Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
←Requests and proposals Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat (at Meta-wiki only) Archives (current)→
Shortcut:
WM:RFH
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. See also: Stewards' noticeboard, Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard, Category:Meta-Wiki policies, Category:Global policies

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

Meta-Wiki maintenance announcements [edit]
General maintenance announcements:
(as of 26 February 2020)
Discussions:
(as of 26 February 2020)
None currently.
(Last updated: 2020-02-04)
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
This box: view · talk · edit

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

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

Request for flood[edit]

Hi. Can I please be flagged as a flooder for a bit (I'm about to get off for today, and don't know how long it'll take when I'm back, so ~2 days should be enough) to clean up translations of links at Meta:Policies and guidelines? The whole translated message for links is currently, eg, <translate><!--T:65-->[[<tvar|1>Special:MyLanguage/Terms of use</>|Terms of use]]</translate>. This results in a translation [[$1|translate the message here]]. Only the piped text should be in the translation unit, simplifying translation without no net change in the end. To transition, current translations need to be updated, which will be a lot of repetitive edits that would flood rc. I have read Meta:Flood flag, and if I need to make any edits that shouldn't be hidden I'll use one of my alts. Let me know if there are any questions. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 07:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

This needs a crat attention. @DannyS712: If without flood how much edits will you be making? If it's not like 100/ min in RC should be fine w/o flood. No opposition in granting flood though just there are only 3 crats.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:58, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Its hundreds of edits, and I'd prefer to be able to make them quickly so it doesn't take as long --DannyS712 (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Noted. I will try to find a crat for this. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Asking @Base and Kaganer regarding the proposed changes. If they're okay, them I am too re granting flood. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

It is tagged correctly now. It gives important context to the translator as well as helps Translate interface render translation as a link in its preview. --Base (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Base: Do you then oppose DannyS712's proposed edits? Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
MarcoAurelio, I do. --Base (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Then X mark.svg Not done per Base. Do discuss the edits somewhere and when there is consensus, come back to request for flood to execute the changes if needed --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Agree with Base. Current scheme is optimal; please do not broke this. In common case, proposed change may be doing by single edit; Flood flag is unneeded for this task.--Kaganer (talk) 23:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
@Base, DannyS712, and MarcoAurelio: I'm re-check this page, and I tend to agree with Danny's idea. In common case, current scheme is better; but Meta:Policies and guidelines is mainly table, and first column in this table entirely filled by wiki-links. Thus, the proposed simplification for the first column seems reasonable, and I Support Support its implementation, but flood flag for this seems redundant. Initial change may be doing by single edit; and then should be needs update very many translated strings - but translation namespase excluded from default view of the Recent Changes. --Kaganer (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Danny, Thank you for the initiative and the willingness to implement it! Please note: i'm made some edits (to isolate the remaining direct links in the second column).--Kaganer (talk) 23:41, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Protect the SRG page[edit]

Good morning everyone. Please protect the SRG page. It has been recently vandalized multiple times by long-term abusers in the past seven to ten day(s). Notable examples of vandalism include: this edit, this edit and also this edit. Thankfully, some of the users have already been globally locked by some stewards, including Defender, Revi and Matanya. I know that Hasley and WikiBayer have some experience with this particular LTA. Please see also the revision history. I saw that there have been more than ten reversions in probably the past couple of days. I do hope that the SRG page will definitely be fully protected by someone. Thank you and have a great day. 185.163.46.141 05:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I believe that the next level of protection is "sysop only". The page is frequently edited by non-admins and protecting it as "sysop only" doesn't seem to do any good. Minorax (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Basically per Minorax, we can't increase the level of protection, the only solution is to keep watch of the page and block/lock the LTA.--AldnonymousBicara? 09:08, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Concurred. Best is to revert, block, ignore those users. They are clearly gaming autopromotion to autoconfirm, but still manageable, or else we can deploy some abuse filters. Just to note that is a steward page and meta sysops typically defer to stewards to manage their own pages. If uncontrolled, stewards should be able to respond accordingly. Thanks for the report, we will keep an eye on it. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, it does look like we do need more admins here. 185.163.46.141 12:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
We need more admins always, but we need active ones and for now, the coverage seems alright to me as compared to a year ago.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I do have a great idea, we should add some edit filters so that this LTA won't edit on SRG anymore because it's been happening all the way back since last month. 185.163.46.141 12:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Not now, blocking is still the best. Closing this thread as nothing more is required at the present. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Just a note about these threads: One of the LTAs loves to point out how much vandalism the SRG/related pages gets. Other patterns of behaviour include pinging random admins. Please, if you see threads like these in the future, just revert and block on sight. Deny recognition and all that. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat&oldid=19843620"