Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2020-05/User:Tr-conj-bot for bot status

Nomination: I hereby request the Bot flag for User:Tr-conj-bot for the following purposes:

I made a newer version of the templates {{tr-conj}} and {{tr-conj-v}} that is easier to use, is more correct, and most importantly supports irregular verbs. If you want to check it out, a test page with comparisons is in here and the template itself is here. I'm making this request to replace the current template with the new one, and then using a bot to change the template syntax to use the new one.

Example edits: Special:Diff/59346783, Special:Diff/59346782, Special:Diff/59346781

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 11:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
• Vote created: betseg|g 11:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2020/May#AWB_bot_request
• User talk:Betseg
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/bt-2020-05/User:Tr-conj-bot for bot status

1. Support, as there seems to be sufficient consensus for these edits as per the BP discussion. — surjection ⟨??⟩ 13:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
2. Support Imetsia (talk) 14:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
3. Support: @Lambiam supports this, so I do too. PUC – 10:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
4. Support. Great improvement.  --Lambiam 16:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC) 12:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
5. Support as it makes the templates smarter. Fay Freak (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

1. Abstain. There's too many headless chickens running round already. DonnanZ (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
   • @Donnanz: ...what. Is that even a criticism? --betseg|g 05:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

• 5-0-1, passed. We need a bureaucrat to mark User:Tr-conj-bot as a bot.
• @SemperBlotto, Chuck Entz — surjection ⟨??⟩ 16:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

  15 days later, no bureaucrat has taken action. Do we need a vote for a new bureaucrat? @SemperBlotto, Chuck Entz, Hippietrail, Ruakh —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

•  Done; thanks for the ping. (And yes, I think we need some new bureaucrats.) —Ruakh_TALK 03:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)