From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

New Rules for cloaks[edit]

Rules follow ;-) --Paddy 23:49, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone help me with an explanation of these instructions, please? I would like to use IRC with a cloak, but I'm finding the instructions impenetrable. It says: "The user must register their IRC nickname." But must first register where? Then it says: "See /msg nickserv help register for details on how to register." But it doesn't say where msg nickserv is. At another point, it says "see below", but then below there is nothing. Any help would be most appreciated. SlimVirgin 05:26, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
"/msg nickserv help register" is a command, so you type it in where you would say something. Typically, anything beginning with a foreward-slash (/) is a command on IRC. 13:31, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

More group contacts[edit]

I think that we would need more group contacts in Wikimedia. I have been trying to get a cloak for two weeks, but JamesF|Away have idled longer. So how could we do this, and would somebody like to be one? -- mzlla 21:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken this role; please feel free to pester me with requests. I'm also refactoring the cloak system so there will be a new link on the cloak page shortly. —Xyrael / 16:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Wikiversity[edit]

Wikiversity has been online since August, 2006 as a Wikimedia project. Our interlingual hub channel is #wikiversity. (See Wikiversity:Chat for others) I would like a Wikiversity cloak, please. Thanks in advance. - CQ - Quinobi 11:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested this back then also and nothing done so far - I guess we just need to collect here our voices for future cloak owners :-) ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, wiki blog) 20:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the thing, then I should also say that I was very disappointed that there wasn't a Wikiversity option for me to choose. :( --Assassingr 20:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just asked Sean (Group Contact) and he siad that you will be able to get Wikiversity cloaks soon (about a week) and when they are available the cloak request system will allow you to select them. Cbrown1023 talk 20:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cbrown1023, we that have already a cloak will we be able to switch to a Wikiversity cloak? --Assassingr 21:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you just have to request one here. Cbrown1023 talk 14:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

German Translation for the cloak request tool (done)[edit]

Dear Sean, please add the following german translation to your tool:

Page One (Wichtige Information)[edit]

Wenn du mit den Wikmedia-IRC-Kanälen auf Freenode verbunden bist, wird dein Hostname oder deine IP-Adresse angezeigt. Du kannst einen Cloak beantragen, der deinen Hostname durch eine Kennung ersetzt, die deine Zugehörigkeit zu einem Wikimedia Projekt und deinen Wiki-Benutzernamen wiederspiegelt, Beispiel: n=swhitton@ wird zu n=swhitton@wikimedia/sean-whitton. Dies hat keinen Einfluss auf deinen IRC-Nick, verbundene IRC-Nicks teilen sich einen Cloak, wenn du zwischen ihnen hin und her wechselst. Die Vorteile eines Cloaks:

  • Der Hauptgrund für das tragen eines Cloaks ist, eine Verbindung zwischen deiner IRC-Identität - deinen Nickname(s) - und deinem Wiki-Benutzernamen herzustellen. Dies erlaubt dir, deine Identität zu beweisen, da du keinen willkürlichen Cloak auf dich selbst setzen kannst: jwales' Cloak wikipedia/Jimbo-Wales sagt jedem im IRC, dass es sich um den wirklichen Jimbo handelt.
  • Ein Cloak zweigt auf Freenode deinen Stolz auf das Projekt an dem du teilnimmst und hilft den Gemeinschaftscharakter zu stärken. Sie können auch zur Identifikation dienen um zu bestimmten Kanälen zutritt zu erhalten.
  • Aus Gründen der Sicherheit und zum Schutz der Privatsphäre ist es auf nützlich, deinen Hostname zu verstecken.

Dieses System wurde erdacht, um dich durch bei der Einrichtung eines Cloak zu unterstützen. Es soll sicherstellen, dass dein Nick richtig für den Freenode-Cloak eingerichtet ist, dass deine Identität von beiden Seiten, IRC und MediaWiki, bestätigt ist, und es wird sichergestellt, dass deine Cloak keine Zeichen enthalten wird, die durch die Freenode-Software nicht unterstützt werden. Wenn du Schwierigkeiten hast, einen Cloak zu beantragen, kannst du Hilfe in Kanälen wie #wikimedia, #wikimedia-irc und #wikimedia-ops auf Freenode, oder du kannst Sean per E-Mail kontaktieren:

Page Two (Einen Cloak auswählen)[edit]

Um einen passenden Cloak für dich zu erstellen, musst du ein Benutzerkonto angeben.

In deinem wichtigsten Wikimedia-Projekt bist du User:

Hinweis: Wenn du dich mit mehreren Projekten oder der Wikimedia Foundation selbst in Verbindung bringen willst, solltest du aus der Liste auswählen. Du musst selbstverständlich Eigentümer dieses Accounts im Meta-Wiki sein!

Dein Haupt-Nickname auf Freenode ist:

Hinweis: Du musst deinen Nickname vorher registrieren, falls du es nicht bereits getan hast. Verwende dafür /msg NickServ register your_password

Es gibt verschiedene Varianten der Groß- und Kleinschreibung für deinen Cloak. Die Standardvariante ist projekt/Benutzername. Bitte wähle eine Variante aus der Liste:

Projekt: kleingeschrieben, Benutzername: unverändert (standard)
Projekt: kleingeschrieben, Benutzername: erster Buchstabe klein
Projekt: erster Buchstabe groß, Benutzername: unverändert 
Projekt: erster Buchstabe groß, Benutzername: erster Buchstabe klein
Alles kleingeschrieben

Du kannst einen Kommentar hinterlassen; in den meisten Fällen ist das nicht nötig.

Page Three (IRC-Nick-Setup)[edit]

Die folgenden Schritte müssen ausgeführt werden, um den IRC-Nickname vorzubereiten. Es kann sein, dass du einige dieser Schritte bereits ausgeführt hast, diese sollten nicht wiederholt werden.

Hinweis: Wenn dein Benutzername Nicht-ASCII-Zeichen enthält (Auch Umlaute und „ß“ sind keine ASCII-Zeichen!), solltest du dir diese Hinweise durchlesen.

Als Erstes musst du einen alternativen Nickname mit deinem Haupt-Nickname verknüpfen. Dieser alternative Nickname verhindert, dass deine IP sichtbar wird, wenn du dich nicht mit deinem Hauptnickname einloggen kannst.

  • /nick ***
  • /msg NickServ register your_password
  • /msg NickServ link *** password_for_***
  • /nick ***

Danach musst du eine Emailadresse mit deinem Haupt-Nickname verknüpfen. So kannst du ein neues Passwort anfordern, falls du dein altes vergessen solltest.

/msg NickServ set email

Als Letztes kannst du deine Emailadresse vor anderen Benutzern verstecken. Dieser Schritt ist optional!

/msg NickServ set hide email on

Official or unofficial?[edit]

If the IRC is an unofficial thing, isn't this page a bit misleading? I mean, you have a page on Wikimedia and various pages throughout the site which suggest it's an official IRC of Wikimedia. Zenwhat 23:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read previous discussions for a response on this. It has been discussed many times. Cbrown1023 talk 02:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How to tell[edit]

It says: In order to keep the system moving, no notification is given when a cloak is set. So how do I determine when a cloak is set? I've been identifying myself to the nickserv by password, but when I look at my info, I'm still seeing an IP address. It's been over three months now. Is there a backlog? Bovlb 00:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see from the request page, "The contacts are presently renewing their relationship with freenode. This means that there will be a short hiatus in the setting of cloaks until this can be sorted out. Thank you for your patience." Cbrown1023 talk 16:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When it's set you will get a message every time you identify to nickserv saying that nickserv changed your hostname to your cloak. --Erwin(85) 17:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help. I guess I didn't see that box back when I put in the request, and I didn't think to look there for an update. Bovlb 21:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this still available?[edit]

Somebody told me cloaks aren't being handed out anymore. Was I misinformed, or should I just give up and get an unaffiliated one from freenode? --Closedmouth 15:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were misinformed. Cloaks just take a while to process. You can get an unaffiliated one in the meantime. Here's where you can request a wiki* cloak. - Rjd0060 17:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had a feeling that was the case, thanks. --Closedmouth 09:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Is there a reason it takes so long to get a cloak? Is that by design? If not, can we get more people the rights to issue them? shirulashem 17:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's any reason for it to be by design, and I second Shirulashem in that if this is just a backlog we should seek more capable volunteers here. Finn Rindahl 01:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(or just nag here until someone clears the backlog - now empty ;) Finn Rindahl 10:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But name registration expires...[edit]

The page says,

"The primary reason to wear a cloak is to prove that you are the user on-wiki who you say you are on IRC. For example, jwales' wikipedia/Jimbo-Wales cloak shows that he is who he says he is, as you cannot add a fake cloak onto yourself."

But, if you don't actively use a registered nickname (if you don't /msg identify nickserv <your password here>), after two months the freenode operators consider the name expired and will allow someone else to claim the name. See the nickname information on the freenode FAQ[1],

"I registered my nick and now someone else has it. Did someone steal it? How do I get it back?
To keep your registered nick, you must continue to use it. If you don't sign onto the network for at least 60 days, or you don't identify to nickserv for at least 60 days, the nick is considered expired, and someone can ask to have it dropped. When a nick has been dropped and picked up by some other user, we can't take it back from them. That would be unfair to the user who picked it up."

Jimbo Wales isn't currently signed into the #wikipedia room on freenode -- there's a JW|AFK, but not a jwales. I'd be willing to bet that it's been more than two months since he last logged in. If I wanted to, I bet I could petition the freenode staff and get the jwales username for myself... and since I believe it would still have the Wikipedia cloak assigned to it, I could then go around spoofing Jimbo Wales, couldn't I? Not, of course, that I would do that. Perhaps we could get the freenode people to automatically remove any cloak from a username when it lapses and someone requests it? Banaticus 04:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

freenode says it's possible to have it dropped, the doesn't mean it will actually be dropped. In my experience, they are very hesitant to drop a nickname with a cloak (and one that has been around for a while/is from someone they know) and with channel access. Also, if they dropped the nick, it wouldn't still have the cloak. Don't worry, I don't think we'll have an identity problem. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 13:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it still working?[edit]

I cannot open the link given on the page. Firefox 3.0 displays an empty one, IE 7 reveals an error (HTTP 500). What's up? =p.s.a.= 08:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked and it works for me right now, do you still have the same problem? Cbrown1023 talk 13:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, unfortunately. It doesn't want at all with the same HTTP 500 stuff. May I request a cloak in some other way, because this problem won't disappear at once, I'm afraid? (I tried to open it a couple of weeks ago, just by chance, and was equally unsuccessful.) =p.s.a.= 09:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm told that this link may work better. - Rjd0060 21:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

doesn't work. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, there's a note on the attached page explaining that: "The cloak request system will be unavailable until July 13, 2009." Cbrown1023 talk 16:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, I've just updated it to July 19. It may be done sooner, however. - Rjd0060 18:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, didn't even see that... –Juliancolton | Talk 01:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's still broken now (March 2011). Is there a place to get good information on IRC? Mattisse 22:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki cloaks[edit]

MediaWiki community member Lewis Cawte just asked:

<Lcawte> Hmm, ok, so since we changed to git, what happened to the requirements for a @mediawiki/ cloak? It used to be people with svn commit... but now is it people with Git/Gerrit accounts or has nobody decided on that yet? :)

That is, we used to limit Subversion commit access but now have switched to Git and give commit access to basically anyone who requests it. What should the new criteria be? Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 12:44, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We rarely ever get mediawiki/* cloak requests at all. However, we basically look if the requester fulfils the criteria and then grant the cloak. I think I remember one case where I declined a cloak request for a mediawiki/* cloak for someone, but I don't remember the reason. It might generally be useful to be listed here when requesting such cloaks. Our rules are not set in stone, if you want us to change something, to only give such cloaks to special people etc, then we are of course happy to discuss it. -Barras talk 13:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Commit access to SVN is basically the same as the right to merge to core/master in Gerrit. So to stay consistent, the rules should be updated to reflect this: only developers with the ability to merge stuff should get this cloak.
Whether or not this is desirable of course depends on what that cloak implies. As far as I know, the only current implication is the ability it manage mwbot in the #mediawiki channel. -- Daniel Kinzler (WMDE) (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm perhaps we should have a list of those people then, so that the GCs know who they are. Snowolf How can I help? 16:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
People with merge access to MediaWiki core is only a subset of the SVN commiters. We also already have people with the mediawiki cloak but no merge access. In my opinion, mediawiki cloaks should be given to those who could reasonably be considered part of the MediaWiki community - be that by active editing on, support in the #mediawiki channel, and/or patch contribution through Gerrit. Maybe just require someone that already has a mediawiki cloak (or is eligible for one but have chosen another) to vouch for the requester? --Krenair (talkcontribs) 19:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Daniel. "Merge access" could be a reason enough. Previously we used as a reference list. --FiliP ██ 19:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivoyage cloaks[edit]

Since the WMF is about to launch its travel guide soon: is anybody already working on getting cloaks for the new project? It is pretty certain that the guide will be called Wikivoyage (considering the overwhelming support on Travel Guide/Naming Process and just a few days left to vote). There are already some Wikivoyage related channels on freenode -- Arne (akl) (talk) 12:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if the GCs have thought about this yet. However, since June of this year, freenode stopped processing new group requests for an indefinite period. Given that we're a well established group, I'm not sure if anything can be done. But if not, it will all have to wait until freenode re-opens the group registration process. Rjd0060 (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that would not be the creation of a new group, but adding a new name space on freenode to our group. I will see what we can do here. -Barras talk 14:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In freenode terms, that would be creating a new group. :-) They are all separate groups. At some point in the past, some of the GCs (through an oversight) didn't have access to all the namespaces (as they're technically 'separate'). But christel, etc. may be able to lend us a hand here. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have wikivoyage cloaks now and also wikidata ones. The request page has been updated and the meta pages will be updated shortly. -Barras talk 16:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vulnerability/Race condition[edit]

I realize this is somewhat unlikely, but I think it is a real vulnerability/race condition. If the following happen:

  1. IRC user john/Wikipedia User:Smith opens the Google Spreadsheets.
  2. IRC user eve (the adversary) opens spreadsheet.
  3. User:Smith makes an edit to his userspace as requested.
  4. eve gets the diff and submits the Google form, putting IRC:eve and Wikipedia User:Smith, and including the diff.
  5. IRC:eve submits the IRC code:
/msg MemoServ send wmfgc IRC cloak request

IRC:eve is now tied to User:Smith (who may or may not ever submit a conflicting form).

This is trivial to fix by saying (e.g.):

The Wikipedia edit must say 'My IRC username is john'.

and requiring they include the Wikipedia username in the IRC message. E.g.:

/msg MemoServ send wmfgc IRC cloak request User:Smith

--Superm401 | Talk 02:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cloaks are not meant as a way to hide one's IP address[edit]

Cloaks are not meant as a way to hide one's IP address from anyone, not even from other unprivileged users. About this re-addition of the content that I removed: Glaisher: "They are also a way to hide your hostname for security and privacy reasons." is wrong; anyone could abuse ChanServ's "unquiet" command to get the IP address of any user behind a cloak:

 /mode #channel +b UserName!*@1*
 /mode #channel +b UserName!*@2*
 /mode #channel +b UserName!*@3*
 /msg ChanServ unquiet #channel UserName
 --> ChanServ sets mode -b UserName!*@2* on #channel. -> we know that their IP starts with the number 2.
 /msg ChanServ clear #channel bans
 /mode #channel +b UserName!*@21*
 /mode #channel +b UserName!*@22*
 etc., until you're at this point:
 --> ChanServ sets mode -b UserName!*@234.123.321.12 on #channel.

...and then we know their exact IP. Works for IPv6 too, of course - it just takes longer. No privileges are needed for this example, the user does not have to be present in #channel, and it is explicitly not a bug but a known reason why cloaks should never be suggested as a way to hide one's IP address. If it's about hiding the hostname, a simple "host 234.123.321.12" in a terminal will reveal that too.

I hope this sufficiently explains why the following sentences are blatantly wrong and misleading:

  • "They are also a way to hide your hostname for security and privacy reasons." -> wrong, see above.
  • "Note: Unaffiliated cloaks will not hide hostnames for users using the webchat client or who already have a gateway/... hostmask." -> completely unneeded, as cloaks will never really "hide" hostnames.
  • "Caution is advised when doing this as, in the example above, a cloak is rendered useless because the exposed IP address is displayed before the cloak is set." -> no, a cloak will not be rendered "useless" if the IP address is exposed, as it was never meant to hide it anyway. Making users think that it would be is simply wrong.

Best regards, ToBeFree (talk) 22:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I agree with removing the last part ("Caution is advised[...]) completely. Perhaps we could add it again after rewording that? --Glaisher (talk) 12:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I just think it shouldn't imply that it was ever meant to hide the IP :) ToBeFree (talk) 21:36, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recovering old cloak[edit]

I had a cloak some years ago, but lost the use of an IRC client until recently. Would my cloak still be available? I am still NotACat on Freenode. —Phil Boswell (talk) 18:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Phil! It looks like your freenode account was deleted in one of the purges and so the cloak is gone. Please file a new request as detailed on IRC/Cloaks and we'll process it in due course, thanks! Snowolf How can I help? 02:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks: this would explain the mysterious PM which I found in IRC just now ;-) —Phil Boswell (talk) 05:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cloak request[edit]

Hi. I submitted a cloak request 20 days ago (on 1 November) according to the instructions on IRC/Cloaks#Obtaining a cloak, but it hasn't been processed yet. Could someone, please, go through the delayed requests? Thank you in advance. --Meno25 (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cloak request[edit]

Hi, I requested a cloak today, but I forgot that I already have it since November. Sorry for the confusion. Just ignore the request, thanks--Parma1983 (talk) 17:01, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to know[edit]

I requested a Cloaks. How can I know when I get one. Will I be notified or is there any way to know if a cloak was given to me? Thanks-BRP ever 16:27, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When will cloaks be next issued?[edit]

Hi, How long should it take for my cloak to be issued? RhinosF1 (talk) 17:57, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any ETC? RhinosF1 (talk) 10:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RhinosF1: Try asking in #wikimedia-opsconnect. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 12:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Have now being getting a temporary voice when needed. RhinosF1 (talk) 14:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CloakedRhinosF1 (talk) 06:56, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to obtain a cloak if you didn't have one on Freenode?[edit]

Am I missing something, or is the page missing information on how to actually apply for a new cloak if you didn't have one on Freenode? Are new cloaks not being issued? If so, the page should state that. Ahecht (TALK
) 17:11, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of cloaks by a certain Group Contact who is trying to enforce a guideline which was never discussed[edit]

I wanted to start this on a much more active area of meta for discussions related to this but there isn't any. Earlier today i noticed my cloak was removed without notification or anything, took me a while going through GC's to figure out who did it. Apparently this GC is enforcing some guideline that was added in March 2018 without any proper discussion and which was something when i was active on IRC were vehemently against. That #4 requirement of obtaining a cloak which says "User must not be actively blocked from a project" is very unwelcoming and frivolous. If you understand how cloaks work, its divided into many options mentioned here. and adding a requirement such as that could force the removal of cloaks for many users who may be admins/crats on other projects but blocked on some random wiki and that to me is a big mistake and should not be allowed. The cloak is supposed to be worn with pride for being part of a certain project or the project as a whole and this new requirement which wasn't even discussed in the proper channels goes completely against it..... wiki*edians already go through a strict process of acquiring a cloak and just because someone without discussion added a requirement without going through the proper channels and now another GC trying to "enforce" a criteria which was never discussed in the first place is IMO a stupid move.

As i told that GC on IRC, wikimedia does not revolve around one wiki. A user can be blocked on one project and hold admin rights on 3 others but this policy will treat them unfairly and will eventually force us to lose contributors as a whole as cloaks allows access and voice in channels where they may need it. Please remove that stupid criteria, a person should not be denied a cloak just because certain projects are "moderated" poorly. Stemoc 18:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if there were an understanding that possessing a cloak does not authorize entering and being voiced in channels where the holder is blocked on the associated project. If that principle were consistently honored, there'd be no issue. Jmcgnh (talk) 02:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't about me, the GC in questions said he was going to do it to everyone on IRC because he somehow believes its a guideline set in stone when its not even a criteria that was discussed before being implemented. Unlike enwiki, we discuss major changes before enforcing it.. there is one policy that has been set in stone, which is "IRC IS NOT WIKIPEDIA". Its a policy that has been there long before i joined, it implies that we don't treat people on IRC like they are treated on the wikis. Its an open area for discussion cause wiki*edia is NOT governed by one wiki.
If you want to make this about me, sure lets go, i had a "wikimedia" cloak, not a "wikipedia" one and i have always had a wikimedia cloak since December 2006 even on the old freenode cause i have always associated myself as a wikimedian. You don't know this but I helped in running the -en-help channel, which you keep kicking me out from alongside thehelpfulone who took control of it in 2010 as it needed active enwiki volunteers. Enwiki project has definitely devolved over the last 8 years... The only reason i even rejoined -en-help after so many years was because i asked for help on the main channel a few times the last 4 months and did not get it (Sadly this is how enwiki treats block editors) and i was hoping to find someone that could and luckily today i did (no thanks to you guys). I also randomly helped a person there today but no this is how enwiki treats its volunteers and its about time they were told that their lack of respect for other editors doesn't not flow into IRC as well and this is why i started this this discussion in the first place. Is this what we want? long standing wikimedians getting disrespected and removed by people because they no longer have cloaks which was removed by someone who lacks the knowledge and experience to be a group contract? Personally i think if someone is not a steward, they should not have GC access to be able to remove cloaks, cause those are WIKIMEDIA IRC channels and someone from one project should not be allowed to make changes to a cloak which affects other projects, oh and @Jmcgnh,you might want to read-en-helps page on who can be on that channel when it was created, we allowed everyone to volunteer and help out... If you don't want someone there, remove them and even block them from the channel if you must, don't remove their cloaks which can remove their access to projects they aren't blocked on Stemoc 03:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh look, another needless fucking mess, as if there aren't more pressing matters to attend to. @Jmcgnh: give Stemoc his cloak back, @Stemoc: stop entering channels you shouldn't be in, everybody else, please disperse. Nick (talk) 20:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cloak shows your affiliation with the project/movement, and a cloak puts you in a position where you are actively displaying your affiliation to that project. To those outside of the movement, you're representing the project/movement as a whole. For those with a wikimedia/* cloak, you're representing the movement as a whole. With that in mind, it should be common sense that only those in good standing are able to have a cloak (wikipedia/Grawp anyone?). I think "don't be blocked" is probably a simple enough statement for the majority of cases, and wording that covers all the edge cases is likely to be lengthy and much harder to understand. I'd support a change that permits users blocked on (for example) Wikibooks to be otherwise eligible for a wikiversity/* cloak, but I'd still oppose the eligibility for a wikimedia/* cloak if they're not in good standing movement-wide. Of course, that still leaves a few edge cases (especially those wikis which we don't issue cloaks for - Meta, Wikifunctions), but I think handling those on a case-by-case basis is the best approach. How does "User must not be actively blocked from the project(s) linked to their cloak" sound? stwalkerster (talk) 20:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"User must not be actively blocked from the project(s) linked to their cloak" should do the job very well, I think. We should also be a bit more explicit that being naughty on a project may have your cloak removed, since the wording (me being purely pedantic) is about getting a cloak and not about retaining a cloak. That can probably be addressed with a line with wording similar to "cloaks are likely to be removed or replaced if indefinitely blocked or banned on a project" somewhere around the eligibility area. Nick (talk) 21:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally that line should be removed completely as its biased towards people who speak multiple languages or are active in multiple language wikipedias and might hold rights on those wikis and won't be allowed to use /wikipedia cloaks. It was never discussed in the first place before @Charitwo added it and it should be removed as such without discussion. IRC is already near its deathbed, most have already moved to other venues for discussions and personally I have found wikipedia help channels on IRC to be uterly useless anyways as no one wants to help people blocked due to their own "prejudices". If Wikimedia IRC survives the next 5 years (it won't), do we really want it to be a place that becomes as restrictive, biased, un-friendly, un-welcoming as the wiki projects itself?. My cloak was removed by @Matthewrb without even having the decency of notifying me and that to me is Abuse of rights. I only randomly noticed and asked the 4 active GC on IRC. He claimed he was doing a cleanup but honestly, I don't believe a single word he said. I remember we discussed guidelines in the early days of IRC before enforcing them, now apparently someone can add one and others will willy nilly enforce it.... Who decides who are in good-standing cause obviously i'm still treated like some "troll or vandal" by people of one project only so i personally cannot trust people from that project to be the one to decide such things due to their own prejudices which one another GC has also shown... IRC is a wikimedia project, think of it as the UN, it cannot be dictated by ONE COUNTRY... Best to remove that stupid criteria cause people already have to jump hoops to get a cloak, I remember getting mine in just over 8 weeks, when it normally takes a week to get and mine was a /wikimedia cloak as i have always associated myself as a wikimedian which my contribution on the current and previous account will attest to...what next?, removing and banning people from main channels like #wikipedia or #wikipedia-en as well cause they are blocked on that language wiki (even though #wikipedia is the general channel not associated with any language but if you enforce one stupid criteria, how long before more stupid criterias are added to justify it)..... Stemoc 17:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What a mess. You wouldn't even be blocked from enwp in the first place if you conducted yourself more cordially. Even now, six years after your block, this conversation about your cloak notwithstanding...I look at some of your edit summaries and commentary, and from someone who used to consider you a friend, it's really disheartening.
It's also quite strange for you to feel so strongly about a cloak and your standing in IRC while simultaneously denigrating IRC as being "on its deathbed" and its channels "utterly useless". While the dynamics have shifted a bit when freenode failed due to poor decisions by a certain staffer, the folks that run Libera represent the good that freenode used to be. Many WMF related channels aren't as active as they used to be but several still serve a very useful purpose. I trust and support the decisions of the current group contacts to be in the best interests of the project, including the removal of your cloak.
I wish you the best. --Charitwo (talk) 03:52, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My Block on enwiki? you might want to read my enwiki talk page on the discussions relating to it and "definitely" see the block log. I have been mistreated on that project since i joined in 2006 but i still kept a level head and worked through it but most people won't know the anguish and honestly the pain i had to go through because all i ever wanted and all i still want is the project to grow and even though i can no longer contribute in creating articles, i have been actively adding imagery even requesting and even begging a few people on flickr to release images so that it can be used on wikipedia and this is where my comment about it being "utterly useless" is implied, for the last 6 months or so on both the -commons and -en channel i have asked people to please add the images i have painstakingly gotten through begging and searching to related enwiki articles of people as they don't have images on them but i have gotten no reply or help. There is no other place left for me to ask for help and even them i'm ignored.
Since Wikidata is not incorporated to enwiki in a way that images added there will appear on enwiki on biography inforboxes, this can only be done manually so when you beg on irc for help and people still don't, what else will i call it apart from being "utterly useless"? so even when i went to wikipedia-en-help knowing someone there would be willing to help i was told to leave cause i was blocked on enwiki, and when i didn't, the Group contact there, Matthewrb removed my cloak which then "de-voiced" me in the HELP channel and to make things worse, he didn't even bother to message me and tell me that he was de-cloaking me and when i challenged him on this, he showed me the change on the the IRC/Cloaks page, A change that did not exist during my time cause i would never allow something so ridiculously harmful to the project as a whole to ever pass through. A criteria that can basically force people to leave IRC for good cause a large majority of people are blocked on one project or another and that reflects poorly on the projects that blocked them than the user itself if they are productive on other projects. is this the type of Project we have become? Is this the type of project i have been wasting my time on for over 17 years?. I intentionally left this discussion running for 14 days hoping for feedback from other GC's as well cause this needs to be something that has to be discussed and yet that Group Contact has yet to comment because he knows he messed up. My comments above were not targeted at you @Charitwo and you know this. AlexZ, Stwalkerster, Nick and You are honestly the only 4 friends i have left on this god-forsaken project and knowing 3 of them were Group Contacts, i felt safe being there but alas, no more.. It's really sad that something i talked about and kinda predicted when i retired my first account has proven to be true...People have always misunderstood what i say, what i do, I even stopped being friendly or joke around with people because they started to assume i was immature, ofcourse, you can't be happy and a wikipedian. I have a habit of writing an essay when i post something so people assume I'm being confrontational. People see the picture of Trump on my enwiki page and assume i'm some blowhard trump supporter instead of finding the "humour" behind why its there in the first place which this year has become humorous George Santayana said "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" sad how much it implies to both Americans in the upcoming elections and me....i should have learnt my lesson after my first account and left for good then........
I know he doesn't post here but i'd personally like to thank @Primefac who i was lucky enough to find lurking in the -en-help channel before i got de-cloaked and removed for being the only user to help me with my situation which i have been seeking help for for over 2 years now..Thanks mate, hope you frequent wikipedia-en channel too and not just the help chan.. Stemoc 23:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"...that Group Contact has yet to comment because he knows he messed up" - No, I intentionally haven't commented here because I am open to having my actions discussed without my input, the same as an admin action. In this case, I made the right decision to remove your cloak, and I'll explain why.
When I was selected as a Group Contact, I was trained to manage cloaks. I was selected at the end of 2022 for the role, and the guideline had stood for over 4 years at that point. Stemoc, as well as any other user, had the chance to open a discussion on this guideline. I review the current version of the page before I take action. I saw no reason to question a guideline that had stood for so long (so long in fact, I reviewed it when I applied for my updated cloak)
Stemoc, your cloak was removed because you were using it to hide in a channel that doesn't allow blocked users, and your conduct was so bad that it required calling channel ops to remove you. For that reason, I expedited removing your cloak under the "no blocked users" guideline. Using your cloak to hide is not becoming of a user representing our movement. In addition, your conduct above shows the same problem - walls of text badmouthing me and the other group contacts. Also, our PM conversation was not courteous and ended with a personal attack.
I am on board with a discussion to amend the guideline. I agree with Stwalkerster's wording actually, I feel that's fair to users who are blocked on projects where they don't plan to contribute in the future.
Stemoc, if you reapply for a cloak I won't review it. I'll leave it to my colleagues. ~ Matthewrb Drop me a note 23:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]