Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2018-08

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 01 August 2018, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Report concerning EndlessLumita[edit]

EndlessLumita (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log) LTA vandal sock of Liza Veniza. SA 13 Bro (talk) 09:42, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Taken care of. — regards, Revi 09:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — regards, Revi 09:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning 46.227.72.25[edit]

46.227.72.25 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log) Persistently creating nonsense pages and vandalism. SA 13 Bro (talk) 10:10, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done locally by Steinsplitter and globally by me (Based on this request) --Alaa :)..! 10:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --Alaa :)..! 10:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Tegel[edit]

Hello, maybe this should be semiprotected again? --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:57, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Done for 1 week. Stryn (talk) 17:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Stryn (talk) 17:58, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning 75.131.25.207[edit]

75.131.25.207 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log)Reasons: IP is vandalizing multiple pages Esteban16 (talk) 01:24, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 01:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --Alaa :)..! 08:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Indef-semiprotect for User talk:Маршмаллыч[edit]

Please, semi-protect page User talk:Маршмаллыч for indefinite. Now, its just redirect to my main talk page — I don't suggest ask any question in my alternative account's user talk. Also, this page was persistely vandalised. Marshmallych 09:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Since this is effectively fighting vandalism, I'm going to take it as being within my remit even as a limited administrator. Thank you for moving the one serious question/statement/request to your main-account talk page. Don't be surprised if that page gets vandalized, though. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: StevenJ81 (talk) 13:39, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Omar&lhmam[edit]

Please block user:Omar&lhmam for vandalizing Meta talk:About. 2602:306:3357:BA0:C50D:27D5:E8B8:CA8C 20:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Not even get warned. Most likely they never return. So not done. Stryn (talk) 18:28, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Test-bad-person-to-be-blocked[edit]

There is a user named user: Test-bad-person-to-be-blocked. 2602:306:3357:BA0:C50D:27D5:E8B8:CA8C 20:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

So? Looks WMF test account. Stryn (talk) 20:28, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Global lock of account user:Asim543[edit]

@Billinghurst: Hi,it had been long since i requested for unblock of my account [1].But nothing had been progress since then.It had already been 9-10 days.I know its take time for a review but i hope not that much time is needed in any web case.However,today i had seen some progress here [2] but the account is still blocked.But i had answered the question here [3]that User talk:Ruslik0 made on my global unlock request page.Its a a humble request please help in recovering my account.(117.226.176.189 05:01, 2 August 2018 (UTC))
No value in asking meta admins about a global lock, it is nothing that we control. You should be talking to stewards at stewards' noticeboard or SRG.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:18, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Hi,i would have asked there but since the account is semi-protected so i would not do that.Can you please forward this message there.(117.226.129.144 14:03, 2 August 2018 (UTC))
There are multiple ways to contact stewards that they list on those and related pages, and not affected by a block, please use one of them. It needs to be an uninterrupted two-way conversation, not through third parties.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:08, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning 49.163.196.154[edit]

49.163.196.154 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log)Reasons: This IP user persistingly create fake articles and add fake informations in Korean Wiktionary. Please delete articles created by 49.163.196.154 and if possible let him stop. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 05:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

You're in the wrong venue. That's SRM. I'll take care of it though. — regards, Revi 06:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, I think this is Korean Wiktionary only, not "cross-wiki" vandalism. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 06:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
This page is for issues on Meta-Wiki only. — regards, Revi 06:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Umm... Then, informations on this article is wrong in my opinion. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 06:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
@Garam: Are you sure? The top part of that page says cross-wiki issues are to go to stewards, and that includes the "Miscellaneous" section. The bottom half of the page directs users with regard to meta issues.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:38, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
@billinghurst: I understand what you and user revi said. Thanks.--Garam (talk) 23:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Korean translation has "Vandalism reports". It has been abandoned, and non-meta requests for anti-vandalism matters are for SRM and meta requests are for here. I stopped using Korean in MediaWiki interface for a long time, so I don't care about the translation that much. — regards, Revi 11:48, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — regards, Revi 11:54, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Misidentified vandalism[edit]

Hi, the system has misidentified one of my posts as vandalism (when I tried to post it on the discussion for the proposal on WM) Dogs curiosity (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it did. That filter is picking up sexual and racial abuse, and it is a little ugly to problem solve. The filter is predominantly MarcoAurelio's, so I suggest that you talk to them about the false positive.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:49, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
I have amended the filter so confirmed users and autoconfirmed users can override the filter. I'd like to ask MusikAnimal to review the filter and see if it is okay and if it can be optimized a little so it doesn't waste 3 conditions. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey, so a few problems: I don't think ('foo'|'bar') in user_groups works. in merely checks that the left-hand operator is in the right, treating both as strings. !('confirmed' in user_groups) should be sufficient. That will account for autoconfirmed as well, and bots will be confirmed so no need to check for that too (if a bot is hit by this early on, just manually confirm the account). I'm also checking that the regex is not in removed_lines, asserting that offending content wasn't already there. That wouldn't prevent the above false positive, but it helps.

That being said I don't think there is a fool-proof way of preventing the above false positive, or at least I don't have any good ideas :( I would confirm Dogs curiosity's account myself, but it seems sysops can't do that here. Any ideas why? That would be the solution in this case, I believe. The false positive is just a necessary consequence of a generalized counter-vandalism filter like this one. On that note, since this filter isn't targeting a long-term vandal or the like, shouldn't it be public?

The other issue I saw with that filter is we were throwing a warning and disallowing. This is not necessary unless you want to show a customized message in the warning. We were using the default, which misleadingly says "If this action is constructive, you may submit it again".

The filter is still averaging at 3 conditions. Restricting to specific namespaces would help, but I'm not sure if you want to do that. There may also be an issue with the profiling itself... I've noticed on enwiki that as of late, some filters average at 0 conditions which isn't possible because the first condition is always ran (phab:T201334). That might be related, not sure. Hope this helps MusikAnimal talk 17:24, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

MusikAnimal & billinghurst Sorry for the delay in getting back to you guys and thank you for the really quick replies. I'd keep up more but i'm getting ready for University in September so I hope you understand. I noticed you've mentioned that, at the moment, only confirmed users can bypass this anti-vandalism feature and that there have been some amendments to the filter as well. I've just tried to create the discussion again but it's still blocking its creation so I am wondering what the best thing to do would be? I mean I could provide a link to the essay at the discussion page for the Community Health Initiative proposal but then it is making it a bit more difficult to view. Dogs curiosity (talk) 21:10, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I have manually confirmed the account (permission expires in one week, time enough to get autoconfirmed anyway). Could you please try again? Thank you. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I have tried to publish a biography written by EdenTrain and edited by me, Kelvin Noel of ApogeoVideo. I keep getting the same errors as maliciuos and destructive. I don't see the errors. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ApogeoVideo (talk)

@ApogeoVideo: This is not the site to publish an encyclopaedic article about anything, this is a coordinating wiki. You should be over at the Wikipedias, and the one of the language in which you write the article.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:17, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning Mha3131[edit]

Mha3131 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log)Reasons: This user creating Out of project scope pages via cross-wiki on Wikimedia Commons. Web SourceContent Management System 08:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Web SourceContent: Meta admins have no call on managing user accounts for xwiki abuse, that is a steward's area of action, and should be reported to SRG. In this case it has been managed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:16, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Possibly confusion?[edit]

Dear MarcoAurelio and SPoore (WMF) and Billinghurst and MusikAnimal , I am not sure if there has been some confusion however my account has been blocked and I'm not certain as to why. My account is Dogs curiosity and on my former Wikipedia project homepage, it says that I was identified as a user called A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver. However, I've not heard of that user before and I am not that person. The rationale for the misidentification follows per an investigation thread on the English Wikipedia:

  • submits Draft:Maisie Trollette, which was created by a BT IP (dysk's usual provider) and is a Cornwall related article.
  • Userpage with the same usual nonsense as past socks (email me for further detail.)
  • Immediately delves into AFDs of clearly notable topics just like past accounts

On the first point, BT is a very common internet service provider in the United Kingdom. I use something called BT Wifi with FON (see more information about that here). The IPs are reassigned each time you log into the BTWifi hotspot.

"And is a Cornwall related article." I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean but the reason I created Maisie Trollette is that I saw them on this BBC news report.

As for the second point regarding my homepage, this isn't very nice and it feels like a personal attack rather than anything to do with the issue at hand.

The reporting user has also taken to reversing some edits which I made on the Community health initiative discussion page despite those edits clearly not being disruptive. 109.144.209.219 10:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

  • I can identify myself to the Wikimedia Foundation if this will help resolve this issue? I apologise if I was too quick with the AfD, it was due to the fact I couldn't find any references on the page in question. Furthermore, the articles dates are in Irianian dates (which I had no idea about) so it looks like its an article about a living person stating they qualified in 1376 from Universities which didn't exist at the time, thus I thought the article was nonsense. 109.144.209.219
  • You're not locally blocked, but you are globally locked - you need to appeal that via either SRG or by emailing stewards(at)wikimedia.org - TNT 💖 11:33, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  • There'sNoTime Hello, thanks for the information. The SRG will not let me post because it says the page can only be edited by registered users which means I will have to submit an email from my email address which I'm not very comfortable with because I don't know who is going to get access to read my email address however it looks like i've got no choice really. I will email in now, I'll just copy and paste this thread if thats okay. Thanks. 109.144.209.219 11:45, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  • There'sNoTime I have, reluctantly, emailed the Stewards email you have provided regarding this issue. It's difficult in these situations because i'm concerned about exposing my email address to people who have summarily blocked/locked my account without looking into it much but I feel pressured as I really wanted to keep up with the replies on my essay which I spent quite some time writing on the Community Health Initiative discussions page. Anyway, thank you for your time. 109.144.209.219 12:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC) (ping) (Jalexander-WMF)

Closed Closed Nothing for meta admins, this is a stewards' matter, and should be pursued at SRG

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Users getting blocked from editing[edit]

Hello, I am currently doing a series of workshops. Some of the people are not able to write on other people's talk pages because apparently their username is abusive. It affects people in this list. Are abuse filters responsible for that? Can they somehow bypass that block? Greetings, --Zenith4237 (talk) 13:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Who is experiencing the errors? And which page? — regards, Revi 13:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Ndyanaboandrew on his own talk page. --Zenith4237 (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
I don't want to help trolls by giving a way to override the filter publicly. I will email you with one way to bypass that filter. — regards, Revi 13:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
And mailed. — regards, Revi 14:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Received and with thanks for the fast reply, --Zenith4237 (talk) 14:06, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — regards, Revi 14:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)