Operator: ErrantX ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 12:25, Tuesday April 26, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): Python (pywikibot and some custom code for imageusage API calls)
Source code available: http://hg.errant.me.uk/wikibots/src/tip/commonsbot.py (still in dev)
Function overview: This bot will replace the original CommonsTicker bot (which has been out of action for a while) to notify WP users of file deletions that might affect them
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Issue (of commons ticker being down) was noted on AN/I, no further discussion but I can get input from VP if needed (update: opened a discussion here for input)
Edit period(s): Continuous
Estimated number of pages affected: No idea... but in the bot functions I propose having an "upper limit" of the talk pages the bot will place a notice before going to a central location instead. 300-500 edits per day (200-400 to article talk pages) updated 06/05/2011
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): No not sure it is needed
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No
Function details: The bot monitors commons file deletions and checks for the image use on this wiki. Where image usage on WP is found the initial implementation will do the following:
All of the above limits can be tweaked as required.
UPDATED 27/04/2011: The bot can now do the above for images nominated for speedy deletion (i.e. logging nominations, addign a note to article talk pages). Currently working on a good way to track normal deletion.
We need something and if this looks good to the bot people from a bot standpoint I'd get behind it. Fact of the matter is that Commons is never going to reach out to us and tell us that they're deleting something we use. We have to go to them then and take the information, and this bot seems like a step in the right direction. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I can find no issue with the concept of this bot. For the bots timing this is my suggestion.
The coding people will need to pass judgment on that aspect of the bot. If it performs its 50 edit trial run well then I say approve it. cheers -- Guerillero | My Talk 02:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I just noticed these notifications. While I agree that is useful to notify editors on Wikipedia about deletion discussions on Commons, I see some issues:
-- Elekhh ( talk) 22:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Trial complete. Not quite the full 7 days, but I am going ot be busy the rest of this week so wanted to post this while I had time. Over the week I ran into a few bugs, which are now fixed (a wierd crash bug was fixed this morning) and the code has been pretty stable and accurate for the last couple of days. I'm no longer posting deletion notifications, only nominations. The early problems with posting a notification multiple times to the same page has now been fixed :) Response seems to be good, no one has complained :) r.e. Jarry's comments above, if it is preferable to avoid WP:AN and just go with WP:VPM then that is fine. One of the reasons I chose AN was because it is possible that some of these issues might need admins to fix. Sven has suggested that he is working on a new board/location for image problems - so long term the bot can post there instead. -- Errant ( chat!) 12:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Operator: ErrantX ( talk · contribs)
Time filed: 12:25, Tuesday April 26, 2011 ( UTC)
Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised
Programming language(s): Python (pywikibot and some custom code for imageusage API calls)
Source code available: http://hg.errant.me.uk/wikibots/src/tip/commonsbot.py (still in dev)
Function overview: This bot will replace the original CommonsTicker bot (which has been out of action for a while) to notify WP users of file deletions that might affect them
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Issue (of commons ticker being down) was noted on AN/I, no further discussion but I can get input from VP if needed (update: opened a discussion here for input)
Edit period(s): Continuous
Estimated number of pages affected: No idea... but in the bot functions I propose having an "upper limit" of the talk pages the bot will place a notice before going to a central location instead. 300-500 edits per day (200-400 to article talk pages) updated 06/05/2011
Exclusion compliant (Y/N): No not sure it is needed
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No
Function details: The bot monitors commons file deletions and checks for the image use on this wiki. Where image usage on WP is found the initial implementation will do the following:
All of the above limits can be tweaked as required.
UPDATED 27/04/2011: The bot can now do the above for images nominated for speedy deletion (i.e. logging nominations, addign a note to article talk pages). Currently working on a good way to track normal deletion.
We need something and if this looks good to the bot people from a bot standpoint I'd get behind it. Fact of the matter is that Commons is never going to reach out to us and tell us that they're deleting something we use. We have to go to them then and take the information, and this bot seems like a step in the right direction. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I can find no issue with the concept of this bot. For the bots timing this is my suggestion.
The coding people will need to pass judgment on that aspect of the bot. If it performs its 50 edit trial run well then I say approve it. cheers -- Guerillero | My Talk 02:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC) reply
I just noticed these notifications. While I agree that is useful to notify editors on Wikipedia about deletion discussions on Commons, I see some issues:
-- Elekhh ( talk) 22:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC) reply
Trial complete. Not quite the full 7 days, but I am going ot be busy the rest of this week so wanted to post this while I had time. Over the week I ran into a few bugs, which are now fixed (a wierd crash bug was fixed this morning) and the code has been pretty stable and accurate for the last couple of days. I'm no longer posting deletion notifications, only nominations. The early problems with posting a notification multiple times to the same page has now been fixed :) Response seems to be good, no one has complained :) r.e. Jarry's comments above, if it is preferable to avoid WP:AN and just go with WP:VPM then that is fine. One of the reasons I chose AN was because it is possible that some of these issues might need admins to fix. Sven has suggested that he is working on a new board/location for image problems - so long term the bot can post there instead. -- Errant ( chat!) 12:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC) reply