Commons:Bots/Requests/Dexbot 3

Dexbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Ladsgroup (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Removing manually added "See Below" (and similar cases) in | Permission = in Template:Information usages.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run (I can keep reporting it)

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 60/min

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): python

Amir (talk) 20:07, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

For further discussion see Commons:Bots/Work_requests#Remove hardcoded "See below"s in Information permission field Amir (talk) 20:07, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

• Yeah, this seems useful and necessary (without the template nesting please). I thought we already had bots doing this though. We'll why don't you do a small testrun. --Dschwen (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

  @Dschwen: : I just made 20 edits Amir (talk) 08:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

  Ok, Amir, I'm sure string matching is within your "limited" python capabilities ;-). The edit summary looks ok to me, too... maybe you should add redundant to make it more clear to the casual user that the "see below" is removed because it is not necessary. I.e. "Bot: Removing redundant 'See below' in permission". Then I think we can approve this, unless anyone has further comments. --Dschwen (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

  Ha! Found it, Amir, do you know of this bot? --Dschwen (talk) 13:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

thank you for your note, the "redundant" is added now and about the bot, this is interesting. I think my approach is different, I only remove the tag when the permission argument, starts with or ends with "see below" (or similar) and no template is used in the argument, so my bot wouldn't remove that part Amir (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I don't think it would hurt, to have this bot run. I suspect that the overlap with YaCBot is negligible (and even if not, two bots would get the work done faster). --Dschwen (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@99of9 and EugeneZelenko: any objections to approving this? --Dschwen (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks OK for me. But as usual I prefer to make multiple clean-up at the time, like headers internationalization. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Well YaCBot does headers internationalization. It is not obvious to me that the sets of images worked on my those two bots necessarily intersect that much. We have to weigh between getting work done now vs. potentially reducing the amount of edits on commons by a tiny amount (in the grand scheme of things). Sure, the alternative would be to modify YaCBot, but YaCBot seems to be in the middle of a long run over all files on commons already and furthermore this would introduce an overhead of volunteer work to have the two bot operators coordinate. Amir has a working solution now, that can be deployed with the push of a button. I would tend to valuing contributor time a bit higher than server resources in this case. --Dschwen (talk) 15:05, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

---

 Approved. --Dschwen (talk) 15:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to inform you that there's an issue with this task, see User talk:Dexbot#Incorrectly cleaning "see below". The bot is erroneously removing additional information from the permission parameter. --Patrick87 (talk) 00:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Pulled the emergency brake and blocked the bot. The latest edits where potentially informative stuff is removed along with the see below warrant a bit more discussion. If any admin wakes up before me, feel free to unblock at your discretion. --Dschwen (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2014 (UTC)