Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 41

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

Denied.

Yobot 41

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

Time filed: 12:57, Thursday, February 2, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB / WPCleaner

Source code available:

Function overview: Remove special characters from DEFAULTSORT

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 10 pages per day

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Remove special characters from defaultsort to enable correct sorting. This is aready done by BG19bot and Menobot.

Discussion

Example diff, please. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 13:19, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Example: {{DEFAULTOSRT:Lol%}} becomes {{DEFAULTSORT:Lol}}. This shows that you were not very familiar with the tasks performed so far. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:21, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for someone to be familiar with the tasks - this request has to be self-contained and fully specify the changes that will be made. Also, I presume general fixes are disabled, as they are not in the task description. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:43, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have to wonder how anyone could be familiar with the tasks Yobot was previously running, since most of them weren't in the original approvals. That's the whole point of actual community oversight here. Is that typo in the original DEFAULTSORT template intended or accidental (the flip of the O and S in sort)? I assume the bot cannot actually correct typos like that. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 15:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, there are other bots doing this currently? Will this task be exclusion compliant? — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:51, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Denied. No consensus is apparent for this task. Whether other bots are doing it is immaterial beyond raising the question as to why we need another one. Furthermore, I find flooding WP:BRFA with 20 requests all at once is probably bordering on WP:POINT: I suggest you limit yourself to fewer than 5 open requests at a time so you can more easily express yourself clearly and so you and the community can have time for necessary discussion. Anomie ⚔ 02:16, 3 February 2017 (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.