Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DaedanBot 2

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 Denied.

DaedanBot 2

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

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

Operator: Gomdoli4696 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 08:18, Sunday, August 9, 2020 (UTC)

Function overview: Article fix bot

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB, regex

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): 1 to 2 times per week

Estimated number of pages affected: About 100 weekly articles(problematic articles), focusing on the newly-written anicles.

Namespace(s): main space only

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): yes

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

Function details: Use AWB's Apply general fixes function.

-> To reposition misused templates, arrange wrapping, etc.

— Gomdoli4696 (토론) 08:23, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Comment: How would this bot avoid violating WP:COSMETICBOT? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
• Denied. Fails WP:AWBRULES #4 and the general prohibition on bots making rapid cosmetic edits. You are welcome to manually use AWB to fix these articles, but a bot is not an acceptable tool to do so. Primefac (talk) 14:02, 9 August 2020 (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.