Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/EarwigBot 3

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.

EarwigBot V

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

Operator: The Earwig

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic, unsupervised

Programming language(s): Python, Pywikipedia

Source code available: User:EarwigBot V/Source

Function overview: Create daily, monthly, and yearly categories at AfC submissions by date

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Here

Edit period(s): Daily at Midnight UTC

Estimated number of pages affected: Approximately one per day.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: Every day at midnight UTC, the bot will create the daily AfC category page at Category:AfC submissions by date, using the format Category:AfC submissions by date/DD FULLMONTHNAME YYYY. The page will consist solely of {{AFC submission category header}}. If it's the first day of the month, the bot will create a monthly category, Category:AfC submissions by date/FULLMONTHNAME YYYY with the same template, and if it's January 1st, the bot will create Category:AfC submissions by date/YYYY with the year. This ensures speedy creation of categories, and doesn't require us to make them far in advance. — The Earwig @ 18:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

• Note that trialing this bot is impossible until January 2nd. — The Earwig @ 18:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. beginning Jan 2-ish. MBisanz ^talk 01:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I realize the trial is still in progress, but I'd like to post a quick update. The bot make it's first edit, and everything (from its own logs) seems fine. — The Earwig @ 04:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps the bot could work up to a week ahead? This would give a margin should there ever be a problem with the bot or toolserver in future. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

That would definitely be possible, but I would personally prefer a few days; a week seems like too much. I can't recall the last time the Toolserver was completely down for more than a few hours. Would anyone else like to weigh in on this? — The Earwig @ 19:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

If the toolserver is down, it is usually down for less than 24 hours or more than a few days, so a 2-3 day margin would like buffer against all reasonable failures. MBisanz ^talk 01:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I see the bot is still running. I'd say making the bot create the pages two/three days in advance would be a good idea. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 17:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that, I had semi-forgotten about this task. The code has been updated to create the pages three days in advance. I'll run it once more today, then it's Trial complete. — The Earwig @ 19:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

 Approved. (X! · talk)  · @779  ·  17:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

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.