Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Darkicebot

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.

Darkicebot

Operator:Razorflame Razorflame (talk)

Automatic or Manually Assisted:Automatic Supervised

Programming Language(s):Pywikipedia

Function Summary:Interwikis

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run):Continuous , but only run whenever I'm on

Edit rate requested: 1-2 edits per minute

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):Has bot flag at simple

Function Details:Works with interwikis. Standard pywikipedia throttle settings, should only make 1-2 edits per minute, however, I'm unsure about that. It could be more or less. This is my first bot ever.

Discussion

What do you guys think of my bot request? Razorflame (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which interwiki's? "de." "fr." something else? Dreamafter ^⇔ 18:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um...any interwikis. It will mainly be adding the simple interwikis, but may also remove interwikis that don't exist or may add ones that do. Razorflame (talk) 18:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should work, so

Approved for trial (20 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Dreamafter ^⇔ 19:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my mind. I'll run him as soon as I get back. Razorflame (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved him to automatic mode. Razorflame (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There you go. 19 edits. Please tell me what you think of my bot now. Razorflame (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite good! Basically your bot does the "simple." wiki addition mostly, correct? Dreamafter ^⇔ 21:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget the removal of others! ;) Soxred93 has a boring sig 21:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course! But for additions, it is really just the "simple." interwiki, correct? Dreamafter ^⇔ 21:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question again, I'm afraid, but it should have only taken you at maximum 19-20 minutes to do the edits, but it took the bot 115 minutes to do the edits, so why? Dreamafter ^⇔ 21:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should say that it is semi-automatic. I have to run the program, but once I run it, it is automatic. Razorflame (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but still, 95 minutes more than it should have needed? Couldn't you go a bit faster? Dreamafter ^⇔ 21:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I probably could have, but we are dealing with an issue on the Simple English Wikipedia. I have not had the time to work on it. The computer I run it on isn't the fastest out there. It is only a pentium 3. Razorflame (talk) 21:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you can, bump it up just a bit, if you can't that's okay. You are

Approved for trial (30 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Dreamafter ^⇔ 21:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bump it up? What do you mean? I'm sorry, but I'm completely new to bots. I just made this bot yesterday. Razorflame (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the misunderstaning, I just mean if you can make it go faster that would be good. Dreamafter ^⇔ 22:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I do that. Also, I currently have it to off because of the massive amount of discussion that I am partaking in currently on the se:WP. Please leave this as open. I will get back to it as soon as possible. Razorflame (talk) 23:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is settled down, so I'm starting it up again. Sorry! That was my IP address. Razorflame (talk) 00:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can I make it faster? Razorflame (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I guess that it might depend. When you run your bot, you just run your code right? Just let the code go, and do its thing, if you have to check, just watch the edits, it can't really go wrong if the pages are there, right? This is only a suggestion. I am a perl programmer, so I don't totally know. Dreamafter ^{<fontcolor="indigo">⇔} 01:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I load the program, type in the code, then let it go and it does it's thing. Razorflame (talk) 01:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, 46 edits have been made. Razorflame (talk) 01:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. I'm totally sorry about that. I thought it said that I was approved for 50 edits, not 30. Razorflame (talk) 02:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. You just did 26, so it works out properly. It seems that your working at an edit rate of 1 edit per every 2 minutes. So

Approved for trial (10 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Just to check on the speed. Dreamafter ^⇔ 02:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Booted back up. It's running right now. Razorflame (talk) 02:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it so slow!? Razorflame (talk) 02:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, finished 10 edits. (actually 11) Razorflame (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Totally perfect! I have now

Approved. this bot. Dreamafter ^⇔ 03:38, 2 January 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.