Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MadmanBot 2

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

Speedily Approved.

MadmanBot 2

Operator: Madman bum and angel

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic.

Programming Language(s): PHP.

Function Summary: Evaluates templates in Category:WikiProject banners for support of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}, then outputs a report to an operator-configurable location.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily.

Edit rate requested: 1 edit per day.

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

Function Details: Bot uses query.php to retrieve all articles in the Template mainspace in the WikiProject banners category (query.php?format=php&what=category&cptitle=WikiProject%20banners&cpnamespace=10). Bot then retrieves the latest revision of each article using Special:Export and searches for indicators of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} support ({{{nested|}}}). Finally, bot generates a report and outputs it to an operator-configurable location. As it is my understanding that bots that edit in the User namespace are generally speedily approved, location is currently configured to User:MadmanBot/Report.

Discussion

Looks good. Why don't you just add this on to the bot you already have? ~ Wiki hermit _(HermesBot) 04:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am; I was just under the impression that I'd have to notify the BAG of the additional task, especially seeing as so far my bot has only been semi-automated. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 04:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's right. Reviewing the procedure again, it looks like I could have just left a note on the talk page. Which would be preferred? I'll implement the task immediately and put this page up under CSD g7 if I was being unnecessarily officious. ;) — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 04:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the task is new, or is an extension of the task, it should really come under a new task. We can always speedily approve it if it's virtually the same as the old task. A note on the talk page is never an excuse for bot approval, by the way :) - Wikipedia talk:BRFA or Wikipedia:BOWN, maybe, but not yet in policy. Martinp23 06:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I figured. This is a new task. Thanks! — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 06:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So it looks on the templates for what term exactly and then it reports to the user subpage right? I'm in favour as it only really edits in the user namespace. E ^talk 10:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It simply searches for '{{{nested|}}}' (without the quotes). Easy; that term is commonly used in #ifeq or other condititionals to change the output of the template based on the setting of that parameter. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note the change in function; bot now uses Special:Export once instead of retrieving the raw content of each page. As such, use of maxlag is no longer needed and there is no unnecessary continued load on the server. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 16:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can also use the API to get pages in XML format; it's a bit more recent, and can be retrieved from a GET (not just a POST). Gracenotes^T § 02:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This request has been open for six and a half days. Go ahead and start? — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 21:37, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but, you're going to have to wait for approve from a BAG member, who have been slow in responding these days. ~ Wiki hermit 01:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was well aware of that; that's why I requested the assistance of a BAG member. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 01:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Sorry, I haven't had much time, go ahead and make 50 edits or so. --ST47Talk 01:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fifty edits would take fifty days. I've already been publishing the reports manually; would publishing one automatically do? — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 01:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay for pseudo-generic messages.

Speedily Approved.. --ST47Talk 01:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I did the trial anyway. :P — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 02:16, 19 June 2007 (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.