User talk:CategorizationBot/Archives/2011/July

Category Additions

Hi thank you for your note about adding a 'Category' to each the pictures created for use in 'CUSACK'.

I am rather old and unfamilure with Wiki so I may not have done it correctly!

Will you be so kind as to have a look and either let me know what needs doing or make the adjustments as you see are necessary.

Best Regards C.Cleeve (talk) 15:24, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Please link images

Done :)--Subeesh Balan (talk) 10:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with this bot?

It keeps on marking images as uncategorized that have been categorized right from the beginning/uploading. -- Ies (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Not a bug, but a feature: By request the bot ignores not-existent categories and marks images with only red link categories as uncategorized. Multichill (talk) 20:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

So if one wants to put images in a not yet existent category, what is a common event over here, he has two alternatives:

1. He can upload images with red link categories (as I did) and soon gets annoyed by absolutely needless bot messages before he has the chance to make the red links blue.
2. He can make empty categories in advance and soon gets annoyed when the categories get deleted because they're empty before he has the chance to fill them.

I wonder who made the mentioned request and didn't consider its consequences.

I totally agree that the categorizing rate (and quality!) must be improved, and that's what I'm fighting for here day for day, but annoying useres who make everything correct isn't an acceptable solution. -- Ies (talk) 14:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll remove it for now. Multichill (talk) 15:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I had the same question.[1] If implementation is not too much trouble, white-listing editors with user rights, e.g. Special:ListUsers/autopatrolled, and/or delaying notification 24 hours may help. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Couldn't pages with redlink categories be ignored for the first 24 hours, say, to give a chance to users to turn them blue? Rd232 (talk) 10:36, 21 July 2011 (

What the bot does is good and should not be changed. Ies uploaded the file at 14.35 with a red category and the bot marked it at 17.31 as uncategorized. The category was not created until 19.02. If you don't manage to create a category for three hours you have to live with getting notified. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 10:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The current functionality should be left unaltered. There is nothing wrong in getting a bot notification to add a category or adding {{Unc}} in the page. We can remove it anytime anyways. --Sreejith K (talk) 11:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree, most red-linked categories are from users who just pick the wrong category, I think we can live with the occasional bot message if it just happens to catch us in the middle of creating a new category. --Tony Wills (talk) 12:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I support ignoring nonexistent categories as well, and even a run over existing images to find those with only hidden and nonexistent categories, which won't show up in the list of uncategorized files generated by the wiki. The empty category list generated by the wiki would not update so quickly that an admin would see the category is empty until long after the point in which an image would be filed into it. – Adrignola talk 15:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Support. There are tens of thousands of images categorised in non-existent and forgotten categories since years. The longer one waits to discover them, the less chance we have to get help of the uploader. --Foroa (talk) 16:02, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I may be missing an important point. It seems to me that a 24 hour delay, as Rd232 suggests above, would not detract from the functionality of CategorizationBot. I use Commonist to upload my images in batches. It is convenient for me to start an upload before an errand. I'd prefer not to have to remove a bunch of no-category tags when I return. I support a list of users that CategorizationBot ignores, as an alternative. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Not to be missunderstood. I don't care whether the bot waits 24 h or not. I do care that the bot still takes action.--Cwbm (commons) (talk) 18:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok. The bot runs in two modes:

• Recent changes
• Uploads of the day

I plan to do the check only on the "uploads of the day" and not the recent changes. Still have to change some code to get this working. Multichill (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Checing all recent changes is not a bad idea since it helps fighting vandalism. In my opinion you should rather teach the bot to take account of categories provided by templates. --Carbenium (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You're going a bit offtopic here. But let's me clear about it: Topic categories should not be added by template so I'm not going to "teach" my bot anything. Multichill (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Till recently, a way to escape the bot was to use any template in an image, even when the template was not existing. Since many files use non existing templates or things like {{Information This picture is ...}}, {{My very own work}}, {{License from me}} , {{User name xx}}, it might be good idea to check if the latest version still traps that correctly. --Foroa (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Bot message about deleted files

At User talk:Lucas koche the bot left its message at 11:57 this morning about three images. That would have been appropriate, except that the images had been deleted at 11:31. I have deleted the bot message, because it will only confuse the newbie.

I should add that this is only a report of behavior, not a complaint. I think the bot is essential, even if it has a few quirks.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

There's always a bit of lag between query, start of run and actual addition of the template. This would explain this. Just bad timing... Multichill (talk) 11:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Done

Thanks for your message. Image:CorradoMelfi.jpg was categorized. --Gmelfi (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Good job! Multichill (talk) 11:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

CategorizationBot

FYI: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Patrolling_Category:Media_needing_categories. --  Docu  at 08:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

{{Tango}}

Hi, the category provided by this template ({{Tango|weather}}) is obviously not recognized by the bot, see [2], [3], [4]. Greets, Carbenium (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

That's intentional. The {{Tango}} template shouldn't add topic categories. Multichill (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Why not? Doing so is common practice and btw very handy. --Carbenium (talk) 17:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

But a pain in ... for category management, renaming and organisation. It is not common practise on Commons and we tend to substitute them. --Foroa (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Substituted, deleted and categorized the remaining uncategorized images. Multichill (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Ummm... that'S not what I intended. Anyway... And what so with {{Tango project}}? It still gives a category to "File:"-pages. Besides, this cat is hidden and should be visible to all (category:Images from the Tango project). --Carbenium (talk) 19:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)