14? That's the category namespace, right? I can't see anything wrong with that particularly, but I thought I'd flag it up. Also, you're not going to be running this from the Toolserver, are you? I just need to check. - Jarry1250[Deliberationneeded] 12:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
That's more for the Toolserver staff to enforce rather than us. Hersfoldnon-admin(t/a/c) 20:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Namespace no 14 is Category. I have not a account on the Toolserver. I only use my own machines to databasedumps and bots. --Steenth (talk) 15:54, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Approved for trial (35 edits). — madman 04:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Just serious (although it is a standard codebase): why didn't the bot added here the other intereikilinks listed at es:Carlos Zárate? mabdul 11:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Carlos Zarate is a disambiguation page and es:Carlos Zárate is not a disambiguation page. PyWikipedia ignore links between disambiguation pages and non disambiguation pages. --Steenth (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
But shouldn't the bot remove than that link because the es page is linking to the correct article? mabdul 19:48, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
No. Looking at interwiki.py, in the case of such a mismatch the link will always be skipped if the script is running in autonomous mode. If it's not running in autonomous mode, then the user may elect to follow the link (in which case the link here would have been flagged for removal when the stronger link was discovered). — madman 22:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out why the bot linked to hu here; there's no corresponding interlanguage link. — madman 22:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
The interwiki-link to hu: come from sv:Almost Doesn't Count. Svwiki is a source for update. Huwiki link to a disambiguation page on dewiki. --Steenth (talk) 22:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Makes sense. Approved. You clearly have a good amount of experience with and understanding of interwiki.py.
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.