Commons:Bots/Requests/OKBot

OKBot

Operator: OsamaK

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic

Programming Language(s): AWB/Pywikipedia

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): When needed.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Functions:

There is always something very minor to be done using a bot. I want to run a bot on Commons which has "Open approval minor edits bot", I believe that, I spent enough time for understanding Wikimedia Commons' rules, and I have older bot operating on many wikis.

Many and many helpful thinks can be always done using this open bot.. Moving categories and replacing same-gallery license are some examples, For sure, before doing ANY edits, I'll be sure that community is agreeing with me.

I think that there are more than one user has a bot just like that (At least for current time), I want to operate one. Read AGF before discussion!

Discussion

I don't know that we give free reign like this. There are plenty of bots to do most tasks - is there something specific you wanted to do?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

But I don't have one. I spend there many hours a week, so I do need one operating by me. There is not a limit number of bot flags :), we can give them as much as we trust.--OsamaK 20:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see an issue with this. I trust Osama, and if he says he will find uses for a bot flag, I'll take his word for it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collard (talk • contribs)

Request looks to generic for me. Also will be good idea to look into 3 previous failed request by same owner: Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/OsamaKBOT, Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/OsamaKBOT 2, Commons:Bots/Requests for flags/OsamaKBOT 3.

I also think that User:CommonsDelinker/commands already provide category move functionality.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you know that CommonsDelinker is an bot for admins only? Previous request was before more than 8 months, last one was closed on 3 November 2007; That's meaning you cannot say it as an example.. This is a different bot request. By the way, Why do we have some people who think that bot flag is a feature, advantage, rare, precious, something expensive, or maybe a weapon of mass destruction! It just a helpful tool for helpful users. It can be given and removed in minutes.. That's it!--OsamaK 21:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that OsamaK means edits like these [1] [2] [3] (Fixing license templates.) which will be very helpful. Also, while browsing his bot edits on English Wikipedia, I saw [4] [5] [6] (Adding {{Rename media}} template where appropriate.). I believe that OsamaK should be authorized for a trial run to see what he will do and OsamaK, please be very specific about what your bot will do. --Meno25 (talk) 03:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I wrote what I'll do. Fixing licenses cannot be done using an unflagged account (OsamaKAWB), it will fill recent changes. In English Wikipedia I have already a bot flag for interwiki bot, then I can do some minor edits for fixing images (Just like what Meno list). My trial run can be seen there.--OsamaK 07:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

That's the information we're looking for. Looks like good work with no errors I could find.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I am somewhat dubious (based on the failed requests, and the lack of clear tasks), but sort of OK with OsamaK running a bot. And if others agree, we should note that it's approved that OsamaK do that. However I am not keen on granting that bot the bot flag... since we do not know what the bot is doing, I don't want its activities hidden from recent changes. So: Support approving, at least tentatively. Oppose flagging. ++Lar: t/c 02:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I concur, at least now, with Lar's comments. —Giggy 09:19, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the original request isn't so clear, but I think the main task is supposed to be fixing licenses like this: [7], [8], [9]. If so, I think this can be done in an automated fashion safely, and flagging for that would be OK. Perhaps let's have a test run unflagged so we have some additional clarity about the task(s) and revisit this after that?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Lar. Bot purpose is not clear. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

If you give me an open approval without flag, that's good enough. But the problem is, some people will ask me to stop it, or to speed it down, because it doesn't have a bot flag, then it will fill the recent changes (Same notes former), and that's bad.--OsamaK 09:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather see flooding of the log than not see changes that we haven't specifically approved in advance... ++Lar: t/c 16:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I do not care, if you explain to them the importance of keeping so.--OsamaK 21:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Just throttle to something somewhat reasonable and if people are concerned, tell them the community ended up preferring the changes be visible (assuming it comes out this way) ++Lar: t/c 00:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

3 weeks has been done, any other options?!--OsamaK 12:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we ask one last time for objections, then if there are none, consider this bot "approved" by the community to run various tasks, but without the flag. Should folk ask about volume of recent changes, point them here to demonstrate that people prefer to see the changes. ++Lar: t/c 17:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Any objections to considering this approved? ++Lar: t/c 17:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope, go for it. —Giggy 23:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the need for a flag either. Osama, go ahead and edit with this account, as long as you don't flood Recent Changes, it's fine to edit with a bot without a flag on Commons (it's not mandatory to have a flag, as in en.wiki, for example). Please add some description on the bot account's userpage, it's still a red link :). Patrícia ^msg 13:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thank you!--OsamaK 23:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we can archive this once you've created the bot's userpage per Patricia. —Giggy 06:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done--OsamaK 08:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done. :-) —Giggy 08:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)