Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Thehelpfulbot 3

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was

Approved.

Thehelpfulbot 3

Operator: The Helpful One

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): AWB or Python

Function Overview: The bot will run simple and regex find/replace tasks for Wikipedia:WikiProject Topic outline and any other articles that need it.

Edit period(s): Whenever required.

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

Function Details: The bot will run simple and regex find/replace tasks for Wikipedia:WikiProject Topic outline and any other articles that need it. The Python script would be from pywikipedia, replace.py

Discussion

Approved for trial (20 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Basic find and replace is what bots were made for, really. For later reference the bot is intended to make changes such as this and this. Richard ⁰⁶¹² 18:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

n.b. TheHelpfulOne isn't ignoring this page, they've been off Wikipedia altogether since 2009-02-11. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 08:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. The Helpful One 10:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~So to add in broken wikicode? (as in the second example. Q ^{T C} 11:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

As the page in question is a draft, I would imagine that the code is being added automatically now, and then a human fills in the appropriate time zone later before moving the page to mainspace. Richard ⁰⁶¹² 11:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, that's what the user who asked me to run this find/replace task wanted, all of the articles in the Wikipedia: namespace won't be moved to the article mainspace until they are 100% complete. The Helpful One 11:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, missed that it wasn't in mainspace. Q ^{T C} 11:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Now that all concerns look to have been resolved, I see no reason not to approve. Richard ⁰⁶¹² 11:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.