Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard
Bots noticeboard |
---|
Here we coordinate and discuss Wikipedia issues related to bots and other programs interacting with the MediaWiki software. Bot operators are the main users of this noticeboard, but even if you are not one, your comments will be welcome. Just make sure you are aware about our bot policy and know where to post your issue. Do not post here if you came to
|
Bot-related archives |
---|
easy-brfa
[edit]Easy-brfa has been a helpful tool to a lot of bot operators in filling out the BRFA paperwork. According to the notice on their user page, all of Enterprisey's projects are to be considered unmaintained. Additionally, it's a bit weird to have to install a user script that does something on just a single page (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/request). Along the lines of other form-filling scripts like MediaWiki:DYK-nomination-wizard.js, I propose that we move easy-brfa to MediaWiki namespace and have it load via URL parameter (so that you don't need to install the script), and setup the instructions at WP:BRFA to link to the JS form. – SD0001 (talk) 04:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Personally I'd rather not force the script on everyone. Anomie⚔ 11:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't mean to suggest that. Perhaps the "Create request page" button in the instructions can be retained for the no-JS experience and another button can be added in parallel pointing to the JS form. – SD0001 (talk) 12:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I personally use the "Create a request page" box in Step 2, and I like it; really all I want/need is something to preload the form for me. Primefac (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't mean to suggest that. Perhaps the "Create request page" button in the instructions can be retained for the no-JS experience and another button can be added in parallel pointing to the JS form. – SD0001 (talk) 12:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not hard opposed to this (note would also need User:Enterprisey/easy-brfa.js/tpl-form.js) as an onclick OPTION to the standard form (per @Anomie comment above); however, forking a userscript to a community script means it needs to be more maintained - not less. Are there script maintainers who want to volunteer to maintain it? — xaosflux Talk 13:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Bots and their source code
[edit]I know this has come up from time to time, but what are the current sentiments on requiring new BRFAs to provide source code for their bots (unless an exemption is sought, eg because the task is considered sensitive; WP:BEANS, in which case it be provided to some BAG members privately)?
I think what we've seen recently is that individual bots disappearing doesn't cause huge disruption, but can greatly affect individual processes (c.f. FireflyBot, ST47ProxyBot), and open source code would help with continuity. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- There was a discussion earlier this month at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Open source bots where some gave their sentiments. Anomie⚔ 11:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the pointer! I wasn't aware of that one. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- just a random thought, would it be better to redirect/soft redirect WT:BOTPOL here? —usernamekiran (talk) 18:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, BOTN is for critical need. BOTPOL is rarely critical. Izno (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- yes, that's true. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Also it's probably good for WT:BOTPOL to be there specifically for discussing policy changes. Anomie⚔ 22:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- No, BOTN is for critical need. BOTPOL is rarely critical. Izno (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Inactive bots (October 2024)
[edit]The following bots are removable for inactivity:
* Pppery * it has begun... 20:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Operators notified. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's time to deflag them now. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Done. Primefac (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's time to deflag them now. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
A new stable version 9.4.0 of Pywikibot was published. This becomes the new base for PAWS web shell. Among others the changes include the following:
- Scripts for Pywikibot can now also be provided and installed via Python Package Index (Task 139143 and 139144). Instructions for this can be found here in the documentation.
- The supported Wikimedia projects have been expanded.
- Further changes are described in the release history.
With version 9.4.0 all Pywikibot scripts can now be installed via the Python Package Index, see pywikibot-scripts. The command pip install pywikibot-scripts
installs the scripts and the associated Pywikibot framework including all required external packages as a site package. The script must be called via the pwb wrapper, e.g. pwb touch -page:Wikipedia:Sandbox
.
@xqt 09:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
ReportsBot at Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/Members
[edit]I'm not entirely sure what I have broken, but it almost certainly has to do with the WikiProjectCard I created for myself as a preliminary experiment, i.e.: User:Biohistorian15/WikiProjectCards/WikiProject Conservatism. Deleting the card should work I guess. Sorry for the effort. Biohistorian15 (talk) 12:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @DreamRimmer already tried simply removing the contents of my WikiProjectCard. Apparently there's some other reason for the Bot's non-constructive reverts. Biohistorian15 (talk) 15:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I tried to restore the content, but the bot removed it again. Maybe you could reach out to the bot operator to get it sorted out? – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Problem resolved now. I was only so reluctant due to an irrational fear of editwarring with a bot. :) Biohistorian15 (talk) 20:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I tried to restore the content, but the bot removed it again. Maybe you could reach out to the bot operator to get it sorted out? – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Category:Open Wikipedia bot requests for approval
[edit]There are entries in Category:Open Wikipedia bot requests for approval that are either not linked from the request page (not sure why), old requests or not actual requests. Gonnym (talk) 17:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- shrugs I don't really see that as an issue; it's not like space is at a premium. If you think a possible task has been abandoned, you're welcome to ask the bot op whether they wish to continue. Primefac (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- At least, this one can probably be tagged by a BAG member, since the operator got blocked. Nobody (talk) 05:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- At various times in the past I've gone through and decategorized the ones that were never submitted at all. Nowdays I think it would probably make more sense to create Category:Unsubmitted Wikipedia bot requests for approval and move requests that were never properly submitted to that category instead. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Probably a good idea. Primefac (talk) 12:03, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think it will be more useful to have the BRFA housekeeping bot add a comment on such pages noting that the request needs to be added to the BRFA main page for it to be considered. cc @Anomie? – SD0001 (talk) 16:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- That would be useful for the future. For the dead-on-arrival proposals now their doomedness should just be silently acknowledged. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Usernamekiran created Category:Unsubmitted Wikipedia bot requests for approval, and I have moved 22 unsubmitted task pages from Category:Open Wikipedia bot requests for approval to this category. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Good shout, done. Primefac (talk) 12:03, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- It seems like the operator has withdrawn this request. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Closed, thanks. Primefac (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Deltoro05bot can be marked as denied, as the operator is indefinitely blocked as NOTHERE. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- The operator's last response in this task suggests that they may have withdrawn this task. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Deltoro05bot can be marked as denied, as the operator is indefinitely blocked as NOTHERE. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Closed, thanks. Primefac (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- It seems like the operator has withdrawn this request. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- At various times in the past I've gone through and decategorized the ones that were never submitted at all. Nowdays I think it would probably make more sense to create Category:Unsubmitted Wikipedia bot requests for approval and move requests that were never properly submitted to that category instead. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- At least, this one can probably be tagged by a BAG member, since the operator got blocked. Nobody (talk) 05:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Global bot approval request for Leaderbot
[edit]Hello!
I apologize for sending this message in English. Please help translate to other languages..
In accordance to the policy, this message is to notify you that there is a new approval request for a global bot.
The discussion is available at Steward requests/Bot status#Global bot status for Leaderbot on Meta.
Thank you for your time.
Best regards, EPIC (talk) 09:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note the English Wikipedia requires most global bots to get local approval to run here, see WP:GLOBALBOT. In this case, this bot task has already been approved to run here in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Leaderbot. Anomie⚔ 11:43, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anomie: Indeed, but per policy, global bot discussions require a mass message to be sent about it, with this page being one of the pages included in the mass message list, thus why it was sent here. EPIC (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I wasn't saying anything against the mass message. I was adding context for the audience on this wiki. Anomie⚔ 11:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I misunderstood your comment then. Thanks for the clarification. EPIC (talk) 12:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I wasn't saying anything against the mass message. I was adding context for the audience on this wiki. Anomie⚔ 11:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anomie: Indeed, but per policy, global bot discussions require a mass message to be sent about it, with this page being one of the pages included in the mass message list, thus why it was sent here. EPIC (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)