Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Chrisbot


 * 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.

Chrisbot
Operator: Chris DHDR

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic, but supervised

Programming Language(s): AWB

Function Summary: This bot's main purpose is to replace icons at RDT whenever the conventions change, or should an already widely used icon need renaming due to a badly choosen name.

Edit period(s): Occasionally, when the need arises

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

Function Details: Not much more to say than above, apart from that the current problem with the CONT set made me think of making this bot and rectifing the problem will be this bot's first task.

Discussion

 * These aren't strictly technical, but I think they are important. How and when will you change the icon sets, will people approach you? Will you approach them? Will you only change when there is a clear consensus? How will you determine that consensus?
 * I will change the icons as soon as this request is approved. There is a consensus at Wikipedia talk:RDT/C, however questions have been raised recently, so I'll wait to see what is decided there. Chris DHDR 19:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I see no problems with this bot. Foxy Loxy  Pounce! 02:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nor do I, Begin whenever a consensus is reached on how to update the icons/which to update.  Richard  0612  21:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (just 2 colons to avoid gross indentation) I am not in favour of these quite sudden declarations of This Is What I Am Going To Do. Any proposed change of icon name needs to be carefully and lengthily considered with virtually nem. con. and nothing but a change of name involved as the condition for it implementation. There seem to be those who think that a mad mass change of ICONA to a different AICON is completely problem free. An example: CONTs are the latest rage, they seem usually better than LUECKEs, but to proclaim LUECKE "obsolete and soon to be deleted" shows no appreciation that the newer icon is not just the old one by another name.--SilasW (talk) 20:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think you have understood what this bot will do: it is not going to change LUECKE icons to CONT icons – that would work roughly only one quarter of the time and never for LUECKE's legitimate uses. What it is going to do is change the CONT icons to their new names (which respect the naming conventions) as universally agreed here. Since a week has passed since I posted the way this bot will work and asked for any last objections – and nothing has happened – I will start working in the next couple of days. Chris DHDR 15:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * When I first came across l & r and other directions there was no clear indication that it was as tho driving down the page, Is there now? Personally I would prefer to have them as I saw them but as it goes it goes, however your "universally" is hardly the right word for the comments made there and elsewhere. What you are about to do may be innocuous and wholly beneficial but in my opinion a week is not long enough for a balanced consensus to emerge. The naming of these icons is indeed chaotic, it seems to have grown from a simple German set of abbreviations for BS w/ no #.Just look at the vast lists of icons while surely a well documented set of naming conventions would let anyone derive the required icon's name (with an automatic look-up for its existence.)--SilasW (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see what you're complaining about. There are a set of rules about icon naming conventions here, and the CONT icons, like all others, must adhere to these conventions:
 * l: left
 * r: right
 * f: in down direction (forward driving direction)
 * g: in up direction (against driving direction)
 * The problem is that these rules are not always respected, and this bot will change the wrongly-named icons whenever the need arises. There is no need for discussion, the only need for an eventual discussion will be to change the rules. I just asked for any comments since it is the bot's first run. If you are not happy with the specific correcting of the CONT icons, please say so here, at it's specific discussion.  Chris DHDR 21:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have corrected 2 icons, ueCONTf and ueCONTg. Looks like there are no problems, everything seems to have worked. Chris DHDR 19:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

-- Chris  11:23, 14 February 2009 (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.