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.

Operator: —— nixeagle^{email me}

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): Perl

Function Overview: Manages WP:SPI, request is not for permission to edit that process page, but for permission to edit user talk pages under certain circumstances.

Edit period(s): Continous (probably 2 to 10 user talk edits a day)

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

Function Details: The bot already manages the WP:SPI process by moving cases around and archiving at the request of users. All this is done within the WP:SPI process page space. This request is for permission to edit user talk pages when the user has made a mistake in filing a case. This provides immediate input to the user, rather then having to wait for another person to review the case (this can take several hours, in which time the original reporter is offline).

• The bot will make sure that it does not leave multiple messages on the same talk page for the same thing. eg, it will say that you forgot a checkuser code letter once and only once per case.
• To be clear, this request is not on the operation of the bot itself, but on adding one particular feature that effects pages outside of the WP:SPI space. —— nixeagle^{email me} 22:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (5 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. -- Tawker (talk) 05:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've finally managed to get this working, we had some problems related to the template having a sig and the bot also trying to sign. I've fixed the template and counting the trial time starting now. —— nixeagle^{email me} 18:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any news Nixie? MBisanz ^talk 08:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, finally enough edits, sorry I've been out for a few days. The feature is bug free. There was a few issues when I first introduced it, but after that it has worked flawlessly. See the bot's talk page edits for evidence of correct behavior. —— nixeagle^{email me} 23:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that we did go over 5 edits... but no damage done or anything. I won't disable it unless you guys find an issue with the recent edits. —— nixeagle^{email me} 23:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. Ok, I'm happy. MBisanz ^talk 06:00, 6 March 2009 (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.