Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Chris G Bot (2nd Request)

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was

Withdrawn by operator.

Chris G Bot edit

Operator: Chris

Automatic or Manually Assisted:

Programming Language(s): PHP, Stealing Cobi's Classes

Function Summary: Mass Reverting Vandal Page Moves

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): When needed

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y

Function Details: Gets all the users page moves from the api and reverts them. See the source for more info

Discussion edit

Chances are there will be a page move vandal when I'm not online to run the bot. What would be the best way to allow other users to run the bot, while making sure it won't be missused (I was thinking something like a toolserver page which lets approved users run the bot) --Chris 10:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just had a good suggestion from Cobi. Bot runs every minute or so, checks User:Chris G Bot/Users.js and reverts all the page moves made by users listed on the page. Users will be listed like so:

Foo;
Bar;
FooBar;

--Chris 10:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will it be able to handle complex page moves properly? Say, A -> B, B -> C, D -> A? What would it do in the above case if the redirect at "D" had subsequently been edited? --Carnildo (talk) 20:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If D had been subsequently edited the bot would crash (Bots can only suppress redirects, not merge histories). As for the order of the redirects it will just revert A->D, C->B, B->A (Not sure that's the ideal scenario, but this bot is intended for mass page moves like this, more complex vandalism will have to be dealt with by a human) --Chris 22:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will this be manually activated, or automatically? SQL ^{Query me!} 07:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will run on a one minute cron job --Chris 10:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like it's generally a good idea, but should there possibly be some sort of time horizon on what it reverts? I'm envisioning a situation where a good user turns bad and starts doing move vandalism; reverting every move they've ever made could lead to undoing some proper moves. Another possible situation -- perhaps more plausible -- is that an admin misjudges something as move vandalism, reports the user to your bot's list, and the bot ends up undoing perfectly good moves that the admin didn't intend to affect. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 20:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mass page-moves are usually spotted very quickly; limiting it to pagemoves in the previous six hours should catch everything. --Carnildo (talk) 21:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see the attention needed tag... do you want to go ahead with a very limited trial on this? If so, I see no problems -- Tawker (talk) 05:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take it it can't run without User:Chris G Bot/Users.js being populated. giggy _(:O) 09:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, User:Chris G Bot/Users.js will need to be populated, in the event that there's a rather low turn out I'll just move some of my userspace and get the bot to revert me. Also I should be ready for a trial soon, I've just got to fix the api query to work with Carnildo's suggestion(I've been meaning to do this for awhile but I'm having some computer troubles). --Chris 10:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} I've updated the source and I'm ready for a trial --Chris 10:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. BJ^Talk 12:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I just tested the bot and it's working. I've also made a post to Wikipedia:AN, everything is going smoothly so far --Chris 07:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine, I'd like to see some "real world" tests before approval. BJ^Talk 05:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} BJ^Talk 05:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be a real need for this bot anymore so

Withdrawn by operator. --Chris 08:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.