Revision as of 14:51, 20 August 2008 edit Useight (talk \| contribs) Bureaucrats, Administrators 78,853 edits →FA Template Protection Bot: added comment ← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:25, 21 August 2008 edit undo Chris G (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Administrators 20,836 edits →Discussion: rsp Next edit →
Line 86: :Just thought I'd chime in here, guys, and say that I'm not a big fan of bots having admin rights, as they don't have the ability to make judgement calls. There aren't really any calls to make in this particular case, but I'm still not a fan of the idea. [[User:Useight\|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight\|talk]]) 14:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ::Which would you preffer? # Hard to revert template vandlsim on the main page FA # An unapproved admin bot that has not gone under any sort of review protecting the templates before the article goes live # An approved admin bot that has been reviewed by the community and coders for any policy/technical flaws protecting the templates I understand your hesitation about giving a bot +sysop, but RedirectCleanupBot has proven that we won't have a SkyNet style incident. In this case I think a bot is much more accurate than a human and does a better job at protecting the templates. Also could you please explain why you don't like admin bots? The only reason you gave you dismised in the next sentence --[[User_talk:Chris G\|<b><font style="color:Red;">Chris</font></b>]] 09:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FA Template Protection Bot: Difference between revisions