Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/APersonBot 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.

APersonBot 2

Operator: APerson (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 13:37, Sunday June 8, 2014 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: https://github.com/APerson241/APersonBot/blob/master/dyknotifier/

Function overview: Will notify an editor if an article they had created/expanded was nominated for DYK by someone else.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 60#Asking_for_Noting_bot

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 60 (per run)

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: This bot will notify an editor if an article they had created/expanded was nominated for DYK by someone else. The notifiers and creators will be detected by scanning the signatures present in the DYK nom, and ~~User:APersonBot/DYKNotice~~ {{DYKnom}} will be used to notify people.

Discussion

Questions from Xaosflux

Do you plan to send notification to everyone in the article contribution history ('persons who expanded'), if not what will be your criteria for inclusion?

— xaosflux ^Talk 02:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria for inclusion will be strictly limited to the user(s) who the nominator entered in {{NewDYKnomination}} as the author(s) using the author parameter (or one that works the same way). At the moment, the bot checks who these users are by parsing the line that appears inside <small> tags. APerson (talk!) 02:34, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging the WT:DYK page to see if there are any objectors still, and to bring such objections here. If no objections in a day will approve for trial — xaosflux ^Talk 02:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Special:Diff/613764883 — xaosflux ^Talk 02:59, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Maile66

Just would like to mention that it would be good if when the notification posted on a user's talk page, it had a link to the nomination template so that the editor would be able to comment on the nomination template. — Maile (talk) 13:14, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maile66, I believe that {{DYKNom}}, which I rewrote and expanded for the occasion, links to the nomination template if possible. APerson (talk!) 02:37, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK Chiltern Firehouse kicked out a notification within minutes of the nomination template being created, which is good. However, it was the nominator who got the notice on his talk page, rather than the desired creators other than the nominator. — Maile (talk) 18:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See response below. APerson (talk!) 19:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trial Period

Original Trial, 100 edits, 7 days Please post back the results of your trial here; include any user feedback (positive or negative). — xaosflux ^Talk 01:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you've hit a couple of minor bugs? (e.g. double posting to User_talk:MelanieN; posting to nominator. Have these been solved along the way? — xaosflux ^Talk 04:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Xaosflux and Maile66: I just fixed a bug about the bot forgetting to not notify the nominator. The double post was caused by an earlier version of {{DYKNom}} not adding a HTML comment with the name of the template when it was subst:'ed. APerson (talk!) 19:26, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, please reply when your trial is done, flag this with the BAGAssistanceNeeded template too. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Status update: I'm changing the library which the bot uses from wikitools to pywikibot, since I've found that wikitools is extremely buggy. This may take a few days. APerson (talk!) 02:49, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

((BotExtendedTrial|edits=100|days=14)) Trial extended, please verify edits to each of the categories from the original trial after your code change. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@APerson: It's been 11 days. Please proceed to the extended bot trial. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Magioladitis: I've finished the bot (almost) and am currently trying to get it to save a page. Everything else works; the bot will probably start editing within one or two hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by APerson (talk • contribs) 18:31 12 July 2014
APerson Could you please provide us with a status on this bot? — Maile (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Maile66: I've been very busy both on and off Wikipedia. Since I haven't gotten pywikibot (the library I switched to) to save, I have my pywikibot script spit out a list of people to notify and another script notify everyone on the list. The only issue I have right now is that for some inexplicable reason, the bot insists on coming up with people whose submissions have already been resolved (i.e. passed or failed) but have not yet been "officially" notified. For instance, the bot wants to notify people whose nominations have been closed but whose hooks have yet to actually appear on the Main Page. I'm not sure if this behavior is desirable, so a few more changes should fix this. APerson (talk!) 22:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Maile66 and Xaosflux:, update: the bot is now alive and kicking, but (now that all the logic is properly working) I've discovered that there just aren't that many people who haven't had their submissions nominated by someone else AND that haven't participated in the nomination discussion. It'll take a while to rack up 100 edits. APerson (talk!) 22:44, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
APerson I see it! I don't know what you have configured to trigger the notice, but it looks to me like it scans the DYK nominations page. It seems to be going back through some older ones, so some editors may wonder why they're getting this at this point in time. I assume that once it gets through the backlog on that page, it will then just work on the newer ones as they come along. I'm so happy this is working now. Matty.007 will be, also. — Maile (talk) 23:32, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw this bot was on trial (for MURDER!; call Robot Jessica Fletcher!) and purposely didn't notify the author of Parliamentary War Memorial when I nominated it. There's still no sign of a notification the editor's page, so you might like to investigate (call human Jessica Fletcher!) Belle (talk) 09:43, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Belle, I have not yet had the opportunity to start running the bot on toolserver. So, at the moment, the only time the bot runs (and notifies people) is when I double-click it on my computer. I'll look into running it on toolserver soon. APerson (talk!) 16:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
APerson, Did you mean labs? I thought toolserver was no more. — Maile (talk) 16:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, I meant labs. APerson (talk!) 16:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
APerson, I see the bot recently placed a couple of notifications on editor pages. I assume you're still testing and probably don't need me to tell you this. However, the latest I've seen is getting it right, but still missing something. When there is more than one editor (creator) that needs to be notified, it only notifies one. — Maile (talk) 22:52, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
APerson Is the trial complete? -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis, it looks like APerson on August 22 put a notice on his user page that he'd be on a Wikibreak "...a pretty long time." Do we have an alternative solution to getting this bot done? DYK approved this bot January 2014. The request for the bot was made on Feb 23, 2014 and picked up by user Ceradon on March 1, 2014. However, as far as we know, Ceradon never took any action on that, and has not edited on Wikipedia since April 1, 2014. A new request was made for this bot on June 1, 2014. DYK has waited for several months now, with two different people volunteering to do the bot. As far as I can tell, his last testing on this bot was through APersonBot on August 31, 2014. That test showed the bot was not yet perfected, as by my message above. Please let us know our alternatives. — Maile (talk) 18:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(editing from bot account) Maile66, due to unusual circumstances I will be unable to access my main account until around 7 November. I can vouch for the bot's readiness, although you should hold off on approving it until then. This will be the only non-bot edit I'll make with this account. APersonBot (talk!) 21:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis, the date of Nov 7 is only 6 weeks away. I can wait if you can give APerson time to resume his work. — Maile (talk) 21:48, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. We can wait 6 weeks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
— Maile it's been 2 months. Any news on this? -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis, nary a word from APerson. I was wondering about this, too. — Maile (talk) 14:05, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
{{BotExpired}} @APerson: please resubmit request after you are active again. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 23:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reopened I have resubmitted the request. APerson (talk!) 01:42, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis, care to take another look? APerson (talk!) 01:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Approved for extended trial (100 edits or 14 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
APerson did you finish the extended bot trial? Please provide diffs and comments on bot's action. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:12, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry - I've been quite busy, with both on- and off-wiki projects. At the moment, I'm trying to get the bot to recognize when it's already notified someone. There have been some errors, which means that I have to run the bot in interactive mode (i.e. I approve each edit) while testing. This, in turn, means that testing is going slower than I'd like. Still, I hope to have a wonderfully working bot as soon as I can. APerson (talk!) 01:51, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, how's this going? Josh Parris 19:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} APerson. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Josh Parris and Magioladitis, I've been a bit busy IRL and in other projects on-wiki, but I've been testing out a much better version of the bot's code. I hope to have a working version by the end of this week, and it's very likely that I'll have it ready sooner than that. APerson (talk!) 14:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} APerson. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
APerson? -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:06, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis - hi; sorry I haven't been that responsive here. I've been a bit busy with other projects on- and off-wiki. I've spent a while trying to get some much revised code I originally got from Betacommand to work; however, I've just tested the code I originally wrote and it's been working perfectly. So, it looks like the bot is ready to be approved. APerson (talk!) 00:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Trial complete. - Magioladitis, I've been testing the bot lately and it looks good. APerson (talk!) 17:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
APerson can you provide us links to the edits and comments? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
APerson -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis, the bot's contributions are all at Special:Contributions/APersonBot. In general, the bot did what it was supposed to do for every edit in the most recent run (during 7 April 2015, UTC); if you'd like further explanation of a particular edit, just ask. As I said earlier, I'm very sure that the bot's ready to be approved. APerson (talk!) 18:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:40, 8 May 2015 (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.