Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/LuvRobot

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Withdrawn by operator.

LuvRobot

Operator: Jafeluv

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic

Programming language(s): Java

Source code available: Will be

Function overview: Performs file moves requested by administrators, and corrects links to the moved files.

Edit period(s): Daily or a few times daily, depending on how fast the work queue is updated by admins working with the backlog.

Estimated number of pages affected: Potentially around 4000 files listed at Category:Incomplete media renaming requests, plus pages that link to those files.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): N

Function details: The bot reads a list of proposed file renames from its work queue (a subpage in its userspace). It checks whether or not the move is possible, and if so performs the move. A move is possible if the specified source file exists and is tagged with {{rename media}}, and if the specified destination file does not exist in en.wikipedia nor in Commons. The existence of the destination page in Commons has to be checked because the software gives no warning when overwriting a Commons file of the same name, and in such a case all links to the Commons file would be broken. After performing a move, the bot removes the {{rename media}} tag from the page and fixes file links to point to the new destination (only links in the article, template and image namespaces will be changed). The work queue of the bot will only be editable by administrators, since file moves have been enabled for administrators only and using the bot would circumvent that limitation. For the same reason, the bot will need admin rights to be able to perform the moves.

Discussion

So, instead of an administrator moving the file to the new name they would put it in a bot's queue for that to be done? The administrator checks the name first, or just loads it into the line without checking? How much more work is it for the administrator to make the move than it is for the admin to line the file up for the move? There are a lot of files with bad names that are used nowhere or just in user space, will name changes be for images in article space? I don't know the rules about user images, but if someone proposes a name change for an image file in user space only, why should admin and bot time be spent on that? --69.225.5.4 (talk) 04:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The files in Category:Incomplete media renaming requests don't have a proposed new name, so it's the admin who has to come up with a suggestion. As I was doing these by hand, I noticed that the move dialog doesn't give you any kind of warning before overwriting an existing Commons file. It happened to me once, and it took me a while to realize why the move succeeded but there were still file links to the new name that were meant to show a completely different image. Without the bot, the admin would have to 1) come up with the new name, 2) check that it doesn't already exist locally or in Commons, 3) move the file using the move dialog, and 4) fix the file links by hand. Using the bot, they could open the category, look at each file and list the old name and the proposed new name to the work queue. The bot would then perform everything else, and log an error if the move could not be performed for whatever reason. So it does make working with the backlog significantly more efficient in my opinion.

As for files in user space, ultimately it would be up to the admin who lists the image for renaming to consider if it's worth the trouble or not. Jafeluv (talk) 06:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So the primary purpose is to make sure the admin can verify nothing already exists with the new file name. That's useful to do by bot. There appears to be controversy around admin bots in general, but this bot requires all work in the queue to be entered by an admin, so I don't know if that would be controversial or not. This category is a mess, and it might be messy just because of the amount of work needed to clean it up. I have no opinion on the moving by bot, but I think the important part, verifying the name by bot is very useful. --69.225.5.4 (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not warning if the new name exists on Commons sounds like a bug. If there aren't any other ways that this would improve efficiency, this seems like it would be better resolved by a change to MediaWiki. Additionally, moving a file creates a redirect, so updating all the links isn't really necessary, though it can be useful if the old name is something totally useless like IMG0477.jpg. Mr.Z-man 17:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is generally the quality of name of the files that are tagged, in my experience. --Cybercobra (talk) 22:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"better resolved by a change to MediaWiki"... that is often the case. Rich Farmbrough, 22:49, 15 October 2009 (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.