Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SDPatrolBot 4

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.

SDPatrolBot 4[edit]

Operator: Kingpin13

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic

Programming language(s): C#, using DotNetWikiBot

Source code available: No, not for this task

Function overview: Tags pages with {{Db-g3}}, {{Db-g4}} and {{Db-g10}}

Edit period(s): Continuous, when I can run it

Estimated number of pages affected: 1 in every 200 new pages

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): No, not for this task

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

Function details: The bot patrols new pages, and uses RegEx to identify if a page's content/title is a personal attack, if it is, the bot replaces the page content with {{Db-g10|blanked=yes|bot=SDPatrolBot}}, and warns the page creator. If it is not an attack, it uses RegEx to identify whether the page consists purely of offensive language, if so, it adds {{Db-g3|bot=SDPatrolBot}} to the page, and warns the creator. If it is neither an attack or vandalism, the bot searches the deletion log, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion to see if the page has been deleted via AfD, it it has, the bot adds {{Db-g4|bot=SDPatrolBot}} to the top of the page, and warns the creator.

Discussion[edit]

I've been doing some testing on my computer, and so far it seems pretty good. Obviously it won't get every single page, but so far (since the last recoding) no mistakes. I'd be happy to do a trial only in user-space - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see a user space trial. I got caught by a bot that was checking for bad language after I edited a quote that was more than germane to the article. The bot wasn't the problem so much as the lazy bot operator, and I don't think you're a problem in that area, but I'd like to see how the bottle handles a number of articles to see if problems appear. --69.225.12.99 (talk) 06:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days, userspace only). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. Just have it list the pages it would tag in a user subpage for now. Mr.Z-man 00:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I also plan to change the bot to only mark pages with {{db-g4}} if the AfD was with-in the last four months, so this should get rid of the incorrect pages there (I'll go through them and make a coment if the page wouldn't have been marked). - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure if the bot should be tagging for G4, G4 requires that the new article be a "sufficiently identical and unimproved copy" of the deleted version. While an adminbot could check if the page is mostly identical, there's really no way to automatically check for "improved," as the necessary "improvement" would vary depending on the deletion reason. Mr.Z-man 22:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do have to agree with you here, after the trial run, it's more clear that this willlikely be a problem. But it's a shame to let all these articles through without some review. So how about not tagging the G4's, but logging them on the bot subpage as it does currently? - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 04:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the trial run posted? I4 months or less is good, that may reduce problems, but, these articles are reviewed by new pages patrollers, so letting articles throughout without some review is not really an issue. Maybe just eliminate the G4 part, which is distinct from the G3 and G10 anyway. Sometimes a prior AfD becomes a deterrent to an acceptable new article without reason, having a bot add to an existing problem is not a good idea, imo. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 17:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I don't mind not doing the G4 tags. Sorry for not linking to the log page, it's located at User:SDPatrolBot/Tags. Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks useful, only issues were G4s, so the bot is just tagging G3 and G10, maybe the tagging will make it easier and faster to take care of problem articles that are no-brainers. I can't verify what the bot tagged as I'm not an admin, but I'll trust that Mr. Z-man checked in that area.--IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Listing the G4 articles on a page somewhere would be fine, but you have to make sure that people are actually using the page, and the bot has to have some way of removing old entries, so its up to you if you want to do it or not. Mr.Z-man 22:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Any progress on this bot? MBisanz ^talk 07:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see much more to do, the bot will probs just not check for G4s, if it does I will make sure the list is cleared regularly, and used. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 11:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done MBisanz ^talk 23:21, 16 December 2009 (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.