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: Legoktm (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 14:48, Friday October 5, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: here

Function overview: Adds |image has rationale=yes to files with a valid NFUR

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): See also related BRFA

Edit period(s): One major run, then whenever a backlog is created

Estimated number of pages affected: 400k+

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes

Function details:

• Goes through images in Category:Non-free images for NFUR review
• If it has a valid NFUR template, add |image has rationale=yes to all license tags

Discussion[edit]

Since this bot is going to be editing so many images, are there any other tasks we can combine with this one to make each edit more substantial? Also, it says 400k+, but the linked category has 253 members. Should it be linked to another category? MBisanz ^talk 17:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure about that, I'll ask Sfan00 if he can come up with anything. That's how many pages are in the category, scroll down a bit to see 400k+ files. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 17:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is solely about image review , I can't think up anything else at present. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could we maybe have it look to see if there are any broken templates on the image and add a template that would categorize it as being an image with broken templates? Or maybe if there is red-linked category on the image, do the same thing? MBisanz ^talk 03:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Approved for trial (50 edits). Please provide a link to the relevant contributions and/or diffs when the trial is complete. MBisanz ^talk 04:39, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks MBisanz. To try and make the edits more valuable, the bot will also do the following things:

• Tag with ((file with non-existent templates)) if a file has red-linked templates, or ((file with non-existent categories)) for categories.
• Date any templates on WP:AWB/DT (I don't know if any of this applies, but it will still do it)
• Expand any redirects on WP:AWB/TR
• Any AWB Genfixes that I can get reliably working in time and will be used on files (right now: none).

And I won't start the trial until Legobot 21 finishes. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 05:59, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've just thought of something additional as well :-

Update NFUR rationale templates as follows :-

• ((album cover fur)) to ((Non-free use rationale album cover))
• ((book cover fur)) to ((Non-free use rationale book cover))
• ((logo fur)) to ((Non-free use rationale logo))
• ((nfur)) to ((Non-free use rationale))

etc... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:41, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's also useful. There are old partial lists at User:MBisanz/BotR and User:AWeenieMan/sandbox, but they are several years out of date. I did the 10 outlier cases by hand, please ignore that part. MBisanz ^talk 14:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sounds good. I've asked for them to be added to AWB's list of template redirects to be resolved so other bots can use it too. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 07:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AWB only does replacements in the mainspace for now, so I've started generating a list at User:Legoktm/AWB/TR which can be merged in with their list later on. I'm generating a bigger list based on Category:File namespace templates, but if there are any other categories I can add them easily. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 08:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Trial complete. Log is at User:Legobot/Logs/22. A good example of the bypassing redirects would be this edit. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 00:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks good. Since this is so many edits, I want to let this sit another day for comment, but I am leaning towards approval. MBisanz ^talk 15:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to be on the safe side, I've implemented a "stop" page at User:Legobot/Stop/22 so the task can be disabled without blocking the bot. MBisanz, would you be able to semi-protect that page? Thanks, LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 20:27, 9 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done MBisanz ^talk 23:20, 9 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Approved. MBisanz ^talk 15:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[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.