Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AvicBot 11

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.

AvicBot 11

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

Time filed: 08:50, Sunday May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: pywikipedia

Function overview: Performing Category (re)moves as listed on WP:CFD/W

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): This is essentially what Cydebot does, without the admin bit, and I am only requesting duplication of this task per a WP:BOTR request.

Edit period(s): as needed

Estimated number of pages affected: unknown, varies

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: AvicBot will either 1.) move pages from [[Caregory:foo]] to [[Category:bar]], as listed on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working, if it's a move/merge request, or 2.) remove [[Caregory:foo]] entirely if the requests is to empty the category. Note that as AvicBot is not an AdminBot, it will not be deleting any pages.

Discussion

Comment. I'm still trying to consider whether or not this is an entirely good idea. Cydebot seems to be back to normal, and so, WP:CFD/W has been cleared up mostly. I'm thinking that this should just be considered redundant, but approved if the need arises? I don't really think we need both bots running at once, as that would lead to, at some points, both bots having nothing to do at the same time. Hazard-SJ ✈ 02:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking to get the task approved, but only started manually upon request when/if Cydebot goes down again, or if there is a backlog. (I don't think my crontab could handle another automatic job!) Redundancy in itself is not a bad thing - How many bots do we have managing interwikis or fixing double-redirects?

^Avic _ennasis @ 05:49, 9 Sivan 5772 / 05:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting it approved sounds good. I'm not sure we need too many double-redirect fixers, but, along with interwiki bots, they are allowed by the global bot policy. I'm not sure how many double-redirect bots we have, but I know it's a lot of interwiki bots. However, your idea about activating it "when/if Cydebot goes down again, or if there is a backlog" sounds acceptable, as recently, there hasn't been a backlog since it's been cleaned up (Cydebot did them all and has nothing to do as it related to WP:CFD/W. Hazard-SJ ✈ 01:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Originally CFD had several bots supporting it because of the volume of work that can pile up. Unfortunately over time most of the bots have generally retired and not been replaced, leaving just one bot currently handling all the processing. When it goes down, or when we get a particularly time consuming category (which is not just measured by the numbers in it but also article sizes - anime & manga categories take especially ages to do) then a significant backlog piles up and at present the only alternative has been to manually make the changes with AWB. Additional bots that can do CFD work will reduce the problem no end. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of this. The only problem is the distribution of the work. How did the bots handle it before? Hazard-SJ ✈ 01:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure about the bots, but sometimes I and other have used AWB to help process a large backlog. If Cydebot enters a category that others are already emptying it processes the articles not yet reached and then continues down the rest of the Working list. To my knowledge there's never been a crash out when two try to make the same edit. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently located a bot that once did this task, and so, it must be okay. As for two bots attempting the same edit, PyWikipedia is developed to re-load the page if it encounters an edit conflict. Strangely, every time I see a request for help with the backlog and check, it had already been cleared. Maybe the best way to fix this is to let a bot check a page in its userspace, maybe every hour or so, and if it (the page) either contains a specific text, or does not contain a specific text, it should operate. This would allow the bot to operate only if needed. Hazard-SJ ✈ 23:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This can be done. I've coded and tested it. A page such as User:AvicBot/CFDCheckpage can be used (and fully protected) to trigger it. AvicBot is no stranger to checkpages. If the page has 'enable', the bot will run - anything else, and it will not. ^Avic _ennasis @ 04:41, 16 Sivan 5772 / 04:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Any concerns here, or can we get a trial run? ^Avic _ennasis @ 08:00, 26 Sivan 5772 / 08:00, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does this bot use custom code, or is there some standard library with pywikipedia for moving categories that you're using? - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 11:58, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's essentially the same script Cydebot uses - cfd.py - which is included in the standard pywikipedia library. The only change I have made is to include an -enablepage option. ^Avic _ennasis @ 04:39, 28 Sivan 5772 / 04:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (up to 50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Okay, lets just make sure it implements everything smoothly. (There have been some other Cydebot clones in the past, see for example Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/CrimsonBot). - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~20 done so far. ^Avic _ennasis @ 05:34, 30 Sivan 5772 / 05:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~30 done.

Trial complete. ^Avic _ennasis @ 14:40, 1 Tamuz 5772 / 14:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edits all look fine. If Cydebot needs any more helpers it's good here. Rcsprinter (orate) 18:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that if you're going to use {{delete}}, as you did at Category:Esperanto Academy members, then you need to bot to supply a reason parameter. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Instead of the line {{delete|bot=yes}}, it will add {{db-g6|bot=AvicBot|rationale=Empty Category per [[WP:CFD/W|CFD/W]] listing}}, as well as retaining the line below that with the full explanation. (Or, if there are any other suggestions, I can easily change this.) ^Avic _ennasis @ 06:04, 4 Tamuz 5772 / 06:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Trial edits look okay, seems to be a fair amount of support for the bot. As mentioned above there is some precedent for Cydebot clones, and conflict with the existing Cydebot shouldn't be an issue since the code allows for multiple users renaming the categories and the bot will only be run when needed. I will semi-protect the CFDCheckpage (don't think full-protection is necessary for this) and set the bot to disabled for now. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:13, 26 June 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.