Operator: Enterprisey (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 04:29, Thursday, July 7, 2016 (UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic
Programming language(s): Python
Source code available: https://github.com/APerson241/RemindMeBot
Function overview: Reminds editors upon request.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): WP:BOTREQ#ReminderBot
Edit period(s): Half-hour intervals
Estimated number of pages affected: 10, maybe?1,000
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No
Function details: When you ping the bot by saying ((u|RemindMeBot))
plus a time interval, the bot stores the location of the ping in a databasein your space and puts a reminder on your talk page with the location after the time interval.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Let me clarify:
If you intend to solve a problem, you should take into account the present facts and the past attempts to look at it. Actions should be in response to the past in the context of the present. The Phab link describes implementing it directly into MediaWiki through Flow/Echo/some form of an extension. In the Phab link, there is no discussion of using a bot for this. The BOTREQ discussion linked to two archived discussions. Both described a bot and the second eventually linked to the Phab task, but it was not further discussed.
You were not aware of the phab link at the time of this BRFA—nothing wrong with that—but now that the phab link is brought to light, it would be greatly beneficial if you could incorporate the data from it into this discussion.
Implementing this bot may give the appearance that the task is complete, and so someone who knows how to write MediaWiki extensions might not start work, thinking that it's best not to create redundant software. Multiple users have suggested making a gadget or adding new features to Echo. In the BOTREQ link, Earwig expressed that if we did it by bot it would end up being a strange hack that would probably have other issues, which I agreed with in my first comment here. Creating this bot without addressing all this is fundamentally flawed.
→Σσς. (Sigma) 20:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I'm not trying to prevent this bot from being approved—worst case scenario, you've done some prototyping and edge-case discovery for the future echo feature—all I want is an effort to help ensure a smooth transition from the bot to the echo feature (I understand that this will take significant product design/planning). And I agree with the "we're all volunteers" philosophy alluded to below, but we should be trying to make things that don't impede other work, even unintentionally.
I don't have much of an opinion on an n-month shutoff, but as a general idea I think it should be heavily underlined (somehow) that this bot isn't meant to last forever. Maybe a huge notice on the bot's userpage would be all; I don't know, ideas are welcome.
→Σσς. (Sigma) 05:06, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Feedback from the trial: