Jump to content

User talk:Martin Urbanec/Archives/2021

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Sysop flag

Hi, I want get the sysop flag back. I am active in malayalam wikipedia from 2008.--Rojypala (talk) 09:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rojypala Hello, please start a request for adminship in your project. We do not re-grant flags after user resigned them. Thank you for your understanding, Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I am a registered logged-in wikipedian when using Mullvad VPN I am blocked

Hi, I am about to edit https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvicklera but when using Mullvad VPN I cannot despite I am a registered and logged-in wikipedian. I would consider the behavior to be a bug. The workaround for me is simple, just disable the VPN, but I am rather fond of using VPN. V29 (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@V29 Hi, no, it's not a bug. The global No open proxies prohibits the use of proxies and VPNs, enforced by global blocks. Thank you for your understanding, Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification BR V29 (talk) 21:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)


Hello Martin,
Can you give me the permissions global-rollbacker and global-interface-editor? I used to edit interface in Wikiquote ([1]), now I am autoreview, editor, reviewer, sysop in wikisource, autopatrolled and patroller in hewikipedia and autopatrolled in hewikivoyage and meta.
Thanks! מושך בשבט (talk) 10:54, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@מושך בשבט No. Please read the instructions at SRGP and request the permission there. If you cannot understand writen English enough to understand and carry out the instructions, you probably don't have enough experience to hold the requested permissions. Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


Hi. Who was that user? Please email me in case of BEANS or DENY. -- Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll email you. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:26, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Create new wiki

We already have a very similar page: Setting up an internal Wikimedia wiki.--GZWDer (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@GZWDer Oh, thanks a lot! I knew I read about that page somewhere, but I wasn't able to find it, so I created a new one. I'll merge the content. Thanks again. Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Hallo :) I wonder if it might be better to "move" the old page to the new title, instead of just redirecting it. That way people who had the old page watchlisted will still have it, and the page-history will be more complete. Just a thought. :) Quiddity (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


Hi, Martin,

The Editing team has scheduled a major update to mw:Extension:DiscussionTools (the new Reply tool) for next week's deployment train. Since you invoke the feature from a script (I do, too), you're probably going to see that update next week, before it's officially released in the mw:Beta Feature system. The new update will use a similar system for starting a ==New discussion==. As before, full-page wikitext editing will not be affected. There is more information on the project page at mw:Talk pages project/New discussion.

If you encounter problems next week, please ping me or leave a note on the talk page for the project. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:04, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up Whatamidoing! Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)


Hi! I report that Global sysops/Speedy delete requests/Data is not updated by UrbanecmBot since two days. ;) --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 12:50, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Samuele2002, thanks for the info. I just fixed it, it should work again :). Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Sysop elections on hr.wiki

Hi, I'm not active on hr.wiki (I'm a sysop on another wiki - sh.wiki), but out of curiosity I follow developments on the wikis "akin" to mine; and so I wanted to draw your attention to recent elections on hr.wiki, which resulted in their community electing two new sysops. Both of the active bureaucrats voted against both candidates and, since I saw you had recently taken an interest in what was going on there, I thought it might be prudent if you kept an eye on when/if a bureaucrat would grant them the sysop rights. Thanks and sorry for interfering! --Igor Windsor (talk) 20:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, please disregard my message above, the sysop rights have been granted by a bureaucrat – so, I was interfering and unnecessarily so. My apologies! Best, --Igor Windsor (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

CentralNotice for SE/2021

Hello Martin. I've seen you made CentralNotice for steward elections/2021. This CentralNotice does not appear on my computer. Although the applications have started for 1.5 days on this year, 1 candidate has been announced. I wonder if there is a problem. Or on my computer, CentralNotice notifications turned off? I don't remember ever turning it off but how can I turn it back on if I turned it off. If there is a problem with CentralNotice, admins on other wikis except users on Meta may be unaware of this election. Regards. --Uncitoyentalk 13:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Uncitoyen Hello, the CentralNotice only appears on projects where you have sysop rights on (as only sysops are eligible), and only once per three days. So, if you recall seeing it at least once, it works properly :-). I just cleaned localStorage, where the centralnotice impression data is loaded, and tried to load cs.wikipedia, where I'm a sysop. The banner appeared properly. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Yep, I saw it for a few seconds on trwiki yesterday. But I fastily closed that page. When I didn't see it again, I thought if there was a problem. Because Commons WLE's centralnotices were always open. According to your answer, this isn't a problem. Thanks for the answer. :) --Uncitoyentalk 14:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, it displays only once upon a while :). Since nominations are accepted until end of January, it should be seen by interested sysops at least a couple of times. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

CN India

Hi Martin,

I think the ping from the requesting user failed, so may I please draw your attention to CentralNotice/Request/Wikimedia Wikimeet India 2021 once more? Ciell (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Martin..? Ciell (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Looking now @Ciell, thanks for the reminder :). Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
@Ciell Hi, banners are prepared now, just needs (three) campaigns to be created now. Sadly, I can't do that now, as "Indic languages" and "South AfricaAsia" is too generic for me. Once the requestor adds those information, this can be enabled. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I'll respond on the request page. Thank you for all of this all ready! Ciell (talk) 20:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

SE2021 Rules

Hello Martin and @Tks4Fish, Mardetanha, RadiX, and -revi:. For this year's election, the rule page states that new candidates must sign the relevant agreements by 8 February. This date was the rules of last years. As a committee this year, you announced the start date of the election as February 5th. This date should be corrected for February 5th. Regards. --Uncitoyentalk 07:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Uncitoyen, thanks for the information. I just changed the starting date to the correct date. Thanks for letting me know! Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit. You're welcome. --Uncitoyentalk 14:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


Hi, I contributed to this project for about two years. My requests rejected, but another user contributed only one month. Again this user only for one month test administrator and this user blocked me for one year. diq.wiktionary.org now opened and this user protected all templates. Maybe after same day later bloking me also. Xorasan (talk) 09:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@Xorasan Hello, sadly, I'm unable to help you with this issue. The user was granted admin rights per local community discussion. If you wish to be also an admin, you need to undergo the same process. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: nobady unvote him. The user was granted admin rights for diqwiki, but not for diq.wiktionary.org project. Can you make control again. Xorasan (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Account Request

Hello Martin, can you please create account MrJaroslavikTranslations for me? My email is mrjaroslavik(_AT_)gmail.com - I will use this account for watchlist of czech translations and source pages here on Meta. Thank you.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

@MrJaroslavik Done :). Klidně na mě můžeš mluvit česky, i tady :). Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

E-Mail request

Hello Martin!

I have sent you an E-Mail with an Steward request for hr.wiki.

Could you please take a look at that? :-)

Best regards, Koreanovsky (Ča–Kaj–Što?!) 19:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

I saw the email, I'll reply soon :). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Martin, the Turkish Wikivoyage logo looks small compared to the English Wikivoyage logo. Do you know what this is caused by and how we can fix it? Thanks. --ToprakM 15:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Martin's fast action

Hi Martin. Here I just reported it when you lock it. If possible, would you mark that already done? Thank you for your fast action. :) Regards. --Uncitoyentalk 12:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Uncitoyen Hey there, the bot did so already :). Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
OK. I wrote you because you are active. But the bot is out fast too. --Uncitoyentalk 12:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Regarding request for Central notice

Hi @Martin Urbanec:, hope you are fine. We posted the central notice request but we are still waiting for the update. I would humbly request you to help as soon as possible as the contest starts in a week.--*•.¸♡ ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕤𝕙𝕒𝕟 𝔹𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕡𝕒𝕝 ♡¸.•*𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 16:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benipal hardarshan Hello, see my note at the central notice request. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for code review

Hello, Martin Urbanec

(I'm sorry I repeated this message in 2 places. I'm sorry if it disturbs you.)

Excuse me. I saw you leave a message in this discussion, I’m also a new new contributor of gerrit.wikimedia.org. This is the first time I'm trying to use gerrit: and I would like to ask, can you also help me review this code gerrit:657572? (about this task phab:T271612) Thank you.-- Nanachi🐰Fruit Tea(宇帆·☎️·☘️13:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2021 Central Notice Enquiry

Hello @Martin Urbanec: I am Joy Agyepong the Programs Coordinator for Wiki Loves Folklore 2021 that is its 3rd edition. I wish to prompt you about the current updates we have made to our request on central notice per your feedback. We will appreciate your feedback since the campaign starts on February 1. Thank you. Joy Agyepong (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Time Sensitive: Urgent support needed

Hi @Martin Urbanec:. Hope everything is okay. I am writing as a follow to my previous request for the central notice banner. Our banner is not working and we have now 27 days left. Today we did not receive any images and this is a big concern for us. There must have been a miscommunication on my end, Please open the banner for all Wikimedia projects including Wikipedia, Commons, Wikidata, and Wikisource. --*•.¸♡ ℍ𝕒𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕣𝕤𝕙𝕒𝕟 𝔹𝕖𝕟𝕚𝕡𝕒𝕝 ♡¸.•*𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 15:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


Hi Martin,

If that's the rules, then obviously you need to revert them, but two things come to mind:

1) The timings are really sort of unclear, and should also be indicated on the templates themselves which parts can be commented in at which segment.

2) Also, a question, only allowing comments after confirmation process starts seems to risk people placing supporting/opposing comments and leaving before potential concerns are raised on a page, assuming that not everyone is watchlisting each stewards' confirmation page. Why is there not a question phase before the "!voting" phase, as it were? Nosebagbear (talk) 14:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Nosebagbear, thanks for writing to me. I understand your concerns. Indeed there is currently no grace period for asking questions before placing keep/remove comments. Maybe there should be, but right now, there is no place for questions asked, like there is for new candidate elections. Since the confirmations start really soon (ie. tomorrow), it's probably too late to try to change that. Will keep in my mind for SE2022 elections, assuming I'll stay a steward. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

~riley's global interface editor right

Hello Martin. Today you removed the riley's global interface editor right because riley hasn't used this right for more than 6 months. Do you need to write a note on the page here? Regards. --Uncitoyentalk 18:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your message. I just removed it. Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


Hi. You wrote that my report of Sciencia58 was done in this edit, but it appears no lock took place. Please look into that. -- Jeff G. ツ (please ping or talk to me) 18:03, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Need help at Commons

Hi, @Martin Urbanec:.

Wikimedia Indonesia will organize an infographic contest with European Union Delegation in Indonesia, start in March 2021, named EUforia Wiki4Women. Can you help us to set up the campaign page (Campaign:EU-Wiki4Women-id) in Wikimedia Commons?

The example page is like WikiKaleidoskop that you made before: commons:Campaign:wmid-wikikaleidoskop-2021

If you need the header and thank you template, we already made it.

commons:Template:Upload campaign header EUforia Wiki4Women
commons:Template:Upload campaign thank you EUforia Wiki4Women

Thank you for your support. Best, RaymondSutanto (talk) 07:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

In regards to the two-letter project shortcuts (Lithuanian Wiktionary)

Hi, this might be a newbie question, but as I haven't worked much on meta-stuff, I would simply like to know. In the Lithuanian language there is no "W", so a "WT" project code perhaps wouldn't be the most appropriate (more appropriate would be "VŽ"). I've already read that it will be possible to change the project code, yet still I must ask - how can one add the shortcut project code to a wiki project? And is it feasible to even do so, or rather would it be wiser wait for the initiative to pass through and then change the project code by requesting a wiki configuration change? Thank you.--Kiberevoliucija (talk) 15:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

A suggestion

The user who asked you to oversighted yesterday seems to have created a puppet 2001:44C8:4101:4474:BC8D:34FE:C1CD:EA3E. I think it should be necessary to check whether he have sleepers. (`・ω・´) (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

New Village Pump address on plwikt

Hello. From time to time, mass message notifications arrive at the wrong page on plwiktionary despite our efforts to update stale links across Meta. This, for instance, should have landed at wikt:pl:Wikisłownik:Bar/Dyskusje ogólne. I can see that your bot fetched the old location from somewhere (Special:Diff/21124996). Could you please tell me if I can do anything in order to prevent future misplaced MM deliveries? Kind regards, Peter Bowman (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I have just realized it could have come from Wikidata, as I was told here (and already forgot about that...). I guess this is not that easy to circumvent, but I'll keep an eye on a possible solution. Sorry for bothering you, have a nice day! Peter Bowman (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
@Peter Bowman Hi Peter, you're not really bothering me. Indeed, I usually use the Wikidata item for village pumps, and use whatever is listed there. If you have any other idea how to generate a list of targets for such notifications, I'd really appreciate hearing it! Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Clarification and question about Arabic wikipedia

Hello Mr. Martin Urbanec, According to your suggestion here I find it a good idea but in the Arabic wikipedia we have prefix in Arabic letters which is (وب) do you mean by your suggestion to have global one for Arabic wikipedia in Latin or English letters (as you would like to mention them) if so and nothing suggested yet it Could be (AW, ArW). --Sandra (talk) 00:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Help in Interlingua Wiktionary

Hello Martin,

I don't know where to go to ask for this kind of help, but I saw your message in the Wiktionary Community Portal in Interlingua and decided to write to you.

I am working all alone there, nearly anyone is interested in contributing to it, but I am trying whenever I have the time. The point is that I can't stop users from insisting in creating pages that are out of the scope of the Wiktionary there. Can you help figuring this out? This is the page being created by the user, 눨삽 춫리구스. It is an IP that is trying it, and I am unable to make it stop.

If you can't help in any way, could you please guide me to the right place to ask for this specific help?

Thank you so much in advance and sorry for disturbing you with this subject. I hope this message fins you and your family well! Manandez (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

CN Banner

Sorry for bothering. Requesting your assistance on CentralNotice/Request/Bangla Wikipedia article contest 2021. Last 4 years you helped as creating this banner :) --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:44, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Globally blocked has hopped over to

Today you globally blocked (thank you for that). That editor has now hopped over to and is continuing their disruptive edits (today on en.wikipedia.org). was previously globally-locked for a week (the block expired on Feb. 19). There is a list of other IPs this editor has been using since last October/November over at [2]. Is there anything that can be done globally to slow down this editor? – 01:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

MediaWiki logo issue

Wikimedia portals: see for example https://www.wikibooks.org/. The MediaWiki logo si flattened. --NGC 54 (talk / contribs) 21:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@NGC 54 Hello, that is known, and will be fixed automatically on Monday (or at least it should be). Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Please help us with a difficult question.

Hello, Martin. Please help us understand the problem. Something tells me you may know the answer to our question.

Thanks to you, for the 4th year in a row, a banner has been put up for the Science Photo Competition, held among Russian Wikimedians via CentralNotice.

For the three previous years, this banner attracted 2,500 to 5,000 new visitors per day to the contest page. Here are links to statistics by year. (2018 - Request, 2019 - Request, 2020 - Request)

This year, oddly enough, the banner is attracting no more than 300 people a day, with attendance dropping more than tenfold (2021 - Request).And this year's contest for this reason is failing, very few photo uploads. :(

A very big request to prompt from what caused such a small attendance and how it can be corrected, the contest will go another 25 days, it is still possible to fix something? JukoFF (talk) 12:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@JukoFF Hello, I just looked at this year's config and 2019's config, and both of them are very similar – they are displayed twice per day at most, to 50 % of users. I don't see any difference between those two configs. I just tried to VPN to Russia (to get correct geolocation) and load ru.wikipedia anonymously a couple of times. The banner showed as expected.
I see two possible reasons for this (right now, it's pure speculation).
First reason) I'm not sure whether there were any concurent banners in 2019 (right now, both Wikigap and this appear, both set to 50 %, meaning there is always some banner). If there weren't any, it's possible the concurent banners displayed now make the banner feel much less exclusive (or interpreted as an advertisement rather than announcement), thus less users click on it.
Second reason) 2021 is a special year of sort – many countries are tired of the coronavirus pandemy, and it's possible people actually care less about volunteering (possibly because they lost their own jobs).
If you see any difference between the configs, please do let me know, and I'm happy to look at that, but I failed to see any.
Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Cache update for special page is needed

Can you update the Cache for a special page?

https://mg.wiktionary.org/wiki/Manokana:Fihodinana_tapaka 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 10:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I've been using sql now. That's why I don't need it anymore --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 17:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Done anyway, but using SQL in quarry is best when you need almost-real-time data. Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


Hi, could you please unban me? I have to add some sources I found about John de Lancie. One being that he can speak French, which he revealed in a recent live stream. --

Info: This is a crosswiki LTA this Spam short Article without useful content in smallwikis --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 09:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Not locally hardblock ranges unless required

Hi. Got users unable to follow the global guidance to apply for exemptions as OP blocks like Special:Block/ have been hard blocks. Would steward please be able to make these softer so impacted real users are able to follow the guidance of use at SRGP. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Alternatively we find some way for users to subscribe to newsletters and the like.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hmm, right now, the global block interface does not support it (maybe it should?). Maybe worth raising at SN? Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:23, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Re: new wikis

Hi Martin Urbanec

At a task you wrote, "It looks like this is supposed to be a private wiki used by an estabilished project, not a chapter/user-group used wiki, is that right?". Unrelated to that request, now I have a question: does Wikimedia Foundation host wikis for user groups? What else does it host? Does it host git repositories for user groups? If so, could examples please be provided? I am a developer for several wikis, and would be interested in registering a user group to document and share my software with other language editions at these wikis.

Thanks, --Gryllida 07:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gryllida Hello, thanks for asking! There is a couple of WMF-provided infrastructure that could be interesting to you.
First, there are Wikimedia Cloud Services (WMCS). It is a cloud platform that provides many features, the most important are:
  • Data services: you can access a redacted replica of the production databases, you can directly access Wikimedia Dumps without having to download them, etc
  • Toolforge: platform-as-a-service, you can just deploy your code (a bot, web tool, research project or something else) there, without having to care about maintaining infrastructure (as it is provided by WMF staff)
  • Cloud VPS: a virtual server hosting service for Wikimedia-related purposes; you can request a virtual server to be hosted there, in case Toolforge is not capable of meeting your needs
You can learn more information at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Cloud_Services_Introduction.
In addition to this, you can also choose to host a Git repository with the Foundation: any Toolforge-hosted tool can directly create a Git repository hosted on Phabricator for version-control of the code. Externally hosted tools (or tools hosted on Cloud VPS) can request a repository too, by creating a task.
It is also possible to host code on Gerrit, which is the code-review system the WMF uses for MediaWiki. More details are available athttps://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/New_repositories.
I hope this provides some useful information to you. If you have any specific needs, let me know, and I can help you find a solution that fits you. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
By the way, none of the possibilities listed above actually requires you to have an user group, all of this is available to any tech-savvy Wikimedian :).
I just realized I did not answer the wiki question. Currently, we believe it is usually better to host a wiki outside of production infrastructure, as it does not increase maintenance burden for the production infrastructure (which is very difficult to maintain, and it has a lot of complex moving parts that needs to be taken care of). You can do this in Cloud VPS or Toolforge pretty easily, and maintaining a wiki that runs on the LTS (long-term support) release of MediaWiki should be reasonably easy.
Wikis in production realm (ie. ending with .wikimedia.org rather than .wmcloud.org, and fully maintained by the WMF) are ocasionally given to affiliates as well. Right now, user groups are not likely to get it, because it is quite easy to get an UG, and even an abandoned wiki has to be maintained (basically forever). So, having a dedicated wiki is not an option for most people – but you can host your documentation at one of the already existing wikis. Cloud VPS projects have an information page on wikitech (see one for wmcz-stats, a project I maintain), and Toolforge tools can have a page in the Tool namespace, see https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tool:Bash as an example.
Let me know if this makes sense. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Lock too wide

Hi. I am the editor of Polish Wikipedia, including the supervisor of the section of the awarded articles (Medal article and Good article). the IP range lock you set is harmful and prevents me from working. Please remove the block immediately. You are preventing me from performing my regular duties. I can make this entry only thanks to the Internet access granted to me by my family. Do not do that again. Jacek555 (talk) 08:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jacek555 Hello, thank you for messaging me! Unfortunately, at times, the Wikimedia Stewards are forced to globally block a range of IP addresses to stop abuse.
I'm sad to hear that you were unable to edit because of the block. I just gave your account a global IP block exemption, which should make you immune against the block.
Please note that local wiki administrators can locally disable the block I made, if desired (at https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specjalna:Wk%C5%82ad/, any Polish Wikipedia administrator will see "local status" buton, which will allow them to disable the block).
Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:37, 1 May 2021 (UTC)


Hi! Could you elaborate on what kind of “cross-wiki abuse” led to the global block? The user contributed productively at least on dewiki. Regards, XanonymusX (talk) 12:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@XanonymusX Hello! Sure, thanks for asking. This user created article about Ivan Senoner on multiple wikis, and it got subsequently deleted as spam by local administrators (happened on Spanish Wikipedia, Dutch Wikipedia, French Wikipedia, lld.wikipedia and likely others). The vast majority of the user's contribution was considered spam. For that reason, I locked the user for cross-wiki abuse. Does that make sense to you? Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. This case stirred up some controversy on dewiki, so I would like to fully understand what happened. From what I could see so far, you locked him for “cross-wiki abuse” and afterwards the speedy deletion of his articles was requested (reason: “cross-wiki spam”) on several projects (and granted on most of them, I guess). So I have some questions:
  • What is the definition of “spam” in this context? On dewiki (and also here on Meta, as far as I could see), the term refers to violations of the external link policy. I cannot see how that would have been relevant in this case.
  • Why did you become active in the case? Was there a request that is documented somewhere? If so, it would be nice if the summaries would contain a link to it.
Right now, the user has his account blocked on dewiki although he just created a normal article some time ago. I get that the notability of the subject is debatable and depends on the exact criteria per project, but just calling these contributions spam and then blocking the user globally is a bit exaggerated in my eyes if there is nothing more to the story. Regards, XanonymusX (talk) 23:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Could you please react (either here or there)? There is still no evident reason for the global lock. Regards, XanonymusX (talk) 13:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
This case was sufficiently covered both here and at the SRG request, with a review done by a fellow steward. At this point, there is nothing to say that wasn't said already. Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
I still know as little as before. No definition for “spam” is given, no decision for the global lock is publicly documented, a sufficient justification for blocking this account from editing dewiki is lacking. If this is regarded business as usual, I am in any case highly disappointed.–XanonymusX (talk) 16:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Obviously, my "Oppose" against your confirmation was fully justified.Mautpreller (talk) 08:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


ticket:2021051010003661 - Cabayi (talk) 08:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, no need to ping me on that, spams me in my mailbox as well :/. Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Nemohu se přihlásit

Nemohu se přihlásit ani na anglickou, ani na ruskou verzi Wikipedie. Na několika jiných projektech se mohu přihlásit bez problémů/respektive vzhledem k centrálnímu přihlášení jsem při jejich návštěvě již nalogován. Znamená to, že jsem na en.wiki a na ru.wiki blokován? Otevřen "článek" s nadpisem: Центральный вход в систему a pod nadpisem červeně: Нет активных попыток входа для вашей сессии. a pod tím: Вернуться на предыдущую страницу. Analogickz na en.wiki: Central user log in; The provided authentication token is either expired or invalid.; Return to the previous page. Tato situace mi ztěžuje práci, protože nemohu použít svoje nastavení a tím např. vidět stránku v jazyce, který mne zajímá, i jiné problémy. Co mám učinit k nápravě. Kdo mne může odblokovat? --Kusurija (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kusurija Dobrý den, pravděpodobně se jedná o chybu v systému přihlašování. Mohl byste prosím zkusit se přihlásit v anonymním okně? Pokud se Vám to nepodaří ani tam, prosím Vás o vytvoření bugreportu na phabricator.wikimedia.org, někdo se na to určitě podívá (případně zkuste nahrát obrazovku přes ctrlv.tv, a mohu to tam popsat za Vás). Rozhodně nejde o blokaci, u ní Vám to MediaWiki poměrně jasně sdělí. Dává to takto smysl? S pozdravem, Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Teď jsem nějakou dobu neměl přístup k internetu, po návratu se již mohu přihlásit. Kde byla (a jaká) chyba nemám tušení. V tento moment je vše v pořádku. I tak děkuji, zejména, pokud náprava byla Vaší zásluhou. --Kusurija (talk) 05:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Problém se opakuje úplně stejně, přihlášení i jako nováček neprůstřelné (uživatelské jméno již existuje, vyberte si jiné). Vyčištění cache nepomáhá. Přibyla nemožnost přihlásit se na českou Wikipedii. --Kusurija (talk) 08:44, 4 May 2021 (UTC). P.S. Pokud se mi podařilo náhodně přihlásit, nemohu odeslat poděkování (bad token) ani se odhlásit. Co mám udělat aby moje editační činnost (a procházení mezi projekty podle mého nastavení) nebylo blokováno? --Kusurija (talk) 12:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: nemohu uložit na litevskou wikipedii text: (text již uložen; odsud smazáno) do článku w:lt:Lisa prie Labės. Prosím velmi pomoci s odblokováním (ne odblokováním jakožto akci adminů, ale odblokováním z vlivu bugu). Na lt.WP se mohu přihlásit/jsem již automaticky, ale nemohu uložit text, nemohu se odhlásit (bad token) nemohu poslat vzkaz adminovi, napsat na diskusní stránku. Jak vidno, problém je setrvalý. Zatím jsem bez problémů editoval jen na cs.wikt. Pokud nemůžete pomoci, poraďte mi, na koho jiného se mím obrátit o radu aby mi poradil, co konkrétně mohu udělat pro vyřešení problému. Jelikož nemohu editovat ani na cs.WP, prosím nějakým způsobem upozornit též českou komunitu (pod lípou technickou?). To, že jsem odešel z cs.WP snad ještě neznamená, že by mi měla být znemožněna editace na jiných (mnoha z cca 750) projektů nadace. --Kusurija (talk) 14:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: text uložem po 2,5 hodinách nepřetržitého (pardon, přerušeného krátce dvěma vzkazy zde a třemi editacemi na wikiverzitě) "přemlouvání" počítačů a mobilu. Po(!) uložení se mi povedlo se odhlásit a znovu přihlásit. Za tu dobu jsem mohl učinit ke stovce editací na wikislovníku nebo dokončit ten článek o Lysé na lt.WP. To je mrhání lidskými zdroji! (a příčinu zblokování jsem stejně neodhalil). --Kusurija (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Kusurija Zkoušel jste prosím přihlášení v anonymním okně prohlížeče, příp. vyprázdnit cookies (https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/clear-cookies-and-site-data-firefox)? Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Není to poprvé, co zmiňujete "přihlášení v anonymním okně prohlížeče" a začínám mít podezření, že správně nerozumím tomu, co tím máte na mysli. Prosím, mohl byste mi ten termín nějak detailněji osvětlit? (s ohledem na to, že pravděpodobně jsem méně chápavý, a tudíž (je mi líto) byste měl použít názornější způsob vysvětlení). Já jsem to (asi nesprávně) pochopil tak, že bych se měl pokusit odhlásit (což mi nijak nešlo) a udělat editaci jako nepřihlášený? Používám Firefox (a nemíním používat jiný - z různých důvodů) a na něm žádnou možnost "anonymních" oken nevidím (nebo zase jenom nechápu terminologii). Alternativy: na plnou obrazovku vs zmenšené okno mi také ani jedna z nich nezní jako "anonymní". V tomto jsem skutečně beznadějně nechápavý. --Kusurija (talk) 20:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
@Kusurija Dobrý den, anonymní okno je zvláštní mód prohlížeče, kde ignoruje nastavení uložená z předchozího používání (jde tedy o prohlížeč "čistý"). Ve firefoxu jde o tlačítko "New Private Window", resp. klávesovou zkratku Ctrl+Shift+P. Viz také https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/private-browsing-use-firefox-without-history. Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:27, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Děkuji, podle Vašeho návodu nalezeno a vyzkoušeno, jen nerozumím tomu, že když se v použitém anonymním okně odhlásím, jsem odhlášen i v neanonymních oknech. Jediný rozdíl, jaký jsem zaznamenal je, že historii navšívených stránek v anonymním okně nevidím v historii neanonymního(/neanonymních) okna. Ještě jednou děkuji. Vždy je pro mne problém, že některé termíny PC technologií neznám v jazyce PC, který právě používám. Nejčastěji jde o tři různé jazyky, podle toho, na kterém zařízení právě pracuji. --Kusurija (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
@Kusurija Je to proto, protože tlačítko "Odhlásit se" Vás odhlásí všude, na všech zařízeních. Tím se můžete odhlásit i na zařízeních, které již nemáte u sebe.
Rozumím tomu správně, že to již funguje? Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Posledních pár dní méně "cestuji" po různých projektech, než obvykle, takže jsem se s dřívějšími problémy již nesetkal. Děkuji za optání a přeji hezký den. --Kusurija (talk) 05:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

server side upload

Is there still a blocking issue with my server side request? I would need to use the webspace for different projects soon. --C.Suthorn (talk) 16:09, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

ping. --C.Suthorn (talk) 09:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello @C.Suthorn, first, do note that I'm a volunteer just like you, and that reuplading dozens of GBs of data is not really a trivial task – it takes several hours of my time.
Ad your archives, it would really speed stuff up if they followed the recommendation at phab:T282755#7085737. The format listed there (files named in the same way as they are on commons) is the only format supported by the SSU script.
So, either way, it will have to repacked. Either I'll do that when I find some time, or you do it when you find some time. I can't guarantee the files will always be uploaded under the "correct" name, as there will be always some delay between importing and renaming the files to file names.
I hope this makes sense Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:48, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I followd help:ssu, which said I can use zip. tar is basically something i use to untar a file if i am unlucky enough to stumble upon a file that only is available as tar (same for gz). I wrote in the ticket, that I can upload individual tar files, then started to create this files, and when I had a subset ready, looked at the ticket and found nothing to the contrary, i started uploading (what I had already tried for weeks with upload tools, and had done with the zip files). if no zip is possible, it shouldn't have been in help:ssu in the first place, it did cost me time (actually the upload wizard took 4 years of my life. I have a backlog of ~40000 files I did not upload over the last 4 years - but with external tools I can start to upload these, once I have cleared up these files). It would be enought at the moment, if the files are copied to another server, so that I have access again to the space, I have it uploaded to now. - And meanwhile I saw again new features in the upload wizard, with all the errors in place. it is exasperating. --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Request to delete 7 IP user (talk) pages in testwikidata:

There are 7 IP user (talk) pages in testwikidata: are nonsense or inappropriate soft redirect. They are testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/273696, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/276453, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/288130, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/152115, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/305328, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/305234, testwikidata:Special:Redirect/page/288127. I posted the same message on another steward last week but there are no any responses. Thank you for your help. 07:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

The bot had a genuine mistake that caused some non-proxy IP addresses to be blocked. This bug was fixed. There is nothing else to do here. -- is there any evidence that the bug was fixed? The operator of the bot repeatedly denied existence of such a bug in his bot, much less fixing the bot. --Crash48 (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

"it looks to me that the requestor considers AFM to be a free card to edit all filters arbitrarily"

I don't know where in the discussion I made that claim, fairly sure for each request there was one filter that I intended to edit/add for each request, could you clarify on what you meant? Citing my failed AFM proposal (see archives), I had to press the emergency stop button due to the abuse I was receiving there (not directed at you), hence I did not follow up as I did with others, apologies. Thanks in advance. Leaderboard (talk) 20:25, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Filter 227

This does not seem to have hits in over a year – do you think I can repurpose it for logging of some other abusive usernames/usernames suggesting lock evasion? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
21:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4 Sure, go for it :). Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Mass Message List Containers

Hi Martin,

Can you please help to create more container links on this page - Global message delivery/Targets#Empty MassMessage lists to use? Thank you so much for your works!--SOyeyele (WMF) (talk) 12:00, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@SOyeyele (WMF) Hello, upps, I see there were none left! Done. Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:24, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much! :). --SOyeyele (WMF) (talk) 12:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Invitation for Functionary consultation 2021


I'm letting you know in advance about a meeting I'd like to invite you to regarding the Universal Code of Conduct and the community's ownership of its future enforcement. I'm still in the process of putting together the details, but I wanted to share the date with you: 26 June, 2021. I do not have a time on this date yet, but I will let you soon. We have created a meta page with basic information. Please take a look at the meta page and sign up under the appropriate section.

Thank you for your time.--BAnand (WMF) 14:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Greetings SWMT member,

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

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

@BAnand (WMF) Hello, I'd appreciate receiving only one message at a time. Sending me three messages about the same topic isn't ideal. Thanks a lot! Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Martin Urbanec, got it. Thanks--BAnand (WMF) (talk) 01:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:09, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Please mark VRT/Activity policy for translation

I have updated the template for VRT/Activity policy. Please mark the latest version for translation. thanks. --mirinano (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:09, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

you authorised sysop temporarily for a year; expired yesterday; already link for permanent

Hope you and your family well in this pandemic time, sir. I am from ta.wikimedia.( SUL, xtools-All). My ta.wikisource sysop expired yesterday(you authorised). My application is in process for permanent sysop with local votes link. Kindly consider.--Info-farmer (talk) 02:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Info-farmer Hello, please place your request to SRP once the local application runs for at least a week. Thanks! Martin Urbanec (talk) 06:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:32, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Server-side upload

Hi, just want to make sure, that all 712 tar.gz filess are transferred to your tmp storage? I neeed the server space for other projects, I have been going about my contributions on commons, know I can run a sript, to check that all uploads are fine, and expect not more than a handful of faulty ones, only at the moment, the script would return an additional 712 error messages bacause of the missing server side upload. I can manually correct a dozen files, but the 712 I already know of are impossible to fix manually. --C.Suthorn (talk) 11:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

(PS: the size of the 712 tar.gz is probably a it larger than that of the 5 zip files, at phab you wrote something to the contrary.)

Hi, just want to make sure, that all 712 tar.gz filess are transferred to your tmp storage? I neeed the server space for other projects, I have been going about my contributions on commons, know I can run a sript, to check that all uploads are fine, and expect not more than a handful of faulty ones, only at the moment, the script would return an additional 712 error messages bacause of the missing server side upload. I can manually correct a dozen files, but the 712 I already know of are impossible to fix manually. --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn Hello, could you please update the task with the list of URL addresses that I'm supposed to download? I lost track :/ Martin Urbanec (talk) 06:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
List updated at phab. --C.Suthorn (talk) 08:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for the work at SRG; looks like the backlog is clearing out ultimately. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
14:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Steward requests/Permissions/2021-06#Interface administrator access

Steward requests/Permissions/2021-06#Interface administrator access: Good morning. The question I asked was why do I have a time limit when the small community of the Wiktionary Veneto voted me for a permanent action? This is the question. I will never be able to make fundamental changes with such a short time and especially in 6 months the problem of the lack of an administrator will arise and consequently again a total abandonment of the Wikidictionary by users because no one will delete the pages requesting erasing, no one will intervene to stop the vandalisms, no one will be able to modify the basic scripts for the maintenance and creation of the articles and no one will be able to adapt the graphics of the local Wiki according to global changes. That's all. I have read that it takes a minimum of 5 votes; the problem is one: the Wikidictionary community has been abandoned due to the lack of an administrative body and today we do not reach 5 members! I await your kind response and hope to be understood in my doubts and questions. Good job and good day. --ꜰɪᴇʀᴏᴅᴇʟᴠᴇɴᴇᴛᴏ (Talk)-(Scrìvame in vec.wiki)-(Contributions) 10:28, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Fierodelveneto Hello, the reason why small communities are not granted permanent administrators is to protect the project.
It is very easy to appoint an administrator -- at any project (regardless how small it is). As long as no one opposes the request, it is (usually) fulfiled by the stewards (although usually only for limited time). The adminship may be renewed as many times as necessary, following the same process.
It is, however, hard to demote an administrator (at least compared to promoting). The limited time adminship ensures the community is able to review the administrator's status periodically, until the community is big enough.
Estabilished projects have permanent administrators (sometimes granted by stewards, sometimes by local bureaucrats), because the risk is lower there -- estabilished projects also have estabilished policies to review admin's status, which makes demotion of a bad admin easier.
Please let me make it clear that the limited time does not have any other effect on your adminship status. You may do whatever admins normally do on your wiki. The only difference is that you need to start a new voting when your adminship expires, to renew it.
Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 05:59, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Unlock request

Is there a chance to unlock my account? Relly Komaruzaman (talk) 20:30, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Relly Komaruzaman Please direct any appeals to stewards@wikimedia.org. Please include your username, as well as your explanation as what lead to the lock. Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 05:53, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Global lock for Sidowpknbkhihj socks

Please see Steward_requests/Global#Global_lock_for_Sidowpknbkhihj_socks. Please block. In addition, ミンジャ (talk · contribs) and Noppori (talk · contribs) are also socks of Sidowpknbkhihj (talk · contribs).-- 15:39, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

The accounts are active only at ja.wikipedia. I don't see a reason to carry out a global action ATM. Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
However, For example, User:ミンジャ is active in also English Wikipedia ([3]). So it is need global lock.-- 16:15, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:52, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Mail request

Hello Martin, I hope you're doing fine!

I sent an e-mail to the stewards oversight mail-adress, could you please take a look at it? It is urgent.

Best regards, Koreanovsky (Ča–Kaj–Što?!) 19:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


Hey, Martin! I wanted to ask a quick question. Please could you lock User:Kwhizzzz’ account because they are blocked here and have abused multiple accounts. Thank you. 19:42, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

might need a global block. Mucking about. Requested rename for globally locked user on my talk. Caught me in a weak moment. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:19, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra I'm sorry, but I do not understand why a global block is warranted at this point. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:52, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

phab T282755 - server side upload


I replaced 3 files and added 82. I also updated the phab task, the csv file with the desctription and checked all files for correctness. I needed to add more rented server space for the additional files and I need to clear the rented server space urgently. Please confirm the the files are transferred to your temp space. --C.Suthorn (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn Transfered to the Toolforge cluster (I'll have to do some preprocessing first, to make an archive that conforms to the requirements I listed at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T282755#7085737).
Please check my comments at Phab. Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:02, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
As only two files are affected by this: Leave this files out, once you have uploaded the other files I can run a script, that checks for discrepancies between my local files and the files online. With only two dicrepancies I can then reupload two files with Rillke's big chunked upload javascript. Please notify me, when the uploads are done. --C.Suthorn (talk) 14:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


Hi, Martin! Can you help on Phabricator? Thanks. Malikxan talk 14:59, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Global bot approval request for InternetArchiveBot

Oauth applications

Hello, @Martin Urbanec:. I received notifications that all of my appilcations had their Oauth consumer disabled, per T286416. Is there something wrong with my applications or is this something global? I was unable to find T286416 on Phabricator, so I reach for you. Good contributions, Ederporto (talk) 21:40, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ederporto Hello, you're very quick in noticing this! You can't see the ticket, because it's currently set to private as it's about a security vulnerability.
I was just sending all affected tool maintainers an e-mail about the action I took. Can you have a look in your mail? It should come from urbanecm@tools.wmflabs.org, and the subject starts with IMPORTANT:.
Let me know if you have any questions. Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:59, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Solicitation to deny a consumer

Hi, sorry to bother you. I'm in the midst of proposing the new consumers of the applications I developed and I messed up in the name of one of them: 44701374976bc0e559d032f1e3462bab. I think the name can't be changed, so can you please deny it? Thank you very much! Good contributions, Ederporto (talk) 02:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Sure. I just rejected that consumer. Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:59, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Tasks in Gerrit

@Martin Urbanec: Could you do me a favor related to gerrit.wikimedia.org? In my dashboard is with 6 changes needing Code-Review, being important because they are requests from Phabricator. So could I Code-Review my requested changes? Thank you in advance!
Juan90264 (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2021 (UTC)


I am involved at English Wikinews. We have 1 'Crat, but she has been unreachable. We need actions taken on 2 nominations for 'Crat, as our project needs them badly. Can you jump over to our Request for Permissions page and take action, please?--Bddpaux (talk) 21:36, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bddpaux Hello. I see the only bureaucrat did edit recently at en.wikinews. The stewards can only act as bureaucrats if there is no local bureaucrat or if all local bureaucrats are inactive. If Gryllida doesn't process the bureaucrat backlog soon-ish, you can fill a SRP request (expect delays, however, we'd probably also attempt to contact the 'crat ourselves before granting anything). You can look at Steward_requests/Permissions/2020-12#Robins7@cswikinews for how bureaucrat absence was handled in the past (at cs.wikinews). Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Well....that does help. I anticipate that she will get to this matter fairly soon. Let's give it a wee bit more time. Thanks for getting back to me!--Bddpaux (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Help me!

Hello Martin, will you please help me to install the w:en:User:Enterprisey/reply-link here on meta. I added the code to global.js file but it didn't work. If you don't mind, will you please help me! Hulged (talk) 08:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

It works now. Hulged (talk) 08:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding these statements that you and 1234qwer1234qwer4 have added with his advice to me:

I know that I have been getting a bit too low when it comes to reporting too fast. For the most part, I do provide evidence of abuse, and sometimes report without even thinking, often rushing reports in hopes of getting a user locked. However, that won't stop me from reporting every so often (every day even), I think I should improve the reports by adding diffs to each report I make. What do you think? :/ DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 22:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I doubt that will help when it comes to users that should not have been reported to SRG in the first place. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
08:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
1234qwer1234qwer4 Yeah, that too. I don't blame you for even having a doubt like this. This is just like Miraheze's system, in a way. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:06, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Dropping by to say thanks:

Thanks for protecting my user talk page. I'll be honest: My user talk page has been a recent target by those LTAs who think they're tough as nails. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Please see

Please see Steward_requests/Global#Global_lock_for_Sidowpknbkhihj_socks. long term abuse.-- 12:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Help in my tasks in Gerrit

@Martin Urbanec: Could you do me a favor related to gerrit.wikimedia.org? In my dashboard is with 6 changes needing Code-Review, being important because they are requests from Phabricator. So could I Code-Review my requested changes? Thank you in advance!
Juan90264 (talk) 02:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Re-placing that same order... Juan90264 (talk) 02:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Please Steward user@Symphonium264 Abuse of wikipedia

Please act quickly, he is a sysop on wikipedia Indonesia who is a paid contributor, and intentionally blocked some users for fear of being reported. I am afraid that this person will become a bureaucrat on wikipedia Indonesia by defaming the good name of the wikipedia foundation. Regards 10.000 Volt (talk) 00:17, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

If you accuse someone of abusing access, you need to present evidence. I would also suggest to discuss the matter locally first; while stewards can remove permissions in emergencies, they will not do it unless strong evidence of clear abuse is submitted. Martin Urbanec (talk) 01:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Original poster is now locked. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
21:56, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I made a mistake


I overlooked a missing community consensus in phab:T287091, which is obviously not good. I'm not sure what to do now. What would you do?

Regards --Zabe (talk) 08:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

@Zabe Hi, good question. @1997kB, do you think that change should be rolled back? Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Zabe, I think yes. There's little local community and those who edit locally can be manually welcomed. Also there are concerns on proposer's talk page locally. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:28, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I uploaded a revert patch. Hopefully it can be deployed on monday. --Zabe (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
@Zabe Sure! You probably don't even to schedule it, I'll just do it in the morning. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! --Zabe (talk) 23:21, 20 August 2021 (UTC)


Hello. As you globaly blocked user:Strange editor 2, I let you know that user:UnknownEditor1234567890 is probably a new sockpuppet of him. See this check user request. I blocked him indefinitly on french wikipedia. Supertoff (talk) 09:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Edit : we have probably a lot of new sockpuppets (see this request)... Supertoff (talk) 17:46, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Zhxy_519’s case in zh.wikisource

Hello Martin Urbanec, I respect your operation to hide discussion. But what I said an admin operation before the vote reaches 14days. Don’t you think that is not just discussion, but at least a note needed to pay attention?--Gzdavidwong (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

A global locking request for deceased accounts and open proxies

@Martin Urbanec: @Sotiale: Good morning! I have found some Wikipedia accounts who had died since long ago, but were not locked for security reasons because it happened when the policy on doing such isn't existent yet.

All of the above are declared as deceased, as seen in WP:DECEASED. Those are wholly pre-2009, just to clarify a bit.

Besides that, there are two open proxies that need to be blocked as well.

The basis of this request is purely out of security reasons, as over time passwords can be leaked through database incidents and most of us have a bad habit of re-using them. Furthermore, there is a likely imminent editing campaign targeting Wikipedia by anti-vaxxers because lately most of Reddit has been pushing their CEO to remove vaccine-related disinformation community boards from there.

Take care! 09:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)


You have new messages
You have new messages
Hello, Martin Urbanec. You have new messages at 1234qwer1234qwer4's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
12:44, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Unblocks on ENWIKI.

In the past, you have said the Stewards will not consider lifting a global lock unless a local Wiki agrees to unblock. It is pointless to send a globally locked user to y'all if a local Wiki will not unblock. If this is true, could you please make a post on en:WP:AN to that effect? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:32, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Requesting Bureaucracy for ckb project

hello dear @Martin Urbanec (A/S) wish you a great time, i would like to ask about requesting a Bureaucracy permission, for a ckb Project, can we have this right? it's necessary for the project, It's right i heard about "Bureaucracy is not for small projects" but the ckb community has been developed significantly and it's not that small, Thank you 😊 Sakura emad (talk) 15:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad Definitely not based on this thread . Bureaucrat rights are not usually granted to small projects, as it is a sensitive permission. This is done for several good reasons (for example, procedural issues when a bureaucrat is inactive; stewards will refuse to process a request, waiting weeks for the local bureaucrat to respond), and motivated by keeping small projects more safe.
You might want to read Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements. If you decide to pursue getting a bureaucrat, you'd need to start an on-wiki discussion and then make a request at SRP.
Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec Thank you dear for explaining it logically, yeah considering safety it will be soon for small projects but i believed that CKB Wikipedia meets the criteria for Bureaucracy Permission, as for now we will wait a little longer to develop our community, we may meet again in the future at SRP hope you help us when the time comes, 😊 Thank you very much for the warm reply. Sakura emad (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Sakura emad (talk) 08:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Crosswiki Abuse

Hi Martin Urbanec, as you already globally blocked this IP [4] you might consider blocking its Range, see enWP [5] or idWP [6].

Todays IP 2405:4802:35E:6FF0:459B:8B61:6AB2:B6DB [7] is doing crosswiki vandalism again [8] (spotted it in deWP abuse filter [9]). Johannnes89 (talk) 08:00, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

#WPWPCampaign2021: Learning and evaluation

Hello Martin Urbanec/Archives,

Many thanks for participating in the WPWP campaign.

We are glad about the level of participation, this year and we are excited to inform you that over 900 volunteers around the world added photos to more than 250,000 articles in 298 languages Wikipedia. This year, we surpassed the 2020 edition's milestone by over 170%.

We are in the process of evaluating the WPWP campaign this year and we need your help. We'd love to get your feedback. Your feedback will allow us to better meet your expectations for the campaign in the next editions.

Please complete a brief survey so that we may learn about your participation in the campaign, strengths, challenges and your expectations. This information will enable us to improve the next editions of the Campaign.

Follow this link to the Survey:

Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:

Thank you in advance for taking this survey.

Kind regards,
Tulsi Bhagat contribs | talk ]
Communication Manager, WPWP Campaign
-- Message sent using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tulsi Bhagat Hello, I'm sorry, but I do not recall myself signing up for WPWP campaign or participating it. Why am I receiving the survey? Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:00, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for the error. Please ignore. Regards. T CellsTalk 13:47, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:06, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Question: Adminship for six months

hello dear @Martin Urbanec sorry for bothering you lately, but i have a question and i know you're highly experienced in this area, that's why i am asking, right now we're running an election for temporary Adminship for six months; we already meet the criteria in accordingly we have 4-5 votes at least 2 supports, my question in Nutshell: by any chance if we get any oppositions can we explain it in meta to the steward? because some of the opposition votes are unfair and unhelpful to the wiki such as (we don't need more admins) etc... are those oppositions taken into consideration or how it works? i will really appreciate it, Please guide me more about it Thank you. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad If there any oppose votes, the page you linked requires them to be "discussed". Stewards usually read through the local discussion (via automated translations systems), and ask questions if they have any. Does that make sense? Martin Urbanec (talk) 08:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes it does, Thank you very much 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 09:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:06, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Unblock IP

Hi. As far I could understand you blocked IP in December 2020 (no open proxies). I cannot read the screenshot of the message perfectly, it's blurred: c:User:Pescia1977 sent it to the organizers of WLM Tuscany (i.e. "me" in this case) because he cannot upload pictures from his camera using his PC. He can with his mobile phone, but he has more pictures. he also used the PC in the past editions.

I have asked in the meantime for some flag of IP block exception on Common but maybe you can gix it on all platforms? Thank you in advance.--Alexmar983 (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Я не могу править

Я не могу править даже свою страницу обсуждения. Стюарды локально не разблокировывают. Кому обратиться? Блинов Рюрик Петрович (talk + contributions) 12:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

"blanking insecure script"

Hello, I'm pretty sure this one is protected. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
22:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4 That one is, but due to the way the page was structured, it made possible to load JS from unprotected pages. Due to en:WP:BEANS, I'm not going to go into the details, but there indeed is an important issue with that page. Do not revert, please . Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I can't revert anyway (not an intadmin), but thanks for the explanation. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
23:05, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Import issue

Hello Martin, Can you please check why bnwikibooks Special:import doesn't work. When i go this page I can just see messages "No wikis from which to import have been defined and direct history uploads are disabled." What should I do now? --MdsShakil (talk) 13:05, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey @MdsShakil, bnwiki needs to decide on wikis that should be "source wikis" (wikis to import from). Once such consensus is reached, request the change via Phabricator. Does it make sense? Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I understand, thanks for your help --MdsShakil (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Any time. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

What's up with the example page?

Hello, I'm Excellenc1 from enwiki. What was going on with the example page today? Excellenc1 (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Excellenc1, thanks for asking! Not much, really. It got linked unintentionally from a global banner about MCDC. The campaign was promptly disabled, but due to caching/people not refreshing, the page was quickly filled with nonsense and (incorrect) attempts to "fix" the link (although the true fix needed to be done in the centralnotice's admin interface, which was done a few minutes later). To avoid more nonsense being added, etc., I applied a temporary full protection. As the temporary protection is no longer needed, I just lifted it. Hope this explanation makes sense to you. Feel free to ask clarifying questions if not. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I got it. Thank you! Excellenc1 (talk) 03:45, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Hide my name

Hello, I have created several Noah Sokolowski accounts to protect the name and I would like you to disappear all of his accounts by locking them globally. And also the contributions After the request, can you hide the message also ? Here is the list of accounts to be deleted:

Noah SokoIowski (talk) 00:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Discussion about CentralNotice Adminship inactivity and membership

Hello Martin Urbanec. There's an ongoing discussion happening on Meta:Babel that proposes changes to existing Meta:Central notice administrators practices. In particular: membership duration and inactivity. As a current volunteer central notice administrator, your participation in the discussion would be appreciated. Thank you, --MarcoAurelio (via MassMessage) (talk) 10:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


Hello Martin Urbanec and thank you very much for your assistance with https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/734451. I'm still newbie in using git.

Before starting to make this patch, I updated my local repository by git pull. I noticed that my branch was ahead of 'origin/master' by 3 commits (git status), but I continued to commit. I also noticed that you abandoned the patch [10] and probably upload it from scratch. I would be very grateful if you tell me what I did wrong and what I should have done instead. Thank you very much for your time. 4nn1l2 (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I think I found out myself. I probably should have entered git config pull.rebase true before entering git pull. Can you confirm this, please? I should study more as I currently have no idea what rebase is. 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@4nn1l2 Hello, thanks for asking! So, the usual way people contribute to Gerrit is that they create a new branch, and submit a patch (via git review -R) from that new branch. If you do so, then your master branch will always follow the remote server, and it will be always possible to do a fast-forward on it (merely update its pointer, rather than having to do a merge). In that case git pull will complete without any merge commit, and it will all just work nicely .
Doing git config pull.rebase true will likely confuse your local git repository even more (but I didn't test that at all, so it might somehow work; the branch solution is definitely a better one ).
The words "rebase" and "merge" are quite similar (if you're familiar with one, it's easy to understand the other). Both are ways to "merge" (the generic English word, not git terminology) one branch to the other. Rebase does that by rewinding the destination branch to the source, and then re-applying all commits that were in the destination branch, but not in the source. Merge does that by creating a special merge-commit. Rebases result in nicer commit histories, but they do rewrite the git log (as reapplying a commit changes its hash).
Ad https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/operations/mediawiki-config/+/734450) That's a merge commit, which is not very useful, because Gerrit can deal with merges perfectly on its own. The commit which included actual change, [11], was kept, and even merged & deployed by a fellow deployer.
To summarize, when you upload a patch to Gerrit, you should: 1) switch to the master branch by git checkout master 2) delete all other branches (git branch to list them, then git branch -D <branch name> on every branch that's not master) 3) create a new branch for your change (git checkout -b <branch name>; the name can be arbitrary, I usually go with the task number) 4) do the commit 5) upload with git review -R.
Hope this helps. Martin Urbanec (talk) 07:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

You are a scrutineer for the 2021 enwiki ArbCom election

Hi Martin Urbanec. Thank you for indicating your willingness to volunteer as a scrutineer for the 2021 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election. You have been appointed to be a scrutineer, and I will be shortly requesting that the Arbitration Committee grant you temporary checkuser permissions on the English Wikipedia to aid you in this role. If you do not wish to continue to serve in this role, please notify me or another member of the Electoral Commission (listed here). Thank you again for agreeing to serve in this important role. We deeply appreciate it. Mz7 (talk) 03:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Mz7, thanks for letting me know! Looking forward to the elections. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 07:29, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


There are still 85 files in T292954. All of them are larger than 700 MB. After recent fixes of the server, i was able to upload the smaller ones. But not files larger than 700MB. --C.Suthorn (talk) 16:05, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Light Green Storm

Please globally block Light Green Storm, sock puppet of Dark Green Storm. Thanks. --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:36, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Steward action

Hi! Could you please help with this and this requests? Users were banned in several wikis but they are still active in some others. Thanks.--Renvoy (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Steward requests/Checkuser/2021-11#Babygogolove@zh.wikipedia

Hello Martin. Thank you for helping out with zh.wp's CheckUser request. You closed it as Unlikely Unlikely that they are "geographically very wide apart". While I do respect your work and CheckUser results, may I confirm that they are not by any chance using open proxies that are yet to be blocked? (This question is raised by local users regarding the CheckUser result, and I do find this point interesting, so I raised it to you.) LuciferianTalk 02:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello @LuciferianThomas, as far as I remember my CU'ing from the other day, all the users were using IP addresses that are assigned to residential providers (spanned across multiple countries). While the residential providers may either intentionally or unintentionally provide proxy services to the world/their customers (and I did not actually do any port scanning), I think an use of a proxy is pretty unlikely. Even if one of them did use a proxy, that could only change the result to Inconclusive Inconclusive (just to make that clear, I still stand behind my closing, this is a "what if" sentence).
Does this answer your question? May I know why are local users discussing this question (ie. is there another reason for suspicion not brought up in the original request)? Martin Urbanec (talk) 08:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Understandable. Someone brought it up just to confirm the user relationship results as negative, not about suspicion. LuciferianTalk 08:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
@LuciferianThomas Unfortunately, CheckUser can never provide a 100% answer. That's why I said unlikely. Martin Urbanec (talk) 08:59, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

VRT member rights

Hi, I wonder if there is a possibility to add to VRT members the right to view the deleted revisions of files globaly or just in Commons. As VRT member I working often with deleted files, and without sysop rights on Commons I always need to requesting an undeletion of files, which sometimes need to be deleted again after my review. It will be very easier if I requested the undeletion only when I sure that the file is ok, and not just to look at it. Best regards.--Andriy.v (talk) 10:02, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Andriy.v, that's definitely not going to be solely my call . If you're asking for my personal thoughts about this, let me link you to an old discussion at Wikimedia Commons, where it was suggested to grant OTRS agents the right to view/undelete deleted pages. For some additional context, also see en:Wikipedia:Viewing deleted content, which quotes comments made by multiple former General Counsel of the Wikimedia Foundation on this topic.
To summarize all of the links above, generally speaking, non-admins are not allowed to interact with deleted content. There are some exemptions, but those are made to people elected using admin-like criteria: for example, Czech Wikipedia's ArbCom members (who are usually not admins) are allowed to view deleted content by virtue of being arbs, but that's only possible because the community elects them using a similar process like what is applied for admins.
Personally speaking, I don't think it's possible (or wise) to grant VRT members the ability to see deleted content (definitely not globally). Another solution to the problem might be creating a subqueue in VRTS, that will have tickets requiring administrator attention.
Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I understand, too bad. Thanks for your time anyway.--Andriy.v (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Bot flag

Hello, am wondering if you might grant me the temporary rights. My admin right expires in one day and considering the bulk mess it would take me hours. Since I didn’t want to flood recent changes with hundreds of deletions and moves am requesting the rights for at least a day I fix the mess before I lose the tools. Cheers --Synoman Barris (talk) 13:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

@Synoman Barris Hello, unfortunately, it is not possible to grant any rights without community discussion first. The stewards do not constitute consensus – with regard to granting rights, our job is to evaluate discussion and determine whether a consensus exists (either as a result of ad-hoc discussion or due to a policy existing).
A solution to your problem might be creating a temporary admin bot (an extra account having both the sysop and bot rights), as @Ruslik0 suggested at SRP. Personally, I can imagine other solutions too. However, whatever the final solution is, it'd need to be supported by the community.
I hope the above makes sense to you. Thanks for all you do and have a nice day, Martin Urbanec (talk) 06:58, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

About proxies

I don't think they should be hardblocked. Instead, logged-in users should be allowed to edit. 19:10, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. However, I'm not really able to change the standards for open proxies :). Starting a community discussion about open proxy blocks might be a good idea though. Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

You blocked me

Id 2600:8803:5906:B200:EC52:BEDD:CF88:D495 21:59, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

SahYou blocked me.

hello I work as an actor in movies and TV series and I have created a page for myself several times that have been deleted by you and finally last night I was blocked and my account blocked by you And now I'm here to find out why my edits are erased by you. Thank you --User:Shahram59i 13:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)shahram59i

Global group opt-out configuration

Moved from my staff talk page --Martin Urbanec (WMF) (talk) 20:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)


It is almost certain that fawiki community will reach consensus to opt out of the Global IPBE group, i.e. those who seek IPBE access on fawiki should request and receive it locally. I can provide more context if needed, but here, my question to you is just a technical question.

As you very well know, we have other global groups that have per-wiki opt out configured for them (for example global-sysop, of which most large and medium wikis have opted out). What I don't know is how these are configured. Do I need to submit a Phab ticket and propose a patch (if yes, to which config file?) or is this something that is configured on the web version of MediaWiki, perhaps directly on Meta? If the latter, where should I request it? Steward requests/Miscellaneous?

Thanks, Huji (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Huji, first, note I boldly moved your message to my volunteer talk page – I don't have anything to do with managing global groups as a Foundation contractor.
I strongly recommend not to opt out from GIPBE. It's not because opting-out from the group will give stewards less power. Instead, it's about other issues opting-out will necessarily create (and I'll describe them later in my message). I think the new issues created by the potential opt-out are much more problematic than the GIPBE group applying itself.
First, please let me summarize what the GIPBE group really does, as that can be an easy cause of misunderstanding. As you can see at Special:GlobalGroupPermissions, the GIPBE group grants only two rights: globalblock-exempt and torunblocked; it does not come with ipblock-exempt (which gives immunity against any blocks, local or global). In other words, GIPBE gives its holder immunity against global blocks issued by the stewards and Tor blocks issued by the system itself. It does not have any role when it comes to local blocks.
When it comes to blocks, usually, an authority that's allowed to issue (some) blocks is able to do three things:
  • issue a block,
  • remove/modify a block and
  • exempt an individual from its blocks
As of today, this standard is respected in the way how GIPBE is granted (ie. by the stewards). What's more important, however, is the interface message that is shown when you're faced with a global block. It directly instructs the user to contact stewards with any questions. With the change you proposed at fawiki, stewards would be regularly presented with messages that are actually not for them, because we'd no longer be the users who are able to do something about it. I suspect a certain amount of messages would come even with a local override of the message in place: from users using other language than fa, from users somehow noticing meta's page about global blocks or by some other ways I can't predict yet. That's one of the immediate complications that would happen.
fawiki opting out will also mean that no one will be able to exempt fawiki users from (only) global blocks: currently, the expected way to do that is by granting GIPBE. Local IPBE would be a way, but it'd also exempt the holder from local hard blocks (including, for example, CU blocks). Is that an acceptable tradeoff for your community?
According to my Google-Translate reading of the discussion, this looks to be stimulated by a single case (the GIPBE removal you asked for recently at SRGP). Generally speaking, I don't think it's wise to enact policies based on a single incident. I did my research, and it looks that there are 818 users who have GIPBE and are fa.wikipedia registered. Out of those 818 users, 10 already have local IPBE, no one is blocked by fa.wikipedia and 240 made at least one fa.wikipedia edit (230, if you exclude the 10 users who have local IPBE already). Is the community aware that by enacting the decision, they'll effectively remove global block immunity from 230 users? Based on the lack of complaints, I don't think an abuse's happening by those users (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
In addition to this, let me note that in my opinion, GIPBE is more similar to global interface administrators (which no wiki can opt out from) than to global sysops. Global sysops have their scope limited by policy only to "small enough wikis" (and wikis that voluntarily opt in, like the incubator), and as such, it only makes sense to enforce the policy-set scope via technical means. On the other hand, the sense of the GIPBE group is to provide immunity against global blocks for its holder. For that reason, it only makes sense for the group to apply at all wikis where global blocks have effect (which is, all wikis except Meta). In my opinion, deciding that neither global blocks nor GIPBE is to apply at fawiki would make more sense (even though I'd be likely asking "why do they want this" in my head anyway ).
At this point, I'd like to thank you for reading the lengthy monolog about why I don't recommend the opting out happening. I recognize you didn't ask me "why it is not a good idea to opt out from GIPBE group", but I believe it's part of the stewards' job to explain the impact of a decision involving global groups can affect the wiki, so an informed decision can be made.

In this section, I'd like to (finally) answer the question you actually asked. The set of wikis where a global group is applicable is defined by a wikiset. The wikisets are defined on wiki by the stewards via the special:Wikisets special page (it should provide you view-only access; let me know if not). In the management page for the global groups, stewards can configure which wikiset should benefit from a particular global group. In other words, such change would need to be implemented by the stewards. Such a request would be best placed at SRM, I think.
Once again, let me thank you for reading through my whole message. As always, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed comment. And of course, thanks for educating me about Wikisets and how they are configured and where to request for one.
"It's not because opting-out from the group will give stewards less power." That is not the concern anyway. This is not a power struggle at all.
"... the interface message that is shown when you're faced with a global block ..." Once this measure goes into effect, the only users who will see that interface message who wouldn't have seen it before are those who have GIPBE and are trying to edit fawiki. I am sure we can modify the message to say "If you have GIPBE, note that for some wikis you still have to obtain local IPBE access." They already know on which wiki they are seeing the message, so they should not have a hard time finding out where to ask. FCOL, we can also mention fawiki's exemption on Global IP block exemptions and provide a link to the local IPBE request page.
"fawiki opting out will also mean that no one will be able to exempt fawiki users from (only) global blocks" That is incorrect. Those users can still be exempted from global blocks when they are editing other wikis by being given GIPBE. Only if/when they attempt to edit fawiki, they will have to also ask for local IPBE. Obviously, they will not be given local IPBE if we know they are subject to a local hard block like a CU block. They will also not be given local IPBE if the global block in question is for open proxies (unless they can justify why they need to edit form a proxy). If the global block impacting them is a non-proxy global block, i.e., they have a legitimate reason to evade IP blocks, then they will receive local IPBE. It is most likely that we will issue local IPBE in a timed fashion (e.g., for 3 months, renewable by request). This way, if the underlying block is not an issue anymore, we won't accidentally open the doors for said user to continue to evade other IP blocks such as those for proxies. Notably, GIPBE is generally given on an indefinite basis which is also part of the problem.
"According to my Google-Translate reading of the discussion, this looks to be stimulated by a single case" The case was the instigator, but this is not an isolated case. There was at least one more case for which I requested removal of GIPBE some months ago and GIPBE was removed by another steward (memory doesn't serve who). And there are several other users who we know are using proxies on fawiki because they have GIPBE, even though they exclusively edit fawiki (in other words, they evade the local community's scrutiny as to whether they have a legitimate reason to have IPBE access by not requesting it locally but rather requesting it here at Meta).
"in my opinion, GIPBE is more similar to global interface administrators (which no wiki can opt out from) than to global sysops" Your opinion does not reflect the reality. GIPBE is given out very generously; interface admin is not (thankfully). If there was sufficient scrutiny on who gets GIPBE and if it was given for only short time periods, we would not be having this discussion. If Stewards would have consulted fawiki before giving GIPBE to users who are clearly only active on fawiki except occasionally, we wouldn't have reached the point we reached today. I proposed a process for such scrutiny at Requests for comment/Global IPBE guidelines but I think we can say it has failed.
"GIPBE gives its holder immunity against global blocks issued by the stewards and Tor blocks issued by the system itself. It does not have any role when it comes to local blocks." Correct. However, many (most?) open proxies are blocked globally and not locally. It is unrealistic to expect that fawiki should import every open proxy global block from Meta and re-implement it as a local block. Fawiki is trusting the larger community of stewards in identifying open proxies (which is no small feat) and implementing blocks against them globally.
However, once a user gets GIPBE, they can effectively edit in any project, including fawiki, using such proxies. This leads to some issues:
  • Many GIPBE holders who mainly edit fawiki don't have a good justification for it, i.e., they are not truly cross-wiki editors whose actual IP has been blocked. In case of fawiki, we have some 10-20 users who are nearly exclusively editing fawiki, have received GIPBE, and don't have local IPBE access explicitly or implicitly (as sysop/bot). This query shows some of them (there are otehrs who are not shown). Some of these have coincidentally appeared in results of CUs we ran on open proxies when we found an LTA using those proxies. So GIPBE is making it easy for them to use proxies and not always for good reasons.
  • Persian Wikipedia (fawiki), specifically, is facing a much larger number of users who attempt to use proxies than other wikis do (perhaps with the exception of Chinese Wikipedia). The reason is most fawiki editors live in Iran, internet is highly restricted in Iran, and many users have "anti-filter" tools such as open proxies installed to access internet more freely. Even though Persian Wikipedia is not blocked in Iran (thanks to HTTPS, blocking Wikipedia is now a black-or-white decision and the government is surprisingly not blocking it), many users still find it "convenient" to not to have turn their anti-filter software on and off as they switch between editing Wikipedia and accessing some other blocked website (may it be a source they are using for Wikipedia editing, or just a fun YouTube video they are watching on the side [YouTube is blocked in Iran]). But "convenience" cannot be the basis of giving out IPBE. Fawiki needs more strict control of IPBE access, but GIPBE doesn't allow that.
  • Once you open the floodgates for IPBE access by giving out GIPBE generously (as you said, hundreds of users have GIPBE and have edited fawiki at least once), you increase the likelihood of LTAs and sockmasters getting IPBE access.
I had hoped that Requests for comment/Global IPBE guidelines would be seen as the answer. However, if Meta community is not willing to entertain a more strict approach in giving out GIPBE, the only option remaining would be for those communities that are disproportionately impacted by the disadvantages of GIPBE than its advantages to take the IPBE matters in their hands.
Another way to think about it is through the counterfactual: if every GIPBE issued is totally justified, then all those hundreds of users you mentioned should be able to ask for local IPBE access at fawiki too and be given the access (a.k.a., the "common sense" test). On the other hand, if some of those GIPBE holders don't have a legitimate reason for IPBE access at fawiki, then they have the choice of editing from a different (non-proxy) IP address or not editing fawiki. It is not ideal; it may deter some good-faith users, or some users who edit sensitive (political) topics and don't even trust the CUs on fawiki and think that editing from a non-proxy IP on fawiki would lead to a fawiki CU revealing their IP to some government authority or whatever (frankly, if you have this level of trust issues with Wikipedia, you should not edit on Wikipedia). But the advantage of making it very difficult for LTAs to evade CU is worth it, at least from the perspective of fawiki community.
In short, here is the three ways this could go:
  1. Meta agrees to be more strict with GIPBE (I tried it in the RfC, it essentially failed); if not ...
  2. Meta agrees to set up an exemption for fawiki (fawiki is overwhelming in support, we will see if Meta honors it or not); if not ...
  3. Fawiki will import every single global block (current or future) as reissue it as a local block too, thereby making GIPBE completely moot for fawiki.
Option 3 doesn't seem like a realistic solution and is very wasteful (why duplicate tens of thousands of blocks as opposed to delegate only tens/hundreds of IPBE access requests back to the community) but FYI I already have a bot capable of doing that.
"I believe it's part of the stewards' job to explain the impact of a decision involving global groups can affect the wiki, so an informed decision can be made" Agreed. Conversely, I believe we need our stewards to be better educated about the nuances of individual projects and how incentives may not align when you look at decisions from a global versus a local view. Huji (talk) 02:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)