Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/TheSandBot 9

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.

TheSandBot 9

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

Time filed: 07:10, Thursday, March 26, 2020 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: github (based off of User:RonBot/6/Source1)

Function overview: A replacement for Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RonBot 6, given Ronhjones' absence and subsequent bot block as a result. This task would happily be retired back to Ronhjones, should they return and wish to resume it. It would use largely the same code as RonBot 6, with the only exceptions being changing references from RonBot to TheSandBot.

WP:RESTRICT has 4 sub-pages, each with one table. The bot will move any lines in the table that have expired or the user(s) have been inactive for more than 2 years to the Archive tables. In addition it will move back any rows from the archive tables, where the user has become active.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RonBot 6

Edit period(s): Monthly

Estimated number of pages affected: Eight only

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes, but is unlikely to be used

Adminbot (Yes/No): Yes, for getting the date of last deleted edit of a user

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

Function details: There are 8 pages to be processed:

Each page is processed in turn.

The rows of the tables are separated with newlines to ensure a clean change (this is undone before saving).

The end of table marker is changed to a new row, so as to avoid unnecessary checking when the last row is moved (this is undone before saving).

In the main pages (1 to 4), where the users quoted in the first cell of a row, have been inactive for over 2 years OR the restriction (in the final column) has expired, the row will be moved to the archive page.

Then the pages 5-8 are processed to see if any users on an unexpired restriction have started to edit again, and if so the row is moved back to the main page.

Both normal edits and deleted edits are checked to get the user's very last edit.

Discussion

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. - if we're doing monthly it might as well be in the first day or two of the month, which conveniently gives a week-long window to grant temporary admin status. WP:AN has been notified. Primefac (talk) 13:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@TheSandDoctor: the edit summary needs to be updated from "task 6" to "task 9"; I also suggest that the name of the _target page for the archives be linked, but that is a minor request DannyS712 (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyS712: I realized that a few minutes ago and have shut it down for the meantime whilst I update. Thanks for flagging though! --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:26, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyS712: Restarted w/ correction and linking suggestion. Source code to be updated/made available on github shortly. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyS712 and Primefac: I ran it a bit early to make sure everything is working, but once approved it will be set as a cronjob and you could even pick the date of the month that it runs on. Hope that's okay. I could run it again on Monday or something like that and see if it finds anything new (to get it on schedule). It has done its run for now, but will keep trial open until I get confirmation (Primefac). Your call, just let me know. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If this were a regular job I'd approve it early, but since this task involves granting the sysop bit I feel obligated to leave it open for the full week, if only to allow other users to comment. Primefac (talk) 21:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Github source code added. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@TheSandDoctor: TheSandBot lists a non-admin, DatGuy, as co-operator of the bot. DatGuy is not an admin. If my understanding of WP:ADMINBOT is correct, DatGuy can no longer be an operator. Does DatGuy currently have access to this account? ~riley (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page updated. The task he is listed as a maintainer of was a separate Toolforge tool. I will create another bot account for it when the time comes I guess. All resolved. He does not have access to TSB. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:58, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing the above concern so promptly. ~riley (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. No further comments, and the AN notice has been archived, so it looks like we're good to go. Minor changes to edit summaries can be made without approval, and further discussion about the bot is welcomed on this page's talk page. Primefac (talk) 15:29, 1 April 2020 (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.