Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/The Anomebot 3

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.

Approved--Ymblanter (talk) 20:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Anomebot 3 edit

The Anomebot 3 (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: The Anome (talk • contribs • logs)

Task/s: Addition of WOEID (P1281) property values to geographic entities, taken from and referenced to the Flickr Shapefiles Public Dataset 2.0 (Q24010939).

Code: To be determined: very simple, and probably based on pywikipediabot

Function details: Yahoo! have for some time maintained a database of WOEID (P1281) values for geographic entities. Flickr, a Yahoo! subsidiary, released Flickr Shapefiles Public Dataset 2.0 (Q24010939), a set of geojson shapefiles keyed by WOEID, as CC0 back in 2011. I have cross-correlaed this with data from Wikipedia, GNIS, GNS and Wikidata to create what I believe are high-quality matches between Wikidata items and WOEIDs. Note that once assigned, WOEIDs are never reassigned, so using data from back in 2011 should be safe.

I now have a sample dataset of around 28,000 high-quality matches that I've been testing using QuickStatements. An example assignment is Waarschoot (Q911983). After some spot-checking, I'm confident enough in the data to apply for a bot flag. (Note: some of the earlier entries I made either manually or using QuickStatements either use the wrong property for a reference, or lack a reference: I will rewrite these with the correct references when I perform my initial set of bot runs.)

The current set of assignments is very cautious: as I gain more sources of information and ways of cross-correlating values between the various datasets, I should be able to add perhaps 100,000 more such assignments over the next few months.

-- The Anome (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a good, careful plan. However, I suggest you get the bot written and ready to go and run it (with this bot account) on 100 or so items for test purposes so that people can confirm it is functioning correctly. Good luck! ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Will do. -- The Anome (talk) 16:52, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The bot's basically working now -- I'm working on testing things like timeouts and other edge cases. I should be ready to make the review edits in a couple of days. -- The Anomebot 3 (talk)

I am going to approve the bot in a couple of days provided there have been no objections.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me!

Support ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.