Talk:Community Tech/Commons deletion notification bot

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untitled section[edit]

We are planning to do this as our final year project We are in confusion how to start. Can we have any suggestions? --Harideepan (talk) 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Someone supposedly had a working version here.[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:14, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
How can I check whether an image is deleted from commons, So that I can notify the wikipedia articles that images associated with them are deleted--Harideepan (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)?
We have lists here
Here are the ones listed on Jan 2nd 2018[2]
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
I actually asked about notifying the Wikipedia articles after the images associated with them are deleted Harideepan (talk) 05:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Not sure. There is a bot that comes around and removes the images. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Is it possible to get the usages of an image (in Wikipedia articles) which is deleted from commons using the API?. Can we extract information from the commons deletion log C:Special:Log/delete? --Harideepan (talk) 06:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
If you look at the lower part here
It says all the places an image is used. Can you get this from the API? I have no idea. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Harideepan and Doc James: Just dropping by: mw:Extension:GlobalUsage has query examples, if that helps. Mahir256 (talk) 07:07, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't really see how posting notices about images that have already been deleted would be useful. This information is already apparent to people watching the article due to the CommonsDelinker edit. Regardless, at that point it's too late to do much about it anyway. The proposal at the Community Wishlist Survey was to create a bot to post notices when a file is nominated for deletion, not when it is actually deleted. Kaldari (talk) 08:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Possible obstacles[edit]

There are at least two possible obstacles for the implementation:

  • resistance to vandalism: there should be some throttle or time delay before the notification are sent, because when someone tags for deletion a highly used file in bad faith, it has a potential to produce a huge amount of unwanted spam across all projects
  • "template" files: what should the bot do, when a file is an integral part of a highly used template? Should be only the template talk page notified, or should be the notification placed at talk pages of all articles where the template is used?

--Vachovec1 (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Doc James: Any thoughts on these potential pitfalls? Kaldari (talk) 08:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
The first one is interesting. How often does this occur I wonder? One does not want to wait so long that commons deletes the image though.
It should notify the WikiProject to which the template belongs IMO.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
That would be difficult for projects which have different WikiProject systems. Perhaps just inform the people who have the local filepage watchlisted when the Commons file is altered? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
If the projects are listed on the talkpage would be fairly easy. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

If the bot runs daily, then that should usually be enough to not report common vandalism. If the bot runs continuously, a delay of a few hours should be more than enough. I don't know how active is commons, but anywhere from 1h to 24h would make sense to me. Headbomb (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds reasonable to me. --Vachovec1 (talk) 01:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Article alerts[edit]

Would be good to have the notices combined into this on languages were this exists. For example for medicine en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Article alerts Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree, but for the first version of this bot we will just be writing on the talk pages of the articles that directly use the image. But we'll certainly keep this in mind as we also work on Community Tech/Article Alerts for more languages in 2018. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 18:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
I agree that 'this' bot should stick to article talk pages notices. However, those notices could very well be picked up by the revamped Article Alert bot. Or maybe the new Article Alerts could detect things on commons directly and not depend on another bot. Headbomb (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
User:Headbomb having the article alert bot pick up these notices would be excellent. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:18, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Number of pages to edit[edit]

I assume that this number is the total number of images put up for deletion per month.

One should subtract those which are not used within any project (which I imagine is a fair percentage)

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

This is a bit of a tardy response, sorry. But we will handle this logic in phab:T188150. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 17:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


  • If a file is used on more than 10 pages, the bot will only post on 10 talk pages, to minimize spam.

That doens't make any sense. I can show you deleted images that link to thousands of pages worldwide. So, first and foremost the original uploader should get a notification and every wiki that uses that image. Village Pumps would be perfect places to do that. Best, --OrsolyaVirág (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Or the community should be able to designate a black hole (instead of VP) for all notifications to be sent there. — regards, Revi 16:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
@OrsolyaVirág: I need to update this to say "10 pages per wiki", but this doesn't sound like it entirely addresses your concern. For the first version of this bot we would rather make it too quiet than too loud and increase any limitations (namespace, maximums, etc.) until it is a useful tool. We believe that 10 is a appropriate number that will accomplish the goal of informing enough people to participate in the Commons deletion nomination process. In the future we could build something more sophisticated — I like the idea to post to Village Pump or -revi's idea to let each wiki select the target page. I've created phab:T190313 to keep track of this idea. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 17:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I have the same concerns as Orsolya. 10 pages, even per wiki, sounds pretty low. Possible solutions would include making it configurable per wiki or having the number as a percentage of the total number of usages.--Strainu (talk) 20:07, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
My most obvious ideas for reasons to have over 10 pages using the same image are: a) templates, b) images used in lists or similar. For templates, can the bot try to identify the template and write on the template's talk page instead of talk pages of all template's transclusions? For lists, can the bot probably identify the main article (e.g. if it is a picture of a person, article about that person) and make sure there is a message on that talk page? — NickK (talk) 20:32, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
@Strainu: @NickK: We are going to attempt to identify the 10 pages that are the most watchlisted, which we feel will increase the likelihood that someone will notice the message and participate in the deletion discussion. This bot doesn't need to reach every single person, just one person who is willing to go to Commons and participate in the deletion discussion.
As for your ideas: Yes, it could identify the template talk page, if possible. And we could make the bot configurable in the future. I've updated phab:T190313. It would be much more complicated to try to identify the main article on list pages, and why wouldn't the list article's talk page suffice? — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 00:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
@TBolliger (WMF): The point is that pages may belong to different Wikiprojects and thus may be watched by different people. Say, a portrait of a person can be in an article about that person (whose editors are clearly interested in discussing it) but may also be in List of people related to Anyplace which might be only moderately interested to editors on that specific city, especially if the picture is from a different period. Is it clear why it will be like that? — NickK (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Or signatures. I just subtituted dozens of deleted images in thousands of signatures on huwiki. I know it's one step further but it would be nice to have an extra row for possible image substitution. Many times C admins just click on delete and leave thousands of unavailable images worldwide behind because they never click on "what links here?" and never look for a very similar image that could be used as an alternative. I'm sorry but that's so lazy. They cause a lot extra work for others locally. --OrsolyaVirág (talk) 22:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
That's a good idea but not sure this is within the scope of this very bot. There might be tricky cases as some replacements may involve uploading that image locally as fair use and replacing with a local copy etc. Might be too complex at this stage — NickK (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
@NickK: @OrsolyaVirág: Yes, replacing images is a bit out of scope for this project. This sounds more like something to address in the deletion process itself (e.g. a warning when an image used so frequently is about to be deleted) or handled socially on each wiki. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 00:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Doesn't commonsDelinker remove deleted images automatically? Strainu (talk) 08:06, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it appears User:CommonsDelinker removes redlinks from article pages based on Commons Deletion logs. We won't be changing this bot with our project. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 18:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand. The original uploader of the image will be notified by the bot or not ? --Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 14:51, 13 April 2018 (UTC) P.S. Ia fully agre that first and foremost the original uploader should get a notification and every wiki that uses that image, too. Also, I fully agree that Village Pumps would be perfect places to do that on every wiki.

@Accipiter Q. Gentilis: Thank you for your comment, but that would be a Commons Wiki process, and not part of this project. This project is specifically about cross-wiki notifications when an image used on an article page is marked for deletion. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 18:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Standard way to request deletion is c:COM:DR#Starting requests and if you use the method (gadget there), the DR initiator will issue a notification that "I've put your file into DR". c:Special:Permalink/290702022#File:Hwaseongsine-map.png — regards, Revi 10:24, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Low aims[edit]

It seems like the development process aims very low. There is absolutely no talk about more complex use-cases, such as interested parties (institutions) getting notified when their uploads are proposed for deletion.--Strainu (talk) 20:07, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@Strainu: Correct, we have scoped this very small so we can build it quickly. The goal for this bot is cross-wiki communication when an image used on a wiki other than Commons is marked for deletion on Commons. Because this is a project that deals exclusively with Commons, I think you might be able to discuss it with the Commons community at commons:Commons talk:Deletion policy or with the WMF/WMDE commons:Commons:Structured data team, which is working to improve the Commons Wiki experience for institutions. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 00:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


Why use the account User:Community Tech bot rather than an account like User:Commons Notification Bot or etc? --Terra  (talk) 00:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@TerraCodes: We decided to re-use the existing bot account for speed of development because it is already configured as a bot on a few wikis and it is straightforward to add new commands for the bot to execute. We discussed using a new bot such as you recommended (and are not opposed to doing so in the future!) but feel the frequency of Commons deletion nominations does not necessitate a new bot. — Trevor Bolliger, WMF Product Manager 🗨 21:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for explaining it. --Terra  (talk) 02:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Opt in at EN WP[edit]

Have begun a discussion here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)