The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

IPTaggerBot[edit]

Operator: Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)}

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic operation with manual setup assistance required before operation begins.

Programming Language(s): AutoWikiBrowser

Function Summary: IPTaggerBot will be used to tag existing IP address user talk pages with the appropriate template in Category:Shared IP header templates.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Not continuous, but not set in stone. Since the bot requires manual setup before each run, it will be run whenever there are ranges to be tagged and I have the time to do it. I would not expect the period to ever go above more than 1 to 2 hours twice a day.

Edit rate requested: Up to 30 edits per minute (can be throttled to whatever is deemed appropriate)

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

Function Details: Because of the nature of other existing bots, such as the ones that assist in maintaining Wikipedia:AIV, it is helpful to have IP address user talk pages properly tagged if they are shared IPs, especially by an educational institution. The purpose of this bot is to tag large ranges of existing IP address user talk pages with the proper template from Category:Shared IP header templates. In doing so, it will also remove any existing transcluded or substituted shared IP address templates from the user talk page so that the template is correct and standardized across the IP address range. Ranges to be tagged will be identified by me when processing reports at Wikipedia:AIV and other places (using the ARIN WHOIS Database Search), and also by user submissions on the bot talk page. Once a shared IP address range is identified, I will generate a list of user talk pages for the range and create a worklist in AWB for it. Using AWB's regex replacement features, incorrect or non-standard shared IP templates will be removed from the user talk page while a correct standard shared IP template will be applied with the prepend text feature. The parameters that vary with the IP address range being tagged (skip criteria, new template text) will be manually input by me prior to execution.

Discussion[edit]

sounds interesting lets see a 15 edit test. and a Post on a few notice boards about this, as I feel there will be mixed opinion about this bot. β^_command 16:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good. Where should I do the test? I have two large IP address ranges that I just identified that I could pull some random pages out of. Would that be okay or should I do it somewhere else? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 16:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I believe to do this properly, the IPTaggerBot user account needs to be autoconfirmed. Since I just created it, that won't happen for a while; is there any way to manually confirm the account? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 16:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a non-contoversial task, and would help automate what is a neccessary and yet mind-numbingly boring task to handle manually. If the bot works as described, I see no issues with it. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, but I'm not sure about the edit rate. While IIRC the permitted rate has gone up recently, this doesn't strike me as a time-sensitive task; I think 10-15 epm is now the suggested limit for time-insensitive tasks. Happy‑melon 18:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the 30/min edit rate is the maximum that I project using AWB without throttling. With throttling enabled, I could slow that down to whatever the bot winds up being approved for, if it is approved. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whenever I use AWB for BCBot I cant get much over 10-14 EPM. so I have no clue how you could get 30. β^_command 18:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I haven't been able to use AWB in bot mode yet, so that's just an estimate based on my getting at most 22 (avg 16) edits/min when doing the same thing this bot would do by hand. Betacommand, are you aware of any way I could get around having to wait for the bot account to become autoconfirmed? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

autoconfirmed for what? β^_command 18:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External linking the organization name in the template to their homepage. For instance, ((sharedipedu|[http://www.state.tn.us/education/ State of Tennessee Department of Education])). Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

there is no way to avoid that, its hard coded into mediawiki. β^_command 19:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, then, I will perform the 15 edit trial run without using external links. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Came here from a board, this appears useful and I don't see a downside. MBisanz ^talk 06:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I too came here from a noticeboard, and I too think this looks like a good thing. DuncanHill (talk) 11:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything controversial about the bot's task. I always do a WHOIS search before blocking and if the bot can already identify the IP, then great! Spellcast (talk) 13:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff, mate!--70.64.76.145 (talk) 19:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I wanted to do this! Oh well, :) Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 20:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trial Run Results[edit]

The trial run has been performed on a random selection of existing user talk pages starting with "66.4.", which is registered to the State of Tennessee Department of Education. The list of pages the trial was done on is as follows:

This random selection of user talk pages had examples of the following: no sharedip template, existing sharedip template with non-standard information, substituted sharedip template, and existing sharedip template that matched what was being added. In all cases, IPTaggerBot has performed properly. On pages with no sharedip template, one was added; where an existing sharedip template had non-standard information, it was replaced with standard information; where a sharedip template had been substituted, it was removed and replaced with a transcluded one; where the existing sharedip template matched, the page was skipped (which is why IPTaggerBot has only 14 contributions instead of 15). Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 20:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not too important, but shouldn't it use ((sharedIPEDU)) instead of ((sharedipedu)), which is a redirect? Deli nk (talk) 00:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, since the pages that are being tagged are low traffic ones, it probably doesn't make much of a difference. However, I will remember to use the exact template name, rather than a redirect, when I am setting up the run parameters from now on. Thank you for the input! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 02:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see two things done by the bot in addition to the template addition:

a link to the whois page included
the organization marked up

The former provides a ready link for verification of IP attribution. the latter provides a mechanism for grouping the IP pages using existing wikipedia article content.

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! At the moment, the bot account is not autoconfirmed, so I could not add external links to the pages in the test run. Once the account becomes autoconfirmed, the organization name in the template will also be an external link to the organization's homepage, and I will include a whois link after it as well. The account should become autoconfirmed in a couple of days. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 14:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been away for a bit, but just so you know, MadmanBot (talk · contribs) has been restarted and is approved for ((SharedIPEDU)) taggings. — madman bum and angel 17:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. You plan to hit all talk pages within each IP range, whereas MadmanBot only hits user talk pages that are actually active. Personally, I think your approach overdoes it a bit, uses resources a bit wastefully, but I leave that determination up to the community. — madman bum and angel 17:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "active" talk pages? Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 19:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that when the talk page is actually edited (which usually means the contributor was given a warning), MadmanBot tags the page if appropriate and if it hadn't already. — madman bum and angel 03:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this bot would only tag pages that exist, which in every case I've seen so far was because the user was warned. Given that there are so many ranges out there that haven't been tagged at all yet, it doesn't seem like this bot would overlap with MadmanBot very much. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 14:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's so much related to the fitness of the bot, if it overlaps a little with another bot. Redundancy is a very good thing. As far as tagging goes, Ioeth, does your bot check, to see if the user has any contribs first as well? I've seen a fair amount of IP's tagged with various things like ((tor)) or ((blocked proxy)), when they haven't even edited yet. However, that probably accounts for such a small portion of the users in question, that it wouldn't have any real impact. I think we should probably approve this bot. SQL ^{Query me!} 20:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't check contribs, but since it only tags talk pages within a range that are not empty, the odds are nearly 100% that the talk pages it would be modifying were created because of warnings the IP user was receiving for bad edits. So, it kind-of does, in a roundabout, implicit logic sort of way. Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. β^_command 18:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.