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

SamatBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Samat (talk · contributions · Number of edits · recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: maintenance of images of Wiki Loves Monuments Hungary

  • adding {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2013|hu}} template to submissions where it is missing
  • adding {{Review-wlm-hu}} template to submissions where it is missing
  • removing categories where it is duplicated (where the templates categorize automatically)
  • adding [[Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hungary]] where it is missing
  • correcting the Summary section (e.g. descriptions or monument IDs based on the monuments lists on huwp)
  • adding geocoding templates (future plan) ErfgoedBot is working on it right now, so I was late :)
  • removing submission template ({{Wiki Loves Monuments 2013|hu}}) where the monument is not in the list (therefore it could not be accepted as a submission for the contest)

Automatic or manually assisted: manually assisted or supervised automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): periodically one time run mainly around September :)

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 10

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): AWB

Samat (talk) 17:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


AWB access is granted as a bot. Please make some test edits. – Kwj2772 (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Test edits are done. Samat (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Could you please make test run for each type of fix? Will Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hungary be added when more precise category was specified? It'll be good idea translate templates which is now Hungarian-only. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Test run for one type (where uploader used directly the UploadWizard and didn't add this category to the page),
  • test run for an other type (which is a fix for an earlier "bug" of ErfgoedBot; the bug is fixed so I need only clean earlier runs, not the future ones).
  • In some cases, where my bot could not identify the subcategory, I would insert Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hungary itself, but it is only few number of cases (for first look, I didn't find any kind of page) and Maarten will recategorise them in 24 hours (he won't fix this problem, because he only moves images from Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Hungary to its subcategories).
  • Task No. 5: I will code it later, after the review process, see next point
  • Task No. 7: It (run this task) is not a big deal, but I need some time to make the lists for these, it is possible that the community will collect the problems then I will run the bot. (The list for this task will be resulted by the review process that we can start after I placed {{Review-wlm-hu}} on pages. Some possible images are here: [1], but I (or somebody else from the team) would like to check them one by one before disqualify them from the contest.)
  • Best: Samat (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't like to push your decision, but I would like finish the first run for Task 1–4 today. On workdays I have much less possibility to work on it, and it would be important for the contest. Thanks! Samat (talk) 14:13, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Look like there are problems with referring to categories in edit summaries (missing Category:). Please fix problem and repeat rest run. Other examples looks OK for me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Dear EugeneZelenko, thank you for your answer. It would be easy to insert the Category: prefix before the summary, but it would be still a red link, because Category:Cultural heritage monuments in … doesn't exist, and I don't know before the edit, what will be on …. Editing the edit summary before every save would be painful. :) Maybe the best way, if I don't link it, because, in fact, I insert exactly this string into pages: "Cultural heritage monuments in ". What do you think? Samat (talk) 15:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done: I did a test run with this setting. I hope you feel it acceptable. Samat (talk) 16:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Looks OK for me. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

If there are no any objections, I think bot status should be granted. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree :) Samat (talk) 18:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)