Ruslik00 wrote:

There has been no discussion, no consensus exists for this change. I suggest closing this request unless a consensus is obtained first. See bug 28440 as a precedent.

Prodego wrote:

There was no discussion to give account creators the ability to override any blacklist but the username to begin with, so it shouldn't have been done. Bug 22141 was a bug to fix that error, but it was never completed.

Ruslik00 wrote:

This bug was about creating a new userright, not about changing the real configuration. The latter needs a consensus.

joe wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29#Restoring_to_Account_Creators_the_Ability_to_Edit_Editnotices Please see the above, there is a VP proposal indirectly relating to this. Also, tboverride is reqiuired for some tasks that prevent certain usernames to be created. This right is essential to some account requests. I recommend speaking to the Wikimedia user Stwalkerster before changing that group as it affects the system.

Prodego wrote:

The consensus, if you read the original discussion to create the account creator right, was to give the ability to override the username blacklist. Not all blacklists. That is the right tboverride-account.

Note that fulfilling this request will break certain bots on enwiki unless at the same time a new group with the tboverride right is created and this group is given to the relevant bots. I don't know why Prodego didn't bother to mention this, as he is certainly aware of the fact.

JoeGazz84: wrong, wrong, and wrong.

tboverride not required for creating user accounts which are blacklisted. Actually, EITHER tboverride OR tboverride-account are required. Hence, it is not essential to some requests, and neither would it break any system.

The only thing it would actually change would be the ability of account creators to edit specific blacklisted pages. It wouldn't stop account creators from creating accounts with blacklisted names.

Prodego wrote:

Brad - we can just +sysop the bot, yes?

(In reply to comment #8)

Brad - we can just +sysop the bot, yes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&limit=1&username=Anomie

Adminbot operators on enwiki must themselves be admins. We'd have to either replace the bot operator or pass an RFA.

Why does "AnomieBOT II" even need the rights.... all it is doing is creating subpages in the template namespace...

Shouldn't this all be discussed on wiki? Bug 22141 was filed over a year ago, any concensensus mentioned in comment 2 is really super old at this point [not to mention the fact people are arguing about it on a bug report, means its debatable, all the more reason there should be clear discussion on wiki to point to].

Thank(In reply to comment #11)

[not
to mention the fact people are arguing about it on a bug report, means its
debatable, all the more reason there should be clear discussion on wiki to
point to].

My feelings exactly. Closing as WONTFIX because you really need to show clear community consensus. Please open a new bug when you have it.

(In reply to comment #10)

Why does "AnomieBOT II" even need the rights.... all it is doing is creating
subpages in the template namespace...

Because those template subpages are mass-protected using the title blacklist. I believe the logic there is to prevent people from being able to vandalize templates that no human will watch.