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

Operator: ais523

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): JavaScript

Function Summary: Removing categories from closed AfDs

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Run at most once a day, and only when I'm online

Edit rate requested: 1 edits per 30 seconds maximum when testing, probably 1 per 15 or 10 seconds maximum when approved (there might be large gaps between edits if the bot finds many unclosed AfDs in a row)

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):

Function Details: The bot would help to keep the AfD categories uncluttered by removing the categories from AfD debates that had been closed, replacing the ((REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD)) tag with ((ns:0)), which is a magic word expanding to the null string (and therefore impossible for vandals to change). All its edits would be to project space, and only to AfD subpages. The bot should be harmless because it only edits closed AfD debates, and then only to make a small and easily reversible change. I think a bot-flag would be helpful so as not to clutter Recent Changes or to annoy people watching closed AfDs (there probably are some), but it isn't essential. --ais523 10:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

A couple diffs please - I think it sounds sound but a diff would help me w/ the bigger picture -- Tawker 18:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it seems to be malfunctioning at the moment (correct diffs: [1] [2], incorrect diffs: [3] [4]), and I have no idea why; it always behaves perfectly in testing! I made a change to the bot that I thought would help and tried some more, but it was still making mistakes (all of which have been reverted). Again, I'm really not sure what's causing it, but I think the problem's somewhere in User:Bot523/monobook.js (available for public perusal), as that code makes the final decision about what to decat. I have checked by hand for the phrase 'The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.' in the misdecatted AfDs, but it isn't there, and yet the bot still seems to find it... I'll post here if/when I discover what's wrong. --ais523 09:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Found and fixed the problem. Somewhat embarrasingly, it wasn't the current version of the code; it was just that this Wikiproject User Scripts member had forgotten to clear his browser cache! Now that it's using the current version of the code, rather than the old buggy one, I think it's working, but I'll generate some more diffs just to make sure. --ais523 09:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, definitely working now: [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] (all diffs made by the bot since I bypassed the cache). --ais523 10:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll support a trial period if at least one other approval group member seconds the support. Prepare for a trial of up to 50 to 100 edits and when another member approves, you can go ahead and run it. -- RM 12:01, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The closers are pretty diligent, so it may take a while to get your 50 edits... I will of course wait for a second approval group member's opinion before running the trial. --ais523 12:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I imagined that this might be the case, thus the part about "up to" the limit. Perhaps well just have to run it for a week and whatever you have up to the limit by then will be the trial. You'll just have to run it at 1 or 2 per minute for a week before final approval, and then you can run it faster. -- RM 12:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot trial run approved for the duration of one week. Voice-of-All 23:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I set the bot to work on the entire AfD decat backlog (throttled at 2 per minute, but it's normally slower due to not editing unclosed AfDs at all), and it cleared it all out this morning in 75 edits (if I counted correctly...). I checked some of its diffs and they all seemed OK to me. (I don't expect it to edit so much normally; it's just that a backlog had built up during the approvals process.) --ais523 09:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Approved. You did not find problems and I ran a random check of 15 of the edits and did not find any problems. You are approved for the bot flag. -- RM 14:42, 18 September 2006 (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.