Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval/ProtectionBot: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:32, 7 January 2007

Revision as of 07:51, 7 January 2007

Line 192:

:2. Again, Robert isn't seeking "adminship" for his bot. He's seeking the "sysop" designation, and we have no formal process through which to handle such a request. That doesn't mean that we should fall back on the closest process that we happen to have (thereby anthropomorphizing a computer script). It means that we should devise a new process that makes sense. —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 07:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

::Indeed. Our usual process for deciding whether programs should be allowed special user rights designations is the bot approval system. That system is good for determining whether a certain task should be performed automatically, and whether the given piece of code is capable of performing the task without unacceptable errors.

::we need to make this discussion closed there will be an RfA or there will not be bot approval. as stated before we all want this concluded. As the BAG we have stated that we need community support. Unless you want to wait a month to figure out how you want this done the best way is a RfA, and a b-crat has also stated that we need a RfA. what else will it take to get this started? this will not be a case of IAR we have clearly stated our position. Essjay as b-crat and as BAG.

I know some users consider BAG a ''body with no official authority'' yet per [[WP:BOT]] {which is a policy and not a guideline)

<blockquote>

Prior to use, bots must be approved at [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval]]. State there precisely what the bot will do, observe and participate in the discussion, and await authorization from someone in the [[Wikipedia:Bots/Approvals group|approvals group]]. </blockquote>

thus this issue has been settled. If there is community support for a bot with this function it will be shown there if not the community shall have spoken in a consensus. If this is not acceptable solution we can close the BRfA and kill ProtectionBot. I do not want to see that I think the Idea is a very good one, I just want a clear consensus reached quickly and have ProtectionBot up and running after the RfA since the bot trial has already concluded. Hoping the best [[User:Betacommand|Betacommand]] ^{([[User talk:Betacommand|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Betacommand|contribs]] • [[User:BetacommandBot|Bot]])} 07:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

::RfA, on the other hand, is a system for determining whether human users should be granted adminship, which includes a user rights level but also indicates a social standing within the community. The process is designed to determine whether an individual is trustworthy and familiar with our policies. To apply those standards to a piece of code makes no sense at all. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 07:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)