Brickipedia:BAG/Adminbot - LcawteBot
Brickipedia → |
|
→ Adminbot - LcawteBot |
So it appears there has been some varied opinions on LcawteBot becoming sysop. So we're moving the discussion here. --Lcawte 09:24, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
New Discussion[edit source]
So, I talked about policy changes, not exactly a policy change, but along the same lines. Article comments, some genuis person suggested getting a bot to delete them. Forum. I have a list of comments ready to go to do deletion, so, this should be it, the discussion about admin bots.. as one of the most senior members of the wiki still active (what? May 2009 I cam here!), well one of them, it is highly unlikely I will vandalism, as I would of done it by now, and probally the wiki's most knowledgable person when it comes to bots.. I know when I say that the bot will be fine to run as admin, I mean it.. Comments below --Lcawte 18:34, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
Tasks for an Adminbot[edit source]
- Deleting broken redirects.
- Deleting mass ammounts of pages. Example: Policy changes on Date pages, bot can mass delete them
- If images get converted to PNG, once tagged, bot will mass delete the old JPG's.
- Deleting blog posts/comments? Alot of users want their blog posts deleted when they are done with them, these cause massive RC floods, as generally most have 10+ comments. If users tagged these posts under say, Blog posts for deletion, an admin bot could come round and delete them every now and again, avoiding the painful RC flood, which is very important for CVU members.
Old Discussion[edit source]
The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was to move this discussion here.
LcawteBot (-2)As operator and nominator. LcawteBot is helpful bot around the wiki, and often marks alot of Broken Redirects for deletion, as Kingcjc will know. I am proposing LcawteBot for adminship so he can delete only Broken Redirects and anything in the Category:Watermarked Images, unless asked to delete anything by another admin. The bot will not do a task that isnt properly assessed. Support
Oppose
Comments
Alright, here I am to voice my opinion. I think that Lcawte is a good user, and will make a good admin here someday, but I really don't like the idea of having a bot with an admin flag. What if this bot started to randomly delete pages? Nobody would notice because it's edits are hidden. I think that any bots running admin tasks should just run on the bot owner's account, unless they are deleting hundreds of pages. Also, this would give Lcawte the ability to ruin the wiki if he wanted to. Nobody would notice since the bot edits are hidden in the RC. Overall, I think it is better if bots stay un-admined. Ajraddatz Talk 19:26, February 8, 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's not uncommon that bots have admin rights (see here). But there should be some thorrough technical assessment going on beforehand to assure that the bot will do what it's supposed to do, and nothing more nothing less. And how many pages would be affected by the bot task? How does the bot determine when to delete a page or not? I'm more concerned about unintentional side effects than about the question whether or not Lcawte will wreck havoc ;) which he won't, of course. --User:LegOtaku/sig 12:32, February 14, 2010 (UTC)
{undent} So BAG Members and Admins are allowed to move to the BAG Forum here. --Lcawte 09:26, February 16, 2010 (UTC) |