Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2021-08

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Protection of Alternative paid contribution disclosure policies

I'm not sure where to bring this up, but I was wondering if a sysop could protect this page. It's mentioned in the Terms of Use that "An alternative paid contribution policy will only supersede these requirements if it is approved by the relevant Project community and listed in the alternative disclosure policy page." Hypothetically, anyone could alter the page right and remove alternative disclosure policies (or add them) which could result in legal ramifications. This is probably a thing which we want to avoid happening, so it would seem reasonable to fully protect the page so that any changes would have to go through some kind of review. Chess (talk) 02:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done by Vermont Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:Jerry1050

Jerry1050 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Vandalism MdsShakil (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:24, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interface administrator for Madurese Wikipedia

Hello, I'd like to request myself as interface administrator for Madurese Wikipedia to edit Common.css. In the near future our community want to redesign current interface as well. Thank you! Boesenbergia (talk) 04:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Boesenbergia. The correct venue for this request is SRP. Best regards, Vermont (talk) 05:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I need Use Tor Exit node Edit meta.

I Request Meta Local IPBE,Thank.--初梦之晴 (talk) 14:36, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done added for 1 year (has IPBE on zhwiki). — xaosflux Talk 15:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: कन्हाई प्रसाद चौरसिया (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:Bmmederos

Bmmederos (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: vandalism RG067 (talk) 16:00, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sgd. —Hasley 16:01, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 16:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP block exemption

Please add IP block exemption in my account. I am facing P2P proxies block, Although I'm not using any proxie MdsShakil (talk) 08:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MdsShakil Sorry for the delay, Yes check.svg Done for 1 year. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:03, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for China-Nigeria Wiki Collaboration/China

Please semi-protect China-Nigeria Wiki Collaboration/China as persistent vandalism. Thanks. SCP-2000 03:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black check.svg Already done  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:03, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Block request

User: ATTN-ATTN (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Reason: GRP or copycat. JavaHurricane 10:58, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

user has been locked globally. --Zabe (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki namespace edit request

Please replace content on MediaWiki:Grouppage-vrt-permissions with 'User groups#VRT permissions agents'. Regards --Zabe (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:Hismercy01

Hismercy01 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Spam RG067 (talk) 07:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black check.svg Already done  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:Xtransparency

Xtransparency (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Registered today. Wrote at the Meta RFC: "Dorian, the professional assistance which you need – you can not get at Meta". LTA. --Dgw (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X mark.svg nothing done I understand your concern, the contributions should be observed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:21, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It wrote: "the professional assistance which you need". It should not be accepted nor tolerated. Additional information was sent. --Dgw (talk) 08:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Local block request for User:Dorian Gray Wild

Please block Dorian Gray Wild (suggesting for few months, and locally only) who is abusing meta wiki for very long unclear complaints against Hebrew Wikipedia users instead of just doing it in the local Wikipedia. Some users don't know English and see it as harassment and noising in other sites where they get tagged and requested to reply in language they don't know, and for people who speak Hebrew it is not convenient to make discussions in Meta wiki (Left-to-right content + other site). Examples include Requests for comment/Endless list of sock puppets in the Hebrew Wikipedia and strange rules of a bureaucrat, Requests for comment/The Hebrew Wikipedia block policy. Clearly this user doesn't understand what meta wiki is for. There are 38 sysops and 3 bureaucrats he:Special:Statistics and the community is active and large enough to handle complaints or challenge policies internally, also this user was blocked in the past for harassment against users for one year[1]. eranroz (talk) 06:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to say that it was untrue.
1. I was not blocked for one year due to "harassment against users in the Hebrew Wikipedia". There was a discussion concerning me, and Hebrew users used tough words which were not involved in the discussion. As a result, I took a Wikibreak, and was blocked due to taking this break. It is written here:

כשנערך דיון בעניינו של משתמש, המשתמש יכול לעצור את הדיון על ידי הודעה על פרישה. במקרה כזה המשתמש ייחסם ללא הגבלת זמן, והדיון ייעצר ויאורכב מיד. אם ירצה (אחרי יומיים, שבועיים או שנתיים), יוכל המשתמש לבקש לחדש את הדיון, והמשך הדברים ייקבעו לפי תוצאות הדיון המחודש.

I did not request to renew this discussion. A year later, I met a Wikipedian and Eran. They decided to undo it.
2. The discussions were written in Hebrew. Every user could reply in Hebrew, and it was accepted in Meta.
3. I wrote everything in the Hebrew Wiki pages prior to Meta. The Hebrew three bureaucrats did not reply my applications in their pages. For example, I applied to remove this text, but it was not done:

דוריאן גרי, איך מה שכתבת קשור לדיון הזה? והנה הצלחת לדחוף את שמי פנימה למרות שאתה יודע שאין לי קשר לכך. אם יש לך בעיה עם שם המשתמש שלך המתייחס לדוריאן גריי, כדאי שתשנה אותו. נדהמתי כשנתקלתי בו לראשונה, ותהיתי מי בוחר לעצמו שם כה בעייתי כשם משתמש? חנה Hanay • שיחה • נשר תחגוג ב-2023 מאה שנים להקמתה 04:50, 18 במרץ 2021

Every user is eligible to write in Meta concerning any project in WMF. I looked at other RFC in Meta and it dealt with similar concerns. There was not anything in my application which was untrue. When an administrator in the Hebrew Wikipedia solved an issue, I updated it in Meta.
4. If a user disagrees with me, he can write his comments instead of writing: "Clearly this user doesn't understand what meta wiki is for". Sorry to say, it is Ed Hominem.
5. Therefore blocking is not requested.
--Dgw (talk) 09:48, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also wrote an issue on my talk page and tagged two Hebrew Wikipedia bureaucrats. Nothing has been done. Afterwards, I made the RFC. WMF also wrote to me that I was eligible to make RFC if I got no results.
--Dgw (talk) 10:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X mark.svg Not done Being critical of a wiki in a RFC is not out of scope at metawiki.that said, we would encourage a user to undertake those conversations at the language wikis as that will typically be more effective. Your users can control their echo notifications, either at metawiki, or to ignore a person. I would encourage Dorian Gray Wild to read Meta:Civility and maybe consider using {{noping}}.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:40, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content
Thank you billinghurst for your decision. I am really sorry that I did not know the template {{noping}}, and will keep using it from now onwards. --Dgw (talk) 12:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the Hebrew Wiki RFC, the last three RFC's were made by socks.
The result of the first RFC ended with two decisions of the He bureaucrat ביקורת: "Do not undo any editing of a registered He user" and "Do not discuss any talk page in Hebrew".
Afterwards, the decision was voided by the He bureaucrat ערן, but it was done only after my first RFC on Meta.
The result of the second He RFC ended with a decision ערן: "Do not follow any user in the Hebrew Wikipedia". The result was that other He users followed me endlessly, and I wrote it in the talk page of ביקורת. Therefore, I told ערן that his decision voided.
Now a third sock made a third He RFC which dealt with Meta RFC. It also tagged endlessly Hebrew users in Meta, like here, here, here, here and here. Its words: "the professional assistance which you need" are not civil. It does not want to be identified as a sock. It is the reason why it registers a new user every time. It was also the reason for opening the third He RFC. However, Gilgamesh has already requested to block ארנון בורוכוב who was a troll, and it is written in its blocking reason.
--Dgw (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Billinghurst: i would ask that you reconsider. one thing eranroz did not mention is that these RFCs consistently, and purposefully violate RFC policy, and specifically the clause "If the RFC concerns the conduct of several users on the same wiki, or the conduct of an entire community of a Wikimedia wiki, the initiator of the RFC must post a neutrally-worded notice linking to the RFC on a prominent page on that wiki, such as the village pump". User:Dorian Gray Wild goes out of their way to hide all these RFCs from hewiki community, and to hide and obscure it as much as they can, e.g. by mentioning other users in a circumspect way, such that they will _not_ be notified, and such violating both the word and the spirit of the policy.
inevitably, this activity eventually surfaces, and causes distress and disruptions on hewiki, where users are finding out they are mentioned and discussed on some mysterious pages on some mysterious site (not that many wikipedians frequent meta), and their behavior is discussed or complained against, in a language they may not master.
IMO, these gross violations of the policy are ground enough for the requested block. please note that this policy was brought to Grey's attention, so they can't even claim ignorance. peace - קיפודנחש (talk) 17:47, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry to say that it is also untrue.
Here I notified ביקורת regarding my first RFC.
I remind that ביקורת prohibited me to write anything in the talk pages of the Hebrew Wikipedia, and קיפודנחש read it in the original discussion as well as today.
Here I notified the stewards regarding my first RFC.
Here I notified both גארפילד and ביקורת regarding my second application.
Here I notified גארפילד regarding my second RFC.
Here I notified Hanay regarding my second RFC.
Here I notified בורה בורה regarding my second RFC.
קיפודנחש constantly follows me and is involved in any discussion which deals with me. It did it in the first He RFC, in the second He RFC, in the third He RFC, in the He RFC which I took a break, in my talk page in the He Wiki, in the archive of my talk page in the He Wiki – where it requested twice from two different Hebrew administrators to return its words into my archive, in spite of nobody is eligible to write in an archive. It is written here. Today I moved to {{noping}} by the advise of Billinghurst. If the Hebrew Wiki users want, I will ping them often. Besides, pings feed socks, and I avoid it. Here I make it clear that קיפודנחש is not a sock. It is a top level programmer as well as Interface administrator, and I am clueless why it follows me endlessly. Furthermore, when users complained that they did not master English, I moved to write in Hebrew. I do not understand the issue of "circumspect way". I have to be civil, and did it. --Dgw (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has moved out of the scope of RFH. We do not manage disputes on other projects, and there is not sufficient evidence of abuse of the RfC processes to take any action here. If there are accusations of sockpuppetry, which it seems there are, please state what accounts are believed to be socks of whom and I can look into it. Vermont (talk) 19:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

discussions involving Gray are likely to get "out of scope" - reading the RFCs discussed here makes it evident.
ignoring Gray's contribution, the scope is well defined and narrow: it's a request to block Grey on meta, so they stop harassing hewiki wikipedians using "meta" process. the distress and disruption to hewiki caused by this activity is meaningful, and the positive contribution of those RFCs (and future ones) is zero. as a side, note that the references made by Gray are not in compliance with the policy (only some of the many users mentioned in the RFCs were notified, and they were notified on their meta talk page, which is not what the policy asks for - the policy clearly states that when making a complaint involving a community, the community should be informed). peace - קיפודנחש (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Vermont: The sock is Xtransparency. I applied here. Its former sock was Tagemall. Both socks kept tagging Hebrew Wikipedia users into Meta, and Tagemall was blocked indefinitely from the Hebrew Wikipedia. Dgw (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The previous sock is stale, so unfortunately there is nothing for me to check against. Vermont (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@קיפודנחש and ערן: AS I would not be expecting any further RFCs to be created by [[user|Dorian Gray Wild}} I think that we can resolve the problematic nature of that issue. If there is problematic behaviour at the RFCs then that should be able to be managed. We ask that reasonable debate be allowed, and we ask for anything that sits outside of civility to be curtailed. An RFC is meant to be making places better—not retribution, vindictive, a catfight, etc.

While we don't block accounts for solely being a duplicate, we do block them for being problematic, like being used to avoid blocks, double vote, or like behaviour.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:Tks4Fish Alternative Account

Tks4Fish Alternative Account (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Vandalism, Long-term abuse. Mtarch11 (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Vermont (talk) 00:43, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: CptViraj (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:初梦之晴

初梦之晴 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Long-term abuse: CIH0426. Similar edit pattern in metawiki. Both edit zhwiki. FYI Meta:Requests_for_CheckUser_information/Archives/2021#永恒之蓝. SCP-2000 02:01, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sotiale: Would you mind looking into this, much appreciated. Behavior seems fishy indeed. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:06, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SCP-2000 and Camouflaged Mirage: I almost forgot this friend. If you have any time, I recommend checking out these two accounts' CA; 凉夏之梦, 初梦之晴. --Sotiale (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sotiale Thanks. Conflicted with you for removing their local meta IPBE. :P Thanks anyway. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Damage by them on meta cleaned up, nothing else to do for now on meta. Zh/en/other projects I did not have time to go through. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Local block request for User:Biel8729

Please, could someone block Biel8729 or warn him, he's been chasing me here at Meta for over two weeks (see Requests for comment/Removal of the global administrator DARIO SEVERI). Among the things he wrote is this absurd ..."He doesn't seem to me to be very active globally". ... The link he attached show more than 40 administrative actions, in diferents projects as global sysop, in the last seven days, [2]. I think 40 edits in diferents projects, I done in a week, is enough to show that I'm active as a global sysop.

Biel started editing on Wikinews on 1 July 2021, after being blocked indefinitely on Wikipedia. To give more details about Wikinews, on 13 August Biel opened another request to block me. The community's response was unanimous, no one agreed that I should leave Wikinews, with some editors commenting ... "Stop wasting time with these useless discussions. Go write news. That goes for you too, Biel. Enough of asking for denomination and blocking from everyone. I'm sick and tired of these discussions and I don't want to be called to any more"... (see [[3]]).

He's wasting everyone's time which could be used to improve projects. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 12:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DARIO SEVERI: The accusation of persecution that you make is unfounded, and about the part about you not being very active globally too, this is an opinion, also there is no reason for me to be blocked here because I was never warned about it, and also there is no justification for blocking, I have abandoned the discussions related to you Biel8729 12:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment The part about being blocked on Wikipedia has nothing to do with this discussion, which is a clear conflict of interest, I ask you to remove this request and if you want to come and discuss it with me on my discussion page. Biel8729 12:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And you are talking about harassment because I followed the global admins policy and opened an RfC and after a while opened a local thread that was recommended by an admin? Biel8729 12:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You did not abandon the discussion? yesterday you edited here in Meta [4].
He also wrote on Wikinews ... "you can only fool stewards who don't understand Portuguese, only them." (você só consegue enganar os stewards que não entendem português, apenas eles) [5]. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 12:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just answered the comments that were there a day ago, and what I wrote is my opinion and not an accusation, and another thing: I have already been warned locally about this and stopped.Biel8729 12:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The link Biel added above that was recommended by an admin The sysop mentions that ..."I continue with my position of being against blocking a project by actions that are external to the project (including my position on Wikipedia)" .... There's nothing for Biel to write something here on Meta. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And another: DarwIn wrote the same thing in his RfC, should he be blocked too? As I said: this discussion is a conflict of interest because DARIO SEVERI has already had several discussions with me.
And about the position of the user who recommended to open the thread, it doesn't matter, what matters is that he recommended and I followed his recommendation Biel8729 12:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And I don't understand what you said "There's nothing for Biel to write something here on Meta. " Biel8729 12:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X mark.svg Not done. There is no evidence to indicate actionable harassment. Dario, as you know the primary method of requesting removal of a global sysop is through a Meta-Wiki RfC. Biel has followed the proper procedures for seeking the removal of your global sysop permission, and their continuing to participate in that discussion rather than doing arguably more productive things is not in and of itself a conduct issue. Though the RfC is quite messy and the discussion is heated, nothing is indicative of incivility or harassment. Some odd comments (such as "Notifying the user if he wants to manifest himself" on the RfC) may be interpreted as rude by a native English speaker but could be accounted for as a language or translation issue, and are not explicitly uncivil. If the situation changes, please feel free to re-report here. And for both Dario and Biel, I would highly recommend you step back and wait for community participation in the RfC. It's very unlikely that a continuous back-and-forth would result in anything other than more problems. Best regards, Vermont (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

‎Request for removal of global message delivery right

Please remove my global message delivery right. The purpose is fulfilled, and I no longer need this permission as the WFH Election Committee decided to deploy its own voter reminder emails. See my original request here --Tomo suzuki (talk) 13:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sgd. —Hasley 13:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning サカグチマサル

サカグチマサル (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Reason: Vandalism. Thanks! SHB2000 (talk | contibs) 03:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. Likely LTA from jawiki. Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

‎Request for Global message delivery right

As one of WMF Board of Trusteed election volunteers, I would like to request a global message delivery right once again for 7 days. This is due to low voter turnaround for WMF election among Japanese community which makes it necessary to send out final (2nd) reminder email. Please find my previous granted request here.

Thanks,--Tomo suzuki (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. For 7 days, limited only for messages about WMF BoT elections. Best, --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Movement Charter/Drafting Committee/Proposals

I would like a second opinion on the following motion delection and its justification on my User Page made by Vermont: Movement Charter/Drafting Committee/Proposals.

Reason for request: the justification provided is absurd, starting with issues that have been addressed in parallel: a) the Wikisul page is a requirement of the Affiliations Committee; b) if MeshDesign is already in use and is nothing new, then its use should not be inhibited; finally: c) the WMF does not have exclusivity in community organizing and should not have exclusivity in community organizing for an extremely important document like this one, because this document can effectively reduce the powers of the WMF. Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 09:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Felipe da Fonseca I fully support the actions taken by @Vermont that are challenged here. Meta-Wiki is special, because consultations that happen here are often not started by a given community member, but by an organization or a group of users.
While anyone can start their own consultations, including you, it should be clear those consultations are run by different people, with different backgrounds. Creating a page that's masquerading as a part of someone else's initiative is not appropriate, because it can be easily mistaken for an integral part of someone else's work. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User: (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: vandalism (please also rollback all edits and delete created pages) RG067 (talk) 08:26, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Minorax and myself. Block seems unneeded at this stage as they've not edited for more than 2 hours since their last edit. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 21:54, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Election2021 Board voting starts new-message2

Hi! Please, Update CNBanner:Election2021 Board voting starts new-message/ur & CNBanner:Election2021 Board voting starts new-message2/urObaid Raza (talk) 06:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protection for China-Nigeria Wiki Collaboration

Please semi-protect China-Nigeria Wiki Collaboration as IP users vandalism. Thanks. SCP-2000 07:49, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 09:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning

Vandalism --MdsShakil (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nuked. Has stopped, so a block is no longer regarded as useful. Sgd. —Hasley 16:16, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: MdsShakil (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning harassing User:Liuxinyu970226

Liuxinyu970226 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Cross Wiki project harassment, including using anonymous IPs. Be honestly many of these cannot be called a recent issue, but only because I just came back to meta and checked some of my logs, I found things interesting. I just hope can somebody keep an eye and I understand if no immediate action.

  1. Liuxingyu970226 is deeply related to Tianjin, a Chinese City [6]. Since 2017, he started to attack me for unknown reason.
  2. and, both coming from Tianjin. The 1st is blocked in meta for harassing, and the 2nd one blocked for deleting other's speech, in a discussion about me in zh.wikisource recently.
  3. I speak Korean as well and once started a discussion about w:ko:위키백과:삭제_토론/환자_(역사), Liuxingyu970226 seems stalked me and "joined" Ko.wikipedia for his first time. And since then, he again calling me "don't understand the difference of words at all"
  4. Calling my edits hateful on wikidata, and humiliating me using my 10 years ago block logs in meta.

--Zhxy 519 (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zhxy 519: This a page for assistance for things happening at metawiki, none of what you are raising is happening at this wiki. You should be initially seeking help at the wikis where you are having issues as usually interpersonal issues are resolved at the respective wikis. If you think that this has escalated to a significant xwiki issue, then you should consult one of the stewards though ONLY after you have tried at the local wikis and that has clearly failed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Billinghurst:, I see it. Just to remind you that among the examples I present here, 3 happened in Meta: The very first blame, the IP and the humiliation. I understand that they are no longer recent incidents, and suggest you can take the other project incidents just for reference.--Zhxy 519 (talk) 18:19, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Zhxy 519: the account doesn't exist (special:centralauth/Liuxingyu970226.) And blocking IP addresses used ages ago is a pointless exercise. Go to the wikis where you are having issues and talk to their local admins. Telling us of something historical about which we can do nothing is of no use, which is why you were given the advice that you were given, they can act, they can help.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway typo fixed, sorry for this.--Zhxy 519 (talk) 01:46, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Stale and I don't really think there's anything actionable here. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for autopatroller

Hi. I am Hulged. I am requesting autopatroller flag as I have been translating pages from en to ur. Thank you. --Hulged (talk) 08:19, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been checkuser-blocked on enwiki, which makes me hesitant of granting this right. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
13:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
X mark.svg Not done for autopatrol is a right for trusted user here. Your contributions here doesn't allow us to determine that and the need in general. The block on enwp doesn't give me confidence. Admins will add this right if we feel you are ready for it. Do note translations do not need autopatrol rights. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:10, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Report concerning User:2600:387:1:813:0:0:0:48

2600:387:1:813:0:0:0:48 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Keeps on vandalising translations by removing them or replacing valid translations with URLs. Ferien (talk) 19:24, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stale. Please re-report if behavior persists. Sgd. —Hasley 13:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien: I have blocked the /40 for an extended period.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the range's edits, it appears to be a user (Special:CentralAuth/Thegameshowlad) evading a global lock. User talk:2600:387:6:80F:0:0:0:88: "So I am trying to edit but I am locked as the game show lad" ("I was hacked by that George reeve guy" is also referring to simple:User talk:Thegameshowlad#August 2021). Pinging @Operator873, who locked the account and might consider a global block here as well (as the range is also editing other wikis). ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
13:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4 I think this can be better addressed on SRG? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Camouflaged Mirage SRG has been very backlogged lately and the discussion started here, so I continued it here. I'd like to wait for Operator to answer and only issue a report at SRG if necessary. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
13:19, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sort of true too to an extent. @1234qwer1234qwer4. Let's wait for Operator to answer then. Indeed very fishy. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Further evidence is the legal threat at User talk:2600:387:6:80F:0:0:0:27, similar to what had already happened on enwiki at w:User talk:Thegameshowlad#Unblock. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
13:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ping received but I'm mobile currently. A gblock may indeed be needed. I'll further review when I'm at a keyboard. Operator873 connect 16:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the range and I think, from the global perspective, we'll need to wait on the global block for the range. If there is an active IP behaving in the same manner, a global block on a small range would be entirely appropriate given this subject's activities. However, an extended global block, in my opinion, isn't quite yet warranted. Operator873 connect 17:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This section was archived on a request by: Operator873 connect 17:15, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ease protection on Template:WMF elections translations

While I understand that vandalizing the output of this template would be quite unfortunate, luckily the translation system prevents it—only translation administrators can push the changes to the “live”, actually transcluded version, Template:WMF elections translations/en. I think translation administrators can be trusted not to push any vandalism to the live version. On the other hand, as a translation administrator who’s not a “normal” admin as well (ca. 85% of the 225 translation admins are not admins), it’s difficult to instruct admins to do translation-related changes, as they sometimes affect the whole page, and they can’t be previewed properly, so it’s easy to break pages in a way which requires immediate action by both a translation admin and a user who can edit the page; it’s much easier if it’s the same person. Also, allowing at least autoconfirmed users to edit it will allow more users to boldly edit it (without the risk of breaking important pages), while the need for edit requests probably stops many people from making constructive edit proposals. Can you change the full protection to semi-protection (or even fully unprotect the page)? Thanks in advance, —Tacsipacsi (talk) 09:42, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tacsipacsi what about using the "Allow translation administrators and central notice administrators" option? Its intended for the centralnotice system, but I believe it works on all pages - I just protected User:DannyS712/sandbox with that option, and it seems to work. That would allow translation admins to edit it, while preventing vandalism that might accidentally get marked for translation and made live DannyS712 (talk) 09:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DannyS712's suggestion makes sense to me, at least as a trial.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyS712: I didn’t know about this possibility. It’s definitely better than full protection, but I still think that the gain from allowing most or all users edit the page boldly is greater than the risk of a translation admin marking vandalism for translation. Also, I’m not sure whether it’s a good idea to (ab)use this protection level at places it’s not intended at. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 11:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO DannyS712 suggestion is sensible. I am also not comfortable to open to all users, TA/CNA seems the right level at the moment, inclined to give it a go as a trial. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:17, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict.) I still don’t see in what way can semi- or even no protection make harm except for careless translation admins, but if all admins are against that, I have no other choice than accepting the TA/CNA protection. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what's the point in softening the protection level at this page. In another words, I fail to see an actual problem that needs solution.
On another note, I don't recommend using the TA/CNA protection level on other pages. This protection level is special, created for banners only. In fact, the technical name of the protection level is banner-protect. Any developer which would want to change the way how it works would very likely assume it is only ever applied by CentralAuth itself, not manually by other admins. This could result in bad stuff happening (such as, everyone losing the ability to edit it). Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin Urbanec: The point is that the wiki way is openness, being bold and reverting too bold edits instead of preventing them beforehand, any restriction should have very good grounds. To turn your point around, I fail to see an actual problem that would warrant the protection, because of which the page does need to be protected. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin Urbanec: We are just borrowing a role, we are not doing anything to the role or leveraging anything, I don't see how it has an impact for coders in what we are doing. The major value is that allow translation admins and the other component is pretty well irrelevant IMNSHO.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:49, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One way or the other, could someone do something about this? It’s not particularly urgent, but I’d like to have it handled before this section gets archived. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:36, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tacsipacsi: If the team/committee running the elections has an opinion, then that is probably what should be guiding us.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip, I asked them (I hope I wrote at the right place). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg changed protection to the consensus position of translation admins.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:49, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]