Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MacaroniPizzaHotDog Bot

MacaroniPizzaHotDog Bot

New to bots on Wikipedia? Read these primers!

Approval process – How this discussion works
Overview/Policy – What bots are/What they can (or can't) do
Dictionary – Explains bot-related jargon

Operator: MacaroniPizzaHotDog (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)

Time filed: 20:59, Monday, October 28, 2024 (UTC)

Function overview: Performs sentiment analysis on pending AfC submissions, leaves AfC comments where appropriate.

Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic

Programming language(s): Python

Source code available: No

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): Daily

Estimated number of pages affected: 250

Namespace(s): Draft

Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): No

Function details: Detects non-neutral language (i.e., overly positive, negative, or subjective) in pending AfC submissions (retrieved by querying the MediaWiki API) using TextBlob. Adds AfC comments with mwclient where appropriate.

Discussion

Has this idea been discussed somewhere before?? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This seems like it would be a WP:CONTEXTBOT problem. What if someone were writing a draft article about Michael Jordan that contained text like Jordan is often referred to as the greatest basketball player of all time, with references to multiple reliable sources? Would that draft be tagged in some way? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is a good point. I can make it so it checks sentence by sentence, and looks at the references. The real problem is finding out if those references actually say that, and if they are reliable. MacaroniPizzaHotDog (talk • contributions) 15:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or I could eliminate the polarity check and focus entirely on objectivity. MacaroniPizzaHotDog (talk • contribs) 18:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Needs wider discussion. At the very least, make sure WT:AFC actually wants this. Primefac (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On hold. until this is done. Primefac (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For any discussion to occur on whether this is useful, it would be beneficial to see the comments this would produce. @MacaroniPizzaHotDog I would suggest setting up the bot to initially post the AfC comments in a page in userspace for demonstration. Perhaps a table-like format with the draft name and comment. Do also include entries for drafts for which no comment is generated (to check for false negatives). Once you have 300 or so entries, we can review it and get the feedback of the AFC project as well. – SD0001 (talk) 16:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 ⚡ 23:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I really messed up. Sorry. I accidentally had it edit outside of its userspace. See, the page variable was being used to store the page for mwclient. But it was overwritten to the last page in the for loop. Oops. Sorry. MacaroniPizzaHotDog (talk • contribs) 23:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]