Jump to content

User talk:Fbot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Thincat (talk | contribs) at 14:31, 5 January 2012 (→‎Incorrect tagging of used sound files as orphaned.: another comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Re:File:INANT.JPG

Re:File:INANT.JPG

File is tagged as "priority candidate" and "orphan". Probably status of this file changed during edits of the bot but maybe placing "orphaned" tag should involve removing priority candidate status? Bulwersator (talk) 07:37, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably because I have yet to run Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 15. I'll do that in a few hours. -FASTILY Happy 2012!! 07:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote that File:Chris Ott cafe.jpg is not orphaned, but what has it? It is orphaned. It is a picture of ME. I am totally non-enclycolpedic. Dazedbythebell (talk) 16:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect tagging of used sound files as orphaned.

Fbot tagged File:Acetaminophen.ogg with {{Orphan image}}[1]. This file is in use at Paracetamol and Panadol and, so far as I can see, was also in use at the time of tagging. When I look at File:Acetaminophen.ogg#filelinks I see "No pages on the English Wikipedia link to this file" which is at odds with Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Acetaminophen.ogg. The file's history is also noteworthy.[2]This might not be particularly problematic except the file has also been nominated for deletion on grounds of "Orphaned/Unused, no foreseeable use" when it looks as if the first ground is false and the second is very difficult to sustain.[3] I have raised the same concern over several other sound files and, although Fastily has moved the files to Commons effectively withdrawing the delete nomination, his responses have not referred to the underlying problem of tagging.[4][5]

The other files I mention are now on Commons and so I can no longer see the histories but the files were [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], and [13] (this last is not yet on Commons). Other people have also pointed out similar non-orphaned files Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion#Recent_nominations.

Can someone with more experience of these things see whether the orphaned tagging is indeed going wrong to quite a considerable extent (at least with sound files) because perhaps tagging should be discontinued to some extent. Is it possible to check that such tagging has been done correctly? Thincat (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that tagging with "orphan" is not a major problem since there is a limited number of ogg-files. We just need to be carefull when files are nominated for deletion. I checked the ogg currently nominated for deletion and moved some used to Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If this bot does not stop tagging files (ogg or otherwise) as "orphaned" that are not in fact orphaned, it may be time to review its approval. Anomie 02:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could there be some reason why it is only sound files or ogg files that are being mis-tagged as orphaned? Many are certainly being tagged correctly. Perhaps it could be the way they are linked to in articles. I would have thought it more likely to affect all types of file. If it is only ogg files and there is no immediate remedy could the bot be programmed to skip these files? Is there a bot that can can reliably detect mis-tagging? How best to warn the future "deleting" admin at FfD that many files have been nominated in effect solely on grounds of {{orphan image}} and so each nomination claim cannot be taken at face value? Thincat (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It looks as if Fbot tags all types of free file as {{orphan image}} when the only inbound links are from User:, User_talk: and File: (and, I think other non-main spaces). (Note: the sound files mentioned above were all linked to from main space). For example File:Appoggiatura.png tagged here and linked to both now and at the time of tagging from User:Hyacinth/Images and . I expect this is a feature rather than a bug deriving from fair use considerations. Maybe Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Fbot 5 assumed this behaviour. At the time of approval Template:orphan image said this but now the wording has been changed and does not fit the apparent behaviour of the bot. I think any inbound links should mean a free file is not orphaned (except, of course, links for some types of file maintenance, possibly such as User:Multichill/Free uploads). Thincat (talk) 14:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this template for deletion Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_January_5#Template:Orphan_image Bulwersator (talk) 08:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]