Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Sambot 13: Difference between revisions
Sambot, you may wish you were me, but you aren't. Now cope with it. |
{{BotApproved}} |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<noinclude>[[Category: |
<noinclude><br>[[Category:Approved Wikipedia bot requests for approval|Sambot]]<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color: |
||
#A0FFA0; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' The result of the discussion was [[File:Symbol keep vote.svg|20px]] '''Approved'''.<!-- from Template:Bot Top--></noinclude> |
|||
<noinclude>[[Category:Approved Wikipedia bot requests for approval|Sambot 13]]</noinclude> |
|||
==[[User:Sambot|Sambot]] 13== |
==[[User:Sambot|Sambot]] 13== |
||
{{Newbot|Sambot|13}} |
{{Newbot|Sambot|13}} |
||
| Line 40: | Line 43: | ||
Many of these football templates are assessed as "stub" because the bio tag had previously been auto-assessed as a stub for having a stub template in the article. The trouble is, a few of them no longer have stub templates, but never got reassessed. For instance, see [[Jon Runyan]]. I'd suggest that ''if'' all previous stub assessments are auto=yes '''and''' ''if'' the article no longer is in a stub category, that this bot not assume the article is a stub. Does this sound like a positive change? – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]])</sup> 17:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
Many of these football templates are assessed as "stub" because the bio tag had previously been auto-assessed as a stub for having a stub template in the article. The trouble is, a few of them no longer have stub templates, but never got reassessed. For instance, see [[Jon Runyan]]. I'd suggest that ''if'' all previous stub assessments are auto=yes '''and''' ''if'' the article no longer is in a stub category, that this bot not assume the article is a stub. Does this sound like a positive change? – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]])</sup> 17:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
:So basically don't copy any stub ratings that are in templates marked as auto=yes? Sounds eminently sensible to me. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] <sup>[[User talk:Sam Korn|(smoddy)]]</sup> 17:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
:So basically don't copy any stub ratings that are in templates marked as auto=yes? Sounds eminently sensible to me. [[User:Sam Korn|<nowiki>[[Sam Korn]]</nowiki>]] <sup>[[User talk:Sam Korn|(smoddy)]]</sup> 17:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
{{BotApproved}} Looks good. – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]])</sup> 17:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
|||
<noinclude> |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:Bot Bottom --></div> |
|||
</noinclude> |
|||
Revision as of 17:50, 6 May 2009
- 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
Approved.
Sambot 13
Operator: [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy)
Automatic or Manually Assisted:
Programming Language(s): PHP, using Pillar
Function Overview: WikiProject article-assessment
Edit period(s): As needed
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function Details: Automatically fill in article ratings in WikiProject banners taking information from, in order:
- Are there existing ratings we can copy? If so, use the highest one.
- Is the article a redirect?
- Is the article in any stub categories?
- Is the article in Category:All disambiguation pages?
The task currently in mind is this request, but I am going to ask for approval for doing this with any WikiProject banner upon request, as it's a standard and fairly simple task.
Code available here. Thanks to Anomie for his suggestion re disambiguations.
[[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 16:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
A few comments on the code:
- You convert the values gotten from the other templates to lowercase, so in_array("FA", $classes) and the like won't ever match.
- It looks like you'll only process the first 500 articles in the category, as you don't even get the $continue from get_categorymembers.
Anomie⚔ 21:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oops. Fixed. Thanks. [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy)
Trial complete. 30 edits [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 09:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Many of these football templates are assessed as "stub" because the bio tag had previously been auto-assessed as a stub for having a stub template in the article. The trouble is, a few of them no longer have stub templates, but never got reassessed. For instance, see Jon Runyan. I'd suggest that if all previous stub assessments are auto=yes and if the article no longer is in a stub category, that this bot not assume the article is a stub. Does this sound like a positive change? – Quadell (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- So basically don't copy any stub ratings that are in templates marked as auto=yes? Sounds eminently sensible to me. [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 17:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Approved. Looks good. – Quadell (talk) 17:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- 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.