User talk:Avraham/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2012. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2012. Kind regards, -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 02:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

RfD

Hello Avi. At Meta:Requests_for_deletion#All_fair_use_files_and_templates we've discussed wether all fair use files and templates hosted at Meta-Wiki should be gone. More than 7 days passed and I even requested closure on RFH however even the notice went archived and the RFD is still open with no comments since 5 september. I'm used to see thoughtful and well considerated closures from you and since you have not participated in the RFD I wonder if you could have a look at it and determine an outcome. Best regards, -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I believe that consensus and common sense were in accord in that discussion, and closed it as I thought best reflected both. -- Avi (talk) 02:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - I've started deleting some fair use files. I'm happy that the RfD has clarifyied the situation. Meta should not be a limbo where everything can be hosted. In the next days if there's no issues I'll continue cleaning the fair use categories. Regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Disruptive page moves

Hi Avraham, I'm an administrator on Hindi Wikipedia. Can you tell me how to rollback multiple disruptive page moves by a single user? There's a user on Hindi Wikipedia who has moved loads of articles to nonsense titles. Although, I've blocked him/her for one month (after several warnings, of course) but still there's a huge backlog of such pages which need to rollbacked to their original titles, thanks and regards.--Bill william compton (talk) 12:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if there is a built-in command in mediawiki for that; the rare times I've had to fix those (years ago) I did it manually. Perhaps someone with scripting skills can write a script to help fix it? -- Avi (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your consideration. Do you have anyone in mind who can do this?--Bill william compton (talk) 04:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately not off of the top of my head. -- Avi (talk) 04:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Unified login - problem

Hello, I'd like to usurp the account User:Summergirl on enwiki to create an unified login. Can you help me please? --Summergirl (talk) 12:34, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

You will have to file a USURPATION request on EnWiki at w:Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations and follow the procedures there. Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 16:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! --Summergirl (talk) 07:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Lists

Hi Avi. Please remember to update the relevant lists when assigning advanced permissions. :-) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

:doh: Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

edit request

Hi, Please, add this - Template:Welcome/bn(Bengali translation) in here Template:Welcome/lang. Thank you--Leemon2010 (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Please check that it worked properly. -- Avi (talk) 17:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

On the broader picture of policy

Moin Avraham, I would like to take the opportunity to make a broader point on the RfA-case currently debated by the community in relation to one of your points that not directly (or rather exclusively) linked to the individual case (and therefore I would like to make it here). You pointed out current policy forbids crats to acknowledge consensus in cases like this one and I think that is a very narrow reading of our current policies.

As I pointed out elsewhere in different language, this is an artificial dilemma and - I'm inclined to argue once more- not existent in current policy. There is a perfectly credible case to be made why it is - under current policy - perfectly sound to follow consensus in this case. The RfA policy is obviously not a case falling under the (mainly legal or otherwise WMF-related) limitations of one of our very basic policies; stating:

If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining a project, ignore it.

We all have been around sufficiently long to recognize that our usually sound judgements on policy-design never cover all aspects of all individual cases under the policies we are inventing. That's what judgement is for and I Think we are usually well-justified in our conclusions. The valid policy I quoted above is in place excactly for cases like this one (if one goes with your finding on where the consensus rests; I have just started evaluating the second argument Marco has put forward and his views are always worth careful consideration).

However, strictly legalistic (and that seems to be part of the trouble), the deciding crat would be obliged to explain how he (as a crat) can justify ignoring longstanding policy - which permits him to make reasoned exceptions casuistically on policygrounds in cases under policy (as this one is) - in declining to act in accordance with consensus under policy. That is the current policy position of this wiki, there are no limiting principles preventing the applicability of IAR in this case, and simply ignoring this fact without proper argumentative justification of such a move is an artificially invented dilemma. Its hard to see where we create anarchism by stiking to established policy (IAR) :), regards, --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 18:44, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Jan. Your position is certainly a valid one. I guess I tend a bit more to working within the system, even when it would be easier and simpler to go around it at times. I will agree that I tend to a more legalistic interpretation at times, that probably comes from years of editing in contentious articles on the English Wikipedia, where, sadly, any false step can be used as fodder by those who disagree with one to push a topic ban through, and where, sadly discussion about merits takes a back seat at times to wikilawyering. That reflects poorly on me, I guess. Sorry. I agree with you that IAR would allow the crat to ignore policy, and in this case, it makes about as much sense as it ever would, I agree, and that is why having open discussions like this are so important. If I were the crat, I'm not sure what I'd do; my suggestions were made in order to allow the RfA to succeed by anybody's standards, but that is just one person's opinion among many. Thank you! -- Avi (talk) 18:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the different views expressed in the debate reflect poorly on anyone (although I don't share the rhetoric in which some of them are being put forward); I feel I was able to see reasonably well where everyone was coming from so far. It just happen that I disagree with one of the arguments (narrow legalism, if you like to label it) and to be curious about the reasons backing up two points (non-content project Wikidata by Savh & the causual link one might read into the point made by Kylu).

It might also be worth acknowledging the various grey positions folks have expressed, if one likes to put "upholding the point regardless of any individual aspects" and "abolishment of the point without replacement" in the white/black corners respectively. My own comment - for example - said I would support a copyedit to clarify the status-issue. Thus, I'm among the grey :), best --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 19:31, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Meta_talk:Administrators#General_introduction btw which is according to you the best way to publicise it? --Vituzzu (talk) 14:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Meta talk:Requests for adminship. YOu can always draft a site notice :) -- Avi (talk) 02:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship (April 2013)

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2013. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2013. Kind regards. -- MarcoAurelio 14:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Distributed via Global message delivery, 14:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Signed. -- Avi (talk) 19:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Abusive reasons for block on Romanian Wikipedia by administrators

If you translate the Village pump of the Romanian Wikipedia you realize that the language used is abusive therefore there are making fun in a rude way about the fact that I graduated the school of engineers, they pretend that I have different gender identities, the use two double sens arguments either "I am a child" or "I am too smart to be a child". There is only one fair comment about me that I have done a lot of good work on reverting vandalism.And maybe this is the reason why some people are so upset with me that not only that they dedicated to have a rude attitude about with an abusive vocabulary but also to block me.I think that you have to check through the proper translation of the discussions that are going on the Reclamation page and also the Village Pump.Receptie123 (talk) 18:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 04:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

شكرا لك. -- Avi (talk) 16:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2013. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2013. Kind regards, Barras talk 14:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Signed, thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Stop

Please stop, votes are confirmed in a different manner, thru a bot, and have been done this way for several years. They are confirmed centrally and the bot then propagates it. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 01:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry -- Avi (talk) 01:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the abrupt message, I'm just in the middle of dinner, if you drop by #wikimedia-stewards-elections Pir can explain. Basically the bot copies all votes to a template then we check it there. Right now the bot paused, Alchimista will fire it up when he gets back up and then set it up on cron :) The template is at Template:Stewards/Elections_2014/Voters/Check. I really gtg now, sorry. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 01:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I am trying to get on IRC simply to apologize, but Chatzilla is acting up here. Thank you for the heads up (and enjoy dinner :) ) -- Avi (talk) 01:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Back for a minute, don't apologize, all is fine :) Don't worry about it :) Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 01:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Also noticed I wrote in the middle of dinner, I mean in the middle of making dinner :D Sorry about that. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 01:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Eligibility

Hi, how did you determine the eligibility of this user? I wrote on his meta talk page because he doesn't have a global account and also doesn't have made links between his meta & ar.wiki accounts, but maybe I missed something or he fixed it in the mean time? --MF-W 22:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, User:MF-Warburg (for ping purpose :) ). He has a link to his ar account on his meta page. -- Avi (talk) 22:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

That he has, but not vice versa, as far as I can spot on ar:مستخدم:باسم. --MF-W 22:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh snap; you're right. /lashes self with noodle. -- Avi (talk) 23:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2014. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2014. Kind regards, Barras talk 09:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Handled, thanks. -- Avi (talk) 04:44, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Stew

Hello Avraham. I updated your common.js page to the latest version of StewardScript. This is mainly to enable automatic updates, but it also includes a few fixes. If you notice any problems or have questions, let me know! :) —Pathoschild 04:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 04:45, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Answer

What is the next "obvious" number in this series:3 1 4 1 5 9 ....

I assume the answer is 2? Probably 3.14159245.. Pi. PS: Due to some error on wmflabs, revi [at] tools [dot] wmflabs [dot] org does not work currently. I'm trying to solve the issue. — revi ^{^} 04:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

As requested. — revi ^{^} 04:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Response

-- Avi (talk) 04:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2014. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2014. Kind regards, Barras talk 14:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

My complaint

Hello dear User. I wrote the following complaint to OC member Levg [1]. Later I noticed that he is not very active now. Please if you have time also check my complaint and advise me my following stepts. P. S. I will translate here some russian sentences in my complaint - the request of checking was based on the following (Есть подозрение, что это может быть кто-то из активных редакторов, у кого теперь в активе есть блокировка за НИП, и кто вёл некорректную агитацию. Прошу проверить анрега) on English - There is a suspicion that this may be one of active editors, who is now blocked for violations, and who led the agitation incorrect. I ask to check anregistered editor. If you need any more help for tranlsations please write here, I will support. Please check my comlaint and advise me about my following steps. Thanks. Миша Карелин (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

All complaints should be sent to the OC e-mail address; Lev is no longer on OC. -- Avi (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hywiktionary

Hi Avraham, my admin rights in hywiktionary expire on 2015-05-05, but bot removed it today. Possible to handle this issue? Thanks in advance․ --Beko (talk) 14:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)13:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Please follow the usual steps of posting a discussion about renewing your adminship on your local wiki's admin pages, or the equivalent of the village pump if there are none, and post the request to the appropriate section of Steward requests/Permissions. If after a week of discussion there is no significant opposition, your rights will be extended. -- Avi (talk) 15:19, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

But my rights expire on 2015-05-05, and now not may. --Beko (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I misread. Sorry. Let me check. -- Avi (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Restored. -- Avi (talk) 16:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much. --Beko (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Global user page migration

Hello Avraham. I deleted your local user pages on all wikis as you requested via Synchbot. You can see the full log on your archive page. :) —Pathoschild 05:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 05:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Please block user on Wikipedia

Hi Avraham,

Could you please block this user indefinitely for writing some harassing and harmful comments that are really interfering with my life. I am really angry and upset because I know that person and he wrote some inappopriate comments on my userpage. Could you go over to Wikipedia and please block him.

Cheers - EurovisionNim (talk) 05:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

English Wikipedia has a its own dispute resolution systems. If you would like an EnWIki admin to look into your case, your best bet, in my opinion, is to request help at w:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. -- Avi (talk) 14:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Updated scripts

Hi Avraham. I edited your global.js to update you to the latest version of StewardScript, which is compatible with the latest MediaWiki changes and resides on the Wikimedia Tool Labs for easier updates. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 02:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Pathos. -- Avi (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

YGM response

Decided to reuse this section. Messages were replaced. — regards, Revi 09:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Your decision

Please reconsider your decision, because many facts you not review. 1. armenian Wikiquote not have admin. 2. If not have admin then Vandalism is possible. 3. in "Candidates for speedy deletion" category containing 13 article. 4. I can more facts present. If not, block me in all projects for infinite. --Դեմ խմբակային իշխանությանը (talk) 16:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Armenian wikiquote can have admins who demonstrate that there is a consensus that they have the trust of the community, or at least, there is no significant opposition; in this case that was not shown.
That is why we have global sysops and stewards; HyWikiQuote does not forbid them. Vandalism can be reported at Vandalism reports.
Such kinds of requests should be posted to Steward requests/Miscellaneous.

-- Avi (talk) 19:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

you and you

why deleted my comment, happy years, to a meeting, you will not respond after this act--Badr alkabir (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What did I delete, which page was it, and when? -- Avi (talk) 21:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

6AND5 in Armenian Wikipedia and other wikiprojects

The following discussion is closed.

Hi Avraham.

There is a conflict in Armenian Wikipedia, which is going on in this project, too. This user is a problem-maker. He was an administrator in Armenian Wikipedia, and Armenian wikicommunity make him leave the project because of his rude and unethical behavior. After that he used to tell, that he left hy.wiki by his wish on 18th of February, while from 13th of February the majority of Wikipedians voted against him. After that he blocked himself. As you remember, there was a time, that he was eager to became and administrator in Armenian Wikiquote [2]. Again, in June, he was eager to come back as an editor, and again, the most active Wikipedians voted against him, as during the three months (March, April and May) he had terrible behavior in Russian Wikipedia, Armenian Wikipedia, Armenian Wikiquote, Meta and Wiki Commons - terrorizing the pages of administrators, scandalizing the persons and the whole project, offending the personality of the Wikipedians, who voted against him. In summary, there are more than 30 edits like that [3] if you need, we can translate them into English.

First, I want to paste here the text I have written in the noticeboard - 6AND5 used to say, that his main work is in Russian Wikipedia (he was blocked there 10 times during 2 years [4]). During his adminship in Armenian Wikipedia - less than half year, he used to behave himself badly. He was a rude admin, not wishing to listen to the advises of the others. After a number of reasons, the last ask was about moving of anti-LGBT flag from his talk page in Armenian Wikipedia, which he refused to do. In the end, I have opened a voting page of invalidating his adminship. When There were 8 editors, in summary more than 60 %, he decided to block himself in 18th of February. In Russian Wikipedia he is a patrol, as the other active wikipedians (1769 of 10926 active). Now he is blocked there, too. The only person, that is eager to make him admin in Armenian Wikiquote, is Դեմ խմբակային իշխանությանը user, who has contacts with him during these 2 months - from 18th of February till now - in Russian Wikipedia and Meta, discussing the personalities of Armenian Wiki-editors and criticizing Armenian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Armenia organization.

Second, he continues terrorizing till now. When "coming back" in June, he deleted his page contest [5] which was full of offences and amusements, which I do not want to translate. He insults 3 wikipedians, then added the forth. When the wikicommunity did not wish him to return, and voted for his blocking in Armenian Wikipedia, he was blocked and then, in his page insults two more editors - calling them hyenas and so on. After, his page on meta became the same, and moreover, he started to write such things to fifth wikipedian, again in meta [6] just yesterday. You can check the pages of admins of Armenian Wikipedia, approximately all of them are terrorized by him in Armenian, and the majority of admins did not even answer. During the last edit he wrote that the user is not male, and he has no rights to be called a man. So, this policy is held more than 4 months here, and before that - the same was in Armenian Wikipedia. As a result of that, he is blocked in Armenian Wikipedia. What about here, we shall be waiting for your possible decision.

And the third, why the problem continues so long. At first he used to say, that he is a patrol in Russian Wikipedia, almost each day, while there are 1789 patrols from 10465 active users, it means - every fifth user. We were respecting his contributions there, as being Armenian, he used to edit more, while the other Armenian users in Russian Wikipedia did not have behavior like that, and were editing much more than him. So we waited him to became calmer - to solve the problem, but even after we did not see any change. So, we do not need to see his behavior any more, and I ask you kindly to block him and delete the content of his page. Cheers, Hayk.arabaget (talk) 09:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

PS, if you need more factors, I can show you much more than possible--Hayk.arabaget (talk) 09:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

It's all lies. See it on June 3, is blocked for violation of ethics[7]. See more - chaos in the discussion because of Hayk.arabaget:w:hy:Վիքիպեդիա:Ադմինիստրատորների տեղեկատախտակ#Քննարկման քաոս Hayk.arabaget-ի պատճառով Վիքիպեդիա:Հարցումներ/Վարվելակարգ-ում--6AND5 (talk) 12:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

w:hy:Վիքիպեդիա:Ադմինիստրատորների տեղեկատախտակ/Արխիվ/2015#Հայկ մասնակցի վարքագիծ, April 11 Hayk.arabaget took one topic per month ban, not to block.April 11 Hayk.arabaget left the armenian Wikipedia for a month to avoid being block.

As for the Russian Wikipedia, too, everything is a lie, I dont have 10 blocks, and the admin who blocked me, to see many blocks have she[8], everything is clear already ...--6AND5 (talk) 12:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hayk.arabaget today received a warning for violations[9] - I am very sorry that you (is meant user Erjanik) are in the ranks of administrators--6AND5 (talk) 13:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hayk.arabaget said - And for those who have keen senses, they can go to russian Wikipedia and edit together with Azerbaijanis (Իսկ սուր զգացողություն ունեցողների համար կա ռուվիքի՝ կարող եք գնալ՝ ազերիների հետ խմբագրեք)22.06.2015--6AND5 (talk) 13:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

"It's all lies" - and that is the only answer of the user, just have a look! And several instances of mine in Armenian Wikipedia. So, in general, he has nothing to say, as my behavior in Armenian Wikipedia is my business, and it should not be spoken about in meta. For this, there are administrators in Armenian Wikipedia, who also, are not respected by this user. Nevertheless, we are speaking about the user's behavior in meta, which is terrible. And we have to do something. What about the factors I have mentioned above, I can give links for every single word. Then the user will have nothing to do. OK then, I have said everything and I will wait for your decision. Regards, Hayk.arabaget (talk) 17:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Only in a little top 6AND5's writes can say that 6AND5 is true, and Hayk.arabaget's all writes is lie. And another provacing by Hayk.arabaget, he affronted to 6AND5: "Հա, ու մենք ազգովի մինչև հուլիսի 5-ը (կամ հուլիսի 6-ը) ժամկետ ունենք, թե չէ ավելի վատ է լինելու մեզ բոլորիս համար (սա էլ ցինիզմի գագաթնակետը):" (Yes, and we nationwide have a deadline until July 5 (or July 6), or not becomes more badly for all of us (this is pinnacle of cynicism).) This also violation of Wikiethics. 6AND5 only says that he wait until July 6, to stopping conflict. --Vadgt (talk) 00:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Gentlemen, my (or any other steward) talk page is not the appropriate forum for personal or other arguments. If either of you have concerns about the other and about your local project, the proper place to raise them is on your local project. If there are project-related issues that relate to actions on Meta (such as admin privileges) the proper place to raise them is at the appropriate forum (Permissions, for example). Finally, if the problems cannot be reconciled on the local project, there is the option to open an issue on the Requests for comment page here on Meta. Hashing out your arguments on personal talk pages will not get either of you very far, unfortunately. -- Avi (talk) 14:11, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Bidi directional buttons

Hi, Avi. On Meta and on yiwiki there are five buttons on editing screens allowing one to play with the directionality of the edit box. How do I bring those into ladwiki? Or whom do I talk to? Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:41, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks like it's a gadget called w:yi:MediaWiki:Gadget:BidiEditing, but the page only shows a message, not code. Again, thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:16, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Global checkuser requested

Dear member of the Ombudsman Commission. Yesterday (July 18) I filed a formal complaint by sending an email to the OC (see here). I've been falsely accused of having a sockpuppet and, in spite of my requests, the checkusers at the Spanish Wikipedia keep on claiming I control Pelayo Calderón account. That's not true and, IMHO, the only way to clarify it is to perform a global checkuser verification in order to compare my alleged sockpuppet editions (AFAIK, all of them in the Spanish Wikipedia) with mine (mostly in commons, but also in wikidata and other wikipedias... possibly there are a few records of mine also in the Spanish Wikipedia). I'm perfectly aware of the expiration of logs and therefore I'd like to get a fast response, as it seems to be the only way to clean my name. I'd like to get, at least, an acknowledgement, as I haven't received any news after sending my email. If necessary, I can contact you by mail. Just let me know. Many thanks into advance --Discasto (talk) 21:33, 19 July 2015 (UTC) PS: I'm leaving this message to all the members of the OC. Sorry for the spam.

This is out of the scope of the Ombudsman commission. Our job is to investigate violations of the privacy and access to non-public information policies. If you believe the checkuser tool was used incorrectly, but no privacy violation exists, the proper venue is your local Arbcom or whatever group oversees your local checkusers. If there is no such group, I believe the stewards are the proper venue to address. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 05:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. The general confidentiality agreement is now ready, and the OTRS agreement will be ready after 22 September 2015. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 23:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 31 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that OTRS volunteers sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have been identified as an OTRS volunteer and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access. OTRS volunteers have a specific agreement available, if you have recently signed the general confidentiality agreement for another role (such as CheckUser or Oversight), you do not need to sign the general agreement again, but you will still need to sign the OTRS agreement.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your OTRS access. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 21:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2015. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 09, 2015. Kind regards, MF-W 03:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

talk-page stalker @MF-Warburg: Avraham is on a wikibreak, the timing of which (I speculate) may be related to the ongoing Jewish holidays. While the last day of the holidays is this coming Tuesday, I couldn't guarantee whether he will be back on duty as soon as next week. Notwithstanding the policy, if there is room to stretch the 7-day notice period a little bit, that might be courteous. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both; as today is Chol Hamoed, I checked in and signed. -- Avi (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

A question

Hello，I am an editor on Classical Chinese Wikipedia and I was just granted the temporary adminship. As I did not know this happened at first, I have a question that I hope to be answered. What can I do to prolong the adminship after it is expired? Do I have to hold a new local election?(The fact of Lzh-Wikipedia is that, this wiki has very limited number of editors and an election may always be less than 6 votes.)

Thank you very much. ----損齋 (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, about a week before the term expires, you will have to post another request for comment/election for it to be extended. Usually, temporary admins start with 3-6 months and after a round or two, will often get a year duration. We usually do not give temporary adminship for more than a year at a time. Hope that helps, and good luck! -- Avi (talk) 05:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Confirmation discussions

Dear Avraham,

As you probably know, the confirmation discussions for Stewards have been closed. In order to determine the outcome of these discussions, you are invited to comment on Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2016 before scheduled closure of the confirmation section "one week after the appointment of the newly elected stewards" (Sunday 6th of March, 17:22 UTC), though the closing time might be extended at the ElectCom's discretion for an extra week if it is believed "further input is required before concluding". All stewards are welcome to comment, including those newly elected.

For those who ran for confirmation, consider revising comments regarding you, and replying to those where appropriate. Sa vh ^ñ 08:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2016. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2016. Kind regards, Barras talk 15:24, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Smol mistake

Dear Sir, Please check User rights log page. u r removed user:चक्रपाणी's Autopetrold right on hiwiki. its by mistake.-Yogesh Kavishwar (talk) 09:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you user:YmKavishwar, I just didnt notice that. Thank you for reporting.---चक्रपाणी (talk) 10:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Administrators are automatically autopatrolled, but as the adminship is temporary, you are correct that it makes more sense to leave it in case the adminship expires and is not renewed. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 02:04, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks sir for your quick action.Yogesh Kavishwar (talk) 09:28, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2016. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 18, 2016. Kind regards, MF-W 01:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 03:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Announcing a new mailing list for Meta-Wiki administrators

Hello!

As a regular administrator on Meta-Wiki, you're allowed to subscribe to the recently created metawiki-admins mailing list. This is a closed mailing list for announcements, asking for help and discussion between Meta-Wiki administrators. If you wish to subscribe, please fill the form at this page and then contact Savh or MarcoAurelio via Special:EmailUser using your administrator account so they can verify the authenticity of your request and address. You'll find more information on the mailing list description page. Should you have any doubts or questions, feel free to contact any of us. We hope that this tool is useful for all.

Best regards,
-- MarcoAurelio and Savh 12:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Mailing list administrators for metawiki-admins mailing list.

Message sent to members of Meta:Administrators/Mass-message list. Please see there to subscribe or unsubscribe from further mass messages directed to the whole group of administrators.

Received, thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

My mistake

The mistake in request fixed.--Booklety (talk) 12:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks; clock started. -- Avi (talk) 15:23, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Admin request

Hey Avraham, please see my text on the discussion we had about my admin rights on the Swahili Wiktionary.. Blessed day! Trunzep (talk) 08:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Noted. -- Avi (talk) 14:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

No admins

Swahili Wiktionary has no administrators please confirm from this link -- Trunzep (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Noted. -- Avi (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

No renaming between November 20 and November 27

Hi,

You’re getting this because you’re a steward or global renamer. The Community Tech team are working on cross-wiki watchlists. We need to add a couple of fields to the localuser table in centralauth database. In order to be able to do this, we’d need to run a script that will get in the way of renaming users. Our apologies – we realize this is getting in the way of your work.

We ask that you do not rename anyone between 00:00 November 20 (UTC) and 00:00 November 27 (UTC).

(UTC means that if you live in the Americas, it will be on the evening or afternoon of November 19 when the script starts running, and if you live in Oceania or eastern Asia, it can be closer midday on November 27 before we can be sure the script is no longer running.)

Phabricator task.

If there are any problems related to this, or you have any questions, please write me on my talk page. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:39, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Completed. -- Avi (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Skalee

Nope, we're still waiting for any answer. Tar Lócesilion (queta) 18:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Update: officially (which means: according to Openbk, Nedops and me, who deal with the policy cases), "there's no good solution". AFAIK, Skalee hasn't raised any issues. I think that the status can be changed to done. If there are any news, we'll be able to link to a specific version of SRP, or restore the section etc. anyway. Tar Lócesilion (queta) 23:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Heads up: In re: Marrovi on Ladino Wikipedia

Hi, Avi:

I just wanted to give you a heads-up as a steward that I'm about to start warning User:Marrovi (intentionally not linked, don't want to ping) of a possible future block on Ladino Wikipedia, where he's been extremely active. You are probably aware that he has been a troublesome editor around here. (If not, see Requests for comment/Global ban for user Marrovi.) We have been trying to work with him on ladwiki to get him to do the right thing. And frequently he does, but not always.

Our community at ladwiki is very small; I'm probably the only person who is there every day, and I don't even speak the language. Trying to have a real community discussion of a ban is not going to happen there. So I'm going to have to take more-or-less unilateral action, and I want you to witness that I'm not doing so capriciously. Note that I have been discussing Marrovi off-wiki with User:Universal Life, a fellow admin there, and so far he's tried to play "good cop", while I play "bad cop". But at a certain point we can't let Marrovi's sloppy editing go unchecked or we will have a Wikipedia full of absolute (pardon the expression) crap. And even if we don't mass-delete everything he's done, we'd need to freeze him out for a while just to catch up on what he's done.

So you'll see at Marrovi's ladwiki user page that I'm going to warn him, I'm going to tell him exactly what the block will be, and I will set out a clear paradigm for how he needs to go forward. If at any point you think I'm out of line on this let me know.

Thanks for your understanding and, I hope, your support. StevenJ81 (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, certainly, please keep me posted, and while it doesn't exactly fit the bill, with only 4 admins, you can probably drop a line at Vandalism reports for more help from global sysops and stewards as needed. -- Avi (talk) 02:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I will keep you posted.

I've never really used Vandalism reports. It's a good idea in general, though it doesn't really apply to this situation. But I do appreciate the suggestion.

FWIW, I did notify at Talk:SWMT when I was off-wiki for two weeks watching my son get married in Israel this summer. Nothing was amiss when I got back, so I guess they kept an eye on things there. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:27, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, I have some egg on my face. I blanked what I wrote last night because evidently some of what he went on to edit were two of the pages that I had asked to have cleaned up. So I'm backing off for now, and hope I did so before he saw anything. I am still planning to keep a close eye on him, though, because there is still a history and a problem with him. Will get back to you if I need to start blocking. Thanks as always for your support. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

No problem, and for what it is worth, I'd consider repeatedly adding incorrect information as vandalism, and one of VR's purposes is for "Vandalism on wikis with few or no administrators". -- Avi (talk) 14:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I hear you on that. We'll see where it goes. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

┌────────────────┘
I actually went through with a block today. You could look over there and see, if you have any interest. I'm just running out of patience with this. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Log reason

Please always include a log reason when performing a rename. There's a gadget that "Adds a log reason on Special:GlobalRenameQueue, for stewards and global renamers" automatically in your preferences. Sa vh ^ñ 23:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Seeing that most of the previous renames you performed included that log summary, I assume you already have it enabled. Sorry for bothering, in that case. Sa vh ^ñ 23:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Savh. No worries. I did that one from an iPhone which may explain why the gadget didn't fire. -- Avi (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikibreak

חג שמח וכשר. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

וכן למר! -- Avi (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Avraham. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2017. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2017. Kind regards, MF-W 13:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Taken care of. -- Avi (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Help design a new feature to stop harassing emails

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team plans to start develop of a new feature to allow users to restrict emails from new accounts. This feature will allow an individual user to stop harassing emails from coming through the Special:EmailUser system from abusive sockpuppeting accounts.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you have experience dealing with abusive sockpuppeting accounts and you work across many wikis. We think that your insights will help us build a better feature.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

It is important to hear from a broad range of people who are interested in the design of the tool, so we hope you join the discussion and let us know how it would work best for you.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)