Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Kotbot 6

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was

Withdrawn by operator.

Kotbot 6

Operator: Kotniski (talk · contribs)

Automatic or Manually assisted: auto (after a period of testing)

?

Source code available: not yet (pywikipedia + custom script)

Function overview: The bot will start a series of new articles by a transfer of text from Wiki Source and start 3800 articles from the Dictionary of National Biography from here and will be coded to do the minor wikifying work that is need to post it on wikipedia.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): several days. Will be run possibly with intervals of 6 months to allow texts to accumulate on wiki source again once the 3800 current articles are started.

Estimated number of pages affected: 3850

Exclusion compliant (Y/N):

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):

Function details:

The bot will start a series of new articles by a transfer of text from Wiki Source and start 3800 articles from the Public Domain Dictionary of National Biography from here and will be coded to do the minor wikifying work that is need to post it on wikipedia.
After creation a manual check will be needed by myself and several other editors to ensure that the bot has transferred the articles smoothly, no articles are duplicated and that the new articles are accesible on dab pages if they have the same name and that they are correctly categorized. Given that the proof readin has already been completed on Wikji Source by hard working editors such as Charles Matthews the text is ready to be copied into wikipedia. Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

{{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} What I recommend is that the bot creates the articles with a simple category of the profession given in the title. Once created it places the article in a hidden category Category:Auto-generated DNB article needing checking or something. Then I and anybody else interested can gradually plough through the log over several weeks and check that the articles are probably categorized/wikified. Basically the raw text is already there for the taking so above all the information present on wikipedia is the most important. If the bot can be coded to reduce the manual work needed afterwards by wikifying key words, organizing the article e.g where the DNB articles says "works" it places it under a == == works section underneath the biography and minor categorizing this would make it easier. Kotniski will however need to elaborate on exactly what he can do using the bot to make the transfer as smoothly as possible. Otherwise this process will take years to do manually. It is definately a job for a bot when the text already exist. I propose a trial run of 10-20 articles to illustrate that this task can be done by a bot and to illustrate to people like Charles Matthews etc that the raw work can be done by the bot saving years of transfer work. Dr. Blofeld 10:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of categories if the bot could do the following: For example

{DEFAULTSORT:Adkins, Robert}

Category:Auto-generated DNB articles needing categorizing

This way the articles can be manually categorized later and provides a category in which the generate articles can be checked. Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs wider discussion. Has there been any discussion here on enwiki indicating that these articles are desirable? Anomie ⚔ 14:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Desirable?? We are talking about the Dictionary of National Biography here. Not too disimilar to other content like 1911 Britiannica and the Catholic Encyclopedia drives on here. Are you implying that none of the DNB articles are encyclopedic? Surely this is the sort of content we should relish.... Dr. Blofeld 18:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bot creation of content is often controversial, even when it seems obvious that "we" want it. Personally, I don't have a problem with it if the bot can manage to create good-quality articles. Please advertise this bot request at WP:VPR, WT:WPBIO, and anywhere else you can think of where interested editors might see it. Anomie ⚔ 19:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In response to User:Dr. Blofeld blanking this page: Please do not blank this page. While I am not sure what exactly is going on here, this request lists User:Kotniski as the operator and their bot as the bot. Therefore it is not your place to blank the page. Please do not do so again, as that would certainly be considered disruptive. Anomie ⚔ 20:03, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by operator. I asked Kotniski about this BRFA on their talk page, and they indicated that they volunteered to code and run the bot if User:Dr. Blofeld got approval. Since User:Dr. Blofeld tried to withdraw the request by blanking the page, I am marking this as "withdrawn". As usual, if Kotniski and Dr. Blofeld wish to pursue this request in the future they are welcome to re-open it or create a new request. Anomie ⚔ 21:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.