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.
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
- Assistance with Meta-Wiki maintenance is always welcome.
- Many files awaiting review for basic
{{information}}, source and license.
- None currently.
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.
|
Request renaming or speedily closing a request for comment intended for defamation[edit]
Would any disinterested administrator speedily close or rename this RfC? This is an extremely serious personal attack in violation of Meta:Civility.--Jusjih (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Jusjih: Alleging abuse of administrative rights while providing links and making a case is not in and of itself a personal attack. It is also pertinent to note that threatening editors for opening an RfC about you is not appropriate conduct for a Meta-Wiki administrator. Please try to remain calm and objective while processes like these are going on. Best, Vermont (talk) 20:48, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Vermont's comments are true, though I doubt that it should be at Metawiki, this is a local issue for zhWS and has no global implications, and is between administrators. Having this discussed in English here is just problematic. I have asked for it to be moved back to zhWS, then we should be able to close it out. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:19, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Then please also ask Zhxy 519 to try to remain calm and objective, or he should be blocked here for disruption. Please note how Zhxy 519 retaliated while he would face de-admimship [1] and why the RfC has excessively biased title [2]. See also a new RFC to tighten Requests for comment/Policy.--Jusjih (talk) 19:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Jusjih regarding the first diff, Zhxy 519 does make a valid point, and for the second diff also there was no good reason to move the RfC. Given there may be language barriers, please AGF. SHB2000 (talk | contibs) 23:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Will not close here as it might not be good for me to close zh related issues, but to be honest, I don't see anything actionable here. I really can't see any clear policy violations on any party that is to that extent that sanctions are applicable till now. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- @SHB2000: I disagree that Zhxy 519 made a valid point while I see systematic violations of Meta:Civility. He keeps retaliating against being proposed for de-adminship on Chinese Wikisource. I would like to request these acts:
- Will not close here as it might not be good for me to close zh related issues, but to be honest, I don't see anything actionable here. I really can't see any clear policy violations on any party that is to that extent that sanctions are applicable till now. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Jusjih regarding the first diff, Zhxy 519 does make a valid point, and for the second diff also there was no good reason to move the RfC. Given there may be language barriers, please AGF. SHB2000 (talk | contibs) 23:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Then please also ask Zhxy 519 to try to remain calm and objective, or he should be blocked here for disruption. Please note how Zhxy 519 retaliated while he would face de-admimship [1] and why the RfC has excessively biased title [2]. See also a new RFC to tighten Requests for comment/Policy.--Jusjih (talk) 19:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Vermont's comments are true, though I doubt that it should be at Metawiki, this is a local issue for zhWS and has no global implications, and is between administrators. Having this discussed in English here is just problematic. I have asked for it to be moved back to zhWS, then we should be able to close it out. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:19, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Revert User:Zhxy 519's renaming [3] for continuous defamation, back to Requests for comment/Recent problem in zh.wikisource.
- Leave no redirect of excessive abusive titles. Salt them.--Jusjih (talk) 18:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
- Jusjih: The RFC that you started indicated that a user's name can have purpose in the title, so I am do not feel that the neutral page name you specify is justified. Your commentary in this whole thread is problematic, and I think that you need to take some time to reflect. You even asked this person to be blocked. I mean, what is that? Be open to criticism and improvement, that it has escalated like it has should give you time to look inward, not lash outward. We can all improve the way that we wield the mop. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
CSS tweak for a CentralNotice banner[edit]
Hello! Could the following CSS be added to the POTY_2020_R1 banner to fix a mobile display issue (namely the text appearing too large on small-width screens.
#centralNotice {
font-size: min(12px, 2vw);
}
Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 for the fix. firefly ( t · c ) 06:36, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Seddon: - would you take a look at this please. — xaosflux Talk 18:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Seddon: — billinghurst sDrewth 03:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Perceived personal attack by 維基百科最忠誠的反對者[edit]
Recently WMF banned some Chinese users from the Wikimedians of Mainland China. User:維基百科最忠誠的反對者 called them "wiki-terrorists" here. I asked them to retract this egregious personal attack and severe accusation, but they refused. This usergroup has about 300 members many of which in good standing. Even the banned users should not be called "wiki-terrorists", because being banned from a website on the internet does not amount to being "wiki-terrorists". We know little about this incident and we are not in a position to judge them. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:44, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- @4nn1l2:Firstly, I would like to protest against the misleading and presumed malicious nature of the title. Under the principle of presumption of innocence, I cannot be accused of "personal attack" by such misleading titles until the personal attack is established. I ask this user to change the title or I refuse to comment here.---WMLO (talk) 17:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- In normal, calling user(s) "wiki-terrorists" is clearly a personal attack and incivility. I must note that remaining civility is not only to the unblocked user, also include the blocked/banned user and everyone (Well, you will not call LTA as "terrorists" or "psychiatric patient", right?). I hope we can focus on the present and future of zhwiki community instead of judging the globally banned user like this case. Thank you. SCP-2000 18:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Report concerning User:2403:6200:8830:6B88:864:BBF7:D041:82B9[edit]
2403:6200:8830:6B88:864:BBF7:D041:82B9 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism. Mtarch11 (talk) 03:43, 28 September 2021 (UTC)