Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Monkbot 4


 * 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 keep vote.svg Approved

Monkbot 4
Operator:

Time filed: 00:00, Wednesday April 2, 2014 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: Yes (source)

Function overview: Working in, replace deprecated CS1 parameters coauthor and coauthors with individual authorn parameters (n is a number 2–10). Task 4 operates on CS1 citations that have |coauthor= parameters that contain a comma-separated list of names where the names are in the general form: Last, First Middle.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Occasional

Estimated number of pages affected: At the time of this writing, has 99,178 pages.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Full details are listed with the source.

Discussion
I have taken a brief look at this bot's code and documentation, and it looks reasonable to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

-- as per the other approval, just do the first couple slowly and check them please -- Tawker (talk) 07:14, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you. First 50 done.  I didn't see anything untoward in those edits.  The test edits are listed at Special:Contributions/Monkbot beginning at 10:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC) and ending at 10:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC).  The test edits have this edit summary: Task 4: Fix CS1 deprecated coauthor parameter errors (bot trial).


 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 11:17, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I checked all of these edits. I did not see any errors. At least half of the edits only unitalicized "et al.", a documented feature. I expect that the coauthors in those articles may be fixable by one of Monkbot 4's siblings. I did not see any author counts above six. It would be nice to see a nine-author result, but that may take a while to find.


 * Overall, it looks good to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Another 50; this time with the italicized et al., one-coauthor, and empty-coauthor rules disabled so edits were constrained to coauthor name lists of 2–9 names. Here's your.


 * Special:Contributions/Monkbot beginning at 18:25, 6 April 2014 (UTC) and ending at 21:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC).


 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 21:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I inspected these 50 edits and found no errors. The bot was quite conservative, doing only what it was supposed to do and leaving other formats of coauthors parameters for its sibling Monkbot tasks. Excellent work. I recommend approval. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Comment - if we have lastn/firstn combinations should we not be converting the coauthor to the next available lastn/firstn for consistency of output? Keith D (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)


 * See my reply at BRFA/Monkbot 5 in answer to another question on the same topic.


 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Following the edits described above, I ran task 4 once a day, 500 edits per day, and frequently inspected random edits. I found nothing to cause concern. All of these edits are listed at Special:Contributions/Monkbot with the edit summary Task 4: Fix CS1 deprecated coauthor parameter errors (bot trial) and in this edit summary search result.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:55, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 *  MBisanz  talk 05:03, 4 May 2014 (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.