[WikiEN-l] BetacommandBot, (currently) centralized discussion

[George Herbert]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  So I admit its irritating, but there doesn't seem to be a better
> >  alternative. If you'd prefer that the policy went back to its original
> form,
> >  that is I suppose a valid opinion that simply lacks consensus or
> approval
> >  from WMF.
>
> I'd prefer a practise that tries to preserve rather than delete in
> cases where the image was policy-compliant when uploaded, and is only
> not standards-compliant right now on technicalities.
>
> -Matt
>

Which, we probably can't code into a bot.

Perhaps... shift the operational policy, have the bot tag not result in auto
deletion 7 (or n) days later, but require a manual review to shift it into
an auto-delete n days later category?

Eventually someone will have to deal with the ones that nobody fixes, but
requiring a human being to pull the trigger on "this isn't used  per policy"
would be useful.

Perhaps an automated tool that would let people shuffle articles from
bot-tagged to either "Policy compliant but needs rework on justification" or
"Not policy compliant" categories.

Out of curiosity, is there a macro that expands to "What links here" ?  If
that were part of the bot tag, that would make the job of people looking at
the tag to reclassify it much easier...


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com