Jump to content

User talk:Ajraddatz

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Welcome to my talk page.

To leave a message, press the "add topic" button at the top of the page. I will usually respond on this page, rather than on your talk page. For any private requests, please email me.

Archive 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5



... am sad to see you leaving the team, but I wish you all the best for the future and congratulate you for your recent OC appointment. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 23:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. It's been six years, and honestly locking spambots isn't as fun as it used to be. That said, there are 15(!!!) candidates this year and most of them look really promising, so hopefully the team gets a big infusion of new blood! – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

What a shocking news! It's really sad and painful to see you resigned. To be honest, you are my idol. Thank you for giving me a new life 3 years ago and making me acknowledged what i had mistaken earlier. Good to connect with you! Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 06:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I was surprised to see you're leaving. Wishing all the best in all the activities you have. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Per the above, sad to see you go. You had processed so much of my requests, Wishing you all the best in your new role in OC. :) --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

👍 enjoy! Fish!  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the kind words everyone. And I'll still be around, just in a different role :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:31, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I wanted to support you for your service during fawiki elections as a scrutineer, but noticed that you had resigned[1]. It's sad to see that. I wish you the best and hope to see you again as a steward. 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the kind words, always happy to help out. – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dear Ajraddatz. Usually I thank those who wish to quit below their resignation note. I couldn't do that for you as you resigned earlier, so that's why I thank you this way. Thanks for everything you did the past years, for being a good steward, colleague and most of all, friend. Good luck in the new role. With love, Trijnsteltalk 17:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the kind words. I've enjoyed working with you as well over the years (and it's been many of them!), I'm very glad to see you staying on, and thankful for all the work you do -- particularly with the OTRS queue! All the best, – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

I was also expecting a message on your confirmation page. First of all, I want to say that you aren't as funny like me, but you are still a very good user and I'd like to thank you for all what you have done like a steward. I hope that you joining IRC when having some free time. Bonne journée :). Matiia (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry


that my rename request ended as it did, I was too persistent in asking for the application of the policy exactly as it is written.
As I've said before, I respect your stewardship and person very much, but I feel that using the word "wikilawyering" for that discussion was implying bad faith, that's not part of my character. I always assume good faith, even when I experience that my appeals are ignored for as long as 7 months. I believe the proper words to describe that discussion is "citing the policy", "asking for explanation and justification". I'd like to ask you kindly to use these words to refer to the discussion and also my contributions preceding my enwiki block.

I have no intent to continue with that request, as I have written in my last comment, however I was surprised that my inqury for the basis of the decision was answered with a page-block. I have no intent to appeal that block either. To honor our fundamental principle of transparency, I'd like to ask you to document the username of the editors, who have decided the consensus to enact that block and also of those editors, who've decided the consensus to deny my request. I hope this is not too much to ask, nor would you find it "wikilawyering". I believe in honesty and openness and write this question in that spirit.

Thank you for your service.
With appreciation, —Aron Man.🍂 edits🌾 08:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Aron Manning: I strongly suggest you drop the stick and move on. This is exactly the form of behavior which is on the edge. I welcome your apologies but I think ~riley said that there will not be disclosure of the people on the list who voted for or asked for your block. I strongly suggest you to go to other projects, be productive, and then regain your standing in enwp for the rename or whatsoever. Persistent continuation of such behavior here will really do no good for you. Even if it's something decided by a cabal, such continuation is not useful whatsoever. Regards,--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
You don't seem to understand the issue here, because you keep engaging in the same behaviour and making arguments that entirely miss the point. Your actions have established a relationship with other users whereby they will go to any length to decline even a relatively benign request like a rename. The justification given, that it would obfuscate previous bad conduct, makes no sense to me because you're already blocked on enwiki with no talk page access. But the fact that you have been so disruptive in the past that multiple people would be uncomfortable with giving you any potential new avenues to engage shows what the issue here is. I don't make these comments with a mean spirit; I hope that you reflect on your actions, try to understand why your approach causes such a hostile reaction, and make changes to your behaviour that result in you being a productive contributor here who is able to get along with others. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

they will go to any length to decline even a relatively benign request like a rename. The justification given, that it would obfuscate previous bad conduct, makes no sense to me because you're already blocked on enwiki with no talk page access.

Thank you for your empathy. I agree, that's what I was trying to prove.

But the fact that you have been so disruptive in the past that multiple people would be uncomfortable with giving you any potential new avenues to engage

As you might be aware, I've refuted and appealed those allegations multiple times since June 2019 and none of those appeals were answered or even acknowledged. If someone were to suggest the community processes to appeal are a dead horse, I'm in agreement, however I'd rather resurrect those than to beat further into non-existence.
To be clear, I do not think that I've made no mistake. I did many, as I was very inexperienced and I'm aware of it. I've reflected on this many times and changed my approach accordingly. It's unhealthy, that making mistakes escalates to this level.

try to understand why your approach causes such a hostile reaction, and make changes to your behaviour that result in you being a productive contributor

I did. I am already a productive contributor in two communities, where someone else's hostile reaction wouldn't be my fault. Where it was my fault and my requests for help in unrelated hostilities were rejected, I don't want to return to, thus I was patiently waiting for a resolution without persuing this matter. I've only recently submitted an appeal to utrs that was instantly rejected without reason with a template response:

At this time, the English Wikipedia Unblock team is declining your unblock request, and will not hear your case anymore. Your next and final step of the appeal process is to email the Arbitration committee at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

As ArbCom hasn't been answering my emails since July 2019, please give specific guidance on which community process will hear my appeal.
Thank you with appreciation, —Aron Man.🍂 edits🌾 20:43, 1 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
Your reply still shows that you don't get it. My recommendation is that you cut out the wikilawyering, contribute productively for a while (in this case, maybe even a long while), and request unblock in a year or two at least. Rather than insisting upon bureaucratic application of every rule, understand that our policies and guidelines aren't a legal code and are subject to volunteer judgment and discretion. There is a large history of precedent for how any policy is applied, so it's best to leave the policy complaints to people with more experience -- if an injustice has been done, someone else will comment on it. But as to what you can do, it's hard to rebuild bridges after they've been burnt, demolished, and buried. – Ajraddatz (talk) 00:10, 2 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your opinion and advice. Does this mean I shouldn't be appealing, or seeking remedy for the bullying I've experienced? AronMan (talk) 08:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
Sigh. Might as well ask if I've stopped beating my wife while you're at it. We're done here; I've given my advice, it's up to you now. – Ajraddatz (talk) 13:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
I certainly have no such thoughts, I don't know how this came into this discussion. I don't have anything else to say other than I wish the best for your wife. —AronM🍂 edits🌾 11:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
w:Loaded question, in case it wasn't clear. I was referencing your question in your previous comment regarding seeking remedy for bullying. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
No, the bullying is unrelated to you. This was a straightforward, procedural question. If you don't understand that, there's no point in discussing it. I repeatedly and respectfully ask you: please stop assuming bad faith which is not there. —AronM🍂 edits🌾 03:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Reply



we add the CNadmin removal to Template:Votings. Is it practice to add removals to the template? Thanks.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'd say so, yes. I think previous deadmin discussions have been linked. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
How shall we indicate the removal? Will 1 RFCN (removal) works?Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Makes sense to me! :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Done, thanks for your advice. :)--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
No problemo, thanks for doing the work. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:12, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply



I think you may have accidentally deleted or omitted some words in this edit. --Yair rand (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Mm yes, thanks. Now fixed. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply



Will you let me know if you do something with the information, or if you don't do something? For all I know, you may have never even received it. — Alexis Jazz (ping me) 09:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for the slow reply; I replied via email last night. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Could you please also notify me on-wiki if OMB does something? (spam filters etc, I sometimes miss stuff) Still hoping for a public notice to say no off-wiki threats (or even off-wiki communication..) exist. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 02:32, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
Are you okay? Just busy I hope? I'm curious, is Ombuds still on track to have all open cases resolved by the end of the year? (still hoping Ombuds will issue a statement to publicly confirm no off-wiki funny business exists) — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

LTA request


I am letting you know that an LTA is requesting you here and says you interacted with them about a potential sockpuppet. Whether you want to respond or not is up to you, but I thought I should let you know. IWI (chat) 02:53, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I should add that their claim may be legitimate. IWI (chat) 02:53, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I've responded there. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply



... how are you? are things fine there? Matiia (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Yes, things are fine here. Very few cases in my country and city for quite a while now, and life is returning to something that resembles normal. Unlike that giant mess to the south... How have you been? – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
Cool. Well, I'm in the south... so things aren't very well. Fortunately, I live in a commune where there's few cases and a sanitary cord since a few months ago and a quarantine to the other side of the sanitary cord around one month ago (here we have obligatory quarantines just in some places, not across the country, but most of us have been in home since around third week march anyway), so I'm safe for now :). Matiia (talk) 23:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
I am happy to hear this! :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Re-using this thread to send you greetings. I miss you on the team. I hope that everything is okay. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Nice to hear from you :-). Everything is going well on my end. I do miss being part of the steward team sometimes, but the OC is a new challenge and quite interesting itself! Hope you're doing well also, – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

We sent you an e-mail


Hello Ajraddatz,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi there!


You are doing good! Keep up the good work then you will get the spirit! Bye! --Giratto (talk) 06:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yay, I love getting the spirit. Thanks very much. – Ajraddatz (talk) 13:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Bernard Griffin


Thanks. FWIW, I view the content at UTRS and on meta as a legal threat and more. I was actually sympathetic to the unblock appeal there, but-- legal threat. I recommended they contact ArbCom and Trust and Safety. You saw their trolling response.Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Deepfriedokra: They are socking here as well, Monsoir Cheesehead + Barry Biggins etc. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, this doesn't seem like the kind of person we want around these projects. Worth noting they've been socking since before the UTRS request and their edits here, and apparently after as well. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Collapsing on the CW RfC


Hey, maybe tone it down with the collapsing on said CW RfC. You're kind of being an ass. User:Imjustthere 14:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your comment, but I won't. The RfC is a mess, and you are directly contributing to that mess. If you continue with your previous style of comments there or personal attacks here you will be blocked. Regards, – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
So will you change your collapsing on RFC, as meta stewards proven that Kubura used 20 fake acc and that it was not any conspiracy but truth?

Help with sock puppetry.


I have not been able to prove im not a sock puppet https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Liz#sock_puppet_hellp Baratiiman (talk) 15:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

See also Wikimedia Forum#Farssi. I have no idea, just noticed I recognized the username from that discussion. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 02:30, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Hrwiki draft


With Kubura banned, why you aren't pushing the draft for completion? I already given support to all of your proposals. SMB99thx 04:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Because there's a lot more work to do on it, and I'm rather busy IRL. I should have more time in the coming weeks. – Ajraddatz (talk) 05:34, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Reply



Not sure if you noticed, but you've still got a draft banner at the top of your RfC and it's been transcluded onto the main page. -Giraffer (talk) 17:26, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, moved into my userspace. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Viewing abuse filters on meta for +patroller


I wonder which would be the right place to request it. I see quite a few hidden global filters that get hit, but cannot find out why such edits trigger the filter. One way would be to request abuse filter helpers (but then I only want to see the meta filters), and another would be to request limited adminship (which I think is too powerful).

My suggestion is to enable viewing (and only that) meta abuse filters on meta to +patroller. After all, users with +patroller are already reasonably trusted, and hence I personally think that's the best alternative. Leaderboard (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

No. We did give patroller very liberally recently. There are 2 implications to this, we add the filter rights, and we have to remove some (I don't trust some to hold abuse filter private rights), and if we add that, some users might just need the rollback tool might find it impossible to get patroller. I am not keen to do so, I am however keen to explore limited sysop for viewing meta only filters or rather AFH. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Actually the place to discuss this will be Meta:Babel.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yes, Babel is the right place to discuss. I'm not sure how I feel about it myself; there was a push to add a bunch of small (but potentially consequential) rights to the sub-admin groups over the last few years, but that trend seems to be coming to an end. The community recently rejected adding autopatrol to a new sub-admin group. Not sure what the reaction would be to this, and I imagine you would need to tie it to an explicit need over a "nice to have" argument. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Invitation for Functionary consultation 2021


Greetings SWMT member,

I'm letting you know in advance about a meeting I'd like to invite you to regarding the Universal Code of Conduct and the community's ownership of its future enforcement. I'm still in the process of putting together the details, but I wanted to share the date with you: 10 July, 2021. I do not have a time on this date yet, but I will let you soon. We have created a meta page with basic information. Please take a look at the meta page and sign up your name under the appropriate section.

Thank you for your time.--BAnand (WMF) 03:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

About os.wiki


Znauri (Qornisi) is part of Georgia and now is occupied by Russia, and there is non-recognized republic South Ossetia, I have made change in this page, I have just written that it's territory of Georgia but administrator of os.wiki has reverted my edit and now I am not able to edit this page because this user has defensed this page, please help me https://os.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%97%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%83%D1%8B%D1%80&type=revision&diff=494522&oldid=494521 --ჯეო (talk) 10:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

You'll need to chat with the local admins there, I'm afraid. I don't have any access on oswiki. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:07, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

How we will see unregistered users



You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

IP_block_exemption request


Hello, I am working in many wikipedia languages and mostly I use University Wifi, Park Wifi or my Apartemnet wifi and most of the time the IP get blocked because someone maybe do wrong Ze221 (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ze221: sounds like you may need a global IP block exemption; you can request one at SRGP. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Spam page left by blocked vandal, needs to be deleted 19:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wasn't sure about this last night, while being created by an LTA it did not appear to be spam/vandalism. But after review by another editor it does not look to be of value, and I've deleted it. Thanks! – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I acted


Wave hello. I acted on AP295's editing, with a block at M:RfH for a week. I had warned about behaviour, which has gone unacknowledged, and then the tirade at RfH. Not having that rubbish on site.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey - your warning came after all the comments on RFH, but fair enough, I was probably giving a bit too much rope. I wanted to give him a (last) chance given the other users goading him into replying there, but I expect it would have been a lost cause. Hope you're doing well, – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply



Hi, Ajraddatz! Congrats for the selection. Nicely done! Julius 12345 (talk) 12:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I appreciate the trust of all :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply



How do you managed to stay consistent on Wikipedia?Sheikbaba36524 (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Not sure I understand the question, but I stick around doing some stuff :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 05:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ajraddatz


Its long time ago since i`ve òpened those pages, but i need some help. There is no Sysop on bs. wikiquote, and one of the users iz vandalizing the project. If you take a look at the recent changes there, you will se that all contributions of user Bosnjacina have been reverted by a sysop and crat of the bosnian wiki. my question is where to request a block?! If needed, i could let the users from bosnian wiki, at least sysops, show the support for block here, or on bs. wikiquote. Thanks in advance WizardOfOz talk 21:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I see the edit warring - can you please explain to me why the contributions are vandalism? I can't tell from the machine translated diffs. I do recommend that both users stop revert warring each other... I can restore the good versions as needed. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hi, so this is the context: User Bosnjacina just reverts vandalism performed by user AnToni, as you can tell from diff on the recent changes. 21:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Would you be so kind and log in with your account so we can see who is responding? WizardOfOz talk 21:59, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Well the one, Bosnjacina is adding quotes from politicaly motivated sources/pages. The other, Antoni is the Crat on the bs wiki and trying to stop him. I was the last sysop there, but was long time off, so there is no sysop at the time to stop or block him. And as i saw, my global rollback right is gone so i can`t even revert him by my self. Not sure, but my account seemd locked by a steward here on meta in 2012. WizardOfOz talk 21:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I see - the Tito page is particularly striking when compared to the en version. I need to head to work now, but will fully revert when I get back later this evening. Thanks for bringing this up :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! Perhaps it will be enough to lock those three pages so at least discussion can come up. And perhaps, if you find some time, you can take a look why i`m locked. cant remember requesting it, but its more than 10 years ago ;) WizardOfOz talk 22:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The user has been adding and re-adding those quotes for months - I think a block is warranted in this case. If the user appeals I will discuss, and if they seem amenable to conversation I could try unblocking + protecting the pages. Your account seems to have been locked following this request - I vaguely remember some of the context, but you could look through your contributions around this time for more context. Hope you're doing well. – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Blocked without any reason


For past years I try to add new quotes to Bosnian Wikiquote and this Anthoni keeps deleting the quotes without any reason.

Vaše korisničko ime ili IP-adresa je blokirana. Blokiranje je obavio korisnik ‪Ajraddatz‬. Navedeni razlog je Non-productive editing. Početak blokade: 03:12, 20 mart 2024 Kraj blokade: trajno Blokirani korisnik: ‪Bošnjačina‬

There is no reason for this block because I try to add new content to Wikiquote. I already descibred issue with this Anthoni https://bs.wikiquote.org/wiki/Razgovor_s_korisnikom:MdsShakil and when you check his profile you can see a lot of complains on his profile because he keeps deleting the content.

This block is really unfair. 2A02:27B0:4C05:E660:4524:8DB4:F195:4FFD 15:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you check this link you can see everything Anthoni do is just deleting the content without any reason: https://bs.wikiquote.org/wiki/Posebno:Doprinosi/AnToni 2A02:27B0:4C05:E660:4524:8DB4:F195:4FFD 15:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
You were blocked for edit warring over a scale of months(!!) to add in very obviously slanted quotes about controversial political figures. That sort of editing, particularly over the time scale involved, is disruptive. If you are willing to take a step back and discuss which quotes should be added (because some of them are probably acceptable, mixed with others from a different political viewpoint) then I would be happy to remove the block. – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
As I already wrote before there was quotes with different point of view mixed and none of them was removed by me. Only Anthoni removed quotes which are different from his point of view.
I am open to discuss of course but I really want to know why Anthoni is still an administrator while he is removing a lot of content from Bosnian Wikipedia and Wikiquote without any sense? It is not only my opinion, I can post you a lot of links where other users discuss about his behaviour.
Klix is the most popular news portal in Bosnia but after faking the facts about Bosnian history they started the article: https://www.klix.ba/vijesti/bih/kome-smeta-bosanska-historija-na-wikipediji/210607123. Why you keep protecting him?
I want to ask, friendly, because I am confused with your latest sentence. You wrote "because some of them are probably acceptable, mixed with others from a different political viewpoint". As I can see you don't speak Bosnian, so I am confused how you can know which quotes are not acceptable? How do you even decide what is slanted? Why you let Anthoni remove them all?
Now get back to the pages:
Josip Broz Tito
If someone said he is a good person about the Tito none of that quotes were removed by me. If someone said Tito was an butcher and bad person, that quotes were removed by Anthoni. How that makes any sense?
Ivo Andric
Ivo Andric have a lot of quotes, and a lot of controversial too which are quoted on a Bosnian media and forums but Anthoni keeps removing them. For example: Ivo Andric have bad opinion of Prophet Muhammad, and that was quoted a long time ago but Anthoni just removed the source and connection/context with the Prophet because in the next steps he remove the whole quote. You can check the history log of that page as a prove. Is this even allowed on Wikipedia? Why he even wants to hide that quotes?
Mustafa Busuladzic
When you check all of the sources on the Wikipedia page all of that sources have good opinion about him, but in the first sentences he is described as a bad person. Try to translate all of Bosnian sources at the bottom and you can see someone tries to put his own views or the views of the some media propaganda. How that makes any sense? Is Wikipedia place where someone can make up things or every fact needs a source? It is the same on Wikiquote. If Anthoni uses his time to add new content instead of removing the one which are opponent to his views we would never have a problem.
For example: If we edit quotes about Hitler and I put a lot of negative quotes/views about him (all of us can agree he is an negative historical person) would you also told me that I am adding slanted quotes? Ivo Andric served as a diplomat in Hitler's Germany and people should learn about that.
I really think Anthoni and I are the best persons for editing that pages but adding the quotes from all point of views and not REMOVING them, what is the main issue from the beginning. Do you understand me now? Bošnjačina (talk) 03:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I really don't have the capacity to wade far into the specific content debate - as you can see above, a former admin of bswikiquote approached me about the issue, and a review of the content being reverted quickly showed why it would be problematic. It will ultimately need to be something to work out, and if you can't work it out, just leave it alone (as in, don't continue to revert war with each other). Start a discussion on the talk page of the articles, or try just including some of the more notable quotes (like those from politicians, in this context). If that sounds good, I can remove the block. – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply



Hello Ajraddatz, in 2016 you gave temporar admin rights to Apipo1907. Later the verry small community voted for him as a third admin, but this vote was never transmitted to someone who can grant the admin flags. In between, there is another candidate: CaptainAfrika. see here: https://ln.Wikipedia:Moy%C3%A1ngeli#Propositions_de_candidature_en_cours May you grant admin status to him, please? Thank you very much. Bombo (talk) 23:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Bombo:, can you please file a request at SRP following the directions on that page? Should be no issues assigning temporary adminship in this case, but we like all request to go to the same page so that everything is recorded in one place. Thanks! And let me know if you need help filing. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

My account (User:Kleshkreikne) has been globally locked for no specific reason


So, tell me. Give me a specific reason of why you unexpectedly locked my account (Kleshkreikne) from all WMF wikis. Although I might not have experience, I'm just trying to be a vandal fighter by fighting vandalism on LTA's and reverting vandalism on all other pages. I think that my edits were reasonably good faith and there is a purpose of why I'm here to contribute to the encyclopedia. P.S. I've already contacted the stewards at stewards@wikimedia.org. Still, no response. Any evidence of sock/meat puppets or block evading editors. Greatly appreciated! I promise I won't repeat any of these things ever again. 06:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also I sent you a friend request on discord. Thank you! 06:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

ticket to check


Hello Ajraddatz, please see this ticket. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 10:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, unlocked. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the quick response. — xaosflux Talk 14:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why globally blocked User:Dorian Gray Wild has been released???


I wants to ask you why you released the global blocking of User:Dorian Gray Wild??? This user is known by his cross-wiki abuse, harrasment, intimidating behavior and stalking of users and particularly mine in the Hebrew Wikipedia and users and in other Wikipedia and Wikimedia sites. Because of this, User:Matanya globally blocked him.

I ask you to return the global blocking of this user. Your reason for his release is delusional. זור987 (talk) 07:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I didn't see any cross-wiki abuse (other than him starting an RfC on Meta, which doesn't seem particularly abusive) when reviewing the lock. What I did see was a potential conflict of interest lock of a user who appeared to be otherwise in good standing at commons, enwiki and wikidata. Another hewiki user and commons admin reached out to me via email - I am discussing with them to see if there are problematic contributions at commons and could re-evaluate based on that. Note that the unlock decision does not impact any hewiki blocks, and I explicitly warned the user to avoid importing hewiki drama to Meta in the future. I am not trying to enable harassment or stalking - if any of that behaviour continues, particularly off of hewiki, please let me know and I will reinstate the lock. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Durian stalked, insulted and trolled me and others at the English Wikipedia in the articles Alex Fridman and Disabled, Not Half a Human Being that has been deleted later. זור987 (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Convenient Discussions


I've refrained from further engagement in the discussion on the "Joint Statement on Palestine" as promised. However, I'd appreciate your help resolving an issue with accessing hidden discussions while using the "Convenient Discussions" gadget. It's become quite challenging to read messages with this gadget enabled due to the template in use. Perhaps user:Jack who built the house could lend a hand as well.

The template added by you is causing difficulty in reading messages with the gadget enabled, as it closes the expand button. Any assistance with this matter would be greatly appreciated. Aisha8787 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey - I have noticed and appreciate it. I don't think that I want to remove the collapsed portions yet, but when the discussion is closed I could if you think that would help readability. In the meantime, you could view the page without the gadget for improved readability. – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the option to view discussions anonymously, yet I'm seeking a more permanent solution. Given your role as a steward, your technical expertise in the wiki engine is evident. I was wondering if there might be a way to adjust the template or script code, enabling the reading of hidden messages without the need to disable the gadget. Aisha8787 (talk) 18:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Unfortunately my experience is more on the front end of the wiki interface, I'm not much of a programmer. You could reach out to the author of the script, or ask on the template talk page here. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I've reached out to him beyond wiki-sites previously. Although he provided some guidance on expanding "off-topic" discussions, it seems these methods might not be intuitive, even for experienced users.
Still, thanks for your responses! Aisha8787 (talk) 23:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

This RfC has been running for months, been inactive for over a week, and has a clear consensus. I’m tempted to just close it myself but as I’m both an involved user and a non-admin I’d appreciate if you could close it for me. Dronebogus (talk) 11:31, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I normally would, but I have commented on the RfC. Given the nature of that RfC I don't imagine an admin/steward would need to close it, but some might disagree - you could post on RFH or SN to see if an admin or steward wants to close it, and go ahead if not. – Ajraddatz (talk) 13:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Closed it in the spirit of IAR/not a bureaucracy on WP. Asking for “official” approval to close a dead discussion with an obvious consensus seems silly. Dronebogus (talk) 21:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Works for me. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

User Name


Hi, I have a question regarding the suggestion for the user whose name is Obscenity. kind regards Déjà vu 00:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I don't understand. If you have a question, go ahead and ask. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I mean, what shall I do if someone's username is a bad word in Persian? Déjà vu 21:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Depends how bad. If it is a blatant attack name, you can report it on SRG (or Special:Contact/Stewards if it's really really bad) and stewards can hide it. If it's only kinda bad, it could be blocked locally or you could ask the user to request a rename to something less bad. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
As Sysop on fawiki, I blocked the user's account. But the username is vulgar (swearing). Could you please hide it. kind regards.Déjà vu 22:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Check User


So, I am being voted on as a Check User at English Wikinews. EPIC (steward) said there must be 25 votes. We will be waiting until the year 2031 to get 25 people at that project to vote on ANYTHING... Ours is a tiny project. 'Policy' here does not take a lot of that into account... Our 2 Check Users are pretty much ENTIRELY in the wind. There has to be some kind of work around for this. We need a CU involved there.--Bddpaux (talk) 15:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Bddpaux the global policy requires 25 votes for a reason. If a project is not large enough to elect 2+ CU they can always choose to stop having local CU and use SRCU instead for all CU requests. Johannnes89 (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
But like I mentioned on my talk page, the local policy also notes the 25 vote requirement. As I also noted on my talk page (and as Johannes also noted here), the requirement of 25 votes is simply because it is a sensitive right that requires a high amount of trust; however, two CU candidates managed to reach 25 votes at enwikinews in 2021, so it's not impossible either. EPIC (talk) 17:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks to my colleagues for their responses, I agree with what they have said, as unfair as that may seem for someone editing on a smaller project. I've explained a bit more of the policy intent (as I understand it) here: wikinews:User talk:George Ho#Support...., as well as the issue of canvassing. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reminder to vote now to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously voted in the 2021 Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) election.

This is a reminder that if you have not voted yet on the ratification of the final Wikimedia Movement Charter draft, please do so by July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC.

You can read the final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter in your language. Following that, check on whether you are eligible to vote. If you are eligible, cast your vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 15:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply