Commons:Requests and votes/LifeBot
Hello. I would like to request the flag for User:LifeBot (based on pywikipedia) which would help maintenance of plants and animals pictures. The bot is started manually and, after that, is restricted to one of the 380 subcategories of Category:Plantae by family at the moment, with the animals a possible target later. For technical information, background discussion (gallery vs category etc), algorithm, and source please see the bot page. Most importantly, the bot is doing what maintainers (of the Tree of Life project) are doing now, there is no new policy introduced by the bot itself. I'm sorry to not have applied for the flag earlier. OTOH, from the runs one can say that the bot is stable. Can I help with further info? -- Ayacop 16:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Comments
- No objection. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 16:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Let's roll. Zirland 17:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Good by me. Stan Shebs 20:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- No objection.--Jusjih 12:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- Strong object. Ayacop is obviously a highly competent bot administrator, as the bot runs perfectly. Unfortunately, he has been using the bot to roll out a novel approach to categorisation that has not been widely discussed, and I do not believe will be supported by the wider community. His assertion above that "there is no new policy introduced by the bot itself" is difficult to reconcile with the facts that his initial proposal for the bot opened with "Please read User:LifeBot. It includes a slight change in policy for the Tree of Life Project",[1] and Ayacop subsequently changed the Tree of Life documentation to reflect that change. Ayacop's statement that "the bot is doing what maintainers (of the Tree of Life project) are doing now" may also be disingenuous, as I'm not aware of any Tree of Life participants that have been using categories in the novel way that Ayacop and his bot are. The fact is, the bot has been and will be used to roll out an approach to categorisation that is a major departure from previous policy and modus operandi; I ask that the bot flag be withheld until he has obtained community support for what the bot will be doing. Snottygobble 00:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- object for now. Per Snottygobble... the categorization scheme changes need discussion and consensus first. The idea of a bot that can make categorization better is hugely attractive though! Please try again later... ++Lar: t/c 12:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- User:Snottygobble still choses to misrepresent what I'm doing. There is one addition of a category, no categorization scheme change. I'm disappointed people are swayed by strawman arguments so easily. -- Ayacop 16:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Oppose for now. It's always good idea to discuss mass changes before making them. Especially in non obvious situations. --EugeneZelenko 14:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree it's a nontrivial matter. Here are explanations with examples. -- Ayacop 16:27, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- OK thankyou for making that. I put my comment there. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Siebrand 06:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment I'd like to close this request as failed and reexamine it in the near future, once the issues have been resolved, as there are substantial objections. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 13:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)- Comment I agree. It is quite possible I'll return soon with a somewhat different proposal, as there were some ideas recently. -- Ayacop 14:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)