Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2023-02

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

trwiki Adminship Desysop Policy

Hi. A adminship desysop policy has been developed by trwiki community. I added the local policy here. FYI. Vincent Vega msg? 11:48, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Vincent Vega: Thank you. I've noted this so trwiki is skipped from AAR from now on. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Only one thing MarcoAurelio. Policy came into effect on January 29, 2023. It says on temporary topic: "After this policy comes into effect, a desysop procedure is applied for inactive admins within 1 month". We are also following this. Thanks. Vincent Vega msg? 12:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
@Vincent Vega: Forgot to mention that I also excluded trwiki in the current inactivity review :) I hope this is right. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:41, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Hard to inform all wikis one has editted

Hi all. When I was drafting Requests for comment/Global ban for PlanespotterA320 (2), I found this user edited on 452 wikis. It's so hard for me to drop a note on all wikis manually, is there any better ways?--Lemonaka (talk) 19:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lemonaka they appear to have only "edited" on ~141 projects, and it would only apply to projects that have a community. In 2012 a policy rewrite changed the notification from only ones where the contributor was "recently active" to the current wording - it seems that some sort of cut-off could be reasonable here, but I'm not the decider! Suggest excluding at least projects where there are both <10 edits and no edits in the last 3 years. — xaosflux Talk 20:39, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello @Lemonaka, generally, those notifications can be handled via MassMessage. Feel free to request it being sent at M:RFH (ideally, with a prepared message and a list of pages where it should be posted; Wikidata MassMessage tool can help with getting that list ready). Hope this helps, Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
@Martin UrbanecThank you. I will have a try ASAP Lemonaka (talk) 21:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Lemonaka (talk) 00:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

user:Dan Polansky edit warred on that page, kept adding contents to this closed RFC. We have tried to discuss with them on their talk page, but they reply with a bunch of strange questions and went on adding the same content.

Though this RFC is over, it seemed this need to be protected or Dan Polansky need to be carefully instructed. Lemonaka (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: An admin has already protected that page. — xaosflux Talk 16:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Responsibility of responding contesting of global locks

In the past, When someone who is blocked in a wiki this user mainly edited and also globally blocked appeals global locks, Stewards may consider letting the user appeal the local block first (especially there are off-wiki way to appeal such as UTRS in enwiki). Recently a user who want to appeal a ban was directed to first appeal the global lock. What a buck passing. GZWDer (talk) 15:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah this is an open discussion. It depends on the lock reason and context, in many cases. I'll try to explain my understanding of this question.
If there's a lock that hinges on a local block on a specific project (who may be interested in maintaining the lock), it's often beneficial for stewards to direct users to appeal to that specific project first, especially if there's been ongoing abuse there. If the appeal is successful, the project can ask stewards to unlock, who will optimally review if there's other projects who may have a stake in maintaining the lock. This is generally for the more long-term or higher-profile cases, such as of locked users who were formerly established. People locked for generic cross-wiki vandalism, spam, etc. generally can appeal directly to stewards before making local appeals, as there are unlikely to be local projects who are invested in maintaining the lock.
There's a high degree of nuance in handling who hears appeals first, which is difficult if not impossible to write some sort of global guidance for. The TL;DR is, if there are local projects who are interested in maintaining the locks to prevent abuse, an unlock should generally require input both from stewards (in terms of identifying if there's ongoing global abuse/threats) and the interested local projects. The question of who provides that input first is difficult, especially considering that both require volunteer time: local input generally requires either some sort of local discussion or arbcom action, and steward input requires steward review. In other my view, contact stewards first, and if the lock would hinge on a local project's approval (which is a call stewards can make), the appealing user can be redirected to whatever processes exist there. If the local processes would be okay with either a local unblock, or possibly a global unlock while maintaining the local block, the appealing user can be sent back to stewards who can do a final review of the case and finalize the appeal. This is my understanding of how these are best handled, and I hope the explanation helped :-) Best, Vermont (🐿️🏳️‍🌈) 01:01, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

an attemp to hack my account

Hello to everyone. I received a message from Wikipedia today stating that I requested to change my account password from IP address This IP address does not belong to me, and I did not request a password change, indicating a hacking attempt. Please take the necessary steps before I lose my account.Cyclone605 (talk) 10:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC) the message which I recevied is as follow: " Fri, Feb 24 at 1:26 PM

Someone (may be you, at has asked to reset your Wikipedia password (< 81%D8%AD%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A6%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A9>). The account below has been associated with your email:

user name: Cyclone605

Temporary password: **********

The temporary password will expire in 7 days You can login and choose a new password. If this request was made by someone else, or if you remember your original password and no longer wish to change it, you can ignore this message and continue using your old password.

However, if you do not create this request and want to block emails unwanted items, you may wish to update your email options at < %B6%D9%8A%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA#mw-presection-personal-email>.D, You can require both a username and an email address to create a password reset emails, this may reduce the number of such incidents." 2001:8F8:1621:3EF1:6836:4272:18D8:C60F 10:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cyclone605 please change your password to make sure your account is protected. If you want to strengthen your account security I recommend reading Help:Two-factor authentication (you would need to request 2FA tester permissions in order to use two factor authentication). Johannnes89 (talk) 10:33, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Also requiring both your email and password to do a reset through preferences can help stop this too. -- Amanda (she/her) 00:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Information provided. — xaosflux Talk 13:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Assistance for global ban for user "Ben Bilal"

I was directed here by an administrator to put forth a global ban for "Ben Bilal" and also his IP address

Here is the discussion between me and the administrator Unfortunately9018M (talk) 12:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Unfortunately9018M: => global ban page. If we are just talking about an out and out troll, then global lock may be easier via SRG.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:41, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
@Unfortunately9018M and Billinghurst: Ben Bilal was globally locked by AmandaNP yesterday. --Ferien (talk) 21:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, it seems like Ben Bilal's IP address was not also globally locked, as he is still editing on his ip address ""

Unfortunately9018M (talk) 15:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

This is not the place to be reporting this. Please see SRG. -- Amanda (she/her) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Recently promoted admin on a small wiki (QRNKS@kaawikipedia)

QRNKS (talk · contribs) was last month promoted to an admin at kaawiki. The permalink to the RfA can be found here. The result was 3 supports and 1 oppose. The promotion here at Meta did not go smoothly as the single oppose was not discussed fully (as required by the minimum voting requirements).

Now I know QRNKS from one thing: cross-wiki creation of Akilbek Allan (Q114743080), a non-notable Uzbek musician. It was sent to AfD on enwiki and was deleted. There is a catch, however. He used sockpuppets to !vote keep at the AfD. Per the SPI, KzWikimen (talk · contribs) is also one of those. KzWikimen has voted at the kaawiki RfA of QRNKS, so the result is actually 2 supports and 1 not discussed oppose. This alone is a huge problem that puts the idea of an emergency desysop forward.

What has QRNKS done on kaawiki with the admin tools? Well, created kaa:Aqılbek Allan and immediately indef full protected it. Other than that he has two blocks, both of which I'd consider abuse of tools. On 17 February, QRNKS indef blocked ДолбоЯщер (talk · contribs), who I know does basic maintenance (merge/redirect duplicate articles, add categories, revert vandalism etc.) in a lot of Turkic projects and ruwiki, with the reason being "For the fact that it does not give freedom to edit". His last edit was on 2 January, and there is nothing in the deleted contributions that shows anything remotely disruptive (last deleted contrib was in December and consists of adding a CSD tag). Yesterday, TPA and email was also revoked by QRNKS, for no apparent reason.

The second block is an IP. Also indef with TPA and email revoked (can IPs send emails anyway?). The sole contribution of the IP is to create kaa:Talqılaw:HTML (no deleted contribs), which can be considered disruptive, but an indef is a clear overreaction, especially given that the page in question wasn't deleted nor fixed.

So to recap, we have cross-wiki spammer who socked at a controversial RfA and is now abusing the admin bit. ~StyyxTalk? 08:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out. Apologizes to @Zzuuzz: for missing their ping on the SPI. I granted the flags, so I have now cleaned up the mess. -- Amanda (she/her) 08:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Dear Styyx, thank you for your support. Actually, we (kaawiki admins) were watching also his (QRNKS) last activities and trying to understand, what he was doing. Because after he had been selected as admin (sysop) in December 2022, we asked him to join to our Kaawiki Admins Team (we created a Telegram Application group for Admin Discussions), but he didn't reply to us. And then he was inactive for a long time. And suddenly he appeared recently and blocked two users. We were waiting for some clarification from @QRNKS side, but you have already pointed it here for Global Admins. Thank you for your quick action. Qaraqalpaqpan (talk) 05:38, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Remove global rollback for User:Sakura emad

This user is currently vandalizing de.wikivoyage by reverting correct edits and engaging in edit-wars because he does not understand the edit comments (written in German). Please remove global rollback immediately. 2A02:908:121:6600:0:0:0:2142 13:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

You're right i made a mistake about reverting some legitimate edits because i didn't see the edit summary properly, however given my experience and situation i can prove that i do understand what i am doing and i do participate against vandalism not only on de.wikivoyage but dozens of other projects. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Per Global rights#Abuse of global rights, Abuse is the willful violation of a local or global policy, or consistent violation of local or global policies through ignorance or an inability (through a language barrier) to understand the local policies. I don't believe this is willful or consistent, but stewards make the decision whether to remove or not. --Ferien (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
@Ferien i am participating against vandalism and abusing my rights is on another level, plus i just given GR even without GR i still could do the same thing because i didn't notice. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 14:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Moreover this IP implies that i reverted their edit because it was written in German and i couldn't understand, which it's not true, how i participated on other projects then if it's the case?, how these people who voted on my GR Request trusted me, didn't they check my cross-wiki activity? how could i be GR in the first place if i was misusing my editing rights? i participated on French, Dutch, Arabic, Spanish, Italian, Chinese, Russian, Ukrainian among many other projects. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 14:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
It's best to avoid wikivoyage projects all together if you aren't a local editor. Just a WMF fuck up where spam is in the project's scope. ~StyyxTalk? 16:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
@Styyx-san i got your point but i really don't like to limit my vandalism combat just because i am promoted to GR, i will Give up on my GR status if it limits me to participate widely against Vandalism and Vandals. i would like to remind all my fellow Wikimedians including the ones who trusted me with GR, i originally asked for Captcha Exempt why? because i wanted to comfortably revert vandalism without any prevention by captchas. and i always check edit summaries in any projects before reverting anything; sometimes double check to triple checking to ensure everything goes smoothly. but as i said on my GR Request:

i am someone with flaws and imperfections, i do mistakes, and i learn from them

i can't guarantee that i will be perfect but i can guarantee that i will try better next time, i try to learn as much as possible to avoid any conflicts. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 17:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Checking some of your edits in de-projects I would suggest being a bit more careful when reverting edits you consider not useful.
Rollback is intended for edits that are „blatantly counterproductive, such as vandalism and nonsense“, furthermore Global rollback#Guidelines explicitly says „Users should avoid rolling back legitimate or questionable edits if at all possible, and the rollback feature should never be used in a revert war“.
The IP gave reasons for their edits [1][2]. Even if one might disagree with those reasons, these edits are not vandalism. You might have prevented the following edit-war [3] if you gave a reason for reverting instead of using rollback.
I noticed a similar tendency of using rollback (or reverting without explanation) when instead a revert-summary was required at dewiki, e.g. [4] -> a newbie tried to point out a possible mistake or [5] -> a newbie tried to insert helpful links, not knowing that only wikilinks are allowed.
Please make sure to provide an edit summary unless the edit is clearly in scope of GR policy --Johannnes89 (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
@Johannnes89 to check vandalism i mostly use SWViewer, as for Global rollback#Guidelines i make sure to follow the GR Guidelines and Policies.

That's true The ip gave reason for each edit, but at the time i didn't notice, and when i noticed i immediately stopped, apologized for my actions , if you see my explanations above; i always check every edit summaries before doing anything (if provided). 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I know you're mostly using SWViewer, but especially when dealing with newbies (like in the examples I gave above) I would like to see you using the „rollback with summary“ option more often. That being said, I don't think any of these mistakes should lead to removal of GR which was just granted hours ago. Johannnes89 (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
As i am also a Mentor on ckbwiki mentoring newbies. i see your point, maybe i was hard on new commers, so maybe instead of only undo/rollback an edit summary can guide them better, unless it's spam and they intend to repeatedly add it back. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Not done. After discussing this issue with some other stewards, I am closing this request as not done. @Sakura emad: Here are a few things I would like to point out:
  • Assuming good faith also means not reverting edits unless we know they are unconstructive or bad.
  • Many wikis have rules like 3RR, which tells you to stop at certain point and discuss the issue. You clearly didn't stop to look back, which is a problem. I hope you keep this in mind moving ahead. Communication is very important in roles such as GR.
Mistakes can happen, but we need to be cautious. I hope you will keep these things in mind and will be more cautious with your reverts moving ahead. Thank you.--BRP ever 00:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
i will keep this in mind thank you. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 00:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm just a random user to comment here who frequently lurks various language Wikivoyages, and nor do I want to escalate things further, but this is one of the key reasons for my oppose !vote. While Sakura's edits were made in good-faith, many Wikivoyages are basically dead because there are no "passer-by" editors; I'm glad this IP editor knew the procedures, but there's a very real chance that this needless edit war could have killed another Wikivoyage, had this happened on a smaller-language Wikivoyage. SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 12:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Disruptive editing on Bhojpuri wikipedia (bhwiki)

Hi, This user राजा_भोजपुरिया has been creating articles in a script other than the projects acceptable script and then manipulating the wikidata links in a disruptive way. After politly asking not to do so and even after warnings the user continued to do the same. I have blocked the user for a short period but it appears he has already created another account लोहरान. Another older account seems to be sock of the user i.e. Binay babu. Please take notice and suggest accordingly. Thanks. --SM7--talk-- 19:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

@SM7, they are also translating some content on Meta, could you advise whether the translations they produce are correct? They have also created a topic Wikimedia Forum#Bhojpuri_language calling for people to use Google Translate, but they claim to be a native speaker themselves. --Base (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
@Base, their claim to be native speaker appears to be correct as I can locate them belonging to Eastern part of Bhojpuri speaking region per their contributions on Bhojpuri wikipedia. However, their contributions are quite contradictory in nature. On the one hand, they are using the Devnagri script in the above mentioned translations, they are claiming an obsolete script Kaithi to be allowed to be used on Bhojpuri wikipedia. The above mentioned translations may require to be reviewed as they are heavily influenced by Hindi language (some of these are even completely in Hindi and not in Bhojpuri 1, 2, 3 4). Translation quality is poor and appears to be machine translation, without applying sufficient understanding. For example, After your mention, I found them translating on here on foundation's site too, and the very word "foundation" itself is wrongly translated to be नीव which is a term dedicated strictly to foundation of a wall in Hindi. Thus, even if they are native speaker, they are not putting this advantage to good use. Same is the problem with their articles created on bhwiki using content translation (many of them I have had to modify in order to keep them). In my opinion, their call for using Google Translate in order to create more articles (Number admiration) may not be a thing to welcome.--SM7--talk-- 18:57, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Assist as volunteer to AAR22

This year, I thank you who a few valuable stewards are taking the process. Since a small number of these stewards aren't unavailable from time to time, it may be helpful for this process who are volunteer non-stewards -for example, me- to inform affected inactive users and their communities. I present it for your information. --Uncitoyentalk 09:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

I did a few this morning, but did mostly processing. I wouldn't object to the assistance, but please wait for other stewards to comment. -- Amanda (she/her) 12:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
This has been done in the past [6][7] so it is certainly possible. --Rschen7754 17:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Apologies for the off-topic, but thinking out loud I believe AAR needs some redesign.
The process is far too manual nowadays (manual notify here, manual notify there, add a date here, post an update there, etc...) and cumbersome. Can't at least the notification process be scripted so it doesn't take forever to complete? MassMessage now supports sending translatable pages, which means MediaWiki automatically selects the language in which the message has to be posted based on the local wiki language (if we don't have it translated, it'll look for the fallback language and, in there's no translation or fallback, English will be used).
I am not sure we need to keep using Admin activity review/Notice to communities to notify the village pumps (a message we have to modify for each wiki notified to add the names of the inactive users... and every year is quite a number of wikis we have to notify) when AAR does not seem to require us to do so (See AAR#Policy, section 4; it is the responsability of the notified user to ask the community to keep their rights).
I think we could speed the process a lot by:
a) Every year, build a MassMessage list with the names of the inactive users according to policy (I guess Openbk script/bot can create it in addition to the /Data page).
b) Use the MassMessage List to send these users Admin activity review/Notice to inactive right holders (as mentioned above, MediaWiki picks which translated version to post based on the wiki local language, if there's no translation, then the translation for the configured fallback language(s) and, if there's no translation for either, it'll use English).
c) The clock starts ticking as MassMessage is logged.
d) Stewards then can keep an eye on SN, and verify if after one month there has been some activity/community discussion, and act accordingly.
If you think the community notification may still be useful, I think it needs to be more generic so we don't have to manually change it for each wiki in which we have to use it.
Sorry for the wall of text, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:52, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
What if the community notification was scripted to link to stewardry or some other tool? In the past at that stage in the process some communities have decided to create their own policy or otherwise object and I do not think that opportunity should be removed from them. As far as the individual messages, when I used to send them out I had to keep looking and guessing what language to use. Eliminating that would speed up the process. --Rschen7754 18:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
That'd be great, or "some advanced right holders of your community will soon receive a message on their talk pages about ..." - I agree with you that the community has to have a say of course, as AAR is subsidiary to local processes; but as we talked a while ago if the user does not ask the community to keep their permissions it does not seem that they can keep 'em, but perhaps this should be clarified in the policy. It does not seem reasonable to force a removal when the community do not agree, even if the user remain inactive and/or silent about it. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
@Uncitoyen: I think we've left this long enough with no objections, but if you could go ahead and assist with the notifications for this year, it would help and save some time. Feel free to ping me on my talk on dates where action is needed and i'll go through and pull flags. Obviously for next year we can consider a different process, but let's get this years over with. -- Amanda (she/her) 19:52, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for comments of all you. I started sending notifications slowly. I hope these helps you stewards. Other hand, MediaWiki's notification is little difficult for me (however I think easy for @MarcoAurelio:). Marco, you had listed WMF employees separately in Mediawiki previous years already. I would like to remark that Brion VIBBER has both a personal and a foundation account. Only locally him personal account has been authorized as sysop on mediawiki. Maybe other accounts like it that work for WMF. So I want to leave Mediawiki's notice to the stewards. --Uncitoyentalk 10:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
The trick is to guess which of these are work accounts . For example: Brion VIBBER; while Brion Vibber (WMF) exists he doesn't seem to be using it. Similarly Eloquence was Erik Moeller (WMF), and so on. Yes, this needs to be sorted out first. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi @AmandaNP:, I have completed the notifications and noted their estimated process dates and status. If there is no problem, I can write down their community's answers when I will see as non-steward comments for your ease. However, the final -done/not done- decision is your stewards. Other way, can you make trwikiquote's notifications, I want to avoid these notifications as a local editor here as not to be misunderstood in local project. @MarcoAurelio:, yes I wanted to draw your attention because of these users. Instead of foundation accounts, they did use personal accounts. It would be good to list them. --Uncitoyentalk 16:20, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Yes feel free to document/link responses, again ping me as necessary when dates/reviews come up. I am also happy to do the one notification for you. If you don't see it done 24 hours from now, ping me because I'll forget. -- Amanda (she/her) 00:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
@AmandaNP: For remind. It's passed 24 hours. Only if I see right, it missing notification of trwikiquote. --Uncitoyentalk 11:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: I would compare all affected Mediawiki's admins with foundationwiki and Meta, I could only find the followings. I think these users who have worked for the Wikimedia Foundation now or in the past may include:
  1. Brion VIBBER use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop, bureaucrat (Brion Vibber (WMF) is still employee of Wikimedia Foundation)
  2. Eloquence use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop (Erik Moeller (WMF) is former Deputy Director of the WMF, his WMF account is locked by WMF because offboard)
  3. Guillom use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop (Guillaume (WMF) is still employee of WMF)
  4. Krenair use use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop, bureaucrat (Alex Monk (WMF) is former employee of WMF, his WMF account is locked by WMF because no longer)
  5. Pchelolo use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop (PPchelko (WMF) is former employee of WMF, his WMF account is locked by WMF because no longer)
  6. Siebrand use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop, bureaucrat (Smazeland-WMF is former employee of WMF, his WMF account is locked by WMF because former staff)
  7. Sumanah use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop (Sharihareswara (WMF) is former employee of WMF, her WMF account is locked by WMF because offborad)
  8. Varnent use personal account on Mediawiki as sysop (GVarnum-WMF is still employee of WMF)
Former employees may not currently be able to contribute on behalf of WMF on MediaWiki. So it may be better to separate the current WMF employees. --Uncitoyentalk 12:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
@Uncitoyen: What I did on past reviews is to exclude personal accounts from current employees. See e.g. mw:Topic:W17zb5p3datkn29e. As such, I'd exclude Brion, Guillom and Varnent, and notify everyone else. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:21, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
In any case if you don't feel comfortable doing the part I can take care of it. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC) I'll handle this myself. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
It's better for me if you can handle. --Uncitoyentalk 15:57, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
@Uncitoyen: Done. Community notified at mw:Topic:Xdac9fsd71grrbup and the users at their respective talk pages with the exception of Vogone whose talk page redirects to his user page there, so I notified him here at Special:Diff/24629225. Titoxd notified as well too on their ENWP talk page (per their request on top of their talk page). To process on or after 2023-03-26. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)