Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/TFA Protector Bot 3

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard. The result of the discussion was

Approved.

TFA Protector Bot 3[edit]

New to bots on Wikipedia? Read these primers!

Approval process – How this discussion works
Overview/Policy – What bots are/What they can (or can't) do
Dictionary – Explains bot-related jargon

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

Time filed: 01:55, Thursday, September 8, 2022 (UTC)

Function overview: Semi-protect TFAs

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Rust

Source code available: [1]

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 1 per day

Namespace(s): mainspace

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Adminbot (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Note: This has only been approved for a 30-day trial, at which point it would need further community consensus to keep running AIUI.

This is fully independent of the move protection the bot already applies
At 23:00 UTC, get the next day's TFA (following any redirect)
Get edit protection status:
- If protection is indefinite, do nothing
- If protection expires after the article is off TFA, do nothing
- If protection expires before the article is off TFA, extend the current protection until it is off TFA (keeps existing protection level)
- If there is no protection, apply semi-protection until it is off TFA

I ran a simulation of the next 30ish TFAs (full logs): here's an example of a page that has no edit protection:

INFO tfa_semi_prot: 55 Wall Street needs protection!
INFO tfa_semi_prot: Protection options: [["action","protect"],["title","55 Wall Street"],["protections","edit=autoconfirmed|move=sysop"],["expiry","2022-09-12T00:00:00Z|2022-09-12T00:00:00Z"],["reason","Upcoming TFA ([[WP:BOT|bot protection]])"]]

And here's an example of a page that has semi-protection, but it needs to be extended:

INFO tfa_semi_prot: A.C. Monza needs protection to be extended!
INFO tfa_semi_prot: Protection options: [["action","protect"],["title","A.C. Monza"],["protections","edit=autoconfirmed|move=sysop"],["expiry","2022-09-21T00:00:00Z|2022-09-21T00:00:00Z"],["reason","Upcoming TFA ([[WP:BOT|bot protection]])"]]

Discussion[edit]

Notifications: Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article#TFA_bot_semi-protection, @Hog Farm, Sdkb, ProcrastinatingReader, SD0001, and Peacemaker67:. Legoktm (talk) 02:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much Legoktm. I can't speak for the code, but your efforts to operationalise this for the trial period is greatly appreciated. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as well. This was very much needed. Hog Farm _Talk 13:47, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC closer approved a 30-day trial, and then evaluate how well it went, presumably culminating with another RfC. To do so, we need a mostly equivalent 30-day period we can compare against. I'm not sure we can look look to the previous month, since it could be impacted by seasonal events (e.g. vandalism goes down when school starts) nor the same time in the previous year (COVID, etc.). One idea I had last night was to run the trial over the next 60 days, only semi-protecting every other day. I think that would give us a reasonable sample of data to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of the protection. Legoktm (talk) 16:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable. Hog Farm _Talk 20:58, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Every other day over 60 days sounds reasonable to me. Maybe drop a note saying this at Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article so interested parties are aware? If no objections are forthcoming then I think it's good to proceed with that plan. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:22, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Legoktm (talk) 06:02, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Trial for 30 days of bot protection, done every other day, as discussed above. Thanks Legoktm, let me know how it goes. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 18:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Set the cron for 0 23 */2 * * and a calendar reminder to turn it off in mid-November. Legoktm (talk) 06:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It seems that this trial is largely working and I support the idea. But it seems that lately there has been an LTA who is vandalizing TFAs with autoconfirmed accounts, which results in ECP. wizzito | say hello! 23:49, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I've turned off the semi-protecting job. For next steps, we need to finish the data collection/analysis that was started at User:TFA Protector Bot/Semi-protection trial (I will aim to make some time in the next few days to start updating that again). Then hold an RfC for discussion on the long-term future of this task. Legoktm (talk) 20:06, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good; thanks! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On hold. Marking this as as On Hold for the duration of the RFC. Feel free to disable the template once the RFC happened. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: Apologies if I shouldn't comment here, however is there any update on this? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:26, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf, unless I'm forgetting something (this has been a many-stage saga...), it looks like this got stuck. If you have the inclination to do, feel free to open the RfC, linking to the last one and the trial results data as background (maybe with pings to past participants and definitely with {{Please see}} notices to relevant places), and asking if the task should be kept going. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:05, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I might get some help with opening up the RFC since I've never done so before. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC has been opened. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Only took 6 months.~~ ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{blaze__wolf} 02:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAG assistance needed}} Said RfC has now been closed, so I think we're ready for full approval. Legoktm (talk) 11:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. As the RFC shows overwhelming consensus and this has been trialled before. – SD0001 (talk) 17:15, 30 August 2023 (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 Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard.