Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Infobox Journal Update Bot: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:10, 28 July 2007

Latest revision as of 21:04, 26 February 2009

(13 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)

Line 1:

<noinclude><br />

<noinclude>[[Category:Wikipedia bot requests for approval]]</noinclude>

==[[UserCategory:InfoboxExpired JournalWikipedia Updatebot Botrequests for approval|Infobox Journal Update Bot]]==

<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color: #dedaca; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

:''The following discussion is an archived debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' The result of the discussion was [[File:Symbol question.svg|20px]] '''Status Unknown'''.<!-- from Template:Bot Top-->

== [[User:Infobox Journal Update Bot|Infobox Journal Update Bot]] ==

{{Newbot|Infobox Journal Update Bot}}

Line 21 ⟶ 25:

*Sorts links and re-enters appropriately

=== Discussion ===

<!-- This is not a vote. It is a discussion -->

A quick decision would be welcomed as some instances of the template look a bit messy (unintended consequences...): I've edited quite a few by hand but it's quite a considerable task! Verisimilus, 19:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

*''Added to [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval]] by [[User:Mets501|Mets501]] at 20:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)''

::That is quite a requested edit rate... Does it really need to be so high? Or would something such as a more reasonable 4-6 per minute be ok? [[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 22:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

:::To operate at less than 1 a second, you would need a VERY fast internet connection. Also, speaking as a person who knows MediaWiki well, it would not cope. <s>No more than 50epm on critical tasks, and this isn't critical, so you probably want a max of 20/30 epm.</s> [[User:TheFearow|Matt/TheFearow]] <small>[[User_Talk:TheFearow|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/TheFearow|(Contribs)]] [[User:DeadBot|(Bot)]]</small> 23:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

::::Due to high Wikimedia database server load, we tend to set a limit of about 15-20 epm for '''extremely time critical''' tasks. No higher than this. For your task, the maximum rate will be 9-10epm, because it isn't time critical by any standards. [[User:Martinp23|Mart]]'''[[User talk:Martinp23|inp23]]''' 23:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

:::::My bad, I misunderstood something. 9-10epm for this task, as Martin said above. [[User:TheFearow|Matt/TheFearow]] <small>[[User_Talk:TheFearow|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/TheFearow|(Contribs)]] [[User:DeadBot|(Bot)]]</small> 23:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Why can't you just use AWB for this task? It's a one-time task, and <600 pages transclude {{tl|Infobox Journal}}. — [[User:Madman bum and angel|Madman bum and angel]] ([[User talk:Madman bum and angel|talk]] – [[User:Madman bum and angel/Desk|desk]]) 00:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

:Sorry - I hadn't realised that this was a high edit rate. I'll change the limit to 8epm - which will probably be difficult to attain anyway, as I'm manually checking each correction.

:As to why not use AWB: I'm relatively new to coding and am keen to get some useful experience in the world of bots (and there's nothing like the satisfaction of having done something yourself!)

:''[[User:Verisimilus|Verisimilus]]''&nbsp;'''<small>[[User talk:Verisimilus|T]]</small>''' 08:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

{{BotTrial|edits=50|editrate=8}} —<span style="color: red;">[[User:Mets501|M<small>ETS</small>501]] ([[User talk:Mets501|talk]])</span> 04:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

:Always good to see a botop with some coding experience - there are so many bots operating using tools like AWB. Also, I clarified the trial template to say 8epm, as the request is still at the old EPM. I apologise if this counts as message editing, remove if it does. [[User:TheFearow|Matt/TheFearow]] <small>[[User_Talk:TheFearow|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/TheFearow|(Contribs)]] [[User:DeadBot|(Bot)]]</small> 21:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

::Eek, sorry... I hadn't realised that a one-time bot would require a trial, and took MB&A's comment to symbolise approval... I've now run the bot (at <5epm): I manually checked every edit until I was confident that it was working acceptably, and kept an eye on it as it went. Sorry if that's broken protocol! But I can vouch that no harm has been done... ''[[User:Verisimilus|Verisimilus]]''&nbsp;'''<small>[[User talk:Verisimilus|T]]</small>''' 19:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

:::Since it's already been used, and wont be used again, does this need full approval? A bot flag is pointless. I'll just archive this, nothing more needed. [[User:TheFearow|Matt/TheFearow]] <small>[[User_Talk:TheFearow|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/TheFearow|(Contribs)]] [[User:DeadBot|(Bot)]]</small> 23:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:Bot Bottom --></div>

</noinclude>