Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BJBot 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
Approved.
Operator: Bjweeks
Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic; started by cron job or manually
Programming Language(s):
Function Summary: The bot will find all incomplete IFD listing or images that have been listed for more than 20 days and relist them on the latest IFD page.
Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): daily-weekly
Edit rate requested: 1 edits per day-1 edits per week
Already has a bot flag (Y/N): Y
Function Details: The bot makes a list from Category:Images and media for deletion, checks the page on the list to see if they have been listed on an IFD page for the last 20 days, if not list them on the that days IFD page. The bot's code is mostly done and I will be running tests posting to a user subpage rather than to IFD. If anybody thinks this bot should have it's own account (IFDBot?) or the current account (BJBot) should be renamed to something else (ImageBot?) please make a note of it.
Discussion
[edit]A report has been generated here, User:BJBot/IFDReport. BJTalk 05:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just to make sure I understand: the bot would find the pages that link to each of those images (presumably through query.php), and if an IFD page older than twenty days links to it or if no IFD page links to it, then it would be listed on today's IFD page. If no IFD page links to it, though, how would the bot know what to put as the comment when listing it? —Mets501 (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it would just say incomplete listing or something else. BJTalk 19:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps it would just be better to remove the ifd template from the image if it is not listed within 20 days? —Mets501 (talk) 20:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure about that because the images have something wrong with them if they were tagged. I was thinking to show the last edit summery along with a message about being a incomplete nom when it places them. BJTalk 22:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Along those lines, the thought is that sometimes people just put the IFD tag without finishing the nomination, whereas they put IFD because it's redundant, they uploaded it by mistake. To simply remove the tag wouldn't be appropriate. At the least, it should have someone review the list the they could then determine the status of the images, but I think (re)listing would accomplish the same task. BJBot should clearly list that it is "finishing" the listing. There is a bot that does this for AFD. --MECU≈talk 02:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps it would just be better to remove the ifd template from the image if it is not listed within 20 days? —Mets501 (talk) 20:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it would just say incomplete listing or something else. BJTalk 19:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Since I'm unfamiliar with IFD, is it customary to remove images from the old page when relisting them? —Mets501 (talk) 12:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's not really the same relistment as AfD, this is more of a placing forgotten images back on the stack. BJTalk 14:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- OK, no problem. Approved for trial. Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Make 50 or so edits and report back here with sample diffs. —Mets501 (talk) 22:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- OK, no problem.
- It's not really the same relistment as AfD, this is more of a placing forgotten images back on the stack. BJTalk 14:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Approved. —METS501 (talk) 15:57, 17 March 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.