Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BJBot 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] BJBot

tasks • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block user • block log • flag log • flag bot

Operator: Bjweeks

Automatic or Manually Assisted: Automatic; manually started

Programming Language(s): Python (pywikipediabot)

Function Summary: Comment out fair use image in all non-mainspace pages.

Edit period(s) (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Run when needed (biweekly most likely)

Edit rate requested: 6 per minute

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

Function Details: The bot will go though a list of fair use image being used outside of mainspace (from db dumps at this time) and check the images to see what pages are using it (not linking) and if any non-mainspace pages are using it will then comment out the offending image. This is following the fair use policy and any non-mainspace pages currently using fair use images are in violation of the policy.

[edit] Discussion

I support this (and indeed perhaps take some collateral blame for the idea). I would, however, add some caveats: obviously doing this in the user: space has in the past proven somewhat controversial (though selective linkifying is a 'lighter touch' approach than some have used in the past (such as mass blanking)). Also, there may be some "legit" instances of fair use images in the template namespace, though these should be the rare exception to the general rule: ideally there'd be a 'whitelist' maintained somewhere. Other namespaces I see no reason not to go ahead with immediately. It appears the majority of these are actually occur on article talk pages, for some unknown reason; I'll have to double-check that for false positives arising from whackiness in the categorisation of images, of which I have little doubt there will be large amounts. (Probably images in both the "free" and "fair use" categories, which probably need some sort of separate treatment by way of a "please clarify the status of this image" tag.) Alai 19:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

For false positives I'm checking to make sure a known fair use template in on the page first just like with the OrphanedFairUse bot. A whitelist is a good idea and I was already thinking of putting one in but I think it should be private SoSomebodyWhoKnowsWhatThey'reDoing TM must add the page to the list. BJ^Talk 17:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there a distinction between "known fair use template", and anything that categorises images in the "fair use images" category? Is there such a thing as "known 'free image' tags", and likewise, does that differ from the "free images" category? The overlap between the latter pair seems quite large, but possibly my criteria are blunter than the bot's (though we can take the detail of that off-page). I'd prefer if the whitelist were not private as such, on the basis of transparency being the surest and speediest way to fix problems, but I could see a case for protecting it if there's thought to be potential for abuse. Alai 05:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Depending on how you plan to handle image inclusion that occurs via template expansion, you might want to give some thought into how your bot will interact with Template:Gallery. I've seen it in use on many user pages, usually to display thumbs of images that the user has uploaded or that they particularly admire. Template:Gallery also occasionally appears elsewhere outside mainspace. I don't think the bot could safely convert these images into links. How do you plan on handling these galleries? Do you intend to remove fair use images from galleries, perhaps by commenting them out in the template parameter? If so, perhaps a note should be added to the corresponding talk page? —RP88 14:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Mmm those can be dealt with vie a regex replace function as far as I understand. Instead of Find '\[\[(?<image>Image:Blah)\]\]' Replace <!-- ${image} -->. You should be able to modify that to \[?\[?\s*(?<image>Image:Blah)\]?\]?' Replace <!-- ${image} --> With some success. I've not looked into this further to see what to do in cases of say... image captions, but that should be a rather trivial modification of the above regex. I am of course assuming that you are using regex in the first place ;) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

For images removed from the userspace a message will be left. As for breaking people's galleries, I really don't care, they can fix it themselves. BJ^Talk 17:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No, that doesn't work for me. Even if the user is doing something wrong, you can't break their userpage. —METS501 (talk) 18:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Time to go do some testing, will post when done. BJ^Talk 18:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, linking is not going to work the images will have to be commented out, which doesn't break anything. Changing request as such. BJ^Talk 18:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Can't you just skip usages in {{gallery}}s on user pages? Or, comment those out, and linkify all others? Unless I'm misunderstanding something, this sounds like a matter of Bigger and Better regexes, as Eagle says. Alai 05:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• This bot's code will need to be adjusted to not function on the pages in Category:Wikipedia fair use exemptions, or their subcategories. These pages are often time crucial to operating the project (see WP:FUE). — xaosflux ^Talk 01:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  (addendum) These are mostly categories so would not be affected by this bot, but discussion pages get added here from time to time to deal with issues. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  I don't see anything on that page will be affected by the bot. BJ^Talk 02:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• Will BJBot_3 allow exceptions in general? I'm specifically thinking of the fair use images used on templates that were or are on the main page. --Iamunknown 02:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, a whitelist exists. BJ^Talk 02:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Those templates are now tagged in the WP:FUE exemptions category. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
      • OK, not anymore, looks like we don't want FU on MP anymore (Wikipedia_talk:Fair_use_exemptions#Removing_exception_in_policy_for_.22Main_Page.22). — xaosflux ^Talk 12:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Fair use can appear in FA of the day, and it's for humans to decide which are allowed, not a bot. Likewise the FA of the day queue - where folks post the synopsis of FAs for consideration for front page status - should also be skipped. There must be a whitelist and if there's any doubt humans must decide. Beyond that, this seems to be a worthwhile task for a bot. --kingboyk 16:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
          • I think that instead of a whitelist, the bot could be set to only remove the images in question from userspace and user talkspace, creating a list of those it finds in all other namespaces to be sorted through by humans. The fact that (excepting Main page related things, vandalism, and BJAODN) I've only seen one fair use image placed outside of the user (talk) and article (talk) spaces suggests that there will really hardly be any instances of this. Because of that, I think a whitelist is likely to be more time-consuming than a simple dump on a subpage. Picaroon 20:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
            • What BJAODN page? They shouldn't be there. --Iamunknown 19:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
              • Of course they shouldn't, but they are. This and this are two removals I made from just one page; who knows how many there are throughout the whole 60 or so? Picaroon 19:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
                • Thanks for doing that. At one point I went through all 61 of the main BJAODN pages and watchlisted all of the fair use images; but, they got swallowed by my watchlist and I haven't had time to go back yet. --Iamunknown 19:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Agreed, I will put that into the code today, thanks. BJ^Talk 20:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please be away that some fair use tags such as {{Money}} can be applied to public domain items as well. Also, images in Category:Fair use images used with permission should be left alone. I am working on a similar project at User talk:HighInBC/FU in userspace. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I've got another question for BJ: why will it only comment out the images? They should be removed straight out so they can't get put back in. Unlike the images OrphanBot removes from articles these images are never going to be appropriate outside of articlespace. So there's no reason to simply leave them commented out. Picaroon 19:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)