Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DarafshBot 3


 * 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

DarafshBot
Operator:

Time filed: 04:46, Monday July 9, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Standard pywikipedia

Function overview: add interwiki by -autonomous parameter.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: 100

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): yes

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

Function details:

Discussion
Mamad TALK 04:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

You've requested this same task twice before. What has changed that we shouldn't deny the request again for the same reasons? Anomie⚔ 20:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * i fix my wrongs and just run bot in -ns=0. Mamad  TALK 11:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You said that the last time. I would suggest waiting a couple of months.— cyberpower  Chat Online  15:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * in past, i was Beginner, but my bot has flag in more than 60 wiki now! please give a trial edits. Mamad  TALK 07:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Your bot does not have a bot flag.— cyberpower Chat Offline  12:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 60 other wikis, Cyberpower. Link handily supplied above.  Rcsprinter  (yak)  @ 15:11, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * But not on this wiki. As I've been told numerous times, it doesn't matter how he got the flag on other wikis as they have different policy over there than we do.  I am willing to assume good faith since his bot runs on 60 different wikis and not oppose a third chance but his bot does not have a flag here.— cyberpower  Chat Online  22:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I have a few questions. If satisfactory answers can be given to each of these, I'll be willing to consider one last trial run. However, due to the issues we've had before, I'm inclined to say that this will be your last chance here. Hers fold  non-admin (t/a/c) 15:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) What has changed since the end of your last request? You have not answered this yet.
 * 2) What arguments do you use for interwiki.py? This has been answered in pieces all over, but I would like the full command for clarity, please
 * 3) If your bot is granted a trial run, are you sure that it will only edit articles, and only perform interwiki edits? This has been a problem in both previous requests.
 * 4) Do you believe you understand English well enough to respond to concerns about the operation of your bot?


 * 1) In past i was beginner but at this time i learn more thing about Robots and Pywikipedia.
 * 2) -autonomous and just run in ns:0
 * 3) Yes, Sure.
 * 4) Yeah :)
 * Thanks. Mamad  TALK 13:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Fine, one last chance. Hers fold  non-admin (t/a/c) 16:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Mamad  TALK 23:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * then, so it can be reviewed. &mdash; madman 20:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You exceeded the limits of your trial; you were instructed to run a 50-edit trial, not a 57-edit one. Regardless, I don't see any issues with the edits, so it appears as though the bot is configured properly at long last. My only remaining concerns lie with you as the operator; after three BRFA's, including one in which you also exceeded the bounds of your trial, I am not fully convinced that you have sufficient familiarity with this bot framework or how the English Wikipedia functions to operate a bot here. I'll leave this open for other BAG members to review, and will note that in my opinion the bot can probably be approved (it's just an interwiki bot, after all). Hers fold  (t/a/c) 22:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Would also lean towards approving this. As for going over a trial, I don't have serious problems with that – trial lengths are more of a guideline than a hard-and-fast rule. Aside from a blatant disregard (say if over 75 edits were made), I don't think it can indicate much more than general-but-not-severe uncomfortability with the bot framework. I would be more concerned if this task was nontrivial, but as Hersfold says, it's just an interwiki bot. —  Earwig   talk 22:23, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I second this and note that I don't know of a way with Pywikipedia to have it automatically die after a certain number of edits have been made; for trials I usually use a high throttle and have to watch it closely. Since the difference is minor and Hersfold says there were no issue with the edits, . &mdash; madman 19:12, 30 July 2012 (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.