Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MondalorBot 2


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 The result of the discussion was Symbol oppose vote.svg Withdrawn by operator.

MondalorBot 2
Operator:

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic assisted

Programming language(s): Python (Pywikipedia)

Source code available: Yes, because it is the standard Python Wikipediabot

Function overview: Making the cosmetic changes

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected:

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: My bot can make the cosmetic changes, when it adds or edits interwiki links. It has made more than 8000 edits after the first approval (for more detailed information look at Special:Contributions/MondalorBot). But it has been some objections here since yesterday and that is why I requested the additional task for my bot.

Thanks, best regards, Mondalor (talk) 11:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Bot can work fine without cosmetic changes. However, I would like to know an opinion of the distinguished community about this issue. Mondalor (talk) 11:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * BAG assistance needed No comments in one week... What is a status of this request? Was my bot approved or denied for the task? Mondalor (talk) 13:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer you didn't do this. Bot policy, plus, I don't see the need. Would anyone else like to comment? &mdash; The Earwig   (talk)  22:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, normally we don't allow bots to only do cosmetic/minor/general fixes. However, its different if you want to add general fixes to your already approved bot tasks. That, I imagine, would have little problem being OK-ed. Tim1357 (talk) 23:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Earwig here. I don't see the point of moving around whitespace, or moving around text which makes no difference to the way the page is displayed. And isn't particularly encouraged by editors. I admittedly don't know a lot about cosmetic changes. But looking at the source code it doesn't look like there's much left after removing the functions mentioned at Bot_policy. @Tim I don't think the problem is that the edits are wasted, so just because it's doing this alongside another (useful) task wouldn't make a difference. The problem is that most of these changes are redundant and unwanted. @Mondalor If you want to get this approved you will need to get community input and consensus that this task is wanted. Since it does not currently exist. Do you want to go through this? - Kingpin13 (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * No, I do not want to go through this because I have not enough time. That is why this request was withdrawn. Mondalor (talk) 13:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)