Revision as of 17:50, 7 January 2007 edit Peter M Dodge (talk \| contribs) 4,982 edits Reply to David Levy ← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:04, 7 January 2007 edit undo Xaosflux (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Election clerks, Importers, Interface administrators, Oversighters, Administrators 84,922 edits re Next edit →
Line 231: :How about you, Xaosflux? Did ''you'' read my replies? I don't understand why my argument that we should refer to the discussion as something other than an "RfA" has continually been construed as an argument that there should be no discussion. —[[User:David Levy\|David Levy]] 17:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC) :It is simple: Wikipedia is built on community consensus. RFA is the proper forum for consensus regarding sysop functions. if you want a bot to pass, you must satisify conditions laid out by the BAG. if you do not, then it will not be approved. A condition of this bot's acceptance is passing RFA. Full stop. Cheers, ✎ <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:Wizardry Dragon\|<font color="#696">Peter M Dodge</font>]] ( [[User_talk:Wizardry_Dragon\|<font color="#696">Talk to Me</font>]] • [[WP:WNP\|<font color="#696">Neutrality Project</font>]] )</span> 17:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC) :I did read your replies, I simply do not feel that there is a community support to allow the bot approvals group to approve the sysop flag to accounts; should the community support that, I would not have a problem exercising it. — [[User:Xaosflux\|<b><font color="#FF9933" face="monotype"><big>xaosflux</big></font></b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Xaosflux\|<font color="#00FF00">Talk</font>]]</sup> 18:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

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