Change Details

AWB has [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AWB/CP|WP:AWB/CP]] page for access control. I think this is good feature. But this page needs few bureaucratic works for maintainance (user needs to write request, admin must check applicant's contributions and judge it. And after it, adding name to the page, or decline request.) Although maintainance needs few works, "no-CheckPage" could cause troubles. So if CheckPage supports general option, like [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control|Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control]] or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Twinkle|WP:Twinkle]]([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AzaToth/morebits.js|User:AzaToth/morebits.js]]), it would be very helpful for many wikis. Especially wikis in which admins are not so many. For example, JAWP where I'm from has only about 60 admins[[http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=sysop&uselang=en&limit=100|1]]. Active admins are more fewer than it. Active admin who can use AWB is almost nearly zero. If some general options (e.g. "number of edit", "account-age", "all bots are yes") are available, I think it is very helpful. Thank you. Was a bee 06:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

AWB has [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AWB/CP|WP:AWB/CP]] page for access control. I think this is good feature. But this page needs few bureaucratic works for maintainance (user needs to write request, admin must check applicant's contributions and judge it. And after it, adding name to the page, or decline request.) Although maintainance needs few works, "no-CheckPage" could cause troubles. So if CheckPage supports general option, like [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control|Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control]] or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Twinkle|WP:Twinkle]]([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AzaToth/morebits.js|User:AzaToth/morebits.js]]), it would be very helpful for many wikis. Especially wikis in which admins are not so many. For example, JAWP where I'm from has only about 60 admins ([[http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=sysop&uselang=en&limit=100|link]]). Active admins are more fewer than it. Active admin who can use AWB is almost nearly zero. If some general options (e.g. "number of edit", "account-age", "all bots are yes") are available, I think it is very helpful. Thank you. Was a bee 06:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

AWB has [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AWB/CP|WP:AWB/CP]] page for access control. I think this is good feature. But this page needs few bureaucratic works for maintainance (user needs to write request, admin must check applicant's contributions and judge it. And after it, adding name to the page, or decline request.) Although maintainance needs few works, "no-CheckPage" could cause troubles. So if CheckPage supports general option, like [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control|Wikipedia:Huggle/Config#Access_control]] or [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Twinkle|WP:Twinkle]]([[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AzaToth/morebits.js|User:AzaToth/morebits.js]]), it would be very helpful for many wikis. Especially wikis in which admins are not so many. For example, JAWP where I'm from has only about 60 admins ([[http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=sysop&uselang=en&limit=100|1]]link]]). Active admins are more fewer than it. Active admin who can use AWB is almost nearly zero. If some general options (e.g. "number of edit", "account-age", "all bots are yes") are available, I think it is very helpful. Thank you. Was a bee 06:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC)