Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/TheSandDoctor


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for BAG membership. Please do not modify it .

BAG Nomination: TheSandDoctor


I was asked to run by over the holidays, but have put it off until now, which seems a good a time as any. I really don't like talking about myself, but here it goes:

I am TheSandDoctor, an en sysop and global renamer who runs three bot accounts: Combined, these accounts have over made over 270,000 edits across 8 BRFAs, with the majority of those being filed within the past 10(ish) months. Outside of bot work I frequent various areas of the project, including WP:AN/C, and help out wherever I can. If the community wills it, I would love to also actively help with Bot Requests and would become an active member of BAG.
 * TweetCiteBot (originally TweetBot) is my first bot account. It fixes instances where tweets are cited using cite web instead of cite tweet. It has not run in a while, but I plan to run it again once I free up the hard drive space to unpack a database dump
 * DeprecatedFixerBot (DFB) is the bot account with the most edits - over 180,000 - and is used for resolving deprecated parameters and fixing templates in general
 * TheSandBot (TSB) is my newest bot and is most likely the account which all future tasks that do not "fit" under DFB will be filed on

I am also a computer science undergraduate and feel that I have the demonstrated competency, temperament, and necessary experience to serve as a member of the Bot Approvals Group. Lastly, as I have seen it asked at at least one previous BAG nomination, I have indeed read Bot Approvals Group/Guide and am familiar with Bot policy. Thank you for your time, The SandDoctor  Talk 05:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

 * I have now notified the required noticeboards (AN, VPM, WT:BOT, and BON). If anyone would like others notified, please let me know. -- The SandDoctor Talk 05:46, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support I'm happy to support the nomination of this editor, who has demonstrated familiarity with bots and the policy. No reason why not to. programming Geek (contribs) { this.timestamp = 16:27, 14 January 2019 (UTC)  {{font color|red|Error: Unmatched '{'. Unrecoverable syntax error. (100% scanned)}} --DannyS712 (talk) 23:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support, Competent bot operator, active, isn't insane, familiar with the bot policy. will make a great addition to the team!  SQL Query me!  18:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Had thought to ask him myself. Good botop with a good demeanor and is active.  Good candidate. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 20:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support Why not? - F ASTILY   00:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Support I think I would have nominated them myself by the end of the month if they hadn't done so themselves, so support. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't really see what could go wrong here. —  Earwig   talk 07:03, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - High level of clue, technical competence, and bot experience, very professional as an admin, also a very levelheaded, friendly and reasonable person in general. TSD is an asset to the project and will be an asset to BAG. Swarm  {talk}  01:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - make it so.-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 20:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I guess we don't make joke opposes anymore. I would (joke) oppose on grounds of "lacks insanity".-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * support obviously Hhkohh (talk) 23:06, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Closed as successful. WJBscribe (talk) 16:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The above BAG membership discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.