Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Robert SkyBot 2

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

Request Expired.

Robert SkyBot 2

Operator: Robert Skyhawk ^{So sue me!} (You'll lose)

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic; supervised

Programming Language(s): AWB

Function Overview: Removes instances of {{AFC submission}} in mainspace.

Edit period(s): As needed; no more than three times in a week

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

Function Details: See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/2014 5#Template:AFC submission transclusions in mainspace. The bot will use AWB's find and replace feature to search for any occurence of {{AFC submission}} and remove it. The bot will get the list of articles to work on using Special:WhatLinksHere.

Discussion

I'm all for making life easier, but there are several different possible ways of dealing with these articles and I'm not sure it will be easy for a bot to know which is which. It is not just a question of removing the {{AFC submission}} templates necessarily; some others need to have the whole edit undone. I gave some broad instructions on how to deal with them at Category:Uncategorized Afc requests (numbers 2 and 3 relate to {{AFC submission}} transclusions in main space). Can the bot do the job as well as a human? Martin 22:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good point - I didn't think about the fact that the existence of the template doesn't necessarily mean that it is an accepted submission with a negligent reviewer forgetting to remove the template--it could also be a botched submission, which means that simply deleting the template would automatically "accept" the article, which may not be acceptable. On the other hand, if the submitter put the submission in the mainspace, that means he/she would be a registered user, and this could be interpreted as no longer falling within the scope of AFC, but rather the Newpage patrollers, etc. So, in this view, removing the template would be acceptable. This is really a question of how AFC wants to look at that, so that discussion can take place either here or at WT:WPAFC. Robert Skyhawk ^{So sue me!} (You'll lose) 23:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A user has requested the attention of the operator. Once the operator has seen this message and replied, please deactivate this tag. What's the status of this bot request? ST47 (talk) 03:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Request Expired. Feel free to refile once the specifics of the task have been worked out with the various involved groups. Q ^{T C} 00:42, 13 March 2009 (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.