Stewards' noticeboard

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Stewards Stewards' noticeboard Archives
Welcome to the stewards' noticeboard. This message board is for discussing issues on Wikimedia projects that are related to steward work. Please post your messages at the bottom of the page and do not forget to sign it. Thank you.
  • This page is automatically archived by ArchiverBot. Threads older than 30 days will be moved to the archive.
For stewards

Question about bureaucrats in small Wikipedias[edit]

Hello. It is very hard to understand WM policy regarding bureaucrats in small Wikipedias. As I see in this page, there are 4 bureaucrats with 4 admins in Maltese WP, or 0 bureaucrats with 8 admins in Mongolian WP. Have we got some strong rules in this situation? For example, we got 5 administrators in Lezgi Wikipedia, but one of them, who become sysop last year, forced to re-nominate his candidacy year-by-year. I think that after 4 years of developing, Lezgi Wikipedia could get at least one bureaucrat with 5 admins. But I don't understand this policy almost at all.--Soul Train (talk) 10:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the permanent administrator privileges, as well as that of a bureaucrat, are granted depending on the activity on the project – not its age. I know of no written policies on this matter, but it looks that they tend to change slightly over time – as does the activity at the projects. (Hence, even if the community has approved one or more permanent administrators at some time, they may not be able to do that any longer. The solution? Attract more contributors to the project.)
The questions that arise are very simple. For instance, is the community active enough to continuously monitor that the advanced rights’ holders do not come to abuse their privileges? (So that if they do the community could assemble with ease for a “vote of no confidence.”)
[B]ut one of them [… is] forced to re-nominate his candidacy year-by-year. – why is that a problem? Per my experience, the support of even two of the four other administrators will be enough for his term to be extended for another year. On the other hand, if said administrators are no longer active, and if searching for another contributor to support the proposal proves to be hard – I guess the project is not ready yet for a permanent administrator.
As for the bureaucrat privileges, the question could be: how many requests would one get, on average? There’s hardly a good reason to grant such an advanced right if it would only be used once or twice a year. Also, will there be one another bureaucrat at the same project? Once the project gets its bureaucrats, the stewards will generally cease to handle the respective requests. Now, think that the sole user in that position may go to a month-long vacation – sure asking stewards would get the request done in a more timely fashion in that case.
Ivan Shmakov (dc) 10:20, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

b:ru:Викиучебник:Заявки на статус администратора/Oleg3280 4[edit]

True to his earlier promise, Oleg3280 has today applied for the extension of his administrative privileges at Russian Wikibooks for another year.

I believe that the administrative practices he follows are not on par with the best of Wikimedia standards, have argued against them in the past few months (see User:Ivan Shmakov/Административные практики Викиучебника 2015, for example), and formely promised myself (120703) to raise my objections on his then-forthcoming application – in the hope that the community could make a more informed choice.

Which now proves to be impossible, as Oleg3280 has blocked my account there – including the access to my own talk page.

Therefore, I hereby request a party interested in resolution of this issue to pass my comments, which I hope to provide in my userspace here on Meta later this day, or a link thereto, to the Russian Wikibooks community, on the application page.

I have formely asked Mardetanha and Arbnos for possible assistance, but seen no reply so far.

Thanks in advance.

PS. Just in case one may wonder, I cannot request a review of this block by an uninvolved administrator at the project, as we two are the only active administrators there.

Ivan Shmakov (dc) 07:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

I’ve left my comments at User:Ivan Shmakov/Комментарии 2015 and ask for someone to review and comment on them. TIA. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 02:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Напишу на русском. Есть гуглопереводчик. Ответы на все вопросы есть в моей заявке.

Признаю, что в период с 15.06.2015 по 17.06.2015 я два раза блокировал Ивана.

Нынешняя блокировка третья и последняя.

Эта блокировка является прямым следствием активных, но абсолютно безрезультатных дискуссий (после 10.05.2015) на тему использования административных инструментов.

Я принял трудное и весьма рискованное решение о блокировке после того, как Иван выступил против блокировки учёток 06.09.2015.

Примеры последних блокировок за 06.09.2015, против которых Иван тоже был против:

Эти учётки (кроме второй) заблокированы в английской и русской Википедии. Чем они могут быть полезны для Викиучебника?

Также 09.09.2015 я заблокировал IP-адрес (сначала на неделю, потом на месяц, как в Википедии).

Этот подход к администрированию я считаю неконструктивным и не понимаю.

И почему я не должен выполнять никаких админдействий в проекте в случае, если сообщество меня поддержит?

Как ещё я должен реагировать на действия администратора, защищающего вандалов и виртуалов, а не многих других участников с конструктивным вкладом?

Прошу обратить внимание и на эту тему.

Где справедливость? Если борьба с вандализмом не соответствует одной из основных задач работы администратора, то в чём же тогда смысл всего этого? Не понимаю...


Количество правок за последние 30 дней:


Общая статистика:

Oleg3280 (talk) 16:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

И после третьей заявки (b:ru:Викиучебник:Заявки на статус администратора/Ivan Shmakov 3), где я дал высокую оценку действиям Ивана как администратора и поддержал присвоение ему постоянного флага, в качестве благодарности получил патовую ситуацию, которая сложилась в проекте сегодня.

И ещё, здесь Иван позволяет крайне неэтичные комментарии в адрес всего сообщества Викиучебника (и меня в том числе), которое, с его точки зрения, не способно самостоятельно принять решение и не умеет читать между строк.

Логика Ивана такова, что либо только он здесь администратор (то есть убрать всех конкурентов, в первую очередь меня, как самого активного администратора и участника проекта), либо патовая ситуация и полный измот всем нервов бесконечными неконструктивными дискуссиями.

Мои административные практики чему-то не соответствуют...

А в админдействиях Ивана всё кристально чисто и правильно???????????????

Раскрытие информации об «оплачиваемом» участии (везде инициатором этих тем был Иван):

Oleg3280 (talk) 17:15, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

As the block was lifted on 18th, and then the application (RfA) itself was withdrawn (deleted) by Oleg3280 on 19th, this request no longer makes any sense, and could probably be closed. Thanks for the consideration. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 20:00, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Forgotten password[edit]

Hi. I have a question. A user of sl Wikipedia lost his password of his user account. Unfortunatelly he didn't save his e-mail adress in prefferences. Is there any chance he is sent a password? --Janezdrilc (talk) 23:42, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

How can he prove that he is the account owner? Ruslik (talk) 10:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe that's allmost impossible. In case he registers a new account, is there a possibility to unify the old account (and all of it's contributions) with a new one (I suppose verification of an old account must be done anyway)? --Janezdrilc (talk) 12:51, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

But this requires the proof as well. Ruslik (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

The password is now found as by miracle. Case closed I suppose. Thank you for help. --Janezdrilc (talk) 22:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Error when installing modules[edit]

When adding modules to ee-wiki to get our translation of ee:Malaria up and running I got hit by this error message:

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and it has been disallowed. In addition, as a security measure, some privileges routinely granted to established accounts have been temporarily revoked from your account. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Pattern vandalism #1 - Please report errors at the noticeboard

I don't know what automation identified my installation of modules from en-wiki to ee-wiki as harmful - but it is clearly an error. I have done similar edits over at least 20 other wikipedias.
In lieu of fixing the error - what permissions can I apply for? I know Doc James is globally Captcha exempt - could anything similar be done here to avoid this in the future?

The specific module in question was ee:Module:Infobox

Best, CFCF (talk) 10:06, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

This was an abuse filter. Ruslik (talk) 17:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I disabled this filter for the time being. Ruslik (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, although I can't see the filter as I'm not autoconfirmed there yet. I'll apply for global-autoconfirmed, that should solve some issues. CFCF (talk) 12:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes if you become global auto-confirmed that should make things easier. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)