Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JJMC89 bot 11

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.

JJMC89 bot 11

Operator: JJMC89 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 04:00, Monday, February 27, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: massmessage-list-updater.py on GitHub

Function overview: Update MassMessage lists based on user groups from logs.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): User talk:xaosflux#Admin list (permalink)

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 1, initially

Exclusion compliant: Yes

Already has a bot flag: Yes

Function details: Update MassMessage lists based on user groups from logs.

The rights log (including meta) is used for add and remove. This allows users to opt out after being added. The global rename log is used for renames.

Configuration options for each list:

enabled: Required boolean. If the list should be updated.
group: Required string. User group on which the list is based.
add: Optional boolean. If users added to the group should be added to the list.
remove: Optional boolean. If users removed from the group should be removed from the list.
required: Optional boolean. If group membership is required to be on the list.

Discussion

Approved for trial (50 edits or 30 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete.. @JJMC89: there may be some removals in a few days - need someone to run and pass an RfA too, get to nominating :D. A few questions too:

If 'membership is required' and non-group members get added, how often will they be removed?
Can you add a parameter to "skip users in groups" (e.g. no need to add users that are +sysop, +bot).

— xaosflux ^Talk 04:20, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: They would be removed each time the bot runs, so daily. I could add a new option for it if necessary; however, bots are already excluded from being added. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, looks good. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JJMC89: there was a desysop today, so if you are running maybe you will catch it! (User:Pjacobi) — xaosflux ^Talk 16:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's necessary to remove users from the admin messaging list upon removing their rights. Isn't one reason for the list to keep inactive sysops up to date so when they return they have something to bring them up to speed? –xeno^talk 16:27, 28 February 2017 (UTC) I was confused about the what list was being updated[reply]

I don't use the list, and don't have an opinion on it. The configuration can be adjusted as necessary. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Normally they are only removed for continuing inactivity, I'm generally against maintaining mass-messaging to editors that have left the project - it normally just clutters up their ignored talk page. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:28, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note, this is a different list than the Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe optional, open subscription newsletter page. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Though it may be a good idea to force subscribe new admins to it :D — xaosflux ^Talk 17:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That can be arranged. — JJMC89 (T·C) 17:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my confusion! That's fine then. –xeno^talk 20:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this still running, looks like some of the removals got skipped unless that was suspended? — xaosflux ^Talk 17:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It runs once a day. It is currently scheduled for 00:07 (UTC), so it will catch the desysops then. — JJMC89 (T·C) 17:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Task approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:05, 25 March 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.