Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Theo's Little Bot II

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

User:Theo's Little Bot II[edit]

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

Time filed: 14:03, Saturday May 18, 2013 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: some on github, others sent to me via email by Riley

Function overview: Takeover request for User:RileyBot, per Wikipedia:Bot_owners'_noticeboard#Retired_bot_operator_with_approved_bots after Riley Huntley's retirement.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot_owners'_noticeboard#Retired_bot_operator_with_approved_bots

Edit period(s): Varies

Estimated number of pages affected: Varies

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Varies

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

Function details: Will take over all of RileyBot's tasks. Fairly straightforward; once we verify that everything is working correctly, an admin should feel free to block the now unneeded bot.

Discussion[edit]

  • I take some issues with the idea that we should be blocking Riley's bot. Retired users are no different from current users and blocks are blocked on malfunctions, not at random. Snowolf How can I help? 14:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    A block isn't inherently necessary, although the idea is that currently no one is able to maintain or update the bot if it were to run into trouble. Also note that it hasn't run since April. Theopolisme (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Then we don't need to block it at all :) Abandoned bot accounts are not routinely blocked as far as I'm aware, and we've had bots run by retired users both maintained and unmaintained run for years :) Snowolf How can I help? 14:38, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Reflected in the above. Theopolisme (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The blocking issue was raised here also. I think wp:bot is playing with fire making uthis a social network first, be nice to our retired fellows, versus encyclopedia that needs maintained, bot owners without password integrity should have their bots blocked, but I have said my piece.
  • Useful bot tasks, let's get them tested and running again. -166.137.209.146 (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. Please test each task with a small number of edits <50. Please link to test edits below. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • On hold--I need Riley to send me something first. Theopolisme (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Take your time getting these tasks up and running, imo; working with Riley is a good idea. -198.228.216.23 (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded|D}} Any updates? ·addshore· talk to me! 18:50, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of. I'll try to get this up and running before I go on vacation...I just need to set up a new repo, then install dependencies and configure pywikipedia...putting this on my todo list. Theopolisme (talk) 03:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by operator. At least for now...will re-request at some point, though. Theopolisme (talk) 01:11, 3 July 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Theo%27s_Little_Bot_II&oldid=1074860576"