Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 11


 * 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 delete vote.svg Denied.

Lightbot 11
Operator:

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic supervised

Programming language(s): AWB, monobook, vector, manual

Source code available: Source code for monobook or vector are available. Source code for AWB will vary but versions are often also kept as user pages.

Function overview: Janitorial edits to units - include AWB general fixes

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Multiple runs. Often by batch based on preprocessed list of selected target articles.

Estimated number of pages affected: Individual runs of tens, or hundreds, or thousands.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes, will comply with 'nobots'

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

Function details: Edits will apply AWB general fixes where (and only where) other edits are taking place.

Discussion
To move this BRFA forward, per WP:BOTPOL ("performs only tasks for which there is consensus"; "carefully adheres to relevant policies and guidelines"), please provide link(s) to the relevant policy/guideline/consensus that this task should be both performed and performed by an automated bot. The three BRFAs linked do not provide such links. Thank you. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The relevant policy/guideline/consensus is presumably maintained by BAG but I was unable to find it. AWB general fixes has been discussed in the following bot applications but it isn't clear to me what the outcome was in each case:
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/AnomieBOT_44
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/AnomieBOT_49
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/BrownBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/CapitalBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/ChuispastonBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/DeadLinkBOT
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/DrilBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/DrilBot_2
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/EarwigBot_15
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/JCbot_4
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Jogersbot_4
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/KolBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Milk%27s_Favorite_Bot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/PascalBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/PDFbot_3
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Polbot_4
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/RjwilmsiBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/RjwilmsiBot_4
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/ShepBot_4
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/SmackBot_35
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/SmackBot_41
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/SmackBot_43
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/SmackBot_task_approval_VI
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/SteveBot_2
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Sumibot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/TaeBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/WaldirBot
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Xenobot_6
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Xenobot_6.2
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Yobot_13
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Yobot_14
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Yobot_16
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Yobot_20
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/FrescoBot_2
 * Bots/Requests_for_approval/Kl4m-AWB
 * Note that I would only use AWB general fixes where edits are being watched. I welcome BAG's guidance on this issue. Lightmouse (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not all of the above BRfAs even mention AWB general fixes. - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * BAGAssistanceNeeded OK, how about a 20 edit trial then? Lightmouse (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The above functions would only operate in conjunction with another functions. This functionality was successfully running within Lightbot1 to Lightbot3. If it would make it easier, we could eliminate this individual request and include the functionality within the other bot requests. Lightmouse (talk) 16:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

What is this bot task going to do, exactly? "Janitorial edits to units" is far to unspecific. Amalthea 12:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Amalthea that this may be too broad. In any case, "edits to units" and AWB general fixes are not related (indeed, many of the general fixes could be said to be unrelated to each other), and so it is out of the scope of "[a] group of related tasks" which is all the Lightbot account is permitted to do, per the ArbCom amendment. Applying general fixes at the same time could detract attention from your other, more controversial, edits. With all this in mind I'm marking this as denied. - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:00, 4 May 2011 (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.