Stewards' noticeboard

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to 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 SpBot. Threads older than 30 days will be moved to the archive.
Stewards
Wikimedia steward Icon.svg
Requests
For stewards
Noticeboards
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

AAR interpretation question[edit]

Hello. I am in doubt with regards to Admin_activity_review/2017/Data#hrwiktionary_(not_done). AAR#Policy§4(2) mentions somewhat the user should reply to the notice. In this case, the user has not replied to the notice but has one vote to support the keeping of the permissions as can be seen at the local discussion. Am I right assuming that, in order for an user to keep their rights, such user must always reply to said message? Thanks. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:41, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I would generally agree. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Restored from the archive. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
I agree that "the user himself should reply to the notice" --Alaa :)..! 11:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. And personally I don't understand why Ex13 can keep the rights too... after 1 edit and 2 log actions in 2/3 years. But meh. Trijnsteltalk 21:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS[edit]

Hi all,

as you are probably aware, editing of sitewide CSS and JS will soon be restricted to a smaller user group, to make it harder to steal an account with the ability of deploying malicious scripts for all users. Discussion is at Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS; your input would be welcome. --Tgr (talk) 11:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello again! Your feedback would be particularly welcome on Talk:Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS#Making assigning of techadmin membership central by default? as that would mean extra work for stewards. --Tgr (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Regarding tech admins here on meta: I've opened a discussion at Meta:Babel#Tech_Admins, any feedback is welcome. — xaosflux Talk 20:36, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The MediaWiki change is live now (that is, the interface-admin group exists everywhere; admins can still edit Javascript for four more weeks). I sent Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS/announcement 2 to all wikis; expect some requests for help where there are no local bureaucrats. Thanks in advance (and extra thanks to many of you who helped with the process so far)! --Tgr (talk) 13:18, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Also it would be great if you could rename the global interface editor group to global interface admin (interface admin is the group name we ended up with, instead of techadmin), to avoid confusion. (Or keep both if anyone is interested in editing interface messages globally but not CSS/JS files. Seems unlikely though.) --Tgr (talk) 13:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, the code I have been using to make sure people still can edit CSS/JS during the migration period probably does not work for global interface editors (which have a different right management mechanism); someone might have to add editsitecsseditsitejs manually. Sorry for the confusion if that's the case. --Tgr (talk) 13:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I've updated the permissions in the group. I'll hold off on a name change now because that'll be a lot of work, but if another steward has the time they can go for it. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Shall we also add editsite.* permissions to our group? As for the name change: it is not that simple as it requires sending a patch to the WikimediaMessages repository, etc. With time it can be done though. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Flood of spambots at deWV[edit]

Would a steward please run their eye over v:de:Special:log/newusers and see if there is anything that can be done about the spambots that attacked there yesterday, and have whacked away in our abuse filters. It would be great if there was a set of IPs that could be blocked. Thanks if you can.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:21, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Does global locks overrules local decision?[edit]

This is raised in zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/方针#Wikipedia:封禁方针#封禁申訴_的修訂:

For example, a user is firstly locally blocked in a wiki, and latter globally locked. The user appeal the block to local sysop, and local sysop decides to remove the local block. If the local sysop request unlock of the locked user, may stewards decline the unlock request? particularly, does declining violates Stewards_policy#Don't_override_consensus? What about unblocking based on a community consensus, or even when community consensus specifically request an unlock?--GZWDer (talk) 01:11, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

My personal opinion is if the request is valid, and the user has not disrupted other wikis, then they should be unlocked. XenrøsE 02:25, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
It is a global lock, it wins. SRG is the place to appeal, and there are numbers of discussions over the years. The decision has always been up to the steward, and usually the best approach is to talk about process. Similarly addressing the steward directly can be less confrontational and less challenging.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Exactly. Xenrose on an alt 02:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

sl.wikibooks[edit]

As per wikibooks:sl:Wikiknjige:Pod_lipo#IMPORTANT:_Admin_activity_review, the community wants to keep my admin rights, which expire soon due to inactivity. --Smihael (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. — regards, Revi 12:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Adding some Wikisources to global-bot wikis[edit]

Following local requests, please add the wikis listed below to global bot wikis:

Just FYI: cs.ws, he.ws, hu.ws, is.ws, mr.ws, ru.ws, sl.ws and sv.ws opposes in local discussion, so not forwarding requests here.

es.ws voting is in progress (till end of September). be.ws and nl.ws are also likely still in progress (at least waiting for more input from local users after giving them some explanation). Ankry (talk) 10:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)