Redirect to:
New to bots on Wikipedia? Read these primers! Approval process – How these discussions work Overview/Policy – What bots are/What they can (or can't) do...
Click to read more »that a bot be approved to deliver the newsletter to everyone in the project who does not place their name on an opt-out list. The RFBA can be found here....
Click to read more »the speedy until someone can write the function down. You send me to an RFBA that says it is a copy of another bot's task. Please, just say what the bot...
Click to read more »WP:CHU(/U) as well, although I'm out of the habit. Visiting them (as well as WP:RFBA) to do a different role would be no problem. I'm not out to get the Bureaucrat...
Click to read more »raising flags over here. If it's read only, I don't see much need for a RFBA -- Tawker 23:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC) Request Expired. —METS501 (talk) 04:31...
Click to read more »lowered.) Already has a bot flag (Y/N): (Not applicable, new bot) Since this RFBA is quite old, it contains a lot of information which is no longer completely...
Click to read more »should have the bot name. This is not the purpose of a bot account, and this RFBA should he simply denied and the flag on this account, if obtained should...
Click to read more »below). For now, that is the only task I will have it do. I had a previous RFBA that I withdrew, and the reopening time was obviously delayed. Now, I understand...
Click to read more »to see them deleted, but this requires a community consensus broader than RFBA. -166.137.209.143 (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC) Support: Technical 13...
Click to read more »start. Eliminate BAG, but continue to add bots to be approved on the WP:RFBA page. The community can then go there and, with consensus of the community...
Click to read more »these one-off self-requests should not require all the rigmarole of a full RFBA. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 08:14, 17 August 2011 (UTC) Better safe than sorry...
Click to read more »Epicgenius (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2014 (UTC) Support - As seen in my recent RFBA, Magioladitis is using his experience to ask great questions, which will...
Click to read more »damn bot the right to edit. wat 01:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC) CODE_EXECUTE_RFBA_VALUE = false. SJSF-2-Bot (talk) 01:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC) Doesn't everyone...
Click to read more »social networking is confined to subsets. Your non response to a prior RFBA goes against any need to speedy this one for approval, as communication is...
Click to read more »do. As the code for these extra tasks is not yet done, i will issue a new rfba detailing those tasks. Secondly, im starting to lean to make Coreva a manually...
Click to read more »claimed that this was "CfD work", citing Betacommandbot's RFBA. A cursory review of the RFBA shows that the mass automated removal of all redlinked categories...
Click to read more »(UTC) Hi all. I'm so sorry to say that I have no enough time now. Can this RFBA be frozen? Of course, the code is GPL, so you can run it, althought it is...
Click to read more »days ago), I think it's a little, may I say, overkill, having separate RFBAs for each task (especially since most of these will be done one time only)...
Click to read more »this bot task should be decided by a wider community, then brought back to RFBA. --68.99.89.234 (talk) 05:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC) A user has requested...
Click to read more »that if this task is automated, you will need to receive approval trough WP:RFBA. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 13:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC) How do I find the...
Click to read more »make review easier. (I'm not sure how this would work logistically if this RFBA was inactive -- perhaps we could post a request to Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests...
Click to read more »task if there were some way to add a citation to the articles; but, if the RFBA is going to be a fight to have a bot create articles that include no citations...
Click to read more »Maybe also a reasoning behind this bot task? If more attention were paid ar RFBA to links to community discussions about a need for a bot, then there might...
Click to read more »day for each error. Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): I don't know (see prev. RFBA's) Yes Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): Yes Function details: Change articles...
Click to read more »flag.Voice-of-All 17:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC) Well, if it's reading only RFBA isn't commonly used. Only if it needs write access do we need to worry re...
Click to read more »RfBA would be be needed for such a task, I would like to clarify that per bot policy, number of edits per se does not require one to file for a RfBA....
Click to read more »Bot-RFC in deciding whether or not to involuntarily deflag a bot? A. WP:RFBA is an area where I do not plan to dwell in the immediate future if promoted...
Click to read more »wikipedia.[144] MBisanz is is one of the bot owners who goes after me at BAG and RFBA-he's not an uninvolved administrator, his request for an indef block gives...
Click to read more »purpose to the user's talk page and any concerns to a BAG member or the RFBA page. I am marking this issue as Resolved. Cbrown1023 talk 03:39, 6 May 2007...
Click to read more »designed for experienced users only. I'm tired of dealing with AfDs and RFBAs filed by sock puppets. It's a waste of user time. I'd rather just ABF and...
Click to read more »not, I would hesitate to flag the bot and make my hesitation known on the RFBA page, although in highly exceptional circumstances, proceed using common...
Click to read more »process that decides it with crats given the flag out, something like WP:RFBA. But it would also need a change to the AF itself so that admins without...
Click to read more »an RFBA wasn't needed? No, an RFBA was needed, and it would have taken you 1/10th or less of the time to simply write the function in the RFBA, instead...
Click to read more »for approval/TolBot 13A, which we're now trying to get fixed by bot at WP:RFBA#TolBot 13B since I can't do creations or moves with JWB). Dicklyon (talk)...
Click to read more »with userrights can potentially be dangerous: that's why we have RfA, RfB, RfBA, etc. If the owner of the account has left, they are not going to be using...
Click to read more »view. We could, and likely should, have a wider discussion (outside of the RFBA process) on this issue as a whole. — V = I * R (talk to Ω) 13:43, 19 November...
Click to read more »--GunnarRene 21:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC) I'd use WP:AWB. You'd need to do a WP:RFBA and create a bot account, and come up with a script to do it. I'd recommend...
Click to read more »need to find better solutions. Please note I support GoingBatty's modified RFBA proposal to remove Persondata templates that are empty except for the primary...
Click to read more »a general query) would the new maintainer, Majavah, have to submit a new RFBA to get it reactivated? Ed6767 talk! 15:49, 22 July 2020 (UTC) The bot account...
Click to read more »process to involuntarily de-flag a bot is handled in an ad-hoc manner at WT:RFBA. Where, from whom, and in what form, would you require consensus to de-flag...
Click to read more »Equazcion (talk) 10:59, 9 Nov 2009 (UTC) An editor has proposed a bot at WP:RFBA that will put external links in en.wikipedia articles to a semantic wiki...
Click to read more »own behavior and I think you've become very productive. Whereas your first Rfba went terrible, now you're a candidate for BAG.--v/r - TP 17:07, 24 January...
Click to read more »am I right? That's what I gathered from my much earlier discussions at T_RFBA anyway. So, two scenarios here - a bot login is hijacked and goes wild with...
Click to read more »templates, thus giving them some advice on how to develop the article. At the RFBA a user commented on this and suggested that this time is rather short, and...
Click to read more »was the RfBA in question in any way controversial and of the sort you'd have liked to comment on? And for how long should a non-controversial RfBA be delayed...
Click to read more »process to involuntarily de-flag a bot is handled in an ad-hoc manner at WT:RFBA. Where, from whom, and in what form, would you require consensus to de-flag...
Click to read more »sysop access to a user that already has it. Adminbots should be approved on RfBA, with an announcement and a link there from RfA. But since we're doing this...
Click to read more »conventions on naming). Then you can download WP:AWB and request approval at WP:RFBA. Once approved, your bot will receive a bot flag and someone will allow you...
Click to read more »require community consensus. Please link to the consensus discussion and the RfBA for this task. Thanks. --Kleopatra (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC) I've...
Click to read more »process to involuntarily de-flag a bot is handled in an ad-hoc manner at WT:RFBA. Where, from whom, and in what form, would you require consensus to de-flag...
Click to read more »removing the notice, it seems that it is appropriate to just add it to this RFBA without the need to file new. I agree with MBisanz on this. --IP69.226.103...
Click to read more »starters, it should include a link to the bot's flag logs and a link to its RFBA, but I'll create it myself. Thanks anyway. --Boricuaeddie 19:24, 11 August...
Click to read more »bot flag is not within the policy of bots, and MBisanz says such on the RFBA; as such, this bot flag should not have been granted, and the task should...
Click to read more »premise that the bot only be granted the sysop bit after being approved via WP:RFBA and is confined to those tasks being approved for. — Edokter • Talk • 21:57...
Click to read more »Looks harmless, useful, and appropriate. (You have the honor of my first RfBA closing.) – Quadell (talk) 13:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC) The above discussion...
Click to read more »for http://atlas.thc.state.tx.us, please let me know and I can submit an RFBA for that as well. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC) Mark...
Click to read more »the sideways answers to some of my questions about this bot, before the RFBA. A single straight-forward answer to a question, when first asked, is more...
Click to read more »process to involuntarily de-flag a bot is handled in an ad-hoc manner at WT:RFBA. Where, from whom, and in what form, would you require consensus to de-flag...
Click to read more »Wikipedia community members expressed concerns in prior stub-creation bot RFBAs and in prior discussions about your failure to follow direction(s). Being...
Click to read more »run a Wikipedia bot before and I do not know if this task even warrants an RfBA ? TOW talk 03:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC) I thought every bot needed approval...
Click to read more »would there be a need for a wider discussion for consensus before filing a RFBA for this? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 18:37, 17 July 2020 (UTC) Not Primefac...
Click to read more »Additionally, he's been involved in administrative work: helping out with RfC, RfBA, and the WikiProject on open proxies. He's a regular on various Wikimedia...
Click to read more »Archive the bots on that lists which are currently discontinued Add the RFBA link, since several of them don't have it Expand the "purpose" section, since...
Click to read more »unauthorised BCB operations, and perhaps a revocation of all prior BCB RFBAs (wipe the slate clean to minimise the opportunity for "this is just a variation...
Click to read more »requested. And, I request the bot approval for a trial only be granted after the RfBA has been posted for long enough for community members to comment here. 4...
Click to read more »name ends in "Bot". What's the best way forward here? Do I need to file an RFBA for the next AWB-like task I do using StradBot? Or do I just need someone...
Click to read more »But this particular edit is not what I'm requesting permission for at this RFBA. – Quadell (talk) (random) 12:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC) The edit was needed...
Click to read more »(hitting "change" on every entry), rather than going through the rigmarole of a RfBA. – Quadell (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC) There are over 2,000 articles...
Click to read more »newsletters. βcommand 2 19:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC) I would support declining this RfBA per above and also serious concerns over the operator's judgement, as seen...
Click to read more »alternate account to make the edits. After I asked him/her to link to the RfBA for the task, I then noticed his bot was not making the edits, and crossed...
Click to read more »bot-operators who are admins should request approval for an adminbot at a RfBA, making the request for admin-rights explicit, and (if approved) a bcrat...
Click to read more »don't know, but I am curious about the flagging of this particular bot. The RFBA does not indicate the bot meets the bot policy requirements for a bot, and...
Click to read more »relatively uncontroversial and oftentimes pro forma tasks associated with CHU and RfBA, I have reviewed this RfB with some carefulness over the past few days toward...
Click to read more »Resolved I recently created {{Botlinks2}}, which includes a link to the bot's RFBA. Unfortunately, I forgot that many bots are approved on their 2nd or 3rd...
Click to read more »set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology/Index and similar pages without RfBA approval. You can then have the seven days referred to above to log whether...
Click to read more »RussBot (talk · contribs) is currently doing this (see task description in the RfBA). Jafeluv (talk) 06:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC) Rename to match main article...
Click to read more »{{botlinks3|Polbot|-}} produces: Polbot (task · contribs) The "task" link points to the RfBA without a numerical suffix. (Polbot never had one, which is why it's a redlink...
Click to read more »mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv) per extended trial approval at WP:RFBA. For BAG, — xaosflux Talk 13:59, 4 April 2016 (UTC) Done -- Avi (talk) 15:31...
Click to read more »(talk) 20:51, 16 November 2009 (UTC) An editor has proposed a bot at WP:RFBA that will put external links in en.wikipedia articles to a semantic wiki...
Click to read more »relatively uncontroversial and oftentimes pro forma tasks associated with CHU and RfBA, for the reasons set forth by W.marsh here and much less eloquently tangentinally...
Click to read more »(UTC) @Bsoyka and DreamRimmer: would either of you be willing to file an RFBA on this now, or should I try to provoke discussion elsewhere? Dicklyon (talk)...
Click to read more »policy here, and we should instead take the census case specifically to WP:RFBA? Dicklyon (talk) 18:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC) I can work on some preliminary...
Click to read more »