Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JCbot 3


 * 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.

JCbot 3
Operator: Juliancolton

Automatic or Manually assisted: Manual, supervised

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: The bot will add portal boxes (such as Connecticut portal) to groups of relevant articles, usually categories.

Edit period(s): whenever needed

Estimated number of pages affected: Couple hundred pages per session I'd assume.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes.

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

Function details: The bot will add various portal boxes under ==See also== or ==External links== section headers of groups of articles, usually categories. Seems like a mostly uncontroversial task

Discussion
Any reason you're not exclusion compliant? AWB should have a setting for this. And I presume you will be checking to see if the page already transcludes the portal template, and if so, you will not add it, but will you also be checking if it transcludes any redirects to the template? - Kingpin13 (talk) 09:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If AWB allows it, then yes, it would be exclusion compliant. To answer your other question, yep; that's easy enough to work out with AWB. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 14:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, if the page has both an external links and see also section, the bot should put the portal template in see also, right? And what will the bot do if there is neither a see also or external links section? - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Correct. 2) Most likely skip the article, though I could look for other sections such as References. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, this is a fairly straightforward RfA, let's see how the bot does. Feel free to either skip, or add under/above the references section as you prefer. - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done. I actually found that it's finding "References" more than "See also" or "External links", so I'll be searching for that. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Good to go. All of those edits are fine. And this is (as you say) uncontroversial, as well as useful. - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)