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: Tokenzero (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 21:10, Monday, December 18, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python, pywikibot

Source code available: github (most of it is around making reports, fixPageRedirects() is the most relevant here).

Function overview: Automate regular creation and categorization of redirects from ISO 4 abbreviations to academic journals, with reports on unusual stuff and mismatches.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): User_talk:Headbomb/Archives/2017/October#ISO 4 bot run and User_talk:Tokenzero#Bot flagged

Edit period(s): twice a week

Estimated number of pages affected: A few redirects a week, at most 1000 in total.

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details: Create redirects and/or categorize them as ((R from ISO 4)) when safe, just as detailed in the previous BRFA, but make this regularly (proposed: twice a week) and update the following reports along the way:

• 300 first mismatches (between human edited and automatically computed abbrev)
• 50 first mismatches (less, but with costly helper templates)
• various unusual journal names and redirects

Since this was already run a few times (see contribs), new changes will essentially only occur when someone updates a journal infobox, so not too often. Regular running would allow editors to focus on handling the Category:Infobox journals with missing ISO 4 abbreviations; the bot will then automatically create/fix redirects, while any corner cases will appear in the reports.

• Maybe I'm just confused, but how exactly is this different than the previous task? Just the reports? ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tokenzero: Forgot to ping to above. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I - the reports, II - the previous one was for a one-time run. Headbomb (talk · contribs) suggested I make another BRFA, in particular to extend the bot flag (expires 13 January). Tokenzero (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. The reports, since they're in your userspace, do not need approval. The extension of the task doesn't really require a technical trial. As long as no-one objects in the next couple days, I'll approve and ask a bureaucrat to make the flag indefinite. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily Approved. This approval is only for extension of the original task, but the reports you propose to run don't need approval if they're in your userspace. Note that if you ever moved the reports out of your userspace (e.g. to project space), you would then require approval for that aspect of the task. It's easiest to keep them there. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 20:41, 5 January 2018 (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.