A village pump in Hungarian Wikipedia had not been archived for a long time before we noticed it.
Investigation showed that the bot had hit a warning-type abuse filter upon copying the text to archive and saving. In this case the abuse filter displays a warning and lets the user press Save again if he/she wants to do it anyway.
Of course, the archivebot
- did not save the page for the second time (could it?)
- did not pass the problematic section and archive the remainder
- did not let the owner know about the problem.
It just silently failed, with logging being the only action.
So what would the desired behaviour be in a similar case? Please keep in mind that archivebot is tyoically run with cron or other timing, not in interactive mode.