Stewards' noticeboard

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Stewards noticeboard)
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.

Meta:Babel#Meta:Snowball,_revisit_again[edit]

For notifying.--GZWDer (talk) 00:39, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Potential misuse of sysop tools from OsvátA on hu.wikiquote[edit]

OsvátA on hu.wikiquote seems to be regularly blocking stewards and global sysops for invalid reasons, leaving cryptic block summaries, and refusing to engage in discussion about the blocks.

OsvátA blocked today (17 July 2020) the global sysop Stanglavine with reason I. The question that Praxidicae left at q:hu:Special:Permalink/50685#Block? remains unanswered. The edit that triggered Stanglavine block was q:hu:Special:Diff/50683 from September 2019 which the admin reverted today. The edit is correct given that such special page was removed and no longer works. The block is abusive, as it's the lack of reasoning behind it and should be removed.

However this has not been the only incident:

  • On 2018 blocked steward علاء because "renaming is boring". [1]. He was unblocked two days afterwards but he neither engaged with Stryn nor علاء about its actions despite being asked.
  • On April 2019 blocked global sysop Praxidicae for two weeks as "vandal". The admin was asked by Tegel about the block, yet the admin refused to answer either to Tegel or Praxidicae.
  • On September 2019 he blocked steward Martin Urbanec [2].

While I acknowledge there might be a language barrier (I think Tacsipacsi is engaging with him here), this is the fourth time OsvátA has blocked legit users on hu.wikiquote for doing legit edits.

Could someone, perhaps in Hungarian, please tell him to be careful about the blocks he's doing and ask him to unblock Stanglavine by the way?

Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

@Grin: the other admin at huWQ who I believe has a good capability in English.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
I asked him to revert his revert and unblock Stanglavine, and all I’ve got so far is a “thank you” (I have no idea what he thanked for, by the way), with no actual action. OsvátA always had an odd style, but this is more than enough… Unfortunately I don’t see any policy on huwikiquote about revoking administrator right (q:hu:Wikidézet:Adminisztrátorok says admin rights can be revoked at Jimbo Wales’ request or upon Arbitratrion Committee’s decision—there’s no AT on huwikiquote—, but not when the admin misbehaves). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 23:19, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
This could be moving into emergency desysop territory - I see similarities to the amwiki case (blocking stewards etc. for just doing their job) and the small size of the project. Surely blocking someone for an edit to a MediaWiki: page (which only admins can edit) would give me pause. Probably worth seeing if Grin responds as they are also a bureaucrat there (though seeing as they are semi-active, I wouldn't count on a timely response). --Rschen7754 23:39, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
It seems that this is isuse of tools rather than abuse of tools. I would think that I would have categorised amWP as abuse. Maybe we can provide some simple text and links to a couple of pges where the user can check permissions, and have that translated to Hungarian. Something that allows simple checks of stewards and global sysop listings would be a start.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:48, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Comment Comment Ping @Bencemac: as hu-N user --Alaa :)..! 08:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Tacsipacsi, OsvátA truly has an “odd” style, but these actions aren't acceptable. I don't want to hurt the user, but he's objectively a complicated phenomenon @huwiki. If you need me or anything in Hungarian, please let me know how I can help! Bencemac (talk) 08:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I've been summoned, thanks for the notification. I have checked the visible details and there are possibly three problems:

  1. serious language barrier,
  2. lack ot technical knowledge on OsvatA's part,
  3. lack of volunteers to be admins.

OsvatA is a person with good intents but admittedly no deep technical knowledge about the wiki, and he tries to do the undesirable cleanup work using the admin bit, but easily miscategorise hard-to-understand actions from non-local people as vandalism. All these blocks were not - in my personal opinion - bad faith but lack of due care and means of communication. I know him asking more knowledgeable admins on other projects to revert his misaligned actions on his behalf because he never have done reversing and often either don't know the means or don't trust his abilities not to do more harm. These are genuine requests (again, in my personal opinion). He is also open to help, eg. telling him "please don't do this if you see that", obviously not in English.

I do not readily have the time to write him a "do's and don'ts" but if anyone would describe the problem and what not to do when he sees what then I'll translate to English (or probably any of the Hungarian editors here). I prefer the friendly approach even in case of lack of tech skills but the presence of the will to do useful work. Also I can raise the blocks in no time, obviously, I'll look around. --grin 11:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Grin:: Thanks for your reply. I agree with your assessments. Like I said, I don't doubt his good intentions and I support a gentle approach always where possible. If there's anything I or we can do to help him identify our actions as "good" I'm willing to do it. Best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

@Grin: Hello, did anything happen here? We'd appreciate if one of the hu-N users could explain global roles to the user, so they don't block us again Face-smile.svg. Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec: already have been done within the extents of possibilities. :-) --grin 12:33, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Tool for finding accounts created by a user[edit]

Hi. I recently came across a number of LTA accounts created by the same account[1], rather than by the LTA while logged out. I wanted to see if they had created accounts on other wikis as well, since those accounts would have belonged to the same LTA, but unfortunately central auth only shows edit count and doesn't include log info. While it is possible to manually check an account's logs on all the wikis they have registered accounts on, it was tedious, so I wrote a script :)

See User:DannyS712/AccountsCreated.js - simply navigate to Special:BlankPage/AccountsCreated, input the user name to check, and it'll give a list of all of the other accounts that user created, on any attached wiki. Its not the fastest, but its quicker than doing it manually. Hope it comes in handy.

Let me know if there are any other tools that would make stewards' lives easier. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:41, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

[1] See w:cr:Special:Log/Eklander

Thank you. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:53, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Newly created RfCs[edit]

There are significant activity in RfC by unexperienced users, but no users clerking them. The fourth may be a valid issue, but the first three should be closed.--GZWDer (talk) 18:38, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Deleted the first three as they had no meaningful content or history. No need to clutter the archives with them. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Maybe also Requests for comment/LogChecker --DannyS712 (talk) 21:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Someone else has commented, so I'll close that one instead. Thanks for pointing it out. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
As far as the fourth RFC: I am concerned that a steward is blocked for 6 months on their home wiki. That being said, it is inappropriate for a RFC to take place with mostly IP users commenting and it should really be restarted from scratch. --Rschen7754 02:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Interface admin rights for new wikis importers?[edit]

User:Jon Harald Søby and I have noticed that as new wikis importers, we can't editsitecss, editsitejson and editsitejs (anymore; because previously this was of course part of editinterface). It would be useful to have, since sometimes imported pages require certain css/js to actually work properly. Now there is the absurd situation that we can import css and js pages however we want, but not edit them. Can you add the mentioned rights to our user group? --MF-W 14:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Support Leaving this opened if someone has objections. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't think changing this is controversial, also I think this is a natural need. However, I am wondering if 2FA activation is required to change. @Martin Urbanec:, Do you know anything about this? --Sotiale (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I would recommend new wiki importers to enable 2FA, yes. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Having int-admin in general requires 2FA by WMF now, so this would require all the new-wikis-importers to activate 2FA (currently that would only potentially impact SPQRobin as the others should already have this by virtue of being int-admin somewhere else). That being said, seems reasonable enough. — xaosflux Talk 20:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Yup. Any group that can touch user/site CSS/JS must have 2FA enabled and keep it enabled while having them permissions. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I think this is a reasonable and probably non controversial change to make. As interface administrators already need 2FA, I think there should be no doubt that New wiki importers also need it when this change goes through. --Wiki13 (talk) 21:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
The 2FA-enabling right needs to be added then as well, so the group can be "standalone", right? --MF-W 23:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
It's that catch-22 - users are supposed to have 2FA enabled to get this access, not add it after they have the access -- but we adamantly don't allow users to enroll without silly hoops to jump though - that is a trivial "permission" to add though :D — xaosflux Talk 15:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Give me permissions to delete account[edit]

Someone likely not welcome me to my wiki, Nothing I Can't said in my talk page "If that's the case then go somewhere else. Don't make a wiki. It's just tiring". I only want to cross out a vote that have opinion not-related to discussion, and my community does not accept that. So steward, give me a permission to delete this account - so that no one can't respond to me anymore. Bill Cipher, Stan, Twins, Dipper - Gravity falls and J.Smile 03:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)