Steward requests/Global

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Global) latest archive
This page hosts requests for global (un)blocks, (un)locks and hidings.
  • For global IP block requests, read the guideline and make a request below. Indicate why a global block is necessary and for how long.
  • For account lock requests, read the guideline and post under Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding.

If you are here because you have been blocked by a global block, and believe that the block is in error or you have not done anything wrong, there are a few methods through which you can appeal:

  • If the IP is not currently blocked on Meta, you can post a request to this page following the instructions below to have the IP unblocked.
  • If the IP is currently blocked on Meta, you can post an appeal on your talk page. For maximum effectiveness, link to the username of the steward who globally blocked the IP address using the code [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]] so that they are pinged by it.
  • If you are editing from an account and have been caught by a global IP block that is unlikely to be removed (i.e. because it is an open proxy or because of long-term abuse), you can request an individual exemption from the block at the requests for global permissions page. Please see the section on global IP block exemptions on that page for specific instructions for making a request.
  • If none of those options work, you are free to email using this form or writing at stewards-at-wikimedia.org.

Note: (un)blocks apply to IP addresses; and (un)locks apply to global accounts

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Requests for global (un)block[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Please also review Global blocking. Only IP addresses can be globally blocked at this moment. Please see #Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding if your request involves an account.
Global blocks don't affect Meta-Wiki, so if your IP address is blocked, you can still appeal here. IP addresses that cause disruption on Meta should be reported at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat instead of here so that they can be blocked locally.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You know the IP address(es) you wish to have globally blocked or unblocked.
  2. For blocks, the global blocking criteria are met.
  3. For unblocks, your request addresses the original reason for blocking the IP, if any.

To make a request for an account to be locked or unlocked

Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the address(es) should be blocked/unblocked.
=== Global block/unblock for [[User:Some IP address|Some IP address]] ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
*{{luxotool|IP address}}
Description, evidence, diffs, etc. --~~~~
When requesting that your IP be unblocked, note that stewards need to know your IP address to even consider a request.
To find your IP, please visit http://www.whatismyip.com/
You are not required to disclose your IP in public - you may make requests privately to any steward on IRC or by email at: stewards-at-wikimedia.org

Global block for 213.32.0.0/17[edit]

Status:    In progress

IP range is registered as a dedicated OVH SAS server. Most recent abuse comes from 213.32.28.165. Has been abused on the English Wikipedia. See here. 172.58.41.30 03:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Requests for global (un)lock and (un)hiding[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Note that global blocking currently only applies to IPs, due to a technical limitation. If you wish to request a named account for global [un]locking, please request a global [un]lock here instead. Be sure to follow the instructions below:
  • Your request might be rejected if your request doesn't include the necessary information.
  • Warning! This page is publicly viewable. If the account name is grossly insulting or contains personal information please contact a steward privately in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect or email your request to the stewards OTRS queue at stewards-at-wikimedia.org (direct wiki interface) but do not post it here. Thanks.
  • Warning! This is not the place to ask for locks based on your opinion that someone is disruptive. Global locks are used exclusively against vandalism and spam, not because of content disputes, not because you think that someone deserves to be globally blocked. In such cases, you should ask for local blocks at appropriate places.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting that a global account be (un)locked, please be sure that:

  1. You have evidence of cross-wiki disruption from the account(s).
  2. You can show that it is not feasible to use local-only blocks or other measures like page protection to combat the disruption.
  3. You have considered making the request in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect, especially for account names which will be hidden, or for urgent requests.
To make a request for an account to be locked or unlocked
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the account(s) should be locked/unlocked.
=== Global lock/unlock for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{status}} <!-- do not remove this template -->
*{{LockHide|username}}
*{{LockHide|username|hidename=1}} <!-- if you do not want the name to be visible on this page -->
*...
Reasons, etc, --~~~~

Global unlock for Tulsi Bhagat[edit]

Status:    In progress

Hi, This is me Tulsi Bhagat, the account holder. This is fact that my account has been hacked but currently, I'm back in full control of my account. Please check out this, couple of days has been passed away. So that someone please unlock my account. I promise i will secure my account and enable "two-factor authentication" for high security. --49.126.25.208 09:02, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Pinging @Ajraddatz: as the steward locking the account.--GZWDer (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Despite what was noted by Ajraddatz on ne.wiki, there is no proof of the claims in the e-mails that the account was ever taken over by someone else (as should be visible from CU data). It would neither make sense that the account be taken over as "revenge" to do seemingly good edits with it (reverting vandalism by accounts created by the same person controlling the Tulsi Bhagat account at that time). As far as we're concerned, the account was used for abuse on multiple projects, waisting valuable time of volunteers. Savhñ 22:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Apologies for the slow response here. As Savh said, we do not have any proof that these actions were not taken by Tulsi himself. This entire ordeal has been a time-sink, and we are eager to avoid spending further time on it. I will say that I would favour unlocking and leaving the meta block on, but there is not internal consensus to do so. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Once the account is unlocked but the meta block is left we may restore his talk page access to allow him to discuss his meta block.--GZWDer (talk) 16:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz:However, I (Tulsi Bhagat) have contributed over 40,000 globally on wikimedia. Considering my contributions please unlock my account as soon as possible without wasting further any more time on this. --49.126.65.65 08:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
"Wasting time"? --Vituzzu (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Global lock for Drüfft, Kousch?, Aufseiner, Merlernenparkän, IP 87.152.171.169[edit]

Status:    In progress

Continued cross-wiki abuse by surrogate accounts of globally locked user Chauahuasachca (talk • contribs • block • x-wiki • CA • lwcheckuser) (see Steward_requests/Global/2013-01). Moves articles arbitrarily and without seeking discussion or consensus, in dozens of projects without even speaking the respective languages. German, Dutch and French Wikipedia are aware of this problematic user, but smaller projects may be not. The listed accounts and IP have been found to be sockpuppets of the same user in a checkuser procedure at fr.wp. Is there any way to keep this person from creating new accounts and commiting nuisance across multiple projects again and again? --RJFF (talk) 09:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Can I continue with Drüfft only if I promise not to move any site with none of these accounts?--Drüfft (talk) 11:50, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I warmly urge a quick global block for those accounts and IP, given the unexcusable and large mess this sock master has done in fr.wp and the complete passivity of some admins in tr.wp who seem not understand the potential of nuisance of Rülpsmann. Kumʞum quoi ? 15:12, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Is there a chance that I can use at least one account (Drüfft) if I do not continue moving pages? I just wanted to rename names of copied and translated pages into their proper language.--Drüfft (talk) 15:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
For long-term and controversial cross-wiki abuse the global ban process is prefered.--GZWDer (talk) 15:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't want to say anything to the global aspect on other wikis here (don't know those problems), but as for the history of their account Drüfft on dewiki, I'd like to add these facts: Drüfft had been blocked as Dribbler by MBq in November 2015. Some time later in October 2016, there has been this unblocking request by Drüfft/Dribbler: After that community discussion, the user has been unblocked by admin DaB. on 29 October 2016 which has not been reverted until now. Admin Jivee Blau gave Drüfft editor rights (for active reviewing articles) after his request here on 24 January 2017. I don't know why, but it's not long ago. I saw this request by chance and asked former admin Koenraad about this (he says, he doesn't care about these global things at all) because he knows the history quite well. Here you can read that in German language. As I understand Koenraad he doesn't think that locking the account Drüfft is a good idea, and he means that Drüfft abides by agreements which have been made.
Thus, locking the account Drüfft would mean overruling the decision of DaB. after the unblocking request in October (after comments by other community members) and overruling the decision of Jivee Blau giving him editor rights (which is something like reviewer at enwiki). So a steward locking this account would overrule a local unblocking community decision which I think can't be right.
What is done here with the other accounts, doesn't matter for dewiki, two of the mentioned accounts (Kousch?, Aufseiner) are blocked at dewiki as well, the other one (Merlernenparkän) inactive there, that wouldn't matter there. If there have been problems globally with those accounts, then lock the other accounts. Drüfft can be blocked locally anywhere, if there may be problems. Otherwise, a discussion with the de-community would be necessary, if there shall be a locking discussion about his account Drüfft. --Bjarlin (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
By the way: Chauahuasachca has been unlocked two times by Ruslik0 and is not locked anymore since more than two years now. --Bjarlin (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Support Support de:user:Dribbler/Drüfft works on Middle-East-related topics in de.wp since 2009. He was frequently reported for copyvios, erroneous edits, mistranslations, wrong transliterations, cracks/jokes, gaming, and sockpuppetery. He never kept any of his countless promises. I believe he tricked somebody into granting local autoreview and review rights, and I have revoked them today. - After all, he's a friendly and polite guy (most of the time). Best, --MBq (talk) 17:28, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. This user was already unlocked but violated the conditions of unlock. All these account should be locked IMO. Ruslik (talk) 19:44, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
    • Is it possible to lock an account globally which has been unblocked after a broad unblocking discussion in one wiki (here: dewiki) without discussion in that wiki again which means overruling a local decision with a global lock? That sounds very strange to me. This is only the case for one of those accounts, so it's another thing what shall be done here with the others. I think this issue should also be communicated locally, if the reasons for global locking should apply apart from that. de:WP:AN would be good for such a discussion about Drüfft and those global problems. MBq: Would you perhaps initiate such a discussion there? --Bjarlin (talk) 00:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I locked all accounts except Drüfft. So, the question is whether the German Wikipedia community was aware of the long history of cross-wiki abuse by this user when they were discussing the unblock? Ruslik (talk) 19:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure about that, I think it just hasn't been discussed then, but only the local unblock. There are a few hints and links to other global pages, but that is mostly not part of the local discussion.
But I noticed now that there are a lot of locked accounts of the years 2009 until 2014, but many of the accounts from 2014 til 2016 aren't locked globally, but only blocked at dewiki and some also in other wikis. Maybe you might want to take a look at
Otherwise the older accounts can also be used instead of the ones that have been locked here now. So, first the global state of the accounts of the years 2014, 2015 and 2016 should be clear. If those accounts all remain open globally, then there is no reason for locking every account. If the problem is big enough to lock all other accounts, then there is another basis for the discussion. --Bjarlin (talk) 02:32, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Global lock for Adam aflah and his socks[edit]

Status:    In progress

Crosswiki abuse, copyright violations, and (for some of the accounts listed above) abusive username. Refs: 1, 2, 3 --ArdiPras95 (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Global lock for users with Russian swearing names in viwiki[edit]

Status:    Done

Reason: Swearing user names, attacking Putin. Tuanminh01 (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Done. Savhñ 15:27, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Global lock for 影武者(Nipponese Dog Calvero)[edit]

Status:    Done

--Lanwi1(Talk) 20:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. RadiX 21:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

See also[edit]