Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Arbitrarily0Bot


 * 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 Symbol keep vote.svg Approved.

Arbitrarily0Bot
Operator:   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk )

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Manually assisted to set up, start, and carefully monitor the run

Programming Language(s): AutoWikiBrowser with the Kingbotk Plugin

Function Summary: To tag talk pages with their associated WikiProject Banner

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

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function Details: For example, tagging Category:American magazine editors talk pages with WikiProject Magazines. Subcategories will be carefully checked to make sure that the WikiProject still applies (when the recursive category option is used). I have already been successful in using the Kingbotk Plugin to do this task manually (see my recent contributions).

Discussion
Common request at Bot requests. To clarify: are you only doing this for one project, for all projects, by request of projects? Fritzpoll (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I planned to finish tagging for WikiProject Magazines first, and then take requests from other WikiProjects.   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 17:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have little problem with the technical side of this (well tested code, etc.), and my only other issue (re: asking the appropriate project first before tagging) has been cleared up, so let's get started.  Richard  0612  18:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Requesting AWB access for the bot here...   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 18:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Bot now has AWB access, beginning trial...   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 20:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Here are the results of the 20 edit trial.   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 20:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

04:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm satisfied that it did the job you set out to do. I'd be interested to see if you could do something about the importance/class fields since I can see that adding a lot of manual work for editors later.  Not a major deal, though. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, the Kingbotk plugin can only be used to assess articles for stub quality (for use when tagging a stub-related category). The level of importance/priority is more subjective and varies between WikiProjects, so it is probably not an ideal bot task.   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 17:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That is true, although with the project's permission you could always do autoassessment based on the assessments that other projects have given the article. See this page for more info.  Richard 0612  22:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Autoassessment may be applied through another BRFA if the bot operator wishes so...--  Tinu  Cherian  - 12:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to this being approved - it does what the operator said he wanted it to do, and if assessment is required according to further critria later, another bot can run by and perform the task. Thoughts? Fritzpoll (talk) 12:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me, the autoassessment can be handled in a later BRFA as mentioned above if necessary. I see no reason not to give this the green light.  Richard  0612  16:26, 22 January 2009 (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.