User talk:MarcoAurelio

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
User page Welcome to my talk page Archives (current)→
Please, write your messages at the bottom of the page, use descriptive headers and don't forget to sign adding --~~~~ at the end of your comment. I will answer all messages left to me in this talk page so the conversations are not fragmented. Please note that:
  • I am human and I can make mistakes. If you think I did something wrong, tell me and we will discuss and review the situation.
    • That said, communication is a two-way street, and good communication requires civility.
    • I reserve the right to remove, archive, ignore or leave unreplied messages addressed to me or left on this talk page which are insulting, provocative, disruptive or otherwise not helpful, at my own discrection.
  • Requests to add or remove domains to the spam blacklist should be addressed at Talk:Spam blacklist.
  • Requests for help from an administrator or bureaucrat should be addressed to Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat for wider attention.
  • Requests for CheckUser information for Meta-Wiki should be posted at Meta:Requests for CheckUser information.
  • Please see Meta:Oversighters for how to request permanent removal of content from this project. Please do not make your request in public.
  • Requests for CentralNotice banners and campaigns are only addressed at CentralNotice/Requests.
  • Older discussions on this page are kept in the archive.
Click on the link to start a new topic.
Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Took me a while to figure out this was a reference to some enwiki essay. We have a similar page on meta, by the way. You're not the only one, but to me it is utterly confusing if people reference pages from other wikis without indicating this and expect people on a multilingual/multiproject wiki to understand what it is supposed to mean. No offense intended, just a small suggestion that local links might be less confusing/clearer to some people. Kind regards, --Vogone (talk) 16:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Dear Vogone. No offence taken & thanks for the tip. I though the shortcut was widely known. I'll try to do that local link if/when another similar situation appears. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 16:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
May I ask why Deny was used? Is it that extensive? MechQuester (talk) 22:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it's quite extensive and abusive. Not only those listed there but a flood of other vandal accounts uncovered as well and already dealt with. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 09:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Late but understood. Thank you. MechQuester (talk) 03:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

GS opt-out votes[edit]


Today I encountered amwiki, wanted to perform an action and to my surprise was not allowed to because of
(change visibility) 18:55, 14 December 2016 MarcoAurelio (talk | contribs | block) changed wikis in "Opted-out of global sysop wikis": added: amwiki; removed: (none) (readd, they voted to opt-out: Special:Permalink/2183101#Opt-out_for_Amharic_Wikipedia)
Are you sure adding it back per a 2010 consensus was a good idea? The wiki has only 2 admins left dealing with sysop actions. More importantly, do you have any page where one can keep track of these explicit local opt-outs? This is not too irrelevant since of course it sometimes happens that the GS status of a wiki does need to be re-evaluated and local opt-out decisions are important for that. Also, perhaps some rules need to be defined how long an opt-out consensus remains valid (not necessarily related to this case). Of course one could argue "then stewards take over" but then again if a wiki is left entirely abandoned anyone could simply place an unopposed request for re-opt-in. Kind regards, --Vogone (talk) 00:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I think it was not only a good idea but the right thing to do. When a wiki votes to opt-out, it should not be re-added without consent of said project even if they go below the threshold. In this case, they even complained recently about them being a GS wiki again against their wishes and without them being informed. That's how I noticed and took a look, and excluded them again. In purity, the action for which they complained was not one of a GS. Back in the days we used Talk:Global sysops/wiki set to report changes, but you can find some other requests filled at the SRM archives too. I think it'd be a good idea to have a table of wikis which explicitly opted-out so we can skip those from the default opt-in/opt-out procedures. That'd require a bit of digging into the logs and archives though. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 09:22, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, the complaint was what I was looking for. Makes a lot more sense now. And this is also the reason why I think such decisions should be tracked somewhere. Are you willing to do a bit research? If so, I would offer my help if needed. --Vogone (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Sure. I think I remember a handful of those community opt-outs plus others can be found in the archives. I think I can draft something this weekend. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 10:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)