Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BotMultichill 2


 * 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 Symbol keep vote.svg Approved.

BotMultichill 2
Operator: multichill (talk)

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Manually Assisted

Programming Language(s): python

Function Summary: Transfer pictures to commons using (a modified version of) imagecopy.py

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Every once in a while

Edit rate requested: Max 6 edits per minute, probably much slower

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

Function Details: I'm currently transfering lots of pictures from the nl wikipedia to commons using my bot (approval@commons). I came across quite a lot of pictures at the nl wikipedia which were transfered from this wikipedia (see nl:Categorie:Wikipedia:Afbeelding afkomstig van de Engelse wikipedia for some of them). It makes more sense to transfer these pictures from here to commons, than from nl wikipedia to commons (because of the shorter paper trail). I will first tag suitable pictures with a category (any suggestions on the name?) and will then use the bot to do the actual transfer. For the transfer i'm using (a modified version of) imagecopy.py. I already transfered 5000+ pictures using this program. multichill (talk) 17:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion
Ive got BCBot doing the same thing please see MTC βcommand 17:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * That would be a good alternative yes. It forces you to add a commons category and adds a proper reference to the transfering user, i already like this tool without using it. If you could approve me for that tool I dont see any need to run a bot myself. multichill (talk) 18:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just post your name in the request section, and have someone already approved confirm your request (verify that you can be trusted I dont approve users due to COI issues) βcommand 18:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Multichill, is this request withdrawn? SQL Query me!  20:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * On hold, not yet withdrawn. multichill (talk) 21:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, wasn't sure, thanks! SQL Query me!  21:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * So, it's been ~2 weeks, where does this request stand? If you're still interested, I would suggest to BAG that a trial be granted. If not, I would like to close this BRFA, to reduce the backlog... SQL Query me!  08:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OperatorAssistanceNeeded
 * I am going to go ahead and mark this as expired for now. Please contact me or any of the BAG to reopen this at a later date.  BotExpired  -- Cobi(t 09:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not my home wiki so i dont check my watchlist here that often. Betacommand's bot is fine so i'll withdraw this request. multichill (talk) 14:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I want to reopen this request. Betacommand's bot is blocked. Source is available here. multichill (talk) 14:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The code looks reasonable to me, at a glance. It seems to be essentially just a wrapper around CommonsHelper, so I'd expect it to behave sensibly as long as there are no bugs.  I did identify a potential HTML-escaping bug, but it turns out to actually be a bug in CommonsHelper; I've filed a bug report on JIRA, hopefully Magnus will fix it soon.  (Also, a minor nitpick, but why use a misleading User-Agent string?)  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * poke me when Im on IRC and Ill give you a copy of the code that I use for BCBot. βcommand 2 00:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. It uses commonshelper for the information. I dont know about the User-Agent string for sure, i think it didnt work with the regular identification. multichill (talk) 13:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe something like "Mozilla/5.0 (not really; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BotMultichill)" would work? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for preemptively archiving this, the bot make it look like Cobi's BotExpired was current. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs (st47) 18:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * My bad. I cleaned up the other closure templates and assistance request tags while adding my comment, but missed that one.  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, from the "it would be nice" department, how are you planning to handle files with more than one distinct revision? Sometimes the old revisions may be useful, e.g. if they contain the original version of a retouched picture. A feature I've missed in other Commons transfer tools would be to (at least optionally) upload each distinct revision of the file to Commons in chronological order. I don't think it would be that hard to implement, though you'd need to patch wikipedia.ImagePage.getFileVersionHistory to provide the URLs to the old revisions. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 22:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If the old revision is useful the new revision should have been uploaded under a different name, but if someone feels like implementing this, go ahead. multichill (talk) 16:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Just so you know I'm working on image moving bot for User:John Bot II. Except of course mine will be better. ;-)   CWii ( Talk  00:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I see. Are you going to use imagecopy.py? I improved the code a lot over the last couple of months (rewrote large parts). multichill (talk) 10:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * BAGAssistanceNeeded I feel like going for a test run here. multichill (talk) 13:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see any objections, Mr.Z-man 19:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done transfered some pictures. multichill (talk) 22:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't the bot be changing links to the image if it changes the name like here? BJ Talk 23:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I added the changing of image links. If you upload an image under a different name at commons all the links will be changed. For this i use the ImageRobot in image.py. multichill (talk) 10:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The source, seems to work fine. multichill (talk) 13:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Mr.Z-man 02:43, 11 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.