User talk:Fluxbot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If something needs immediate attention, please leave a message at my operator's talk page: User_talk:xaosflux.

This bot is now fully operational. Fluxbot 04:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I asked User:Pathoschild to block the bot, it was flagged as being reverted heavily in #vandalism-en-wp and is making edits like [1] i think something has gone a bit wrong xaosflux ;) Benon 03:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I fed a entry in to it in error, I was the one that did all the revisions, and fixed it afterwords. Just talked to Pathos, and had it unblocked. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

1 from happy8
2 This is a automated to all bot operators
3 Automated message to bot owners
4 Minor problem

[edit] from happy8

Fluxbot, you're awesome and so cool! FLUXBOT FOREVER!!!!

[edit] This is a automated to all bot operators

Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Wikipedia:Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated message to bot owners

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 02:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor problem

The bot did its work at Wikipedia:Deletion process, and another editor reverted it (correctly). Would it be possible to exclude this page from the bot's purview, assuming this problem might occur again? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 14:54, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up, my operator caught it once but missed it the second time. Fluxbot 16:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)