Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FastilyBot 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: Fastily (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 03:58, Sunday, January 31, 2016 (

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: [1]

Function overview: Find a malformed

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): here & here

Edit period(s): Bi-weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: 1

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): n/a

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

Function details: Basically as described above; find malformed pages and report as necessary to the clerks' noticeboard so that clerks can make fixes accordingly. Pinging @Vanjagenije & @Salvidrim! -FASTILY 03:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

This looks good; my only concerns are lack of traffic to the clerk's noticeboard and the delay between a malformed report being submitted and the bot reporting it; for the latter I would suggest either near-immediate notifications (maybe give the filer a few hours) or transcluding a page from the bot's userspace which contains the reports. Of course, the latter option prevents watchlist updates. I assume you are only reporting each page once? Approved for trial (7 days, or enough for a few reports). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. — Earwig ^talk 04:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Earwig: Fair enough, I've opted to list reports at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Malformed Cases Report for now. I've implemented an ignore list for courtesy blanked pages and administration/documentation pages. -FASTILY 05:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Worked as expected. -FASTILY 03:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{

BAGAssistanceNeeded}} It's been about a week, and nobody has raised any objections/concerns. Seeing how this task is a non-contvoersial and restricted to one page only, could it be approved? Thanks, FASTILY 08:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

 Approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:25, 18 February 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

.