Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JamietwBot 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

Approved.

JamietwBot 2 edit

Operator: Jamietw (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 07:05, Saturday June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Manual

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: Yes

Function overview: Fixes Articles with missing Reflist template as well as fixing Reference to References External Link to External links etc. and a few other general fixes.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily to weekly (When I have time)

Estimated number of pages affected: 30-50 per run

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: Fixes Articles with missing Reflist template as well as fixing Reference to References External Link to External links etc. and a few other general fixes such as adding person meta data where needed and adding missing } to templates and other minor lsyout fixes all of which will be reviewed shortly after made.

Discussion edit

I always have the same issue with similar requests that describe themselves as "supervised": if you're supervising every edit, why can't you press the "Save" button too? Then you wouldn't even need a BRFA. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 12:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know I could use AWB on my normal account but for repetitive tasks like this one I find using a bot saves filling up Recent Changes, I suppose. Jamietw (talk) 12:31, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you could use a bot flag, but check each edit before manually pressing the save button? - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 13:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I already have a Bot flag, I am applying for this as a second task. Jamietw (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So to come round to the main point, why supervise every edit after it is made and not? Where's the need? - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 21:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that it doesn't fill up recent changes - that was the reason the BOT's first task was approved. Jamietw (talk) 16:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my previous post was nonsensical (I was tired, I think). I shall make a better go of it now, if you bear with me: So, filling up recent changes (or not) is associated with having a bot flag. One can still manually edit with a bot flag, and one can still use AWB in semi-automated mode with a bot flag. There is no necessity to be "automated" as such. I inferred from your statement "Automatic supervised" that you were going to sit and watch every edit being performed (AWB has a little bot time countdown, during which you can see the edit about to be made). If this is the case, then, why not offer to press the save button yourself? Pre-checking is superior to post-edit checking in virtually all cases. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 17:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have changed to manual Jamietw (talk) 05:23, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for putting up with me. You will find manual checking saves you a lot of stress too :) Oh, and because the task is uncontroversial and now just normal AWB with a bit flag,

Approved.. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 16:44, 9 June 2011 (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.