Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat

←Requests and proposals

Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat (at Meta-Wiki only)

Archives (current)→

Meta-Wiki has a small active community. When a normal user requires the assistance of an administrator or bureaucrat for some particular task, it is not always easy to find one. This page helps users find one when they need one; asking specific admins directly via their talk pages is one way to elicit a fast response. It is only for assistance required at Meta-Wiki, help for other wikis needs to be requested at those wikis.

• Before posting to this page, make sure your comment doesn't belong at one of these specific request pages:
  • Requests for (translation/central notice/interface) adminship on this Meta-Wiki
  • Requests for CheckUser information on this Meta-Wiki
  • Requests for oversight of edits on this Meta-Wiki
  • General requests for permissions on other wikis
  • Requests for CentralNotice banners and campaigns
• Import is currently enabled in this wiki from some projects. From other wikis, you will need to copy and paste your materials by hand but please remember to add a link, as a permanent link, and the history of the page being imported in the edit summary to avoid copyright violations.
• To report vandalism on Meta: please click here. For immediate assistance, join #wikimedia-meta^connect and use !admin@meta to notify administrators.
• To report cross-wiki vandalism see Steward requests/Miscellaneous.

See also: Stewards' noticeboard, Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard, Category:Meta-Wiki policies, Category:Global policies

General requests for: help from a Meta sysop or bureaucrat · deletion (speedy deletions: local · multilingual) · URL blacklisting · new languages · interwiki map

Personal requests for: username changes · permissions (global) · bot status · adminship on Meta · CheckUser information (local) · local administrator help

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation

Meta-Wiki maintenance announcements [edit]

General maintenance announcements:

(as of 17 August 2026)

• Assistance with Meta-Wiki maintenance is always welcome.
• Many files awaiting review for basic {{information}}, source and license.

---

Discussions:

(as of 17 August 2026)

None currently.

(Last updated: 2025-08-27)

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

• About Meta
• Discussion pages
• Request pages
• Policies and guidelines
• Information and statistics
• Categories
• Help pages
• Meta-Wiki discussion page

Please find answered requests in the archives (this month).

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 10 days.

More opinions on qiuwen.wiki

The zhwiki community has requested the removal of qiuwen.wiki from the global blacklist from time to time, though those requests were declined. I'd appreciate it if others could share their views on the latest request at Talk:Spam_blacklist#qiuwen.wiki. I may be seeing this differently, so some additional perspectives would be helpful for both me and the requester :) – DreamRimmer ■ 16:37, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer only zhwiki? local whitelist Entry? 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 17:36, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

This, that's exactly what the whitelist is for. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:56, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Actually previous requests were more often about blocking qiuwenbaike.cn (summarized at Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2025-06#qiuwenbaike.cn, only the one in 2022-12 requested unblocking, until this year). Unlike previous instances, the current request should be the first one backed by a local consensus.

I don't know how much scrutiny this domain received when it was added to the list. However, I believe the rationale for blocking it does not stand, as I explained in the discussion there. I would like to ask an administrator to review the case. Srapoj (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Vlaemink

• Vlaemink (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

At Talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Project#Interpretation of article 3, participants have now been told 4 times (3 times by U4C members and once by myself) that the page isn't meant to be a forum for discussing systemic failures of the UCoC, and that they should create a case instead. Vlaemink doesn't seem to be taking those warnings for granted and even replied directly to one of them: Talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Project#c-Vlaemink-20260813065500-XXBlackburnXx-20260803232500. They also appear to have gamed our system by making a bunch of PGAME-y edits specifically so they could make those comments, so they were clearly following the discussion in the meantime.

I ask that Vlaemink be reminded, by whatever means one deems necessary, that Meta-Wiki is not an appeals court (except through a U4C case). If they want to challenge how the UCoC has been systematically applied in a particular case, the appropriate venue is a U4C case, not a general UCoC talk. -- -- XXBlackburnXx (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

I've already warned the user for abusing a functional page some days before. @Vlaemink may I ask why you are continuing what another colleague started? NDG (talk) 08:47, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

@Vlaemink I would prefer if you could reply here. NDG (talk) 23:45, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

I think the U4C committee can block this user if they think so. I'm not sure we should be interfering in the U4C space. Leaderboard (talk) 16:29, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

@Leaderboard I agree with you, that Meta-wiki admins should be very careful with users involved into U4C cases. But Vlaemink was warned by me on August 2nd for some testedits as Steward requests/Bot status. There was no reaction from them afterwards. No apology, no explanation. There was another user warned and one blocked in the same discussion some days earlier. Measures against the account would be directed against generally unacceptable behavior. NDG (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

If it's elsewhere in the project then sure, but given that the suggestion is to block on a U4C page alone, I think we should leave it to them to decide. Leaderboard (talk) 17:27, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

As I suspected, that U4C talk page was already semi-protected, but Vlaemink made some test edits on SRB to game the system, and they joined here since 2019. I believe w:en:Wikipedia:PGAME might be considered in this context. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 17:54, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Mass Message request

I would like to target the list I created Global message delivery/Targets/Organized Labour Month Online Campaign with a 1-time message with the following wikitext. I made the Meta link an external link, because this will be send to users on both Meta and English Wiki user talk pages

== Organized Labour September Editing Event==
[[File:Co-op activism5.svg|thumbnail]]
You're invited to join the [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Event WikiProject Organized Labour Month], a cross-wiki editing event taking place throughout September 2026!
The campaign brings together Wikimedians interested in improving coverage of organised labour, workers, trade unions, and labour history. You can join a local WikiProject or campaign page in your language, or add your home wiki to the event.
This is a one-time invitation. You're receiving it because you previously signed a petition related to Wiki Workers United (WWU). We hope you'll join us!
Regards, [[User_talk:Shushugah]]

Shushugah (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm happy to send this since it's a one-time thing and the target list is made up of users who showed interest in WWU. Is there a reason to send it to both their Meta and English Wikipedia talk pages? I can send it to either one, but sending the same message to both seems unnecessary and could come across as spammy. – DreamRimmer ■ 11:43, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Out of the 2675 listed, 645 appear twice. Also, this message could use a few minor improvements. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:49, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

I removed the duplicates, prioritizing keeping enwiki over metawiki. Do you have more specific feedback how to improve the message? Shushugah (talk) 13:03, 16 August 2026 (UTC)