Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/EthicalBot

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 The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

EthicalBot

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

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

Time filed: 16:10, Tuesday January 14, 2014 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: WPCleaner

Function overview: The bot will apply a vast range of fixes to article pages, for example, DEFAULTSORT with special characters, articles with false <br/> tag, etc.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily; at specific hours.

Estimated number of pages affected: In a day: 500-700.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: The bot runs on WPCleaner's bot tools. The bot will run daily, applying patches and fixes to articles as and when appropriate. The source code is written in the Java programming language. The bot, as already said will do work like these: Fix multiple categories on one line, Category duplication, Spelling and typo check, fix headline hierarchy problems, template coding tags without content, etc. The number of pages estimated to be affected by the bot's running is 500-700 daily on custom configurations on WPCleaner. The bot is completely harmless, and will reduce a lot of work given that the number of error in wiki markup and syntax is increasing everyday. Should anything go wrong, at any point of time (which isn't expected), administrators are allowed to block it, and the bot will stop editing from the very next page it tries to process.

Discussion

Looking at the WPCleaner documentation, I see "The suggestions itself are configured with regular expressions allowing to detect potential errors and to suggest fixes." If WPCleaner is making suggestions about potential errors, it strikes me that the bot should not be running automatically. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm afraid you cannot say "like these" and "etc." for the task details. You need to list every one and in exact detail, so we can judge each task's appropriateness, and only then trial and approve accordingly. You have chosen a very ambitious task set, most of which could very well be individual BRFAs. Some tasks you mention, like spelling/typo checking isn't even allowed under such generic description. I'm also skeptical that some of other ones have consensus to be done by bots, not all WPCleaner project tasks are such as I recall. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:33, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay then, I'll run only the ones I mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethically Yours (talk • contribs) 17:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Josvebot, run by Josve05a, already does WPCleaner cleanups. Combined with the fact that you don't seem very familiar with how bots are run here, I'm inclined to deny this request and leave it to the existing bot. Anomie⚔ 17:25, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

(Josvebot has been shutdown until bugs with WPCleaner has been resolved.) (t) Josve05a (c) 17:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Withdrawn by operator. per [1] Anomie⚔ 20:05, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

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.