Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Diligent Terrier Bot

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Approved.

[edit] Diligent Terrier Bot

tasks • contribs • count • sul • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: - DiligentTerrier (and friends)

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Manually Assisted

Programming Language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Function Summary: The bot will be used to deliver newsletters and other notifications users.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Whenever a newsletter needs to be delivered, or a notice (such as an optional opt-out notice) needs to be delivered.

Edit rate requested: The max amount that AWB can do (which I believe is 5 edits per minute)

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):N

Function Details: I plan to start newsletters for several projects, such as WikiProject Florida. Before I do, the bot will deliver a short message to each of the members which will notify them that a newsletter project has been started, and it will give them a chance to opt-out of the newsletter if they would like. All members of projects who I plan to use the bot for will receive an optional opt-out notice before bot delivery, with the exception of WikiProject Homeschooling, whose members have already been receiving newsletters for a while now.

[edit] Discussion

I hope this bot can be approved. Let me know if there is any other information that you need. Cheers! - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 18:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I think this bot should be denied as we already have a dozen bots that do this exact same thing. β^{_{command 2}} 19:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I am actually only aware of two approved bots (Newsletterbot and R Delivery Bot) that do this task, and they have been quite busy lately. Having a third bot to do this task would take some pressure off those bots. I would also like to have my own bot to deliver these newsletters, so that I don't have to keep bugging other users whenever I have a new newsletter for any of the new newsletter projects I will be starting at different WikiProjects which I will start upon approval of this bot. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 20:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have a bot that delivers newsletters and it can handle up to several hundred projects without any stress. β^{_{command 2}} 20:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I would kind of like to have my own bot, though, if I am writing the newsletters, I would like to send them out when I am ready. Your bot may work great, but we are dealing with manual bots here, which means that a bot operator may not be online at the same time that I would like it to be sent out. I also don't see what's wrong with having multiple bots that do the same thing. What if one of the other operators retired from Wikipedia? Since the number of delivery bots would be decreased, would that mean that you would be OK with my bot being approved? - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 20:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

If there there where not already over a dozen bots approved for newsletters I could understand your request for a new bot. But with a dozen bots approved for doing the same thing I dont see a need for yet another bot. β^{_{command 2}} 20:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that with all of the WikiProject newsletters I plan to make, I don't want to have to rely on another user. Bugging him every couple of hours with another newsletter to deliver is not something that I want to do. And what if the user that I relied on retires or goes on a WikiBreak? Then I would be committed to making these newsletters without a bot to deliver them, and I'd have to either deliver them myself or find another user. For example, about a month ago I asked User:R if he could deliver a newsletter. To this writing, he has not responded to me. And as I've said before, I really don't want to bug Milk's Favorite Cookie or you everytime I need a newsletter delivered. I would be so much easier for me and Wikipedia if I had my own bot that I could run at my own convenience without having to rely on a user that could retire next week. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 20:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

(undent) He does have a point BC. It would be more reliable if he did it himself. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 21:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope you all will understand that I wouldn't plan newsletter projects for WikiProjects if I could not deliver the newsletter with my own bot. This is for the following three reasons: 1) I don't want to bug a user every couple of hours or even several times a week to tell them that I want them to deliver a newsletter 2) The user may not be on Wikipedia at the time that I make the request (especially because everyone on Wikipedia is on a different time zone). This would delay newsletter delivery. 3) It would be a disaster if I committed to writing the newsletters and then the user who is set to deliver the newsletter goes on vacation or quits Wikipedia. Then I would have to find another user to do it for me, such as User:R, who hasn't responded to me after about a month. Maybe I'm missing something, but I also don't see what is so wrong with having just one more delivery bot on Wikipedia. For these reasons I wouldn't even start newsletter projects for WikiProjects if I couldn't use my own bot. Having my own bot would take some stress of other users, and would allow more WikiProjects to offer a newsletter service. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 22:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Comphizii, I was just seeing if the operator could defend the need for the bot. He clearly does, so I will offer him the code that I use (something that will make AWB look like a dinosaur.) Diligent Terrier please drop me an e-mail and as long as you agree to some minor Terms of Service Ill gladly e-mail you what I use. β^{_{command 2}} 22:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess this might be a dumb question, but why do smaller sized wiki-projects need a newsletter delivered with an account with a bot flag? Outside of mega-projects like mil-hist, I suspect most newsletters go to 100 or fewer individuals. Wouldn't it make sense then to load the user list in AWB under the human account, append the newsletter, and start clicking "save"? All the bot-flag does is keep things out of recent changes and I can't image 100 edits over 10 minutes makes that much of a difference when there is something like 70,000 edits per day... MBisanz ^talk 23:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

actually AWB bots have the ability to auto save. thus the user would not have to repeatedly press "save" like a normal account has to. β^{_{command 2}} 17:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as someone outside the BAG, I can't fathom why this bot would be rejected. The objections (mostly "we already have one") sound rather territorial. This is a valid and harmless bot request, and it should be accepted. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Rspeer, please read my last post, I was checking to see if the bot operator could defend the use of the bot. β^_command 04:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

And you're offering him your own bot under your "Terms of Service", which I consider to be a poison pill for collaboration. Would you still approve if, as I hope, he does not accept your terms of service and therefore does not accept your bot? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 05:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Not using Beta's code isn't grounds for denying the request, I viewed it simply as a nice offer to use something faster. BJ^Talk 05:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, good. There are many reasons I don't want to see Beta's terms of service proliferating, but I will focus on one of them in particular: apparently the terms stipulate that that the code may not be shown to Wikipedians that Beta does not trust, of which there are many, including me. That kind of divisiveness outweighs any benefit in speed. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 05:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This is getting quite off-topic, but, I don't believe we have any licensing requirements for bot code. The present request, is to use AWB, which, is released under an 'open license'. SQL^{Query me!} 05:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This is off topic but do you understand how simple a python/pywikipedia newsletter bot is? The most complex part is following redirects and that takes all of 5 lines of code. I understand any ideological oppositions you have to not being able to see the code but practically the code for these bots are so simple it isn't worth bothering on. 05:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjweeks (talk • contribs)

If I were to write a bot for Wikipedia (I have written them for private wikis), I would want to look at existing bots, even the simple ones, to determine best practices. Although there are no licensing requirements on bots, and there are many bots I won't be able to see anyway because their source may be closed, it is still in my interest to see as few bots as possible running under the "no rspeer allowed" license. Returning to the issue this started with, it sounds like it would be significantly less convenient for Diligent Terrier to run this task with AWB than to run it with a (very simple) bot he has written. (Very belated addendum: this part makes no sense in retrospect. I hadn't realized that his bot was written with AWB, I thought people were telling him he needed to rewrite it with AWB.) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I've already done this once (and failed miserably) but do want me to write a open source (GPL/BSD) newsletter bot? I mean, how hard can it be? BJ^Talk 06:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Redundancy is good. The fact that there are many bots doing a task already is not a problem with an approval request. — Werdna talk 06:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd be interested in using whatever code someone already has written, provided that they'd either release it into the public domain, or under some kind of free license. Signing a terms of service sounds ridiculous to me, and I wouldn't want to be sued in real life over something that I'm volunteering for. If they can't release the code as stated above, I'd like to go ahead and get this bot approved for a trial using AutoWikiBrowser. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 16:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Diligent Terrier, drop me a e-mail so that we can discuss this. there is no risk of any law suites. β^{_{command 2}} 16:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

This is getting perilously close to disruption of what ordinarily would be an extremely straightforward BRFA, in order to advance an agenda that has very little to do with it. I strongly suggest this be approved to run with whatever means Diligent is able, willing, and demonstrates the competence to use, without any further arm-twisting. Alai (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Are there any objections to a trial run with what he's already put together? — Werdna talk 07:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Approved for trial (150 edits). for the AWB bot only. SQL^{Query me!} 13:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've changed the name to "Diligent Terrier Bot". I'm assuming this will not be a problem. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 15:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Not at all, how's the trial come along? SQL^{Query me!} 14:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

This is Diligent Terrier Bot's first edit. I hope to get some newsletters out soon. :) Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 19:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

• {{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} What's the status of this bot request? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 16:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I will be sending out a newsletter for WikiProject North Carolina very soon, now that I've created the template and other pages. Also, I should be sending out newsletters for WikiProject Kansas City Chiefs and WikiProject Cleveland Cavaliers. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 17:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Is it OK if I send out an invitation regarding a Wikipedia meetup to users in the respective area? - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 19:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

sounds good, let us know when the trial is done. β^{_{command 2}} 19:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} All looks good so far. Any objections anywhere? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 04:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

No objections from me. :) - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 14:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The trial that Beta mentioned at 19:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC) (above my comment)... did you do it? giggy _(:O) 14:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have made more than 150 edits. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 14:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Approved. Please, be careful, go slow, and ask at WP:BOWN if you are ever unsure. giggy _(:O) 14:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

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