Commons:Bots/Requests/Category-bot-helper

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Symbol support vote.svg Support = 1; Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose = 5; Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral = 0 - 17% Result. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Category-bot-helper

Operator: User:Docu

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

Automatic or Manually Assisted:

  • Generally automatic, sometimes manually assisted.

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

  • occasionally

Maximum edit rate (eg edits per minute):

  • n/a

Bot flag requested: (Y/N):

Programming Language(s):

  • python pywikipediabot

That's it. -- User:Docu at 09:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Votes

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support my request -- User:Docu at 09:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - an admin bot should be run by an admin. Docu is not an admin at Commons. ++Lar: t/c 06:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
You may want to see this. Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 06:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I see the relevance of it, exactly, can you explain? If Multichill is going to run this now instead of Docu, let the nom be withdrawn and made by Multichill instead. ++Lar: t/c 15:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I would've just changed the info, and restarted the bot req (which Multichill should do if he intends to run the bot). Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 08:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
The info is below too (see #Discussion). -- User:Docu at 08:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not see the need of this bot at this time. There are enough administrators capable of deleting stuff when fit and needed. There is also the issue of differentiating between empty categories that can be speedy deleted and those that should present a redirect instead. Therefore, this type of task should really be under the discretion of human administrators. Lar also brings up a good point here --O (висчвын) 03:56, 28 September 2009 (GMT)
    • If the consensus is that I should mark them with {{speedy}} instead. This is ok with me. -- User:Docu at 07:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lar. Kwj2772 (msg) 15:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I would rather see a admin as bot operator for a bot doing admin tasks. Huib talk 18:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not all moved categories should be deleted. Better let some of them be a category redirect. If cats are to be deleted then mark them with a {{speedy}} or just make a list. If Multichill don't have the time I'm sure others (me?) have time. If not it should not be a big problem if it take a few days. --MGA73 (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

  • (Sample question by Docu): Question: do you delete all categories you move?
    • No, generally I'm fairly restrictive about which ones I mark with {{speedy}}. All old categories I marked with {{speedy}} have been deleted by an adminstrator and none of the ones I marked for speedy have been undeleted or undeletion requested, as far as I know. I try to abide to Commons:Rename a category#Should the old category be deleted?. If the guideline changed, I wouldn't delete any categories not covered by the guideline. -- User:Docu at 09:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
      • If you make a list of old new pairs I can do it for you. Won't take me long and saves you a lot of trouble. Multichill (talk) 14:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
        • Well I just went through the troubles updating to the version for the new mw. I even added an option for {{speedy}} and {{category redirect}}. Both work quite well. -- User:Docu at 16:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I would say its much beter if the bot tags for Speedy deletion or category redirection because it could be easy processed manual, I delete like 10 a 30 empty categories in the Speedy delete category every day, I don't really see the need why a bot should delete it when it can be done manual. :-) Huib talk 21:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Shouldn't the bot operator be an admin before they can run an admin bot? Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 15:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I think so, yes. Also maybe we should get the bot approved first and then get it the bit? Or run the requests concurrently but separate? Note there is precedent for a bot and a "helper-bot" that has the admin bit, see Commons:Administrators/Requests/EuseBotHelper for more. ++Lar: t/c 16:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Category-bot is already approved. -- User:Docu at 16:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
        • Correct. However this is a different bot, and a new request. ++Lar: t/c 17:12, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Maybe one of the administrators saying that an administrator should be volunteering to do this could step forward and do it? User:O who suggested that administrators (presumably other than he/she) should manually delete each link, didn't reply to my question if he/she would be doing it. -- User:Docu at 09:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Alternatively, rather than objecting the proposal based on a formality, one could review it in detail. -- User:Docu at 11:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
When there is really need for a bot like this and it needs to be runned by a administrator I could be willing to help, but like above I think tagging with category redirect or Speedy could work also Huib talk 21:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)