Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/OsamaKBOT II

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 Denied.

[edit] OsamaKBOT II

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

Operator: OsamaK

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic after manually review.

Programming Language(s): AWB at most cases.

Function Summary: Minor edits bot

Edit rate requested: 10 edits per minute at most.

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

Function Details: This bot works using AWB (Or same program) to making minor edits after manually review. for example when I want tag some images with {{ShouldBeSVG}}, {{commons ok}} or same tags. This bot can be called "Free minor edit bot"..

[edit] Discussion

You have not addressed my concerns as to your communication ability - you must be capable of communicating with new users in order to run a bot that interacts with them. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 18:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

That's not a problem with this bot, I guess. {{commons ok}} (and same tags) doesn't need any discussion. Also this bot will not work in user talk namespace..--OsamaK 18:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Strongly oppose:

• In the first place a proper bot proposal needs to say specifically what the bot is going to do - what edits it will make, based on what criteria, how many per day, and for how long. This proposal simply says they will be "minor edits" made "after manually review", and as as an "example" it may be that the operator wants to "tag some images." In discussions two weeks ago (Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 29#Bot recognition of sources here; note - some of the links in the referenced discussion are no longer current and would have to be looked up in the archive pages) the user made clear that he wants to tag old images for deletion for lack of sourcing, which would be at odds with a consensus decision and approved proposal that we will not use bots to do this before making a concerted effort to save them. Operators of the major immage tagging bots, BetacommandBot, STBotI, and OrphanBot, have all acknowledged this and agreed to concentrate on newer images first while we try to fix the old images. We cannot have bot operators running independent bots that step on each other's toes disrupt the efforts on our proposal. At a minimum he first needs to get consensus that we want mass deletion of these images while efforts to fix them are underway -- or whatever it is he plans to do -- and then come here for approval of a bot to accomplish that. It seems unlikely he will get consensus.
• Second, this user has run bots with an unacceptably high error rate and failed to acknowledge or fully understand that the bots were making errors and tagging images inappropriately (see referenced discussion). We cannot count on him to get it right.
• Third, we already have all the image tagging bots we need. Tagging images is the beginning of a process that 2-7 days later (depending on the exact tag, per CSD) requires administrators to follow behind, evaluate, fix, and possibly delete the image. Large scale tagging efforts are a coordinated matter, with the taggers organizing the work and a flock of administrators marching behind. He doesn't cite a daily maximum; 10 per minute for a whole day would be 14,400 images per day, quite a few. Even 150 per day would be a lot. We already have several existing bots tagging images as fast as administrators can review and delete them. Tagging more images, faster, would either require more administrators to volunteer, or take away efforts of existing volunteers from other tasks.
• Fourth, there is no reason a bot is required. If he is going to tag images he finds manually, a human editor even with the best of tools cannot make an intelligent decision faster than 2-4 images per minute on which images should be tagged. Other users are able to tag images at this rate using Twinkle. At least Twinkle would force this editor to give some thought, however slight, to each image as he is tagging it.
• Fifth, this user cannot be relied on to run a bot properly. Very recently he ran a bot without approval (see discussion), and scoffed at the requirement that his bot required approval because, he claimed, it was only enforcing policy. He refused to respond to questions and requests regarding its operation, dismissed valid claims that it had an unacceptably high error rate, and in general resisted oversight of his bot. In ongoing discussions there was an utter disconnect between this user's stubborn insistence that he intended to run his bot again soon as soon as he fixed some errors in operation, and participants in the discussion who said that the task itself was flawed. There is at best a serious communication gap between this user and the majority of editors involved in this work.

Wikidemo 19:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Note: the above is based on the lack of specificity in the proposal as to what the bot will do. If OsamaK wants to take baby steps making harmless edits to images, I have no objection as long as the task is narrowly defined to preclude any CSD / image deletion, there is an adequate trial period, there is some oversight of the actual code, the user agrees to communicate on any questions regarding the bot, and the edit speed (which should be under 10 per minute), total edits per day, and total duration of the bot are all proposed and agreed to. Wikidemo 19:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome Wikidemo. I think you didn't understand this bot well. /me will not runs any bots which is tagging with {{nsd}} before January 2008. I have talked to Betacommend about OsamaKBOT 5 and he has told me the really reason (he didn't say "because your English" or "tagging using bot is impossible"). Anyway we don't talk about OsamaKBOT 5 which is rejected. Wikidemo, I'll add some cleanup template to images' page like {{BadJPG}}, {{BadGIF}} or something like that. Images which is tagged with these templates will not deleted (as you know), it will cleaning up (or upload to commons) only..--OsamaK 02:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Denied. - The task you are requesting could be performed easier by a person. There is no need to use a bot for these tasks. Also, please make bot requests specific. I do not see how a bot could identify bad JPGs or bad GIFs automatically. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 03:13, 30 October 2007 (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.