CuratorBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: DaxServer (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Batch uploading/Portable Antiquities Scheme

Automatic or manually assisted: Automated

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Initially continuous until backlog is cleared, at regular intervals later on

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 6

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): Pywikibot https://github.com/DaxServer/wikibots/pull/28

-- DaxServer (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• To start, I'll be adding the SDC and then later on (in a few weeks once SDC is done) will do the file uploads (if a separate botreq for the file uploads phase is recommended, let me know). For now, I'm only adding P13556, later I'll update to add more fields to the SDC so as to prioritize backfilling the P13556. I'm also doing file hash checks, as it seems some files (like this linked to this) has incorrect Image IDs in the wikitext, I'll correct them (manually) and re-run the bot to fill P13556. Test run: -- DaxServer (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  Please make test run for uploads. EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

  I'll file the bot request for uploads another time, as much work needs to be done beforehand. For now, it's just SDC. -- DaxServer (talk) 14:37, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

•  Support. Much needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

BoreBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Borealex (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

• download hundreds of files using a pywikibot with pre-generated description templates;
• adding statement "captured with" (P4082) to structured data (code example).

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic/supervised

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): daily

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): ~6 edits per minute

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): Python (using Pywikibot)

Borealex (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

Little clarification about adding structured data: the bot will not randomly sort through the metadata of all files, but will process files from ready-made lists received via the SQL-request (from Quarry for example). Test run: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

What is that useful for? Is there any community consensus that this should be done a large scale? --Krd 13:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I definitely know of at least one practical use for captured with added statements — the ability to search for examples of photos from various cameras, smartphones, camera lenses, scanners etc. This may not be a native user-friendly search functionality yet, but it's already working to some extent. The ability to make such requests useful, for example, when comparing devices before purchase. Some photohosting sites, such as Flickr, have similar functionality. And as my first step, I would like to contribute to filling the Wikimedia Commons with such information.

Answering your second question, I assumed that bots already exist that, among other things, perform the function of adding statements from EXIF metadata (for example), and if I understand correctly, there is a consensus on adding structured data by bots. The original idea was to create and fill categories, but I abandoned it in favor of structured data, based on the discussion of the BotAdventures discussion, where structured data is also given priority in this case. I would also add that the main difference between my bot and others will be the manual compilation of file lists according to something like this flow — I add a new device on Wikidata or add information about the Camera Model, create an SQL query and run the bot based on it. Borealex (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I think structured data shall be set by bot only if they are useful, and I'm not convinced that it is relevant in more that a few dozen cases which camera a photo has been taken with. I think there should be specific community consensus before this can be approved to be applied to all files. Krd 07:13, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Got it. Could you tell me please where would it be more relevant and appropriate to discuss this? Structured data Discussion page or Village pump? Borealex (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Rkieferbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Rkieferbaum (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought:

• Add {{GPS EXIF}} to files that contain valid coordinates in EXIF but no location tags;
• Add Category:Ambiguous location in EXIF to files that contain invalid location in EXIF;
• Add Category:Taken with <Camera> to files that don't have it but contain valid and identifiable Make/Model properties in EXIF;
• Replace {{GPS EXIF}} with {{Location}} tags after at least a week of a file having it and after manual review of files in Category:Media with GPS EXIF.

Automatic or manually assisted: Semiautomatic (supervised).

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Weekly (after an initial drive to clear backlog.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12, usually fewer.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): JavaScript for execution and python for building lists (until I'm comfortable and the logic is tested enough to run everything from python).

Rkieferbaum (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• Please make test run. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

  @EugeneZelenko: I already ran a few edits on the bot account, and the idea, at least initially, is to do pretty much what I've been doing in my main account, so feel free to take a look at my last few hundred contributions as well. Cheers. Rkieferbaum (talk) 16:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• How many users are actually workung on manually checking {{GPS EXIF}}? How many cases have you seen where this was processed within a week? If nobody does it, the intermediate step would be just a waste of ressources? --Krd 07:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

  @Krd: I initially added location tags directly from EXIF, but this led to friction a few times. Either because other users thought a given photo belonged in Category:Location not applicable or because they knew the location information in EXIF was wrong. Users would sometimes remove the added location tag, but SchlurcherBot will sometimes have added that location to SDC, and not all users will correct that or remove it. So I changed the contents of {{GPS EXIF}} to invite watchers to indicate if one of those two situations applies, and that can be done before location is added. Since I switched to this two-step process, I've been following tagged photos and I'd say that on maybe 0.5% of them, watchers will either add a location tag, "Location not applicable" or "Ambiguous location in EXIF" tags. This is in addition to me (and whoever else wants to) manually checking Category:Media with GPS EXIF before running the script to add location to those. I feel like this is a good balance between prudence and efficiency, but I'm happy to make adjustments. Rkieferbaum (talk) 14:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikiwernerbot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Wikiwerner (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Bots/Work requests#Monuments database in Russia

Automatic or manually assisted: automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): one time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 12 edits/minute

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python/Pywikibot

Wikiwerner (talk) 14:47, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• Please create bot account and user page as well as perform test run. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
  • Well, something went wrong with the SUL; I already have a bot account at NLwiki. I have finished what you asked. Wikiwerner (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Putting aside my view that this entire category redirect effort is a waste of time and resources, I’ll point out that for many heritage sites, no dedicated Commons category exists yet, and their images end up in broader categories like 'Cultural heritage in XXXX' (e.g. WLM/1040042000 - d:Q106547672, WLM/1040039000 - d:Q106547578, and another 43 elements in property P373 refer to Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Kondopozhsky District). How meaningful will the redirects generated by your bot be?
  Example wikidata query: https://w.wiki/DsUv Olksolo (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
  • Given that Category:WLM/104003900 does not exist, it will not be redirected to anything. That said, neither that monument's item nor the other 43 items should be linked to a single category. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

    You made a typo in the category name. However, it doesn't matter, you can find any number of more suitable examples among 38,000+ at that link. And the problem is that Wikiwerner's script does not implement this feature as you described. Olksolo (talk) 07:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

    Given that existing categories take the form of Category:WLM/1010021052 what else would you call the category for WLM/104003900, in the same series? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:04, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

•  Support as requester. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

  And how do you feel about the fact that a random sane person, seeing your redirect, returns the category to its original form? — Special:Diff/1022510862 Olksolo (talk) 07:17, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

  Your comment is offensive. Desist. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

  I beg your pardon. English is not my native language. Olksolo (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

• Why just not move files from WML categories to real ones? I don't think that redirects are needed. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

  The WLM/xxxx categories exist primarily to enable quick generation of photo 'galleries' for cultural heritage objects — a feature particularly useful for custom JS scripts. These categories are automatically added via the {{Cultural Heritage Russia}} template, meaning files can be removed simply by updating the template.
  As I understand it, the original design did not anticipate manual category creation (many remain redlinks). The assumption was that file lists could be fetched via the MediaWiki API. While not an elegant solution, it works.
  Unfortunately, these categories attract well-meaning enthusiasts who create them manually (even when redlinks suffice) and attempt to 'improve' them — for instance, by adding navbars (Template talk:Cultural Heritage Russia#Navigation_bar) — even if marked as technical or hidden.
  The ideal solution would be storing object numbers in Structured Data on Commons (SDC), allowing galleries to be dynamically generated from this metadata. The first step (adding numbers) is straightforward, but the retrieval mechanism remains unclear. If implemented, WLM/xxxx categories would become obsolete.
  Given this potential future improvement, I fail to see the urgency of the current redirect efforts. Olksolo (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

  Why Wikidata could not be used for same purpose? Cultural monuments should have both categories and identifiers. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

  Please, explain your idea, I didn't catch it... Olksolo (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

  depicts statement provides Wikidata item, Wikidata item - both cultural monument ID and Commons category name (in plain English). Shouldn't these be enough for generating whatever gallery pages? EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

  Could you please provide an example of how to generate a gallery page for images depicting e.g. d:Q125067097?

  Another problem is that although cultural monuments SHOULD have categories and WD-items, they mostly still DO NOT have either. Meaningful category names for these monuments cannot be generated automatically — they require manual curation. Today we have over 224000 monuments in our database, but only 75410 have a WD item, and just 51612 have any category assigned. Few years ago, I started exporting data to Wikidata, but there are many obstacles in this process. We still cannot consider our data consistent, thus my bot exports not the entire bulk of data but small portions that volunteers deem reliable. Nevertheless this slow, careful approach still leads to backlash, making the whole effort seem pointless. Olksolo (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

  So we need another bot that adds the WLM id tot the structured data? Wikiwerner (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

WOSlinkerBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: WOSlinker (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Fix tidy-font-bug lint errors.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 20

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Javascript

WOSlinker (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• Some sample edits. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:29, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

  Will be good idea to notify users about problematic signatures. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

  …but only if they signatures are current. Krd 07:45, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

@WOSlinker: Please report current state. --Krd 07:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

It's ready to go. I don't have any features to notify users about problematic signatures though. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

CuratorBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: DaxServer (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Commons:Batch uploading/Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): One-time run

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 10

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): N

Programming language(s): OpenRefine

-- DaxServer (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• For latest test run: https://editgroups-commons.toolforge.org/b/OR/3249b63c509/ and other 4 at https://editgroups-commons.toolforge.org/?user=CuratorBot -- DaxServer (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

  Why is the Landesarchiv copyright holder of File:Mayer, Maximilian - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1001 -1.jpg, and why isn't this documented in the file page? Krd 17:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

  Pinging @TheImaCow for further details into the project -- DaxServer (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

  Per the Terms of Use (March 2025, section "Nutzungsbedingungen Online-Katalog"), all digitized archive material which is available online is either a) public domain, b) except from copyright protection as government work, or c) still protected by copyright. Where it is still protected by copyright, the archive has acquired the necessary rights to distribute it under CC-BY licence. The exact status of individual objects is generally not available, so we use CC-BY everywhere. It can be manually changed to public domain later, when applicable.

  A link to these terms of use is at the top in the "Licencing" template. Maybe the template could be improved so that this link is more prominently visible.

  Many collections where copyright matters state explicitly that objects where the copyright has not been transferred to the archive are not available digitally (e.g. here, bottom 4 paragraphs)

  The very recently updated/current version of the Terms of Use states these three categories +"in rare cases" permission is required for reuse. However, this update is from April 2025, we started this project in August last year, so more recently digitized material where such permission would potentially be required is not included in the upload. ~TheImaCow (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

  In the example I mentioned above, File:Mayer, Maximilian - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1001 -1.jpg, the image is clearly marked as "copyright undetermined" at the source. Please elaborate. Krd 07:49, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

  Terms of use state

  Copyright Undetermined: Eine Weiterverwendung ist im Einzelfall zu prüfen. Es handelt sich um Archivgut, dessen Bestandteile rechtlich unterschiedlich sind. In den Archivalieneinheiten können enthalten sein a) gemeinfreie Werke, b) amtliche Werke, die gemäß § 5 UrhG vom Urheberrechtschutz ausgenommen sind, und c) Werke, für die das Land Baden-Württemberg übertragbare Verwertungsrechte innehat und für die insoweit eine CC-BY-Lizenz gewährt wird. Aufgrund dennoch ggf. noch bestehender Rechte Dritter ist eine Weiterverwendung im Einzelfall zu prüfen.

• Meaning most files with this tag should be free, but there can be exceptions. To be sure, I checked the collections selected for upload and found these ones where "Copyright undetermined" is used. Rest is marked PD or CC.

  To be sure, we can leave them out from the upload.

  (Note that this distinction between PD/CC/undetermined is only there since a month or so)

• ~TheImaCow (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

  I think it's not "we can leave them out" but "we have to leave them out", isn't it? Which files with unclear copyright status have been uploaded already? --Krd 03:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  Here're those files:

  • File:Angeklagter- Fauser, Johannes (Gutspächter); Lörrach *11.03.1899 in Talheim; + ? Delikt- Verbrechen gegen die Kriegswirtschaftsverordnung Schwarzschla - LABW - Staatsarchiv Freiburg A 47-1 Nr. 1004 -1.jpg
  • File:Mayer, Maximilian - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1001 -1.jpg
  • File:Jägerrennen auf dem Feldberg- Graf Schliefen (?) startet die Kommandoteilnehmer - LABW - Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe )F-S Paulcke Nr. 8087).jpg
  • File:Mayer, Eduard, Dr.med. - LABW - Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1000 -2.jpg
  • File:Information from Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart M 707 Nr. 1000 Bestand-6597 permalink 1-327806-1.jpg

  In some cases, like File:Photograph from Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg PL 4-81 Nr 100 Bestand-24468 permalink 2-2951655-1.jpg, there is no marking of a specific license, I suppose it would be the default CC-BY license.

  I started populating this information again, should take a few weeks. -- DaxServer (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Here are the stats by license:

• CC-BY 4.0 - 298437
• CC PDM 1.0 - 76300
• UND 1.0 - 216695
• None - 35408 - assumed CC-BY 4.0 as it's the default

Thus the undetermined would be skipped -- DaxServer (talk) 13:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

What about those already uploaded? Krd 17:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

The document is below TOO, people skiing is PD-old-assumed. Portraits are probably PD-anon-70-EU, but I didn't look into that.

Delete those 5 to be sure~TheImaCow (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I'd say I'd appreciated if you'd put speed deletion request on them. Which other problems do we have with the uploads? Please make another test run. Krd 07:06, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

@Krd I've done another test run: , , , , , , , , , - I do not think there are any further problems with the files. The one remaining in the list above, I've marked is in DR. -- DaxServer (talk) 13:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

CobainBot (talk · contribs)

Operator: Coet (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: This bot primarily uploads public domain images from the Generalitat de Catalunya Press Room to Wikimedia Commons.

Automatic or manually assisted: Automatic with human supervision

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): daily runs, about 30 a day.

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): 6/minute.

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): Python with Pywikibot, scripts are hosted on Toolforge

• The bot ensures all uploaded images are in the public domain and comply with Commons' policies.
• It adds appropriate categories and metadata to each upload.
• A log of all uploads is maintained for review.

Coet (talk) 01:53, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• Is it possible to deduce from metadata and add meaningful categories and `depicts` statements? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I'm not fluent English speaker and I used AI to translate my speech, but I didn't review its translation. Script does not add metadata.
  • My script is a remake from another one that was created by a cawiki-mate. Nowadays, the script is not designed to add metadata, and in principle, I do not intend to implement this feature.
  • Next time, I'll make sure to review more carefully what the AI provides.
  • NOTE: The script is entirely my own work, and it has been thoroughly reviewed and tested. No IA was involved. Coet (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

    Is AI really needed? :-) File names and descriptions contain names of politicians, this could be used to add proper categories and `depicts` statements in structural data. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

    Thank you for your message, EugeneZelenko. I appreciate your suggestion and had already considered implementing something similar. However, this requires time, as I would like the process to be dynamic while minimizing false positives. For this reason, I need to proceed cautiously to ensure accuracy and reliability. Coet (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

    If this task could not be automated in near future, is there project dedicated to politicians, so participants could help with categorization and structured data? EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

    Of course, the community already does this periodically and also uses them in wiki articles. Coet (talk) 14:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

    It'll be good idea to do this on regular basis, not periodically. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

@Coet: Please report current state. --Krd 07:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Железный капут (talk · contribs)

Operator: MBH (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions), Iluvatar (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions), Well very well (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Bot's tasks for which permission is being sought: Hello! As one of the co-maintainers of the bot I request for it bot and rollback flags. The bot detects suspicious potentially vandalous edits (on Commons this also includes copyright issues), streams them onto a Discord server, and trusted users revert/rollback/RfD them through an interface. Bot is already running on Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian Wikipedias and Wikidata.

Automatic or manually assisted: Manually assisted

Edit type (e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run): Continuous

Maximum edit rate (e.g. edits per minute): Few edits per day

Bot flag requested: (Y/N): Y

Programming language(s): C# and Python

Well very well (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

@CptViraj Seems like for some reason here on Commons, when a user is linked in bot edits' descriptions that user gets pinged -- a behaviour that doesn't happen on ru/uk/bewiki or WD... Do you know what it may be caused by and would it be fixed with the bot flag? Well very well (talk) 13:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

@Well very well: Per T189040, notifications aren't sent for edit summary mentions if the edit is marked as bot edit (b), so yeah, this should be fixed with the bot flag. -- CptViraj (talk) 16:00, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

It seems from subtasks of that task that just adding : to the start of link should remove the ping. I will go currently with this approach then. Well very well (talk) 17:32, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Edits adding speedy deletion tags should generally not be marked as bot, as they should not be hidden from watchlists. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Currently bot doesn't mark its edits as bot at all, so this shouldn't be a concern. Well very well (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I have some concerns. The test edits that have been made are mostly speedy deletion nominations, which is outside of the bot task you have described, especially since the majority of the files were tagged for copyright reasons, not vandalism. Please revise the request to accurately describe what the bot is designed for and capable of doing. Additionally, the bot does not notify page creators of the speedy deletion tags. More broadly, this bot task appears to mostly have the effect of removing rollbacks and speedy deletion tags from a user's contributions & deleted contributions, where they can be easily monitored by administrators. This is important both to deal with bad reviewing and to be able to establish a history of accurate copyright tagging when applying for advanced rights. And while rollback-like tools like SWViewer and Twinkle make the Commons rollback right less important than it might have been in the past, this bot gives administrators no control over who may be using it. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

@AntiCompositeNumber
Please revise the request to accurately describe what the bot is designed for and capable of doing.
Done.
Additionally, the bot does not notify page creators of the speedy deletion tags.
Ok, will be implemented, thanks!
More broadly, this bot task appears to mostly have the effect of removing rollbacks and speedy deletion tags from a user's contributions & deleted contributions, where they can be easily monitored by administrators. This is important both to deal with bad reviewing and to be able to establish a history of accurate copyright tagging when applying for advanced rights.
Well, you can use tool for searching through user's descriptions — for that reason the bot always includes the type of action (RfD/rollback/undo) and user who did it in its edit description.
And while rollback-like tools like SWViewer and Twinkle make the Commons rollback right less important than it might have been in the past, this bot gives administrators no control over who may be using it.
Hm... @MBH @Iluvatar Maybe we can make the bot take the users list from a wiki page, e.g. a subpage of bot userpage on Meta? In this case everyone could see the list and stewards could also edit it. Well very well (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@Well very well: Please report current state. --Krd 07:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)