Steward requests/Miscellaneous

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from SRSD)
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Miscellaneous) Archives
This page is for requesting that a specific administrative action (such as page deletion) be performed by a steward or global sysop on a Wikimedia wiki having no active administrators. (If the wiki does have active administrators, file the request with one of them.) If the wiki has an active editor community, any potentially controversial action (deletion of actual content, edit to a protected page, renaming of a protected page, etc.) should receive consensus from the wiki community before being requested here, and a link should be provided to that consensus in the request.

To add a new request, create a new section header at the bottom of the page (but above the See also section) using the format below:

=== Very brief description of request here ===

{{Status|In progress}}
Your request --~~~~

Then describe your request more fully below that. It is helpful if you can provide a link to the wiki (or the specific page on the wiki) in question, either in the header or in the body of your request.

To request approval of OAuth consumers please use {{oauthapprequest}} (see the documentation before using).

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Manual requests[edit]

Please see a list of pages nominated for speedy deletion via {{Delete}} and/or the local equivalent. You can also filter by wikis whose admins are less than X or have not delete since Y.

Non-free content[edit]

Status:    In progress

Does anyone have an interest in Non-free content at wikis that have no exemption doctrine policy or that do not seem to be enforcing it properly? As an example of the latter, w:id:Wikipedia:Penggunaan media nonbebas#Kebijakan gambar tokoh yang masih hidup appears to prohibit non-free images for BLPs, but w:id:Istimewa:Daftar berkas seems to have more photos of BLPs than one might expect under such a policy. (Please ping me.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:50, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure, you can/should tag such violations with {{delete}} and if the requests are not acted upon in a month or so you can ping global sysops/stewards here, as with #Speedy deletions on as/ms. Nemo 12:09, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: You mentioned id.wikipedia, which is a larger project and stewards can probably not edit there. There are 295 Wikipedias and of these there are ~85 Wikipedias [1] having more than 1000 local files. In 2012 Nemo claimed 76 [2]. These Wikipedias often 1) have upload open for any logged-in user 2) host dozens of unused files 3) have lots of unfree files among the unused files, i.e. they are not EDP-files, since they lack an applicable rationale. Some Wikipedias have more than 1000 unused files, some more than 5000 – the counter stops then. Some have 20% of all files unused.

Local files in Wikipedias
Date 1 Qty of projects 2 Qty of projects w/o local files
(100% Commons)
3 Qty of projects having local files 4 Qty of local files 4/3 Reference
2013-01-01 285 36 249 2 038 148 8185 [3]
2014-01-01 287 30 257 2 208 750 8594 [4]
2015-01-01 288 30 258 2 311 679 8959 [5]
2016-01-01 291 37 254 2 405 486 9470 [6]
2017-01-01 295 140 155 2 430 156 15678 [7]
2017-04-14 295 140 155 2 436 730 15720 [8]

In the last ~4 years (2013-01-01 to today) the number of local files in Wikipedias increased by 391 925 from 2 038 148 to 2 430 073 [9], i.e. ca. 100 000 per year. At the same time, the number of Wikipedias using local files decreased. The major part of the increase comes from the aforementioned 85 Wikipedias. Some are out of scope for stewards and SRM.

To stop the problem with non-free content in small, open-upload Wikipedias and the workload for stewards to become worse, one could restrict the upload to admins. That is not fixing current violations, but reducing chance for new violations and freeing steward resources.

Candidates for restriction are the following 40 Wikipedias, each has 9 or less admins and uploads still open: ksh, pfl, rm, wuu, nv, frr, als, vec, bar, zh-yue, an, mt, pa, km, ga, oc, bcl, as, ps, scn, eml, mn, ba, be-tarask, am, be, sw, wa, lb, ky, hi, kn, tt, my, si, jv, br, fy, ka, bs. 01:37, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

This is the problem we currently face on id.wp, most of those files were PD-Gov, can be seen from the source links, but we are currently muddling if we should just transfer them to commons or just tag and add pd-gov license to it, but then again, there are thousands file need to be handled, we don't have enough hand. As for Stewards and GS, can close this request as this cannot be actioned by stewards or GS, whatamdoing can just come to id.wp to make this announcement/comment (again).--AldNonymousBicara? 19:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I'm one of the admin in id.wikipedia. I've worked up a Quarry script to detect those violating images and I've deleted all of them. There was around 2,000 of them but I suspect that it didn't cover all fairuse BLP images yet. Feel free to fork and/or improve the Quarry script. Kenrick95 (talk) 10:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm amazed at how much you've already achieved there.
But idwiki is just one example (and perhaps one that is more capable of addressing it than average). Is there a desirable general approach to this issue, e.g., for a wiki with no (or many fewer) local admins? WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing: Yeah, you could fork my script by changing the wiki database name ("idwiki_p"), the fairuse category name ("Gambar_berlisensi_penggunaan_wajar"), and the BLP category name ("Orang_hidup") to the local names. Kenrick95 (talk) 00:43, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Kenrick95. I'm not very familiar with Quarry, but I might give it a try.
OTOH, I'm wondering whether a much more ham-fisted approach would be appropriate, given that copyright violations are involved. For example, instead of manually reviewing and tagging hundreds or thousands of images, we could leave a general note to at a few Village Pumps to report problems. We could say that there are obviously problems, and if local admins don't report that it has been addressed to their satisfaction in <number of days>, then all of the local files will be deleted and uploading will be disabled.
Also, at wikis without any (active) local admins, uploading should probably be disabled anyway. (It may already be the case; I don't know.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Funfact, we even have it on our recent changes for warning to them to review their own files (since year[s] ago), then do single warning for multiple files that uploaded by same person, not a single reply (except from the minority of the [still] active senior user, One of the reason why we muddling it so long, I even left same kind of warning on my own talkpage so every visitor will read it, we kinda wanted those old user return and tend to their own uploads/files)), of course because the files are so old, the person who own the account are also went inactive for year, I don't know how it is with en.wp or other Wikis, but this was the heritage from the old times when the old local laws still don't require user to to give any rationale for the upload. Number of days? More like number of years. Mass deletions are just last resort, not a good way but still a 'way', a better way to avoid legal liability. (Which kinda weird, it's almost complaining why a wiki being old is kinda bad).--AldNonymousBicara? 23:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Improper content on Khmer-Wiki[edit]

Status:    In progress

As raised the issue of the fact of being a not maintained wiki-page here, before, and comming "back" to the most, for my person most obivious issue, Copyright violations - Tipitaka Khmer, my person likes to remark also here (on recommentation of a wikimedia-member), that it would be proper to act on it in the know cases but also to "insure" as much as possible, that there is a maintaining and care afterwards. Aware of the fact that it needs a lot of sacrify, may it be of best use for all and by those able and willing to act proper seen as a possibility for merits, if well done. --សមណៈយុហាន់ (talk) 18:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr. Holder generously and obligated, has started to work through it, sure for only one person and no additional support, also in teaching at the same time, might be a brudensome undertaking, possible at least with less gain for all involved benefit. --សមណៈយុហាន់ (talk) 11:23, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
@សមណៈយុហាន់: I don't see that there is any request to be actioned by global admins or sysops, I believe that this request should be closed as not done. If you believe that there is existing actions, then please identify specific actions that are required at Khmer wiki. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
denying or not, a giver has responsibility on his "gift" and it's not the case that having given birth to something is enough for release, yet at least nurishing on it. If abounding that a holding on strings makes what one would ever face as, direct or indirect as effects of carelessness. Neither to hold on nor to abound is thereby advocated, but just a "this requires that" or "with that, this will need to come along" so that it will not have bad effects for those act and willing to enjoy fruits. Ones own choices mr @Billinghurst:, ones own fruits from them, according to ones selected relations. No wishes, no demands, just pointing. Maybe just bringing "Note: When you edit this page, you agree to release your contribution under the CC0.", or likewise, to more awareness might help, on the other side, even with this words, my person could not confirm with it's requirement, since this is not given for any normal exchange or trade... but for release. May your good choices bring their fruits always quick and possible to trace, may bad choices effects to always bearable with ease and pull to better. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by សមណៈយុហាន់ (talk)

Page Creation vandalism on bh.wikipedia[edit]

Status:    In progress

Recently a large number of pages have been created on bh.wikipedia by IP ranging from -1 to -431 with the same content (almost). These pages are meant to be articles about years.

Earlier in the past, such activity has been noted by IP, e.g 2120 to 2128 which I deleted because I was active right at the time they were being created. I believe somebody was just trying to raise Number of Articles on bhwiki up to 10,000 by creating such pages.

I can delete these using Mass Delete option, but I am afraid such activity may take place again. Is there any solution (like making some filters to prevent pages about Numbers etc.). Please help how to address such situation. I am single active admin at bhwiki (the other admin has not edited recently). Thanks. --SM7--talk-- 02:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

You can look into creating a Title blacklist. See the comments (#) in that page (and MediaWiki:Titleblacklist), including a link to the documentation about the extension that provides the functionality (all Wikimedia wikis have this extension installed). - dcljr (talk) 04:44, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
dcljr, I am very sorry that I mistook your tagging. I will try Titleblacklist. Can I delete those all newly created pages?--SM7--talk-- 05:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@SM7: Sure, you can delete them. You are the admin on that wiki, after all. In this case, if you didn't delete them they would probably be deleted by a steward anyway, because they look exactly like the kinds of "articles" that are created all the time by a longtime cross-wiki vandal (and globally banned user) known as "Decker". Current practice is to delete pages created by globally banned users trying to get around their bans by editing anonymously (as "IP" editors). As for using Titleblacklist, I should stress that you need to be very careful using that feature, since it is based on regular expressions. (You may accidentally block the creation of many more kinds of articles than you intended!) If you are not familiar with "regexes", try to find a user who regularly updates MediaWiki:Titleblacklist on this or some other Wikimedia wiki who can help you. By the way, it seems there is another option: "page-creation protection" (info at English Wikipedia). That looks like a much safer alternative, but would require you to list every single page title you don't want created. That feature seems to already be in use at bhwiki. - dcljr (talk) 19:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Deckerish activity at dinwiki[edit]

Status:    Done

137 (or so) stubs for numbers need deleting, as they are (besides being completely useless) in the wrong language (English). Apparently done to push the wiki past 200 articles. May or may not be our good friend Decker. Normally nowadays I would try tagging one of the pages for deletion with a link to the user's other contributions, since stewards should be watching for that on all adminless wikis (right?), but the wiki doesn't even have din:Template:Delete or din:Template:Db, so I guess I can't do that. (Or would stewards still see it even if the template is missing? I don't even know how it's implemented now.) Hence this report here. - dcljr (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I note that the deletions were done by Matiia. You can, of course, create Template:Delete locally which surely is of some use; but reporting on this page looks more efficient, especially for such a high number of pages. There used to be a tool which shows all pages marked with {{delete}} on all wikis, but I neither know whether it still exists nor whether someone uses it at all. --MF-W 12:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: The "Manual requests" section above links to two tools at WMFLabs, the first of which is apparently no longer working even though it's listed on the "stewardbots" homepage. The second one runs, but is reporting 0 instances of {{delete}} on wikis with no admins, along with a warning that something unexpected happened, so I am skeptical that it is working properly. @Holder: you seem to delete a lot of the stuff I've tagged with {{delete}}; do you use a tool to find them? - dcljr (talk) 20:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi dcljr. Normally, I also use this tool on stewardbots homepage. --Holder (talk) 04:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
OK, so I guess that is working, then. That's the one I was saying didn't work for me — meaning the page never loaded at all. But I'm not a steward nor even an admin, so maybe you have to be one of those to get the page to load? Anyway, good to know it's still working… - dcljr (talk) 05:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

See also[edit]