Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 18


 * 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

BU RoBOT 18
Operator:

Time filed: 05:09, Thursday, June 9, 2016 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: Automatically tag articles for WP:WikiProject Green Bay Packers

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Bot_requests – only the tagging with auto-assessment part

Edit period(s): One-time run initially, possibly future runs if requested again

Estimated number of pages affected: 843 (according to pre-parse)

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Automatically tags the talk pages of articles in the Category:Green Bay Packers category tree (already checked for bad subcategories by the requester) with WikiProject Green Bay Packers. Auto-assesses class as per rules at User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. Please note that the requester is the only active participant of this project right now, which is why I haven't initiated a talk page discussion on the project's talk page. Previously approved tasks of this same nature include Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 10, Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 13, and the soon-to-be-approved Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 17.

Discussion

 * It might be worth looking into seeing whether we could approve a generalised form of this task, so you won't have to wait through a BRFA every time. → Σ σ  ς . (Sigma) 06:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Heh. The last time I tried for a generalized task that I had completed before with no technical issues, it got a single negative comment and then sat there for a month (including a good while with the help requested tag). Based on that experience, I'd rather file BRFAs. If the BAG gets tired of reviewing trials for technically near-identical tasks, there's always speedy approval or they're welcome to indicate that a generalized task would be received favorably (at which point it would make more sense to submit one). I just don't want to delay a task that long while the general version is considered and probably rejected. ~ RobTalk 06:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Good point. Though it's possible to file two BRFAs simultaneously, one for the specific instance and the other for the generalised task, it might not be necessary for a non-urgent task. I'm just putting it out there, but that sounds reasonable. → Σ σ  ς . (Sigma) 07:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * — xaosflux  Talk 17:45, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Contribs here. I forgot to save last night when I added the inherit to the replace part of the auto-assessing rules and tested it out (dumbest of errors, I know), and I'm manually going through and checking the class on affected articles now. To be clear, the "fix" for the lack of inherit is only on the replace side, not the find, so there's nothing technically different after the fix except that last little bit of output on all the rules that add a class. There was also a single error where a Category was assessed as C class, which is now fixed. ~ RobTalk 20:48, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please re-run with your fixed incorporated. — xaosflux  Talk 16:33, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Contribs here. No errors that I found. ~ RobTalk 20:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Task approved. — xaosflux  Talk 02:09, 17 June 2016 (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.