The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was Approved.

Operator: Ankit_Maity (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 12:48, Monday November 26, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Manual start required then it starts working automatically. Will be supervised.

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: No

Function overview: AWB General Supervised Edits. task description below

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Once per month.

Edits per minute: 3 epm

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No

Function details: Some tasks are repetetive and needs a bot handler. So, that's why. Simple.

Who is the owner of this account? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be User:Ankit Maity. MBisanz ^talk 14:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, created this account from the bot account itself. My mistake. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, just let us know what the function details are when you're ready. MBisanz ^talk 02:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Typo fixing is not a task we approve for bots due to false positives (WP:CONTEXTBOT). Even is you supervise your edits (I'm not sure since your last edit), the bot will first make an error before you fix it later. Definitely not something that is non-controversial enough to use a bot flag. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Task 1 up. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 06:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Task 2 up. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 06:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can't approve Commons bots (commons:Commons:Bots/Requests). —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then, Task 1's there. --AnkitAWB (talk) 16:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• So Task 1 is supervised {{WikiProject India}} banner addition to applicable talk pages. Is that's correct, then Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Make sure you use a descriptive edit summary. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request done at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Bots. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 11:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request approved but "Category (recursive)" source process in AWB is going so slow, I am unable to complete the list comparing and tagging process. Will take some days (wait for 1 week) because I am a student so I don't actually get enough time. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Atlast, it's working. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 15:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. A little more than 50 edits. Ran at 2-6 epm. Total of 3 errors. The pages are:

• Talk:Chala Mussaddi... Office Office (Prepend error)
• Talk:404 (film) (Plugin++ error)
• Talk:?: A Question Mark (Plugin++ error)

About 8 edits done with the prepend tool in AWB, rest with Plugin++. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just had a question, if my bot tags banners for another WikiProject, should a new BRFA request be filed or it's all right with this one only. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 16:13, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it has community support (i.e. the project actually wants those tags on those pages), then, generally, yes. Though it would better if you drop a note at WT:BRFA or mention this here (as you sort of have). —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Here the banner was placed before talk page notice and no banner shell was used. Does the bot use {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} and {{WikiProjectBanners}} in principle? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 16:57, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I heard Plugin++ does it. Maybe, there was some kind of error in the plugin then. But then, I will try to integrate it myself in the future (so till then it's normal). --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 04:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, is {{talkheader}} supposed to be on a article's talk page (afterall not all article talk pages have it). --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 04:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the template per Template:Talk header/doc#Usage. There wasn't any discussion on that page nor does it gets high traffic (so it was kinda not needed). --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 08:24, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 08:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 11:18, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That template is really for when the BRFA hasn't had attention for a week or so. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Approved for extended trial (150 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. A larger sample size. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re-Done. Trial complete. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 12:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. I see that Plugin++ doesn't group banners into banner shell (but it seems other bots like TinucherianBot don't either, though there are bots like Yobot that fix this). Otherwise, looks fine. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.