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.

Yobot 26[edit]

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

Time filed: 06:45, Sunday, July 31, 2016 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatics

Programming language(s): AWB / C#

Source code available: Yes

Function overview: Fix section header naming (References, External links, See also)

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): This task was approved in pieces in various places.

The section header policy:

The AWB manual related to this task:

The request:

Edit period(s): Occasionally

Estimated number of pages affected: Less than 1000 per month

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Expansion of Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 22 to cover

and other similar cases. This is a very often requested bot task. See for example: Wikipedia:Bot_requests#External_Links. All rules covered in AWB's manual and source code. AWB/Yobot won't affect any other headers. Example.

Discussion[edit]

This is pretty much the exact same task as Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/OmniBot 5, which was approved recently. Omni Flames (talk) 10:03, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Omni Flames true. Time to do it not only for external links. Maybe we should cooperate and have two bots? I' ve been running this task since 2012. I need the extra help. Would you like us to be sidekicks? -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:59, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Magioladitis: Sure, two bots is generally better than one. My bot request was originally filed with the idea of fixing just "External Links", but it ended up being approved with fixing "See Also" as well. It recently fixed almost 4000 of these headings, but I know there's a lot more out there, and I've been trying to fix some of them manually as well. Omni Flames (talk) 22:10, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Omni Flames I also fixed 6,000 pages yesterday! Wow! -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:13, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which was very spammy in terms of watchlists. Magioladitis, why don't you wait for the bot approval, so that the editors could filter out your edits? There is no urgency in this fix. Materialscientist (talk)

Materialscientist I stopped now and wait for the approval. I wanted to have less in the next database dump which is released in the newxt few days. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux:. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Please post results after trial. — xaosflux Talk 13:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Permanent link with edits. I also provide a customised edit summary for the External links fix but this was already checked in the previous BRFA. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trial edits checked. Working as intended with no issues. — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Magioladitis I'm looking at the list you have above, what do these edits have to do with Fix section header naming?
1, 2, 3, 4 ? — xaosflux Talk 03:01, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The timestamp in the URL isn't correct. Try this. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

xaosflux wrong timestamp. Check the one given above. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:52, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. Task approved. — xaosflux Talk 23:39, 9 August 2016 (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.
Category