Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ListeriaBot

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.

ListeriaBot[edit]

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

Time filed: 08:30, Thursday, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): PHP

Source code available: https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/listeria

Function overview: Generates wikitext lists based on Wikidata queries, and updates pages if there is a change since last time.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: As of this moment, a handful of talk pages.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No.

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

Function details: Detailed explanation in my blog entry. Basically, edits pages containing two specific templates. Runs a Wikidata query daily or on manual request, generates a wikitext list, and updates the page if the list is different than the current one. Example.

Discussion[edit]

Note: This bot appears to have edited since this BRFA was filed. Bots may not edit outside their own or their operator's userspace unless approved or approved for trial. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Dear NagBot, only on talk and user talk pages, AFAICT. Does not operate unless specific templates are set on those pages. --Magnus Manske (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - YOur bot is not allowed to run at all outside of your or its userspace. Please shut it down.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 13:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Magnus Manske I blocked the bot until we set this out and the bot gets approval. I did not check the request yet, I only checked the fact that the bot kept editing without any formal approval and without being in test phase. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a minor bot task and will not break anything, and is used on a global scale. I suggest BAG will do a {{BotSpeedy}}. The bot has done a trial already (without approval) which has been fine. Ping Magioladitis. (t) Josve05a (c) 17:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I really don't understand. I discovered the use of this bot last week with wonder in the eyes. It's very useful to create lists from Wikidata very easily (for example, yesterday : Drawings by Nicolas Poussin and Mythological paintings by Pompeo Batoni. Everybody agree to have guidline for bots, but if nobody complain about the activity, exposed, explained, approved after trial and is considered as very useful for some people, why blocking it? Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 18:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Magnus Manske How and why did these users created the initial list? Are they aware that the bot will edit in their subpages? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the whole point after all. Blog post explaining this. --Magnus Manske (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (5 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Ping me in 5 days if there are no problems and no complains to approve this. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Magioladitis: Seems to have gone well. --Magnus Manske (talk) 11:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I do not understand why the bot keeps running outside bot trial period. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Anomie and MBisanz in case they want to comment the fact that the bot kept editing outside the bot trial period. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Is it really that hard to just follow the rules and not have the bot edit while the paperwork is being done? Anomie ⚔ 13:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not here for rules. I am not here for paperwork. I am here to improve the encyclopedia. Sorry if you are not. --Magnus Manske (talk) 09:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Magnus Manske Please do not assume bad faith. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:17, 7 July 2015 (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.