Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PbBot 2

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was

Approved.

PbBot

Operator: Pb30

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): AWB

Function Summary: ~~WikiProject tagging~~ WikiProject tagging for Wikipedia:SHIPS

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): When needed, mostly one time runs

Edit rate requested: 6 edits per minute

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

Function Details: Received a request to tag some articles for WikiProject Ships (adding {{WikiProject Ships|class=|importance=}}). I'll be using AWB with Kingbotk's Plugin. Plan on starting with pages that start with USS and contain military related templates.

Discussion

This looks alright and I'm in support. I believe a trial would be the way to go from here (if I was a BAG member, this would be in trial now). Good luck to the bot on its editing :) E ^talk 07:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't have a problem with this request either. Please note, however, that the BAG is somewhat hesitant to approve new Wikiproject tagging bots due to problems in the past. When I was doing some minor Wikiproject tagging for Wikipedia:GUNS recently, I ended up skipping about 10-15% of the articles I had already pre-screened (mostly for reasons relating to content, like for instance articles that actually weren't within the scope of the project, articles that were within the scope of the project but that were better handled by another, more specialised project, articles that already had two or three project tags and plain old false positives). IOW, if this is an urgent task, it might be better to take this to Wikipedia:BOTREQ to ask the operator of an already approved WP tagging bot for assistance. -- Seed 2.0 10:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. for 50 edits, all categories and subcategories used must be manually confirmed for both trial and final run. --ST47Talk 00:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See the log. About 3000 articles to be tagged using the first criteria. Currently working with the project to determine any other categories or templates that I can use. -- pb30<talk> 01:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked through the bot's edits yet, so won't be approving right now, but have a couple of generic points to make:

The bot can only, when approved, be used for WikiProj ships
No matter how long the list is (and I really mean this), you need to check it to avoid false taggings.
If someone raises an objection, stop the bot immediately, and then discuss. Not the other way 'round.

As Seed2.0 notes above, we're very hesitant to approve new tagging bots, as all hell can (and often does) break loose, even on the best planned runs. I would urge you to go to Wikipedia:BOTREQ (or Kingboyk or Reedy Boy (or me, if you wait a few weeks :))), as they already have approval and are sufficiently experienced for me to be comfortable. On the other hand, if you still wish to operate the bot, I would like to make clear my point from above that whatever approval you may get here is only for the SHIPs task. If you want to do it again of another project, you'll need to come back and ask. Thanks, Martinp23 12:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, answered one of the questions I had
Understood. I've talked with the project (here) to find some specific criteria to use (here).
Understood, bot would be supervised and bot stops on any talk page edit -- pb30<talk> 19:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any update on this request? I'd like to give this a try and wouldn't mind another trial. -- pb30<talk> 02:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, do another trial. --ST47Talk 14:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did 50 edits from List of active Royal Navy ships that start with HMS. See the log here. -- pb30<talk> 18:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. --ST47Talk 18:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.