User talk:MF-Warburg

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Dresden commemorative plaque nothing happened.jpg

Dates[edit]

Great that you solved that! Something similar should probably be applied to {{Steward election status}}, though I don't really get why we don't create a new template every year or we should edit {{Sr-new statement}} so it includes the parameters - currently the statement pages don't have the required parameters filled in and show "These steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted.". Savhñ 10:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, we can do whatever option works. Another one would be to change the preload for the creation of the statement and vote pages. I have no particular solution for this. --MF-W 10:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

In re. User_talk:MF-Warburg/Archive6#Dellieplagiat[edit]

Hello again. If you have problems with logging to labs, etc. and I can be of any help, feel free to ping me when I'm around. Bryan could in theory also help as well. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 10:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, let's try it the next time we are both on IRC. --MF-W 01:50, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Language committee/Status/wp/inh[edit]

Dear, MF-Warburg! March 9 You have removed the page Language committee/Status/wp/inh. Tell me please what was it for? And how do I create this page again? It refers to the Wikipedia project in the Ingush language, which is now actively developing and which we are trying to open. Sincerely, Adam-Yourist (talk) 08:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello. Status pages were previously used to keep track of the activity of Requests for new languages. They are not necessary anymore, as their information is now incorporated into the template at the top of each request. That's why I am deleting them and why their recreation is blocked. --MF-W 14:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Miniaturenwettbewerb[edit]

Sei gegrüßt MF-Warburg, ich habe zum Ende März den Versuch unternommen, beim Miniaturenwettbewerb einen Text zu plazieren. Dies ist mir aus Gründen, die auf Formalien von Wikipedia fußen, nicht gelungen. Meine Erfahrungen als Author in Wikipedia sind gerade so jung wie mein Versuch. Ich halte meinen Text weiterhin für einen, der die Anforderungen des Miniaturenwettbewerbs erfüllt, nämlich: 'neu geschriebene Miniaturen (Obergrenze max. 15.000 Byte) zu allen Themen' für die 'Kandidatur zum lesenswerten oder exzellenten Artikel'. Eventuell sehen ja Sie eine Möglichkeit, meinen Text irgendwo im Wikipedia-Universum unterzubringen !? Mit freundlichen Grüßen Geilich --Geilich (talk) 12:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Geilich, woran scheiterte denn der Versuch? --MF-W 13:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Disappointed[edit]

My dear brother MFW, I am disappointed by the one sided decision taken by your goodself. As you know that I have tirelessly worked with Wikimedia Foundation as test admin, translator and contributor in khowar wikipedia free of cost, I have yet claimed any single penny from WMF. I have tralslated more than 1000 system most used msgs into khowar language which are necessary for creation of Khowar wikipedia, Your goodself on the basis of one IP marked my and other contributors name as socks, Brother is this a fari decision? This is discrimination, this is violation of human rights. More than 04 active users are also tirelessly contribution without break, we have already completed all the requirements for creation of new wiki, Being a test admin i am authorised to edit all the articles but I have been wrongly linked with other contributers as sock, I am one of the Language Volunteer who are helping WMF free of cost by localizing the contents into pakistani languages. I am very very disappointed sir, please guide me that what is the next step, this is my personal email rachitrali@yahoo.com --Rehmat Aziz Chitrali 03:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Your next step is to account for the additional socking that I have listed here.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 18:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Revert back to incubator[edit]

@MF-Warburg @Barean Hunter please check this project also [1]by check user, stward or clerk that there is no activity since long and revert back to incubator as there is no activity and no active 3 users are availble [2]Thank --Rehmat Aziz Chitrali 06:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

SOS[edit]

Bonjour et permettez-moi de me présenter : je suis Claude Piard, jadis contributeur sous le pseudo de Claude PIARD aujourd’hui quasi-banni dans des conditions pour le moins contestables. Et vous êtes mon ultime recours pour dénoncer des dérives nuisibles in fine à la réputation de Wikepdia. J'ai en effet déjà tenté d'alerter le CAR qui s'est déclaré incompétent puis fais appel récemment aux bureaucrates où mes messages sur leur PdD, revertés dans les délais les plus brefs par Habertrix, n'entrent même plus suite à une prise de contrôle que n'approuverait probablement pas la CNIL. Mais ce genre de manœuvre risquée est bien révélateur en soi de l'urgence qu'il y a pour certain(e)s de "cacher les poussières sous le tapis".

Excusez-moi donc de vous ramener loin en arrière. En novembre 2013 Litlok est intervenu sur la PaS pour TI d’un article consacré à l’ « Attitude des juifs sous le régime nazi » pour suggérer son transfert dans la catégorie Recherche en histoire de Wikiversité, ce que j’ai fait le 6 janvier 2014 non sans provoquer de réactions de Lgd/Alginatus, longtemps sous simple IP.

Deux ans plus tard, en octobre 2016 la fausse manoeuvre d’un collègue et ami qui a rapatrié par erreur les travaux résultant de l'évolution de cet article sur Wikiversité a été prétexte au procès le plus rapide de l’histoire wikipédienne. Un RA pour « désorganisation de l’encyclopédie » initié par Heddryin à mon encontre déposé le 22 octobre à 12 heures 46 a abouti à mon blocage indéfini le 24 octobre à 18 heures 41, sanction prononcée par Lomita – après une large consultation certes – aux motifs allégués de « WP-POINT, meatpuppetry et contournement de décision communautaire », la décision étant appliquée par Starus. Le RA initial a été clos dès le 23 par la même Lomita à 9 heures 33 – soit 15 heures après son ouverture – pour « conflit d’édition » trois minutes exactement après le dépôt de mon argumentaire, la discussion se poursuivant ensuite uniquement sur le BA entre administrateurs où celui-ci est ignoré.

Mes tentatives d’appel au RA puis au CaR sont rapidement éludés avec pour seul effet le blocage de mon IP (2A01:E35:2E8F:19D0:E574:9CCA:1C5C:7825) et l’effacement de ma page présentation ainsi que sa PdD probablement trop compromettantes pour mes détracteurs. Depuis d’épisodiques tentatives de modestes interventions lors d’éphémères déblocages de mon IP se traduisent par son reblocage immédiat par Lomita au seul prétexte du test du canard, empêchant ainsi toute remise en cause de sa décision. Et actuellement ma détermination à faire rétablir l’exactitude des faits me vaut en RA une proposition de bannissement de la part d’Heggesipe. L’IP flottante de mon téléphone me permet néanmoins de porter à votre connaissance cette situation sur laquelle je reste prêt à fournir tous les renseignements complémentaires utiles. A cette fin, et faute d'autres moyens, mon adresse e-mail était accessible via mon ancienne page Claude PIARD. Celle-ci est certes effacée et je suppose que vous avez les outils nécessaires pour la ré-ouvrir. Néanmoins je me permets de vous la confirmer : crjpiard@free.fr

Merci d’avoir pris le temps de me lire et bonne semaine. Envoyé depuis une adresse flottante, faute de pouvoir le faire plus régulièrement.--37.166.90.99 16:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Je découvre que ma connexion n'est pas bloquée sur Meta-Wiki et vous confirme donc totalement ce qui précède.--Claude PIARD (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Cette version archivée avant effacement de ma page de discussion confirme et explicite ce qui précède. Elle démontre également que j’ai épuisé tous les recours avant de vous solliciter. Sans résultats autre que provoquer une demande de bannissement. Indifférence générale ? Complot ? Quoiqu’il en soit le remplacement du respect des principes fondateurs et des recommandations écrites par le concept de « décision communautaire » ( i.e. « au soviet ») a de quoi inquiéter pour l’avenir de Wikipédia francophone--Claude PIARD (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC).

Close RftAs[edit]

Hi, I would like to know if it is possible to close this request to be a translation administrator, 8 days have passed and there have been no objections. There is also a request from another user but I think it still needs more discussion. Thanks and regards. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 01:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Already Done. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 01:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

pawikisource[edit]

I noticed that you imported few pages from sourceswiki to pawikisource. Unfortunately, some books are incomplete (missing Index or Page namespace pages), likely because they were not directly assigned to the language category.

Here is the list of pages that still need to be imported. Could you finish the import, please? Or whom/where can I ask for such action?

I think having these books in both pawikisource and sourceswiki may be misleading for users. Ankry (talk) 12:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

You are right, I only imported the pages that were in the category. I will import the pages you listed. Thanks. --MF-W 13:26, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
User:Ankry: Done now. --MF-W 19:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Request Wikinews[edit]

Hi MF-W, as you can see here, the Dutch Wikinews community has published a request to launch. Unfortunately, none of the LangCom members has responds in a period of more than 30 days. We would like to know the decision (or at least some information) of the LangCom. Can you take a look at this? Can we do something more? Kind regards, --Livenws (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC) ps: I also have made contact with other langcom members who speak my own language (Dutch) buth they can not give me more information about the approval.

"Done" at Steward requests/Miscellaneous for Janevistan?[edit]

Hi MF-Warburg, you placed "Done" at Steward requests/Miscellaneous [3], but Janevistan was not deleted yet. Do you plan to delete Janevistan [4]?178.223.36.104 21:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

No. --MF-W 09:58, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok, but if no one intent to delete Janevistan, you should label that "Not Done". Right?178.222.118.171 12:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
No. --MF-W 20:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
How can you say "Done" if nothing has been Done! That contradicts logic. You didn't make any changes anywhere. Nothing was done. How can you say go and request deletion yourself, when you know that page was and is admin. locked. As a Steward you should act in an impartial way. And, by the way, did Igor Janev offended you or anybody here? What is the reason of your behavior?178.223.25.122 23:00, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Email[edit]

Hello, hope you in good health, I sent an email to you about Language committee before 1 week almost. --Alaa :)..! 23:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Answered. --MF-W 14:55, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Emails to Stewards OTRS[edit]

I sent emails to Stewards OTRS queue. I was told that it is largely backlogged, and a response may be unknown. What else do you know about the Stewards OTRS service? --George Ho (talk) 05:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, I know the content of some tickets. But I am not sure whether I understood your question correctly. --MF-W 09:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I'll rephrase: May you estimate when a steward answers my emails? --George Ho (talk) 15:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I dug it out and answered. --MF-W 15:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Have you answered them all or just one? --George Ho (talk) 16:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
The tickets I saw were all about one topic. My answer is to all of them. But feel free to reply by mail. --MF-W 16:40, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Sent you email directly. --George Ho (talk) 16:46, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

And another email to OTRS queue. --George Ho (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Another email[edit]

Hello again. I sent you another email. --George Ho (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

Continuing what we spoke about earlier, could you perhaps translate at least some of the mw:Universal Language Selector/Compact Language Links page into German?

Thanks a lot! --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:38, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

withdrawal of the negotiation page[edit]

Is this precisely forbidden by the rules in all Wikipedia? Why? I was not fairly blocked. I now want to completely delete the discussion page. This question is blocked by ukrviki administrators? --Jphwra (talk) 20:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I also ask to be able to lock my account forever. I very much ask him to block it to any Wikipedia I will not post anything. --Jphwra (talk) 07:11, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, what are you talking about? --MF-W 16:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi, he's talking about this: Wikimedia Forum#Why can not I remove a discussion page at the user's request?. We've started a discussion on ukwiki, so if you have any thoughts regarding whether we should remove user talk pages on users' requests or not, we'd be glad to hear your opinion here--Piramidion 17:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Help design a new feature to stop harassing emails[edit]

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.

NL gelöscht?[edit]

Da User_talk:Stemoc#Community_health_initiative.2FCommunity_health_initiative_Newsletter tut sich nichts. Ich wüsste aber gerne, was aus dem NL geworden ist. Das Projekt hat auf dem dewiki bisher keinerlei wiederhall gefunden, praktisch tot. --Manorainjan (talk) 14:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Der Inhalt der Seite war:
==Sign up for the Community health initiative Newsletter==
{{noise2|<center>Add your name below to have the Community health initiative Newsletter delivered to your talk page.</center></br><center> </center>}}
# 
#
Hilft das weiter? --MF-W 16:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Meta:Requests for bureaucratship/Billinghurst[edit]

Hi. I am not sure if you have seen the ping there, but there is an active RfB going on for almost a week, and basically because we only have 2 bureaucrats considering the current process it is up to you whether it moves forward, so everybody is waiting for your response. You seem to be back now, so I would appreciate you taking some time to deal with that. Thanks. --Base (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there MF-W. I was comming to say the same as Base did. Apologies for the incovenience but we need you to decide if you want to endorse it or oppose/abstain it because in the later case a regular vote should ensue. If you could please address this at your earliest it'd be good. With best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
(apparently my email from a couple of days ago didn't arrived or has been sent to your spam folder; curious to know why as I don't really use the email so tagging it as 'spam' is kind of fun)
Hello. What a weird situation with my spam filter! I will comment on the page. However please note that the request will be unsuccessful after my comment, as Meta:Requests_for_adminship#Bureaucratship and Meta:Bureaucrats make clear that a request needs to be endorsed by 2 bureaucrats to be able to be considered at all. --MF-W 16:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello again. Thank you for commenting there and unlocking the process. I have closed the request as unsuccessful given that there can't be two bureaucrat endorsements now and concerns have been raised. The validity of those cannot be evaluated by an uninvolved bureaucrat either since we both have commented. This unlocks phase two, where the candidate can open a new RfB which will be governed by the rules of RfA. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Allow users to restrict which user groups can send them direct emails/Usurps[edit]

Hi MF-Warburg, Thank you for joining the discussion about the new feature to allow users to restrict which user groups can send them direct emails. After you pointed out the situation of emailing people with 0 edits for usurps, we are planning to allow users in the groups bureaucrat, steward, wmf-supportsafety, and global-renamer to still have the ability to send email to these users. Does this address your concerns? And are there any other situations that you know about that would require the ability to contact someone on a wiki where they have made 0 edits? SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi MF-Warburg, In addition to allowing users in the groups bureaucrat, steward, wmf-supportsafety, and global-renamer to still have the ability send emails to accounts with 0 edits, we are considering allowing 0 edit accounts to receive emails from the home wiki where the account was created. These additions address all of the cases that we have encountered related to Education programs and off wiki editing event follow up. Please let us know if you know of other situations that we need to address. Again, thanks for your feedback. SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this addresses my concerns, and I can't think of any other situation except the ones you described. I added some technical note on the page. --MF-W 10:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Three deletion proposals under LangCom review?[edit]

Hello again. I see that you changed the status to under review by LangCom. However, I still see three deletion proposals as "open for discussion". May you or I please change the proposal statuses? Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)