Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FastilyBot 3

FastilyBot 3

[[User:FastilyBot|FastilyBot 3]]

{{Newbot|FastilyBot|3}}

Operator: {{botop|Fastily}}

Time filed: 03:58, Sunday, January 31, 2016 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: [https://github.com/fastily/ctools/blob/master/src/enwp/FindBrokenSPI.java]

Function overview: Find a malformed WP:SPI reports and report them at WT:SPI/C Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Malformed Cases Report for clerk review.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): here & here

Edit period(s): Bi-weekly

Estimated number of pages affected: 1

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): n/a

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

Function details:

Basically as described above; find malformed pages and report as necessary to the clerks' noticeboard so that clerks can make fixes accordingly. Pinging @Vanjagenije & @Salvidrim! -FASTILY 03:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

=Discussion=

This looks good; my only concerns are lack of traffic to the clerk's noticeboard and the delay between a malformed report being submitted and the bot reporting it; for the latter I would suggest either near-immediate notifications (maybe give the filer a few hours) or transcluding a page from the bot's userspace which contains the reports. Of course, the latter option prevents watchlist updates. I assume you are only reporting each page once? {{BotTrial|7 days, or enough for a few reports}} — Earwig talk 04:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

:@Earwig: Fair enough, I've opted to list reports at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Malformed Cases Report for now. I've implemented an ignore list for courtesy blanked pages and administration/documentation pages. -FASTILY 05:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

::{{BotTrialComplete}} Worked as expected. -FASTILY 03:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:::{{t1|BAGAssistanceNeeded}} It's been about a week, and nobody has raised any objections/concerns. Seeing how this task is a non-contvoersial and restricted to one page only, could it be approved? Thanks, FASTILY 08:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

{{BotApproved}} — xaosflux Talk 20:25, 18 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.