Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RileyBot 17


 * 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

RileyBot 17
Operator:

Time filed: 07:19, Friday, February 5, 2016 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python or AWB

Source code available: Not yet

Function overview: Find section redirects and add Template:R to section to the page if the template (and any of its redirects) is not already on the page.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Bots/Requests for approval/RileyBot 15, Bot_requests/Archive_54

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: 11,000 says my DB scan.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Run through a list (list created via db scan) that contains only section redirects and adds Template:R to section to the page if the template (and any of its redirects) is not already on the page. As a safety, the bot will ignore the section redirect if "  " and "   " tags are around it.

Discussion

 * This task was previously approved for trial at Bots/Requests for approval/RileyBot 15 but due to retirement, never occured. Reopening now that I am back. -- Cheers,   Ri l ey   07:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds mostly fine; is it aware of redr and friends? — Earwig   talk  03:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is, as well as any other redirect templates I can think of. Specific contributions --  Cheers,   Ri l ey   06:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, we didn't get a chance to test any edge cases, but that sorta makes sense given how few pages are likely to already include (e.g.) redr without also being tagged as a section. Last question: are you checking for Category:Redirects to sections directly? — Earwig   talk  04:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's checking indirectly via templates and directly via Category:Redirects to sections. :) --  Cheers,   Ri l ey   05:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good, that's what I was hoping. —  Earwig   talk  05:36, 11 February 2016 (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.