User talk:Barras/Archive 3

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Frigotoni in topic IRC cloak request (2) :)

Please unprotect

Please unprotect Don't be a dick. I believe your protection was premature and simply freezes a debate that is going along calmly. I was about to write a version incorporating some changes from both sides in the hopes of finding a consensus.--Jimbo Wales 18:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

To quote from the English Wikipedia: "On pages that are experiencing edit warring, temporary full protection can force the parties to discuss their edits on the talk page, where they can reach consensus." I don't believe there was any wrongdoing in this action, and I hardly find the edit summaries used on the page calm. This was not premature. PeterSymonds 18:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
I am not suggesting wrongdoing. I'm requesting unprotection so that we can move forward more productively. There was hardly even an "edit war" and protection was premature.--Jimbo Wales 11:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
As what Peter said. Looking at the last edits it is clear that there was some kind of edit war. Please do first discuss major changes to meta pages with long term stable version. It's much better to discuss first. Just changing and get others to revert it doesn't make much sense to me. Until I get a very good reason, I won't unprotect. However, feel free to bring this up for discussion on WM:RFH. If there are many people who want it unprotected, I'll reconsider. Thanks, -Barras 16:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
Please? I could just do it myself but I would prefer that you do it. You can reprotect if there is a problem. 2 weeks is much too long.--Jimbo Wales 03:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
Well, even if you have the technical power to do it, it may would bring you into troubles since you are not a meta sysop. Then, I would have a reason to open a thread on RFH. -Barras 06:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Re: Administrator access.

Thank you :) And the apple Danish was indeed delicious, something to really make my day (runs off for a cup of coffee). Wojciech Pędzich Talk 09:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hello there ! I just translated your statement in French. I just see you are a fr-2 speaker, so please check all I wrote really reflects your opinion.

'wish you a good luck as future steward ;) -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Fantastique ! Merci beaucoup pour la traduction ! Lit la position en français est plus facile d'écrit la position.
Mais, déjà je ne suis pas un steward. ;-) Merci beaucoup! -Barras 15:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hey Barras, like Quentinv57 I just translated your statement in Shqip (or Albanian). Wanted to wish you luck as well! I think you have a good chance of becoming a steward. Kolrok | Msgs 14:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thanks to you as well! Sadly I'm not able to reply to you in Albanian :-) But one person simply cannot speak every language. I appreciate your translation. Thanks! -Barras 19:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

To the future steward

Hi, Barras! Having read your statement in stewards' elections page, that, in particular "I've a quite good understanding of Privacy Policy" and "I want to help …people asking for steward attention on IRC (helping with globally blocking crosswiki vandals…)", I found at least two points where the scope your experience intersects with the certain problems I came across recently. In particular, this essay and this talk of mine may be of interest for you. Whenever my vote for you shall be helpful in the stewards' elections, I shall appreciate to exchange opinions with you upon these subjects. Best regards, — Cherurbino 10:30, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply


Kannst dir das hier bitte mal ansehen? jetzt geht nur Übernahme. Die Frage ist welcher Account hinzugefügt wird nach der Umbenennung, da höhst wahrscheinlich beide das gleiche Passwort haben. Danke --WizardOfOz talk 19:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mh...ich würde sagen den einen nach ..._(usurped) verschieben und dann den alten Geaser auf den geünschten schieben... sprich usurption. -Barras 19:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Das meinte ich auch mit Übernahme :D thx. --WizardOfOz talk 16:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Dann sag das doch gleich ;-) -Barras 16:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Kann nichts dafür dass du mich nicht verstehst :D --WizardOfOz talk 16:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Vielleicht liegts ja auch an mir ;-) Weist ja...Mein Deutsch ist eher...naja... wollen wir dann halt mal nicht drüber reden lol. -Barras 16:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations for your election !

Well, I think the headline is explicit enough !! VonTasha 17:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! -Barras 18:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
Aye, Congratulations!! Jalexander 18:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hi Barras,

Could you please move Wikimedia Brasil to Mutirões pelo Conhecimento Livre (the actual name) in order to create a new proposal for the chapter?

Thanks in advance, Béria Lima msg 19:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Done - 100 out of 251 subpages moved. Rest needs to be done manually. -Barras 20:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Barras, this is a lie, that request was an act of vandalism, the person who made the request and does not accept any ideas that are not disclosed, made this grotesque act. I urge the restoration of the pages. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:47, 3 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

And, I have to ask to make a reversal of all acts of it, on any page that belongs to the Wikimedia Brazil. I will not make the request for sanctions, because it is yours to consider. I'm tired of childishness. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Well, I doubt that a request made by a former cu and crat from a major wiki and current admin on commons makes a vandalism request. -Barras 09:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Believe me, it's weird, but her posture is known. As you can see on the page of Wikimedia Brazil, there is nothing she placed in the Meta page She disagrees with the model, and rather than argue, takes these attitudes. If you still doubt that it is capable only see the "log" of she on Wikipedia-pt, you see that she was kicked out of office bureaucrat, blocked for a while and things like that. Another thing, I am a volunteer of the Wikimedia Brazil, she is from Wikimedia Portugal. Just as she asked, I pray. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 04:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Just for the record: You don't have to discuss this with me. I jst did the move, because I can also move subpage since I'm an administrator here. She could have simply done it herself, but it would have take more time. I just did it because I can do it much quicker with my local administrative access on meta. Please discuss the move with Beria on her talk page. I really don't have an opinion to it. If normal users could do moves including subpages, she'd done it. I don't care about the massive problems ptwiki has. Also, I don't believe that a bureaucrat has done anything on ptwiki, since this wikis currently doesn't have any bureaucrats. This doesn't make your position better, imo. But please, as said above: Go to Beria's talk page. -Barras 08:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
I can not argue against vandalism, I'm just asking to reverse what you did. Not crossed your mind that are 200 pages and she does not belong to the group in question? It was hard to ask someone else? I'm just asking to reverse what was done, because it is vandalism, if you don't want, I will ask to another administrator. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 09:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
See my comment above. Discuss the massive problems ptwiki has with Beria and give me the result. Anyone can undo the move...some people with more, some with less work. -Barras 09:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Barras, here is not a " problem", is more a "brazilian community problem". And the "full" explanation about this request is here (in portuguese). Béria Lima msg 09:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Less work????????? Less Work???? As you can see "Brazilian problem, " she is out of the country criticizing the work of others. I will ask another administrator.

obs:I was administrator of the Strategic Planning, making several translations in projects such as Wikimania, I do various jobs for the Wikimedia Brazil, a volunteer of OTRS ... And unlike her, I do not speak, but go well, do not want to be insulted anymore. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 12:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply


What is the work with autopatroller? Memo18(contribs|talk|ro.wp(t)) 11:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just something for us admins to be a bit more lazy. It saves us some work. See Meta:Autopatrollers. -Barras 11:30, 6 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Automatic approval

Hi! Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but shouldn't a wiki explicitly state that automatic approval is allowed, per the bot policy? For example, vec.wikipedia's bot policy doesn't seem to mention automatic approval at all, yet for some reason it's listed as "allowed" in the table. Jafeluv 09:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

As it is mentioned on the table, just click there at "vec" and you get to this page. There you will find the notification, just above the content table. I usually only look on the table which seems to be correct. -Barras 09:26, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, but my point is that the page doesn't mention automatic approval, it just says that the wiki uses the standard bot policy and allows global bots. Automatic approval only applies to wikis which explicitly allow it, doesn't it? Jafeluv 09:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
As far as I understand it allows the standard bot policy and in this policy is the automatic approval permitted. That's how I understand it. If they allow and agree with this meta policy, then it include every part of it exempt mentioned differently on this page. -Barras 09:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hmm, that's not how I understand it. The section in the standard bot policy starts with If automatic approval is explicitly allowed on the wiki, which to me implies that by default it's not allowed. For example, is marked as "not allowed" in the table although its bot policy says that they use the standard bot policy and doesn't mention automatic approval at all. Jafeluv 09:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
This drives me crazy, I think we need to discuss this on steward-l or on the steward's noticeboard. I for example checked randomly such pages and found wikis were it is clearly stated that they disallow it. I also always looked at the request pages, see this archives for references. I remember that there were more similar cases. This is also a reason why I followed this and flagged the bot. -Barras 09:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
You're right, it's definitely not consistent either way. I'll post a question on the mailing list about this. Jafeluv 10:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Please also link to this discussion and also, if you want me to remove the flag again (better safe than sorry), then I will do this of course. However, this is a real problem with the bot policy. -Barras 10:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Posted a message there. If the locals object we can of course remove the flag again, but I don't think it's necessary to do it just for bureaucracy's sake. It probably won't be all that controversial anyway. Jafeluv 10:38, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Lock requested...

...not for me, but for my sock PM Editor, because I forgot the password and don't remember which email address I had used to create it. This proves that it is my account. Thanks, Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 18:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Done. -Barras 18:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bullets, numbers...?

Hi Barras. Of course I'm fine with this. I changed it, because I saw bullets by the other two requests (for admin and cratrights). I guess I was wrong. :-) Kind regards, Trijnstel 14:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

We normally use bullets on requests, however for easier counting (since checkusers and oversights need a certain number of votes to pass) we use numbers for cu/os elections. I know, it's sometimes kinda confusing :-) -Barras 14:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hello Barras, I am a user of ptwiki and i'd like your help.

I recently renamed my account at ptwiki and then on enwiki. The problem is that I usually translate articles from other languages​​, but now I'm havin problems with my Global login (SUL).

The eswiki bureaucrat sent me to try changing my name here on meta, but do not know if this will solve my problem.

Is there some kind of process that I can correct the error?

I changed my name Willy oath to Willy Weazley.


Willy oath 19:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Willy. I can rename you here on meta upon request on CHU. You then should go to Special:MergeAccounts to reunify your your account so you have a global account. Currently, your new username does not have a SUL which might be the reason for the problems you have. Kindly, -Barras 19:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • its Done there.

Or I think so.

Willy oath 21:27, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Will you ...

Will you say enough is enough on this matter, please? Thanks, Shustov 18:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I completely endorse the action taken. -Barras 19:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

In case: I assume you have red this, haven't you? Thanks. Shustov 22:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

One more discrepancy

The following reason(s) were used for this block: resetting to indef, had second chance. At the same time, on 20:32, 5 March 2011, (UTC), fr33kman wrote: "… let's now call it a 1.5th(?) chance now." Sincerely! Shustov 20:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

  • If we [admins] find that a block is necessary (no matter if covered by policy), the block can simply be issued. Also, our local policy allows to block blocked users from other Wikimedia-Projects on side. We could simply use as a reason "As per your block on the English Wikipedia". Nothing more to say. Thread closed. -Barras 21:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Implement, maybe?

Hello Barras. Sorry to bother you but I'm wondering if we can implement once for all the community wishes regarding RfAs in meta. Regards, -- Dferg ☎ talk 18:16, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mh... I think many people missed that poll. However, Herby's conclusion sounds like what we should do. -Barras 18:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Meinen Benutzernamen global zu ändern

Vielleicht könten Sie mir helfen: ist es eine Moeglichkeit meinen Namen global ändern?... Danke sehr. — D.Deu. 12:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hallo! Derzeit ist es leider nicht möglich den Namen global zu ändern. Dazu muss man eine Umbennung auf jedem Wiki einzeln beantragen. (Sadly there is no tool to globally rename someone, you will have to request renaming on every single wiki.) Sorry, can't help much here :-( -Barras 14:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Das macht nichts :-). Danke sehr. — D.Deu. 15:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oppression in Chinese wikipedia

I have posted a cases about oppression in Chinese wikipedia. Looking forward to your assisstance, recommendations or judgment. Thank you very much.--Coekon 08:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I commented. -Barras 08:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. But could you help me to do that. I use meta wiki first time. and i dont know how to do it. thanks again--Coekon 08:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think there is some kind of introduction at the top of the RFC-page. I haven't used this page myself yet. I assume you have to create a subpage like [[Requests for comments/<describing name here>]] and add it to the RFC-page under open / year 2011. -Barras 08:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Looks correct what you did, btw. -Barras 08:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much. This is my good beginning in meta wiki. Ha ha~ --Coekon 08:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Barras. in RFC, we are arguing with same persons in our local wikipedia. It makes RFC become non sense to solve the matter. I need some independent persons to make some comment to solve this matter. It also is the purpose of RFC, i think. could you please to help us? Thank you--Coekon 10:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

selamatkan aku

Hello, are you steward? Help me! Because I was blocked there (accusation) canvassing at Indonesian Wikipedia. And lately I've never done anything like that. Just look list contribution at there. Please (if possible) revoked the block status.

Oh ya, I also ask to release the SockPuppet I was there named id:User: Erik Evermtus at Indonesian Wikipedia because this account will be used as a substitute if the main account stolen by others such as id:User:Kenrick95Sock. Thank you --Erik Evrest 04:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I sadly can't help you. The Indonesian Wikipedia has an active team of local admins. You will have to appeal you unblock to them. Best, -Barras 09:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Help me! That means the same as abuse of authority. So blocking is a feasible status revoked and the blocker can be removed his admin status. But the admin of there not answering my messages through their talk pages in wp.en. Help me! Erik Evrest 00:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Again, I can't help you. Stewards do not overrule local actions. You will have to appeal the block locally to an admin. -Barras 08:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Help me! how to contact a local admin if I am currently being blocked. Meanwhile, if I contacted via en.wp course they're not active there.
Hiks, hiks, you're evil, you not have the heart

--Erik Evrest 08:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Try Special:EmailUser. I, as a steward, can't help you. Contact them via meta or what ever. I won't unblock you, I'm not a sysop on the project in question, I won't overturn a local decision. (And this section will be kept here, not moved below!) -Barras 13:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Help me! how I can contact them via surel while I do not have email. Moreover enter email at surel. If the steward is not going to bare blocked status because they have the local admin. What about the incident when the Main Page Wikipedia Malay divandal by an anon by accident have not been protected? (I hope you know about that) When was the local admin too busy for anything else so that the steward who should handle it. How is it possible that the stewards do not handle it? And again, anyway I see no changes in the admin user from Indonesia wikipedia even active here. If still denied, try to specify the admin or user of an active Indonesia wikipedia here. Help me! --Erik Evrest 01:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Leave this section on this place where it was before!!! And once more, as long as there are active local admin, we don't act there. If you don't have an email address, then I can't help you. Also it is not the job of stewards to take care of unblocks set somewhere. Email the local admins, contact them via another wiki or whatever. I won't and I can't help you. -Barras 08:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Account ArbcomDE-l

Hallo Barras,

Das Benutzerkonto hier auf Meta User:ArbcomDE-l täuscht vor, etwas mit dem Schiedsgericht der deutschen WP zu tun zu haben: arbcomde-l ist die offizielle Emailadresse des Schiedsgerichts, so veröffentlicht auf einigen Seiten. Dadurch kann es zu Verwechslungen mit unbekannten Folgen kommen. Ein ähnliches Konto, Arbkomde-l, wurde auf der deutschen WP bereits umbenannt und gesperrt. Weil dieses Konto auf Meta ebenfalls nichts mit dem Schiedsgericht zu tun hat, beantrage ich dessen Umbenennung und Sperrung. Ich selber bin Mitglied des Schiedsgerichts. Danke im Voraus, Gruß -jkb- 13:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Alles klar, ist erledigt, Benutzer ist gesperrt und umbennant. -Barras 13:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Recht vielen Dank, schöne restliche Sonntagssonne (hm...), Gruß -jkb- 13:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Danke, dir auch! (Hier hat sie gerade wieder angefangen zu scheinen :D) -Barras 13:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Geht nicht, gerade versucht, es kommt "Login error Cannot create account: the requested username is already taken in the unified login system." Stimmt:, Gruß -jkb- 15:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mh, naja, damit kann dann dieses Konto nicht mehr benutzt werden, ist ja auch gut so. -Barras 15:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Eben, und Email ist nicht aktiviert (Klar), daher prima. Danke und Gruß -jkb- 15:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Freut mich, dann haben wir ja erreicht was wir wollten! -Barras 15:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Kann der Benutzer sich denn nach der Umbenennung mit dem ursprünglichen Passwort dieses arbcom-SUL-Accounts noch irgendwo anmelden und automatische Konten erstellen? Das wäre dann auch die Frage bei möglichen weiteren Umbenennungen alter Funktionsnamenaccounts.
Schau dazu auch mal auf de:MediaWiki Diskussion:Titleblacklist#problematische, ungeeignete Benutzernamen rein, da geht's auch um die Blacklist auf Meta und wie das nun am besten alles eingetragen werden und weitergehen kann. Jene Diskussion begann auf de:WP:AAF#bitte sperren (bzw. eigentlich schon früher), das auf AAF wird wohl heute Nacht archiviert. Auf der Disk. zur Titleblacklist kannst du als Steward wohl helfen, derHexer ist grad weiterhin noch nicht zugegen. Viele Grüße --Geitost diskusjon 18:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Konkrete Nachfrage: Gehe ich recht in der Annahme, dass du bei obigem Account nur den E-Mail-Ausgang gesperrt hast, es aber auch für Stewards nicht möglich ist, den E-Mail-Eingang zu sperren, und dass es bei noch nicht eingetragener Mailadresse somit nötig werden kann, das Konto zu verschließen, damit man dann nicht mehr ins Konto reinkommt und keine E-Mail mehr eintragen kann? Und dass es nach Umbenennung und Kontensperrung bei SUL-Accounts weiterhin möglich wäre, dass der Accountinhaber sich woanders wieder einloggt (z.B. auf de) und dort eine Mailadresse einträgt? --Geitost diskusjon 18:56, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, der User kann den Arbcomde-l account nicht mehr nutzen. Er wurde umbenannt und kann immernoch emails empfangen. Dadurch, dass ich ihn gesperrt habe, kann er auch nicht mehr Sulen. Da gibt es irgendwo etwas, dass, wenn man auf dem Homewiki gesperrt ist man nicht mehr neue Accounts machen kann. Da meta sein Homewiki war, kann er das jetzt nicht mehr und umbennant ist er auch, also den Name ArbcomDE-l gibt es de facto nicht mehr. Das empfangen von mails/mail eingang sperren, können wir als Stewards nicht. Auf jeden Fall kann er mit dem Konto nichts mehr anfangen. Grüße, -Barras 19:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ok, danke, dann hab ich's jetzt verstanden. Dass er mit dem umbenannten Account Mails empfangen kann, ist ja kein Problem. Dann reicht das also so. Sollte man dann wohl mit den anderen Funktionsnamenaccounts ähnlich machen, siehe MediaWiki-Disk. Und du könntest dann wohl die Ausdrücke in der Meta-Titleblacklist eintragen als Admin hier? Kannst ja mal was zum Vorgehen dort auf der Disk. schreiben. --Geitost diskusjon 19:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, ja ich kann, aber werde davon die Finger lassen. Jedes mal, wenn ich mich daran versucht habe, ging das irgendwie schief. Mit solchen Zeugs kennt sich User:Lustiger seth sicherlich aus, oder, wenn er nicht kann mal User:Hoo man fragen, der bei solchen Sachen vielleicht auch helfen kann. Ansonsten sind solche Accounts hier auf meta eher weniger ein Problem, die können einfach und unbürokratisch gesperrt und dann umbennant werden. Gruß, -Barras 20:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ja, Lustiger seth guckt da schon in die Diskussion ab und zu rein. Gruß -jkb- 23:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, but...

Barras, why are you accusing me to do canvassing in a log (do you really believe in this? Are you saying who i had "...systematic initiation of direct contact with a target group of individuals commonly used during political campaigns." source using a log? Please... I have >6 years of project, sysop on almost 4 years (without any, any issue...) totally low profile admin and bureaucrat. Why i will do canvassing?

It's too difficult to assume who may i had exaggerated in this log...? Dferg seems the same strange things. May you suggest that i'm canvassing with Dferg, contacted him? I don't have any external contact with users. Now Meta turns a secret society? Sorry by my message (you can revert if inappropriate, no problems). Regards. Leandro Martinez msg 02:47, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I do. Linking this way to an ongoing RfA is clearly a kind of canvassing/advertisement. As we all know the community is split into two parts. Such links clearly result in bringing people to vote support/oppose. This is and was very clearly a no-go. There are better ways to remove flags instead of leaving a link to a RfA in a log. And it is canvassing, because people usually log into the log and follow links. I do this myself, but well, wouldn't vote on projects I'm not active at. What you did was clearly not ok. This is one thing which brought many one-time voters here and made the decision for the crats even harder. That's it. Nothing more to say. -Barras 07:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Sorry to me in the middle of that, but...
Barras you know how much i respect you as a user and a steward, and i continue to do. But accuse a user of canvassing for point out another user misbehavior in an RfA is kinda ridiculous. If he had pointed another user logs I could agree with you, but since the problem linked was with the same user, is a valid question.
And again, i love the way you people think. So post a log is canvassing but contest every single support vote by violating privace policy is ok? And after crats who have problems. Béria Lima msg 07:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Probably you haven't noticed, but I haven't been involved in any way in your RfA. It is nothing new that you people from are divided into two parts. My comment still stands. The was a way to canvass a RfA. There are better ways to remove people's rights without linking to an RfA. Especially in cases such as this one, where it is clear that everything turns into drama... He just wasn't the only one canvassing, that's sure, but one always gets the blame. That's it. There is no need for more discussion, my point stands. I won't say sorry or something. I still stand by what I said, this was a kind of canvassing a vote. Feel free to drop more comments, I may just ignore it... I'm sick of it, really. -Barras 10:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hi Barras, I've spoken to you on IRC the day before yesterday about Abigor and his alledged Xxxxxx xxxxxx fucks Xxxxx Xxxxxx in his ass-account. According to you the checkusers were discussing this and there should be a response to this. I haven't seen any reaction so I'm wondering why this is taking so long. Information on nl:Overleg gebruiker:Abigor/blockmsg shows that the account and Abigor are linked and that the information came from a CU done on meta. Could you tell me when and where a reaction will be given from the checkusers about this account which has been linked to Abigor? Thank you Silver Spoon 20:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

We've been discussing this a fair bit. Currently we are discussing the whole case on our private wiki. I sadly feel unable to say something yet as long as the discussion is on-going. We surely won't forget about it and one of us involved cus will make a statement once we've finished the discussion. Please be patient. -Barras 20:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Well thank you, I'm just making sure there's still discussion about it. I hope there will be a response soon. People are getting anxious (just like me). Silver Spoon 20:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
We worked it out and Dferg now finally posted something on the RfC. Hopefully that helps. -Barras 18:33, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Re Abigor again, you wrote, in the RfC, none of us cus can provide the IPs or will provide them, because it is quite simply against any policy, even if requested by the user himself. I don't understand this. From Privacy policy:
It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be released by Wikimedia volunteers or staff, in any of the following situations: [...]
2. With permission of the affected user, [etc.]
  • This does not require you to disclose the information, but it does not appear to be against policy. Can you clear this up? --Abd 01:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
    This is dead obvious - if the IPs are not Abigor's, and he is indeed innocent, then Barras would have just released the IP of some other user publicly without their permission, which is most certainly against the policy. His entire reason behind wanting the IPs is to show that they aren't his, right? Simple logic would suggest that the IPs are then someone else's. If Abigor wants to know his IP, he can look it up at any number of websites on the internet. However, when it comes to determining who is a sockpuppet of who, that is why we elect checkusers. If he wants a second opinion, he is free to ask one of them. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
    Oh, and before you comment on how the IP address of an unknown user won't help at all, consider this; the only people who could have used that IP realistically (as in they live in the same country), and who have expressed a desire to get him banned are Trijnstel, MoriaMoria and SilverSpoon from what I know. That means that the IP revealed would be one of three people - one of which might well get blocked for disruption as a result. It would be pretty obvious who it is then. But why am I even saying this? I don't understand why we are searching for even a ridiculous reason to save face for Abigor - and if we need to start to resort to blaming two global sysops and another globally trusted user (all of whom haven't been disruptive recently, to the point of being desysopped and blocked on multiple wikis), that might be an indication as to the validity of these claims. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Catch 22. No, Ajraddatz, this is an incorrect argument. Please think this all the way through. You just claimed on the RfC talk page that the odds of Abigor not being the vandal were "astronomically small." You clearly considered the identification to be beyond a reasonable doubt. The user's wiki reputation was completely ruined by this identification. I am not claiming that the information *must* be released, not by volunteer checkusers. The Foundation might be under a legal obligation, that's speculative. But fairness, here, suggests that giving the information to Abigor would be a kindness, and against this you would protect the speculative privacy of a gross vandal who deliberately acted, if Abigor is innocent on this, to assassinate Abigor's reputation?
What claims? As I see it, Abigor has requested the IP information. He was told that this was against policy, when it is not against policy. This brings up issues of fundamental fairness. If a user is identified as socking, to the point of being sanctions, it is unfair to not allow them to see the evidence against them, unless there is strong reason not to. None of this means that we should allow further disruption, and enough has become clear, even aside from the vandal account, to justify blocking. --Abd 02:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I've said earlier, and does not in any way go against it. I'm saying that Abigor is requesting the evidence, obviously, to try and prove it wrong. That's what someone uses evidence for, to work in their favour. The policy says that an IP can be released upon user's consent, but surely, if he is requesting that the IP be released, it must be to try and prove that it isn't him? That presupposes two things, the first of which is that the IP is not his. Therefor, Barras could be releasing an IP without consent. Second, checkuser is not always 100% accurate, even in cases like this. Barras would be releasing an IP which, either way, could be someone else's. This has nothing to do with my personal belief that the checkusers know how to do their job, this is simple logic. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I haven't read it all above, simply, I don't have the time. I can't release any info about IPs, UAs and stuff, because it isn't necessarily against the policies of Wikipedia, but against the laws I've to follow as a European citizen. I've quite simply to follow German and European law. This is very very strict about personal info. I don't post IP addresses and/or UAs to the public as this could result in big problems for me. All I do here is in my capability as a volunteer and I'm not going to get into troubles with laws and stuff just to proof what actually 3 CUs confirmed. If you want, you can ask the staff members to help. They also have checkuser rights here and may not be bound to quite strict law as we European citizens. If anyone of us posts the CU result, we could get sued for it actually, and the foundation is sadly quite known to be not really helpful to their volunteers. -Barras 07:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Barras - I assume the WMF would provide for legal defense if that happened. What additional help would be useful? SJ talk | translate  
Acually, I strongly doubt this. I remember a sentence by a staff member by the sense, saying that what we do as volunteers is our problem. It was also about privacy related stuff. I think this says all. But as I now quieted my CU access here on meta, I can't do it anyway. So I'm finally out of all this. -Barras 22:41, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Merely to support Barras's statement - privacy laws varied widely throughout the world and, for example, I am governed by both EU and UK laws. While the laws may not be very clear at times the only people who can begin to interpret them are those who are legally qualified. I would also suggest trying staff for this. --Herby talk thyme 08:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Abigor has consented to release of checkuser data. Are you saying, Barras, that German and European law does not allow release of this information to the user on user request and consent? That would be strange. I find it odd that checkusers would be concerned about releasing data for a vandal who might have spoofed being a user, but have no concern about the release of conclusions from the data, which could actually be libelling the user! My opinion is that Abigor has the right to legally compel the disclosure, though he might choose not to assert that.
  • Note, some, commenting on this, have assumed that the purpose is to attempt to exonerate Abigor. That's just plain wrong. I assume that the conclusions were sound, and Dferg has made it very clear, by an edit after closure of the RfC, exactly what was found. Checkuser cannot rule out certain possibilities, and Abigor should be allowed to investigate them, being responsible for what was done with his account. Even if his account was hacked, to gain the Dirt Diver password, for example, he'd still be properly blocked, for negligence, and he did certain other things that fully justify the block. He's not "innocent," even if it turns out that he didn't make the vandal edit in question.
  • There is no unclarity about the disclosure being legally allowed, per policy, given Abigor's demonstrated consent, so I remain puzzled by the objections. --Abd 18:39, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
    • Again, I'm bound to European/German law. The privacy policy/checkuser policy and also the foundation usually follows US-American law which is actually not that hard as the European counterpart. The foundation is based in San Francisco and those has to follow US-American law. I'm an individual working voluntarily on this project and have to follow the law in my country, not the one in the USA. Just because the USA probably allows this doesn't necessarily mean that Europe or Germany does the same. I'm not going to post the complete results of the CU as this could result in big troubles for me. Abigor would then probably be able to sue me. I really can imagine better things than having a lawsuit about my work as volunteer. As I already said above, all staff members have the technical ability to run checks, so feel free to get them to post CU results or ask any other checkuser. I'm not going to post the stuff. I think this can finally be seen as the end of this discussion here. Thanks, -Barras 19:07, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, Barras, I won't trouble you again about this. My comments were only a result of your expressed opinion that did not correctly state WMF policy , that's all. --Abd 19:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Megrelische Wikipedia

Halo Barras,
ich habe ein Problem in der megrelischen Wikipedia. Vielleicht könten Sie mir helfen.
During the incubator period of the xmf wiki I used to work there under account Dato deutschland. Later I've changed the username an created global username, and there is such a situation in xmf wiki - ther exists user Dawid Deutschland countributionless and contributions of Dato deutschland, but the user itself doesn't exist (Yes, there are contributiobs without user). If it's possible, can these users be merged?
Danke schön und liebe Grüße, — D.DEU. 15:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

P. S. Antworten Sie bitte mir deutsch. Danke. — D.DEU. 15:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hallo Dawid! Wie gewünscht kommt die Antwort natürlich auf Deutsch. :-)
Das Problem besteht darin, dass du die Bearbeitungen im Incubatorwiki unter dem Namen "Dato deutschland" gemacht hast. Diese wurden dann zu dem neuem Wiki importiert. Dadurch werden die Bearbeitungen automatisch dem Namen zugeordnet, der die Edits gemacht hat. Leider ist es hier nicht möglich einfach umzubennen. Du könntest versuchen den Account "Dato deutschland auch auf xmlwiki zu erstellen und dann kann man 2 mal umbennen, wenn die Bearbeitungen vorher einem existierendem Namen zugeordet wurden. Ich hoffe das hilft dir weiter! (Bei Wikipedia ist es üblich immer "du" statt "Sie" zu benutzen, also keine Angst, ein freundliches un kollegiales "du" ist immer in Ordnung) Viele Grüße, -Barras 18:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, ich duze :-)
Wie so 2 mal umbennen? Dato deutschland → Dawid Deutschland? oder Dawid Deutschland → Dato deutschland → Dawid Deutschland? (Ich meine, erste ist unmöglich, weil Dawid Deutschland existiert schon).
Und auch, wer kann in xmfwiki umbennen? Dort sind derzeit doch keine Bürokraten. Köntest du das als Steward? :-)
Danke schön und Grüße, — D.DEU. 05:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, wenn Dato deutschland erstellt wurde, kann man Dawid Deutschland zu Dawid Deutschland (renamed) (oder etwas ähnlichem umbennen) um dann Dato deutschland zu Dawid Deutschland zu machen. (Dawid Deutschland → Dawid Deutschland (renamed) → Dato deutschland →Dawid Deutschland). -Barras 08:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ach so. Und so: Dawid Deutschland → Dato deutschland (so wird Dato's Bearbeitungen in die Beiträge Dawds verschieben) und dan wieder → Dawid Deutschland. Ich meine, so ist leichter :-) (Natürlich, wenn es möglich ist). Und noch eine Biette: könntest du das alles machen? :-) — D.DEU. 08:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ja, die Variante klingt einfacher, aber das habe ich noch nie so versucht und weis deshalb nicht ob das funktioniert. Leider kann ich das nicht machen, siehe eine Sektion weiter unten. -Barras 08:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hm.. Leider.. Also, andere Stewards können. O.K. Danke schön für die Hilfe und viele Grüße, — D.DEU. 08:40, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Die anderen deutschsprachigen Stewards sind Eptalon und DerHexer. Frag einfach einen von denen und gib ihnen einen link hierher. Die können dir sicherlich weiterhelfen. :-) -Barras 08:43, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Wie erwartet ist es nicht möglich, die Bearbeitungen zweier Autoren durch einfaches Umbenennen zusammenzuführen. Auch das Übertragen von einem Account auf einen anderen geht nicht. Importierte Versionen werden auch nicht auf das umbenannte Konto übertragen. Alles blieb nach der von Dawid vorgeschlagenen Umbenennungsreihe beim Alten. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your service

I see, Barras, that you just removed your steward bit. Thank you for your service to the WMF family of wikis, since the end of February. If that was an error, I'm sure you can get the bit back on request. Good luck. --Abd 01:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

And ... welcome back.

--Abd 21:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you are around

This needs attention - thanks (will post to Df as well - info in CU log :)). --Herby talk thyme 11:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, was away the whole day. I've globally suppressed the account and delete/suppressed the stuff on eswikisource. I think an global IP block is now not longer needed. -Barras 21:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Seems to be working now

[1] Best regards, Finn Rindahl 11:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mh... I tried it, but it didn't work. So I stopped the process and closed the page. Weird. -Barras 12:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

help me (again)

Please, I was blocked again at Indonesian Wikipedia. I do not bully really. I just told to reconsider their decision. I even talked more and more refined in every voters as well. And again, on the nomination before I even do worse than that blocked why do not I? Or because I was mocking the id:User:Sentausa "Si Lamban dari WikiLand" (The Delay of WikiLand) I scoff at id:User:Ezagren "Anak Durhako" (Son of Lawless) ? It's just a joke wrote again. Similarly, id:User:Mimihitam give a nickname to id:User:Willy2000 "BadutWiki" (ClownWiki) in here ==> id:User talk:Willy2000/arsip3#Interwiki. Please consider again, have mercy on me to cook I have to enjoy the Christmas holiday with iron bars in the state like this. Similarly, the blocking period before this where I have to go through the school holidays with the same situation like this. Try to imagine if you are so I do it how? --Erik Evrest 01:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Stewards do not override local decisions fr33kman 02:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Abuse filter

Hi, I've recently be researching the abusefilters and came across the ones used on meta, i noticed you were the last to edit a filter. So I was just wondering, if i import one of those filters in to a Wikia wiki, would it work correctly or are they just for Wikipedia style wikis? Any help on the matter is appreciated greatly. Daking123 09:09, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, but I'm not really familiar how the things on wikia work and can't say if our filters will work there or not. -Barras 09:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
That's fine, thanks for the reply. Daking123 11:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hey slacker, woz up? :) fr33kman 02:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nothing, just a bit busy in real life. Hope you are fine! :-) -Barras 11:43, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hi. I'm Elfhelm and confirm that the IRC account Elfhelm is me. Elfhelm 17:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Added you to #wikimedia-privacy. -Barras 17:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

irc nick confirmation

I'm maikking and confirm that my accounts on IRC is "maikking" and "zlyadmin".Maikking 17:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Added you to #wikimedia-privacy. -Barras 17:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sintingegneria username change

Hi. I would like to ask you to change my username into SintSimone and to shift every my contribute to that new account. I have already created this new accont but I hope it is not a problem to you. Let me now any news. Thank you


Hello, could you please give a look at the last comments in German and decide what to do with the request? Thanks, Nemo 14:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Will look at it. -Barras 13:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ich habe nochmals mit genauerer Erklärung geantwortet. Lady Whistler Projekt Andere Wikis (Project Other Wikis) 20:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Könntest du dir meine Antwort nochmal anschauen? LG Lady Whistler Projekt Andere Wikis (Project Other Wikis) 13:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe da jetzt nicht nochmal geschrieben, aber mal Hoo nach seiner Meinung gefragt, die er dort auch schon gepostet hat. -Barras 13:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Countervandalism Network/Channels

Hello Barras. I moved back the channel here, everything is explained on the summary. I hope you would have understood me, please remember that's not my fault if the channel is now in a second channel namespace. I don't think that removing it from the list, i.e. preventing others to use this tool, is a good idea, just because it's not in the #cvn namespace. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 21:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Non-standard will be removed in future from there too and the channel owners will be asked to merge with cvn. However, that will take a bit. Second namespace has nothing to do with us. Please remove it again, or just get back to the normal namespace :-). Oh, and yes I know why you moved to the second namespace, you just don't like not being the founder and that I moved the founder flags to our role account with this stuff. -Barras 21:42, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I'm sure we will find a compromise. As I already said, I created this channel to help other stewards by giving one more tool to monitor wikis, so my aim was not to be in conflict with anyone by doing that. I don't have any problems with moving the channel to the #cvn namespace, but I don't see why there is a need to give so many people access there, as there is no need for staff to make the bot work. I do not oppose to give staff access there (I gave you access the first time for that), but I really don't understand what prevents me to have the +s flag. For the foundership, I really don't care, if it's given to a secure account that's actually better. To sum up, except from the +s flag you removed from me, I agree with everything but was shocked that you removed permissions without asking first. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 14:36, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is it allowed in Wikipedia?

To keep in the pages of wiki Administrator's personnel thesis? at ? Other problem is We call Computer as same in English, but admin forcibly used his word Ganpukar of Computer. I have proof that thousands of published books called it Computer not Ganpukar. If some one oppose him he started abusive language. That is the reason never got attraction to Sindhi community. Plz check record there. Other things are he locked CSS due to that on the same site there are lot of font styles appeared there. He is not able to set commonCSS or Monocss. We are in trouble to work in our local Sindhi language. I don't know where to say for this problem. Record history says all the situation there. I appeal plz warn him to follow rules, other wise he will continue use his personnel details and personnel promoted articles there. Dear I am sorry If u r not right person to say all about this, Plz suggest me where I can raise this issue. My ID is same. His thesis is not a violetion?ماحولياتي_انتظام_ڪاڻ_اُپُگِرَهِي_عَڪس_ضماءُ_۽_درجه_بنديءَ_جي_طريقن_جو_اَڀياس

Alixafar 01:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mh... I can't do much here. Maybe go to RfC and discuss it there. I don't understand this language version of Wikipedia and might probably not be able to help you. -Barras 11:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

IRC Cloak: forgot password

Hi Barras, I registered the IRC cloak King_of_Hearts a few years back and haven't used it for a long time, so I forgot my password. Is there a way to get my password reset? Thanks, King of 05:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you still have the email address you used for the nick registration, then yes. Go to #freenodeconnect (even if logged out) and ask kindly for a staffer to send you a password reset. Best, -Barras 09:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply


I have done as was outlined to recive my cloak and register; however, when I still do a whois check on my name the cloak isn't there. Please advise. Jab843 14:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

We don't always do them right now when you've sent the request. We need to check if everything is fine with the request and then always wait for some more requests, so it is more effective to get them done. Please be patient. -Barras 16:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Cloak also :)

Hi, thank you for you advices. I done what you wanted. would you please active my account?Reza1615 18:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Can you please make a confirming edit on your user page on fawiki with the edit summary "IRC cloak request" and post the link here for me? Thanks, -Barras 19:01, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

IRC cloack request

Ok, I've done all the steps. Now what? PcTalk 18:06, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

IRC cloak request

Hi ! I did the steps you had asked me to do. But when I typed '/msg MemoServ send wmfgc IRC cloak request', I'm seeing a message- "You are not logged in". Could you help me out ? :) Souravmohanty2005 16:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I saw this on recent changes, you need to follow the instructions at '/msg NickServ help identify' -- essentially you need to type '/msg Nickserv identify yourircnick yourircpassword' without the quotes. Then you can try to re-send your memo. Hope this helps! :) The Helpful One 16:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thanks User:Thehelpfulone. I have sent the memo after following your instructions :) ! Souravmohanty2005 14:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Re: IRC cloak request

here's the diff (I realized the missed subject in my diff on userpage just when I clicked to complete the procedure, sorry)--Shivanarayana 17:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

IRC cloak request (2) :)

Hi Barras, I've asked for a cloak recently and I remember doing this procedure with Orashmatash. He told me that I should have waited awhile. But I don't see any improvement... So could you help me? Here I had done the diff requested...--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 13:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)Reply