Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2007-05/User:AutoFormat

User:AutoFormat

 * I hereby request the Bot flag for User:AutoFormat. See discussion at Beer parlour and User Talk:AutoFormat
 * Vote ends: 22 May 2007
 * Vote started by: Robert Ullmann 13:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Discussion: Please refer to the documentation at  User:AutoFormat

AutoFormat fixes several classes of common syntax and structure errors common in new entries and in existing entries that have not been corrected. These include entries that have not been corrected in the past. Some of the corrections are simply wikitext spacing that is preferred; some affect the visible appearance of the page. Examples are correcting misspellings in headers (Pronounciation) and correcting headers to sentence case (Related Terms). It is also updating some template calls.

Two classes of action have been suspended/excluded for now:


 * moving categories to the appropriate language section(s); policy vote pending
 * correcting levels of headers to WT:ELE standards for L4; vote or whatever TBD

Support

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Robert Ullmann 13:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Coffee2theorems 13:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Cynewulf 14:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support —RuakhTALK 15:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support EncycloPetey 15:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support DAVilla 17:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC) Robert has been open and responsive to criticism, deserved or not. The bot is a very nice cleanup tool now and I strongly trust it will continue to serve well as its functions are expanded, which I would recommend and encourage. The details above are too precise. Basically, this bot takes stuff that's patently wrong, if it knows how it's wrong, and fixes it. DAVilla 17:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Williamsayers79 19:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Atelaes 01:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support, good bot. bd2412 T 07:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Tohru 00:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support H. (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC) since it does more good than bad.
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support H. (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC) since it does more good than bad.

Oppose

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose Connel MacKenzie 04:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC) There needs to be an informal vote thing in place for minor items.  While Robert is very trustworthy and responsive now, it is bad juju to give a carte-blanche go-ahead.  The vote, if approved now, would set the features of AF in stone, not allowing additions (which to date, has been the beauty of it!)  --Connel MacKenzie 04:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why do you think it is that rigid? There isn't anything keeping a bot from being improved or extended. (Were all the things User:Connel MacKenzieBot has done and does on occasion in the initial approval? [Others should read the notes there, including that it usually runs w/o a bot flag, as AF has been]) If we have an addition, for example perhaps User Talk:AutoFormat it can be added with a parameter to switch it on or off (as you observed), tested a bit, and then subjected to whatever level of approval we like. Discuss it a bit on BP or run a vote, then turn it on again. Just as catmove is turned off at the moment. Robert Ullmann 14:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * see Votes/2007-05/AutoFormat converting context labels to templates

Decision

 * With a vote of 11-1-0, the bot flag is approved. --EncycloPetey 03:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)