Interested Article - Xinbenlv bot

This user account is a operated by ( ). It is not a , but rather an automated or semi-automated account for making repetitive edits that would be extremely tedious to do manually.
Administrators: if this bot is malfunctioning or causing harm, please .

Другие языки:

For machine translation:

Xinbenlv_bot is a bot operated by . It's currently applying for approval to operate in multiple languages. You can find its contributions here Special:CentralAuth/Xinbenlv_bot .

Bot Status

Bot Status of on Each Wikipedia
Language	Lang Code	Botflag Application	Botflag Status	Approving Admin	Template for Message	Number of Notified	Number of Fixed	Number of Validated
Français	FR
русский	RU	ru:Application	Officially Approved	ru:User:Vladimir Solovjev	Template	3	0	0
日本語	JA
Deutsche	DE	,
中文	ZH		Approved for Trial	(trial)
Italiano	IT		Approved for Trial (default)	N/A
English	EN		Approved for Trial
Español	ES		Request temp withdrawn. Approved for Trial	(trial)

Task 1: Notifications for Birthday Inconsistency

The first task for this bot is to notify inconsistency of birthdays. It rely on a public available dataset to obtain inconsistencies of birthdays found on Wikipedia across different local Wikipedia pages.

For example:

on Chinese (ZH) Wikipedia, the birthday of is 1985-01-01 as of today ( )
on English (EN) Wikipedia, the birthday of (the same person) is 1984-01-01 as of today ( )

Therefore, there are inconsistencies.

The bot then write a notification on the Talk(Discussion) page of the subject, to notify the authors of the page so that they can look up the references and sources to back up the birthdays or fix them

Frequent Asked Questions

Q. Does the bot fix the dates directly? Why or Why not?

No. The bot doesn't edit the page directly. The bot only notifies editor and let human editors decide how to fix the dates. The reason is as bot we only know there are inconsistency. Fixing inconsistency is non-trivial - one should rely on checking sources before making a judgement.

Q. Why are there birthday inconsistencies, which date is correct?

It depends. When there are multiple birthdays on Wikipedia, it can be any of the following cases, or a combination.

0. Reference is not available, so the birthday correctness is unverifiable

Solution : delete the birthday if no reliable source is available.

1. There are editor typos causing the error

Solution : Look up the reference and fix the typo.

2. One or more of the sources are unreliable.

Solution : Remove the unreliable sources and its date

3. Multiple reliable sources disagree with each other.

Solution : This means different people hold different opinions, and according to , Wikipedia should keep and cite all different opinions if backed by reliable sources.

Q. Is XXX language Wikipedia always correct, when contradicting another YYY language Wikipedia?

There are local communities raise their concerns about "Why do we consider XXX(some more active) Wikipedia data correct? Is it just because it comes from XXX Wikipedia so it's more trustworthy than my local language of YYY Wikipedia?" To that question, our position is that we don't assume any particular language Wikipedia are better than any one else. We believe these kind of inconsistencies should be checked by each individual local communities and let them make their own judgement. We just raise the awareness of such problems.

Q. What about if there are many vandal edits, will this trigger to many false positive?

In response to

comment by Lemure Saltante
comment by Leoncastro

Our notification is not real time, instead we release daily snapshot. Therefore, if an vandal edit is added and reverted quickly, we will not notify people. Only for those vandal edits that stay over a day (technically cross the time point where we take the daily snapshot), will be notify. Therefore, it's actually a good chance for us to help notify editors for the vandal that was not found and thus stayed for long, b now they can get fixed. ( talk ) 20:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Q. Should this be put in a maintenance template over the article page, or as a section of the discussion page?

In response to

comment by et al.
comment by

There are pros and cons for each. The maintenance template is good for batch clean up and after that it's taken down, and and have higher visibility. Putting in the discussion page can allow people to document detailed source checking, thought processes and debate. We believe putting it as a discussion page is better in this case. If for larger visibility, we can add a maintenance template in addition to discussion page notificaiton, but at this moment we will only do discussion page.

Q. If you put it in discussion page, will many people see it?

In response to

Yes, there are existing examples where we have seen authors found the problem and come in to resolve the inconsitencies.

Q. If people all use Wikidata, wouldn't this inconsistency be solved already?

In response to:

for
for

If every local wiki agrees to use Wikidata, that's possible. The biggest challenge is that different community trust different sources differently, and thus they might lean towards calling one value of the inconsistency more reliable than another.

What it does

It reads a public-available datasets and notify on Talk/Discussion pages for the article that the subject (a person) has conflicting birthdays on different wikis.