Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/BeneBot* 6
From Wikidata
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Approved--Ymblanter (talk) 13:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BeneBot* (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: Bene* (talk • contribs • logs)
Task/s: Archive requests for deletions at WD:RFD.
Function details: Hazard-Bot stopped archiving old requests for deletions so I was asked after a request to do this task as Hazard-Bot does not work very consistent and is not really stable atm (sorry Hazard-SJ). The first idea to archive redirects instead of marking them as deleted won't work as there might also be some critical requests. Best regards, -- Bene* talk 21:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Yay. Make a few test edits and then I'll go ahead and approve it :) Legoktm (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Bene*:--GZWDer (talk) 10:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Question How long should the bot wait until a request gets archived? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? -- Bene* talk 11:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- For Hazard-Bot, it was an hour after Done or Deleted or Not done template was added. I think 30 mins would be better. --by Revi레비 at 12:27, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict)My propose:
- For Hazard-Bot, it was an hour after Done or Deleted or Not done template was added. I think 30 mins would be better. --by Revi레비 at 12:27, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
RfD requests | time to wait |
---|---|
<50 (low) | 30 mins |
50-99 (medium) | 20 mins |
100-199 (high) | 10 mins |
>=200 (very high) | 0 (immediately) |
--GZWDer (talk) 12:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Take a look at [1] and [2]. Only archived very old requests for testing (older than 5 hours). @GZWDer: I like your idea. Let's see what the others think about it. -- Bene* talk 12:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict)I like GZWder's idea, but immediate archive is not that sufficient, so 5 mins for very high would be better. --by Revi레비 at 12:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict)@Bene*: please confirm that the bot can archive discussions to archive page, especially if archiving long discussion. Hazard-Bot does not do it well, like [3]: It removed old requests indeed, but does not succeed to save it to archive page because it is too long. If you run bot in Wikimedia Labs, It is probably better then what Hazard-Bot did.--GZWDer (talk) 12:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Legoktm: Would you like to approve this then? For the time being I can do it same as Hazard-Bot and wait an hour. I think this is quite urgent. -- Bene* talk 13:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]