Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Cyberbot I

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by operator.

Cyberbot I[edit]

Operator: Cyberpower678 (talk · contribs)

Time filed: 13:21, Saturday March 3, 2012 (UTC)

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): PHP

Source code available: Coming soon

Function overview: It is my pleasure to introduce Cyberbot I. This bot will serve as a complete replacement of SoxBot with all the functionality & possible configuration settings as SoxBot. This bot will operate from SoxBot's last known state.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Continuous (every 15 minutes for RfA Tallies and Reports) daily for the rest of the tasks.

Estimated number of pages affected: Roughly 400 different pages per day.

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Yes

Already has a bot flag (Y/N): No

Function details: See User:SoxBot for a complete list of functions being replaced.

Discussion[edit]

Is it the same code? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is pretty much the same code with a few adjustments to have it run under Cyberbot I.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,219,251) 13:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the bot is currently operating without being approved for trial. Could you explain that, please? Snowolf How can I help? 13:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Were you operating Soxbot? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:X!/RfX_Report&action=history --v/r - TP 13:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes accidentally. There was a config file I oversaw which caused the scripts to login to SoxBot and not Cyberbot I.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,221,055) 13:49, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The bot can be shut down pending approval. It is merely running to see if it is performing tasks. I shut the bot down now.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,221,167) 13:50, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bot has been shut down per [1]—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,221,474) 13:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can I just ask.. Why did you not read all of the code before running the bot? ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? Of course I read it. The thing is there was so much to read and accidentally oversaw a very important file that is responsible for the operation of the bot. I have been thoroughly checking the code for the past three days to see what the problem was when I ran into the file that I skipped.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,225,104) 14:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is the bot really based on PyWikipedia ? ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ack. Sorry it is not. It is PHP. I was thinking of something entirely different when I filled out this form.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest this request be denied. The user copied the bot's source from X!'s folder on the toolserver, and didn't even bother to change the configuration, or realize that at some point, somewhere, you'd have to put your username and password, or else it's not gonna be able to log on. Also, while I have not reviewed the source, I highly doubt the claim that it's based on pywikipedia at all. Am I mistaken or is it actually written in PHP? :D In my view, the operator is clearly unsuited to run a bot at this time if he didn't check or thought of checking the configuration files and can't even tell the difference between a bot in PHP and one in Python. Snowolf How can I help? 14:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize Snowolf for not presenting myself well. I do program out of hobby and I did read the code reconfigured everything but one file. I have been working at this for a month now making sure everything is working and I am in desperate need of Wikibreak after this because I am exhausted. I do program out of hobby and am knowledgeable with a variety of programming languages.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) A few questions:

  • What previous experience do you have with bots/programming? In particular are you able to maintain the code properly?
    This is my very first bot that I am running. I am knowledgeable with PHP and I believe I can maintain this code.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you sure it is all in python? Last I checked, most of X!'s bots were written in PHP?
    I made a mistake when declaring the language the bot is written in. I was working on a Python program at the same time as when I filled out the form.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are going to have to be much more specific about the tasks this bot will be performing. SoxBot had a lot of tasks, some of which I understand have been taken over by other bots already. Please detail exactly which tasks you will be taking over.
    It appears that cratstats, RfX Tally and Report aren't taken over yet. Functions to this bot can be shut down individually for those have already been taken over.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • When will the source code be posted?
    Within 24 hours.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks --Chris 14:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A small correction to my statement above. The user does not have toolserver access, he got a zip of the folder and it was in there, tho it is also readable from the toolserver. Snowolf How can I help? 15:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that raises a further question. If you don't have a toolserver account, where are you planning on hosting the bot? --Chris 15:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not to piss on anyone's party, but you'd think this would be a pretty open-shut case of a BRFA. The ammount of rectifications, corrections, and... let's call them procedural oddities, all seem rather high for this, and that doesn't exactly inspire confidence. At the very least raises concerns about the amount attention that will be paid to the bot's operation. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
? I have a toolserver account and the bot operates from there.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,232,882) 15:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If everybody thinks I am incompetent, then so be it and I will leave Wikipedia. On the other hand I am very knowledgable about PHP and will maintain the bot code. The fact that I am under stress isn't helping my situation but I am a capable programmer. Mistakes happen to the best of use, especially under stress.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,234,425) 15:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"I will leave Wikipedia" -> there's no need for that, the concern is merely that you may have bitten off more than you can chew. Personally, I would suggest you just take over one task for the moment (e.g. updating the Rfx table), so you get some experience with running a bot before diving into the deep end.--Chris 17:22, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right then, lets actually ask some real questions again..
  • Which of the Soxbot tasks will you actually be running. Feel free to tell me which of the files from the Soxbot code you will be running too as I have a copy of this.
  • Have you changed the Soxbot code (other than the config file)?

·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 15:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have to concur with Snowolf on this one. I do not see much merit to this request, considering how much of a mess has been made of it already, when it's barely been opened (speaking of which, you should list this request at WP:BRFA to open it properly, Cyberpower).
I don't have a problem per se with users running code which others have written, but I think it's important that we only run code which is actually being maintained, and I don't think Cyberpower has demonstrated that he is able to maintain this code (and X! has retired, of course). In fact, everything indicates the opposite, in that Cyberpower has already made mistakes with the bot (e.g. not setting up the configuration properly; not being sure if it needed rollback or not; running before approval, which also suggests a lack of bot policy knowledge; running old tasks which are now covered by other bots).
Ideally, I would prefer that X!'s tasks be rewritten and run by new operators familiar with the tasks. Otherwise, I am okay with the code being taken over, only, however, if there is no doubt that the new operator has a deep understanding of how it works and would be able to maintain the code effectively. In Cyberpower's case, that has unfortunately not been demonstrated. This is not to say that I think Cyberpower is "incompetent"; taking over X!'s bots is a huge challenge, and it's no surprise to me that a number of mistakes have occurred. But this is all the more reason to just let the tasks be taken over separately, rather than having one person try to cover them all – I would be very impressed if anyone is able to support them all effectively, considering how difficult it can be to maintain code which you yourself did not write . - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'm interested in the reasoning in changing every mention of SoxBot in its own userspace to Cyberbot I and then even moving every page in the userspace out of User:SoxBot to your bot's. I just spent almost an hour rollbacking the changes and reverting the moves. Snowolf How can I help? 17:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re Snowolf's comment about - Not Cyberpowers fault or exactly related to this bot, but I'd like to know who zipped up that entire folder and sent it to Cyberpower without checking for passwords. That person needs a trout.--v/r - TP 17:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, that was a misunderstanding as the user pointed out above, he has TS access and retrieved them that way, likely. Snowolf How can I help? 17:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I come home from shopping and find this. For god sakes, I have a toolserver and downloaded directly from his folder. I adapted the code entirely myself and skipped one file that is vital for logging in. It was a file I thought I already did. If I thought I couldn't do this, do you people think I would spend a month working on it just for thrills. I slightly adapted SoxBot code for smooth operation under the name of Cyberbot I. I ran the bot to see if it is functional or not before sending it to approval. Is it hard to at least give me a chance at this?—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,258,399) 18:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of comments here, so you may not have seen Addshore's question above: what change(s) have been made to the Soxbot code? 28bytes (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Username and password changes to run under Cyberbot I—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,287,206) 21:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Note: This bot appears to have edited since this BRFA was filed. Bots may not edit outside their own or their operator's userspace unless approved or approved for trial. AnomieBOT⚡ 20:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You adapted the entire code, but the only change done you made was the login information, and this somehow took a month to do so? What? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't think the SoxBot task regarding reverting test edits should be executed because we already have RscprinterBot, 28bot and CeradonBot(under trial) to do this and of course ClueBot NG removes the vast majority first anyway. Yet another is unnecessary. And carrying on the point, most of the tasks and toolserver things previously done by SoxBot and X! have already been undertaken by other editors, lots by TParis, and individual tasks by various other users, the test edits one above being just one example. So personally I feel this request be declined. Rcsprinter (lecture) (Contribs)
    (Not Rcs)     21:45, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am withdrawing since the community has no trust in me.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 520,295,215) 21:56, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by operator. Please do not leave this with the feeling that the community does not trust. This is simply a matter of, as Chris says, you taking on more than anybody could reasonably be expected to handle and understandably making mistakes. The result is that this BRfA is overloaded, and obviously users at BRfA will take issue with the mistakes. I know you’ve put a lot of work into this, and I appreciate that you’ve basically dedicated yourself to this project over the past week or so, and it would be a shame for that to go to waste. As Chris says, please consider taking on a few smaller tasks to start with, so that you can find your feet and get a few things running smoothly. Otherwise you run the risk of trying to manage too much at a time, and not being able to hold everything together. This, unfortunately, is what appears to have happened in this case. - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Cyberbot_I&oldid=1084321641"