Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Theo's Little Bot 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

Theo's Little Bot 3

[edit]

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

Time filed: 16:23, Saturday April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python + mwclient

Source code available: github

Function overview: Add {{WikiProject Baseball}} to talk pages of files that are included on pages in baseball-related categories.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Would be brought up case-by-case with WikiProject

Edit period(s): One time run

Estimated number of pages affected: over 9,000

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No (as there is no apparent need for it)

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

Function details: I had been doing this manually for a while, but then realized that - hey - it'd be very simple to just write a bot to do this. The general process is as follows:

  • Gets list of pages in given category(s) (each category would be explicitly approved by WikiProject members)
  • Get all images that are embedded on those pages.
  • Checks to make sure that the image talk page doesn't already include WikiProject Baseball banner.
  • Adds {{WikiProject Baseball}} to top of talk page.

This seems like a fairly straightforward task, yet also a big timesaver. AnomieBOT already does something similar to this for pages in a given category; this task simply takes it one step further—to images. I've already made a few test edits with my main account [1][2][3] for some of the pages in Category:Baseball culture. I envision potentially extending the task to other WikiProjects, so if there could be some sort of "umbrella approval," that'd be great as well.

Discussion

[edit]
  • I've got two questions, first, do images like this, this, and this fall under the category of WikiProject Baseball? They feature Jackie Robinson, or something related to him; however, they have no connection to baseball other than him. In addition, pages like Little League World Series contain a lot of flags, will the bot ignore those images (specifically any images in a template)? Ryan Vesey 16:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In response to your second question, the bot ignores all files that are embedded in templates. The response to your first question, though, really depends on what the WikiProject itself agrees upon; it's up to you all to determine how lenient you want to be with tagging. —Theopolisme (talk) 16:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not actually a member of the baseball WikiProject, but if they were to say that the images I referenced didn't apply, I don't think there would be a way to make this work. If they said they were considered part of the project, they'd be fine. I'm not sure if this is different enough to need a separate task, but could your bot pull information from commons categories like Commons:Category:Bowman baseball cards and tag them on English Wiki? Ryan Vesey 17:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry for not replying right away. My question was more of a hypothetical one. Someone from the baseball project would need to say if that is something they want done. Ryan Vesey 21:15, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait a second, why is this approved for trial? I raised a question above that wasn't answered "do images like this, this, and this fall under the category of WikiProject Baseball?". Consensus needs to be reached at WikiProject baseball over what categories need tagging and whether any image that is on a page of one of those categories is part of the project. Ryan Vesey 15:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm trialing it manually at the moment - as in, manual review before each edit - simply to test the functionality of the bot. In this case, it's basically equivalent to me tagging pages on my own accord. Assuming that the bot works (manually) as intended, then I would get explicit per-category approval. —Theopolisme (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see the issue Ryan Vesey raised as important, because the example I looked at was a Jackie Robinson picture; inadvertently putting that file in Wikiproject Baseball did not seem too important. However, your bot labeled every Abner Doubleday file as belonging to the project, his grave marker, a photo of him and his wife, his birthplace image, and an image of the Fort Sumter medal. I think this issue should be cleared up, these files are probably not within the scope of the wikiproject. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Point made. Could we try to get a member of the project to comment here? —Theopolisme (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That seems reasonable to me, post a request at the project to comment here. However, if the discussion becomes involved, it may be easier to have it there and link here and post the conclusions as bot reworkings here. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 19:35, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You might be right. I was surprised at the number of images inappropriately tagged in the trial, and it will wind up being a problem with other people in the baseball category who have substantial articles with many pictures; the Doubleday a particularly bad case, others possibly not so bad, such as marking Robinson's grave marker as part of the project. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 06:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards denying this request as being too subjective for a bot to figure out, unless I'm missing something. MBisanz talk 19:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since there has been exactly no input from the WikiProject itself, I think I might agree with you. However, could we simply convert this into a "manual" bot task in which I have to approve each picture before it is tagged? Seems non-controversial enough. —Theopolisme (talk) 21:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is there some utility in using the bot over AWB? If there is, seems okay to have it as a bot task, as there could still be a lot of files, and, in spite of non-response, it is advantageous, imo, to have files attached to projects. -166.137.210.15 (talk) 23:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Would you care about running the AWB/manual function on your main account, a bot account, or an AWB-specific account? MBisanz talk 02:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, no; the bot account seems easiest (since it already exists), but I suppose it might make sense to specify that is isn't actually a bot doing the tagging. I can create another account if that would be beneficial. My only request that is it doesn't use my main account. —Theopolisme (talk) 10:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see, not to clutter your main account. It seems reasonable to me, but I do not know the rules on this. It is a task that you may find a future way of doing some automated, say the files in the image boxes in the category baseball players. The bot could include something in the edit summary noting the edit is manual, and it is out of article, user, category space. I think it would be reasonable to do it as a bot task, even if manual. However you do it, useful for file management, imo. -166.137.116.18 (talk) 22:58, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okey, so run it under your bot account, but make sure the edit summary shows it isn't automated. That should minimize confusion. MBisanz talk 23:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Can this be closed then? Theopolisme (talk) 11:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by operator. Not required for task. MBisanz talk 02:19, 3 May 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Theo%27s_Little_Bot_3&oldid=1144428974"