Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MauchoBot


 * 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.

MauchoBot
Operator:

Time filed: 02:08, Monday May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Automatic supervised

Programming language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Source code available: Yes (AutoWikiBrowser)

Function overview: That bot will use AutoWikiBrowser to Apply general fixes and Automatically tag articles.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): one time run daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 700

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: This bot will Automatically tag new articles and apply general fixes.

Discussion

 * I've temporarily given the bot flag for a period of one week to permit testing of the 50 edits.  MBisanz  talk 02:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I originally intended to use WikiCleaner but, due to setup difficulties, I have modified the bot to use AWB. Cheers.  maucho  eagle   ( c ) 02:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I have once again deviated from the original plan. To anyone who reads this request for approval, I do promise that this will most definitely be the last time that I do this. Thanks. MauchoBot (talk) 03:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 *  maucho  eagle   ( c ) 03:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't really understand what "automatic supervised" means here. As far as I remember, "general fixes" in AWB needed to be manually supervised. Are you going to be manually supervising the general fixes (checking each edit and confirming it)? The tagging can be automatic and unsupervised, though. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I do check every edit thoroughly and this something that I will do in the foreseeable future, or at least until MauchoBot has 5000 edits and I feel comfortable that it can run by itself.  maucho  eagle   ( c ) 12:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

This bot is only using built in AWB functions right? No custom modifications or such? If so, I don't really see the benefit. Running purely with these built in fixes seems like a bad idea to me, and it would be much better just to leave it to humans - and there are a lot of humans who already make these changes. I note the bot is also making a few cosmetic changes, and I am not convinced that the operator understands AWB to a high enough level and is technically minded to run a bot. - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the exact same thing which is why I would propose something else. What if the bot ran on WPCleaner. I am more efficient with WikiCleaner and can easily determine whether or not the bot is making mistakes.  maucho  eagle   ( c ) 20:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Concerns about the task, and the operator is blocked as a sock. - Kingpin13 (talk) 01:02, 3 June 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.