"I'd like to implement" -> "I suggest implementing" ; for every policy is implemented by the community, not by the robot operator. Hillgentleman 00:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Automatic approval at wikis with active bureaucrats 
But, the last sentence "Other bots should apply below." is confusing. "Other bots need community consensus to be approved." or something would be better. The first sentence means that every bot needs application to obtain local bot statu s, in my understanding. In case of automatic approval, community consensus is not necessary, but the operator should write a request. Without an explicit request, local bureaucrats may fail to notice the bot making trial edits for automatic approval. Thanks. --Kanjy 08:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- No comment? I would like to rewrite it as I mentioned above if there will not be any objection in one week onward. --Kanjy 03:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- My thought is this: Automatic approval at wikis with active bureaucrats should NOT be implemented. If automatic approval is allowed, many operators may ask bot status to stewards directly, without any local notice.--Kwj2772 14:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- My suggestion postulates that local community/bureaucrats may implement automatic approval rule by themselves, of course not depending on stewards. The current version might mislead bot applications to stewards directly, as Kwj2772 mentioned. So I have been suggesting to rewrite it as above. At wikis with active bureaucrats, local bot status request should be posted on the local request page, no matter whether the request is asking a community consensus, or whether the request is asserting automatic approval qualified. Automatic approval means that "the operator does not have to obtain a community consensus by discussion or by vote, local users do not have to discuss/vote on each request". So automatic approval rule may be useful not only for wikis with no bureaucrat but also for wikis with bureaucrats. --Kanjy 17:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Bot policy on the Limburgish Wiktionary 
Please note that the people of the Limburgish Wiktionary are currently discussing whether they want to keep the standard bot policy or create their own policy. Most important points of discussion are global bots, automatical approval, spellchecking, community consensus, supervision and maximal number of edits when the bot isn't flagged. --OosWesThoesBes 13:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Marathi Language wikipedia has indipendant Bot policy needs local approval 
- en: Requests for the bot flag should not made be made on community page. Marathi Language wiki :mr: does not use the standard bot policy, and does not allows global bots and automatic approval of certain types of bots. All bots should apply at Marathi Wikipedia Local Bot Request, and then request access from a local burocrat if there is no objection.
Policy for Non Marathi Bots convey it prominently to all old and new bots
- Policy page governing non-marathi bots should be conveyed at
- All non-Marathi Bots please do register yourself with bot name, controllers User name, talkpage, with brief info the work Bot carrying out; source of Marathi words reffered by the bot etc. at Marathi Wikipedia Local Bot Request.
- Other than interwiki linking,prior permission from Marathi wikipedia Burocrats or sysop is must.
- Non-Marathi Bots are requested, to not to carry out any spellcheck/spellchange in Roaman or Devanagari script in Marathi Language wikipedia or wictionary; except in cases of specific request comming from a Marathi Wikipedia Sysop after due consensus at Marathi Wikipedia.
- Where bots or non Marathi wikipedia want to request spell change shall do so first at mr:Wikipedia:Embassy in a separate subsection.
- Non-Marathi Bots shall not carry out any change in any images and pictures or shall not upload any images and pictures without express permission or request to and from Sysops or Burocrat from Marathi Wikipedia with due consnsus and/or requirement.
- Note for Hindi language bots संस्कृत, हिंदी तथा किसीभी भारतीय भाषासे मराठी व्याकरण और मराठी शब्द लेखन भिन्न हो सकता है इस लिए अमराठी भाषायी बॉट/बॉट नियंत्रक (मराठी भाषी बॉट के अलावा और किसी भाषा के बॉट नियंत्रक) द्वारा मराठी भाषा विकिपीडियामे शुद्धीचिकित्सा या शब्द '"शुद्धीकरण प्रतिबंधीत है।।
Thank you and regards
- Yes that is what the old policy was, the discussion that brought you here is a discussion to change that policy. Please make comments on why or why not you think the policy should be changed on mr.wikipedia. -Djsasso 16:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
According to http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipedio:Permespeto_por_robotoj eowiki accepts global bots. I am not sure if this should be listed in the main table or under global bots (without policy). Nakor 01:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello, according to this page, bgwiki is supposed to allow global bots. Nevertheless when I run my bot on that particular wiki, its edits show in the recent changes list. Nakor 00:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- The global bot feature has not yet been enabled on bgwiki, but Pathoschild has been notified. --Silvonen 02:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- OK. Thanks. Nakor 16:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
mixed vs grouped 
I liked the fact that the results are grouped/sorted by project and then by language. Now the old situation is back. First grouped by language and then by project. There are a lot of bots that run only on the wiktionary projects or only on the wikipedia projects. Aspecially the wiktionary bots are not going to dig out the long list to see what projects they need a local flag and which they can run under the global botflag. Carsrac 18:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hello Carsrac. You can sort the table by clicking the images in the table header. The table is useful for more than single-project bots, and bots should definitely not be screenscraping this table directly. If you're running a bot which needs to know which wikis recognize its global bot flag, you can:
- —Pathoschild 01:45:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- pywikipedia actually is supposed to know which wikis are global? I didn't know that. it always warns me I am not a bot on global wikis. I will have to look into this. -Djsasso 16:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
The tables are a mess 
Sorry for my comment on the tables, but they are absolute chaos. Why putting all projects in one single table, leaving out wikiprojects where there the policy is not implemented, and stating that it is not implemented in other wikiprojects in the same table? If you make tables like this, I would expect all known wikiprojects to be included, or the data being spread over different tables for different types of projects. I have been studying these tables for hours before they started to make some sense to me, but my boss would definitely want to see me if I would present information in this manner (unless we are trying to hide things from the audience) - Quistnix 00:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hello Quistnix. The table is sortable by clicking the table headings. This lets you sort by wiki project, language, automatic approval implementation, global bots implementation, or maintenance status. —Pathoschild 00:56:27, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Quistnix, just click on the different icons to sort the on either project or language. ;-) Annabel 14:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Some inconsistencies 
I went through the list 3 weeks back and noted some inconsistencies that should be fixed. I wrote about this on the mailing list but it's probably better to post this here for reference. Feel free to strike out the ones that have been resolved. Jafeluv 21:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- (List moved to my sandbox since nobody seems interested in this. Jafeluv 06:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)