Let's try to resume previous discussions. Proposals for the first set of global roles are:
* Global bot flag for interwiki bots. This flag may be used only for non-controversial actions, like interwikis and user space pages are. * Anti-vandal fighters. They should have the next possibilities: ** Rollback ** Delete ** Undelete. I submitted a bug at Bugzilla with ask for making permission "undelete if I deleted"; when/if such permission would be implemented, undelte privilege should be substituted with this privilege; it is obvious that undelete is needed only in the case when page is deleted by accident. ** Block user (global) permission is not necessary, but it would be better that anti-vandal fighter are taking care about vandals, not stewards (while stewards are able to do so, too). ** Anti-vandal fighters would be elected in the similar manner like Meta administrators: they would nominate themselves whenever and voting will last something like 7 days. * Meta bureaucrats ** Meta bureaucrats exist and I realized that there is no need for one more role for "global bureaucrats". ** Meta bureaucrats would be able to give global bot flag as well as to give anti-vandal group to the elected contributor. ** Meta bureaucrats should be able to take care about SUL accounts, too. ** Their election process wouldn't be changed. However, note that we will need more meta bureaucrats.
If there are not serious objections about those proposals, I'll formulate more precise draft of rights and responsibilities for new and new-old roles and send it here for further discussion.
2008/5/30, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com:
Let's try to resume previous discussions. Proposals for the first set of global roles are:
- Global bot flag for interwiki bots. This flag may be used only for
non-controversial actions, like interwikis and user space pages are.
That would be really good, but then all interwiki bots will have to be case-sensitive according to page titles. Wiktionaries have case-sensitivity and I don't want to see any interwiki bot run on a wiktionary without case-sensitivity enabled since that causes lots of trouble.
As for the rest of your proposal, why don't we discuss that on Meta? This is a mailing list, thus a platform for announcements, not a discussion platform...
Best regards, Th.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Thomas Goldammer thogol@googlemail.com wrote:
That would be really good, but then all interwiki bots will have to be case-sensitive according to page titles. Wiktionaries have case-sensitivity and I don't want to see any interwiki bot run on a wiktionary without case-sensitivity enabled since that causes lots of trouble.
I don't see a purpose for having cross project interwiki bot. So, bot owners which take care about Wiktionaries will have a possibility to ask for a "Wiktionary bot flag" at one place instead of asking for it at ~150 places. Generally, I think that at least some of the global rights should be per-project, not general. But, present situation is such that it would be complex enough.
As for the rest of your proposal, why don't we discuss that on Meta? This is a mailing list, thus a platform for announcements, not a discussion platform...
This email is a step before making a draft. So, the question here is: Does anyone have a serious objection? After gathering such kind of inputs, I'll make a draft which would be put at Meta (with an announce here); which means, in a couple of days.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
As for the rest of your proposal, why don't we discuss that on Meta? This is a mailing list, thus a platform for announcements, not a discussion platform...
This email is a step before making a draft. So, the question here is: Does anyone have a serious objection? After gathering such kind of inputs, I'll make a draft which would be put at Meta (with an announce here); which means, in a couple of days.
I mean, all of the roles need policies. So, it should be written and discussed in detail. For that purpose we should use wiki.
2008/5/30 Thomas Goldammer thogol@googlemail.com:
2008/5/30, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com:
Let's try to resume previous discussions. Proposals for the first set of global roles are:
- Global bot flag for interwiki bots. This flag may be used only for
non-controversial actions, like interwikis and user space pages are.
That would be really good, but then all interwiki bots will have to be case-sensitive according to page titles. Wiktionaries have case-sensitivity and I don't want to see any interwiki bot run on a wiktionary without case-sensitivity enabled since that causes lots of trouble.
Pywikipediabot has case sensitivity set up on the project level, not on the bot level. If there are some that work correctly (and there are), then all will work correctly. Besides that, most interwiki bots will run on all languages of one project rather than various projects, so interwiki bots for other projects would normally not come to wiktionary to edit there.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:
Besides that, most interwiki bots will run on all languages of one project rather than various projects, so interwiki bots for other projects would normally not come to wiktionary to edit there.
Exactly, you would ask for a global flag on wikipedia or wiktionary or any other project... not a global flag for every project created..
2008/5/30 Mohamed Magdy mohamed.m.k@gmail.com:
Besides that, most interwiki bots will run on all languages of one project rather than various projects, so interwiki bots for other projects would normally not come to wiktionary to edit there.
Exactly, you would ask for a global flag on wikipedia or wiktionary or any other project... not a global flag for every project created..
My understanding is that the tool we have is "global everywhere"; we don't have the capacity to say "global on all Wikipedias", etc., without doing it manually, which is... well, what we had before.
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
2008/5/30 Mohamed Magdy mohamed.m.k@gmail.com:
Besides that, most interwiki bots will run on all languages of one project rather than various projects, so interwiki bots for other projects would normally not come to wiktionary to edit there.
Exactly, you would ask for a global flag on wikipedia or wiktionary or any other project... not a global flag for every project created..
My understanding is that the tool we have is "global everywhere"; we don't have the capacity to say "global on all Wikipedias", etc., without doing it manually, which is... well, what we had before.
Yes, but a person who is running bot from, let's say, German Wikipedia, will never reach any Wiktionary. And if a bot owner is enough trusting to have a bot privilege on Wikipedias, it is really paranoid to expect that such person will abuse their privileges by writing case-insensitive links/pages on Wiktionaries; even this is not default at pywikipediabot, as Andre said.
Milos Rancic, 30 maggio 2008 13.59
And if a bot owner is enough trusting to have a bot privilege on Wikipedias, it is really paranoid to expect that such person will abuse their privileges by writing case-insensitive links/pages on Wiktionaries; even this is not default at pywikipediabot, as Andre said.
Exactly. And if a bot makes harm or does not respect local policies, you can just block it.
Nemo
--- On Fri, 5/30/08, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
From: Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Proposals for the first global roles To: andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk, "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, May 30, 2008, 6:59 AM On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
2008/5/30 Mohamed Magdy mohamed.m.k@gmail.com:
Besides that, most interwiki bots will run on all languages of one project
rather than various projects,
so interwiki bots for other projects would
normally not come to
wiktionary to edit there.
Exactly, you would ask for a global flag on
wikipedia or wiktionary or any
other project... not a global flag for every
project created..
My understanding is that the tool we have is
"global everywhere"; we
don't have the capacity to say "global on all
Wikipedias", etc.,
without doing it manually, which is... well, what we
had before.
Yes, but a person who is running bot from, let's say, German Wikipedia, will never reach any Wiktionary. And if a bot owner is enough trusting to have a bot privilege on Wikipedias, it is really paranoid to expect that such person will abuse their privileges by writing case-insensitive links/pages on Wiktionaries; even this is not default at pywikipediabot, as Andre said.
No one expects bot owners to intentionally do harm. But people would not be aware of these issues unless some bot owner had once thought it a good idea to run the Wikipedia script on another project.
Maybe one solution is to put a cap on these flags for now. If we only have a dozen bots to worry about; it will be easier to watch for them and for all the owners to be informed of these issues. But if there are an unlimited amount of flags given out and they become some sort of trophy for bot owners at some point the information is going to be lost.
Birgitte SB
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
No one expects bot owners to intentionally do harm. But people would not be aware of these issues unless some bot owner had once thought it a good idea to run the Wikipedia script on another project.
Maybe one solution is to put a cap on these flags for now. If we only have a dozen bots to worry about; it will be easier to watch for them and for all the owners to be informed of these issues. But if there are an unlimited amount of flags given out and they become some sort of trophy for bot owners at some point the information is going to be lost.
10 very well organized bots which constantly work may keep interwiki links up to date at the monthly level at the best. And this is only for Wikipedias. This means that around 20 bots may keep interwiki links up to date at the monthly level for Wikipedias. Maybe 5 to 10 more are needed for Wiktionaries. All other projects need 5 to 10 more. So, fair minimum is 40. And I am not sure that we have more than 100 active bot owners.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org