Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FA Template Protection Bot: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Discussion: rsp |
→Discussion: added comment |
||
Line 92:
# 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)
:::I don't really like any of the options you gave me above, so I'll go with option #4, an admin manually protects the templates before the article goes live. As for my explanation as to why I don't like admin bots, I already said it above, they can't make judgement calls. Just because I dismissed it in this case, doesn't dismiss it as my reason for not wanting admin bots. And the RedirectCleanupBot doesn't "prove" we won't have a "SkyNet style incident", one is too small of a sample size to prove anything. [[User:Useight|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight|talk]]) 16:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
| |||