Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Mr.Z-bot 3

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.

Mr.Z-bot 3

Operator: Mr.Z-man

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): Python

Function Summary: Removing Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages from pages tagged with {{Do not delete}}

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Semi-regular basis

Edit rate requested: Standard pywikipedia throttle on page save (8 seconds?)

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

Function Details: Pages in CAT:TEMP are userpages and user talk pages of users who were blocked with one of the indef block uw-Xblock templates, Template:Indefblockeduser, or Template:Temporary userpage. Pages tagged with sockpuppet tags are not supposed to be deleted, and all the sock puppet tags contain {{Do not delete}}, making creating a list of these pages fairly easy. When I last checked there were 775 pages, listed here. This task used to be done by User:Pathosbot. Mr.Z-man 01:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

This seems to be a very straightforward and simple task. I don't see any immediate concerns with it. Are you using the exact same program as pathos? SQL ^{Query me!} 02:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know of. Right now it just removes the category if it is a subst'd template (the uw-block ones) or Template:Temporary userpage and adds the |historical parameter for Template:Indefblockeduser and all of its redirects. I don't know of any other template that adds pages to that category (all the uw ones should be subst'd). After I go through the list I'll see what it missed. Mr.Z-man 03:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me.

Approved for trial (350 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Let's see what she can do. SQL ^{Query me!} 03:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

350 edits. Mr.Z-man 04:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked 20 random diffs, and they all look okay. Are there any objections to this task being approved? — Werdna talk 13:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it went well to me. SQL ^{Query me!} 14:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. — E ^talk _aussie 06:17, 5 April 2008 (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.