User talk:Δ/20080801

Rename bot

Luxo and I are trying to get rid of all badly named images - is Commons:MediaMoveBot started? finished? somewhere in-between? Any update would be good, as that will be a principal factor in how we proceed with this project. Thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

yeah its live, if I forget to run it just give me a poke on IRC. Betacommand ( ) 01:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:CIMG0011.JPG - what happend there? the bot change the template, but the new file doesn't exist. Is it because of the Chinese symbols?--Luxo 18:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I think its an issue with templates, the new image is at Image:中葡友好紀念物-東方拱門.jpg where it should be, not sure why its not linking right see [1] Betacommand 22:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok thank you--Luxo 10:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot renames and equal signs

I think your bot has to be careful with equal signs in image names. Equal signs are treated specially in template parameters, so what your bot reads may not be what the template displays. For example Image:Edouard Manet 017.jpg was incorrectly renamed to Image:1=Edgar Degas - Lorenzo Pagans et Auguste de Gas.jpg, but the name in the template was correctly displayed as Image:Edgar Degas - Lorenzo Pagans et Auguste de Gas.jpg. /Ö 22:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

that was improper usage of the rename template. Please review the instructions, 1= should not be used with the name parameter. the bot does not use template syntax but instead uses a simpler method. Template parameter parsing is very ugly and I try and avoid it at all cost. instead of improperly using the template and blaming it on the bot please follow the instructions given. Betacommand ( ) 01:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

my one mistake

In my history of suggesting names for poorly named images, one of my suggestions was off by a year in the name. A year which did not actually need to be in the name, btw, and now your bot considers me to be not a trusted user.

One mistake is a lousy bar for "trusted" and I suggest that if one mistake is all that it takes that there are actually no trusted users here.

Also, have you ever made a mistake? It is common among human beings to exchange little vignettes of mistakes that were made as a means to help listeners not make the mistake and a means to have a more human appearance and profile. Occassionally, the story of the mistake that was made can be funny as well and often the same kind of mistake gets made and one little story about it can summarize a situation.

I find it a little humorous, for example, that your bot can have an opinion about my "trustworthy-ness" but no one asked me my opinion on the trust-worthiness of the bot. Personally, I have found that most bots here cannot read and cannot figure out what many of the human authors of image descriptions actually intended when they authored the description and also cannot tell the difference between a useful English wikipedia category and a completely non-useful and often inappropriate English wikipedia category. That is my opinion about the trustworthiness of the bots here and I understand that no one was asking this opinion. -- carol (talk) 21:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Very strange! You're on the trusted user list[2] so I've got no idea why it did that! For those who have control of the bot this is the image that the bot failed Carol on. Bidgee (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The recent history of these bots and the idea of trusted user is more interesting than this, actually. They had a trusted user infinite loop problem or something really close to this -- I am not going to take the time to dig this out of the history but it is there. It was a situation where all of the trusted users were disqualified from this bots trusted user list, if I remember correctly. It might actually be the one mistake that the bot made that would disqualify it (with the same rules applied evenly) from changing the names of images -- which is supposed to be what it does.

It is events like this which have helped me to "leave my emotions" and allow things like that to run. The failures are as interesting as the successes and I honestly think that out of 5 ideas, 3 of them are probably not going to work and 2 of them might but with no guarantee that either will be more advantageous than what is in place. However, in the 4 workable ideas of the set of 10; one of those might be perfect and perhaps the next step in the evolution of a system. This paragraph is entirely my opinion and the numbers and proportions used to illustrate the idea were also entirely my invention. -- carol (talk) 22:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Carol, Im sorry if this issue caused you any problems but in order to prevent abuse of the renaming bot a few safety features had to be put into place. One of those key safety features was only allowing people who have been approved, to use the bots functions. in two edits you added some categories and the rename template. but a few days later SriMesh edited the page meaning that the last edit to the page was not made by an approved user. in that case the bot simply stops working on the page and marks it as needing confirmation. the bot does not attempt to parse diffs and check to see who/when added the first rename request. the bot just uses simple logic for that, and does not go into depth history checking. hope that helps. Betacommand 01:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, please reserve the "sorry" for a more fitting occasion. Systems are interesting to observe as your bug hunting for this was. I also have no idea what happened several months ago when suggested a telescope image be renamed and the year in the title was off by one. It was not just me who noticed the error and I blamed other things that happened after that on that.

I am going to be sorry and it is a better situation and one that I cannot guarrentee will go away. I forget that the bots here have access to the last time stamp and what a pain to have the software look more into things. I suspect that actual trusted users can have patience with the situation and not throw a hissy fit, calling in admin for questioning, blocking and rudely upsetting things. I am sorry that I might need to be reminded of that last timestamp thing again. Heh.

I really did rename and upload a bunch of images there when I first started working here. It is with that experience that I am honestly glad that software can do that chore now. Please don't bother with refining the timestamp investigation -- there are far more interesting and useful things to be done here.

Too many words perhaps, not compared to the months of experience and observation though. Thanks. -- carol (talk) 01:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Village_pump#Rename_of_images <-- about the rename bot -- carol (talk) 06:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Error in tag left on original image

Hi. It seems as though the rename bot is leaving the tag {{bad name|Image:New name.ext}} on the old image page when it should be leaving {{bad name|New name.ext}}. The added Image: breaks the syntax used for the universal replacement on the CommonsDelinker's commands. /Lokal_Profil 01:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

can I get an example? Betacommand 02:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

No problems. E.g. Image:486999764 b54bbf2e31 b.jpg

{{bad name|Image:Crucible_theater.jpg}} (as added by BetacommandBot) gives the recomendation "Add {{universal replace|486999764 b54bbf2e31 b.jpg|Image:Crucible_theater.jpg|reason=(incorrectly named) duplicate}} to CommonsDelinker's commands". However this tag gives

CommonsDelinker: Replace File:486999764 b54bbf2e31 b.jpg with File:Image:Crucible_theater.jpg across all Wikimedia projects. Reason: (incorrectly named) duplicate

On the other hand {{bad name|Crucible_theater.jpg}} gives "Add {{universal replace|486999764 b54bbf2e31 b.jpg|Crucible_theater.jpg|reason=(incorrectly named) duplicate}} to CommonsDelinker's commands". This tags gives

CommonsDelinker: Replace File:486999764 b54bbf2e31 b.jpg with File:Crucible_theater.jpg across all Wikimedia projects. Reason: (incorrectly named) duplicate

The issue has also been discussed on Template talk:Bad name#CommonsDelinker commands. /Lokal_Profil 01:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

it should be fixed now. Betacommand 02:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh magic user pages!!

I was looking to move some gallery pages into the same namespace as the category that was moved today and I encountered a very very weird situation when looking at the What links here special page for the first one:

Special:WhatLinksHere/Adonis_(botany) the link that is there to User:Betacommand/Page 1 <-- I get a wikimedia error page when I attempt to look there. Is it magic?

In my defense, I was only looking so that I could make sure that all of the links to the gallery would be updated after I move the page.... -- carol (talk) 05:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not that magic. You can see the wikisource at //commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Betacommand/Page_1&action=edit. It is 193 KB, which is very long, but I'm still surprised it actually crashed MediaWiki given that there are no templates. And I'm oblivious as to the purpose. Superm401 - Talk 14:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There are here at the commons some categories and some galleries which always give me a message when I (I guess) dare to attempt to edit them. The message includes a padlock icon and claims that the database has been locked and suggests that I save my edits locally, blah blah blah. The dependency on this occurring only on particular pages can be argued. That I tend to work on certain types of things at certain times of the day, and similar arguments. I have ceased to believe in this message, however, due to the always inaccurate message it delivers.

This one, however, was impressive and not hidden behind galleries and subject matter which no one owns and while the "agenda" might be not known, the wikimedia error was incredibly uneditable by me. Heh.

It was really cool in many ways. -- carol (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Rename Bot - small problem

It seems the rename bot refuses to rename images if the file extension is changed from .JPEG to .JPG (or vice versa I assume) - see [3] and [4]. Is there a way to fix it or do we need to keep the .JPEG/JPG extension for renaming operations? --Denniss (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Right now I force the file extensions to be the same on both images, Ill look into allowing this switch. Betacommand 18:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

An elegant way to handle this would be to do a mimetype check. For instance, .jpeg and .jpg both map to image/jpeg so the bot should approve that change. This may be too much work though. Superm401 - Talk 02:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Other small problem: Original -> renamed to Image:2007IMG 6355.JPG instead of Wikimeeting 21-24/06/2007IMG 6355.JPG..? Greetings, --Luxo 22:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that might be a MediaWiki issue as I dont think / can be in an image title. Betacommand 19:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

/ is not allowed in file names since they are used in paths for directories where the images are stored. A year ago MediaWiki just silently removed the part of the name before /, and it looks like this has happened here. (But I thought that was fixed so that there is a warning about the changed name.) /Ö 15:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)