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.

Operator: ErrantX (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 12:25, Tuesday April 26, 2011 (UTC)

Automatic or Manual: Automatic unsupervised

Programming language(s): Python (pywikibot and some custom code for imageusage API calls)

Source code available: http://hg.errant.me.uk/wikibots/src/tip/commonsbot.py (still in dev)

Function overview: This bot will replace the original CommonsTicker bot (which has been out of action for a while) to notify WP users of file deletions that might affect them

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Issue (of commons ticker being down) was noted on AN/I, no further discussion but I can get input from VP if needed (update: opened a discussion here for input)

Edit period(s): Continuous

Estimated number of pages affected: No idea... but in the bot functions I propose having an "upper limit" of the talk pages the bot will place a notice before going to a central location instead. 300-500 edits per day (200-400 to article talk pages) updated 06/05/2011

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): No not sure it is needed

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function details: The bot monitors commons file deletions and checks for the image use on this wiki. Where image usage on WP is found the initial implementation will do the following:

• Update Wikipedia:Commons Deletions with a list of files used on WP that have been deleted on commons (example output: User:CommonsNotification/log)
• Add a talk page note to the article talk pages (for each article the image was used on) (template: User:CommonsNotification/imagedeletion_article)
• If the number of articles >50 it will instead post to WP:AN with a notification

All of the above limits can be tweaked as required.

UPDATED 27/04/2011: The bot can now do the above for images nominated for speedy deletion (i.e. logging nominations, addign a note to article talk pages). Currently working on a good way to track normal deletion.

We need something and if this looks good to the bot people from a bot standpoint I'd get behind it. Fact of the matter is that Commons is never going to reach out to us and tell us that they're deleting something we use. We have to go to them then and take the information, and this bot seems like a step in the right direction. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no issue with the concept of this bot. For the bots timing this is my suggestion.

1. For FfDs have the bot run once a day. The discussions tend to last more time (7 days I think) so one big sweep a day would be sufficient.
2. For CSDs I recommend the bot to run every hour, 30 minutes or 15 minutes depending on how speedy commons speedy deletion is.

The coding people will need to pass judgment on that aspect of the bot. If it performs its 50 edit trial run well then I say approve it. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 02:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been told that in many cases CSDs, as well as all admin functions, are slower at Commons than at Wikipedia. As low as our admin numbers are, Commons has it even rougher. 15 minutes should be more than enough time, even 30. I've been told that CSDs can last for two or three days at Commons before being seen. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment I can extend the time limits to whatever is deemed necessary. I am still working on the code to sweep for FfD's. From my testing I suggest running sweeps for deletions and CSD nominations every 15 minutes. And when FfD's get going to run that in a new thread once a day (that should be fine IMO). The crucial thing, to my mind, is catching the big deletions and notifying those who can fix things at this end. --Errant ^(chat!) 09:23, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for trial (7 days). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz ^talk 01:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will start the trial tomorrow morning. --Errant ^(chat!) 16:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed these notifications. While I agree that is useful to notify editors on Wikipedia about deletion discussions on Commons, I see some issues:

• Notification is useful if is announced when a file is tagged/nominated, not when already deleted. After an image is deleted nobody can see it, so is hard to provide any useful feedback. As stated in the notification, there are bots which remove deleted images from articles, so is pointless to notify editors that they should do it manually.
• The notification message is way too large and opulent, creating an unpleasant visual clutter on the article talk page. A shorter message with a small icon would do the same job.

--Elekhh (talk) 22:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will reduce the size of the image, that was on my todo list today FWIW. Regarding the rest - nominations are "coming" (speedy nominations are working, normal deletion discussions might take a bit longer while I work on a solid way to track them). The intent is that each page will get a "image has been nominated" and then an "image has been deleted" prompt, just for uniformity. The image being deleted notification IMO is useful, because it prompts authors to find new images for the page. The main reason for notifying on deletion is that we had a problem where a very very widely used image was deleted w/o notification, which could have been interesting :) If needs be I can limit the "deletion" notification only for images with over 75 uses. Thanks for the feedback. --Errant ^(chat!) 10:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly less opulent notification: Talk:Ludovic_Hubler#File:CARICATURE5.jpg_Nominated_for_speedy_Deletion :) --Errant ^(chat!) 10:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, is much better, but if there would be a way to consolidate multiple notifications into one, (i.e. have only one notification with a list of images) would be even nicer. Regarding deletion notification, in the Wiel Arets case I would have noticed anyway about 15 min later and I don't think is worth the trouble to leave those messages on the talk page. Certainly, a threshold set for such notifications -as you suggested- I would see as an improvement. --Elekhh (talk) 10:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, solid argument, you have me convinced :) On my todo list, I'll try to get it working like that tomorrow. --Errant ^(chat!) 12:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding multiple images in a notification.... I want to try and do this, unfortunately it is not all that easy with the way I have currently structured the code. There are a few pages that end up with a rash of notifications - but mostly it is one notice per page. Once I have things stable and working nicely I will look at re-engineering the bot so it can support that feature. --Errant ^(chat!) 12:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I guess is complicated as so far I only saw one bot doing it. Thanks again for your friendly response. --Elekhh (talk) 13:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Re New Meixco There is no way spamming AN and VPM every time is going to be sustainable. Try just VPM for now, I should think. But looking good otherwise :) - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 16:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trial complete. Not quite the full 7 days, but I am going ot be busy the rest of this week so wanted to post this while I had time. Over the week I ran into a few bugs, which are now fixed (a wierd crash bug was fixed this morning) and the code has been pretty stable and accurate for the last couple of days. I'm no longer posting deletion notifications, only nominations. The early problems with posting a notification multiple times to the same page has now been fixed :) Response seems to be good, no one has complained :) r.e. Jarry's comments above, if it is preferable to avoid WP:AN and just go with WP:VPM then that is fine. One of the reasons I chose AN was because it is possible that some of these issues might need admins to fix. Sven has suggested that he is working on a new board/location for image problems - so long term the bot can post there instead. --Errant ^(chat!) 12:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ready to approve, but would you mind renaming the bot to CommonsNotificationBot for consistency? MBisanz ^talk 02:16, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't mind at all :) request filed @ CHUS --Errant ^(chat!) 08:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Approved. MBisanz ^talk 10:09, 16 May 2011 (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.