The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Speedily Approved.
Already has a bot flag(Y/N): Global bot flag + ar, cs, da, de, el, eo, es, eu, fi, fr, ga, id, it, nl, no, pl, pt, ru, sk, sl, sv, and tr wikipedia.
Function Details: MSBOT updates interwiki links starting by fa.wiki
Discussion
Bot appears to have been operating for some time without issue. Operator assured me it will no longer operate on the template space, so I'd support this. Question, the bot has the global flag, so did it need to come here for approval? All I could find on meta is that we've "opted in" to global bots. –
xenotalk21:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Good point. Speedily Approved. as this bot is acceptable under the current global rights policy. No local bot flag is to be granted at this time, as the global flag is sufficient.
Anomie⚔22:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of the discussion was Speedily Approved.
Already has a bot flag(Y/N): Global bot flag + ar, cs, da, de, el, eo, es, eu, fi, fr, ga, id, it, nl, no, pl, pt, ru, sk, sl, sv, and tr wikipedia.
Function Details: MSBOT updates interwiki links starting by fa.wiki
Discussion
Bot appears to have been operating for some time without issue. Operator assured me it will no longer operate on the template space, so I'd support this. Question, the bot has the global flag, so did it need to come here for approval? All I could find on meta is that we've "opted in" to global bots. –
xenotalk21:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Good point. Speedily Approved. as this bot is acceptable under the current global rights policy. No local bot flag is to be granted at this time, as the global flag is sufficient.
Anomie⚔22:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.