Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Addihockey10 (automated)

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 Approved.

Operator: Addihockey10 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 00:25, Friday December 30, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Manual

Programming language(s): Pywikipedia

Source code available: Upon request

Function overview: Changes superseded raster images to their vector counterparts upon operators approval.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Whenever operator is available

Estimated number of pages affected: Unknown, script skips over all talk pages and user pages. 6-10 EPM, according to Addihockey10 — The Earwig ^(talk) 04:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exclusion compliant (Y/N):

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

Function details: The script finds superseded images that are linked to from the article, portal, book, Wikipedia, template, help and category namespaces and updates them to their vectorized versions.

 Note: The task was already run for roughly a hundred edits on his main account before I recommended he put it through BRFA because of the large number of edits involved (looks like we'll have at least a few thousand). Overall, it looks pretty uncontroversial to me; I have no problems with a speedy approval (considering we've already seen a trial, above) after leaving this open for a short while. — The Earwig ^(talk) 01:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...plus it looks like it'll be manually-run/manually-approved, so I doubly agree. =) --slakr^\ talk / 02:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily Approved. The task is fine; considering it's manually assisted, there's very little chance of error, and there are no apparent problems in what we've seen in the "trial". I'm not sure what whether to give you a bot flag, but that's less of a task question and more of a 'crat question, so I've opened a thread on WP:BN here. Best, — The Earwig ^(talk) 04:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note post-close: Addihockey10 just asked me on IRC if it was necessary to file a new BRFA if he used AWB for this instead of Pywikipedia as noted above. Given that the task will remain manually assisted, and that was the primary reason for the speedy approval, I didn't see it necessary for him to do so. I'm just noting it here for the record. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.