Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/NoomBot 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.

NoomBot[edit]

Operator: Noommos (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 17:59, Sunday February 13, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manually assisted: Auto (unsupervised)

Programming language(s): PHP

Source code available: On request

Function overview: Generates reports for books within Category:Wikipedia books (community books).

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Current bot request Previous archived request

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 1, 700 for first run, then I estimate possibly < 100 per week.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: The bot will run at midnight each night. The bot will go through each book in the category Category:Wikipedia books (community books), checking to see if the book needs an updated report since the last time the bot ran (books are currently set to be updated 1 week after the bot last provided a report). The bot then checks each article in the book for 'problem' templates (through the API) and attempts to enumerate the amount of each problem template on the page. It will then check for the articles class= rating and gives it a score. It will also check for other things such as non-free images and redirections. Once all the articles in the book have been processed, it will give the book an average score and rating before using templates created by Headbomb to post a report on the books talk page. It will attempt to post the report below any templates present at the top of the page and above any talk comments. If the page has no content it will also tag it with {{WBOOKS}}. The bot will not post a report if;

The book was edited by the bot less than 1 week ago.
The books content is the same.
The book uses nobots.

Discussion[edit]

Currently the bot does not wait between API requests. Due to the large amount of requests per book/article, it may be appropriate to impose a read rate limit. Noom _talk ^contribs 17:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems useful and non-controversial. You can iron out details with Headbomb.

Approved for trial (30 books). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Let's see a smaller sample for what we are looking at. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 18:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the update rate may be changed down the line (no faster than daily updates), and that the bot's scope might be extended to Category:Wikipedia books (user books) eventually (following another BRFA). It's also possible that all/some of Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/WildBot 5's tasks are incorporated in the bot in the future. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smaller tasks can be mentioned at one of the talk pages and would probably not need BRFAs or could be speedied. Edit rate is at your own judgement and community input. Extension of scope will either need a new BRFA (if it involves new functionality and/or different principles) or just a mention/speedy if it's the same principle. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 21:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know that bot makers don't generally do this, but if you're ever unwilling or unable to run the script that performs this task, I might be able to help. I don't know much about bots or coding, but I'd be more than willing to help out on this if it's ever needed. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is there any way that we could manually "ask" the bot to run a specific book even if the pages are the same? I ask because while the pages linked might be the same, if one of those pages gets FA/FA/A/GA promotion, it might alter the average score, and Headbomb and I have been bouncing around ideas for a Featured Books system. If not, would you be willing to do occasionally unscheduled manual runs for one or two books from time to time? Sven Manguard Wha? 21:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but not yet. Noom _talk ^contribs 22:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. The bot reports to have finished 30 books, but some of its edits don't appear to have worked, even though it's reported back as having finished. I also wish to change some of the bots code to make it more efficient, due to the time it takes to report on large books. Noom _talk ^contribs 22:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get an approval on this? I've finished my adjustments to the source. Noom _talk ^contribs 19:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for extended trial (300 books). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. You demonstrated the task, and some issues were addressed. Hopefully, you can successfully do a larger sample set now. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:15, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Headbomb wanted to contact you regarding the bot before the further trial/further runs. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, the edit failure occurs when wikibot.classes encounters some kind of problem with tokens. shouldn't be too hard to fix, only problem is, it's spent a while now generating reports which haven't actually been posted. Noom _talk ^contribs 15:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. A couple of small issues were picked up during the run. FL was being churned out as FA because the bot did not distinguish between the two properly. Minor display issue was fixed. An issue with some books with specific titles was also fixed. I've had a look through a good amount of the 300 and all seem fine. Noom _talk ^contribs 04:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

here, here, here, and here the report got posted at the top of page. Is Book_talk:Buzzcocks something you are still working on? Otherwise seems fine. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The regex used should have successfully worked in those articles, but PHP seems to behave differently to the methods I'm using to test the regexes. Anyway, I've put an improved regex in which has fixed the issue. Book_talk:Buzzcocks seems to have been accidentally missed out when the bot became bugged and had to be turned off to apply a fix. I've rerun it on Buzzcocks and its posted the correct report. Noom _talk ^contribs 13:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Everything seems in order then. I trust you will resolve any further issues with Headbomb.

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.