Wikipedia talk:SPI/bot features and bugs
This page is for reporting problems with and requesting features for SPCUClerkbot. If the issue is at all urgent, please email Nixeagle instead.
|
|
Move Function[edit]
- Type: Feature
- Status: In Progress
Description:[edit]
Clerks should be able to move cases with a command on IRC. The proposed syntax is "!move <old casename> <new casename>". This will avoid the time consuming multi-step process currently employed.
Discussion:[edit]
Should the syntax be "!move <casename> <new_casename>". Mayalld (talk) 06:37, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yep. Fixed. — Jake Wartenberg 03:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Doing. Probably be done tomorrow. —— nixeagleemail me 03:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
- Giving this some thought, we are going to need to map out exactly what the bot is expected to do for each case, as its not that simple. Example cases include new_casename having an archive, casename having an archive. An existing open case at new_casename, if casename is a brand new case, should the bot just move the case and fix the redirect or copy paste? I'm not really sure if we gain much from automation of this (as far as net time spent). Thoughts? —— nixeagleemail me 19:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Auto Tag[edit]
- Type: Feature
- Status: In Progress
Description:[edit]
Bot should auto-tag all blocked sockpuppet accounts, saving huge amounts of clerk time on large cases.
Discussion:[edit]
I was actually thinking, could this be implemented as a JS tool, similar to the AFD close tool??? Mayalld (talk) 10:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Proxy Scan[edit]
- Type: Feature
- Status: Pending
Description:[edit]
Bot should scan all IP addresses added to cases for open proxies. If scan is positive, bot should note such on case page.
Discussion:[edit]
Case endorsing[edit]
- Type: Bug
- Status: New
- Severity: Mild
Description:[edit]
If a non-clerk attempts to endorse or decline a CU case, the bot will accept that endorsement.
Discussion:[edit]
Ideally, the bot would actually revert non-clerks when they try to endorse or archive cases. — Jake Wartenberg 18:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Evidence prompt[edit]
- Type: Feature
- Status: Pending
Description:[edit]
If the evidence field is left blank, a talk page notice should go out to the filer. This should prompt them to provide evidence in the form of diff's. Also, if there are no diff's in the evidence section, it should sent the same message. Synergy 20:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)