Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot 8

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

SoxBot

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

Operator: Soxred93 (u t)

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): AWB (and pywikipedia sometimes)

Function Summary: Working on Wikipedia:CFD/W

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Occasionally, when I have access to the AWB computer.

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y

Function Details: I know many bots already work on moving/removing/adding categories, but there is no harm with more bots getting it done faster. Only about half of the current bots listed are active, anyway.

Discussion

Sounds fine to me. Inclined to approve for trial summarily. — Werdna talk 00:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 01:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Done one category, Category:British motorcycles. Exactly 50 edits. Soxred93 (u t) 21:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
    • {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} I'm ready for approval now. Soxred93 (u t)`

• Are you doing AWB general fixes? [1] Many of them should not be done in automatic mode. "1960's" can be correct. Gimmetrow 06:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Whether they should or shouldnt be done in automode is irrelevant (the general fixes are fine to be run un-attended). Tthe request doesnt stipulate these will be done at the same time... —Reedy 20:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I have no problem with bots doing CFD work, but that does not give a license to do other changes to the text. And no, I don't agree the AWB general fixes are fine to be run unattended, if these include any changes that may not be correct. Gimmetrow 23:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

 Approved. for Wikipedia:CFD/W. Gimmetrow 05:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

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.