Commons:Bots/Requests

If you want to run a bot on Commons, you must get permission first. To do so, file a request following the instructions below.

Please read Commons:Bots before making a request for bot permission.

I	Create a user account and user page for the bot (by clicking here while logged in to your normal account) On the bot's userpage, add {{bot}}, which automatically adds the page to Category:Commons bots. Then add the following information to the bot's userpage (all this is mandatory): Who the creator/operator is and how they can best be contacted Details of the bot's task or tasks Whether the bot is manually assisted or runs automatically When it operates (continuously, intermittently, or at specified intervals) The bot's maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute) The language and/or program that it is running
II	Create your bot request: Replace "YourBotName" with your bot's username in the box below and click the button. Complete the questions on the resulting page and save it. Remember that your bot will be allowed to operate only for those tasks that you have specified in your request. Add your bot request to the list here: Edit the following Request List, adding the following text to the top of the appropriate section (replacing "YourBotName" with your bot's name): {{Commons:Bots/Requests/YourBotName}}
III	Test run Make a short test run with your bot account (30-50 edits/uploads) to allow other users to review your bot's tasks.
IV	Waiting for approval. You now need to wait for community approval. A bureaucrat will close the request and will also grant a bot flag, where necessary. Closed requests are moved to Commons:Bots/Archive.

Archives List all Requests

Requests made on this page are automatically transcluded in Commons:Requests and votes for wider comment.

Bot Name	Bot Operator	Request Created	Request Status	Waiting For
Autobot (T|C|B|F)	User:BokicaK	19 May 2013	Open	?
SamoaBot (3) (T|C|B|F)	User:Ricordisamoa	14 May 2013	Open	?
Smallbot (10) (T|C|B|F)	User:Smallman12q	8 May 2013	Open	?
Rybecbot (2) (T|C|B|F)	User:Rybec	31 March 2013	Open	Community
SamoaBot (2) (T|C|B|F)	User:Ricordisamoa	26 March 2013	Open	Community
Rybecbot (T|C|B|F)	User:Rybec	22 March 2013	Open	Community
Hazard-Bot (7) (T|C|B|F)	User:Hazard-SJ	19 March 2013	Open	Community
UWCTransferBot (T|C|B|F)	User:Ahonc	18 March 2013	Open	Community
JAnDbot (T|C|B|F)	User:JAn Dudík	21 February 2013	Open	Community
Neuchâtel Herbarium (T|C|B|F)	User:Chandres	13 February 2013	Open	Operator reply
Smallbot (8) (T|C|B|F)	User:Smallman12q	1 December 2012	Open	Operator test run
Smallbot (7) (T|C|B|F)	User:Smallman12q	21 November 2012	Open	Operator reply
タチコマ robot (T|C|B|F)	User:とある白い猫	24 September 2012	In trial	Operator test run

Requests for permission to run a bot

watch

Before making a bot request, please read the new version of the Commons:Bots page. Read Commons:Bots#Information on bots and make sure you have added the required details to the bot's page. A good example can be found here.

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bots/Archive.

Any user may comment on the merits of the request to run a bot. Please give reasons, as that makes it easier for the closing bureaucrat. Read Commons:Bots before commenting.

Noaabot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Fæ (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Uploading of archives of images from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. These are public domain and the background of the initial request and project can be found at Commons:Batch_uploading/Weather_maps#Coordination. In addition to the initial batch upload of around 20,000 images providing maps from September 2002 to the current day, there may be categorization and formatting changes as needed that can run from this account. Beta test images consisting of weather maps for the first year of the archive and the most recent month of maps, can be found at 2002 NCEP weather maps (610 maps) and 2013 NCEP weather maps (ongoing).

Partial supervision. Beta testing then monitored runs would be expected, with unmonitored overnight runs, once uploads or changes are seen to be stable (i.e. 1,000 or more uploads or changes).

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic.

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time runs, likely to be kicked off no more than once a month week—taking advantage of the weekly summary pdfs published by NCEP. The files need processing from gif to png, the encoding may become fully automated without needed a staging space, but is likely to remain a semi-manual project reliant on volunteer availability.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): Approximately 4 per minute.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python

Fæ (talk) 11:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Not sure if the template is correct—the images do not come directly from NOAA, but from NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction) — other than that, I'm quite OK with the way files are uploaded. odder (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

  Categories now changed from using "NOAA" to "NCEP". In theory the NCEP is a child of the "National Weather Service" (previously "Weather Bureau") which itself is a child of "NOAA". I would suggest avoiding making the category tree over-hierarchical until it starts to appear over-loaded or might be misleading. --Fæ (talk) 06:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• Looks OK for me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
• Files should have more categories. A category for the day and a category for the type. Also, are you going to upload the Daily Weather Map Weekly PDF Files? The pdfs contain vectorized maps.Smallman12q (talk) 00:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The categories can be added quickly enough. The types are selected in the ingestion template and I will tweak it to include a NOAA weather map type category automatically. I am less certain about the value of a day category, my original thoughts on this were that the files are strictly named, with ISO format date at the beginning, so any particular month or day's worth of images (there are 5 types for each day) can be easily found by scrolling through the alphanumerically sorted category of the year, and a breakdown further than year would be superfluous. I'm happy to include day categories if the benefits of doing so are a bit clearer to me. In the longer term I would like a navigation template (possibly automated as part of the ingestion template) to provide a link to the other map types for the day, yesterday and tomorrow's image. I am deferring this until either I get to grips with Lua, or another volunteer can take a look at it; certainly it is a more long term improvement that can be worked out once the archive backlog is uploaded (one of the benefits of using an ingestion template is that tweaks like this can happen on the template rather than across 20,000 files ).

     Done Type categories now added to the ingestion template as:

    Category:NCEP daily surface weather maps

    Category:NCEP black and white daily max-min temperature maps

    Category:NCEP daily max-min temperature maps

    Category:NCEP daily 500-millibar height contour maps

    Category:NCEP daily precipitation maps

  • Yes, the weekly pdfs can be uploaded from the pdf page—hopefully the NCEP will stick to the recently changed naming scheme so updates can be part of the batch upload. There are not that many, as they are only available from the last week of November 2012. It would be great if these were decomposed at some point, so that the embedded vector maps are available in addition to pngs, so having the pdfs on Commons is a good start.

     Done Category:NCEP weekly weather maps and Category:NCEP weekly color weather maps. --Fæ (talk) 12:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• Just as an outside thought, I believe that a category for each day is just too much, but I would support creating monthly categories; there should be around 150 files in each category, which would make them quite useful. odder (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Looking at the yearly categories for single map types is useful for seeing weather patterns over the seasons, so we might actually put them both in annual and monthly categories. I think this could be done again by adapting the ingestion template rather than sticking these on every file. I'll see if I can come up with a template inclusion solution. --Fæ (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Categorisation by template is a Bad Idea™ (as I learnt not very long ago). I'd rather just add those categories to directly to file descriptions pages, so to let people use existing tools (CatScan, Cat-a-lot) when necessary. odder (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Okay, easy enough once a scheme is put up. Could you think about how the hierarchy would best work and make a suggestion here? I can then ensure future uploads fall in line, and we can easily fix the 'beta test' uploads so far. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
        • File:2013-05-06 Color Max-min Temperature Map NOAA.png shows how — in my opinion — those images should be categorised: by type (Category:NCEP daily surface weather maps), by year (Category:2013 NCEP weather maps), by month (Category:NCEP weather maps for May 2013), and by year and type (Category:2013 NCEP daily surface weather maps). This was it should be easy to do category intersection and perform other actions necessary for good maintenance of categories and files. I also set up a whole new category tree at Category:NOAA maps. odder (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
          • It all looks useful and commonsense, I'm happy to implement all these automatically in the batch upload once the bot gets flagged. --Fæ (talk) 21:01, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Autobot (talk · contribs)

Operator: BokicaK (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Transfering images from sr.wiki.

Automatic or manually assisted: manually assisted

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run):

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute):

Bot flag requested: (Y/N):

Programming language(s):

 Bojan  Talk  03:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Which task are you willing to run? --Ricordisamoa 09:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't noticed that field. My intentions are moving images from sr.wiki that were uploaded by trusted users -- Bojan  Talk  14:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes duplicated license tags need clean-up. {{self}} is not appropriate. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll clean it (if I get bot flag). I don't understand the latter. -- Bojan  Talk  03:33, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Bot is not photographer. So only license tags without {{self}} wrapper should be used. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is not my script - I'm running Magnus's script imagecopy.py that utilise CommonsHelper. {{Self}} would be ignored if redirect Template:Дуална лиценца wasn't created. -- Bojan  Talk  23:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

SamoaBot 3 (talk · contribs)

Operator: Ricordisamoa (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: internationalize file description pages, using apposite templates (like {{original upload log}}) and MediaWiki system messages (like {{int:license-header}})

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic unsupervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): intermittently, at the operator's discretion

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 20-25 EPM

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N (already flagged)

Programming language(s): Python (with PWB)

--Ricordisamoa 01:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Some test edits: Revision of File:Signator.jpg and Revision of File:Emerald spring in yellowstone.jpg --Ricordisamoa 05:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Another: Revision of File:Hospital-quiron-san-sebastian.jpg (at the moment I'm checking every single diff before saving, later I could run it "bot-like") --Ricordisamoa 05:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• The edits look fine to me. I know other bots do work like this, but I don't see much harm in redundancy, especially since you're making a few changes at once. Which portion of the file database do you plan to run it on? --99of9 (talk) 12:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

For example I can start from a search, or from pages that transclude {{ImageUpload}}: most times they are old, low-frequency-edited pages, and often contain superseded/superfluous syntax structures. --Ricordisamoa 13:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine by me. --99of9 (talk) 13:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

• Looks OK for me, but will be good idea to borrow other trivial clean-ups ideas from similar bots. Like {{Location}} place, etc. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Upd: another test edit. What do you mean with "{{Location}} cleanup"? --Ricordisamoa 13:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I meant that {{Location}} should be near {{Information}} (I usually place it before). --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Above or below? PS: another test edit --Ricordisamoa 14:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Above. Please not that removing 1= from language templates may cause problem when description contains URL with with some special characters. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I know, but it checks for them, and it's always been working. --Ricordisamoa 16:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

But then if someone puts a link in later, they have to also know to put the 1= in as well? That sounds like it will make life difficult. --99of9 (talk) 19:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

So should I avoid doing that? Removing "1=" only breaks the template if the text contains another "=". --Ricordisamoa 21:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion. But I can imagine another user coming here and applying for a bot that puts the 1= in... and I certainly don't want to see bot wars. So maybe just leave them untouched if Eugene (and others?) think that's best. --99of9 (talk) 22:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Smallbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Smallman12q (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: To upload ~500k files from the US National Archives and Records Administration based on a database dump provided in partnership with the Digital Public Library of America.

Example

JSON source

{ "id": "nara--1693425", "key": "nara--1693425", "value": { "rev": "1-a8e9cee50a8cea9d1724c12a0d0d69e5" }, "doc": { "_id": "nara--1693425", "_rev": "1-a8e9cee50a8cea9d1724c12a0d0d69e5", "hasView": [{ "url": "http://media.nara.gov/Public_Vaults/14755_2006_001_a.jpg", "format": "image/jpeg" }, { "url": "http://media.nara.gov/nwl/berryman/H-009_7-1-1928_Yes_We_Have_No_Ambitions_print.pdf", "format": "application/pdf" } ], "sourceResource": { "date": { "begin": "1928-07-01", "end": "1928-07-01", "displayDate": "07/01/1928" }, "description": "This cartoon plays off a line from a popular 1923 song (\\" Yes, We Have No Bananas!\\") to characterize car maker Henry Ford\'s Presidential ambitions--or lack thereof. Ford blames his busy schedule for his hesitation to jump into the \\" Presidential contest pool, \\" while eager supporters encourage him to \\" come on in !\\" Berryman was correct in his prediction: Ford chose not to pursue the Presidency.", "title": "Yes, We Have No Ambitions Today!", "rights": "Restrictions: Unrestricted; Use status: Unrestricted", "collection": { "@id": "http://dp.la/api/collections/15e82b12ef89a63d03737461e2440df8", "id": "15e82b12ef89a63d03737461e2440df8", "title": "Records of the U.S. Senate, 1789 - 2011" }, "stateLocatedIn": { "name": "DC" }, "creator": "U.S. Senate. Office of Senate Curator.\\t(? -)", "isPartOf": "Series: Berryman Political Cartoon Collection, 1896 - 1949", "type": "image" }, "object": "http://media.nara.gov/Public_Vaults/14755_2006_001_t.jpg", "ingestDate": "2013-04-11T21:27:25.187803", "originalRecord": { "access-restriction": { "specific-access-restrictions": null, "restriction-status": "Unrestricted" }, "contributors": { "contributor": { "contributor-display": "Berryman, Clifford Kennedy, 1869-1949", "contributor-record-type": "PER", "contributor-type": "Artist", "standard": "Y", "num": "1", "contributor-id": "3119843" } }, "hierarchy": { "hierarchy-item": [{ "hierarchy-item-inclusive-dates": "1896 - 1949", "hierarchy-item-id": "306080", "hierarchy-item-lod": "Series", "hierarchy-item-title": "Berryman Political Cartoon Collection, 1896 - 1949" }, { "hierarchy-item-id": "375", "hierarchy-item-lod": "Record Group", "hierarchy-item-title": "Records of the U.S. Senate, 1789 - 2011", "hierarchy-item-record-group-number": "46" } ] }, "production-dates": { "production-date": "07/01/1928" }, "created-timestamp": "1/20/2013 4:36:49", "arc-id": "1693425", "use-restriction": { "specific-use-restrictions": null, "use-status": "Unrestricted" }, "title": "Yes, We Have No Ambitions Today!", "title-only": "Yes, We Have No Ambitions Today!", "general-records-types": { "general-records-type": { "num": "1", "general-records-type-desc": "Photographs and other Graphic Materials", "general-records-type-id": "4237050" } }, "scope-content-note": "This cartoon plays off a line from a popular 1923 song (\\" Yes, We Have No Bananas!\\") to characterize car maker Henry Ford\'s Presidential ambitions--or lack thereof. Ford blames his busy schedule for his hesitation to jump into the \\" Presidential contest pool, \\" while eager supporters encourage him to \\" come on in !\\" Berryman was correct in his prediction: Ford chose not to pursue the Presidency. ", "parent": { "parent-title": "Berryman Political Cartoon Collection, compiled 1896 - 1949", "parent-lod": "Series", "parent-id": "306080" }, "edited-timestamp": "[g_x128_110, g_x32_443, g_x64_221, g_x2_7090, g_x16_886, g_x8_1772, g_x4_3545, b_x1_14180]", "objects": { "object": [{ "thumbnail-url": "http://media.nara.gov/Public_Vaults/14755_2006_001_t.jpg", "object-sequence-number": "1", "file-size": "579687", "mime-type": "image/jpeg", "num": "1", "file-url": "http://media.nara.gov/Public_Vaults/14755_2006_001_a.jpg" }, { "description": "Download PDF", "object-sequence-number": "2", "file-size": "209895", "mime-type": "application/pdf", "num": "2", "file-url": "http://media.nara.gov/nwl/berryman/H-009_7-1-1928_Yes_We_Have_No_Ambitions_print.pdf" } ] }, "title-date": "07/01/1928", "subject-references": { "subject-reference": { "subject-type": "SRT", "display-name": "cartoons (humorous images)", "num": "1", "subject-id": "4170951", "standard": "Y" } }, "level-of-desc": { "level-id": "NAVI", "lod-display": "Item" }, "physical-occurrences": { "physical-occurrence": { "media-occurrences": { "media-occurrence": { "num": "1", "media-type": "Paper" } }, "reference-units": { "reference-unit": { "city": "Washington", "fax": "202-357-5911", "name": "Center for Legislative Archives", "ref-id": "36", "address2": "Room 8E, 7th and Pennsylvania Avenue NW", "summary": "true", "phone": "202-357-5350", "state": "DC", "num": "1", "postcode": "20408", "address1": "National Archives Building", "mailcode": "LL", "email": "legislative.archives@nara.gov" } }, "copy-status": "Preservation-Reproduction-Reference" } }, "creators": { "creator": { "creator-id": "1107050", "standard": "Y", "num": "1", "creator-record-type": "ORG", "creator-type": "Most Recent", "creator-display": "U.S. Senate. Office of Senate Curator.\\t(? - )", "summary": "true" } }, "variant-control-numbers": { "variant-control-number": { "mlr": "false", "variant-number": "NWL-46-BERRYMAN-H009", "num": "1", "variant-type": "NAIL Control Number", "variant-number-desc": "NWL-46-BERRYMAN-H009" } }, "arc-id-desc": "1693425", "indexable-dates": { "date-range": "[b_x16_120, b_x8_237, g_x64_30, b_x4_486, b_x16_119, g_x128_14, g_x32_59, g_x128_15, g_x16_118, g_x8_243, g_x32_60, g_x64_29, b_x2_974, b_x8_242, g_x16_121, g_x4_487]" }, "parent-control-group": { "parent-control-title": "Records of the U.S. Senate, 1789 - 2011", "parent-control-lod": "Record Group", "parent-control-id": "46" }, "_id": "1693425" }, "isShownAt": "http://research.archives.gov/description/1693425", "provider": { "@id": "http://dp.la/api/contributor/nara", "name": "National Archives and Records Administration" }, "@context": { "begin": { "@id": "dpla:dateRangeStart", "@type": "xsd:date" }, "@vocab": "http://purl.org/dc/terms/", "hasView": "edm:hasView", "name": "xsd:string", "object": "edm:object", "dpla": "http://dp.la/terms/", "collection": "dpla:aggregation", "edm": "http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/", "end": { "@id": "dpla:end", "@type": "xsd:date" }, "state": "dpla:state", "aggregatedDigitalResource": "dpla:aggregatedDigitalResource", "coordinates": "dpla:coordinates", "isShownAt": "edm:isShownAt", "stateLocatedIn": "dpla:stateLocatedIn", "sourceResource": "edm:sourceResource", "dataProvider": "edm:dataProvider", "originalRecord": "dpla:originalRecord", "provider": "edm:provider", "LCSH": "http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects" }, "ingestType": "item", "dataProvider": "Center for Legislative Archives", "@id": "http://dp.la/api/items/02b4f072d067494f67b08d6a4100f143", "id": "02b4f072d067494f67b08d6a4100f143" } }

File

Yes, We Have No Ambitions Today! - Nara - 1693425.jpg

Description	English: This cartoon plays off a line from a popular 1923 song ("Yes, We Have No Bananas!") to characterize car maker Henry Ford's Presidential ambitions--or lack thereof. Ford blames his busy schedule for his hesitation to jump into the "Presidential contest pool," while eager supporters encourage him to "come on in!" Berryman was correct in his prediction: Ford chose not to pursue the Presidency.
Author	Berryman, Clifford Kennedy, 1869-1949
Date	1 July 1928
Current location	National Archives and Records Administration  Native name National Archives and Records Administration Location Washington, D.C. (headquarters), and many regional facilities and presidential libraries nationwide in the USA Coordinates 38° 53′ 34.01″ N, 77° 1′ 22.71″ W    Established 1934 Website www.archives.gov Authority control VIAF: 132254586 LCCN: n84176101 GND: 00605336X BnF: cb12182396f WorldCat
Record ID	This media is available in the holdings of the National Archives and Records Administration, cataloged under the ARC Identifier (National Archives Identifier) 1693425. This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See Commons:Licensing for more information. Record group: Record Group 46: Records of the U.S. Senate, 1789 - 2011 (ARC identifier: 37) Series: Berryman Political Cartoon Collection, 1896 - 1949 (ARC identifier: 306080) NWL-46-BERRYMAN-H009
Source	U.S. National Archives and Records Administration
Permission (Reusing this file)	This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. See Copyright. Note: This only applies to original works of the Federal Government and not to the work of any individual U.S. state, territory, commonwealth, county, municipality, or any other subdivision. This template also does not apply to postage stamp designs published by the United States Postal Service since 1978. (See 206.02(b) of Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices). It also does not apply to certain US coins; see The US Mint Terms of Use. This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.
Other versions	Please do not overwrite this file: any restoration work should be uploaded with a new name and linked in this page's "Other versions =" parameter, so that this file represents the exact file found in the NARA catalog record to which it links. The metadata on this page was imported directly from NARA's catalog record; additional descriptive text may be added by Wikimedians to the template below with the "descriptions =" parameter, but please do not modify the other fields. (Note: Editors who post this notice are strongly encouraged to add details explaining how it applies to this file.)

	The metadata on this page was imported directly from NARA's catalog record; additional descriptive text may be added by Wikimedians to the template below with the "Description=" parameter, but please do not modify the other fields.
	Please help us by reporting errors! This may include misidentifications, erroneous images, typos in the metadata, possible copyright issues, and poor-quality images needing rescanning. (Be aware that, for documentary purposes, NARA often retains the original image captions, which may be erroneous, biased, or even misspelled.)

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 10-15, as fast as it uploads

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): No

Programming language(s): Python 3.2

Will use metadata from DPLA bulk download for NARA. The metadata is in json, and is converted formatted to the template by the bot.

Smallman12q (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

For reference, a previous NARA batch upload was approved at Commons:Bots/Requests/US National Archives bot.Smallman12q (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah sure, looks good to me. --Dschwen (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Usual suggestion: please use language template for Author/Source/Record ID fields. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

• Please can you put a deeplink in the "source" field, as that is where most editors will look. I tried to get the original of this example, but apparently "The Online Public Access (OPA) system will be down for maintenance from May 10 to May 25.", so we may not be able to thoroughly test this for a couple of weeks. --99of9 (talk) 13:01, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I recently heard some details about that as well. I'll try to keep updated on the status. Bdcousineau (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• What kind of label is: "NWL-46-BERRYMAN-H009"? It might help to add the name of this kind of identifier. --99of9 (talk) 13:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

That is an old catalog number used by NARA. It is no longer in use, but since it is in the current template used by NARA on Commons, it has been included. It most likely refers to the "NAIL" database, which was the in use prior to ARC/OPA, the current database. For a sample, see File:Football team on the field, Haskell Institute, Lawrence, Kansas, 1914 - NARA - 519149.jpg. Better removed? Bdcousineau (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest leaving it in there, but having the template do nothing with it (i.e. not display it). That way we can easily reintroduce it if someone thinks it is useful later. --99of9 (talk) 15:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• 500k files! Wow, this is huge, congratulations and good luck! --99of9 (talk) 13:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

• Great start! Since this is a large set, and since the metadata will not be perfect (never is for a transfer of this size): are you thinking of staging this? Say, a few hundred to start, then 1k, then 10k, with pauses to see what sort of cleanup is needed? --SJ+ 22:40, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

 On hold-As stated at Online Public Access, access to records is suspended from the 10th to the 25th. (2 weeks is a loong roll out). Once access is restored, will do an initial batch upload of 100, 1000, then auto after that. Will also make source available once upload starts.Smallman12q (talk) 00:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Rybecbot (2) (talk · contribs)

Operator: Rybec (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Sometimes when files are transferred from Flickr by a bot, the tags on Flickr lead the bot to add inappropriate categories. For example, this photo of some rocks in shallow water was given the unhelpful categories Commons, Facebook, Flickr, Google, News, Pic, Wallpaper, Wiki, Wikipedia and Photographs. Mass importation of files causes a need for mass removal of categories, which is what this request is for.

Automatic or manually assisted:automatic with some supervision

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run):occasional

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute):4

Bot flag requested: (Y/N):Y

Programming language(s): Python (standard pywikipedia category.py or replace.py script)

Rybec (talk) 02:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Test edits have been done: 50 files were removed from the News category. Rybec (talk) 06:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• So do you remove every image in this kind of category, or only those from Flickr, or??? --99of9 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I think you could make better edit summaries, like Removing [[Category:News]]. Also will be good idea to remove from several categories at once edit when applicable. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• The bots that import images from Flickr don't create new categories, but only add images to categories that already exist, so my intention is not to get rid of the categories entirely. When a category should contain no images but only subcategories, then I would want to empty it of images, but typically there would be some images which belong and others which don't. My intention is to manually identify the ones which don't belong, make a list of them, then have the script make the changes.

I've done another three test edits to show removal of multiple categories in a single edit with a non-default edit summary: [1] [2] [3]. Rybec (talk) 21:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks OK for me, but I think will be good idea to use link to categories in edit summary. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't object to doing that. Rybec (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I’ve have had the same kind of trouble with stuff bot-uploaded from Flickr being piled up in Category:Lisbon (a much more specific category than those above, of course), which is a pain to clean up manually. There’s a few things that the importing tool could do automaticly, like avoiding over-categorization (e.g. if a photo is under Category:Streets in Lisbon is should not be also under Category:Lisbon), but more or less human input and manual work is going to be needed sooner or later. A big problem is how to tell apart what media really belong in a given category from those that should be further moved to more detailed subcategories within the same tree. I’d really like to have separate "(cleanup)" subcategories for all categories afflicted by this kind of flooding, really. -- Tuválkin ✉ 20:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

SamoaBot 2 (talk · contribs)

Operator: Ricordisamoa (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: detecting and logging (in a user subpage) SVG images without a proper xmlns declaration on the root <svg> element: those images aren't viewable at all in some browsers, and should be properly fixed (this can be done later, either manually or automatically)

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic, supervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): intermittently

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): about 1 edit per minute (max)

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N (already flagged, see Commons:Bots/SamoaBot)

Programming language(s): JavaScript, with Ajax (own code, will be published soon)

Ricordisamoa 04:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Here can be seen the log of all images detected so far.--Ricordisamoa 06:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

• How hard would it be for your bot to fix them and reupload? --99of9 (talk) 23:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

  It is currently written in JavaScript (I plan to switch to Python in a few weeks), and Ajax upload isn't tested yet, but I will try to do as much as possible. In the meantime, it could however log these files. --Ricordisamoa 02:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I think will be good idea to add maintenance template to image page too.

Edit summary for log action could be just file name with a link, log page name is self-explanatory.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Does a proper template exist for these cases? (and I'll work on edit summary) --Ricordisamoa 06:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

{{BadSVG}} may be adapted for this purpose, or {{Cleanup image}} may be used. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Info In Firefox, you can use the sendAsBinary() method of your XHR-instance to upload the SVG. This avoids encoding issues (while some SVGs also work with the send method, this will screw up others). Downloading is very easy through a GET since the cross-origin-issue is resolved.
• I created a sample that works with FF 19 (tested): User:Rillke/fastTransfer.js. It downloads and uploads a file immediately when invoked. You have access to the raw data in function _gotFile so you can manipulate that data. -- Rillke^(q?) 20:43, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• I had a look with Firefox 19. It displayed two of the nine files on the list.

(E)-pent-2-ène.svg does not display

(Z)-pent-2-ène.svg does not display

(±)-Ethyl-2-methylbutyrate_Structural_Formulae_V.1.svg has been re-uploaded several times; version of 13:06, 26 March 2013 does not display and Mediawiki did not generate a thumbnail for it; other versions okay

1-Chlornaphthalin.svg displays correctly

1-jpg.svg Mediawiki says there's an error in the file; does not display in browser

1025arud.svg Mediawiki says there's an error in the file; does not display in browser

10th_Panzer_Division_logo_1.svg has been re-uploaded, but both versions displayed correctly

1422_Zeta_in_the_Serbian_Despotate_after_death_Balsa_III.svg does not display

1885ArmenianFlag.svg has since been re-uploaded; original file did not display

Rybec (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, now I'm going to run a fixed version of the script; let's see... --Ricordisamoa 23:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• I tried to view the new additions to the list, with similar results: most of the files did not display, but one did. I don't know enough about the subject to say definitively that there are false positives.

1969_draft_lottery_scatterplot.svg file has been replaced; old version did not display in Firefox

1988_Illinois_Constitutional_Convention_Vote_pie_chart.svg file has been replaced; old version did not display in Firefox

1st_Panzer_Division_logo.svg displays correctly in Firefox

2-propil-amine.svg does not display in Firefox

201globe.svg file has been replaced; old version did not display in Firefox

250x250Feld.svg does not display in Firefox

2NOGCMOS.svg does not display in Firefox

Even with the possible false positives, the usefulness of this list is apparent. If making the list is all that this request covers, I fully support it (if the request is also about automatically fixing the problems that are found, I don't support that part: some unneeded changes might be made, and test edits fixing the SVG files haven't yet been done). Rybec (talk) 23:55, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

After 1st_Panzer_Division_logo.svg I changed the code, so it should work well now. --Ricordisamoa 10:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I  Support this request, but I'm leaning against applying the bot flag. If it's only editing one page, and even that only once per minute, I don't see it as necessary. Am I missing a reason you need the flag? --99of9 (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

The purpose of the bot flag is to avoid flooding RCs (if the bot's speed is out of control)... anyway, there's also the first request. --Ricordisamoa 13:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

What is final functionality? Will bot re-upload fixed files, or only log problematic files? If last is true, will be clean-up template added to file page? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

In case it is only logging, I can try to write a JavaScript-Bot which fixes the issue that does not need any other host than a compatible browser to run. IMHO a logging-bot does not need a bot-flag but it would be great if we could combine this functionality (detection and fixing). Then, we also do not need to log each occurrence or adding a template. -- Rillke^(q?) 09:16, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

You get my {{support}} --Ricordisamoa 11:15, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I need your source code. -- Rillke^(q?) 09:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

→ User:Ricordisamoa/XMLNSense.js --Ricordisamoa 10:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Thank you. → User:Rillke/MwJSBot.SVGXmlNSFixer.js. Log and continue-params are written to my user space by default but this can be customized by creating an own instance of window.SVGXmlNSFixer. Detection of svg root in its own svg namespace like for this file has to be fixed.

• Files processed so far by the script:
  • File:A-weighting, ISO 226 and ITU-R 468.svg
  • File:5 inch floppy.svg
  • File:2NOGCMOS.svg
  • File:(E)-pent-2-ène.svg
  • File:(Z)-pent-2-ène.svg

-- Rillke^(q?) 20:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

So could you operate a real bot for this task? --Ricordisamoa 20:52, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I've no dedicated server/computer for this task, if that is your question. But I think if I or someone else continue(s) running this JavaScript over all 666,540+ SVG files, it would be a good idea to ask whether other issues with SVG files should be considered as well. Also the speed/bandwidth is not really sufficient… -- Rillke^(q?) 16:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I meant "a flagged bot account"; BTW, I got the flag (for another task). --Ricordisamoa 18:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I've no flagged bot account where the task would be appropriate to run under. -- Rillke^(q?) 20:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Would your script work on Chromium/Chrome? --Ricordisamoa 21:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

It seems so. At least the loop runs and the parser does its job. Not entirely sure whether the upload will work but it's very likely (it's using the usual XHR.send() as SVGs are UTF-8 encoded). -- Rillke^(q?) 22:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Should I continue running the script (e.g. under RillkeBot (not flagged)), would you like continuing running it, or do we want to split the load, are there questions left? -- Rillke^(q?) 20:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

For me it's ok, but you should get a bot flag; I'm thinking it may be better to swich to Pywikipediabot, though. --Ricordisamoa 13:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

How many files are we approximately looking at? If it is of the order of a hundred or less then I suggest to just go ahead with it. --Dschwen (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It would have to check all files on the Commons, and upload at least several hundred images... However, I have PWB installed, and will starting coding something tomorrow. --Ricordisamoa 21:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

First of all you'll have to check all SVG files. Secondly, when you code please make sure to do a http range request! Try downloading just the first kilobyte of each file you are analyzing. This should speed things up. Let me know if you need help with that in python, I've implemented it before. --Dschwen (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Rybecbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Rybec (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: re-uploading photos which have been cropped to remove watermarks and editing accompanying text to indicate the watermark has been removed

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic, lightly supervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 2 when uploading files, 4 when changing text

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python (the Pywikipediabot upload.py script with minor changes and the replace.py script with no changes)

Rybec (talk) 05:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Badly needed. Please execute a batch of runs as an example. --Foroa (talk) 06:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
• I'm having trouble doing the test edits because the newly-created bot account doesn't have reupload permission (just reupload-own)--I checked here. Rybec (talk) 12:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes it's very nasty for new bot accounts. Should work now! -- Rillke^(q?) 18:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

    Thank you! I've done the test edits. I only prepared 24 files to replace instead of the suggested 30 to 50. Rybec (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Please do not continue until the bot preserves Metadata and please repair this for all edits done so far by the bot. Example where data is lost at File:047-1211 Enschede 125.JPG (before after processing). Please also include a meaningful upload/edit summary (like "image cropped to remove watermark"). Thank you! -- Rillke^(q?) 21:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

 Question Which software do you use for cropping the file? Is it lossless? -- Rillke^(q?) 22:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review! I used jpegtran, which is lossless. I hadn't noticed the problem with the EXIF data; I don't know why that happened. Rybec (talk) 22:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
  • ExifTool is, for example capable copying (nearly) all metadata from the original file to the edited one. This way you could ensure they are never lost. -- Rillke^(q?) 10:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
• I've reverted my test/example edits. Rybec (talk) 22:34, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you. -- Rillke^(q?) 10:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

• Great demand exists for automated removal of watermarks, and this pioneering bot is brilliant :D I would say the exif is less important at the moment especially if the information is still made available with the older version. If it inspires people to make exif copying bots, all the better. I believe it is not long before we see watermark removal bots that mend the picture rather than crop, but for the time being, in these chaotic times where trigger fingers are blocking people for good contributions, Rybec's bot would help bring some badly needed relief and order. Rybec certainly seems responsive, capable, and I recommend flagging his bot forthwith ! I can't see maintenance and improvements being a problem. Penyulap ☏ 05:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
  • In this case they contained copyright and camera information and it is quite bad if they aren't visible any more at the file description page. -- Rillke^(q?) 10:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Question: Does your bot automatically detect the watermarks or are you manually instructing what to crop? -- Rillke^(q?) 10:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

  I was just using the identify command from Imagemagick to get the pixel size of downloaded images, subtracting 138 from the height, scripting jpegtran to crop to that size, and the only function of the bot is the re-uploading. I agree that the metadata is important. The problem was that I didn't use the "copy all" option to jpegtran. I've manually uploaded to File:1210_Turnhout_029.JPG one example of a file cropped with the "copy all" option. Its EXIF data is preserved. I also learned how to do an edit summary with the script: [4]. I've started another test run, with the metadata and the edit summaries. Rybec (talk) 11:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

• Someone pointed out the need to remove {{watermark}} and the category Category:Uploads by Microtoerisme with watermarks. I was thinking that could be done with VisualFileChange.js. Rybec (talk) 12:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Not remove "watermark", but change it to "watermark removed". ("watermark removed" is appropriate for these uploads) – JBarta (talk) 13:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I've done a second test run, changing {{watermark}} to {{watermark removed}} and removing [[Category:Uploads by Microtoerisme with watermarks]] as described by Jbarta. The files can be seen at Special:ListFiles/Rybecbot. I've changed my request to add the use of the standard replace.py script for the textual changes. Rybec (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Results look good to me. --VanBuren (talk) 21:52, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• Suggestion - Howdy. I suggest using {{Attribution metadata from licensed image}} instead of {{watermark removed}} because the latter redirects to the former. Also, I suggest checking to see if one of those templates is already on the page. When you made this edit, the template was already on the page.--Rockfang (talk) 10:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't even aware that "Attribution metadata from licensed image" existed. Might I suggest that "watermark removed" is more used, more intuitive and easier to spot than the other? The resulting template on the image description page is the same either way. Just a thought. – JBarta (talk) 11:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Assuming Jarry1250's Toolserver Template transclusion count tool is correct, {{Attribution metadata from licensed image}} is transcluded 6,192 times while {{Watermark removed}} is transcluded 3,422 times. If an image license doesn't require attribution, then {{Metadata from image}} can be used.--Rockfang (talk) 13:35, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• The mistaken edit found by Rockfang is one I did manually. When doing the textual replacements, the bot will look for the specific text "{{watermark}}" (by which I mean, enclosed in curly brackets) and change it. Only if {{watermark}} appeared twice already, or together with {{watermark removed}} would it make the same mistake I did. If it encounters "{{watermark removed}}" it does not do any replacement. In other words, it's not inserting {{watermark removed}} but rather changing {{watermark}} to {{watermark removed}}. For the text replacement task I want to use the standard replace.py script from pywikipedia. I don't especially mind using {{Attribution metadata from licensed image}} rather than {{watermark removed}}, although the latter is more succinct. On Wikipedia, using redirects in a similar manner is considered okay. Is it the same here? Is the redirect likely to be deleted? If not, it seems to me like a matter of indifference. Rybec (talk) 22:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hazard-Bot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Hazard-SJ (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Category replacements

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatically

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Periodically

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute):

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): No

Programming language(s): Python

There are cases when more help is wanted for category replacements. Now is an example. User:CommonsDelinker/commands has a backlog with, I believe, no bots working on it at the moment, so I'd like to be able to help out in such cases.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  01:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• There has been some recent issues with SieBot recently that makes COM:CDC to be backlogged. I'd welcome very much a clone for performing those category moves when SieBot is not working. I support approval (with flag). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
• Please make a test run if this is not standard bot. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
• If this is not a standard bot, one has to care that nothing inside <nowiki><!-- --> or <source> is replaced. -- Rillke^(q?) 17:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
• I planned to use CategoryMoveRobot in category.py (PyWikipedia trunk). Originally, I was planning to manually start the bot for each request, but I could create an on-wiki page for the bot (or use the one currently in use) to use so I wouldn't have to manually start it each time. I'd still integrate the CategoryMoveRobot class into it, though. Would that be preferred? (P.S. SieBot is back up so there isn't much of a rush now.)  Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

  I think will be good idea to use User:CommonsDelinker/commands for list of requests and proceed automatically. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  • In such a case, however, the completed requests won't be removed until someone comes along to do so manually, as my bot cannot edit that page.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

    • If you create a separate account for the task, that account could be admin-flagged so that it can edit the page. The task is important and it would be best to integrate a supplementary bot into the existing structure as neatly as possible. Rd232 (talk) 10:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

      Even if I'm not an admin myself (as is the current case)?  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

      • Many moves require still manual intervention as many items cannot be bot moved and in some cases a redirect is created, otherwise deleted; I don't think that can be handled by a bot anyway. (I spend on average 2 minutes per category move on cleaning up). --Foroa (talk) 11:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

        Yes, moving categories it technically impossible, so without admin access it wouldn't be able to do the deletions, but rather, create the new category and request deletion of the old one.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

        • Ideally, the bot should be able to update the Wikidata structures as for example in d:Q1144392. --Foroa (talk) 11:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

          I agree: this is a very good idea. Conveniently, I'm already approved to do this on Wikidata.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC) This can't be done until Wikimedia Commons is somehow integrated into Wikidata.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC) It's currently not possible to search for values of D:P:P373 via the API. The only way to get to the relevant Wikidata item would be, considering there is a (correct) link in a template on the category page (such as in {{w}}), go to the Wikipedia page, then the item (if there is one), then change the value of p373.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• For the record, SieBot is, again, down, so I've gone ahead and coded the bot. I've ran a 16-edit trial with it here, doing four requests in all. Of course, as I already mentioned, the bot isn't able to edit the queue page, since the current one is fully protected. Also, for now, I'm just marking the old category as a category redirect to the new one.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• We need at least one other bot looking at the commands. SieBot is asleep way too often. However
  1. If the bot behaves differently from SieBot, it should replace it and not work alongside it
  2. If the bots are to work concurrently, you would have to account for more than one bot picking up the same request (as neither can edit User:CommonsDelinker/commands to remove a request before they start executing it).

If the bot doesn't behave like SieBot, can you specify in the request how it differs? Does the bot alter the old category for example (afaik SieBot does not)? –⁠moogsi (blah) 02:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

As for working concurrently, the only (if not, main) problem if they're working on the same category at the same time would be an edit conflict, which is already handled. Specifically, the bot currently creates the new category page if it doesn't exist (attributing the authors in the summary, or on the talk page if the list is too long), then moves the categories. After it determines that the category is empty, it replaces the content of the old category page with {{Category redirect|"new category name"}}. All that can be seen from the trial I made. As for behaving differently, I think the main difference is the implementation, and probably that my bot actually edits the old category afterwards (not sure if SieBot does that).  Hazard-SJ  ✈  02:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

{{Move}} requests have to be stripped during the transfer, no need to remove it from the delinker queue as it needs manual inspection (5 % of moves need manual intervention or category restructuring). --Foroa (talk) 16:08, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I can implement that.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  02:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Support I want to make it clear that I support the proposal in its current form, before I start talking about additional features :) One thing which SieBot doesn't do (and which I think wouldn't be difficult to implement) is leave edit summaries for category moves. {{move cat}} has a reason parameter which basically goes unused, as SieBot operates apparently without purpose –⁠moogsi (talk) 19:35, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

---

If nobody has further objections, I propose that we approve this request. I expect that there will be some teething issues, but am confident that the bot operator is capable and will be sufficiently responsive to resolve them. --99of9 (talk) 13:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

UWCTransferBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Ahonc (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: I wrote a bot using php for transfering free images from Ukrainian Wikipedia to Commons. It is an alternative to CommonsHelper, as CommonsHelper often generates bad descriptions and they are to be checked and fixed, and my bot is better adjusted for it. Images will be checked by local sysops before transfer.

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time per day

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): 5-10

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): PHP, based on Chris G's botclasses framework.

Anatoliy (talk) 21:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Looks like human review before transfer is good idea (example: File:Вп станция сихов.jpg). Also better author attribution is possible (File:Врубель Серафим.jpg, File:Бівуак. Чатир-Даг..JPG). As well as better categorization (File:Голосіїв.jpg).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Situation like in first example is fixed. Such images will not transfered from uk-wiki. They should be transfered from original wiki (in this example Russian). Categories for Commons are taken from template 'Move to Commons' in file description in local wiki.--Anatoliy (talk) 12:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• Please can you internationalize the headings to save us having to do this [5] --99of9 (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

  Fixed. Changes will be applied during next run.--Anatoliy (talk) 17:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

JAnDbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: JAn Dudík (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: replacing text, recategorization, maybe more

Automatic or manually assisted: both

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Sometimes

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute):

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Yes (global bot)

Programming language(s): pywikipedia

JAn Dudík (talk) 10:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Could you be a bit more specific please about what you intend to do with your bot? --Dschwen (talk) 14:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Since there was zero further input from the requester I will close this as stale soon. --Dschwen (talk) 23:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I want to use bot mainly for mass recategorization or mass replacing of text, see contributions. Maybe, when Wikidata will be able to store links to commons, I'll work on this field too. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You mean the several thousand edits your bot made without having a flag? Please don't do that or we will have to block the bot. Recategorizations are already performed by User:Category-bot. And I won't give out a bot flag for a maybe job. I'll close this one. You are welcome to reopen a request if and when you have a specific task (that is not already covered by an existing bot). --Dschwen (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Although I agree that the unapproved volume was inappropriate, the 23 Feb URL format changes like this look useful. So if you can give us a clear, more focused/limited scope, I'd potentially support. --99of9 (talk) 22:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe we could create a template for "URL REKOS", to prevent all those bot edits. --Ricordisamoa 22:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Neuchâtel Herbarium (talk · contribs)

Operator: Chandres (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Upload of the pictures created by the commons:Neuchâtel Herbarium project

Automatic or manually assisted: semi automatic, I launch the script manually for a fixed number of picture to upload , but once it's started the process is automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run):around 40 000 pictures remain to be upload, by batch when I'm available to control the upload process, no full automatic work

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute):4-5 upload per minute

Bot flag requested: Y:

Programming language(s):

Chandres (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

It might be a good idea to respect the capitalisation of the categories. So far, I renamed the categories of the majority of your uploads. --Foroa (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning , we update the script and I will correct the already upload pictures.--Chandres (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I think will be good idea to use Bot in account name. Why Template:Information is not used? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

It's not really a bot account, it's always me behind, but used with a script. --Chandres (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, using [[tl|Specimen}} is probably some sub-project policy which we could argue against until we are blue in the face... The sourcecode of the description page is formatted in a very confusing way. It took me 3 minutes to figure out where the closing template braces are and to realize that {{Information field}} is uses within the description field. This needs to be made clearer. --Dschwen (talk) 16:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

 {{Specimen
 |taxon=Abies alba
 |authority=
 |institution={{Institution:University of Neuchâtel}}
 |description=
 {{en|1=Neuchâtel Herbarium - ''[[:en:Abies alba]]''}}
 {{de|1=Neuchâtel Herbarium - ''[[:de:Abies alba]]''}}
 {{fr|1=Neuchâtel Herbarium - ''[[:fr:Abies alba]]''}}
 {{it|1=Neuchâtel Herbarium - ''[[:it:Abies alba]]''}}
 |date=
 |source={{own}}
 |author=[[User:Neuchâtel Herbarium|Neuchâtel Herbarium]]
 |permission=
 |other_versions=
 |other_fields={{Information field|name={{Occupation|1=Botanist}}|value=?}}
 }}

Actually it is a minor miracle that the old version doesn't produce invalid HTML. If you want to use {{Information field}} please add it to the other_fields parameter. --Dschwen (talk) 16:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Is this being adressed? --Dschwen (talk) 17:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, if , see below :-)--Chandres (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Do we need the "description" ? It seems redundant with other parameters. I have proposed an alternate layout at File:Neuchâtel Herbarium - Abies alba - NEU000003665.tif. --Zolo (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

The actual description field is important for the project by the providing the links to the wikipedia articles in several language, especially the swiss one. But if anybody has ideas on how improving this information part, I will be more than happy! --Chandres (talk) 08:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

You mean, in this case, the link to en:Abies alba. There is a link to the corresponding category in the header. I would also prefer a link to Wikipedia, but we should be able to have that once wikidata: is deployed to Commons (hopefully, in a few months). Personnally, I find it unintuitive and rather confusing to have two different links just a few lines away from each other, without clear rationale why one links to Wikipedia and the other to Commons. --Zolo (talk) 05:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I find that the link the the commons category give less information than a link to the wikipedia article, but maybe we could improve the wording of the description to be more explicit. The idea of having the link to wikipedia article is "reader oriented", whereas commons category is really "wikimedian oriented". I don't want to wait for Wikidata deployment, we never what will happend, and we can always run a bot to correct that afterwards. --Chandres (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

• I would like a more expansive description for those who stumble across a file and don't want to read the background of the whole project. My suggested change is here. In some of the test uploads (e.g. File:Neuchâtel Herbarium - Asplenium Viride - NEU000000475.tif there is no description at all!) --99of9 (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The addition of "dried pressed specimen" is ok in english, but would complicated ,without benefice, the script in other language. I will control after upload if all description are present.--Chandres (talk) 06:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

• I don't completely understand your answer. Do you mean that you do not know the translation for "dried pressed specimen" in the languages you plan to use, or do you mean that it would be hard to add the words to each language? (Sorry for the slow reply) --99of9 (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Smallbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Smallman12q (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: To upload files related to Commons:Batch uploading/ECGPedia The files that will be uploaded can be found at User:Smallbot/source/Cardionetworks

This is based on OTRS Ticket#2011102310008874 . The ticket is a year old.

Related discussions:

• w:Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_76#Attribution_of_images
• w:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine/Archive_22#Offer_to_share_images

Automatic or manually assisted:automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run...though there may be future uploads

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): depends on upload speed (10)

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): VBScript (Javascript, XMLHTTP, MSHTML, XMLDOM, COM).

Smallman12q (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

A lot of the files lack a description. Also, how should author information be handled? There are a number of .swf, a format that will never be supported on commons Bugzilla: 26269, that could be converted to a supported video format. The .avi could be converted to a supported video format.Smallman12q (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Please make test uploads. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

First, I need to verify the OTRS ticket and make the relevant template. I've asked at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Cardio_Networks.Smallman12q (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

The answer from another OTRS volunteer on that page:

License template exist at Template:Cardionetworks permission that provides the relevant details. Regards -- KTC (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Hope this helps, if not, don't hesitate to remove the {{section resolved}} template and ask further! Trijnstel_talk 18:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Didn't know the template was already made. Will do upload later this week.Smallman12q (talk) 20:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful. Will these images all be put together in a single category? Do you need anything further from my end? James Heilman, MD (talk) 18:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't see the test uploads yet. Also can you supply links to a few swf files? If they are either static or videos they could be converted as well. Do you have a solution for converting the avi videos yet? --Dschwen (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Working-I'm going to do this upload this week..was busy with Commons:Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum but they seem to be stuck in a bureaucratic quagmire. The .swf files have an equivalent .avi file (my guess is the .swf is just a flash wrapper for those who can't play .avi but have flash). The .avi will be converted to the webm format(which the commons now supports) before upload. I am in the process of downloading the files... probably around 10GB + for each wiki. I've written a script that will download all files, the file history table for each file, and text of the file for a wiki so this may be handy for future uploads. A lot of the files lack any text so I'm not sure what to put for these. Any thoughts are welcome.Smallman12q (talk) 00:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

What are some examples of fills missing text? James Heilman, MD (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

There are quite a few files missing text. Have a look at User:Smallbot/source/Cardionetworks/Example to see how the uploads will look (including those missing text). Let me know if it looks okay.Smallman12q (talk) 17:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes that is okay. We will need to go through and add this after the fact. James Heilman, MD (talk) 02:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

A few peculiarities

• Afib_ecg.jpg (and a few more) == Description == inside the description value in the Information template.
• 2072.jpg this description is not useful (maybe tag everything with a description of less then 10 chars as needing description)
• Course.jpg this is most likely a copyright violation (stock image, compare to this image or do google image search or tineye.

That last point makes me a bit uneasy about the whole task. --Dschwen (talk) 21:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I've uploaded ECGpedia at Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECGpedia. I fixed the description issue I believe. I will go back and add {{Description missing}} to descriptions with less than 10 characters. I've requested speedy-delete for File:Course (CardioNetworks ECGpedia).jpg I'll do uploads of the other pediass tmrw.Smallman12q (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure so 2) the HR = 32 means that the heart rate is 32, standard shorthand and useful 3) I have sent a note to the up loader there and we will figure out who has copied from who. Does look like it is from here though [6]. The point is the ECGs though and not the clip art. James (log in appears broken)

Ok, so it was probably a fluke. I suggest you go ahead and do a few more test uploads. We should be able to resolve this quickly if you have time. --Dschwen (talk) 02:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

@Dschwen Resolve what exactly? I'll do echopedia.org next.Smallman12q (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

This bot request. --Dschwen (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
For Echopedia, a lot of the files have no description, I will see if I can get some from the template on case files pages.Smallman12q (talk) 02:32, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I have had a look at both ECGpedia and Echopedia and am sceptical as to the usefulness of this bot approach. What it does on the Commons end (i.e. after spidering the source side) is (1) upload the files with (2) information on source, author and licensing, (3) add maintenance categories. For most of the files, this leaves Commons users with the tasks of (4) providing descriptions, (5) providing content categories and (6) renaming the files to Commons standards. That is a lot to ask for, and so I would personally favour an approach more akin to Flickr2Commons, in which individual Commons users import selected materials, and thus take responsibility for them here. Another thing I noticed is that the image pages over there link to "description pages" on Commons, which never exist because the files have the " (CardioNetworks ECGpedia)" suffix here. Has that anything to do with their collaboration with us or is this simply an error in their MediaWiki configuration? -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 22:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Daniel here. There hasn't been a lot of discussion whether this stuff should be imported. I can see that some of the files can provide educational value, but this is largely dependent on good descriptions. Is there an anticipated use for those file on Wikimedia projects? Ie. Wikiversity cardiology? ;-) --Dschwen (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

An obvious use case would be WikiProject Medicine but the usefulness certainly depends on the quality of the descriptions and discoverability by way of categories (or perhaps file names). -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:05, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

For the stuff already imported, I suggest adding specific (rather than things like {{Description missing}}) maintenance categories that address the points 4-6 in my comment from an hour ago, i.e. something like Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECGpedia missing descriptions (for which an alternative would be CatScan), Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECGpedia missing categories (these have not been tagged at all, by the way, since Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECGpedia had not been marked as hidden and thus counted as a content category) and Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECGpedia needing file name review. This way, people interested in helping out with ECGpedia can dive right in and do not have to spend time searching for files in need of their help. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

In terms of converting multimedia files to OGG, it may be worthwhile to have a look at media.py. Adding WebM support to that is easy. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 23:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

For converting to .webm, I'll be calling w:FFmpeg in a subprocess from python. Daniel Mietchen's description above is fairly accurate as my bot is spidering and then uploading whatever info it can get...which isn't that much. The links to commons from the pedia pages are non-existent (it's a bug). I could add a custom description missing template and whatnot. So far, none of the files are being used...so I'm not sure if I should upload more files for Echopedia. I will post a note to WikiProject Medicine as to whether this upload is worthwhile.Smallman12q (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I plan to go through the ECGs, add descriptions and than add many of them to the appropriate Wikipedia article. James Heilman, MD (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I've uploaded ECHOpedia to Category:Media from CardioNetworks ECHOpedia. I could do animated gifs for the videos, but most would fall in the 25-30 million total pixel range and currently only less those with 25 million will be rendered.Smallman12q (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Upload videos as videos. It makes no sense to convert them into animated GIFs nowadays. --Dschwen (talk) 22:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Animated

Thumbnail not animated

The videos are 1-2 second clips. Here's what a gif version would look like.Smallman12q (talk) 22:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Five times the file size, conversion loss, and no apparent advantage. Why on earth would you convert to anmated GIF?! --Dschwen (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Gifs may be easier to use in some places and can loop by default. Anyhow, it's probably not worthwhile. PCIpedia is up next...it's ~200 files.Smallman12q (talk) 01:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Smallbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Smallman12q (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: To upload the NOAA Office of Response and Restoration Photo Collection. 4000 files of high-res JPG and PCD. I plan to convert PCD to 2048*3072 JPG for upload.

See User:Smallbot/source/NOAA Office of Response and Restoration Photo Collection for more details.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): 5-10 (depends on upload speed)

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): VBScript (Javascript, XMLHTTP, MSHTML, XMLDOM, COM).

Source: User:Smallbot/source/NOAA Office of Response and Restoration Photo Collection

Smallman12q (talk) 22:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

The extracted metadata is limited the galleries 1,2, and 3. (See the xml files of User:Smallbot/source/NOAA Office of Response and Restoration Photo Collection). I'm not sure how to name the files where there is no metadata.Smallman12q (talk) 22:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Can you give examples of how the file names will be constructed, and can you point us to an example of missing metadata? --Dschwen (talk) 08:02, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I've posted a table here. Some of the items have no description, some have a vague description ("??Oregon somwhere"), some have conflicting descriptions ("Roebling Steel, Roebling, NJ 4/4/90 Water treatment facility located on the banks of the Delaware River." and "Roebling Steel, Roebling, NY 4/4/90 Water treatment facility located on the banks of the Delaware River.") Should I upload with multiple descriptions?

Some are very good. From gallery 4, they follow this pattern: <incident>, <place>, <State>, <Date>. <Description>. such as "Powell Duffryn chemical storage tank incident, Savannah, Georgia, April 1995. Data from a berm chracterization overhead used during the Powell Duffryn incident."Smallman12q (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I suggest the bot includes all descriptions, and humans can work out which one is true. It looks like the directory structure has some info when there is no description. So how do you propose to construct filenames? --99of9 (talk) 11:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Gallery 4 is the most complete. I've created a table here. I'll take the first 230 characters of the description as the filename.Smallman12q (talk) 02:45, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy to approve the gallery 4 upload. For the others, especially those without descriptions, I'd like to see an example of the proposed filenames before upload. --99of9 (talk) 11:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• Maybe we're all waiting for each other here. Would the bot operator like to comment on plans for galleries 1-3? Or should I just close with approval of gallery 4? You're a very experienced operator, so I trust whatever you decide to go with. --99of9 (talk) 12:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

タチコマ robot (talk · contribs)

Operator: とある白い猫 (talk • contribs • recent activity • count • block log • rights log • upload log • SUL)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Bot will tag featured pictures from other wikis (main concern is ar.wikipedia) using {{Assessments}}.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic, unsupervised after the generation of the list of pages to be edited.

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): infrequent runs to tag new promotions/demotions

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute): 60

Programming language(s): AWB, bot already has a flag

-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 07:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

• Please make a test run. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Certainly. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 14:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
    • It seems like someone has already manually tagged the images. I can demonstrate with another wiki if you approve. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 15:06, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
      • A small test run from any wiki would help us to evaluate this. --99of9 (talk) 03:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
• I don't quite understand this request. Is this about extending the scope of a previously approved bot request? For the description it sounds like this is a small one time task. Does this warrant a request? --Dschwen (talk) 15:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I doubt it would be one-time, since other wikis are going to be periodically featuring pictures and not marking them here. But it does seem like it would be infrequent. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 12:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
    • @Dschwen: It's quite common sense that small one time tasks (or small few times task) don't warrant a request, and I think such request basically give more work to bureaucrats, who have already a lot of work - judging by this page. Anyway, as far as I can see, bot policy is very strict about bots running without requesting, and there are no written exceptions in policy. IMO, providing some clear exceptions for low volume tasks would benefit bureaucrats, bot users and the project.--Pere prlpz (talk) 16:05, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
• Four months and still no report of a test run. I will close this as stale within the next few days. --Dschwen (talk) 17:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
  • What exactly am I supposed to test? I am merely trying to understand the nature you want me to run. How many edits would be sufficient? My plan is to grab a category off a wiki that has featured pictures and use a regex to apply it to the assessments template (or add the template if it isn't present). -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 23:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
    • 30-50 edits per step III of Commons:Bots/Requests. --99of9 (talk) 00:08, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
      • I might not be able to generate 30 edits due to people manually tagging which is why I was asking. I am processing all 3,345 files from and hopefully I have enough to reach that mark. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 16:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
        • Yeah I only have 17 edits (edit summary: "adding enwiki fa assessment, replaced: {{Assessments| → {{Assessments|enwiki=1|)"). It is a simple regex in AWB. Is this sufficient? -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 19:09, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
• Also, please note that 60 edits per minute is much higher than the normal maximum. --99of9 (talk) 00:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
  • This has been discussed before. Is there any reason why we have to worry about such an arbitrary number bot operators disregard? It artificially creates a massive backlog as 1000 edits would take 16.66 hours to complete. I have placed a remark on the talk page of the policy to avoid duplication. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 15:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

1000 edits would take 100 minutes with recommended maximum bot speed. I think that is a reasonable speed fot this kind of task. Bots can make errors and if they do they should not do it at to high speed. This bot needs to be fixed so that it links to correctly named nomination pages at English Wikipedia, like this. It also needs to make sure that the pictures it tags really are featured pictures, eg File:Eastern Screech Owl.jpg does not seem to ever have been featured and File:Ebony Bones backup performer.jpg seems to have been delisted as featured picture. /Ö 19:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

FA Page ghosts on en.wikipedia
  Eastern_Screech_Owl.jpg
  Ebony Bones-01.jpg

Linking to nomination pages is a later issue. Not all of them are marked on en.wikipedia or on commons and crawling for them is a non-trivial task. That is a future task I hope to tackle.

The idea is also to sync enwiki (and other wikis) delistings with commons. The bot has no way of verifying if a file is actually featured or if it tagged without even being nominated. It can however check if files are in the en:Category:Featured pictures or not. The two mentioned files were in the category or at least en.wikipedia reported them as such (Eastern_Screech_Owl.jpg doesn't exist as a page on en.wikipedia despite appearing on category, Ebony Bones-01.jpg is a redirect on en.wikipedia to Ebony Bones backup performer.jpg which is the matching image which again shouldn't appear on category). On my second sweep I'd run a similar regex to en:Category:Wikipedia former featured pictures. Also not everything is nicely marked so catching problematic images is again a future development task.

The restriction is no faster than 1 edit/10sec according to the linked policy page. Simple math is 10sec*1000=10,000secs, 10,000/60=166.66... minutes, 166.66.../60=2.77... hours, provided bot does not spend any time doing anything. I do not want to add a 10 second counter between edits which would serve no purpose than waste my time. I do not see the point of a speed limit for bots. It was thrown in as an idea that servers couldn't handle such speeds. Developers disagreed and did not see a problem. The quicker the bot edits the better as edits would be rolled out quicker. That way I can change the parameters to work on the next wiki. This script would probably check for about 20 wikis that have featured pictures - of which most don't have that many files or new files. This task would take probably no more than 20 edits per month after the initial run. I do not believe the speed limit is based on consensus mind you. Let's discuss bot speeds on Commons talk:Bots as its a more general question if this is worth tracking and enforcing.

-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 02:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Please notify me on my talk page if there are any developments here. I cannot watch a page forever. :/ -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 22:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• Per the talk page I have adjusted the speed limit to 12 edits per minute (1 per 5s), but I'm not willing to go higher than that without very good evidence or directions from above (i.e. developers/techs of some kind). So please adjust this request to that rate. If the actual number of edits is as you expect, then this will take you only 2 minutes per month after the initial runs. --99of9 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
• I agree with Ö that linking to the nom would be very useful, especially since this allows others to verify the bot's edits. How is your progress in implementing this? If it's too hard for you, I suppose I'm ok with running the job as it is now, with a view to crowdsourcing the nom-linking. --99of9 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

  I unfortunately haven't focused on it yet. I want to see how the bot preforms with this task as is to establish the workload. One possibility is to add the new images into a temporary category for crowd-sourcers to plow through. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 14:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

---

I propose to approve this bot once the speed limit is adjusted to 12 per minute. --99of9 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Exactly why do you want to force a speed limit? Speed limit for bots do not make any sense as I discussed on the policy page which didn't get much of a reply. I am just trying to understand the reasoning. I don't think the bot would make 12 edits per minute for this task (as typically you do not get 12 promotions even on en.wikipedia I think) but I am running multiple tasks and sometimes they may overlap. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 14:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

As a precaution to protect the server we need *some* limit (e.g. if supercomputer bot wanted to upload 1 million files per second, would you approve that??). I do not know what the ideal balance between bot operators and server protection is, but per that discussion I have doubled the speed limit and brought it into line with the absolute maximum on the meta policy page. You are going to have to ask someone above my paygrade if you want approval beyond the policy limits. --99of9 (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not trying to be difficult. My question is more fundamental/philosophical, why do we care about edit speed at all when developers do not. When asked developers stated that such a protection isn't needed. Performance is their worry, not ours. There actually is an edit limit for bots too so it is not like a bot can upload a million files per second. Mind that it is impossible for bots to hit such edit speeds due to latency reasons alone (bot has to request a page, receive the page, parse the text on the page, send the modified content, request a confirmation (that it saved), receive the confirmation - even through API this takes time) unless they basically operate next to the servers or run multiple (unrelated) tasks at the same time through multiple computers (like my case). I just do not see the technical problem that prompts for us to even care about bot edit limits.

Mind that I am not complaining about my own bots edit speed. It will probably never hit either limits even if I don't bother with a timer due to latency. I am just saying the policy doesn't make sense.

-- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 17:32, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

If you can get an appropriately authorized developer to say that on record, then I'd be happy to see the meta policy changed. --99of9 (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)