User talk:Billinghurst

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
User language
en-N This user has a native understanding of English.
fr-1 Cet utilisateur dispose de connaissances de base en français.
Users by language
en-str This user can read and write fluently in Strine.
"Da mihi basium"

To leave me a message, click this link

User talk


Hello, can my account be unlocked now? Pardon and thanks!

Vandalism report for Beleiutz[edit]

Hello, Billinghurst.

I don't think we've crossed paths too often before—I'm primarily active on copyright cleanup on English Wikipedia and on Commons. You may recall that in response to various requests from myself and User:Callanecc, you applied global locks [1] [2] to sockpuppets operated by Beleiutz, a user who has been engaging in years-long disruption across various Wikimedia projects through promotion and copyright violations. (Beleiutz also has a history of claiming to be or to represent celebrities and company directors; User:Mdennis (WMF) recently acted on a case where Beleiutz was impersonating a WMF official.)

I recently filed a global lock request for the latest cross-wiki sockpuppet [3], and was surprised to find an uninvolved user, User:Abd, immediately leap to Beleiutz's defence, starting a cross-wiki campaign to rehabilitate him and to obstruct or reverse his blocks. This would be of little concern to me, except that most of Abd's efforts seem to be aimed at discrediting me personally. This is strange as I'm far from the only person tagging and reverting Beleiutz's socks, and Beleiutz is not the only long-term spammer/copyright violator currently handled this way by myself and others. I don't recall having had any prior interactions with Abd.

Nonetheless, Abd moved an abuse report on Beleiutz which I'd been maintaining at Vandalism reports to a dedicated project-space page, refactored and edited my own comments while leaving my original signature in place, and filled it with annotations highlighting my involvement (but not anyone else's) [4]. Within a day he dumped nearly 20 kilobytes of text into the report and its talk page which, among other things, speculate that I am myself a perpetrator of long-term abuse, belittle my edit count, imply that I'm impersonating an administrator, speculate about my ethnicity, and label me as "hostile, vengeful, punitive" [5]. Meanwhile, on Commons, he called my competence and impartiality into question in an effort to overturn the block of the latest Beleiutz sockpuppet [6] and continued his complaints even after a checkuser confirmed the identification [7].

In some of his shorter posts (such as [8]) I can see that literally every single statement he makes is false—I hesitate to say "a lie", since I have no idea whether he's being wilfully deceptive or just carelessly neglecting to research his claims. However, most of his contributions are just giant walls of text containing all sorts of bizarre inferences and half-baked speculations about me, Beleiutz, and project policies, which I couldn't hope to read carefully enough to rebut point by point. I regret to say I already responded to a couple of his shorter posts before I realized who I was dealing with [9] [10]. Having read through the complaints from his community ban discussion I see a lot of similarities to what's going on now ("placing huge walls of text", "maintaining unacceptable pages" to gather "evidence", "support for other site-banned editors", "participation at… sister-project sites where they pursue the same agenda", "massive timesink", "massive communication issues", "blatant ignorance of anti-socking policy", etc.).

I've already completely disengaged from him, and would have left things as they are, except that I noticed you and User:M7 recently intervened in a similar problem with Abd [11]. If the present incident with myself is a continuation of the same or similar behaviour, then I suggest it's time to do something to curb his disruption here on Meta. Otherwise, I'm happy to migrate my report on Beleiutz to en:Wikipedia:Long-term abuse where it can be communally maintained without further interference. (In which case, would it be OK if we moved Abd's version to his own userspace?) —Psychonaut (talk) 13:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Gday @Psychonaut:. To let you know that abd watches this page, as we have had (umm) disagreements previously and discussions about actions and their appropriateness. I am not in disagreement with your assessments, though I will admit to standing up for due process, not necessarily the person, with some of the proposals surrounding our most significant of sanctions. This user has a specific and some may say unique approach, though while may be okay for an ideal world with ideal people, may not be considered particularly reasonable and practical in the dynamic environment of a wiki, and you have (umm) encountered some of the well-intended earnest advice and opinion. While I have my more personal opinions, and I may share them over a beer, it would be unfair to express them on a talk page. Your opinion and your approach will have been noticed, so hopefully a head will be pulled in somewhat; creating more enemies is not good for a performance review if there are no benefits.
To the specific issue of placement, I would suggest that it can stay where it is, it is now just a subpage of the main, I have added it to my watchlist, it doesn't make a large difference in the end, though amazing how annoying such 'assistance' can be. There is a collapsed section listing subpages, so the page is readily available, and I have added the link for respective checkusers to find it for information. All opinions expressed are noted and evaluated, credibility of approach, knowledge of subject matter, and practicality of desired outcomes are all part of a decision-making process. [What I call the 'Animal Farm' evaluation process]. My suggestion is to continue on offering your advice on the LTA/vandal, and stewards will support actions that have high value preventative actions, and low impacts on other users.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for your insightful and reassuring comments, which I have taken under advisement. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
There is no "campaign to reverse [Beleiuz's] blocks." I had reviewed the evidence and the most recent sock report was perhaps premature, and so I requested that the block of Adi Vancica be lifted at Commons. However, Trijnstel then confirmed sock ID, so I dropped that immediately. The Vandalism report Psychonaut had filed long ago was largely unusable, with broken links, and old reports are routinely archived on Vandalism reports, so I created the subpage to collect data and fixed the broken links, and I've been gathering substantially more data, I now see the patterns. From those patterns, Adi Vancica was likely but not certain, that's all. I hadn't seen that collapsed section.... Thanks. --Abd (talk) 00:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Global CSS/JS migration[edit]

Hello Billinghurst. I noticed you load User:Mike.lifeguard/removeSpam.js on many wikis (see example). Since your global.js is now loaded automatically on all wikis, do you want me to delete the local scripts with synchbot? —Pathoschild 23:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure @Pathoschild:, if you want. As the Erwin tool is now dead, and seems beyond hope of resurrection, they can be removed. If we get a replacement I will add it then.  — billinghurst sDrewth
Done. You can see the full log on your archive page. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 05:58, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: Possibility of adding a Babel tag[edit]

Of course, actually I thought I had it since I added it to all wikis by using a bot, but I forgot I had already an user page here so it did not change. Thanks for advising. Regards. Mr.Ajedrez (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

(-: thanks for whatever you can do in this space. It is not a requirement, though obviously it is useful.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:39, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #126[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #127[edit]

User rights account creator on fr.wikisource[edit]

Hi Billinghurst,

Please can you either give me the right to give rights of account creator, or give this right yourself, to User:Ernest-Mtl. Thanks for your help! --Zyephyrus (talk) 22:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done via SRP. @Zyephyrus: If you wish for the grant rights for "account creator" to be held by frwikisource bureaucrats (s:fr:Spécial:Liste des droits de groupe), then have a local discussion, to reach consensus (and submit a bugzilla request). If you need a hand, then give me a shove and I can explain the technical detail, but to start the conversation, that is the pertinent detail. :-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:52, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #128[edit]


Hello Billinghurst. I think that you forgot to remove your checkuser right on fawiki. Regards.--Calak (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

COIBot xwiki review[edit]

Hi billinghurst, can you examine my action on User:COIBot/XWiki/ and other COIBot userspace edits (mostly clousures)? I'm newbie to antispam world (especially COIBot), so I want to get second opinion on it, and I saw you have done lots of effors in this area :) — revi 16:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks fine. I usually just place commentary to explain either to myself or to others what I sort of did. More explanation if I think that it needs more, or less if it is obvious.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, one question: Can COIBot configured to stalk a domain addtion on local wiki?(not xwiki) — revi 07:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
There are local reports Category:COIBot Local Reports‎, though generally it isn't designed to limit its focus, per wiki as COI and spam are just that, and it doesn't matter whether it is a local wiki or xwiki it is still spam, or CoI.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Then, how can I command to watch addition of some domain? — revi 09:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Available commands at Small Wiki Monitoring Team/IRC  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Template:Tps(Edit conflict.) - User:-revi, do you mean that you want a report for a specific domain? For that, on wiki, there is User:COIBot/Poke - you poke the domain in a LinkSummary template there, and COIBot should save a report for that domain 'shortly' (though it seems to have saving hickups at the moment, I hope to have time in the end of next month to look at those problems). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:56, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Billinghurst: Thanks, but seems the commands need some permissions, but I don't have it :(
Beetstra: Thanks, that's what I was looking for! — revi 12:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

New Mail[edit]

Eurodyne (talk) 04:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I have no specific opinion about your block on species. My comment was more generic.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC)