Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2018-09

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 September 2018, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Report concerning 2001:56A:76EC:E800:2CC9:B265:1DA1:477C

2001:56A:76EC:E800:2CC9:B265:1DA1:477C (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: IP is creating nonsense pages. Esteban16 (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 16:21, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: StevenJ81 (talk) 13:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Amire80

Hello. Could you, please, delete this revision, including the summary? Please ping me if you need to ask something. Thank you. Special:diff/18361710 IKhitron (talk) 17:03, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. RadiX 20:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: RadiX 20:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Block needed for range


Blocked on for trolling, they responded with (all bark no bite) threats of violence, and they've decided to come here to continue. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like it's going to need to be global, see de:Spezial:Beiträge/Spahnyeses. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:00, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Also es:Especial:Contribuciones/2600:1:950F:CCA2:599F:BE06:B4C5:A369. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Also ko:특수:기여/Gullstamer, ru:Служебная:Вклад/Wallsayes, ja:特別:投稿記録/Polomess, fr:Spécial:Contributions/Acreslick. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:49, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. Please reach out to stewards next time. See SRG. RadiX 22:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: RadiX 22:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

typo in MediaWiki:Gadget-modrollback

Hi, could please somebody add an "A" to MediaWiki:Gadget-modrollback ("fter using rollback" →‎ "after using rollback")? Regards --Schniggendiller (talk) 19:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks for reporting! --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Schniggendiller (talk) 21:36, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning СһескИѕегѕ сап ѕиск му һогѕе'ѕ ԁіск

СһескИѕегѕ сап ѕиск му һогѕе'ѕ ԁіск (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: vandalism Wumbolo (talk) 13:24, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm running a purge on Category:Deleteme to clear the fallout from langswitch. — xaosflux Talk 13:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Category:Deleteme is cleared out now, monitor as usual. — xaosflux Talk 14:07, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Wumbolo (talk) 13:31, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: IP is creating test pages Esteban16 (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I deleted the test pages. Thanks for the report. I'm not going to block unless IP repeats the action. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: No further activity — xaosflux Talk 12:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning

Please delete pages created by (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC). They are adding pages in the Translations namespace which are not translations. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 17:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Deleted or rolled back edits. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: No further activity. — xaosflux Talk 12:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Mass Message Sender for RaixFo

Note: Account is now globally locked, reason is Long-term abuse. Regards, — TBhagat (contribs | talk) 10:57, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not donexaosflux Talk 12:47, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 12:47, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Supress edit

Please supress this edit as it's a personal attack. Esteban16 (talk) 19:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Threats of harm. SA 13 Bro (talk) 20:28, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
I already contacted emergency about that. A global block on the IP range would be more useful, as they're basically hopping around each language edition of Wikipedia leaving the same message. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. RadiX 20:43, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 12:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Data retention guidelines

The Data retention guidelines page has been updates recently by the Legal Departement. I've noticed that that page is often vandalized. Maybe it should be semi-protected to reduce RC noise.

Thanks, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 00:47, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. — xaosflux Talk 01:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Trizek (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 12:47, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


MonsterHunter32 (talk · contribs) Would it be possible to get a block on meta for this account? He's been blocked on en with talk page revoked and has basically been using meta to appeal to en admins here despite being told he needs to wait 6 months, and now has started a campaign to get his accusations of sockpuppetry against users noticed on meta (by either stewards or en admins) while he himself is blocked for socking. He's importing drama to meta and disrupting the talk pages of multiple users with things that really have no relevance to meta. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:14, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I've already told TonyBallioni I won't contact him or any more admins again - ( I only contacted earlier because the users I complained have been suspected of socking for months by both admins and users, if anyone wants proof I can show them of being suspected. Also I've already accepted his six-month unblock offer despite it being not mandatory. And Tony vengefully said they won't support my unblock in November after I critisiced his behavior on Wikimedia and IRC - ( This person is just harassing me even after I already said I won't appeal to any more admins or contact them. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 06:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
The issue is that at least 80% if not more of your edits here since May have constituted one of three things 1) Appealing your block 2) Trying to start an SPI on meta 3) creating a grant proposal clearly based off the fact that you don't like that you were blocked on for socking. You had been just bothering admins on meta, now you're bothering stewards and pinging en admins who rarely ever edit here in an attempt to communicate with them about matters despite your being blocked without talk page there. You're exporting non-existent en drama to meta, which is disruptive.
Re: why I'm making this request: because I'm the sysop on any project that has the most experience with you and when people get annoyed at you they let me know. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:33, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
This thing is not non-existent nor disrutpive. Admin Abecedare talked about it too. As for my grant, it wasn't just because of socking even though I should have been unbanned earlier, but because of power abuse by you and other admins for banning me even though I only requested an unblock. I didn't come clean on my talk page because obviously anyone will be hesitant in admitting they're a sock. I admitted socking on UTRS but was banned from there as well. The ban reasons were frivolous - "repetitive", which doesn't even exist in Wikipedia policies. Acting against such admins is needed because you people negatively affect the community health - the topic which the grants were about.
And there is nothing wrong in me asking about whether behavioral or technical SPIs can be done on Meta. But I've already said I won't contact others about SPIs again. So you're only doing this to harass me after you harassed me on IRC and Meta and I detailed it publicly. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 06:39, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Now can we please close this? You're starting another drama yourself. I've already said I won't contact any more admins about SPIs again. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 06:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
MonsterHunter32, please refrain from forum shopping on meta, it's not a place to bring your disputes in regards to your ban on another project. I've gone through your contributions here, and it's rather clear that you've done this a number of times already. Further occurrences of this will result in a ban. --Az1568 (talk) 06:53, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm extremely sorry then Az, I didn't know it would be wrong. Regardless, contacting others endlessly after they're clearly saying no now would be disruptive. As I said before this complain I won't contact Wikipedia admins again about my issue. Also won't be contacting Wikimedia admins or anyone else about it. As you adviced, I will stop contacting them about issues that should be on Wikipedia. Thank you very much. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning Гиляна Эренджепова

Гиляна Эренджепова (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: Multiple vandalism & repeated LTA actions. Also Гиляна Эренджепова had a disruptive cross-wiki violations (see Special:CentralAuth/Гиляна Эренджепова). Web SourceContent Management System 02:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Already blocked, and nothing we can do about xwiki stuff, that is stewards' domain and you have already lodged it at SRG.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:55, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning 2601:192:C180:322F:A191:DDB9:B88D:C05D

2601:192:C180:322F:A191:DDB9:B88D:C05D (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC) This IP editor created the translation pages semmed not a translations, request for mass deletion. SA 13 Bro (talk) 12:03, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
You only removed the translation units, not the main translation pages, now removed them as well. Stryn (talk) 13:07, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: IP is vandalizing Esteban16 (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done.—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 20:44, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Vandalism continued, has been removed again, reblocked. — xaosflux Talk 12:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 13:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC) Adding garbage text to the translation pages, request for mass deletion. SA 13 Bro (talk) 23:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Deleted. Matiia (talk) 00:32, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 13:16, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Add MassMessage flag

Hi, we want to start sharing our Wikimedia Polska bulletin via mass message. Our target list is here. Can I have request to add MassMessage flag to accounts @Yarl, PMG, and Natalia Szafran-Kozakowska (WMPL)? – two board members of WMPL and employee. Yarl (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Yarl: who do you expect to be joining this list? As your list only has 2 users, and the are both on plwiki, and all the people you want to be "senders" are on plwiki and have access to w:pl:Specjalna:MassMessage already: can you elaborate on why you are building this on meta? — xaosflux Talk 13:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: because it will be used across all Wikimedia projects in Polish, as there are people who are not editing Wikipedia and still interested in chapter's work. Since we didn't announce that people can subscribe on this page, obviously there is noone except us. Yarl (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done, Yes check.svg Done, and Yes check.svg Done. — xaosflux Talk 13:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Yarl (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 13:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

TemplateStyles: ContentModel change request

I want to use TemplateStyles for my user page and created User:MisterSynergy/styles.css, but for some reason it got a css ContentModel. Please update to sanitized-css on Special:ChangeContentModel/User:MisterSynergy/styles.css. Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 10:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Seems admins cannot help you here (only 'interface-admin's are allowed to change someone else's page's contentmodel, but meta has no community members in that user group). Pinging a bureaucrat: @MF-Warburg:. --Vogone (talk) 10:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
See above section - it would be great to get this active, see Meta:Babel#Tech_Admins to try to get a compromise! — xaosflux Talk 03:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: your page can not currently be converted to that model due to the following errors:
Unrecognized or unsupported property at line 5 character 2.
Unrecognized or unsupported property at line 6 character 2.
Unrecognized or unsupported property at line 7 character 2.
Unrecognized or unsupported property at line 12 character 2.
xaosflux Talk 04:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: I have now removed all the browser-specific stuff from the source. Can you please try again? —MisterSynergy (talk) 05:25, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
As said, currently we cannot help you. If it is really urgent, you can ask a steward at SRM. Otherwise, with a little patience, we might get this done within a week. --Vogone (talk) 10:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: Done. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Great, works now! —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MisterSynergy (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Getting the IAdmin policy done

Hello all, please review Meta:Interface_administrators and the discussion at Meta:Babel#Tech_Admins, while we can always continuously improve this policy its absence is in the way of processing requests right now and I think it may be at a state that is sufficient to begin. Your feedback is most welcome on the discussion. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 13:24, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Revision hiding / oversight request

Could someone please oversight or revision hide Special:Contributions/Anonymousblade's edits? The addition to my talk page is grossly offensive. Thanks. --B (talk) 00:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I don't know if this is oversightable here on Meta. I would say not, but either way I don't have the buttons. MusikAnimal talk 00:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Check in with the oversight team about it. StevenJ81 (talk) 02:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
I've emailed them. Thanks MusikAnimal talk 03:35, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Web SourceContent (Management System) 06:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding to User:Abuse filter

What to say about this automated MediaWiki account called Abuse filter, because it blocks people username triggering filters configured to disable editing when they are logged? That gives the rule: «Specific user page spam». Should have been false positives, please give response. 16:02, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Any specific account that you're referring to? No false positives from today or yesterday. -- Tegel (Talk) 16:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes @Tegel:, it's Abuse filter (an automated account will automatically block users triggering filters configured to block). This thing sounds like COORDINATED sysop account. 16:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the "Abuse filter" can block accounts that triggers certain filters. It all depends on how the filter is set up. Do you want to report any false positives? -- Tegel (Talk) 16:40, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
No, i don't want reporting false positives. I'm not sure, but User:Abuse filter is called SYSTEM ACCOUNT. It blocks indefinitivelly registered-only user accounts, and for IPs (with a temp. period). Thanks in advance! 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that is what the "Abuse filter"-account is, and what it does. -- Tegel (Talk) 16:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
For detail see mw:Extension:Abuse Filter
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: IP is vandalizing user talk pages Esteban16 (talk) 03:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Blocked by Matiia. Web SourceContent (Management System) 06:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: This IP started to vandalize page namespaces. See also edit filter log Web SourceContent (Management System) 06:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

2601:601:101:21E0:BC1D:B9F3:E31E:4653 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC) This IP editor also as well, see the abuse filter log. SA 13 Bro (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning 2607:FB90:54A9:200A:A13D:D345:383E:EFB5

2607:FB90:54A9:200A:A13D:D345:383E:EFB5 (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: Persistent vandalism Esteban16 (talk) 20:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:08, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Report concerning HeAssaultedMeJustBecauseIDiscouragedHimOnFreeSlurpeeDay

HeAssaultedMeJustBecauseIDiscouragedHimOnFreeSlurpeeDay (talk · contribs. · moves · block · block log · GUC)Reasons: User-targeted harassment. Removal of edits might be warranted, too. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Same kind of vandalism occurred on my talk page.-- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 10:23, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Same false accusations on everyone's talk pages. Can nobody ban em? Taylor 49 (talk) 10:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I get the feeling it could be some kind of bot or something similar Saederup92 (talk) 10:37, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
It's just an xwiki LTA with a level of creativity that is round about a brick. It would be helpful if we could get some CU-type computer magic and lock out their IP range across projects, assuming that's technically possible. See for example this account, and this account, also history here. GMGtalk 10:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Also User:HakanIST, global locks are neither here nor there, since this LTA seems to register a new account for each vandalism spree for each project. GMGtalk 11:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo, I put my money on "WhenDatHotlineBling", which is a name so stupid I can't type it without quotation marks. And the user matches it. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Yup Drmies, that's the one I believe. Although I wouldn't put any money on it being the original. I know Chrissymad has had a few goes at them too. My original question still stands, is there some kind of tech savvy more effective way to stop that buzzing fly? GMGtalk 21:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
I wish I could answer that, and there's a few more. I know Ajraddatz has had his hands full, but you wonder when the breaking point is for the WMF to FINALLY do something real. Get some sleuths on payroll, get some attorneys in various places, file some criminal and civil suits--for harassment too. Drmies (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
@Drmies: That is not something that admins can address. If there are risk and safety issues to community members then they are best addressed to Wikimedia Foundation's responsible team. If CU are required then Meta:RfCU or if it is xwiki then SRCU.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
I know, but I know some admins also wear other hats. And you know, there's always the off-chance that someone from the WMF actually reads what's going on here. Thanks for the links. Drmies (talk) 01:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Edit conflict.) Oh, there's a thread here about this. Now that I think about it, @Billinghurst: I mostly agree. However, while this is obvious vandalism to most experienced Wikipedians, it might not be that obvious for all random readers of the revision history in the indefinite future. I believe that the specific accusation, directed at specific users, in the edit summary and the edit are severe enough to justify suppression of both. Please, as the very least thing that you can actually do as an administrator, perform a revision-deletion. ToBeFree (talk) 01:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Can I reflect that a good subject line is useful for identifying the purpose of a request, and with everyone else piling on the original intent of this post was lost. It was not clear and evident that this was a revdel discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:55, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg revdel'd  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:55, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Global block

Dear Sir or Madam

It seems the IP range from to is (partly or fully) blocked. Can you inform me how far exactly the block is and the exact reason for it, that i can inform the webmaster? Even better might be if you could inform the webmaster, that the problem "open proxy" can be solved.

Yours faithfully --This Range (talk) 22:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@This Range: This matter is not a local issue that meta admins can resolve, you will need to talk to the stewards at Steward requests/Global. You can see the block at Special:GlobalBlockList/ and the blocking steward, who you should {{ping}} when you make your request. This will have been due to abuse of IP addresses on the range, and the blocking admin will know more detail whether it is IP directly, or via created accounts. Best of luck  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:29, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Lock My User

Hi There, Kindly lock my user Amina Al-Madhi (WMAT) as of tomorrow! Many Thanks and best regards,--Amina Al-Madhi (WMAT) (talk) 09:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Are you requesting a lock or a local block on meta? Ruslik (talk) 20:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
X mark.svg not a meta function. Please see SRG  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:06, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk page block


I ask that the Discussion page (talk page) of the participant:, in ru wikipedia be

unlocked, and that the talk page be started such as the welcome template, as the same can not start

his own talk page as has been one of the issues, so that the unlock bottom in the special templateШаблон:Блокировки that comes from trying to edit a page that will

redirect to the request page, can be used or the unlock template put on the talk page can be used

as is my right to ask for my block be revived, by other than the blocking administrator as is my right.

in as mush that user 50. has been in an edit war with blocker.

blocker has failed to warn 50.

blocker has not "A more detailed explanation of the locking of your account will soon appear on your discussion page"

put a explanation on 50. talk page as stated in the template.

and as stated "you do not understand the reasons for your blocking and want to clarify them from the administrators."

has not been given the right to face ones accuser.

blocker has failed to consider the alternatives to blocking as recommended by Trust & Safety, Wikimedia Foundation

and is part of the problem 02:20, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, as the header above says this venue is for seeking assistance with items here on the metawiki, ruwiki has a large community with ~85 administrators and an arbitration committee (w:ru:Википедия:Арбитражный_комитет). There is nothing meta sysops or bureaucrats can do for ruwiki local page protections or blocks. — xaosflux Talk 03:59, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

i seek a bureaucrats or steward, arbitration is the last step not the first, the talk is blocked which means the appeal tools are blocked. "Do not apply if you did not try to solve the matter outside the arbitration in all ways" 12:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Uhhhh...what? Marseillaise2 (talk) 12:58, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

  • The metawiki bureaucrats have no special standing for matters on the Russian Wikipedia. As far as the stewards go, individual projects are mostly self-governing so the stewards don't generally get involved with established large community matters (such as a local block). In any case, this is the wrong venue to ask for steward assistance, you could try asking at Stewards' noticeboard but I don't expect they will engage. — xaosflux Talk 13:13, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Please read the intro, this discussion is out of this boards scope. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
:This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

ADMIN NOTICE: Implemented Meta:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage

Can all admins please note that there has been an abuse of AutoWikiBrowser on site (see report of incidence). As AWB bot use is less usual at Meta, it is not unreasonable in my opinion to implement the security aspects of AWB by introduction of its checkpage.

The usual configuration requests for addition to the checkpage is by requests on the respective talk page, however, I have redirected that talk page here to manage all requests for access.

I hope that these actions meet with the approval of the community and my fellow administrators. Please add discussion and issues for resolution below.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:16, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

  • This seems like a reasonable idea. I see no issues. Killiondude (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
    Agree. Shouldn't form too unreasonable of a burden on trusted people wanting to use the tool. – Ajraddatz (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
    Seems fine in general - however @Billinghurst: the report you linked to above appears to be about HotCat, not AWB - am I missing something? But as far as using AWB/CP - so long as we are good adding constructive users on request no worries. Adding to the "bot" section should only be for bots with a bot flag though. — xaosflux Talk 04:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

My user page -advise

Hi. I hope this is the right place to ask. I have added to my talk page another user's opinion of me, made by him publicly at Meta while revewing a CU request. This opinion of me is libelous, and made by a troll, but I think it is worth it, e.g. reproducing it because it represents the way many abusers and sockmasters think of the users who are "chasing" them. My question isː Do I have the right to use other user's opinions about me; Furthermore, can I quote something libelous written about me by a troll, or this may be considered to be a mockery (from my part) of the user (troll) who made the initial statement on me? Please advise. ——Chalk19 (talk) 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@Chalk19: The best advice that we can provide is wp:don't feed the trolls. Admins here will look to protect users where reasonably possible. Admins on site will look to keep posts within scope. We do allow for xwiki issues to be brought here where it is civil and well-meaning, we won't condone all out brawls. Admins can delete problematic posts; block problematic accounts or IP addresses; protect pages partially or fully. If you need posts oversighted, then that will need to be an application to those admins with the additional oversight rights.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks for your response, although I think it refers to the subject (my question) in a broader sense. ——Chalk19 (talk) 08:55, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Local wikis will have their rules about expected behaviour, and about xwiki battles, and we have our scope. All we can say is not to do things that are illegal; don't do things that are explicitly against a wiki's scope or rules. At this page we handle requests for help from those with advanced administrative rights. Your question falls out the administrative functions that we undertake. Our experience is to not engage in stupid arguments with trolls, they beat you for experience; of course they are being libellous, rude, and dickheads trying to elicit a response. Please don't feed the trolls.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Fine. Thanks again for your reply. ——Chalk19 (talk) 07:18, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


Recent spambot generated accounts:

Best, --Achim (talk) 21:02, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Achim55: Generally better to drop them to the stewards at SRG as they have a tool that can take a username paste (one per line) lock them all as a group, where we can block them one-by-one as per any other wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
billinghurst, even if they are not x-wiki but meta-only spammers like these? Thanks for notifying! --Achim (talk) 13:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
@Achim55: I'm not seeing edits or deleted edits for any of these users, nor any global edits. Can you elaborate on what evidence of misuse you are seeing? — xaosflux Talk 14:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
xaosflux, that's right. It's just my experience after 8000+ spam blocks on Commons that there are spam heroes who come back after some weeks or so. I know of wikis outside wm foundation where spammers created stocks of 50,000 still unused accounts. So on Commons I use the fly swat as soon as I detect them. Best, --Achim (talk) 15:08, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Edit: I'm fine with keeping these accounts alive. The spam level on meta is quite low and User:Abuse filter does a good job. Btw: one should fix the typo in Special:AbuseFilter/96 "ferragmo" → "ferragamo". --Achim (talk) 15:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done (spelling fix) and X mark.svg Not done account blocking, not without some "proof" that they are bad accounts. — xaosflux Talk 18:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Penny to a pound that they are spambots; they proliferate, read any and many small wiki RCs. @Achim55 and Xaosflux: often you will only find some of these accounts in Special:log/spamblacklist as we have got ahead of the game. And I cannot tell you why sometimes they leak through and hit abuse filters, and spamblacklists, despite the spamblacklist extension being called first and meant to be the earlier defence.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:06, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: thanks for the note, I wasn't loading all the logs fully when I first checked these. @Achim55: I've blocked the ones that have log hits; but following up as billinghurst suggested for locks may still be warranted. If you see a log for one that I missed, please let me know exactly what you are seeing. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 02:10, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Xaosflux:, thank you, next time I'll provide detailed evidence like this:

Cheers, --Achim (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux Talk 13:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)