Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/LivingBot 21


 * 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 The result of the discussion was Symbol oppose vote.svg Withdrawn by operator.

LivingBot 21
Operator:

Time filed: 14:19, Saturday March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual:

Programming language(s): PHP / Peachy

Source code available: Yes, Toolserver SVN

Function overview: Update the |status= of bot

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):, Bots/Requests for approval/Bot0612 8

Edit period(s): Weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: Continuous; 400 edits initially, thereafter weekly, maybe a dozen each week.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: The |status= parameter of the bot template is useful, aiding categorisation, display, and providing a more useful template display. When it was introduced in 2009 as a result of a discussion that I lead about bot categorisation, Richard0612 offered to automate it, where the status would be changed from "active" to "inactive" if the bot had not edited within six months. He then stopped editing overnight, the request was archived and I decided to handle things semi-automatedly. Now I've changed my mind, and am hence filing this request. Here, "User:ExampleBot" is the page being edited:
 * To change |approvalneeded=no to |approvalneeded=yes iff ExampleBot has edited outside the usual userspace areas since |approvalneeded was set to "no"
 * To allocate |status where it is not present, based on the six months edit rule.
 * To change |status=(active|approved) to |status=inactive if no edits have been performed in six months, but not changing it where |approvalneeded=no (because it might be active as an API intermediary, or somesuch)
 * To change |status=inactive to |status=active if there have been edits by the bot since it was marked as inactive

Discussion
Let's see what it does. Please make a few edits for each case. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How's this going? Josh Parris 12:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Too busy at the moment to do the trial (still tinkering with the code). If I can't manage anything in the next week, feel free to archive until I can. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 15:42, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Is that still the case or would you like the BAG to archive it now? We can always re-activate when you are ready.  Rcsprinter  (articulate)  19:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yup, still busy, so please, be my guest and archive this one for the moment. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 19:41, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Without prejudice to reopening in the future, Josh Parris 00:37, 20 April 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.