Commons:Bots/Requests/Revibot I
Operator: -revi (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Replace ArchiveBot
Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic
Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Daily, at 2:30 UTC.
Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 6 per minute.
Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y
Programming language(s): pywikibot_core/scripts/archivebot.py without any modifications.
Since Fastily has retired and ArchiveBot has stopped, I think this will be useful for Commons Users. No change from user is required (Bot will continue to listen from MiszaBot's link) Bot is already approved on Korean Wikipedia and English Wikinews for same purpose.
— regards, Revi 11:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Discussion
I'm not running test for now, because if bot edits without botflag it will trigger email to ALL User talk edits. — regards, Revi 11:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Do you use the pywikipedia script? I tested it today and it needs some debugging (it is moving around templates o_O). --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes,
git clone https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/p/pywikibot/core && cd core && python pwb.py archivebot(in short). I've been running this way for +9 months and had no problems. — regards, Revi 11:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)- Strange. This. Oh... And i
support this request of course :-). --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:31, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- That's just a bot's fix to match the standard forms, if I'm correct. If you think that's a bug, phab is waiting for you xD — regards, Revi 11:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Strange. This. Oh... And i
- Yes,
- Support Would be useful for Commons. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 11:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- I would rather see 'fundamental' bot tasks being deployed by bot accounts with two or more operators. This is quite easy to set up, and means that bot jobs that everyone relies on are far more likely to have an operator to approach and discuss improvements or bug fixes in a timely way. This means that the bot operator can have an extended wikibreak or not be so concerned when issues flare up during holidays. It also guarantees that bot code is permanently released (along with past test results or experiments) and will not be removed from public resuse should a bot operator retire or rage quit.
- It would be neat if the ArchiveBot account could be usurped and reused rather than an operator named bot account.
- Revi, though you are welcome to run your bot and get the job done, could you consider the benefits of the above collegiate approach to operation? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:44, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- I would prefer doing it using my own bot, as I use standard pywikibot without any modifications and (in this case) I don't want to bother retired user. Of course I can give access to tools.revibot-i if someone requests it, as it runs on Wikimedia Tool Labs. — regards, Revi 11:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Fæ and -revi: would you want to let User:ArchiverBot (yes, an additional "r", sorry for the confusing name) do the job instead? It's not an operator named bot account, and two users (Revi and me) have already access to its Tool Labs account. As an additional small feature, there is a public log page (which Revi could replicate, too; see the crontab). To be clear, as of now we share the Labs access, but not the wiki password; I'm the only active operator, but but Revi can request password reset by Tool Labs email at any time to take it over. whym (talk) 15:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- Excellent. Support. Sounds reasonable. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- I'm fine with this, I'm contacting him offwiki. — regards, Revi 04:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for going in this direction, looks good. Page archiving is relied on by so many contributors that it is sensible to have multiple operators interested and available. --Fæ (talk) 13:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
- Excellent. Support. Sounds reasonable. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Fæ and -revi: would you want to let User:ArchiverBot (yes, an additional "r", sorry for the confusing name) do the job instead? It's not an operator named bot account, and two users (Revi and me) have already access to its Tool Labs account. As an additional small feature, there is a public log page (which Revi could replicate, too; see the crontab). To be clear, as of now we share the Labs access, but not the wiki password; I'm the only active operator, but but Revi can request password reset by Tool Labs email at any time to take it over. whym (talk) 15:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- I would prefer doing it using my own bot, as I use standard pywikibot without any modifications and (in this case) I don't want to bother retired user. Of course I can give access to tools.revibot-i if someone requests it, as it runs on Wikimedia Tool Labs. — regards, Revi 11:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Please create bot user page with information about operator. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, forgot that. Done. — regards, Revi 03:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Strong support, please speedy approve. --Krd 13:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
If there are no objections, I think bot status should be granted. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
On hold please. — regards, Revi 04:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination with archiverbot. — regards, Revi 13:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)