Steward requests/Bot status/2019-11

Global bot status requests

Removal of global bot status


I am requesting removal of global bot flag for JAnDbot owned by JAn Dudík (and often effectively controlled by Danny B.) for the following reasons:

  1. The bot was used repeatedly to make clearly controversial mass deletions on Slovak Wiktionary (see cases below) without so much as an announcement. This is against the rules.
  2. Carpet bombing of Slovak Wiktionary with deletion regexes is infuriating to the affected editors and it has already resulted in loss of interest in the project by several editors. Removing the global bot flag would protect the community.
  3. Bot owner is uncommunicative. Bot actions are not even announced, let alone approved. The bot was clearly and intentionally used as a substitute for discussion (see case 3 below). Removing the global bot flag would hopefully force the bot owner and his friends to participate in discussions.
  4. Bot owner is unwilling to admit wrongdoing, let alone revert his bot's actions.
  5. Aside from controversial mass deletions, the bot only performs some useless reformatting (example) on Slovak Wiktionary. The bot primarily serves there as a weapon of mass destruction to settle disputes by force.
  6. The bot flag was originally granted for interwiki links, which are no longer used.
  7. The bot is now active only on a few Slovak and Czech wikis. Such use is not a good reason for global bot flag. Bot owner should seek approval on every wiki and comply with local policies.

Cases of clearly controversial mass deletions that are known to me:

  1. Undiscussed and unannounced mass deletion of images (example) provoked this heated discussion in 2016. Bot owner clearly knew he is deleting fresh edits by Bluepossum and yet he didn't bother to talk to him first. Once the discussion was opened by Bluepossum, bot owner did not participate in the discussion (posting his first and only comment months later).
  2. Slovak Wiktionary had no documented entry layout when I joined the project at the beginning of 2019. I have documented existing practice in many ways, including in template Príklad. Danny B. removed some of that documentation claiming it's a change of established practice. After he was shown proof that it is indeed an established practice, he did not respond in the discussion and instead asked JAn Dudík to use JAnDbot to delete the relevant formatting from all entries (example) in the spirit of "hey, look, it's no longer common practice!". Bot owner clearly knew he is implementing a controversial deletion and yet he preferred action over discussion. After I challenged the edits, bot owner's response was evasive. When I countered his (very weak) arguments, he did not respond anymore, showing no interest in building consensus.
  3. Following that incident, I was more careful. I posted a proposal in local Village pump, supported everything I felt could be challenged with arguments, waited one month for objections, took into account raised objections, and then implemented the change according to the final version of the proposal over several weeks. Bot owner never communicated with me during this whole time. Within 24 hours of marking the task as done, JAnDbot performed mass removals of formatting that was part of the proposal (example). I am under the impression that this was intended to teach me a lesson (about who is in charge) or to frustrate me out of the project. After I requested revert of bot's actions, bot owner did not even reply. Only Danny B. posted a shockingly rude response, apparently believing that he and the bot owner can veto changes by simply abstaining from discussion.

Note: Controversial mass deletions by JAnDbot are part of a pattern of problematic behavior by a group of editors on Slovak Wiktionary, which I have recently documented at the local Village pump.

Robert Važan (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

If the bot is doing something controversial just block it. Removal of the bot flag will not stop the bot. Ruslik (talk) 05:58, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
The reasons listed above are more than sufficient for removal of the global bot flag. Granting global bot flag to a harmful bot and then waiting for individual wikis to block it is a really bad idea. Some of those wikis, including Slovak Wiktionary, do not have community active enough to stop abuse. It is really unhelpful when stewards add fuel to the fire by authorizing harmful bots to reign free on these wikis.
The situation on Slovak Wiktionary is more complicated and I don't want to go into details here, but simply blocking the bot is not an option. Removal of the bot flag will help by setting limits on the number of edits and forcing the bot owner to seek local bot flag, which can be effectively opposed. — Robert Važan (talk) 11:33, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
In 2014, the same bot was deployed to forcibly enforce the opinion of one small group on Czech Wikiversity. This group did not want to discuss and come into the consenus. (more info)
If the same thing happens again in 2019 and JanDBot has global rights, it can happen on other projects behind our backs. It is absolutely inappropriate for Wikimedia users to promote opinions by force without open discussion and consensus.
Therefore, I suggest that JanDBot lose the global flag, because it can be a security threat. If a community trust it and its services, let them grant it the rights localy. --Juandev (talk) 04:58, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I have red the Bot policy and I dont understand what we have to discuss here. It say for example:
  1. "Global bot...must only maintain interlanguage links or fix double-redirects" - how mass deletions (sk.wikt) or discussed template removal (cs.wv) fits into this scope?
  2. "Unacceptable usage:Controversial changes:...they should never be used to perform controversial edits." - the cases mentioned above show, theat the bot has been widelly used to perform controversial edits. Juandev (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
  Not done I said above just block the bot if it misbehaves or you can remove your wiki from the global bot set if you want. Ruslik (talk) 17:31, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
@Jon Kolbert, -revi, and RadiX: Is it possible to have this reviewed by another steward? I find it unbelievable that a harmful bot that blatantly breaks rules is allowed to operate. Why do those rules exist then? — Robert Važan (talk) 08:19, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: As I have said before, local blocking is not an option. This is because the only active admins on Slovak Wiktionary are JAn Dudík and Danny B. and they certainly wouldn't block their own bot even if there is a vote on it. Desysoping them is the more severe option and it's full of difficulty since the community is inactive. Removal of the global bot flag would at least limit damage. — Robert Važan (talk) 08:20, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Nobody will remove the global bot flag just to solve your petty local problem, which you as a community can not solve on your own. Ruslik (talk) 08:32, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
No change here and stewards continue to support undermining small projects. What a petty problem that bot breaks Global bot rules! --Juandev (talk) 09:22, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: This request is about global bot flag granted on meta by stewards. This is not a local problem. Only removal of the global bot flag will turn it into a local problem by forcing bot owner to seek local bot flag. I requested removal of the bot flag after exhausting less severe alternatives. I invested quite a lot of effort into activating the local community, seeking wide consensus, and handling infuriating actions of some other editors patiently. The problem isn't petty. It's killing Slovak Wiktionary, robbing it of editors, a scarce resource on small wikis. — Robert Važan (talk) 09:52, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Bot status requests


Thanks. Xiplus (talk) 23:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2019 (UTC)


Needed bot right to do bulk OCR.--*•.¸♡ ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕤𝕙𝕒𝕟 𝔹𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕡𝕒𝕝 ♡¸.•*𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 11:13, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

  On hold Only one support vote other than bot operator. Needs more discussion/community participation. Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Jon Kolbert: check the discuss now.--*•.¸♡ ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕤𝕙𝕒𝕟 𝔹𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕡𝕒𝕝 ♡¸.•*𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 07:14, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
@Jon Kolbert: Thanks.

Removal of bot status