Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/Guide: Difference between revisions

(→‎Guide to BRFAs: expand a bit)
If consensus has been demonstrated (or can [[WP:SILENCE|reasonably be presumed]]), BAG members have the discretion to allow the proposed bot to undergo trial to judge its technical soundness. Trials can also be used to help determine consensus if relevant communities have been notified, but failed to engage in dialogue after a reasonable amount of time has elapsed. Bot trials exist both for the community to have a chance to review a proposed bot's behaviour, suggest improvements, voice opposition, point out issues, discuss the scope of its task, and to [[WP:SILENCE|break silence]]. Once technical soundness and consensus are satisfied, bot tasks can be approved. If a new bot requires a [[WP:BOTFLAG|bot flag]], ping a [[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Current bureaucrats|bureaucrat]] to request it.
Typically, a BAG member will oversee a BRFA from trial to closure, and invite (or mandate) involvement from the community. Other BAG members will often participate and comment during the BRFA to give their opinions on various matters, but defer to the trial-granter for closure. This is not an official rule, but more of a recognition that whoever approves a bot for trial is usually more familiar with the background of the task, and has implicitly agreed to reviewingreview the bot's edit and followingfollow up on any issues raised during the trial. If a BAG member is unable to finish the review, or is unsure on how to proceed, they should leave a note at [[WT:BAG]] so others can help.