Commons:Bots/Requests/Fructibot

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Fructibot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Fructibus (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Fill the categories like Category:Wrist clasps in the Portable Antiquities Scheme - Category:Buckles in the Portable Antiquities Scheme and then other tasks like these.

Automatic or manually assisted: manually assisted

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

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): None. Using AWB

Fructibus (talk) 23:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@EugeneZelenko: I can't log in on Commons, using AWB. It says "Fructibot is not enabled to use this" and then it opens this page in my browser, where it specifies: "Access - This list of users with AWB access is only for the Wikimedia Commons. Note that approval is not always needed on other projects, but it is for Commons." I tried to login in a few Wikipedia projects too (en, de fr, fa, hi), but it doesn't work. Fructibus (talk) 23:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I added your bot account to Commons:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Approved users. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@EugeneZelenko: Thank you! I've made several test edits, please take a look at them to check if their edit summaries are OK - Special:Contributions/Fructibot. Fructibus (talk) 12:06, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't include section header, it doesn't make sense for categories. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@EugeneZelenko: You are right! I was very irritated by that section header notice, I simply could not imagine that there's an option for that. I made a few edits more without section headers now. Fructibus (talk) 17:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine for me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@EugeneZelenko, Krd, and Odder: Could you approve the bot? It's already running happily. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Why is that already running at full speed without bot flag? --Krd 06:41, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes why. It is flooding "newbie contributions"> Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have now blocked the bot. Operator doesn't appear to act responsible to me, running at full speed without bot flag and no response at the bot request page. Also the bot doesn't appear to run manually assisted as specified above, and does more the 12 edits per minute as specified above. --Krd 07:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I had no time for editing these days, now I came back. I thought I can already run the bot since I got the answer "looks fine". I had no idea that it doesn't have the bot flag yet, I'm not familiarized with the various levels of the approval procedure. Therefore I didn't check this page since I was thinking that the approval is done and the request is simply waiting for being archived. I came back now because I was intrigued why the request was not archived yet. I applied for "manually assisted" because I am using AWB and I noticed that AWB doesn't have the bot options as it did some years ago (IIRC). So I thought that manually I will make one edit every five seconds. Then when I started editing I was overwhelmed by the enormous amount of edits I had to do (thousands) and I thought it would be nice to do it faster. I think I should have asked here first. Then I realized that I can actually make the edits much faster, once every one or two seconds. Then I got the idea to recompile AWB to save modifications automatically without user intervention. Again, I should have asked, but I was afraid it will be refused, since AWB doesn't have bot options (or at least I can't find it) and I've set it at one edit every 2 seconds (30 per minute).

Sorry for the inconvenience. Can I apply again for a bot? If yes, then when? And is it possible to have an automatic bot? If yes, then is it allowed to use recompile AWB to make it run automatically? For the moment I am mainly focused on categorizing the items in the Category:Portable Antiquities Scheme, I think I did a decent job about it already. - Fructibus (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have now unblocked the bot. Please stop the task until this bot request is closed. I'm going to let this open for the moment as I think I should abstain from closing here, and I think there are still issues. --Krd 05:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Can I change the "Maximum edit rate" to 50 and or at least 30 and the "Automatic or manually assisted" parameter to automatic? Fructibus (talk) 06:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you technically can, because I don't know your system. As long as no bot flag has been applied, please stop the task completely. --Krd 06:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh, I mean the parameters of this request - I mean if it's ok to change them, I'm not going to use the robot for the time being - Fructibus (talk) 23:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Fructibus: Changing what is being considered after people have already started discussing it is frowned upon in a main discussion, but you could start a new subsection about such a potential change. However, since Krd thinks there are still issues, insisting on such a high edit rate on automatic would be inadvisable.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: Sure, I don't want to insist - just tried to make my question clear. I'll just wait and see what happens. Thanks. - Fructibus (talk) 16:09, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@EugeneZelenko: Could you please comment here? Thank you. --Krd 08:45, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should approve it. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! @Krd, EugeneZelenko, Jeff G., Hedwig in Washington, and Artix Kreiger: Question: as I need to make thousands of modifications, I would like to know if I'm allowed to run the bot automatically. I can recompile AWB to make it make the saves without user intervention. I am very careful to make modifications only where they are appropriate. I can happily have patience to wait and run the bot manually for a while: weeks, months - as much as required to prove my good will and responsability. -- Fructibus (talk) 08:10, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any problem in running it automatically, as I consider your "test" run already fullauto, as you didn't even notice the block in time. I'd prefer, though, to have the statements given in the bot request to match the actual setup. --Krd 09:22, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd: Thanks, does these last three edits look ok? -- Fructibus (talk) 13:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As there is no further feedback, I'll close this as approved. --Krd 20:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]