Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/RegularBot
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Not done @GZWDer: This request seems to be abandoned, please reopen it if that is not the case. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RegularBot (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: GZWDer (talk • contribs • logs)
Task/s: Doing fully-automatic and periodic tasks (see below)
Code: See /data/project/largedatasetbot-regular in Toolforge
Function details:
Current tasks are:
Creating new items for unconnected pagesSee Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/RegularBot 2.- Daily importing from Prime Page
Potentially future tasks:
- Fixing common errors (similar to KrBot autofix)
- Importing statement from a specific pattern (for example mass adding instance of (P31)=Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410), or importing JSTOR article ID (P888) from Wikidata:WikiProject_Source_MetaData/Wikidata_lists/Items_missing_JSTOR_ID
- Updating specific database reports
Before the task moved to a dedicated bot account, they are performed via the GZWDer (flood) account. But this needs to be moved to a new account to cope with phab:T258354. (The request is not ready to be approved until we decided how to use the user group.) --GZWDer (talk) 13:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely preferable to run this under a bot account, thanks! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until problems from previous runs of the operator's bots are fixed, e.g. User_talk:GZWDer#Mass_creation_of_items_without_labels. --- Jura 12:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer: I don't think it's adequate that the response to problems raised on the operators talk page is limited to noting that the same tool wont be used again and another bot will clean it up (what hasn't happened in four months). Can you present a plan to investiage previous problems with your bots and a way to track their resolution? I don't expect you to fix them all yourself (you can place requests on Wikidata:Bot_requests), but similar problems need to be identified and you need to ensure they don't reoccur. It's not ok that you bork items for Wikisource (leave it to others to clean up) and then years later you do the same again. --- Jura 05:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: Do you find any examples that are not fixed?--GZWDer (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I had found 2000. I don't think think it's for Matej or myself to fix or check if identified problems are fixed or not. It's really up to you to do that. Can you do that and come back? --- Jura 06:16, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: For example?--GZWDer (talk) 08:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Sample for what? --- Jura 09:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: Do you find any items that have such issue and are not fixed?--GZWDer (talk) 09:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The comment linked above pointed to 2000 of them. --- Jura 09:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: But they are fixed.--GZWDer (talk) 09:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The question for you is if your bot(s)/account(s) created more simiarly defective items and if they all have been fixed since. Further, if all other defects raised to you have been followed up. --- Jura 09:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think so. Feel free to point to an example if it is not the case.--GZWDer (talk) 09:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem with the label of Q75877437 raised in 2019 is still unresolved (and probably thousands of similar ones). --- Jura 09:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: See https://w.wiki/ZaU --GZWDer (talk) 23:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Ty. When I wrote that comment in 2019 I thought it was helpful to include an entire regex of cases that needed fixing. I fixed some, others fixed more, but there is still left. Maybe we should add it to Wikidata:Bot_requests. --- Jura 17:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem with the label of Q75877437 raised in 2019 is still unresolved (and probably thousands of similar ones). --- Jura 09:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think so. Feel free to point to an example if it is not the case.--GZWDer (talk) 09:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The question for you is if your bot(s)/account(s) created more simiarly defective items and if they all have been fixed since. Further, if all other defects raised to you have been followed up. --- Jura 09:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: Do you find any items that have such issue and are not fixed?--GZWDer (talk) 09:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Sample for what? --- Jura 09:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: For example?--GZWDer (talk) 08:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I had found 2000. I don't think think it's for Matej or myself to fix or check if identified problems are fixed or not. It's really up to you to do that. Can you do that and come back? --- Jura 06:16, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jura1: Do you find any examples that are not fixed?--GZWDer (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer: I don't think it's adequate that the response to problems raised on the operators talk page is limited to noting that the same tool wont be used again and another bot will clean it up (what hasn't happened in four months). Can you present a plan to investiage previous problems with your bots and a way to track their resolution? I don't expect you to fix them all yourself (you can place requests on Wikidata:Bot_requests), but similar problems need to be identified and you need to ensure they don't reoccur. It's not ok that you bork items for Wikisource (leave it to others to clean up) and then years later you do the same again. --- Jura 05:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If this request is approved (on which I am giving no opinion), it should only be on the firm condition that the bot creates no new items under this task -- i.e. any job that might involve creating items would need to be submitted as a new bot request, for separate discussion, and should not go ahead under this approval. Any such new bot request would need to set out in detail for consideration what actions were being proposed to avoid the creation of duplicates, and how the new items would be properly populated with enough statements to make them well identifiable. Given GZWDer's previous tendency to be rather "relaxed" on both these scores in the past (at least in the eyes of many), I believe this limitation, and requirement in future of specific approval before any such tasks, to be necessary. Jheald (talk) 13:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- This task will only create items from Prime Page, I hope there will be no duplicates.--GZWDer (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]