Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 4


 * The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was Symbol keep vote.svg Approved

Fbot 4
Operator:

Time filed: 04:32, Sunday August 14, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: Not presently, but I will eventually post a copy in my userspace.

Function overview: Performs the opposite function of Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 2. Removes Copy to Wikimedia Commons from files with questionable content on their file description pages.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: 10k

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

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

Function details: The bot will remove Copy to Wikimedia Commons from any files inappropriately flagged for transfer to Commons (in other words, files transcluding Copy to Wikimedia Commons and any templates on this list). A disturbingly high number of files are inappropriately transferred to Commons on a daily basis, creating severe and harrowing copyright problems. This bot will help to prevent users (e.g. users who don't understand copyright, or worse, users who just don't care) from making these problematic transfers and decrease the workload of our few, very thinly spread Commons admins.

Discussion
What are the criteria you use to decide that an image is inappropriate for transfer to commons in this task? SQL Query me! 08:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As stated above, any files transcluding templates from this list. - F ASTILY  (TALK) 08:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't see any issues here. Only false positives would be if a non-free template is used incorrectly. But that would not be bot's fault. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:53, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Let's trial. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and if possible (and not too much of a hassle), it would be nice if the reason for removal was given in the edit summary. Something like
 * Removing Copy to Wikimedia Commons because this file is tagged with Non-free 2D art. See WP:TRANSFER for more information. Report errors, bugs, and suggestions at User talk:Fbot.
 * If it's too much of a hassle, then there should at least be something linking to WP:TRANSFER in the edit summary. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The blacklist contains Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons (for those unfamiliar with Fbot function 2, this is in there to prevent duplicate tagging). Wouldn't that create the problem that everything the bot checks will come up as needing Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons removed?  S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:18, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah. :o That could be a problem. I'll create a new blacklist before running the bot.  Good catch! - F ASTILY  (TALK) 21:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * (@ Headbomb) An easier message would be:
 * Removing Copy to Wikimedia Commons because this file uses a non-free license, a non-free fair use template, or has been put up for deletion. See WP:TRANSFER for more information. Report errors, bugs, and suggestions at User talk:Fbot.
 * Those three categories make up the entirety of the blacklist (save my point above), and that allows the bot to use one message for every edit it makes under that task.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

No obvious issues. Bot did everything it was supposed to. - F ASTILY  (TALK) 23:55, 22 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hold approving this task - The potential exists for Fbot task #2 and Fbot task #4 to edit war each other. Fbot task #2 has templates like Template:PD-AustraliaGov on its whitelist, meaning that it will add Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons to pages that include that template (and nothing from the task #2 blacklist, of course.) Fbot task #4, however, will remove Template:Copy to Wikimedia Commons from anything with Template:PD-AustraliaGov in it, apparently because Template:Non-free in US is built into PD-AustraliaGov, and Non-free in US is part of the Fbot task #4 blacklist. Oddly enough, it is also part of the task #2 blacklist, however in that case, Fbot didn't seem to care. The chain of events, looped infinately, can be illustrated in this diff Note that PD-Australia-CC is a redirect that resolves to PD-AustraliaGov and that Svenbot is a clone of Fbot task #2. I turned Svenbot pretty much as soon as I realized that I passed out of the PD-USGov stuff, because I realized I needed to do more research on the remaining templates, so even if Fbot task #4 runs now, there won't be an edit war, however I do have a strong suspicion that running it will take out a lot of good manual tags.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  08:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I resolved this bug two days ago, prior to writing the code for task 4. Have you tried running the new code yet? - F ASTILY  (TALK) 00:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You misunderstand, I'm not saying Svenbot shouldn't have tagged it, I'm saying that Fbot shouldn't have removed the tag.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  01:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, Fastily explained it to me over IRC. I'm striking my hold.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  05:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Edits look good, task seems sound. Make sure you update the edit summary and watch out for any tagging changes/updates. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 06:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.