Wikidata:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive/2020/10

Request for flood flag

This is an alt account of User:Harej. I would like to request the flood flag for this account so that I can add 1M+ values for Fatcat ID (P8608) on pre-existing items. My algorithm uses the DOI field present on 25M+ Wikidata items and runs them through the Fatcat DOI lookup to find a corresponding item. This will allow bulk actions to stay out of recent changes while my regular account that I use for day-to-day edits can remain unflagged and visible in recent changes. Example edit. Harej batch edits (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I endorse this (my) request. Harej (talk) 20:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Ymblanter Would it also be possible for the account to be confirmed? It isn't able to use QuickStatements otherwise. Harej (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 22:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for a flood flag

I'm requesting for a temporary flood flag for my account as I'm planning to do ~ 12958 x 3 = 38874 edits (3 edits per item) using QuickStatements. All the items having instance of (P31)chemical compound (Q11173) and and InChI (P234) with "?" sign (which is an indication that the specific stereocenter is not defined thus it's not a chemical compound, but the item represents at least two potential chemical compounds) will be modified to instance of (P31)group of stereoisomers (Q59199015) and subclass of (P279)chemical compound (Q11173). I'll remove the flag after this. Wostr (talk) 14:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:37, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. DannyS712 (talk) 22:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Cliverbot

Special:UserRights/Cliverbot shows that the bot has both flooder and bot rights - if the account is meant to be flagged as a bot, the flooder flag shouldn't be needed. Can it be removed? CC @MJL as the bot operator --DannyS712 (talk) 22:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm okay with whatever helps the project out more. Cliverbot only has flood on Scots Wikipedia and that works as far as I know. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

The story was that the bot was doing a huge amount of edits on the Scots Wikipedia which showed up on the recent changes lists here. To avoid this, I gave them the flooder flag--Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Now that I think about it.. I guess we could remove flood if Cliverbot has (bot) through bot. All that really matters is that the account has (noratelimit) or (apihighlimits), right? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 05:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)