requests get removed from the archive subpage after a minimum amount of time has passed. (Default time = 7 days)
The {{adminbacklog}} template is added/removed when necessary. (Default # of unanswered requests = 10 to add the template, 4 to remove it)
Place a note on a protection request if the page has already been protected.
Place a note on a protection request if there has been a previously denied protection request for the same page in the last 7 days.
Place a note on a protection request if it has been marked as completed, but the page hasn't been protected.
Place a note on a protection request if the user who posted it has been blocked.

‑Scottywong | converse _ 20:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Approved for trial (50 edits or 5 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz ^talk 16:03, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Approaching 50 edits, see here. Had some issues to fix throughout, but looking pretty stable in the later edits. ‑Scottywong | prattle _ 16:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} I don't want to be pushy, but in this particular instance the bot is replacing a function that used to be provided by a user script, and the user script has been deactivated in a way that is not easily reversible. In the absence of both the bot and the user script, no archiving is taking place. It would be great if someone could take a quick look at this, and either approve it or allow an extended trial while it's in the process of being examined. Thanks. ‑Scottywong | communicate _ 15:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Non-controversial task, only one well-watched page, trusted botop. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:30, 2 November 2012 (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.