Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GeneGoBot

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was Denied.

GeneGoBot

• (BRFA
• Approved BRFAs
• talk
• contribs
• count
• SUL
• logs
• page moves
• block log
• rights log
• flag)

Operator: Kariohlsen

Automatic or Manually assisted: Automatic: supervised

Programming language(s): Perl or PHP

Source code available: Not yet developed

Function overview: This bot will add external links that link to the free content available on the GeneGo web site.

Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):

Edit period(s): one time run, quarterly updates.

Estimated number of pages affected: 10,000 pages on first run, 10's on subsequent runs

Exclusion compliant (Y/N): Y

Already has a bot flag (Y/N):

Function details: This bot will build and update external links on the Gene Wiki pages that link to the free high quality pathway maps that are on the GeneGo website. Scientists and laypeople would both find this resource useful, as it provides a concise visual picture of the known interactions and pathways involving the gene.

Similar links are already present for such resources as GeneCards, OMIM and similar resources on existing Wiki Gene pages

Discussion

Why should we link to GeneGo all throughout Wikipedia? Take a gander at Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Spam and keep in mind that we're frequently subject to people's desires to add links to their website on Wikipedia. @harej 23:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

This is a free resource that has high quality information that has been painstakingly gathered. The existing links to GeneCards, OMIM and a host of other sources are very parallel.--Kariohlsen (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• There seems to be a strong consensus against this bot: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Add external links to existing Gene pages that link to free pathway maps Josh Parris 04:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, as it stands, I'd say "definitely not" to this one. Echo the statement on that page that you will want the strong support of a reasonable sized Wikiproject saying that it will be helpful to articles in their scope. If you can convince them, you'll find it much easier to convince the rest of the wiki. Perhaps Wikipedia:WikiProject Genetics? Ale_Jrb^talk 11:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.