Nomination: I hereby request the Bot flag for User:Darkicebot for the following purposes: Esperanto verb, noun, and adjective form batch creation and Ido noun plural batch creation. Tested and confirmed transitive verbs working after the test edits with dekori. All coding can be found on this bots' userpage. All the forms of dekori were correctly made, which makes me believe that this bot is ready to go fullscale. Tested and confirmed intransitive verbs working after the test edits with kompliki. I have also added on the capability for this bot to create form-of entries for Esperanto noun forms as well. I tested it on alveno, and all three of the resulting entries from that run of Darkicebot were all made correctly. All three of the entries were correctly made. I just added Esperanto adjective capabilities and bongusta, bova, and bonhava all had the form-of entries created perfectly. There are currently no bugs in the system right now. Thank you!
All of the coding that my bot uses to make these edits are on his talk page. You can also feed him Esperanto nouns and verbs as well as Ido noun plurals for creation here.
dekori and all resulting form-of entries for this verb were made with the purpose of automatically batch creating Esperanto verb forms from a text file.
alveno, angulo, amrilato and all resulting form-of entries for these nouns were made with the purpose of automatically batch creating Esperanto noun forms from a text file.
bongusta, bova, bonhava and all resulting form of entries for these adjectives were made with the purpose of automatically batch creating Esperanto adjective forms from a text file.
ĉirkaŭo, alaranĝi, dolĉa and the forms of these Esperanto words are examples of how Darkicebot can handle special characters now. All resulting form of entries for this noun was made with the purpose of automatically batch creating Esperanto nouns, verbs, and adjectives with special characters in their names.
Support Yair rand 19:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC) I've checked all the Esperanto forms and they all seem to be correctly made. --Yair rand 19:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)