Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AstRoBot


 * 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 Symbol keep vote.svg Approved

AstRoBot
Operator:

Time filed: 16:29, Monday June 24, 2013 (UTC)

Automatic, but will be run supervised for the first few months

Programming language(s): C sharp with WikiFunctions.dll

Source code available: here

Function overview: Bot will obtain orbital elements from Heavens-Above and place them into articles which contain templates requesting that it add that data to them. It is essentially a replacement for PALZ9000, which is currently defunct due to its operator being indefinitely blocked.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):
 * BRFA for the defunct bot which this will replace

Edit period(s): I'm proposing approximately once per fortnight, where possible during the morning (UTC) at weekends. If a lower or higher rate is required, I'd be happy to discuss it.

Estimated number of pages affected: Initially around four in the article space per run (the four which were maintained by the old bot), although this will increase as new pages are added (see below), and could eventually reach as many as a few hundred. Will also edit its own userspace to log its activity.

Exclusion compliant (Partially): The bot will only edit pages where it is requested to, so it can be excluded by removing the template/parameter requesting it to edit that page. It will, however, does comply with inuse

Already has a bot flag (No): This will be needed upon approval.

Function details: The bot will place orbital elements from Heavens-Above into articles. Unlike the previous bot, User:PALZ9000, the bot will edit the articles directly. It will look for a template (currently a draft in my userspace - User:WDGraham/Orbit - but will be moved to the template namespace upon the bot being approved or entering trial in the article namespace), and insert the requested parameter into that template. The template doesn't modify the data in any way, it just indicates to the bot where to put the information (eg. would display 432, and when the bot edited the article, the 432 would be replaced with the new perigee value.) The list of articles to edit will be generated from a list of pages that transclude the template. Initially it will only be placed on the pages which were maintained by PALZ9000, however in theory it can update elements for any satellite included in the Heavens-Above database - further pages could be added following discussions on their talk pages, or at WikiProject Spaceflight. I would recommend limiting operations to active spacecraft in Earth orbit.

The bot can also add orbit data to, if a parameter is added to the template to instruct it to do so, using field names rather than the orbit template to guide placement. None of the initial four articles use this template, however if its use is expanded, this could come into effect.

The orbit parameters which will be edited are:
 * argument of perigee
 * apogee
 * eccentricity
 * epoch
 * inclination
 * mean anomaly
 * number of orbits completed
 * perigee
 * right ascension of the ascending node
 * orbits per day

It will also edit the orbital period and semi-major axis, which are not included in the Heavens-Above data, but can be calculated simply, which is permitted per WP:CALC. (period = 1440/orbits_per_day, semimajor_axis=((apogee+Re)/(1+eccentricity))=((perigee+Re)/(1-eccentricity)), where Re is the radius of the Earth) -- W.  D.   Graham  16:29, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

 * This bot appears to have edited since this BRFA was filed. Bots may not edit outside their own or their operator's userspace unless approved or approved for trial. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That was a non-automated edit to a project namespace page in order to demonstrate that I was in control of the bot account, required as part of the Requests for Permissions process; I was requesting Confirmed permissions to allow userspace testing. -- W.  D.   Graham  19:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

BAG assistance needed - bot has performed well in userspace tests and I feel it is ready to move on to the next stage of the process, please can a member of the BAG review the request and see if it is ready for trial/approval. -- W.  D.   Graham  17:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

-- Chris 16:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll do the first run tonight and run on alternate weekends after that until the end of the trial. For my reference, does the bot posting a log page to its own userspace count towards the trial edit count or not? -- W.  D.   Graham  16:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. -- Chris 16:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In that case, would it be possible to either increase or decrease the number of edits by two so the trial can finish on a complete run. -- W.  D.   Graham  16:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe I expressed myself poorly. By "No, it doesn't.", I meant that posting a log to the userpage would be fine, and would not count as part of the 50 edits. We are a bit flexible and the edit count is not set in stone. e.g. going up to 60 edits would be reasonable. Going up to 100 edits wouldn't be. So yes, you're fine to do 52 edits. -- Chris 17:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that makes sense. -- W.  D.   Graham  18:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

What's the status on this? did you finish the run? Is it now back to BAG to make their final approval? Hasteur (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The trial is still ongoing at the moment - the bot's editing rate is quite small compared to the size of the trial group so it's taking a while. I'm currently expecting the initial 50 edits to be complete on either 5 or 19 October, depending on numbers. So far the trial has been going very well. -- W.  D.   Graham  21:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * For the record, I have been keeping notes on the bot's performance on User:AstRoBot/TrialLog -- W.  D.   Graham  22:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Edits look good, log notes noted, no issues with task that I can see, user is long-standing editor and has shown diligence, edit rate is very slow, and the task has previously been approved. Let's not keep this open for the sake of WP:BURO. On final note, please make your edit summary more descriptive and understandable to laymen with a link to some explanation, per WP:BOTCOMM. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 23:24, 19 September 2013 (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.