User talk:Jeroen

A few comments on the method

Murdos 15:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

• Please create a specific user for all the automated edits, that will then be given a bot status. See e.g. Editor:ffimon_bot - Jeroen 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC) - Ah, I checked for something like this, but could not find anything in the docs. I created Editor:JeroenBot.
• Please limit the number of open edits. You saying that your scripts/reports are error prone and that you're ready to react (cancel edit, fix script) each time someone finds a mistake. However if you're flooding the open edits queue, nobody will ever be able to review your edits and the errors will just silently pass. - Jeroen 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC) - What would you propose?
• Do you plan to open the source of your scripts? I'm not interested in running them, but if I'm able to check how you're doing your business, I may be able to spot errors at the source. And I'm not really inclined to trust a black box machine. - Jeroen 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC) - Sure, if it helps. Do you have a proposed way of doing that?
• Do you really 100% trust Discogs? - Jeroen 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC) - No, of course not, just like I don't 100% trust MusicBrainz. But I make sure that the tools will never repeat the same edit, so if there's a fix, it won't be re-added. It helps that editors are watching the artists they know. By the way, I'm not focusing on Discogs in particular. I think the next data source on my roadmap are the structured infoboxes on Wikipedia.

Spotter errors. Are they fixed?

Murdos 15:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

• Edit:12582655 Two different artists added for only one performance credit - Jeroen 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC) - Will do that. Nothing is running now, but before I restart I will add a check for common 'ancestors' in the equivalence map.