Steward requests/Global

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Global) latest archive
This page hosts requests for global (un)blocks, (un)locks and hidings.

If you are here because you have been blocked by a global block, and believe that the block is in error or you have not done anything wrong, there are a few methods through which you can appeal:

  • If the IP is not currently blocked on meta, you can post a request to this page following the instructions below to have the IP unblocked.
  • If the IP is currently blocked on meta, you can post an appeal on your talk page. For maximum effectiveness, link to the username of the steward who globally blocked the IP address using the code [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]] so that they are pinged by it.
  • If you are editing from an account and have been caught by a global IP block that is unlikely to be removed (i.e. because it is an open proxy or because of long-term abuse), you can request an individual exemption from the block at the requests for global permissions page. Please see the section on global IP block exemptions on that page for specific instructions for making a request.
  • If none of those options work, you are free to email us at
Note: (un)blocks apply to IP addresses; and (un)locks apply to global accounts
Crosswiki requests
MetaWiki requests

Requests for global (un)block[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Please also review Global blocking. Only IP addresses can be globally blocked at this moment. Please see #Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding if your request involves an account.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You know the IP address(es) you wish to have globally blocked or unblocked.
  2. For blocks, the global blocking criteria are met.
  3. For unblocks, your request addresses the original reason for blocking the IP, if any.

To make a request for an account to be locked or unlocked

Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the address(es) should be blocked/unblocked.
=== Global block/unblock for [[User:Some IP address|Some IP address]] ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
*{{luxotool|IP address}}
Description, evidence, diffs, etc. --~~~~
When requesting that your IP be unblocked, note that stewards need to know your IP address to even consider a request.
To find your IP, please visit
You are not required to disclose your IP in public - you may make requests privately to any steward on IRC or by email at:

Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Note that global blocking currently only applies to IPs, due to a technical limitation. If you wish to request a named account for global [un]locking, please request a global [un]lock here instead. Be sure to follow the instructions below:
  • Your request might be rejected if your request doesn't include the necessary information.
  • Warning! This page is publicly viewable. If the account name is grossly insulting or contains personal information please contact a steward privately in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect or email your request to the stewards OTRS queue at but do not post it here. Thanks.
  • Warning! This is not the place to ask for locks based on your opinion that someone is disruptive. Global locks are used exclusively against vandalism and spam, not because of content disputes, not because you think that someone deserves to be globally blocked. In such cases, you should ask for local blocks at appropriate places.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting that a global account be (un)locked, please be sure that:

  1. You have evidence of cross-wiki disruption from the account(s).
  2. You can show that it is not feasible to use local-only blocks or other measures like page protection to combat the disruption.
  3. You have considered making the request in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect, especially for account names which will be hidden, or for urgent requests.
To make a request for an account to be locked or unlocked
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the account(s) should be locked/unlocked.
=== Global lock/unlock for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
*{{LockHide|username|hidename=1}} <!-- if you do not want the name to be visible on this page -->
Reasons, etc, --~~~~

Global block for Mutter Erde[edit]

Status:    Not done

I think, the case is a older one, a time where we haven´t the global block for users. But now, we have this and this user made many problems in the German Wikipedia. By best AGF, this Account doesn´t need any chance to work in the Wikipedia. de:Benutzer:Katharina finished her (I think she is a woman in connection with the username) work for ever, even the account is blocked for a time of indefinite. In the English Wikipedia he is anche block indefinite from Jimbo. I don't think, this user would make this in any Wikipedia project better. In many other project he made some useful works, but his thinks in the two grand is enough, that he show us, he wouldn´t make it better. I don´t know, what de:Benutzer:Elian thought, when he unblock him, the case is for everyone clear, and we don´t support this user. --Olmoj (talk) 18:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC) after a update --Olmoj (talk) 17:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

There is no SUL for the username MutterErde. Please confirm which user you are referring to. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I didn´t know, that is there an user, whos name are written together. --Olmoj (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Per SULtool, there is no unified account, so we can't lock anything. Individual projects will need to block him as needed. Sorry, Ajraddatz (talk) 15:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Global unlock for جافيد[edit]

Status:    Not done

Reason is this message I got: Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis. The block was made by Billinghurst ( The reason given is Open proxy: abused web host; real users; convert to softblock. Start of block: 05:19، 4 فبراير 2014 Expiry of block: 12:13، 11 مايو 2014 Your current IP address is 5.1. . . Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki.

There is no account lock. From what you have provided, it would appear that I softened an existing block, and the nature of this block is that you need to be logged in to edit. I don't see that we would be looking to remove such a block. I will need to dig to find the specific block as the detail is incomplete.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:06, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it is a /24, and the narrative is as above. Please login to edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Please login to edit?!

At least read the message in your talk page, sir. I put a shot (Shot means photo), but you did not take one a look at it. If I made edits at arwiki & commons, thats because a free vpn I had used which I will not use any more. Thanks & next time read well before making an answer.

--جافيد (talk) 06:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Your account is not locked, you should be able to edit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for Pecohuh[edit]

Status:    Done

Xwiki vandalism (Geógrafo23 (talk · contribs)). --Alan (talk) 18:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, thank you — TBloemink talk 08:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Global unlock for User:Augusto De Luca[edit]

Status:    Not done

User created 555 user pages over three days, considered a "spambot," for obvious reasons, though detailed analysis shows not a bot. The pages created were not spam, as such, they were each only a link to a single photo from commons:Category:Photographs by Augusto De Luca. That was considered "promotion," though w:Wikipedia:User pages, as an example, allows limited self-promotion on user pages; this could also be considered an introduction to the user and disclosure of conflict-of-interest, efficiently. The user stopped, but the user was locked and the name added to the title blacklist (without being logged), the user then could have been warned on the home wiki and the lock lifted. I requested Vituzzu unlock,[1] but the steward has no edits or logged actions for ten days. Please lift the lock, because it is unnecessary and prevents communication with the user, which could be especially important on Commons. --Abd (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not doneFor obvious reason should be enough. The play has ended. --M/ (talk) 16:14, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
If the reasons are obvious, they should be incorporated in policy, especially users should know not to do what Augusto De Luca did. This is a brief request. It's easiest to handle it here. But this is up to the steward community. Thanks, M7. --Abd (talk) 16:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
It was not locked as a spambot, but rather as a spam-only account. I agree with this decision. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, my take on the issue is that creating hundreds of pages, all alike, should be considered spam, whether all done on a single wiki, or distributed across hundreds of them. (To me, limited self-promotion means creating, say, a dozen of user pages, across a handful or so of wikis.) I believe that should the person behind that account will ever become interested in contributing to the WMF projects, he or she will probably register one another account, and start anew, anyway. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 18:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
That may be a common view, but it is not covered by any policy, so users have zero notice that this is disallowed. This is a real name account, that was locked, not an anonymous one. Yes, if the photographer Augusto De Luca wants to participate, he could register Randy from Napoli. Could he upload his own photos to Commons? Definitely, this is an example of a user doing something that would routinely be accepted on one wiki, it would not be identified as "spam," but done cross-wiki, rapidly, is sanctioned. We have no policy on this, only defacto procedure, which is not what users would expect if they are unfamiliar with our antispam practices. Now, the real issue here is whether the lock needs to be continued. The account creation and user page creations were done. The title blacklist is in place, and I did not request it be lifted (nor do I plan to do so, it is harmless at worst). Why is the lock continued? --Abd (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
This is the same that happens for external links repeated abuse. This block is a protection for the future and a severe warning for everybody thinking about such a wrong meaning of free and thus won't be lifted. Abusers will definitely not like, and this is what it is really important in a collaborative project. And taking their part might seem quite awkward. --M/ (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Global lock/unlock for five users[edit]

Status:    Not done

See User talk:Vituzzu. All these users were inactive when locked. Giulia D'Eboli had cross-wiki edits. She was warned on it.wikipedia about editing re her father, Augusto De Luca, and stopped, edited some more, no problems, no edits after November, 2011. The first four of these were locked as "spam-only accounts" which is clearly incorrect. The last was locked with "cross-wiki promo," which is more correct, but then is not a legitimate lock reason, absent local blocks (which did not exist. There may or may not have been a conflict of interest, but that is routinely handled locally. These users, arguably SPAs, had clean block logs, everywhere, when locked. The locks may cause damage, particularly at Commons, but, as well, these users (and De Luca) would be the people most likely to know if reliable sources exist (perhaps in print) showing the notability of this photographer, which is needed for the wikipedia articles. Please unlock all five. --Abd (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

sameasabove. --M/ (talk) 16:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd hope for a second opinion. --Abd (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
@M7: please look more carefully at this request. It is reasonable and I don't think it should just be dismissed as "obvious". Giulia D'Eboli, for example, had been inactive for years! PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I have looked accurately at this spam case, dating back to its first attempts, and I endorse a full lock for all involved (ab)users. --M/ (talk) 16:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Global lock for AlanBotXD[edit]

Status:    Done

X-Wiki vandalism-only account. (Geógrafo23) --Alan (talk) 00:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Locked, thanks for reporting. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

See also[edit]