Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DyceBot
- 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
Approved.
Operator: Dycedarg
Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic and unsupervised; supervised during trial period.
Programming Language(s): Python based off of PyWikipediaBot
Function Summary: Replace Wikipedia:UMed userboxes
Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily
Edit rate requested: 6 edits per minute
Function Details:vThe amount of migrated userboxes waiting to be replaced with their userfied versions is getting somewhat ridiculous (over 4000 of them at the moment), despite the fact that, from what I understand, there are other bots who work on them. This would be, for now at least, a bot solely dedicated to removing this backlog. It would simply load a list of pages that transclude a particular userfied userbox, then replace all the template space versions with the userfied versions. It will also change those instances of the template that appear in the {{tl}} template so as to fix those pages where there are lists of userboxes with the code to insert them.
Discussion
[edit]You're welcome to do this if you want, but there's really no need. I will run my bot (probably) tomorrow and it will completely clear the backlog in just a few hours of running. If you do this function, however, please load all the userpages which need to be changed and all the changes that need to be made at the beginning, so for example, if a userpage has 6 userfied userboxes, only one edit is needed to change all of them instead of six edits. —Mets501 (talk) 05:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that's basically what I was planning. Sorry if that part wasn't overly clear. Anyway, I know that there are other bots, but just about every time I've looked at it there has been a backlog, so while it doesn't take that long for a bot to clear it, it seems to fill up again just as quickly. I just thought it would be a good idea to have a bot keeping that number at zero permanently, because the affected userpages really look like crap.--Dycedarg ж 05:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Make about 50-100 edits and report back. —Mets501 (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Done. DyceBot made 94 edits, and while I didn't check all of them, I checked a large number and it didn't seem to be doing anything untoward.--Dycedarg ж 07:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- They look good. Does it work with babel boxes and {{tl}}'s? —Mets501 (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'd kind of forgotten about babel boxes, but it does now. [1]--Dycedarg ж 03:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Great! My bot just finished it's run, so there's not much left to do for the time being, but for next time someone userfies boxes, it's
Approved. This bot will run with a flag. —Mets501 (talk) 03:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Great! My bot just finished it's run, so there's not much left to do for the time being, but for next time someone userfies boxes, it's
- I'd kind of forgotten about babel boxes, but it does now. [1]--Dycedarg ж 03:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- They look good. Does it work with babel boxes and {{tl}}'s? —Mets501 (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done. DyceBot made 94 edits, and while I didn't check all of them, I checked a large number and it didn't seem to be doing anything untoward.--Dycedarg ж 07:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem.
- 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.