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.

Operator: BU Rob13 (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 05:18, Friday, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): AWB

Source code available: AWB

Function overview: Automatically tag articles for WP:WikiProject National Football League as requested by the project (using the typical rules).

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Football_League#Auto-tagging_of_articles

Edit period(s): One-time run initially, possibly more if there's a need

Estimated number of pages affected: Initially, approximately 8,083

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

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

Function details: Places ((WikiProject National Football League)) on the talk pages of articles within categories defined by the WikiProject. Currently, the need is within the category tree of Category:National Football League players by team (which I've already checked - no inaccurate sub-sub-categories or such). Automatically assesses class if available via another WikiProject template (using the rules discussed at User:BU RoBOT/autoassess, which has seen past use).

• Would you be able to execute your AWB task with manual supervision for a few edits and link to them here, for examination? →Σσς. (Sigma) 08:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Σ: I could, but you'll find a much more complete trial in the edits associated with Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 10 and Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BU RoBOT 13. From a technical standpoint, this task differs only in that I replace "Women/Volleyball" with "National Football League" in the code. There were no technical issues in those trials or the actual runs. If you'd still like to see NFL-specific diffs, ping me. ~ Rob^Talk 01:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • If that is the case, I see no problem with this. →Σσς. (Sigma) 12:12, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (100 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Well we do like "trials" to ensure that no unforseen glitches are introduced. I expect this to be speedy though. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I just meant for the pre-trial trial that Σ was looking for. ~ Rob^Talk 14:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Contribs here. I looked through the first half and found zero errors. ~ Rob^Talk 19:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

((OperatorAssistanceNeeded)) You appear to be adding a redlinked category to pages, is this expected? — xaosflux ^Talk 15:24, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: That is intended behavior by the bot in the sense that the category should be added, but it also shouldn't be redlinked. That category was deleted years ago at a CfD due to being empty, apparently, although it was a tracking category and should have been tagged as ((empty category)). I've recreated the category since it's no longer empty, so this is fixed. ~ Rob^Talk 15:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. Task approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:42, 9 June 2016 (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.