Revision as of 03:36, 18 August 2008 edit Nixeagle (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 32,737 edits →Discussion: note, this should go to RFA ← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:40, 18 August 2008 edit undo Brandon (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Administrators 23,427 edits comment Next edit →
Line 69: I recommend this bot goes to RFA, I say this as the programmer of the original redirect cleanup bot. (check the rename logs for my old username). As far as operation, the idea that east said above is a worthwhile one. If you are doing checks every 10 minutes, then check to see if the template has recently been edited (in last 10 minutes), and if it has, bring the template up for human review somewhere. Have it say something in #wikipedia-en or the like, or post somewhere where people don't mind watching. The only real way out of this is to monitor on IRC. —— '''[[user:nixeagle\|<font color="navy">nix</font>]][[User talk:Nixeagle\|<font color="red">eagle]]'''</font> 03:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC) :The proposed policy is to not go to RfA per the adminbots RFC. [[User:Bjweeks\|BJ]]<small><sup>[[User talk:Bjweeks\|Talk]]</sup></small> 03:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

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