[Commons-l] CommonsDelinker

Thu Nov 23 19:26:12 UTC 2006

It was discontinued by its operator because individual wikis required the
bot to get individual bot status approval. The creator was even asked on
commons to get approval. The bureaucracy is overwhelmed him basically.
    - Cool Cat

On 11/17/06, Bence Damokos <bdamokos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "and unlinking them [deleted images] is sometimes a serious pain" [copied
> from thread: Re: [Commons-l] Getting rid of "best before]
>
> What is the status of the CommonsDelinker bot, why does it seem inactive?
> Was there a decision to stop it?
>
> Bence Damokos
> huwiki
>
> On 11/17/06, Cool Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I believe that is not happening due to technical limitations. Currently
> > we just subst: current day/month/year. I would like that though.
> >
> > It takes longer than 7 days because there are WAY too many of them to
> > delete and unlinking them is sometimes a serious pain (pd-soviet images are
> > particularly cluttering the backlog)
> >
> > PS (unrelated): Magnus your tool has issues with .gif images I believe.
> > I do not know if you fixed this recently.
> > PS (unrelated): If your tool would detect "http" (possible source) and
> > treated such images differently it would be of great help since sometimes
> > people forget to remove the no source template. (sometimes it is a hunt to
> > find a url in a block of text on the tool)
> >
> > On 11/15/06, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske at googlemail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > When I just read about admins getting scolded for deleting an image
> > > that was long past its "due date", I thought about the nature of the
> > > templates and the message they convey.
> > >
> > > Currently, they say something like "this image needs more source info"
> > >
> > > etc., and give the date the template was added. If nothing changes,
> > > the image *may* be deleted after, what, a month? This would be the
> > > equivalent of "best before" - in reality, it might last a lot longer
> > > than that.
> > >
> > > What if the attitude of the templates were changed? "This image lacks
> > > this and that. It will be deleted on XXXX-YY-ZZ unless this
> > > information is provided." My tool [2] can be used to find images that
> > > have reached their final use-by date, and could be deleted with good
> > > reason.
> > >
> > > Theoretically, one could write a bot which could do the deletions, so
> > > no admins get scolded. The idea of a deletion-bot with admin rights (a
> > >
> > > virtual equivalent of [2];-) might sound scary, but setting it for "no
> > > edits for a month since addition of the template", combined with the
> > > image resurrection capability, should calm this.
> > >
> > > Magnus
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/bad_old_ones.php<http://tools.wikimedia.de/%7Emagnus/bad_old_ones.php>
> > > [2]
> > > http://www.newlaunches.com/archives/samsung_develops_machine_gun_sentry_robot_costs_200k.php
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Commons-l mailing list
> > > Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Commons-l mailing list
> > Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20061123/0b55558a/attachment.htm