Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnkitAWB 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.

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

Time filed: 15:08, Monday, April 25, 2016 (

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: N/A

Function overview: Nominates empty cats for deletion per CSD#C1.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Established criteria.

Edit period(s): Occasionally (mostly one-time).

Estimated number of pages affected: 2k approx. at first run. Very few afterwards.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Fetches list of cats with 0 items in CSV/.txt form, fed into AWB. Chug the ones which are supposed to be deleted. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 15:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Are you working off a database dump for your source pages? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How are you avoiding pages in

Template:empty category? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes, it's a database dump.

All templates with "Do not delete" kind of messages are avoided by setting skips in regex. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 03:46, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would an admin bot be feasible in this case? Although I'm not sure what AWB has to offer. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 08:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adminbot to automatically delete empty cats - probably not going to get support - and would need an admin to operate it. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{

OperatorAssistanceNeeded|D}} Could you please run a sample list (say 100 pages) that you WOULD tag for speedy deletion - link the list here and we can look for false positive type things. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

@Xaosflux:I fetched a list of empty categories from Quarry (exact number is 9864) in CSV. Extracting as Wikitable is not feasible as it crosses 2048 bytes and I get the Wikitable in .txt file, so it's hard to determine where's 100. I wouldn't nominate them for deletion as many of them are redirects, administrative category and so. The thing is I cannot really filter the pages until I run a simple regex skip on AWB and that would require edits. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 13:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After some improvisation I managed, the list of the first 100 arranged alphabetically. Note that they are just empty, not necessarily suitable for deletion. After some *intelligent filtering*, the number is down to 2.5k, so I can estimate tags to be less than that too. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 14:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit lost here - I'm looking for a sampling of pages that you would have you bot place speedy delete tags on - so we can see if your process is sound or needs corrections. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is AWB needs to parse the wikitext in order to find the regex string and skip, so there's no way for me to make a list now, except manually (which is *impossible*). --QEDK (T ☕ C) 19:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Your edit summary must include a link to this trial (you may use a redirect to shorten). — xaosflux ^Talk 21:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I think I went one over the limit. Also, the edit summary box was locked so when I added the new summary, it did not appear. I fixed it midway. Category:18th-century establishments in Pakistan seems to be only mistake, for double-tagging. I'll add Db-empty (or just "Db") to the regex string, so that should fix it. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 04:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now for the real test! Will watch Special:Contributions/AnkitAWB to see if these actually get deleted, or declined. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, hey, hey, be optimistic (also, give me a good reason to decline any of those). Really it's in the deletion space that you see the real dearth of admins now. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 13:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion is still waiting processing by roaming admins. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:06, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 11:48, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{

OperatorAssistanceNeeded|D}} Looks like it was mostly successful - do you have any comments on these 2: Category:810 by country and Category:1999 in the British Empire? — xaosflux ^Talk 02:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

The first was rescued and the second was redirected (both after my bot went over it), so I'd say it was perfect. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 09:38, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. @QEDK: looks good. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:53, 4 May 2016 (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

.