426:
there is generally not a required reason; they are not always denied if one is lacking. (However, there is inconsistency among the bureaucrats here.) 5 is irrelevant, since there is no edit requirement for renames. I suggest you check the blocklog of the requesting editor, since renaming a problematic editor is not always permitted (I believe). Finally, I strongly suggest that the bot make a much less obtrusive comments. Make only a small note if nothing is wrong, and if there is, make it small as well. The pictures are annoying IMO, and WjB has asked that the page be less cluttered.
296:
1177:
1046:
394:
361:
47:
965:
950:
915:
900:
830:
930:
666:
I'm concerned that it's relying on the signature rather than the actual origin of the edit, e.g. "Requester forgot to sign, most likely an IP address." - it also does not appear to catch cases like WHEELSUK → BAROLD by User:WheelsUK where there is a typo in the "source name" - catching these would be
581:
Heh, you're behind the game :). The 25 edits thing has been removed. I put the forgot to sign thing in because it indicates that the user might be an IP, or not the user who wants a rename. It also only lists what's ok if something's wrong. If you want, I can completely remove it. Also, I am putting
520:
I agree with Chris, but I think the bot should make a small note on ok requests, so that the bureaucrats know it has been checked. There are three lines per request on valid ones, and that is too much, in my mind. The only thing that would be necessary is one line saying that the request has nothing
859:
Its error message about signatures is an issue - it seems to miss signatures separated by a line from the request and the lack of signature message tends to be a false alarm anyway (there seems to me to be no correlation between lack of sig and the requester being an IP). Ideally it could detect if
548:
At the moment, the bot is adding a lot of lines of text, often without pointing out anything wrong with the request. Given the number of request we get, that many lines is far too much clutter. I am grateful for any help a bot can provide, but hope it could be a little less intrusive. I have always
442:
25 edits has been removed. Images have been removed, except for the error or no error images (I don't think those would clutter up the page much more than bureaucrat notes). Minimum of 200 edits for pointing to USURP. I'm a little uncertain about removing number 3, as that might remind the crats to
425:
I think this is a good idea, in theory. However, for point 1, it is probably not best to point them to usurpation without checking if the requesting editor is eligible to usurp a username (several hundred edits) as pointing them to a page that they cannot use is pointless and time-wasting. For 3,
868:
As a general observation, I have a concern that requests flagged up as problematic are waiting longer for bureaucrat attention, even when these are requests that should be performed. I'm worried that
Kingturtle as a bureaucrat coming recently to performing renames has issues with this bot. The
869:
Rambling Man's input may be useful. Given as I noted above that this bot has now completed its trial period, a further trial period seems in order if BAG are minded to give this bot a green light. My thanks again to Soxred for the time he is expending on this task.
852:
Thanks. I've unblocked the bot. We are however beyond it's 5 day trial period. I think we need a further trial to continue to iron out issues - and I note
Kingturtle's concerns above about the overall utility of the bot. As far as changes I'd still like to see go:
638:
I don't object to the task, but I think the bot needs to leave more comprehensible messages. Reading the example message, I can't see in the "above notes" why there's a problem. The line with the X should just say what the problem is in plain
English.
334:
I like the sound of this. Certainly, we shouldn't worry about "stealing future 'crat's jobs", since ideally a 'crat is someone reliable, not someone good at clerking CHU. That said, I'll need someone more knowledgeable to check the technical side.
1087:, the bot said "SoxBot VI has analyzed this request, and renaming appears to be possible" - however, renaming was not possible. "Cannot rename user SimpsonsFan08 locally as this username has been migrated to the unified login system."
521:(that the bot can detect) wrong with it. A line saying that this is a summary by the bot, and line saying the account does not exist, and a line saying nothing is wrong with the request is just unnecessary.
315:
There have been some concerns about how it could steal possible future crats' job. I argue that claim with the fact that it is just giving information, and the crat should still do a last minute check.
269:
Here is an automated analysis of the request, done by ]. * {{User:SoxBot VI/CHU|ne}} * {{User:SoxBot VI/CHU|le|25}} * {{User:SoxBot VI/CHU|df}} * '''Final result:''' {{User:SoxBot VI/CHU|error}} ~~~~
504:
I don't think a few extra lines saying that it's an ok request is too much clutter (see WP:USURP), IMO. But that's just me. It also checks not is there is a newline or a space before the signature.
549:
asked human clerks not to list what is OK with requests, just to point out potential problems - it would be appreciated if the bot could do the same. As to a couple of specific issues:
1225:
487:
I should really only make a note when it detects something that could stop a username change, adding a "this has been oked by the bot" is just extra clutter. Also check out this
622:
Furthermore, the bot cannot discern what is and is not a promotional or offensive username. This bot saves no time and does very little. I really don't see its usefulness.
553:"Requester forgot to sign" isn't a very useful note - what's important is whether the request was made by the account to be renamed, not whether they remembered to sign.
564:
If this is saving human clerks work, I'm all for it but I would like the opinion of those who clerk the page as to whether this is making their life any easier.
211:. We both thought it was a good idea, and Cobi and I worked out a plan that he does USURP, and I do CHU. Currently, it processes each request, and checks:
856:
I would appreciate its message being shortened further - where it detects a problem, the message takes up at least 3 lines and I think that can be reduced
860:
the request was made by the account to be renamed and ignore sigs or lack of it. If this isn't possible it may be better to leave this check out.
770:. Could the bot be programmed to notice if its message is replaced by a more useful note by a human editor? At the very least could it treat
21:
459:
As it turns out, I don't find a way to get the block log using the API. all the others have been implemented, though (except number 3).
87:
604:
is unnecessary and superfluous. I don't think we need it. I'm still going to check it manually. I don't see how a message such as
672:
82:
365:
Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.
1059:
343:
1121:
I think I have fixed the bisecting issue, and I am seeing if there is a way to check for global ownership using the API.
1050:
Approved for trial (1 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.
863:
Detection of previous rename requests would be ideal - this is the one tasks that human editors can't perform at present.
398:
Approved for trial (5 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.
117:
556:"Old username has less than 25 edits" isn't helpful either - there's no edit requirement for accounts to be renamed at
402:
370:
1190:
102:
1053:
337:
1196:
1164:
1138:
1116:
1096:
1068:
1039:
1017:
987:
880:
847:
821:
748:
737:
The problem is that you don't link to your userpage, which is required for the regex. I'll fix that later.
732:
709:
676:
659:
631:
617:
593:
575:
532:
515:
499:
470:
454:
437:
418:
386:
352:
1103:
Sometimes an editor's signature isn't lined up properly with their request. In such instances, SoxBot VI
97:
443:
look a little deeper, or something like that. I'll work on the block log now. Thanks for the comments.
92:
1112:
1092:
627:
613:
147:
876:
817:
668:
571:
77:
1157:
1131:
1032:
1010:
982:
842:
784:
743:
704:
588:
510:
465:
449:
307:
133:
804:
774:
725:
527:
492:
432:
247:
651:
1108:
1088:
938:
623:
609:
409:
377:
219:
208:
295:
1187:
871:
812:
566:
303:
276:
58:
17:
1022:
All have been dealt with. I'm now ready for approval, or another trial, if necessary.
1219:
1148:
1122:
1023:
1001:
979:
839:
794:
740:
701:
585:
557:
507:
462:
446:
237:
204:
166:
130:
523:
428:
200:
640:
302:
has evaluated this request, and a problem(s) was found. Please see above notes.
299:
256:
If the old username has less than 25 edits. (will probably remove in the future)
976:
I would like for any BAG member to hold off on a trial, until these are fixed.
46:
1184:
667:
useful, at least as "current name in request does not exist, likely typo" --
156:
582:
in a note if the user has been blocked in the past 3 months. Is that OK?
218:
If so, then checks if it has had any edits, and if not, points them to
1204:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
601:
152:
937:- Very hard to do with the API alone, I'd have to resort to
491:, the user did sign. Apart from that it looks pretty good --
259:
If the new username is just the old username in lowercase.
720:
You should check your signature regex, it still thinks I
1144:
758:
I have blocked this bot as it was edit warring with me:
1104:
768:
765:
762:
759:
721:
488:
321:
112:
107:
72:
275:
Here is an automated analysis of the request, done by
1210:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
42:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
391:This task may be better suited for a time trial.
1000:3 out of 5 done, working on the other two next.
36:The following discussion is an archived debate.
608:removes my responsiblity to check it manually.
698:I'll work on it soon. Oh, the trial is done.
8:
1226:Approved Knowledge bot requests for approval
810:and not comment on the request in question?
203:gave Cobi and I an idea to make bots for
910:Modify messages to give 1 line problem.
687:Modify messages to give 1 line problem.
230:If the request uses the default reason.
600:I find the work this bot is doing for
176:(e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run)
262:(I'm always open to more suggestions)
7:
215:If the username requested is taken
895:Add nonexistent old username error
684:Add nonexistent old username error
28:
227:If the request was made by an IP.
44:The result of the discussion was
1175:
1145:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ca.php
1044:
963:
948:
928:
913:
898:
828:
392:
359:
294:
165:Give information on requests at
45:
925:Give notice for rename history.
690:Give notice for rename history.
606:renaming appears to be possible
141:Automatic or Manually Assisted:
1085:SimpsonsFan08 → StewieGriffin!
1:
891:Ok, here's a NEW to do list:
1242:
266:It reports in the format:
681:Ok, here's a to do list:
1207:Please do not modify it.
1197:01:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
1165:00:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
1139:00:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
1117:12:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
1097:12:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
1069:10:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
1040:04:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
1018:04:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
988:02:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
881:01:43, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
848:00:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
822:00:43, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
749:19:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
733:10:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
710:22:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
677:20:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
660:16:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
632:18:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
618:11:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
594:22:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
576:19:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
533:16:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
516:12:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
500:11:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
471:03:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
455:03:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
438:02:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
419:01:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
387:00:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
353:23:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
39:Please do not modify it.
960:Remove signature notice
159:'s wikibot.classes.php
185:Already has a bot flag
1143:Ok, implemented from
1107:. This needs fixing.
945:Current block notice.
693:Current block notice.
324:for others' opinions.
22:Requests for approval
941:(which I hate to do)
253:tag for the request.
233:Skips if there is a
148:Programming Language
1105:bisects the request
1054:dihydrogen monoxide
338:dihydrogen monoxide
199:A few weeks back,
1195:
1067:
414:
382:
351:
197:Function Details:
163:Function Summary:
1233:
1209:
1193:
1179:
1178:
1161:
1153:
1135:
1127:
1057:
1048:
1047:
1036:
1028:
1014:
1006:
986:
971:
967:
966:
956:
952:
951:
936:
932:
931:
921:
917:
916:
906:
902:
901:
879:
846:
836:
832:
831:
820:
809:
803:
799:
793:
789:
783:
779:
773:
747:
729:
708:
657:
654:
647:
644:
592:
574:
514:
496:
469:
453:
416:
412:
408:
405:
396:
395:
384:
380:
376:
373:
363:
362:
341:
298:
252:
246:
242:
236:
137:
49:
41:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1205:
1176:
1159:
1151:
1133:
1125:
1083:In the case of
1063:
1045:
1034:
1026:
1012:
1004:
977:
964:
962:
949:
947:
939:screen scraping
929:
927:
914:
912:
899:
897:
870:
837:
829:
827:
811:
807:
801:
797:
791:
790:as the same as
787:
781:
777:
771:
738:
727:
699:
655:
652:
645:
642:
583:
565:
505:
494:
460:
444:
415:
410:
403:
401:
393:
383:
378:
371:
369:
360:
347:
331:
322:the noticeboard
270:
250:
244:
240:
234:
220:Knowledge:USURP
128:
123:
62:
37:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1239:
1237:
1229:
1228:
1218:
1217:
1213:
1212:
1200:
1199:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1100:
1099:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1061:
993:
992:
991:
990:
974:
973:
972:
957:
942:
922:
907:
886:
885:
884:
883:
866:
865:
864:
861:
857:
756:
755:
754:
753:
752:
751:
715:
714:
713:
712:
696:
695:
694:
691:
688:
685:
663:
662:
636:
635:
634:
597:
596:
562:
561:
554:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
478:
477:
476:
475:
474:
473:
423:
422:
421:
407:
375:
355:
345:
330:
327:
314:
312:
311:
292:
287:
285:
283:
272:resulting in:
268:
264:
263:
260:
257:
254:
231:
228:
225:
224:
223:
173:Edit period(s)
122:
121:
115:
110:
105:
100:
95:
90:
85:
80:
75:
73:Approved BRFAs
70:
63:
61:
56:
55:
54:
32:
30:
27:
18:Knowledge:Bots
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1238:
1227:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1211:
1208:
1202:
1201:
1198:
1192:
1189:
1186:
1182:
1174:
1173:
1166:
1163:
1162:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1146:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1137:
1136:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1101:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1081:
1070:
1065:
1056:
1055:
1051:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1038:
1037:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1016:
1015:
1009:
1008:
1007:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
989:
984:
981:
975:
970:
961:
958:
955:
946:
943:
940:
935:
926:
923:
920:
911:
908:
905:
896:
893:
892:
890:
889:
888:
887:
882:
878:
875:
874:
867:
862:
858:
855:
854:
851:
850:
849:
844:
841:
835:
826:
825:
824:
823:
819:
816:
815:
806:
796:
786:
780:(and perhaps
776:
769:
766:
763:
760:
750:
745:
742:
736:
735:
734:
731:
730:
723:
719:
718:
717:
716:
711:
706:
703:
697:
692:
689:
686:
683:
682:
680:
679:
678:
674:
670:
665:
664:
661:
658:
649:
648:
637:
633:
629:
625:
621:
620:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
598:
595:
590:
587:
580:
579:
578:
577:
573:
570:
569:
559:
558:Knowledge:CHU
555:
552:
551:
550:
534:
531:
529:
525:
519:
518:
517:
512:
509:
503:
502:
501:
498:
497:
490:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
472:
467:
464:
458:
457:
456:
451:
448:
441:
440:
439:
436:
434:
430:
424:
420:
417:
413:
406:
399:
390:
389:
388:
385:
381:
374:
367:
366:
356:
354:
349:
340:
339:
333:
332:
328:
326:
325:
323:
317:
309:
305:
301:
297:
293:
291:
290:Final result:
288:
286:
284:
282:
281:
280:
278:
273:
267:
261:
258:
255:
249:
239:
232:
229:
226:
221:
217:
216:
214:
213:
212:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
192:
189:
186:
182:
180:
177:
174:
170:
168:
167:Knowledge:CHU
164:
160:
158:
154:
151:
149:
144:
142:
138:
135:
132:
127:
119:
116:
114:
111:
109:
106:
104:
101:
99:
96:
94:
91:
89:
86:
84:
81:
79:
76:
74:
71:
69:
65:
64:
60:
57:
52:
48:
43:
40:
34:
33:
31:
23:
19:
1206:
1203:
1180:
1158:
1150:
1149:
1132:
1124:
1123:
1084:
1052:
1049:
1033:
1025:
1024:
1011:
1003:
1002:
968:
959:
953:
944:
933:
924:
918:
909:
903:
894:
872:
833:
813:
757:
726:
641:
605:
567:
563:
547:
522:
493:
427:
400:
397:
368:
364:
358:
357:Looks good.
336:
319:
318:
313:
289:
274:
271:
265:
196:
195:
190:
187:
184:
183:
178:
175:
172:
171:
162:
161:
146:
145:
140:
139:
125:
124:
67:
50:
38:
35:
29:
181:Continuous
1109:Kingturtle
1089:Kingturtle
978:Soxred93 (
838:Soxred93 (
739:Soxred93 (
722:don't sign
700:Soxred93 (
624:Kingturtle
610:Kingturtle
584:Soxred93 (
506:Soxred93 (
461:Soxred93 (
445:Soxred93 (
329:Discussion
143:Automatic
129:Soxred93 (
113:rights log
103:page moves
1181:Approved.
785:clerknote
669:Random832
320:See also
304:SoxBot VI
277:SoxBot VI
126:Operator:
108:block log
59:SoxBot VI
1220:Category
934:Not done
805:not done
775:cratnote
673:contribs
248:not done
155:, using
83:contribs
51:Approved
20: |
1152:Soxred
1126:Soxred
1027:Soxred
1005:Soxred
524:seresin
429:seresin
201:MBisanz
1194:(st47)
877:scribe
818:scribe
572:scribe
411:(talk)
379:(talk)
300:SoxBot
1188:ʎʇɹoɟ
1185:uǝʌǝs
728:Chris
653:ɹəəds
646:speer
602:W:CHU
495:Chris
404:Maxim
372:Maxim
209:USURP
188:(Y/N)
88:count
16:<
1113:talk
1093:talk
969:Done
954:Done
919:Done
904:Done
834:Done
795:done
628:talk
614:talk
489:diff
308:talk
238:done
207:and
157:Cobi
150:(s):
118:flag
98:logs
78:talk
68:BRFA
873:WjB
814:WjB
568:WjB
243:or
205:CHU
153:PHP
93:SUL
1222::
1191:ʇs
1183:--
1160:93
1147:.
1134:93
1115:)
1095:)
1035:93
1013:93
808:}}
802:{{
798:}}
792:{{
788:}}
782:{{
778:}}
772:{{
767:,
764:,
761:,
724:--
675:)
656:ɹ
650:/
630:)
616:)
528:¡?
526:(
433:¡?
431:(
279:.
251:}}
245:{{
241:}}
235:{{
193:N
169:.
1111:(
1091:(
1066:)
1064:O
1062:2
1060:H
1058:(
985:)
983:t
980:u
845:)
843:t
840:u
800:/
746:)
744:t
741:u
707:)
705:t
702:u
671:(
643:r
626:(
612:(
591:)
589:t
586:u
560:.
530:)
513:)
511:t
508:u
468:)
466:t
463:u
452:)
450:t
447:u
435:)
350:)
348:O
346:2
344:H
342:(
310:)
306:(
222:.
191::
179::
136:)
134:t
131:u
120:)
66:(
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
