Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/SamoaBot 39
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Approved Vogone (talk) 20:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SamoaBot (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: Ricordisamoa (talk • contribs • logs)
Task/s: importing interwiki links for Wikimedia Commons
Function details: it will follow the outcome of WD:Requests for comment/Commons links; see also commons:Commons:Bots/Requests/SamoaBot 5 and [1]. --Ricordisamoa 16:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It would also create new items, if the RFC establishes that. --Ricordisamoa 16:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that this request be put On hold until that RfC is closed, which could be some time. The Anonymouse (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- @The Anonymouse: it's ok for me. --Ricordisamoa 02:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ricordisamoa::Wikidata:Requests for comment/Commons links is closed. Please add sitelink Categories to categories, articles to galleries, and use category's main topic (P301) and topic's main category (P910) (NOT Commons category (P373)) to connect them. and please DO NOT create any items with only a sitelink to a category page in Wikimedia Commons unless it has links to Wikipedia. see Wikidata_talk:Requests_for_comment/Commons_links#Review_of_closure.--GZWDer (talk) 10:47, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer: the bot will follow the RFC's outcome. At first, it won't create new items nor add any statements. I'll make some tests ASAP. --Ricordisamoa 17:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you already make some tests? Some links would be helpful. -- Bene* talk 12:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ricordisamoa:--GZWDer (talk) 13:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer, Bene*: some old ones --Ricordisamoa 22:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Is this change really wanted by the guideline? I see no point to link pages to a template. -- Bene* talk 05:54, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ricordisamoa: any updates? Hazard SJ 16:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Is this change really wanted by the guideline? I see no point to link pages to a template. -- Bene* talk 05:54, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer, Bene*: some old ones --Ricordisamoa 22:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ricordisamoa:--GZWDer (talk) 13:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you already make some tests? Some links would be helpful. -- Bene* talk 12:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @GZWDer: the bot will follow the RFC's outcome. At first, it won't create new items nor add any statements. I'll make some tests ASAP. --Ricordisamoa 17:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricordisamoa:One month later... status? I find import of links very important, in particular Commons where it's been possible for 7 months and the number of connected pages is same as cswiki or arwiki (source). Support Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The script is now well-tested, but the peculiar linking rules for Commons (especially between galleries, creators and instance of (P31)human (Q5)) makes this anything but an ordinary task. --Ricordisamoa 14:48, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Five month later... status? --Pasleim (talk) 16:41, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ricordisamoa: Do you still intend to seek approval for this task? Vogone (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Vogone: There's no hurry around it anymore, and I'm not actively developing the underlying script, but I'd like to get formal approval in case there's still need for occasional imports. --Ricordisamoa 07:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- In my opinion this formal approval may be granted. @Bene*, Ymblanter: What do you think? Vogone (talk) 19:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, we can approve--Ymblanter (talk) 20:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The task is hereby Approved, then. Vogone (talk) 20:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, we can approve--Ymblanter (talk) 20:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- In my opinion this formal approval may be granted. @Bene*, Ymblanter: What do you think? Vogone (talk) 19:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Vogone: There's no hurry around it anymore, and I'm not actively developing the underlying script, but I'd like to get formal approval in case there's still need for occasional imports. --Ricordisamoa 07:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]