As of 15 April 2007, BetacommandBot is flagged and approved for the following tasks:
BetacommandBot is approved for no other tasks; without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing statement he is specifically not approved for:
I believe and trust this is a fair statement of BAG's decisions in this matter; any comments or corrections to the talk page please. -- kingboyk 00:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I would like to have the bot automatically tag catagorys older than 5 days with ((db-catempty}} that remain unused after five days Betacommand 05:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I will get a dump of all articles in Special:unused categorys and wait five days at that time i will get another dump and compare them manualy, any category that remains on the list is subject to deletion after only four days on the list. once i have the list of old empty cats i will then run the bot in AWB to tag each article with {{db-catempty}} per the deletion policy. I plan to run it no more than once a day, less as the number of empty cats goes down. currently there is 3926 empty catagories. Betacommand 17:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I plan to use Special:Unusedcategories which states The following category pages exist although no other article or category make use of them. . as for the comment about flooding CSD i have a solution. create a category something to the effect of Category:Categories that have been empty for moer than five days and put a link to it on csd, so that the list can be accessed without flooding CSD and i will also maintain a record of the data I use at User:BetacommandBot/oldCategories — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betacommand ( talk • contribs)
I plan to log them under User:BetacommandBot/oldCategories and slowly release the first large CSD over a period of time into the speedy. i was also thinking instead of {{db-catempty}} i create a similar template and put all Cats into it and place a link on WP:CSD so that they can handle the large number of cats as they get time without flooding CSD. Betacommand 03:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC) PS. kind of like a Backlog Category wich i will slowly release into CSD Betacommand 03:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Betacommand 05:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC) PS: will work according to xaosflux Regardless, due to this complaint, trials relating to editing the categories themselves are suspended, but ones that are preparing lists are not. Betacommand 06:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC) reply
I see no problem with this task. However, if certian categories are "required" or whatever, why not tag them with a template to that effect? Bots can detect the template and ignore it, and it will give humans the same cue. -- Chris (talk) 02:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC) reply
User:Splash I object to your to how you have handled this situation you are going against Wikipedia policy (empty categories older than four days are subject to deletion), and you inability to read.
is how I marked the categories ‘‘‘NEVER’’’ did I list it for deletion or attempt to speedy it, all the bot did at this point was state 'This page meets Wikipedia's
criteria for speedy deletion'. Regarding the fact that the categories are key elements in series of categories show some proof that there are guidelines to keep them and that they are exempt from
Wikipedia:CSD#1. Also please show some consensus about keeping them that has more than four editors. That is NOT a consensus on Wikipedia. I am operating per
Wikipedia:deletion policy. Please show me some guideline or policy that exist to back up your personal opinion, and the uncalled for hostile bordering on rude behavior you have show in this discussion.
Betacommand 19:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
reply
Ok, I am approving this bot on a trial run under the following conditions
-- Tawker 05:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
This is still no good. The trial has flagged a number of categories tagged as category redirects that have very obvious reason to exist for that purpose: to help prevent people categorising articles into them by seeing the red box that says "no, please put them in that category over there". It also tagged one category as meeting speedy criteria when it is currently on CfD. Betacommand, you seem to be unable to accept that BEFORE you do this, YOU NEED TO CHECK WITH SOME PAGE OTHER THAN THIS ONE. I can't make this any clearer than bold, italic capitals, and I've said as much several times earlier. The 'approvers' on this page do not apparently check that anybody actually cares whether or not your bot does stuff, and so you have to do that legwork yourself, before before before before before before before you jump in and do it. Now two of us have pointed out things wrong with this trial, I trust that it is unapproved - again. - Splash - tk 17:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
And if that does not seem to work for this task I have an alternate solution have the bot add all unused categories to a parent category such as category:Abandoned category as of ..... That Would allow users to quickly identify old empty categories by date. this would not involve marking categories for deletion or placing a template on the page it would be something like the orphaned category page only this Would identify abandoned categories Betacommand 05:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC) reply
NOTE: This specific request has been rejected permanently, but may be superseded by a future request of the same nature. -- RM 14:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply
as per request on my talk page and my responce on their page
Betacommand 04:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
NOTE: This specific request has been rejected permanently, but may be superseded by a future request of the same nature. -- RM 14:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Operator: Betacommand ( talk • contribs • Bot) 00:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Automatic or Manually Assisted:Auto
Programming Language(s):Python & AWB
Function Summary: CFD/TFD, Substing, WikiProject tagging, Spam stats
Edit period(s) :Continuous
Edit rate requested: depending on the task edit rate varies no more than ~10epm
Already has a bot flag :N
I've divided each area into its own subsection. -- RM 12:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
AFIAK the bot was cleared for spam stats w/ no edit flag. Perhaps splitting the bots work into multiple accounts would be a good thing here -- Tawker 00:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Speedily Approved. The spam stats / linksearch function has already been mostly tested, so there is no reason to put this through trial, unless someone wants to disagree. The VixDaemon trial is basically done and ready to be approved anyway. It is explicitly not to be used for any automated or semi-automated link removal without a separate approval, which you are encouraged to seek. The bot flag will not be granted for this task, but will likely be granted when the other tasks are approved. -- RM 12:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Betacommand, we don't want more problems. You need to be more specific. "Substing" is not a task summary. — METS501 ( talk) 04:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Adding wikiproject banners to article talk pages and associated issues. IE if pages are tagged as {{WikiProject}} but are listed in a sub cat I may add or change {{Wikiproject|class=stub}} or variants of that. or if its in cretin categories add the template to talkpages. see [1] for a request that has been asked. Betacommand ( talk • contribs • Bot) 15:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Speedily Approved. As per kingboyk's motion for a speedy close. This is the least controversial of Betacommand's tasks. I should also note that I approved of his usage of "Infoboxneeded" on those talk pages, as that was similar enough. Placing maintenance tags for the Wikiprojects on article talk pages is exactly what he is doing here, whether or not it is labeled "WikiProjectXXXX" or not. It should be pretty obvious whether a differently named tag is sufficiently different to require bot approval. I should note that I like when Betacommand takes requests from specific WikiProjects to do these things. Just be careful, as kingboyk points out, that these types of banners may at some point be frowned upon, so care must be taken to stop immediately if anyone complains and engage in a dialogue as appropriate. -- RM 13:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Could you describe this task in specific detail? -- RM 12:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
I propose that we defer this part of the application until you are actually planning to do the task. If you agree, I think that concludes the application and it can be archived? -- kingboyk 21:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I think Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. is the easiest solution here. I'll give you permission to run CFD/TFD for a week on trial. That means you won't be sitting around waiting but also gives us an opportunity to check your work (since the above isn't particularly clear). -- kingboyk 15:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Approved. for CFD. I've seen your CFD edits, they look good, and didn't draw any complaints. However, I'm not prepared to give blanket permission for TFD at this time, per the discussion above. When you need TFD permission I'm sure we can get it sorted out quicker than a week so worry ye not :)... come back then, and we can see exactly what the job is and exactly how you propose to execute it. -- kingboyk 23:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC) reply
As of 15 April 2007, BetacommandBot is flagged and approved for the following tasks:
BetacommandBot is approved for no other tasks; without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing statement he is specifically not approved for:
I believe and trust this is a fair statement of BAG's decisions in this matter; any comments or corrections to the talk page please. -- kingboyk 00:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I would like to have the bot automatically tag catagorys older than 5 days with ((db-catempty}} that remain unused after five days Betacommand 05:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I will get a dump of all articles in Special:unused categorys and wait five days at that time i will get another dump and compare them manualy, any category that remains on the list is subject to deletion after only four days on the list. once i have the list of old empty cats i will then run the bot in AWB to tag each article with {{db-catempty}} per the deletion policy. I plan to run it no more than once a day, less as the number of empty cats goes down. currently there is 3926 empty catagories. Betacommand 17:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply
I plan to use Special:Unusedcategories which states The following category pages exist although no other article or category make use of them. . as for the comment about flooding CSD i have a solution. create a category something to the effect of Category:Categories that have been empty for moer than five days and put a link to it on csd, so that the list can be accessed without flooding CSD and i will also maintain a record of the data I use at User:BetacommandBot/oldCategories — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betacommand ( talk • contribs)
I plan to log them under User:BetacommandBot/oldCategories and slowly release the first large CSD over a period of time into the speedy. i was also thinking instead of {{db-catempty}} i create a similar template and put all Cats into it and place a link on WP:CSD so that they can handle the large number of cats as they get time without flooding CSD. Betacommand 03:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC) PS. kind of like a Backlog Category wich i will slowly release into CSD Betacommand 03:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Betacommand 05:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC) PS: will work according to xaosflux Regardless, due to this complaint, trials relating to editing the categories themselves are suspended, but ones that are preparing lists are not. Betacommand 06:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC) reply
I see no problem with this task. However, if certian categories are "required" or whatever, why not tag them with a template to that effect? Bots can detect the template and ignore it, and it will give humans the same cue. -- Chris (talk) 02:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC) reply
User:Splash I object to your to how you have handled this situation you are going against Wikipedia policy (empty categories older than four days are subject to deletion), and you inability to read.
is how I marked the categories ‘‘‘NEVER’’’ did I list it for deletion or attempt to speedy it, all the bot did at this point was state 'This page meets Wikipedia's
criteria for speedy deletion'. Regarding the fact that the categories are key elements in series of categories show some proof that there are guidelines to keep them and that they are exempt from
Wikipedia:CSD#1. Also please show some consensus about keeping them that has more than four editors. That is NOT a consensus on Wikipedia. I am operating per
Wikipedia:deletion policy. Please show me some guideline or policy that exist to back up your personal opinion, and the uncalled for hostile bordering on rude behavior you have show in this discussion.
Betacommand 19:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
reply
Ok, I am approving this bot on a trial run under the following conditions
-- Tawker 05:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC) reply
This is still no good. The trial has flagged a number of categories tagged as category redirects that have very obvious reason to exist for that purpose: to help prevent people categorising articles into them by seeing the red box that says "no, please put them in that category over there". It also tagged one category as meeting speedy criteria when it is currently on CfD. Betacommand, you seem to be unable to accept that BEFORE you do this, YOU NEED TO CHECK WITH SOME PAGE OTHER THAN THIS ONE. I can't make this any clearer than bold, italic capitals, and I've said as much several times earlier. The 'approvers' on this page do not apparently check that anybody actually cares whether or not your bot does stuff, and so you have to do that legwork yourself, before before before before before before before you jump in and do it. Now two of us have pointed out things wrong with this trial, I trust that it is unapproved - again. - Splash - tk 17:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
And if that does not seem to work for this task I have an alternate solution have the bot add all unused categories to a parent category such as category:Abandoned category as of ..... That Would allow users to quickly identify old empty categories by date. this would not involve marking categories for deletion or placing a template on the page it would be something like the orphaned category page only this Would identify abandoned categories Betacommand 05:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC) reply
NOTE: This specific request has been rejected permanently, but may be superseded by a future request of the same nature. -- RM 14:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply
as per request on my talk page and my responce on their page
Betacommand 04:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
NOTE: This specific request has been rejected permanently, but may be superseded by a future request of the same nature. -- RM 14:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Operator: Betacommand ( talk • contribs • Bot) 00:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Automatic or Manually Assisted:Auto
Programming Language(s):Python & AWB
Function Summary: CFD/TFD, Substing, WikiProject tagging, Spam stats
Edit period(s) :Continuous
Edit rate requested: depending on the task edit rate varies no more than ~10epm
Already has a bot flag :N
I've divided each area into its own subsection. -- RM 12:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
AFIAK the bot was cleared for spam stats w/ no edit flag. Perhaps splitting the bots work into multiple accounts would be a good thing here -- Tawker 00:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Speedily Approved. The spam stats / linksearch function has already been mostly tested, so there is no reason to put this through trial, unless someone wants to disagree. The VixDaemon trial is basically done and ready to be approved anyway. It is explicitly not to be used for any automated or semi-automated link removal without a separate approval, which you are encouraged to seek. The bot flag will not be granted for this task, but will likely be granted when the other tasks are approved. -- RM 12:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Betacommand, we don't want more problems. You need to be more specific. "Substing" is not a task summary. — METS501 ( talk) 04:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Adding wikiproject banners to article talk pages and associated issues. IE if pages are tagged as {{WikiProject}} but are listed in a sub cat I may add or change {{Wikiproject|class=stub}} or variants of that. or if its in cretin categories add the template to talkpages. see [1] for a request that has been asked. Betacommand ( talk • contribs • Bot) 15:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Speedily Approved. As per kingboyk's motion for a speedy close. This is the least controversial of Betacommand's tasks. I should also note that I approved of his usage of "Infoboxneeded" on those talk pages, as that was similar enough. Placing maintenance tags for the Wikiprojects on article talk pages is exactly what he is doing here, whether or not it is labeled "WikiProjectXXXX" or not. It should be pretty obvious whether a differently named tag is sufficiently different to require bot approval. I should note that I like when Betacommand takes requests from specific WikiProjects to do these things. Just be careful, as kingboyk points out, that these types of banners may at some point be frowned upon, so care must be taken to stop immediately if anyone complains and engage in a dialogue as appropriate. -- RM 13:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Could you describe this task in specific detail? -- RM 12:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
I propose that we defer this part of the application until you are actually planning to do the task. If you agree, I think that concludes the application and it can be archived? -- kingboyk 21:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply
I think Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. is the easiest solution here. I'll give you permission to run CFD/TFD for a week on trial. That means you won't be sitting around waiting but also gives us an opportunity to check your work (since the above isn't particularly clear). -- kingboyk 15:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply
Approved. for CFD. I've seen your CFD edits, they look good, and didn't draw any complaints. However, I'm not prepared to give blanket permission for TFD at this time, per the discussion above. When you need TFD permission I'm sure we can get it sorted out quicker than a week so worry ye not :)... come back then, and we can see exactly what the job is and exactly how you propose to execute it. -- kingboyk 23:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC) reply