| Revision as of 14:03, 20 April 2014 editBrownHairedGirl (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,942,733 edits →Discussion: note RFA← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:30, 20 April 2014 edit undoDavidLeighEllis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers58,329 edits close, withdrawnNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <noinclude>]</noinclude><div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color: | |||
| #DEDACA; margin:2em 0 0 0; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at ].'' The result of the discussion was ] '''Withdrawn by operator'''.<!-- from Template:Bot Top--> | |||
| <noinclude>]</noinclude> | <noinclude>]</noinclude> | ||
| ==]== | ==]== | ||
| Line 54: | Line 57: | ||
| :::I noticed later that DavidLeighEllis ''did'' apply for adminship (see ]). The application didn't go well. --] <small>] • (])</small> 14:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC) | :::I noticed later that DavidLeighEllis ''did'' apply for adminship (see ]). The application didn't go well. --] <small>] • (])</small> 14:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Oppose''' A bot should not be allowed to bypass non-admin closure restrictions. ]<sup>♦]</sup> 07:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC) | *'''Oppose''' A bot should not be allowed to bypass non-admin closure restrictions. ]<sup>♦]</sup> 07:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at ].''<!-- from Template:Bot Bottom --></div> | |||
Revision as of 19:30, 20 April 2014
- The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA. The result of the discussion was
Withdrawn by operator.
DavidLeighEllisBot 2
Operator: DavidLeighEllis (talk · contribs · SUL · edit count · logs · page moves · block log · rights log · ANI search)
Time filed: 15:17, Wednesday April 16, 2014 (UTC)
Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic after manual invocation of cfd.py
Programming language(s): Python pywikipediabot
Source code available: yes, cfd.py standard script, modified only to use User:DavidLeighEllis/CFDwerk.js instead of Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Working
Function overview: Effectuates CFD closures.
Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate):
Edit period(s): As needed.
Estimated number of pages affected: 200 pages/day
Exclusion compliant (Yes/No): Yes
Already has a bot flag (Yes/No): No
Function details: Changes/removes categories as needed to effectuate my closures of discussions at WP:CFD. While Cydebot, etc, already handle this task, they are controlled by Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Working, a fully protected page which I cannot edit. A request to reduce the protection level for this page to template protection was denied on the grounds that template protection shouldn't be used for non-template pages. The use of a javascript page in my userspace for bot control prevents vandals from tampering with the control page.
Discussion
- Oppose I would prefer that this bot is not authorised. Category discussions affect a wide number of pages, and their effects are not easily reversed. The protection of WP:CFD/W has been in place for about 7 years, and the only adverse effect of it is that non-admins are unable to close CFDs which result in a renaming. This accords with the essay WP:NAC#Appropriate_closures, which restricts non-admins to "clear keep outcomes".
- I am sure that this request is well-intentioned, but is effectively an end-run around WP:NAC#Appropriate_closures. If DavidLeighEllis wants to close CFDs with non-keep outcomes, he should apply for adminship at WP:RFA. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have left a note at WT:CFD pointing to this discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- I noticed later that DavidLeighEllis did apply for adminship (see Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/DavidLeighEllis). The application didn't go well. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have left a note at WT:CFD pointing to this discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose A bot should not be allowed to bypass non-admin closure restrictions. Philg88 07:32, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.