To nominate a user (including yourself), add their username to the appropriate section below. Please explain why you feel the nominated user would be a good choice. All registered Wikibookians may comment, and provide arguments in support or opposition. For the bot flag, technical information about the bot may be requested. See the specific requirements for each type of access on their respective pages.
Consensus does not need to be demonstrated —though discussion is welcome— in granting autoreview, reviewer, importer, and uploader flags. Administrators may use their best judgement in granting those. Interface admin was historically part of the administrator tool set and is granted on request to administrators. All other tools require community consensus and can only be granted by bureaucrats. Access to CheckUser is governed by CheckUser policy. After about one week, if there is consensus to grant access, then a bureaucrat will make it so and record the fact here. If not, a bureaucrat may refuse to grant the rights and the request will remain until a consensus is reached.
Note: You may request removal of your own rights at meta:Steward requests/Permissions. Requests to remove others' rights should be placed here, whether due to inactivity, or abuse. Proposals for the removal of advanced permissions (included admin and bureaucrat rights) are governed by the WB:ADMIN policy. A minimum discussion of one month is required to remove an admin or bureaucrat for inactivity.
The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Not done I don't have any issue with you, but there is no support at this time. You can just contact any reviewer/admin or post a request at WB:HELP regarding the pending changes. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 22:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I nominate myself for autoreviewer. I'll probably only write commentary work like this one and I think I have written enough original material to qualify as not a vandal. As a some of my book changes are still pending, I think it would also take a little bit of work off the backs of others. If you read this, it would be nice if you could accept the outstanding pending changes in the book as well. Could also just make me a full reviewer, although don't expect me to work outside of my niche, I simply lack the time :/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayutac (talk • contribs) 10:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
We generally prefer to let users gain experience on the project, acclimating to its unique local culture, before giving them reviewer privs. Likewise autoreview, mostly. Cf. WB:Reviewers. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
While I disagree with Pi zero to an extent, I think that you'll do fine without autoreview at this time, partially because of your sporadic activity, and also it's easier to review your type of edits since you create them in one go. Maybe try again after about 40 edits? Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 14:47, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't mind. I just thought it would be more convenient for others. I don't really care about about the pending change line. --Ayutac (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I would like to advise getting more experience, including remembering to sign your talks.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 04:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Other projects that are already using this bot: enwiki, dewiki many other wiki across the whole of WikiMedia sites.
Additional information: All ready running on the English wikipedia at en:User:Texvc2LaTeXBot. Has sucessfully run on many other wikis, the update plan is described in mw:Extension:Math/Roadmap. The bot will apply 10 regexps replacing deprecated syntax inside <math>...</math> tags. The code has been tested to eliminate false positives. The bot is operated by Salix alba on English language wikis and meta:User:Debenben on German and other language wikis.
Comment There is no registered user with that name. Before noticing that, I was going to ask how much activity one would expect from such a bot, thus whether it would be better to allow it to run without the bot flag. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
I've now created the account, it seemed to happen automatically. The activity is going to be about 200 edits, with maybe a second run to catch pages we've missed. I'm happy to run with/without the bot flag, but thought it would be better to check. --Texvc2LaTeXBot (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
It's been my understanding that one should get permission before running a bot, regardless of whether one wants the flag for it. Though I don't see that spelled out in policy (WB:Bots), so either I'm overlooking it, or I'm looking in the wrong place, or it's more of a matter of courtesy/etiquette. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
We will want to flag the account so that the edits autoreview. Another 200+ manual reviews will not be welcome. While the policy doesn't spell it out, it is custom and practice here to not allow bot-like processes to be run without discussion due to the additional impact of having flaggedrevisions active here. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)