Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/718 Bot

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.

718 Bot[edit]

Operator: east718

Automatic or Manually Assisted: automatic

Programming Language(s): PHP

Function Summary: maintains trackers in my userspace for images tagged for pseudo-speedy deletion

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): every six hours

Edit rate requested: maxlag=5, unthrottled otherwise at it makes only 21 edits per run

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): no

Function Details: I've been keeping track of images that are about to be deleted and sorting them by type (i.e. logo, album cover, art, etc.) - this helps myself and other users apply fair use rationales to them with ease and save them from deletion. I've been running this task and variations of it on my main account without problems for around a month now, results can be found here and at these deleted pages: [1] [2] [3] [4]

Discussion[edit]

Sounds like a reasonable request to me. Shouldn't harm anything @ 21 edits per run, and, it's in your own userspace. SQL ^{Query me!} 20:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one request, sort the list by deletion date. β^_command 18:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see Special:Prefixindex/User:East718/DFUI. east.718 at 12:51, February 17, 2008

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} Can I have +b please? I'm running the bot only once a day and it's already racked up over 400 edits with no errors (see Special:DeletedContributions/718 Bot). With the sorting by date, it also floods RC for a couple minutes. east.718 at 19:21, February 20, 2008

If it's only making 21 edits per 6 hours (per your request), it shouldn't flood RC w/in a couple mins? SQL ^{Query me!} 04:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With the switch to datesorting, it makes 60-80 edits per run now. east.718 at 17:32, February 22, 2008

Ahh, fair enough. Looks like the trial went well to me :) SQL ^{Query me!} 06:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So... Can we call this approved yet? Declined? I'm only prodding because it's been a while now... I'd suggest approved... SQL ^{Query me!} 08:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 09:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.