Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JJMC89 bot 14

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 14

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

Time filed: 05:55, Wednesday, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: movepages.py on GitHub

Function overview: Move articles with , [JS]r\. to remove the comma

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#Comma before Jr. and Sr. (permalink)

Edit period(s): One time run

Estimated number of pages affected: ~3,300 (half of those are the talk pages; ~1650 articles)

Namespace(s): 0,1

Exclusion compliant: No

Function details: Move articles (plus talk pages) with , [JS]r\. to remove the comma per WP:JR. The articles are listed at User:Certes/JrSr/titles#Normal cases (permalink).

Discussion

{{BOTREQ}} Please advertise this at a wider venue such as WP:VPR, discussion can be there or here. If there are no objections after a week (or if a consensus support develops) trials should be fine. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:01, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advertised at WP:VPR#Bot requested to finish up the WP:JR moves. Dicklyon (talk) 17:02, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No objections to bot after 7 days. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 18:23, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{BotOnHold}} Thank you, will check back in. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ping ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 22:18, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How is a bot going to handle cases where WP:JR permits ", Jr"? "The comma can be used in cases where it is clearly and consistently preferred for a particular subject in current, reliable sources (most likely a living subject whose own preference is clear and consistent)." Are you going to manually review pages in Category:Living people or something along those lines? --B (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is working from the already vetted list linked above. — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. (25 article / 25 talk). — xaosflux ^Talk 22:47, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. 50 moves (edits) — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is looking good. Thanks, all. Can we run the lot now? Dicklyon (talk) 02:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Task approved. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:40, 28 October 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.