Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MadmanBot 2

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Speedily Approved.

MadmanBot 2

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

Operator: Madman bum and angel

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic.

Programming Language(s): PHP.

Function Summary: Evaluates templates in Category:WikiProject banners for support of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}, then outputs a report to an operator-configurable location.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily.

Edit rate requested: 1 edit per day.

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

Function Details: Bot uses query.php to retrieve all articles in the Template mainspace in the WikiProject banners category (query.php?format=php&what=category&cptitle=WikiProject%20banners&cpnamespace=10). Bot then retrieves the latest revision of each article using Special:Export and searches for indicators of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} support ({{{nested|}}}). Finally, bot generates a report and outputs it to an operator-configurable location. As it is my understanding that bots that edit in the User namespace are generally speedily approved, location is currently configured to User:MadmanBot/Report.

Discussion

Looks good. Why don't you just add this on to the bot you already have? ~ Wikihermit _(HermesBot) 04:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I am; I was just under the impression that I'd have to notify the BAG of the additional task, especially seeing as so far my bot has only been semi-automated. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 04:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, that's right. Reviewing the procedure again, it looks like I could have just left a note on the talk page. Which would be preferred? I'll implement the task immediately and put this page up under CSD g7 if I was being unnecessarily officious.  ;) — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 04:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

If the task is new, or is an extension of the task, it should really come under a new task. We can always speedily approve it if it's virtually the same as the old task. A note on the talk page is never an excuse for bot approval, by the way :) - Wikipedia talk:BRFA or Wikipedia:BOWN, maybe, but not yet in policy. Martinp23 06:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

That's what I figured. This is a new task. Thanks! — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 06:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

So it looks on the templates for what term exactly and then it reports to the user subpage right? I'm in favour as it only really edits in the user namespace. E ^talk 10:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It simply searches for '{{{nested|}}}' (without the quotes). Easy; that term is commonly used in #ifeq or other condititionals to change the output of the template based on the setting of that parameter. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Note the change in function; bot now uses Special:Export once instead of retrieving the raw content of each page. As such, use of maxlag is no longer needed and there is no unnecessary continued load on the server. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

You can also use the API to get pages in XML format; it's a bit more recent, and can be retrieved from a GET (not just a POST). Gracenotes^T § 02:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

This request has been open for six and a half days. Go ahead and start? — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 21:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but, you're going to have to wait for approve from a BAG member, who have been slow in responding these days. ~ Wikihermit 01:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I was well aware of that; that's why I requested the assistance of a BAG member. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 01:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Sorry, I haven't had much time, go ahead and make 50 edits or so. --ST47Talk 01:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Fifty edits would take fifty days. I've already been publishing the reports manually; would publishing one automatically do? — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 01:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yay for pseudo-generic messages. Speedily Approved.. --ST47Talk 01:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I did the trial anyway. :P — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 02:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.