Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SigmaBot


 * 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

SigmaBot
Operator:

Time filed: 23:42, Thursday June 16, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Automatic supervised unsupervised

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: Standard pywikipedia

Function overview: Bypass unprintworthy redirects

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Bot_requests/Archive_42 and Bot_requests/Archive 42

Edit period(s): 1 time run

Estimated number of pages affected: 1013 ± 10

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function details: User:SigmaBot is not to be confused with User:Sigmabot. As was suggested here, the bot will replace all instances of the unprintworthy redirects with the direct link. I will watch everything happen as it does.

Discussion
Is every one of 1013 ± 10 edits going to be reviewed by you?

Make sure you use a good edit summary with a link to task's description. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 06:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll start small for the trial, and only do Italian Liberal Party (historical). And no, I'll leave the screen open at the side where I can see it while RC patrolling or playing a game, and check on it every minute or so. But after it's complete I'll pull out random diffs and see if anything wrong happened. -- The Σ talkcontribs 06:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Then it's an "automatic unsupervised" task. Supervised implies that every edit is checked. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 06:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

All test edits reverted for review. -- The Σ talkcontribs 06:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Why did you revert them? Part of the trial is if editors of the trial-affected pages have any comments on the task.


 * Sorry. I didn't know I was't supposed to. -- The Σ talkcontribs 21:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

— HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 06:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

50 edits were completed, working only on Italian Liberal Party (historical). -- The Σ talkcontribs 21:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * What exactly is the scope of the request? All unprintworthy redirects? Or just a select few? Because I don't see any reason to bypass redirects such as PNAS &rarr; Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I am working under the assumption that this only affects the links given in BOTREQ and is only for 1 run. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * H3llkn0wz summed it up perfectly. -- The Σ talkcontribs 20:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * BAG assistance needed Any news? -- The Σ talkcontribs 06:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Approved for bypassing the given BOTREQ links. Just a note, that this approval does not extend beyond that. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:32, 6 July 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.