User talk:INaturalistReviewBot
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
|
Bot not working again?
[edit]Is there a problem with the review bot? Several pics I uploaded 10 hours ago not reviewed yet, and I see the Category:iNaturalist review needed has gone up to 170 files . . . MPF (talk) 10:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- @MPF I had forgotten I had disabled the config setting that controls whether iNaturalistReviewBot will attempt to review files from iNaturalist even if they don't have {{INaturalistreview}} back in July when PetScan was having issues. I turned it back on, which meant the bot had to deal with a few months of invisible backlog. The bot doesn't currently try to handle both backlogs at the same time, it'll check tagged files first then untagged, but won't switch between the two until complete. It's really only a problem when there's a large backlog. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:31, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Actually, even a small backlog can be a problem, if it happens to involve a pic that an uploader is anxiously waiting for the review to go through, so they can upload an edited version of the iNat original on top. A lot of the originals need cropping to be worth using on wikipedias, or need watermarks editing out, and quite a lot are badly under-exposed too. Uploading an edited version before the review causes the auto-review to fail and triggers the need for a (very slow!) human review . . . - MPF (talk) 16:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- @MPF Fair enough. I think the only real solution is increasing the edit rate. The bot was approved at 1 file/minute, but could run much faster than that as most reviews take on the order of 3 seconds. I'll have to figure out what speed is reasonable and if I could go that fast without a new bot request. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 17:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Super, thanks! - MPF (talk) 17:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- @MPF Fair enough. I think the only real solution is increasing the edit rate. The bot was approved at 1 file/minute, but could run much faster than that as most reviews take on the order of 3 seconds. I'll have to figure out what speed is reasonable and if I could go that fast without a new bot request. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 17:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Actually, even a small backlog can be a problem, if it happens to involve a pic that an uploader is anxiously waiting for the review to go through, so they can upload an edited version of the iNat original on top. A lot of the originals need cropping to be worth using on wikipedias, or need watermarks editing out, and quite a lot are badly under-exposed too. Uploading an edited version before the review causes the auto-review to fail and triggers the need for a (very slow!) human review . . . - MPF (talk) 16:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)