Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MonoBot 2


 * The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Symbol keep vote.svg Approved.

MonoBot
Operator:  Mønobi

Automatic or Manually Assisted: auto - unsupervised

Programming Language(s): Python and PHP

Function Summary:

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): continuous

Edit rate requested: maxlag = 5

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

Function Details: Tag pages over x bytes w/  . The bot is sitting on the irc recent change feed and when an edit is made by an anon it grabs the anon's talk page and logs it to a file (thanks to Cobi for the IRC script :)) . It then scans each of those talk pages. If the talk page is over x bytes, it adds the header. If it isn't it simply skips it. All the finalization is coming together on how many bytes before it should tag, etc. I'm just waiting to implement it.

Discussion
Thanks, everyone. I'm going to move the template to Template:IPtalk in the main template namespace. Please update the bot source code. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, no once has been able to inform me of a byte size, so I've selected 30,000 which is about the size when the software usually gives a note to archive. Does that sound alright ?  Mønobi 21:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * -- Cobi(t 21:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked at the example page I cited on IP talk page proposal, and played with the length on User:Shalom/Test. The page that inspired me to propose this bot was 23,000 bytes long.  I think 10,000 bytes is long enough to justify its use, or maybe 15,000.  30,000 seems a little higher than necessary. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 23:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a log of the first run at 30,000 once I started logging:. I forgot to tell it to skipped if the template was on the page so there was an error but I quickly corrected it. I've changed it to 20,000 and will run it again but I'm afraid to go any lower because of the large number of pages that would be tagged.  Mønobi 23:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. 20,000 seems like a good compromise to me. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 15:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good, -- Cobi(t 10:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.