Commons:Bots/Requests/Polbot 2

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


closed as successful request for additional functionality by community, archived by EugeneZelenko 11:59, 18 January 2008

Operator: Quadell (talk)

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Manually assisted

Programming Language(s): Perl and Perlwikipedia

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): until complete

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): No, Polbot already has a bot flag

Functions: For those categories at Category:Requested moves which have consensus, Polbot will move the category by editing each page in that category. There's a huge backlog, and this work seems well-suited to botwork.


Polbot already received her bot flag here, but I promised there: "I may wish to perform other bot functions in the future, but if I do I will request authorization here and see if there is consensus." Quadell (talk) 15:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

No objections. --EugeneZelenko 15:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Polbot is a girl??? ++Lar: t/c 00:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Att-love.svg -- Polbot (by Quadell) 01:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Everybody knows bots are girls ;) -- Bryan (talk to me) 21:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
As someone who has run a bot here for sometime now and has been around Commons for much longer than me I see no reason to decline this at all. Probably thanks for doing the work is appropriate too! --Herby talk thyme 09:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Is there an official approval I'm waiting on (like BAG on the English Wikipedia), or do I just run it when it looks like there's clear consensus? I'm not sure how this works. Quadell (talk) 15:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

We're not quite as procedure happy as en:wp ... for additional functions (or for approval of a bot that wants to start running but was never flagged and it doesn't seem that a flag is wanted (rare, but not unheard of)) we tend to just do a consensus check, one of the 'crats who normally would grant the flag will "call the consensus" after a few days. Sometimes it's me, sometimes some other crat... Personally I sort of would like to hear what exactly it was you wanted to do that you're not already, I may have missed that bit :) But I'm not seeing anyone standing up and saying "wait" so I was probably going to call consensus in a day or two if no one else did. (first request, or repeat after fail normally waits a week-ish) I really need to write COM:MELLOW don't I? :)++Lar: t/c 03:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, cool. The additional function (what I want to do that I'm not already) is the category moving, in the "function" section above. All the best, Quadell (talk) 14:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It's been over 5 days. I like to wait a week usually. But I'm not seeing any big issues raised by ANYONE here. So when we hit a week unless someone says boo, let's archive this as approved and that will be that. meanwhile if Polbot wants to do another test run or two in this area so we can see what she does that would be fine. ++Lar: t/c 19:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, great! Polbot ran a test batch of 8 categories:
And yeah, I know, she doesn't get special characters correct right in edit summaries. From what I can tell, there's nothing I can do about that. Quadell (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Question: would we eventually modify the instructions on Category:Requested moves to suggest that requests could be given to Polbot OR Siebot ? ++Lar: t/c 01:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, absolutely. Actually, it isn't clear to me just how to request that Siebot do this. (The instructions are a bit opaque.) Quadell (talk) 06:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I think it would be good if you could ask him (perhaps with an example of your best guess) because if Polbot used exactly the same format for the requests that might be a good thing. Less confusion for users and it means either could fill in for the other during outages... ++Lar: t/c 15:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know much about Polbot, but Quadell has done fantastic work at Wikisource, and I think he can be trusted not to let her run wild. Cowardly Lion 01:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)