<\/p>\n
– The templates can be used to block most bots<\/strong><\/strong> or specific bots<\/strong><\/strong> by name or function.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Non-administrators can report misbehaving bots<\/strong> to.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Sysops are allowed to and should block uninvited bots<\/strong> on sight.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Most tools and bots<\/strong> only want to know about disambig templates.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – These bots<\/strong> do not usually edit often enough for them to need the bot flag.\n<\/p>\n – Spam bots<\/strong><\/strong> should be treated the same as vandalbots<\/strong><\/strong>.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – We need some policy on Bots<\/strong> urgently.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Let the global bots<\/strong> do it.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Just a thought, perhaps this list could be trimmed\/updated, and inactive bots<\/strong><\/strong> be removed\/have their flags removed? Certainly quite a few tasks are obsolete on some bots<\/strong><\/strong>.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – There is also the possibility of running other bots<\/strong> important to the wiki from the same project.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I know there are bots<\/strong> cleaning it up hourly thus no one can do long-term damage to that page, but I still believe a better idea is to send them to the actual sandbox if they want to actually try editing: this way they will be taught that if they want to mess around, use the sandbox, not just any page on the website.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Hi all, I noticed some bots<\/strong> which are used in the past for interwiki links are inactive for quite a long period of time.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – So the interwiki bots<\/strong> need to know about the set index templates.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I’m very interested in working RFP and the BOTS<\/strong> page when I’m able.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Per proposal, please have some bots<\/strong> move the tags on talk pages.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I am concerned for bots<\/strong> like is inactive and have been indef for sockpuppetery at zhwp.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Shouldn’t be a problem…but if you are using it in this way do you really need to use a bot? Can’t you just add the link to en.wiki and allow the other bots<\/strong><\/strong> to do the rest? Interwiki bots<\/strong><\/strong> are really for ongoing tasks and don’t really stop.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Burroughs interwiki to the article on fywiki, and then bots<\/strong> added it everywhere else.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – IRC Bots<\/strong>\/Chatroom bots<\/strong> are used in many things now, from sending RuneScape statistics, to keeping track of users who abuse the networks.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Many of our abuse filters were made or contributed to by Operator, he\u2019s written code for bots<\/strong> we use on IRC channels, and is very well-versed in networking, IP addresses, and the like.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Users should be aware that by opting-out of bot posts, they will not be notified of matters relating to material they have edited or uploaded, which are tagged or scanned by bots<\/strong> per policy.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – From my personal experience with admin\/antivandal bots<\/strong> safely detecting general vandalism is much much harder than just serial vandalism.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Why do we need to have bots<\/strong> creating our articles for us? Whatever happened to quality, not quantity? I’d much prefer to see us have a small amount of articles of good quality than thousands of short one sentence stubs, as many of these rivers and communes seem to be.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – The IW bots<\/strong> will do the rest and spread the information back here to our pages.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I feel this is far less complex than mixing bots<\/strong> in the selection.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – It is highly debatable to allow bots<\/strong> to run rampant, and make opinionated conclusions about lowercase words.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Hopefully, manually entered IW links will get picked up by bots<\/strong> for entry into the system ie.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Several semi-automated tools and bots<\/strong> facilitate orphan-tagging.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Concerning the two recent blockings of my bot it’s not really a personal error, but linked to these collective decisions: straw poll on all the fr.wikt bots<\/strong> and on the fr.w evaluations system.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – If you do place the it will be detected as an error by syntax-checking bots<\/strong> and will then be placed in the syntax cleanup project queue and will need to be fixed by someone.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I just realized that two bots<\/strong> clean the sandbox.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Using these parameters can assist bots<\/strong> or other automated processing to detect which date format is intended; leaving the format as default may lead an editor or bot to change the format to an unintended value.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – This template can be used to encapsulate deliberate or apparent typos to save them from correction by bots<\/strong> and automated wiki-editors.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Global bots<\/strong> are limited in what they can do; they can only deal with interwiki links and double redirect.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – During their approval process, bots<\/strong> may make up to 50 edits to show how they will be working.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – You are of course free to continue making those changes, but, if you wanted, you could hold off and let the bots<\/strong> make those changes.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – What I noticed is that with new articles, bots<\/strong> come along rather rapidly to add missing interwiki links.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – In the European Union, for example, bots<\/strong> must now ask for permission to mine data from users.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Your articles and bots<\/strong> help to keep the entire project together in many ways and you can not be thanked enough for them.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – This statement may deny neither Bot1 nor Bot2, only one of the two bots<\/strong><\/strong>, or both bots<\/strong><\/strong> as intended.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – These values can assist bots<\/strong> or other automated processing to detect the intended date format; omitting the df parameter may lead an editor or bot to change the format to an unintended value.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Accounts used by approved bots<\/strong> to make pre-approved changes can be flagged as such.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Popular IRC bots<\/strong> include Infobot, blootbot, Supybot.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – The bots<\/strong><\/strong> that currently support exclusion are listed at exclusion compliant bots<\/strong><\/strong>.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Each project that want to allow the global bots<\/strong><\/strong> must opt-in to the process before the bots<\/strong><\/strong> are allowed on that project.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – The server currently has three bots<\/strong> that help in various ways.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Hi all, now that wikidata has been deployed to all wikis, I propose the mass deflagging of all bots<\/strong> whose “sole purpose” is to maintain interwiki links.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – I would like to seek the same assistance from the admins here to finally stop his destructive edits, since bots<\/strong> are keep on posting wikilinks in en.wiki pointing here with an article that was created by that vandal.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Once a few more people show up and discuss this, we can come to a decision as to whether “unflagged” bots<\/strong> can edit, or if we will allow them to edit without a flag.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – What I can imagine is that bots<\/strong> operate on “new” articles, and that imported articles do not get tagged as new.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – For example, this can be used to opt-in or opt-out from user talk bot messages or to cause maintenance bots<\/strong> to avoid certain pages.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – He has many successors since Jack bots<\/strong> are usually destroyed.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – So other bots<\/strong> don’t have to load the same pages again.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – That is mainly given Wikidata were estabilished in 2013, and it is no longer necessary to have dozens of bots<\/strong> that maintain interwiki links.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Some users operate Bots<\/strong> that will go through and make repetitive changes like what you are doing with the “Other Websites” sections.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Do we allow the bots<\/strong> to continue running.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – There would likely be a drop in bot requests as well as more bots<\/strong> checking us regularly as they no longer would need to go through the application process to work here.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – For the single-player campaign, the player can command two command bots<\/strong> to help the player.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n – Please leave my bots<\/strong> unblocked, as well as account creation by my IP and email by my username.\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n![\"bots](\"https:\/\/englishteststore.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/bots-example-sentences.jpg\" "\\"bots")
Example sentences of “bots”:<\/h2>\n
- Spam bots<\/strong><\/strong> should be treated the same as vandalbots<\/strong><\/strong>.\r\n
- We need some policy on Bots<\/strong> urgently.\r\n
- Let the global bots<\/strong> do it.\r\n
<\/pre>\nMore in-sentence examples of “bots”:<\/h2>\n
- Users should be aware that by opting-out of bot posts, they will not be notified of matters relating to material they have edited or uploaded, which are tagged or scanned by bots<\/strong> per policy.\r\n
- From my personal experience with admin\/antivandal bots<\/strong> safely detecting general vandalism is much much harder than just serial vandalism.\r\n
<\/pre>\n