Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2011-10/User:GedawyBot for bot status

User:GedawyBot for bot status

• Nomination: I hereby request the Bot flag for User:GedawyBot for the following purpose:

  Interwiki (Examples: [1], [2], [3]). محمد الجداوي 09:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

• Vote ends: 23:59 2 November 2011 (UTC)
• Vote started: 09:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

• Discussion:

  User:محمد الجداوي

Oppose

1. Oppose Incorrect editing: diff --Yair rand 13:31, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
   • Also a-walc'h?diff=14172141, a'right?diff=14172142. —Ruakh_TALK 13:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
   • To be fair, that is the result of redirects in the Wiktionnaire. They don't use the ' in their entries, but the stylised apostrophe. I believe all with ' get redirected, so I consider those interwiki edits useful and productive. --Rockpilot 08:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
     • We all know what causes it. We also all know that the Wiktionaries have chosen a specific approach to interwiki-links. A bot that deviates from that approach is liable to enter wheel-wars with the bots that do not. Any change to the approach must be discussed by all Wiktionaries, not made implicitly (and accidentally, and without comment) by this sort of bot-vote on one Wiktionary. (Don't get me wrong, I'm certain it was an honest mistake on حمد الجداوي (talk • contribs)'s part. But it's a mistake nonetheless, and (s)he was quite right to fix it.) —Ruakh_TALK 16:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
2. Oppose —Ruakh_TALK 13:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

   Hi sir, I forgot to type the prameter -wikitionary before running my bot; so i think this caused the problem. I'm so sorry for that. Can i do some test edits?--محمد الجداوي 10:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

   Check up my new edits: ([4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10])--محمد الجداوي 12:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

3. Oppose Dan Polansky 10:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC). The owner of the bot seems somewhat hasty, as when he has forgotten to use the right parameter, and when he has misspelled the parameter as "-wikitionary" above. Furthermore, Wiktionary has enough interwiki bots including Luckas-bot (talk • contribs) and Rukhabot (talk • contribs) (recently inactive), I figure, so going for the safe side and opposing this bot seems rather harmless. --Dan Polansky 10:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Decision

Closing prematurely as failed/withdrawn, as the bot owner is still tweaking the code and testing. Please feel free to start a new vote when that's done.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I disagree. The bot owner is running the same code as most interwiki-bots; (s)he simply forgot a command-line argument they use at Wiktionary. This may be a reason to oppose (if you feel it suggests that the bot owner may not be familiar enough with Wiktionarian conventions), but I don't think it's a reason to close prematurely. —Ruakh_TALK 16:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Those who voted voted on one bot; the owner is now running a different bot. Closing the vote is in the best interests of those who want to see it pass: it's more likely to pass if restarted than if continued with two opposition votes that may not apply to it any longer.​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

O.K., that makes sense. Never mind. :-)   —Ruakh_TALK 17:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)