Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis

1 2 3

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

ktc at ktchan

May 28, 2008, 12:58 PM

Post #1 of 53 (3290 views)
Permalink

Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis

Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.

KTC

On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>
> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
> each and every bot policy.
>
> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>
> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>
> Or would that be unreasonable?
>
> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>
> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
> such a standard.
>
> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>
> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
> quite a challenge.
>
> - White Cat
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l [at] lists
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine

Attachments:

signature.asc (0.18 KB)

node.ue at gmail

May 28, 2008, 1:59 PM

Post #2 of 53 (3185 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.

I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
seems.

Mark

2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
>
> KTC
>
> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>>
>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
>> each and every bot policy.
>>
>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>>
>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>>
>> Or would that be unreasonable?
>>
>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>>
>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
>> such a standard.
>>
>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>>
>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
>> quite a challenge.
>>
>> - White Cat
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> --
> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
> - Heinrich Heine
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

node.ue at gmail

May 28, 2008, 2:06 PM

Post #3 of 53 (3188 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.

I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
example.

Mark

2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>
> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
> seems.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
>> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
>>
>> KTC
>>
>> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
>>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>>>
>>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
>>> each and every bot policy.
>>>
>>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
>>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>>>
>>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>>>
>>> Or would that be unreasonable?
>>>
>>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
>>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>>>
>>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
>>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
>>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
>>> such a standard.
>>>
>>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
>>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
>>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
>>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>>>
>>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
>>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
>>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
>>> quite a challenge.
>>>
>>> - White Cat
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>> --
>> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>> - Heinrich Heine
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l [at] lists
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

scream at datascreamer

May 28, 2008, 2:12 PM

Post #4 of 53 (3183 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mark Williamson wrote:
> Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
> the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.
>
> I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
> alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
> there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
> writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
> counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
> J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
> guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
> the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
> samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
> than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
> example.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>>
>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
>> seems.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
>>> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
>>>
>>> KTC
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
>>>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>>>>
>>>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
>>>> each and every bot policy.
>>>>
>>>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
>>>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>>>>
>>>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>>>>
>>>> Or would that be unreasonable?
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
>>>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>>>>
>>>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
>>>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
>>>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
>>>> such a standard.
>>>>
>>>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
>>>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
>>>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
>>>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>>>>
>>>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
>>>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
>>>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
>>>> quite a challenge.
>>>>
>>>> - White Cat
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>> --
>>> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>>> - Heinrich Heine
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l [at] lists
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

We could just not get wrapped around the axle about sorting interwiki
links. I don't think it is a large issue. I can be convinced otherwise
however.

Best,
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIPcqk6+ro8Pm1AtURAicNAJ0WG0LOEhtvV7yoZDRzZKrlra5kWACfe3wx
2H57fRQTpVuH07d7q9kUaac=
=7WNy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

zvandijk at googlemail

May 28, 2008, 2:37 PM

Post #5 of 53 (3166 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

I too prefer the order of the interwiki links to be alphabetical by
the language codes. This makes it easier to find interwiki's.
Sometimes for a new article I take over the interwiki's from en.WP,
also then it is better to have them in the same order they will have
in the other WP.
Ziko

2008/5/28 Jon <scream [at] datascreamer>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
>> Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
>> the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.
>>
>> I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
>> alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
>> there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
>> writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
>> counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
>> J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
>> guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
>> the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
>> samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
>> than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
>> example.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
>>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>>>
>>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
>>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
>>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
>>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
>>> seems.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
>>>> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
>>>>
>>>> KTC
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
>>>>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>>>>>
>>>>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
>>>>> each and every bot policy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
>>>>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or would that be unreasonable?
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
>>>>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>>>>>
>>>>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
>>>>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
>>>>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
>>>>> such a standard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
>>>>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
>>>>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
>>>>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
>>>>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
>>>>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
>>>>> quite a challenge.
>>>>>
>>>>> - White Cat
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>> --
>>>> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>>>> - Heinrich Heine
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>> foundation-l [at] lists
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l [at] lists
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> We could just not get wrapped around the axle about sorting interwiki
> links. I don't think it is a large issue. I can be convinced otherwise
> however.
>
>
> Best,
> Jon
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFIPcqk6+ro8Pm1AtURAicNAJ0WG0LOEhtvV7yoZDRzZKrlra5kWACfe3wx
> 2H57fRQTpVuH07d7q9kUaac=
> =7WNy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

aphaia at gmail

May 28, 2008, 2:45 PM

Post #6 of 53 (3185 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk [at] googlemail> wrote:
> I too prefer the order of the interwiki links to be alphabetical by
> the language codes. This makes it easier to find interwiki's.
> Sometimes for a new article I take over the interwiki's from en.WP,
> also then it is better to have them in the same order they will have
> in the other WP.
> Ziko

Me too, just becase it is easy to place, but personally I don't care
the other prefer the other way. Japanese may prefer kana (50-on) order
(it is an phonetic order so a bit different from "alphabetical" order
of the heading letter). Each wiki may know their reader at most: why
should we create a global standard which may not be the best for every
wiki?

>
> 2008/5/28 Jon <scream [at] datascreamer>:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Mark Williamson wrote:
>>> Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
>>> the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.
>>>
>>> I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
>>> alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
>>> there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
>>> writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
>>> counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
>>> J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
>>> guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
>>> the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
>>> samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
>>> than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
>>> example.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>>>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
>>>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>>>>
>>>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
>>>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
>>>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
>>>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
>>>> seems.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
>>>>> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
>>>>>
>>>>> KTC
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
>>>>>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and memorize
>>>>>> each and every bot policy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
>>>>>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or would that be unreasonable?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
>>>>>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless tasks.
>>>>>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
>>>>>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof from
>>>>>> such a standard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
>>>>>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have cooperative
>>>>>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what interwiki
>>>>>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone only
>>>>>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
>>>>>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone can be
>>>>>> quite a challenge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - White Cat
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>>>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>>> --
>>>>> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>>>>> - Heinrich Heine
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>>>> foundation-l [at] lists
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l [at] lists
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>> We could just not get wrapped around the axle about sorting interwiki
>> links. I don't think it is a large issue. I can be convinced otherwise
>> however.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Jon
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>>
>> iD8DBQFIPcqk6+ro8Pm1AtURAicNAJ0WG0LOEhtvV7yoZDRzZKrlra5kWACfe3wx
>> 2H57fRQTpVuH07d7q9kUaac=
>> =7WNy
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l [at] lists
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ziko van Dijk
> NL-Silvolde
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
KIZU Naoko
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

putevod at mccme

May 28, 2008, 2:50 PM

Post #7 of 53 (3167 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

We do have a bot policy:

[[:meta:Bot policy]]

It is implemented in all small wikipedias I am active. Bot owners (in
theory) leave a request at a special bot page, if there are no objections
within a reasonable time (a week or so), the steward grants the bot
status. Once I had to report on meta and actually ask stewards to grant
the bot flag for some of the old requests on os.wp.

You may be sure the small wikis suffer much more when a bot can not get
the status since the list of recent changes becomes unusable - this is for
instance what is right now happening with the newly created wikis.

Cheers
Yaroslav

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

mst at warszawa

May 28, 2008, 3:20 PM

Post #8 of 53 (3185 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Yaroslav M. Blanter pisze:
> We do have a bot policy:
>
> [[:meta:Bot policy]]
>
> It is implemented in all small wikipedias I am active. Bot owners (in
> theory) leave a request at a special bot page, if there are no objections
> within a reasonable time (a week or so), the steward grants the bot
> status. Once I had to report on meta and actually ask stewards to grant
> the bot flag for some of the old requests on os.wp.
>
> You may be sure the small wikis suffer much more when a bot can not get
> the status since the list of recent changes becomes unusable - this is for
> instance what is right now happening with the newly created wikis.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav

the problem is in some wiki you get rejection because "the bot is
involved in to few projects". Hmm.. how ca it be involved more if one
cannot apply?

masti

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

May 28, 2008, 8:49 PM

Post #9 of 53 (3165 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail> wrote:
> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>
> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
> seems.

So, this should be solved. And I think that pywikipedibot (maybe more
than 90% WM bots) implements that for a long time. It is even possible
to change the order from wiki to wiki and it is integrated in the code
of PWB framework.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

May 28, 2008, 8:51 PM

Post #10 of 53 (3154 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod [at] mccme> wrote:
> We do have a bot policy:
>
> [[:meta:Bot policy]]
>
> It is implemented in all small wikipedias I am active. Bot owners (in
> theory) leave a request at a special bot page, if there are no objections
> within a reasonable time (a week or so), the steward grants the bot
> status. Once I had to report on meta and actually ask stewards to grant
> the bot flag for some of the old requests on os.wp.
>
> You may be sure the small wikis suffer much more when a bot can not get
> the status since the list of recent changes becomes unusable - this is for
> instance what is right now happening with the newly created wikis.

This is one of the most problematic issues: Asking for bot flag on
~250 projects is really painful. There should be one place for asking
the bot flag for interwiki bots.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wiki.ral315 at gmail

May 28, 2008, 10:55 PM

Post #11 of 53 (3162 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail> wrote:

> This is one of the most problematic issues: Asking for bot flag on
> ~250 projects is really painful. There should be one place for asking
> the bot flag for interwiki bots.
>

I believe this is technically possible with global groups. Certainly this
needs to come to some discussion on Meta and here, because of the issues
with local communities that will inevitably occur.

--
[[User:Ral315]]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

gerard.meijssen at gmail

May 28, 2008, 11:02 PM

Post #12 of 53 (3153 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Hoi,
Sorry there are something like 700+ projects .. the current number of
Wikipedias is bigger then what is currently shown on meta's list of
Wikipedias it must be over 260+ now. Maybe someone can update this list ?
Thanks,
Gerard

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail> wrote:

> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod [at] mccme>
> wrote:
> > We do have a bot policy:
> >
> > [[:meta:Bot policy]]
> >
> > It is implemented in all small wikipedias I am active. Bot owners (in
> > theory) leave a request at a special bot page, if there are no objections
> > within a reasonable time (a week or so), the steward grants the bot
> > status. Once I had to report on meta and actually ask stewards to grant
> > the bot flag for some of the old requests on os.wp.
> >
> > You may be sure the small wikis suffer much more when a bot can not get
> > the status since the list of recent changes becomes unusable - this is
> for
> > instance what is right now happening with the newly created wikis.
>
> This is one of the most problematic issues: Asking for bot flag on
> ~250 projects is really painful. There should be one place for asking
> the bot flag for interwiki bots.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

May 28, 2008, 11:56 PM

Post #13 of 53 (3155 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen [at] gmail> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Sorry there are something like 700+ projects .. the current number of
> Wikipedias is bigger then what is currently shown on meta's list of
> Wikipedias it must be over 260+ now. Maybe someone can update this list ?

So, ~260; I am not so well introduced in the number of Wikipedias.

I am using the number of Wikipedias because this is the biggest number
for *one* interwiki bot and the most often purpose of them. Interwikis
are used between the projects of the same type. And maybe only a
couple of persons (if there is a such person at all) have interwiki
bots all over the Wikimedia projects.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

millosh at gmail

May 29, 2008, 12:11 AM

Post #14 of 53 (3163 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Ryan <wiki.ral315 [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail> wrote:
>
>> This is one of the most problematic issues: Asking for bot flag on
>> ~250 projects is really painful. There should be one place for asking
>> the bot flag for interwiki bots.
>>
>
> I believe this is technically possible with global groups. Certainly this
> needs to come to some discussion on Meta and here, because of the issues
> with local communities that will inevitably occur.

Communities may elect global bot-only "bureaucrats" (which would be
able to give and to remove bot flags). Let's say, one per project
which already has a bureaucrat, as well as a person has to be a
present or former bureaucrat there (some projects have the rule that
CU may not be a bureaucrat, too; and, usually, CUs are recruited from
bureaucrats).

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail

May 29, 2008, 1:16 AM

Post #15 of 53 (3162 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

These are software issues not policy issues. If a fix is needed for it
bugzilla (pywikipediabot bugzilla) is the median for it. Pywikipedia bot and
AWB uses SVN meaning the source of all these bots are synchronized.

There is no way for a human being to know what each and every of the 200+
wikis individually agreed up on some discrete sub-page in a language coder
isn't necessarily familiar with.

The point is

- Bot operators are humans and asking them to dea with 200+ different
flavors of bot policy and "wiki-ways" is very unreasonable.
- An interwiki standard would help all wikis run more efficent bot
policies which are intended to regulate bot usage.
- It would be easier for individual wikis to adopt a standard that the
interwiki community agreed up on.

- White Cat

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail> wrote:

> Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
> the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.
>
> I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
> alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
> there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
> writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
> counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
> J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
> guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
> the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
> samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
> than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
> example.
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
> > I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
> > order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
> >
> > I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
> > by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
> > after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
> > has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
> > seems.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
> >> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try again.
> >>
> >> KTC
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
> >>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
> >>>
> >>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and
> memorize
> >>> each and every bot policy.
> >>>
> >>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every wiki.
> >>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
> >>>
> >>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
> >>>
> >>> Or would that be unreasonable?
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks like
> >>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
> >>>
> >>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless
> tasks.
> >>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
> >>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof
> from
> >>> such a standard.
> >>>
> >>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
> >>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have
> cooperative
> >>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what
> interwiki
> >>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
> >>>
> >>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone
> only
> >>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an unnecessary
> >>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies alone
> can be
> >>> quite a challenge.
> >>>
> >>> - White Cat
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
> >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >> --
> >> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
> >> - Heinrich Heine
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l [at] lists
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail

May 29, 2008, 1:26 AM

Post #16 of 53 (3158 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Like I said what you are saying is an issue to be sorted out with the
developers of interwiki.py at the pywikipediabot bugzilla. You can link to
the discussion at pywikipediabot bugzilla. What ja.wikipedia or en.wikipedia
or tr.wikipedia agrees on a discrete sub page in a language the bot operator
does not know is not very helpful. Via SVN that change can be applied to
each and every running instance of interwiki.py.

The idea behind this proposal is to set a standard so both communities and
bot operators take a deep breath from the bureaucracy and instead focus on
the actual work.

Any unnecessary restrictions should be lifted.

- White Cat

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Aphaia <aphaia [at] gmail> wrote:

> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk [at] googlemail>
> wrote:
> > I too prefer the order of the interwiki links to be alphabetical by
> > the language codes. This makes it easier to find interwiki's.
> > Sometimes for a new article I take over the interwiki's from en.WP,
> > also then it is better to have them in the same order they will have
> > in the other WP.
> > Ziko
>
> Me too, just becase it is easy to place, but personally I don't care
> the other prefer the other way. Japanese may prefer kana (50-on) order
> (it is an phonetic order so a bit different from "alphabetical" order
> of the heading letter). Each wiki may know their reader at most: why
> should we create a global standard which may not be the best for every
> wiki?
>
> >
> > 2008/5/28 Jon <scream [at] datascreamer>:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> Mark Williamson wrote:
> >>> Let me add that I think it's ridiculous to use the sorting order of
> >>> the Roman alphabet for languages that don't use it.
> >>>
> >>> I can appreciate the sentiment of wanting to sort people's languages
> >>> alphabetically according to the native names for the languages, but
> >>> there is no scheme for sorting all writing systems, rather, each
> >>> writing system has its own sorting order. It could very possibly be
> >>> counterintuitive for a speaker of Hebrew to find "עברית" between H and
> >>> J, instead they are expecting to find it between samech and peh. I'm
> >>> guessing that the second thought, when it's not there (because most of
> >>> the entries are in the Latin alphabet, so they can't look between
> >>> samech and peh), is to look for it under the "H" for "Hebrew" rather
> >>> than under the I for "Ivrit", but I could be wrong, this is just an
> >>> example.
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
> >>>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
> >>>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
> >>>>
> >>>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
> >>>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
> >>>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
> >>>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
> >>>> seems.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mark
> >>>>
> >>>> 2008/5/28 Kwan Ting Chan <ktc [at] ktchan>:
> >>>>> Hmm, it appears it didn't forward properly last time. Let's try
> again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> KTC
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 03:55 +0300, White Cat wrote:
> >>>>>> We should require interwiki bot operators to
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Know each language they operate their bot so that they can read and
> memorize
> >>>>>> each and every bot policy.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Expect them to watch and follow each and every talk page on every
> wiki.
> >>>>>> Require them to have 5-10 checks of these talk pages per day.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wait several years (for the wiki to grow) before getting a bot flag.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Or would that be unreasonable?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Perhaps a unified standard bot policy is needed for mindless tasks
> like
> >>>>>> interwiki linking, double redirect fixing and commons delinking.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The interwiki bot policy would set the standard for these mindless
> tasks.
> >>>>>> Such a standard would let bot operators to operate more efficiently.
> >>>>>> Particularly the largest wikis and the smallest wikis are very aloof
> from
> >>>>>> such a standard.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Very small wikis often have a mini dictatorship by a few users (not
> >>>>>> referancing anybody spesific). Such small wikis generally have
> cooperative
> >>>>>> people but sometimes the wikis regulars do not understand what
> interwiki
> >>>>>> bots and botflags are about and why such are necessary.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Very large wikis often have overly complicated policies. For someone
> only
> >>>>>> interested in dealing with mindless bot tasks these pose an
> unnecessary
> >>>>>> bureaucracy. Due to the language barrier reading these policies
> alone can be
> >>>>>> quite a challenge.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - White Cat
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>>>>> WikiEN-l [at] lists
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
> >>>>> - Heinrich Heine
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>>> foundation-l [at] lists
> >>>>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>> foundation-l [at] lists
> >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >>
> >> We could just not get wrapped around the axle about sorting interwiki
> >> links. I don't think it is a large issue. I can be convinced otherwise
> >> however.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Jon
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >>
> >> iD8DBQFIPcqk6+ro8Pm1AtURAicNAJ0WG0LOEhtvV7yoZDRzZKrlra5kWACfe3wx
> >> 2H57fRQTpVuH07d7q9kUaac=
> >> =7WNy
> >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l [at] lists
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ziko van Dijk
> > NL-Silvolde
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l [at] lists
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> KIZU Naoko
> http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)
> Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail

May 29, 2008, 2:03 AM

Post #17 of 53 (3163 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

I have seen many wikis do *not* grant bot flag because
... "there are far too many bots with that flag"/"they do not feel they need
a bot"
... they are inactive (as in no one edits the wiki regularly aside from
existing bots and stewards who only remove spam)
... there is something minor on the local bot policy that is in the way.
... the bureaucrat / the community (made out of fewer than five local people
for example) says so

Wikis should grant interwiki bots bot flags because
... each interwiki bot generally only operates from a certain wiki. This
means the bots "input" is all pages on a spesific wiki. For example a bot
operating off of ja.wikipedia would check if all wikis link to the pages on
ja.wikipedia and *update non-ja.wikipedias* if they lack the necessary link
*to* ja.wikipedia
... inactive wikis do need to get updated because other wikis are still
active. Waiting a week or more for a bot flag there or even put a request is
a waste of time. A list of inactive wikis should be compiled and and the
interwiki bot policy should be applied by default. Since no soul is active
on inactive wikis, there is no one to complain
... local personal preferences should only matter to local users. A
"foreigner" who is only there to deal with mindless automated tasks should
not deal with cosmetic issues. You would need to translate the local bot
policy to each and every used language otherwise. Bot flags should not be
made a big deal.
... on very very small communities (made out of fewer than five local people
for example) people who allow/disallow a bot base this decision on
subjective reasons rather than objective ones. Smaller communities do not
understand that bots can break down due to various reasons. It is the bot
operators responsibility to clean after the bot, there is no question about
that. But hard blocking the bot or denying it a flag because it broke once
or twice isn't objective.

----

It should not be necessary to "test" bots that use standard code for
standard mindless tasks such as interwiki linking double redirect fixing or
commons delinking. If a spesific python code works properly on one computer
there is no reason why it shouldn't properly work on another computer.

Granting of the bot flag for tasks like interwiki linking, double redirect
fixing, commons delinking should not be based on a vote.

- White Cat

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:20 AM, masti <mst [at] warszawa> wrote:

> Yaroslav M. Blanter pisze:
> > We do have a bot policy:
> >
> > [[:meta:Bot policy]]
> >
> > It is implemented in all small wikipedias I am active. Bot owners (in
> > theory) leave a request at a special bot page, if there are no objections
> > within a reasonable time (a week or so), the steward grants the bot
> > status. Once I had to report on meta and actually ask stewards to grant
> > the bot flag for some of the old requests on os.wp.
> >
> > You may be sure the small wikis suffer much more when a bot can not get
> > the status since the list of recent changes becomes unusable - this is
> for
> > instance what is right now happening with the newly created wikis.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
>
> the problem is in some wiki you get rejection because "the bot is
> involved in to few projects". Hmm.. how ca it be involved more if one
> cannot apply?
>
> masti
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

andreengels at gmail

May 29, 2008, 2:20 AM

Post #18 of 53 (3172 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>
> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
> seems.

Maybe you should have *shock* told us? Long time ago en: decided to
use alphabetically by language name. So the bot programmers
implemented that. Since then, we haven't been told it has been decided
differently, so we haven't changed it. We have some nice code, but no
crystal balls. We use whatever order the local community prefers, but
we do need to be told what that preference is.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

andreengels at gmail

May 29, 2008, 2:31 AM

Post #19 of 53 (3151 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:
> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>>
>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
>> seems.
>
> Maybe you should have *shock* told us? Long time ago en: decided to
> use alphabetically by language name. So the bot programmers
> implemented that. Since then, we haven't been told it has been decided
> differently, so we haven't changed it. We have some nice code, but no
> crystal balls. We use whatever order the local community prefers, but
> we do need to be told what that preference is.

I searched, and the information about interwiki sorting order that I found is:

"The link tags should be sorted alphabetically based on the local
names of the languages, as described at m:Interwiki sorting order. The
vast majority of articles are currently sorted this way." -
[[en:Help:Interlanguage links]].

So if this rule has changed, then please change the information AS
WELL AS notifying the bot programmers.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

node.ue at gmail

May 29, 2008, 3:50 AM

Post #20 of 53 (3151 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Please read my original e-mail, where I said I'm not aware of
up-to-date information, but I remember participating in a vote at
en.wp where sorting by code won overwhelmingly.

Mark

2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:
> 2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:
>> 2008/5/28 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>>> I do think it's unacceptable that Interwiki bots go in and change the
>>> order of interwikis against the agreed-upon orders at each Wiki.
>>>
>>> I remember a while back, we agreed on en.wp to order interwiki links
>>> by code, and it seems that the bots never cared - ja: always came
>>> after nl: rather than after it:. I'm not sure if a different policy
>>> has been decided since then, but bots have always been oblivious, it
>>> seems.
>>
>> Maybe you should have *shock* told us? Long time ago en: decided to
>> use alphabetically by language name. So the bot programmers
>> implemented that. Since then, we haven't been told it has been decided
>> differently, so we haven't changed it. We have some nice code, but no
>> crystal balls. We use whatever order the local community prefers, but
>> we do need to be told what that preference is.
>
> I searched, and the information about interwiki sorting order that I found is:
>
> "The link tags should be sorted alphabetically based on the local
> names of the languages, as described at m:Interwiki sorting order. The
> vast majority of articles are currently sorted this way." -
> [[en:Help:Interlanguage links]].
>
> So if this rule has changed, then please change the information AS
> WELL AS notifying the bot programmers.
>
> --
> Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
> ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

mohamed.m.k at gmail

May 29, 2008, 3:59 AM

Post #21 of 53 (3142 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

I support global bot flag for interwiki bots.. it will make life easier for
those of us running interwiki bots, instead of duplicating the request for
bot status on every single project. I believe there is no such need for it..
all I'm (we?) getting the flag for is the usual python interwiki.py -always
-autonomous -start:something .. if a user misuses the global flag, it is
taken from them and their abuse reverted. simple as that.

--
--alnokta
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

andreengels at gmail

May 29, 2008, 6:26 AM

Post #22 of 53 (3146 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

2008/5/29 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
> Please read my original e-mail, where I said I'm not aware of
> up-to-date information, but I remember participating in a vote at
> en.wp where sorting by code won overwhelmingly.

So? You remember participating in a vote... I know of one such vote,
which is not overwhelming (63 against 53 for using the codes), and
which actually went the other way for the first 1.5 years of its
running. Either get the English Wikipedia to MAKE THE DECISION or STOP
COMPLAINING about people not following a decision THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
The current language order in the bot was done that way because we
were told to do so by the English Wikipedia. I'd happily change it,
but THE DECISION IS UP TO THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA, NOT TO YOU.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

andreengels at gmail

May 29, 2008, 6:37 AM

Post #23 of 53 (3153 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

I apologize for the tone of this message, it was uncalled-for. Still,
my main point stands: As long as the en: wikipedia has not stated that
their agreed-upon order is by code, there is no ground for criticizing
someone for not following that non-agreement.

2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:
> 2008/5/29 Mark Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>:
>> Please read my original e-mail, where I said I'm not aware of
>> up-to-date information, but I remember participating in a vote at
>> en.wp where sorting by code won overwhelmingly.
>
> So? You remember participating in a vote... I know of one such vote,
> which is not overwhelming (63 against 53 for using the codes), and
> which actually went the other way for the first 1.5 years of its
> running. Either get the English Wikipedia to MAKE THE DECISION or STOP
> COMPLAINING about people not following a decision THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
> The current language order in the bot was done that way because we
> were told to do so by the English Wikipedia. I'd happily change it,
> but THE DECISION IS UP TO THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA, NOT TO YOU.
>
>
> --
> Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
> ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
>

--
Andre Engels, andreengels [at] gmail
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

dgerard at gmail

May 29, 2008, 6:38 AM

Post #24 of 53 (3147 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:

> The current language order in the bot was done that way because we
> were told to do so by the English Wikipedia. I'd happily change it,
> but THE DECISION IS UP TO THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA, NOT TO YOU.

The answer is surely to include interwiki-link ordering as a parameter
that can be set for each wiki. That way, whatever order they're in at
the end of the article, they show up in the correct order in the
rendered page.

The bug is: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2867

Surely someone can get that patch into acceptable shape for the MediaWiki code?

(unless there's some problem with it that isn't clear from the bug -
cc to wikitech-l)

- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail

May 29, 2008, 7:59 AM

Post #25 of 53 (3164 views)
Permalink

Re: Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Bot policy for all wikis [In reply to]

Right. Such technical problems can be solved in many ways. But this wasn't
the point of this post.

- White Cat

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:38 PM, David Gerard <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:

> 2008/5/29 Andre Engels <andreengels [at] gmail>:
>
> > The current language order in the bot was done that way because we
> > were told to do so by the English Wikipedia. I'd happily change it,
> > but THE DECISION IS UP TO THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA, NOT TO YOU.
>
>
> The answer is surely to include interwiki-link ordering as a parameter
> that can be set for each wiki. That way, whatever order they're in at
> the end of the article, they show up in the correct order in the
> rendered page.
>
> The bug is: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2867
>
> Surely someone can get that patch into acceptable shape for the MediaWiki
> code?
>
> (unless there's some problem with it that isn't clear from the bug -
> cc to wikitech-l)
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

1 2 3

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads