User:SHB2000

This is a Wikimedia global user page.
If you find this page on any site other than a Wikimedia one, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with the site. The original page is located at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SHB2000.

Hello there, I'm SHB. I am available to assist you. Please feel free to reach out to me through my talk page or via email (for autoconfirmed users).

Userboxes

This user is a global sysop. (verify)

This user is a global rollbacker. (verify)

This user is an abuse filter helper. (verify)

This user is a global renamer. (verify)

This user is an administrator on Meta-Wiki. (verify)

This user is an administrator on English Wikivoyage. (verify)

This user is a bureaucrat on English Wikivoyage. (verify)

This user is a checkuser on English Wikivoyage. (verify)

This user is a Wikibooks administrator (English) (verify).

This user has file mover rights on Wikimedia Commons. (verify)

200,000+

This user has made over 200,000 contributions to Wikimedia projects.

User language

en-N	This user has a native understanding of English.

fr-1	Cet·te utilisateur·rice dispose de connaissances de base en français.

SHB

Any pronouns fine.

My Work

Hello there. My home wiki is the English Wikivoyage, but I'm also active on Wikimedia Commons, the English Wikibooks and here on Meta. I also sporadically edit the English Wikipedia and the French Wikivoyage. I occasionally edit a few other projects and do some x-wiki patrolling. I'm a mesomedian on all the projects in question, except the English Wikibooks where I only do administrative tasks. On my home project, I am a sysop, bureaucrat and checkuser. Elsewhere, I'm a global sysop and global rollbacker in addition to sysop on Meta-Wiki and the English Wikibooks. You can contact me via my talk page or email (for autoconfirmed users). I don't usually use IRC; I find it too dated.

About Me

I do many things, but I'm generally passionate about travel, specifically nature. I find myself working on such topics when working on content topics (and am proud to have created over 10 per cent of the English Wikivoyage's park articles and 1 per cent of the wiki's total articles). Otherwise, I usually clean up content and revert vandalism, spam and other vandal gobbledegook.

Personal thoughts and opinions

Anti-vandalism

Opposing effective proven measures to help with anti-vandalism because "it will make it harder for newbies" comes out as another indirect way of saying "I don't really get involved with anti-vandalism work, but I will get in the way of people who do know what they're talking about."
I don't exactly agree with not mentioning the usernames of LTAs, nor do I agree with completely avoiding discussions on what to do with them – it makes things needlessly complicated.

Admin/global matters

Abuse filters should not be a place to have admins-only discussions. If this does happen, I will not participate in them.
Logs should rarely be revision deleted. Admins should be held accountable for their actions; revision deleting logs will create a system open to abuse.
Admins should not be allowed to furtively get away with misusing their tools. Unfortunately, on smaller WMF projects, the lack of oversight means this is very common.
If you're an admin and semi-protect your talk page indefinitely, you need to have at least one way for anons to contact you. Otherwise, it is an attempt to cut off communication.
I will not shy away from controversial opinions (related to the project side of things) if I think it is a net benefit for the wider community – even if it means garnering oppose votes or dissatisfaction by a few.
It's fine for bureaucrats to close sysop nominations they participated in – your personal opinion should not stand in the way of your ability to determine consensus.

Behavioural/blocks

Minor, simple issues can be resolved without the need to request comments on a high-profile page.
A wiki that doesn't accept standard globally-accepted norms cannot expect to significantly grow without pissing off its editors.
No gratitude should be given to serial copyright violators. I'm all for a "one warning, then you're out" policy for copyright violators (outside Commons). If someone has been given a harshly worded warning for copyright violations and then still does it again, then why should we trust them to not make another one yet?
Block evasion shouldn't be allowed – no excuses whatever. Period.
- I'm all for using Wikipedia's duck test to identify IP sockpuppets as CUs cannot publically connect IPs with accounts. Maybe this wouldn't be an issue had the WMF never allowed anons to edit.
Hat collectors and single-purpose accounts often don't have the intention to genuinely improve Wikimedia. What you will see more or less is the permission in question being used in the single digits and maybe enough uses of the perm to avoid removal, but never a genuine use.
User talk pages are not "private talk pages". Use emails or some off-wiki chat for that.
Local username blocks should never be a thing – either a username is egregious enough that it warrants a global lock, some other reason comes up that warrants a block, or you leave the username be. You lose perfectly fine contributors and in an era where accounts are global and connected via SUL, having different username policies on different wikis will only make things more confusing.
Using AI as a substitute for human-written text (not including minor copyedits and translations) is plain lazy and is an insult to the community. If you use AI to generate a nomination statement, it will be an automatic oppose from me unless a very compelling explanation is provided.
One of the worst reasons for opposing a global ban is "they aren't disruptive on my wiki". This is an extremely narrow-minded take and ignores the bigger picture (read my essay for more of my thoughts on this).

Content matters

Copying content word-for-word from one project to another should generally be avoided. It hampers a wiki's potential to grow due to a SEO penalty.
I'm all for requesting comments on high-profile pages, but if you are going to do that, don't make it sound like canvassing, or worse yet, canvass.
Don't make edits that have the potential to break links or files if you're on a lousy Wi-Fi network.
Keeping templates to a minimum will always fail. I wrote an essay about this on en:voy:User:SHB2000/Why keeping templates to a minimum will fail, and although it is a bit English Wikivoyage-specific, it does apply to most WMF projects.
Never think about using Wikitravel. It's the inferior, for-profit, out-of-date predecessor version of Wikivoyage (edit: hi Internet Brands). See en:voy:Wikivoyage:Wikivoyage and Wikitravel for some context.
Using bright yellow text does nothing more than hurt my eyes. Unless it's being used with a black background, for the love of those with visual impairments (myself included), don't use yellow text.

Admin statements

I didn't want to have identical text on several wikis, so here it is. As an admin, here are a few things that I will and won't do:

I have no authority to unilaterally change or use IAR to bypass most policies that are not out-of-date or relevant.
I will not use my admin tools in an edit war or interwiki dispute (even if it is with another administrator who uses their tools against me) unless it's an egregious case of vandalism, POV pushing, obvious trolling or some other policy violation that would warrant a block.
For blocked users, I am not your proxy. Any request on my talk page regarding your block should only be about your block. If you're looking to use me as a proxy, no matter how hard you try and convince me, the answer will always be no.
I tend to avoid deleting pages in RfD discussions that I initiated, but there is a clear consensus, or if the discussion has gone stale even after a request for another user to handle the request for a certain period (usually 4–7 days).
For touts on the English Wikivoyage, if your edit was reverted, I will not rewrite your reverted edit unless it's a very mild case of touting.
I rarely revision delete logs. See #Personal thoughts and opinions for why.
I can come out as harsh on users with blocks on other WMF projects due to en.voy's one-strike policy (en.wb does not have one, but my stance is still the same with users continuing their disruption).
I will use the DUCK test at my discretion, provided that it's appropriate.
If you cast aspersions at me just to get a permission, chances are, you're not because of your incivility.