Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Amalthea (bot) 3

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.

Operator: Amalthea (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 14:11, Monday February 27, 2012 (

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): C#

Source code available: no

Function overview: Remove handled quick CheckUser requests from

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Per clerk request. Current practice of removing handled requests is established, but as far as I know not written down anywhere.

Edit period(s): Tied in with other clerking, so runs every 15 minutes. I can also split it out to only run twice a day or so.
Clarification: It will only require few edits though: Judging by the last two months less than five edits per month.

Estimated number of pages affected: 1

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): no

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

Function details:

Quick CheckUser requests on

Algorithm:

• Query current content of current revision of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations
• Find subsections of the "Quick Checkuser requests" section that are marked with {{SPIquick|done}}
• If any: Query content of revision content of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations from 48 hours ago (&rvdir=older&rvstart=[Now - 48 hours])
• Test whether any such handled sections are unchanged compared to two days ago (except for some whitespace trimming)
• If so: remove all such unchanged sections from current content and save the page

Discussion

• I think before this bot is trialed/approved, it would be good to at least notify SPI clerks of the BRFA. So they can comment / know there is a bot being discussed.
  books} 18:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Quite right, notification made. Amalthea 19:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a question, how many of those old quick CU requests are made in a given day? Just trying to gauge what the workload will be.
  books} 20:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Usually very few, there were three requests in January and three in February. Sorry, I didn't really make that clear in the overview above, I will amend the Edit period bullet point. Amalthea 20:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily Approved. Alright, well since it's such a low workflow, and

• • I kinda have above, link name "active SPI clerking task", but I could have made that clearer, yes. :)
    Agreed to understanding as a matter of course. Thanks, Amalthea 20:40, 27 February 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

.