Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 29


 * 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 delete vote.svg Denied

Yobot 29
Operator: Magioladitis

Time filed: 19:49, Wednesday, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB / WPCleaner

Source code available: -

Function overview: WikiProject projects tagging and fixes

Edit period(s): Very often

Estimated number of pages affected:

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: Anything approved in
 * Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 9
 * Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 10
 * Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 17
 * Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 25

Discussion

 * Oppose until we see a clearer description. We need an actual overview that makes clear what is being approved. Many of the old Yobot approvals are quite broad and gave way to problems due to a lack of clarity. ~ Rob 13 Talk 21:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * BU Rob13 you can read the instructions in the separate tasks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * When you cite a task in an edit summary, an editor should be able to clearly tell what that task does. That's an important part of transparency for bot operators, and it requires the function details to be listed in the BRFA being approved. ~ Rob 13 Talk 21:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It will say. Each part has a different edit summary. Check User:Yobot/Task 17 for instance. Please discuss before you oppose. This is the problem with people that revert too much as I described in the recent ArbCom. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:07, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

BU Rob13 Maybe tomorrow I ll find more time to write more details for this BRFA. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:40, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

These new BRFAs need to make a fresh start. The reason that the old ones were vacated was partially that it was not possible to tell what was approved. So rather than referring to the old BRFAs, I do think that new ones need to explicitly say exactly what will be done, so that it is not necessary to look at other BRFAs to know what the task is. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 12:07, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

A bot request needs to specify what specifically the bot is going to do, not refer to several other vague tasks that have been either revoked or suggested for review. Furthermore, I find flooding WP:BRFA with 20 requests all at once is probably bordering on WP:POINT: I suggest you limit yourself to fewer than 5 open requests at a time so you can more easily express yourself clearly and so you and the community can have time for necessary discussion. Anomie⚔ 02:15, 3 February 2017 (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.