Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SDPatrolBot II

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

Approved.

SDPatrolBot II

Operator: Written by Kingpin13, will be run by ~~Sodam Yat~~ ThaddeusB to start off with

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic

Programming language(s): C# using DotNetWikiBot

Source code available: No

Function overview: Will take over from User:CSDWarnBot

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): recent discussion at WT:CSD / Disscussion which led to CSDWarnBot's block

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: 50+ per day, according to CSDWarnBot's edits

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

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

Function details: The reason CSDWarnBot was stopped is because it wasn't waiting before notifying users, this bot will wait 15 minutes (this time can be very easily changed if wanted). Basically, for each page tagged under CSD, the bot will check if the creator of the page was warned, if not, then the bot will warn the creator.

Discussion

The main problem is what template the bot should use to notify the user. I'll have a look into creating one :). - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note discussion on talk: Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval/SDPatrolBot II - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 08:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can the bot also notify the CSDer that they should notify the creator of the article in a timely fashion? Time looks good.

Why run by Sodam Yot? The user page suggests he has is not willing to discuss issues about deletion:

It's rare that I actually re-visit a discussion that I'm not actively involved in. If I commented on an AFD or marked an article for Speedy Deletion, I'm not actually paying attention to it beyond that point. Should my points be proven wrong, or should evidence that I missed surface, I have no problem with an Admin reading my !vote the other way.

Deletions are a matter of community consensus that results from discussions. A user who make unilateral decisions and announces an unwillingness or rather lack of concern about the discussion does not strike me as an appropriate bot operator. The second sentence is pointless, admins aren't going to say, "Oh, I read this guy's user page, and he won't mind if I discount his vote." So, essentially the user is commenting on AfDs and marking articles for speedy deletion, but is not amenable to community input once he's voiced his opinion on the article.

So, he'll operate the bot and ignore what the bot does? IMO this bot should not go forward with this operator. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 11:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I don't take that as him saying he doesn't care about it, rather that he doesn't manage to keep track of it. Anyway, I will be running this bot too, it's just I don't have a computer running 24/7, which Sodam Yat does. But I will most likely be the one paying attention to what the bot does, as I'm the one who has written it, and therefore the one who will actually be able to address concerns. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Yes the bot can identify the nominator (and already does). I can have it leave them a message too. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 12:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is useful as it will cut down on repeat offenders who don't understand it's a courtesy to prioritize nominating the article's creator. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was mainly because I rarely comment in AFD debates, and do not add them to my watchlist. So if I make an argument based on something presented, and that is later proven incorrect, chances are I will not recheck my !vote to make sure it is still the correct choice. If someone wants to bring something to my attention, I will be more than happy to talk about it. While I run the bot, I will make every effort to monitor it while I am available, and will try to check periodically even if I am away, in case something is going wrong. Sodam Yat (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns are not alleviated. A bot operator has to keep track of what the bot does. I have to say that bot policy does not favor an operator who sees community consensus as his putting in his vote and then ignoring the discussion. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia written by community consensus. It's actually working. Bots require community consensus and operators who are communicating with the community. I am uncomfortable with this bot being operated at any time by this user, as I see high potential for unnecessary drama and incivility due to the operator's stated lack of involvement in developing community consensus for deletion discussions. This is particularly a problem with this bot and this bot operator. User:Sodam Yat has offered, on my user talk page, to attempt to find another operator to work with Kingpin13 on running the bot, and I think he should be taken up on this offer.

As usual, I have no issues with Kingpin13 as operator or coder. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the concerns raised, I withdraw my offer to run the bot. If I am able to find someone else to run it, I will do so, but even if I cannot I can't in good conscience run a bot with opposition. Sodam Yat (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's a shame IMO. I've contacted ThaddeusB, since he mentioned something about it.. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 20:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I don't get back to this, just a note that I see no issues with ThaddeusB as a bot operator. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 20:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kingpin has asked me to run the bot and I would be happy to do so. Reducing BITE on Wikipedia is one of the things I care deeply about, so I will of course respond to any questions/complaints that come in. My C is fairly rudimentary, but I trust that Kingpin will make sure any bugs that may arise get ironed out.
As far as the bot goes, I have two comments:

I think a 10 minute delay would be sufficient.
The templated message needed to be carefully crafted. I trust a draft version of it will be released soon.

--ThaddeusB (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, the bot will do the following: For certain CSD types, it will wait until at least 10 minutes after the CSD tag was placed on the article and then notify the creator of the article if they have not been notified already. Will it also not bother notifying if the creator has edited the article within that 10 minutes? Will it catch a situation where the creator was notified and deleted the notification? Was the suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval/SDPatrolBot II#Template bombing implemented? If the bot's templates are not to be fully protected, will it verify that they have not been vandalized before substing them? Will the bot have a non-admin shutoff? Does the exclusion compliance include {{bots|optout=something}} (is there even an appropriate "something"?)?

The bot's userpage also needs to be updated to indicate just which CSD types will be processed and which template(s) will be used, and to indicate the current operator(s); an editnotice pointing out that posting to the bot's talk page to contest a CSD is inappropriate and futile would probably also be helpful. Also, please verify that the account password is only known to the appropriate person or persons (i.e. if Sodam Yat ever knew the password, it must have been changed). Anomie ⚔ 03:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bot doesn't care if the article has been edited since the CSD tag was placed. But it won't notify if the csd tag has been removed, or the page deleted (it won't be able to read the page anyway). The bot will actually be searching the history for the nominator, so removal of the warning shouldn't matter. The template bombing has not yet been implemented, but it should be pretty easy, I'm just yet to actually write the code. I don't plan on having a non-admin shutoff, but I could if it's wanted. At the moment, only I know the password, once the bot is approved I'll let ThaddeusB know. I'll either have fully protected templates, or keep them in code and off-wiki. ThaddeusB; 10 minutes is good by me. And I will try to get around to the template creation soon :), - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. About the exclusion compliance; at the moment the only parameter in optout which will stop the bot is the bot's name, I could add more if wanted..? - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good about the templates and the password. The bot's userpage still needs updating, the rest of the questions were really just to throw ideas out there. Do consider implementing the check for not notifying if the creator edited the article since the CSD went up along with the anti-bombing, unless there is something I'm missing where they are likely to not have noticed the CSD when they made the edit. Let me know when the anti-bombing and templates are ready and I'll give a trial. Anomie ⚔ 20:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a point in a non-admin shut off for this bot with this task and operator, even with change of operator, the task itself does not require a non-admin shut-off, imo. Looks fine, details covered, monitored by competent bot operators/watchers. --69.226.100.7 (talk) 19:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}} Status report Mr. Pin? MBisanz ^talk 00:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difficult thing is the templates :/. I'll try very hard to get them started today :D. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 09:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the update. MBisanz ^talk 10:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, really sorry about the slow progress of this :/ - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No hurry, it'll just be attribute to BAGS ponderous ways. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 07:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How does the bot detect whether someone has been notified? — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment it is just if the user's talk page has been edited since the page was created (to avoid template bombing). - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kingpin: these templates may be of use to you: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot VII 3. (X! · talk) · @751 · 17:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks X! - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kingpin, I understand the bot will not be able to notify the author if their page has been both tagged and deleted within ten minutes. I wouldn't want to delay implementation of the Bot, as I still see the bot as very much needed even with that limitation, but I would appreciate it if you could find a workaround for this. Ϣere SpielChequers 18:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can shorten it to a matter of seconds/a minute (depending on the number of articles the bot is looking through). But it depends partly on ThaddeusB.
I have now created the warnings (they can be seen at User:SDPatrolBot II/Warning Examples). I haven't created one for every CSD, but if someone else wants to make some more I can add them to the bot. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I think the gap between article tag and informing the author is important as it allows for manual and tailored messages; I was just wondering if there was some workaround that would still inform the author even if the article had been deleted in the interim. Is the problem that without making it an admin bot it can't see the deleted articles; or would it require it to be continuously running, keeping a log of tagged articles and then checking ten minutes later so that it could avoid warning the author if either the article was still there and no longer tagged or the author had been notified in the meantime? Ϣere SpielChequers 11:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yuh, the problem is that the bot (as a non-admin bot) can't see deleted edits, and although it does keep a log of the pages which have been tagged for deletion, it checks the page just before notifying the user, so the only workaround would be for the bot to be an admin (which isn't possible with me as op). BAG: The bot should be pretty much ready for a trial if we want :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 16:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A couple quick notes: I am sure changing the delay at some future point would not be an issue, if the need arises. I am an admin, so if admin functionality is decided to be necessary, that won't be an issue. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But it would prove to be a bit of a problem with me coding it. I'd be happy to give the source code to an admin willing to take a shot at making this work with deleted pages. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 13:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. Tim1357 (talk) 16:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grr, trying to get this done asap, but for some reason DotNetWikiBot is refusing to work properly in this particular project (it was fine before, and is working in other projects), I'm working on finding the cause of this. Sorry for the delay - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. I messed up the first few edits, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. Looks like everything went well. Good luck! (X! · talk) · @783 · 17:47, 3 February 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.