Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval

If you want to run a bot on the English wikipedia, you must first get it approved. To do so, add a request below. Rather than running your own bot, it may be a good idea to ask someone else to run one for you at Bot requests. Admin: When bot is approved or disapproved, you can use {{subst:debate top}} and {{subst:debate bottom}} to encapsulate finished discussions.

Current policy on running bots

Before running a bot, you must get approval on this page. State below precisely what the bot will do. Observe discussion and await authorisation from someone in the approvals group. Approval may take up to one week. After approval you may run the bot for a short period so it can be monitored. After the trial, the bot will be evaluated from someone in the approvals group and you may ask that the user be marked as a bot by a Bureaucrat.

Again, please DO NOT start running your bot without following these instructions.

I	Creating a user page for the bot describing its functions. please state the following: Describe the bot's purpose, language it uses, what program(s) it uses (pywikipedia framework, etc). Describe whether it is manually assisted or automatically scheduled to run. The period, if any, we should expect it to run. Describe who the maintainer is. Add the bot's user page to Category:Wikipedia bots (By adding {{bot|your user name}} to the bots user page)
II	Listing your bot here. please state the following: Whether the bot is manually assisted (run by a human) or automatic scheduled to run The period, if any, we should expect it to run What language or program it is running The purpose of your bot Why do you need it? Is it important enough for Wikipedia to allow your bot?
III	Waiting for approval. You must wait for approval from someone in the approvals group.

1. When naming your bot, please make sure that it does not look exactly like your username, and that a person can immediately determine that it is a bot. One common way is to name the bot as your username + "bot".
2. Sysops should block bots, without hesitation, if they are unapproved, doing something the operator didn't say they would do, messing up articles or editing too rapidly.
3. The operator should be at, or logged into, the machine the bot is running on to terminate it if necessary during the debugging phase, or the bot is liable to be blocked without notice.
4. If you are planning to use a "spider", recursive wget, or similar software to get a local copy of wikipedia, please download the database dumps instead.
5. Dynamic loading of Wikipedia pages may also be unacceptable. Please see Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks.
6. Operators should separate their edits from their bot. This means that you should not be logged in as your bot replying to people. Questions or concerns can be addressed at bot's talk page or the operator's talk page, but the one who is responsible for replying is the operator not the bot.

The burden of proof is on the bot-maker to demonstrate the following:

1. The bot is harmless
2. The bot is useful
3. The bot is not a server hog
4. The bot has been approved

Note that according to Wikipedia:Categorization of people certain types of person categories should not be filled/emptied using a bot. Before adding sensitive categories to articles by bot, the input should be manually checked article by article, rather than uploaded from an existing list in Wikipedia.

In the assistance to prove the bot is harmless and useful, a trial period may be asked to demonstrate the bot. Complaints made about the bot during the trial period requires the bot to be immediately stopped, and the issue should be resolved below the application. If the trial period passes with no problems, then a bot flag may be requested from a Bureaucrat.

Organization

Active trial runs

Please document active trial runs at Wikipedia:Bots/Trial runs. When doing so, include

• Username of both the bot and the operator (denote as needed)
• The purpose of the bot
• The date and time the trial run was approved
• The name of the person who approved the trial run

The original discussion should remain on this page or be be moved to the #Trial run holding pen.

Bot flag approvals

When a user has completed a trial run (if needed), and their bot flag has been approved, please

1. Archive the discussion at: Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4 (Current)
2. Add an item to Wikipedia:Bots/Approval log

Bots in on a one-week trial

RobotG

I request permission to run the bog-standard pywikipediabot on English wikipedia under account RobotG, manually. I intend to start gradually, and will begin by instructing it to do simple category renaming and/or removal per WP:CFD (for which I see there is a small backlog). If I see other tasks I could ask the bot to help with then I will ask permission here first. Category renaming/removal are community-endorsed edits, so the bot flag would help avoid clutter in the recent changes log. Please may I have permission to test it out? --RobertG ♬ talk 09:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

There are several bots that do this already. Have you asked their owners why there's a backlog? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 22:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Was that an objection? I suspect there's a backlog because these users haven't run their bots recently, and I'm offering to help. --RobertG ♬ talk 07:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Given that there were no objections, I boldly instructed RobotG to rename a category per CFD, and it went without a hitch. If there are still no objections then I will continue to do informal, carefully-monitored, trial runs. Meanwhile, any chance of an endorsement so that I can log the trials formally at trial runs? --RobertG ♬ talk 13:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Update: things still seem to be going OK, even though there's been no response here. I'm not getting at anyone - I understand all about backlogs! --RobertG ♬ talk 16:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. You've obviously been doing trial runs, so do a week's run starting now and bring us back results this time next week. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Robthbot

Proposed disambiguation bot, manually assisted, running m:Solve_disambiguation.py. I will be using this to work on the backlog at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links; bot assisted disambiguation is substantially more efficient than any other method. The bot will run from the time it gets approval into the foreseeable future. --Robth^Talk_Cleanup? 16:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason we couldn't have a trial run, at least. robchurch | talk 20:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll start running it at low speed in the next couple of days. --Robth^Talk 04:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

DumbBOT, third function

On average, between five and ten AfD nominations made each day are incomplete (for various reasons). In at least one case, these can be fixed (semi)-automatically: when all steps are performed but the third (listing the subpage in the daily AfD page). I'd like to have permission for DumbBOT (talk · contribs) to perform the following functions:

1. list the incomplete nominations; this will be done by
   1. downloading all articles in Category:Articles for deletion with a single export;
   2. check every page and determine if the article is correctly nominated, and create a list of all AfD subpages
   3. download all AfD subpages with a single export
   4. check if every subpage is listed in a daily AfD (this is done by whatlinkshere; this may require another download as the subpage can be a redirect)
2. for every subpage that is not listed:
   1. add ===[[articletitle]]=== if not already
   2. add :*Incomplete nomination listed now. ~~~~ at bottom (or a similar message)
   3. produce a list of wiki links to be include (manually) in the daily AfD

This is to be done semi-manually: I'd run the first script, then check the incomplete noms that can be fixed automatically and run the second script on them. (Liberatore, 2006). 14:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

• A one-week trial seems reasonable to me. Please report back this time next week. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Keiteibot

Greetings. I'm requesting affirmative go for the running of a keiteibot by a keitei. The bot is automatic and runs on pywikipedia. I'm open to input on how often to run it, but every 10-30 minutes is ideal. The purpose is for the Mediation Cabal. Currently it's a mess to add new cases, with several templates and complicated instructions. This bot would just compile a list of pages in a category and list them at the bottom (There's an inputbox in the works that would complete the super simple process). If there's no change, it doesn't edit. With additional community support, it'd do the same for open cases, at the same time, on the same page. Mostly I need it because I'm not awake 24/7 and because I'd like the MedCab to be more friendly and easier to use. The script was written by Ericj and is available here. He notes that it's not polished yet, and may change. I don't think this bot would ever require a bot flag. Pretty please? :] --Keitei (talk) 12:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It will be running unsupervised? robchurch | talk 12:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, as a sort of archiving function. Or as a DPL substitute. I can't supervise 24/7, but if you can suggest any improvements/safeguards that would be necessary/help, I'm sure it can be coded in. --Keitei (talk) 12:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It's similar to DumbBOT above, in the sense that it processes a category, but the process is even simpler. Due to the simplicity of the bot and the way it is written, any possible damage would be limited to the target page, no injection is possible, and it could be stopped by removing the delimited region from the target page. Moving cases from new to open to closed is still manual, and always would be. EricJ 00:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Trial run approved. robchurch | talk 20:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

TuvicBot

I would like approval to run my interwiki-bot TuvicBot (using Pywikipedia). This bot will run in manually assisted mode, adding and updating interwiki-links, using the Dutch wiki as a starting point. I'm mostly planning to solve interwikis that autonomous bot skip because they're ambigious. --Tuvic 20:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Trial run of one week approved, please throttle edits to 2-3/min and check back here before asking for a flag. Usual stuff. robchurch | talk 20:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Starting trial run soon. --Tuvic 12:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

FFBot

If approved, this bot will be a semi-automated maintenance bot, performing tasks such as template substitution using AWB. It will run automatically (without each edit being manually approved) but will be supervised at all times. The main use of the bot will be subst'ing certain user talk messages such as {{welcome}} per WP:SUBST. Thanks, — FireFox 17:23, 03 July '06

Fine with me. One week trial approved. Report back in a week, if you have problems halt the trial, yadda yadda. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Fritzbot

Since there are so many orphan images on Wikipedia, I've been using AWB for the last couple of days to tag unused fair use images listed at Special:Unusedimages with {{Orphaned fairuse not replaced}}, but clicking "Save" every 30 seconds is getting a little bit boring, so I'd like to get a bot permission for this so I can use AWB's auto mode. I will of course still monitor the process. --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 14:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Your contribs look fine to me, I've added it to the AWB bot checkpage, please keep an eye on it and keep edits to once every 30s or so until it's botflagged -- Tawker 15:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks. --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 15:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Approved bots requiring a flag

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Tawbot

Tawbot uses Tawbot framework (in Perl). It has over 100000 edits on pl.wp. It is maintained by me.

It never runs automatically.

The only thing I intend to use it for is importing stubs for Polish members of Parliament, probably just 2001-2005 and 2005-2009 terms. Example (in Polish) - pl:Jacek_Bogucki.

I've spoken with the user on IRC and can vouch for their sanity and approachability. I like the idea. Prior to approving the whole run, though, I'd like to see a quick sample of what the stubs would look like in English. Taw, can you produce maybe five pages and then show me? I don't foresee too many issues. robchurch | talk 09:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Here here - User:Tawbot/Sample Polish MP stub. Taw 12:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Having spoken to the user further on IRC, I'm going to authorise the batch creation of stubs on Polish politicians. robchurch | talk 12:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

So, could someone set the flag ? Is it a bureaucrat thing or a steward thing these days ? Taw 13:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, so first round is done. 439 new stubs were created, 24 had pre-existing articles and weren't touched by the bot.

I'd like to do Senate (100 people + replacement MPs / term) and earlier terms.

I think it would make sense to import every MP since 1989. Earlier (Communist) parliament wasn't that important, and I think significant number of MPs from that time weren't really notable enough for encyclopedia. And there isn't that much data about those times on parliament's website in any case.

So we have five terms to do: 1989-1991, 1991-1993, 1993-1997, 1997-2001, and 2001-2005. The first two have no photos (but many MPs were also in the parliament later, so we may still have their phonos), but these were pretty hot times, so it would be silly not to have them described. As 43% of current MPs were in parliament before I guess that would be some 1700 new stubs.

The data for each term is different, so I'll make a few samples before running.

Any comments ? Taw 20:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Provided everything runs as it did before, it seems fine. If you still need a flag, ping my talk page and I'll set it. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 04:47, 7 July 2006 (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.