Operator: Mabdul ( talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 12:47, Wednesday April 10, 2013 ( UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: supervised and manual
Programming language(s): JavaScript, see WP:AFCH
Source code available: User:mabdul/afc beta.js
Function overview: Mass reviewing of AFC submissions on Saturday and Sunday
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): n/a
Edit period(s): this Saturday and Sunday
u number of pages affected: ~1000, hopefully more
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No
Function details: I will reviewing many AfC submissions on Saturday and Sunday to
i I will try to review 1000 submissions and depending on my time and faith. I simply don't want to flood the Recent Changes and thus want to get the bot flag for my public account (wikignome) for Saturday and Sunday. Every accept review generates 3 edits and one page move and every decline review generates 2 edits. mabdul 12:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Approved for extended trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Flag a crat on IRC or BN when you're ready to begin to give you a temporary flag.
MBisanz
talk
01:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
I am not sure I understand the task. You will be manually reviewing AFCs, and you want a bot flag so that they don't appear as recent changes? Why don't you want them to appear in recent changes? I don't see the benefit. - 150.135.133.2 ( talk) 15:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Again, MBisanz declares community input does not matter and sets up to allow an out-of-policy situation that is not within the realm of RFBA, and really lets the community member giving feedback know exactly where community members stand when it comes to bot participation: nowhere. - 166.137.116.38 ( talk) 16:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I also question the issuing of the flag at the BN. -
68.107.137.178 (
talk)
20:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
I believe this task approval nicely fits within WP:BOTASSIST, WP:BOTDEF ("Note that high-speed semi-automated processes may effectively be considered bots in some cases, even if performed by an account used by a human editor. If in doubt, check"), and the first paragraph of WP:Botz (indicating that some bots may be semi-automated). I am not aware of a blanket prohibition against the use of the bot flag in the same manner as the flooder flag on other projects and I read it policy as leaving it to BAG and the crats to determine when a given task may or may not use the bot flag in cases of semi-automated, assisted editing. MBisanz talk 20:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I'm closing this thread. My weekend is over:
mabdul 18:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Operator: Mabdul ( talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 12:47, Wednesday April 10, 2013 ( UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: supervised and manual
Programming language(s): JavaScript, see WP:AFCH
Source code available: User:mabdul/afc beta.js
Function overview: Mass reviewing of AFC submissions on Saturday and Sunday
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): n/a
Edit period(s): this Saturday and Sunday
u number of pages affected: ~1000, hopefully more
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No
Function details: I will reviewing many AfC submissions on Saturday and Sunday to
i I will try to review 1000 submissions and depending on my time and faith. I simply don't want to flood the Recent Changes and thus want to get the bot flag for my public account (wikignome) for Saturday and Sunday. Every accept review generates 3 edits and one page move and every decline review generates 2 edits. mabdul 12:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Approved for extended trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Flag a crat on IRC or BN when you're ready to begin to give you a temporary flag.
MBisanz
talk
01:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
I am not sure I understand the task. You will be manually reviewing AFCs, and you want a bot flag so that they don't appear as recent changes? Why don't you want them to appear in recent changes? I don't see the benefit. - 150.135.133.2 ( talk) 15:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Again, MBisanz declares community input does not matter and sets up to allow an out-of-policy situation that is not within the realm of RFBA, and really lets the community member giving feedback know exactly where community members stand when it comes to bot participation: nowhere. - 166.137.116.38 ( talk) 16:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I also question the issuing of the flag at the BN. -
68.107.137.178 (
talk)
20:07, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
reply
I believe this task approval nicely fits within WP:BOTASSIST, WP:BOTDEF ("Note that high-speed semi-automated processes may effectively be considered bots in some cases, even if performed by an account used by a human editor. If in doubt, check"), and the first paragraph of WP:Botz (indicating that some bots may be semi-automated). I am not aware of a blanket prohibition against the use of the bot flag in the same manner as the flooder flag on other projects and I read it policy as leaving it to BAG and the crats to determine when a given task may or may not use the bot flag in cases of semi-automated, assisted editing. MBisanz talk 20:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I'm closing this thread. My weekend is over:
mabdul 18:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC) reply