Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Dexbot 11

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.

Dexbot 11

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

Time filed: 14:28, Monday, January 9, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): python

Source code available: Based on pywikibot

Function overview: Clean up incorrect section names

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Special:PermaLink/758550969#Section names fixes

Edit period(s): Once a week

Estimated number of pages affected: Not more than 100 pages per month

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Changing these section names:

see also|related topics|related articles|internal links|also see with See also
external links?|external sites?|outside links?|web ?links?|exterior links? with External links
reff?e?rr?en[sc]es? with References
Further Reading with Further reading

Discussion

Pinging User:Magioladitis who suggested this task and also I made some edits for test [1] Ladsgroup^overleg 14:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The task has been approved for my bot Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 26. More bots have approval for the same or similar task

I asked this as an effort to move tasks from AWB to a stabler environment. Thanks to Ladsgroup for willing to take over this task. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Please run these in a row (outside of other bot tasks you are running) then link to the the contributions here. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. 41 edits Ladsgroup^overleg 18:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The edits look good. Consider linking to WP:MOS or MOS:SECTIONS in the edit summary. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ladsgroup^overleg 23:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Task approved. while not required I agree with JJMC89 that linking MOS:SECTIONS in your edit summary would be beneficial on these runs. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:59, 21 January 2017 (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.