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


Operator: Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!?

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic (but I write the code, so it's manually debugged)

Programming Language(s): Python

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Always working, will run on toolserver

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): I have already another bot, Filbot here on Commons (see below for an explanation)

Functions: The Bot will be simply a clone of Filbot. Simply I'm making the script every day better, in oder to have a better check and avoid the fake licenses (= templates that are not licenses and that the bot might take as one of them). But the checking phase has become really complex and a bit too slow, so the bot starts to slow down and if it happends, the following session takes the lag of the old one and so on, so in few times I've 10-15 script still working but really slowly and it makes a mess on the toolserver. So, I want only to divide the work into two Bots, that will done the same work, but half and half, making both Bots speedier and without slowing each other. I've already made some hack to make all faster, but I would like to have the whole work better done, not simply using some hacking trick that will blow up if the code becomes even more complex (and it should also because the Bot's check is still really naive and it's not that difficult to avoid). --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 13:51, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


I don't have objection based on my experience with bot in the past. However will be good idea if other bot specialist will look into source code. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Maybe a test run? --Kanonkas(talk) 14:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
@EugeneZelenko: I'm a bot specialist, I'm a pywikipediabot developer as you can see here. Moreover, the bot is already running under the account Filbot (I'm the master also of this one). I've said everything above.
Sorry, if I offended you. It was not my intent. But as programmer I know that it's good idea to ask opinion of peers especially in optimization issues. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I only meant, that as a pywikipediabot developer, I've committed the source to the svn, so it's already open to the public. I will improve it as soon as possible (to reduce the call to wikipedia in oder to make it faster) but having two accounts would help a lot also to have the option to recheck the images (sometimes the users simply delete the warning without caring too much). --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 15:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
@I think it's useless, it will work exactly how Filbot works (it's mine also this one). I've said everything above. --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 16:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Filnik, good to have a backup bot. When is it going to run? When Filbot is down? Test run seems rather pointless to me, everybody can have a look at Special:Contributions/Filbot to see how the bot is functioning. Multichill (talk) 17:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
They should run at the same time to reduce the lag that increase in every run. With two I can deal at best the situation without too many hacks. :-) --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 18:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I totaly Symbol support vote.svg  Support to flag this bot directly! Filnik is a very trusted user and his bot is one of the best! abf /talk to me/ 15:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
    Thanks :-) I'm rewriting a lot the script to make it faster, but it's still to slow. I've gained ~ 10 minutes (because now it doesn't wait for real, it only skips the too-new images) and ~ 5-6 seconds for image (I'm using the API now) and some other seconds. But I cannot do the miracles, if we want a smart bot, I have to slice the job into two bots (or make some really evil hack). --Filnik\b[Rr]ock\b!? 16:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)