Commons:Bots/Requests/Whymbot
Operator: Whym (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: I would like to redact location information which was likely to be published inadvertently from ~1000 file pages. This is in response to a recent incident regading a Commons mobile app I help developing. For further background, please read https://github.com/commons-app/apps-android-commons/wiki/June-2018-incident .
The job is two-fold:
- Removing location information from the latest version of the file page - this will only be done when the location information has been there since the first revision of the page. Otherwise, I assume it has already been fixed and removing it is counter-productive.
- Deleting the contents of the applicable revisions
Example: let's say I published a file with a location information template which contains upload-time location of my mobile device that I didn't want to publish (first revision of the file page), and since then I edited it and changed location to the place I know the subject really was (second revision of the file page). My script will not edit the page, but delete the content of the first revision.
So far, it appears to involve 938 pages, 3294 revisions. I collected the data last Friday and I expect a small additional number of applicable revisions have been produced since then.
Automatic or manually assisted: manually assisted
Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): I expect most of the job will be done in a week. However, because not all Android users will download the mobile app's fixed version immediately, I would probably need another run or two after a while. Even considering that, I'd say one month will be enough. The expected number of edits and logged actions will be 3k-6k.
Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 1 10 edit per minute (see talk page whym (talk) 08:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC))
Bot flag requested: (Y/N): actually I'm not sure if bot flag is needed considering the expected number of edits and logged actions. It will definitely need sysop flag for performing revision deletion.
Programming language(s): a script based on the Pywikibot framework
I realize this may not be the most typical case of using bots, especially because it involves revision-deletion. Please advise me if you have other ideas on how to get job done. whym (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Discussion
- I considered asking for oversighting instead of deleting and I notified the oversight mailing list on June 11 - I have not received a response since then. It seems prudent to perform deletion in the meantime if oversight is going to take a longer time (or the request is going to be rejected eventually). whym (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Question: Should I seek using a sysop-bot or my main sysop account? Either way, the temporary flag(s) can expire after one month's time for this job. whym (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Looks good, thanks for writing the bot to perform this very much needed operation. Commons allows bot test runs, feel free to perform one, for instance on a test image created for this purpose with a previous version of the app. Syced (talk) 02:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- It'll be good idea if bot will leave trace in oversight comment. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:36, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- @EugeneZelenko: As for deletion reason and edit summary, does this [3] seem appropriate? I'm not sure what I can do for oversighting. I could share my script but I would be unable to test and adjust it for them. As for 'comment', I'll definitely make sure linking this page in the edit summary and deletion comment. whym (talk) 10:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- I meant that request to hide location information should be log entry. Test edit refer only to this request. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm still confused. The wording I was going to use was "Redacting location information: Commons:Bots/Requests/Whymbot" which clarifies that it's hiding location information. Does it look okay to you? If not, can you suggest a complete wording? whym (talk) 00:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- How does bot detect targets? By uploader request? By request for oversight? Other methods? Whatever method is, reference to request should be mentioned in log entry. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- The is no individual request to refer to other than this. I was going to perform mass redaction of all files in the list I created, just to be safe. We could later inform uploaders offering to restore it, or introducing oversight for further redaction via a mass message. The point is that most of them are likely to have been unaware of the publication due to the app's UI that misrepresented the app's feature, so mass redaction seems safer and speedier. Alternatively we could ask and wait before redacting, but then what to do when there is no response? I consider it an emergency response. The detection criteria and technical details are described in [4] but to put it briefly, it covers photos that satisfy all of 1) contributed via the app 2) EXIF doesn't contain location 3) location template added by the app, and the result is the 938 pages I mentioned. whym (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
- How does bot detect targets? By uploader request? By request for oversight? Other methods? Whatever method is, reference to request should be mentioned in log entry. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm still confused. The wording I was going to use was "Redacting location information: Commons:Bots/Requests/Whymbot" which clarifies that it's hiding location information. Does it look okay to you? If not, can you suggest a complete wording? whym (talk) 00:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- I meant that request to hide location information should be log entry. Test edit refer only to this request. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- @EugeneZelenko: As for deletion reason and edit summary, does this [3] seem appropriate? I'm not sure what I can do for oversighting. I could share my script but I would be unable to test and adjust it for them. As for 'comment', I'll definitely make sure linking this page in the edit summary and deletion comment. whym (talk) 10:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- I think this should be approved to be done with the main account. --Krd 06:56, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
- That would be fine by me. It would mean removals would be flagged just 'minor' not 'bot', but I don't believe the removals will be too many/fast - it would be comparable to tool-assisted categorizations we regularly see. I'll start the task as soon as I get approved to do so. whym (talk) 03:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
As there was not objection, the task is approved to be done with the main account. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2018 (UTC)