Edits to commons.css on enwikibooks
Discuss the block
Hi, I am a checkuser in the Spanish Wikipedia, DARIO SEVERI, I will stay in this hotel for 7 days and this location I will use every months. I tried cancel some vandalism in the Italian wiki and I got this message:
"Non si dispone dei permessi necessari per modificare questa pagina, per il seguente motivo:"
"Your IP address is in a range which has been blocked on all wikis."
"The block was made by QuiteUnusual (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is Cross-wiki spam: Cross wiki promotional editing problem.
Start of block: 11:16, 11 nov 2015 Expiry of block: 11:16, 11 mag 2016"
"You can contact QuiteUnusual to discuss the block. You cannot use the "Invia e-mail all'utente" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is 126.96.36.199, and the blocked range is 188.8.131.52/24. Please include all above details in any queries you make."
- I do not have problem in the Wiki (pt) because I am a sysop there. Could you please allow me to edit in the Italian end Spanish Wikipedia.
- Hello, I am puzzled by your comment about being a CheckUser on the Spanish Wikipedia. I think you mean a Rollbacker? However, I have removed the global block for now as it may not be required any more. Therefore, you should be able to edit. Thanks - QuiteUnusual (talk) 12:22, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
As you probably know, the confirmation discussions for Stewards have been closed. In order to determine the outcome of these discussions, you are invited to comment on Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2016 before scheduled closure of the confirmation section "one week after the appointment of the newly elected stewards" (Sunday 6th of March, 17:22 UTC), though the closing time might be extended at the ElectCom's discretion for an extra week if it is believed "further input is required before concluding". All stewards are welcome to comment, including those newly elected.
Global CSS/JS migration
Hello QuiteUnusual. You have global scripts in User:QuiteUnusual/global.js, which you import using your local JS pages. Since August 2014, your global.js and global.css pages are loaded automatically on all wikis. Since you already import them yourself, you may experience script errors or tools being added twice. Do you want me to fix this by removing the imports from your local pages using Synchbot (without changing any other content)? —Pathoschild 19:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, actually the I don't use the tools that are in global.js, so I've just deleted that import instead - QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
No renaming between November 20 and November 27
You’re getting this because you’re a steward or global renamer. The Community Tech team are working on cross-wiki watchlists. We need to add a couple of fields to the localuser table in centralauth database. In order to be able to do this, we’d need to run a script that will get in the way of renaming users. Our apologies – we realize this is getting in the way of your work.
(UTC means that if you live in the Americas, it will be on the evening or afternoon of November 19 when the script starts running, and if you live in Oceania or eastern Asia, it can be closer midday on November 27 before we can be sure the script is no longer running.)
Hi, You have blocked me in ha. wikipedia and i don't know why you have done this and even i only contributed 1 edit in that wikipedia. Please explain me--Shriheeran (talk) 09:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- You used multiple accounts to try and get an administrator appointed on ha.wiki. I therefore blocked those accounts for abusing editing privileges. QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Please read and reply me at Wikimedia forum--Shriheeran (talk) 15:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Bonjour et permettez-moi de me présenter : je suis Claude Piard, jadis contributeur sous le pseudo de Claude PIARD aujourd’hui quasi-banni dans des conditions pour le moins contestables. Et vous êtes mon ultime recours pour dénoncer des dérives nuisibles in fine à la réputation de Wikepdia. J'ai en effet déjà tenté d'alerter le CAR qui s'est déclaré incompétent puis fais appel récemment aux bureaucrates où mes messages sur leur PdD, revertés dans les délais les plus brefs par Habertrix, n'entrent même plus suite à une prise de contrôle que n'approuverait probablement pas la CNIL. Mais ce genre de manœuvre risquée est bien révélateur en soi de l'urgence qu'il y a pour certain(e)s de "cacher les poussières sous le tapis".
Excusez-moi donc de vous ramener loin en arrière. En novembre 2013 Litlok est intervenu sur la PaS pour TI d’un article consacré à l’ « Attitude des juifs sous le régime nazi » pour suggérer son transfert dans la catégorie Recherche en histoire de Wikiversité, ce que j’ai fait le 6 janvier 2014 non sans provoquer de réactions de Lgd/Alginatus, longtemps sous simple IP.
Deux ans plus tard, en octobre 2016 la fausse manoeuvre d’un collègue et ami qui a rapatrié par erreur les travaux résultant de l'évolution de cet article sur Wikiversité a été prétexte au procès le plus rapide de l’histoire wikipédienne. Un RA pour « désorganisation de l’encyclopédie » initié par Heddryin à mon encontre déposé le 22 octobre à 12 heures 46 a abouti à mon blocage indéfini le 24 octobre à 18 heures 41, sanction prononcée par Lomita – après une large consultation certes – aux motifs allégués de « WP-POINT, meatpuppetry et contournement de décision communautaire », la décision étant appliquée par Starus. Le RA initial a été clos dès le 23 par la même Lomita à 9 heures 33 – soit 15 heures après son ouverture – pour « conflit d’édition » trois minutes exactement après le dépôt de mon argumentaire, la discussion se poursuivant ensuite uniquement sur le BA entre administrateurs où celui-ci est ignoré.
Mes tentatives d’appel au RA puis au CaR sont rapidement éludés avec pour seul effet le blocage de mon IP (2A01:E35:2E8F:19D0:E574:9CCA:1C5C:7825) et l’effacement de ma page présentation ainsi que sa PdD probablement trop compromettantes pour mes détracteurs. Depuis d’épisodiques tentatives de modestes interventions lors d’éphémères déblocages de mon IP se traduisent par son reblocage immédiat par Lomita au seul prétexte du test du canard, empêchant ainsi toute remise en cause de sa décision. Et actuellement ma détermination à faire rétablir l’exactitude des faits me vaut en RA une proposition de bannissement de la part d’Heggesipe. L’IP flottante de mon téléphone me permet néanmoins de porter à votre connaissance cette situation sur laquelle je reste prêt à fournir tous les renseignements complémentaires utiles. A cette fin, et faute d'autres moyens, mon adresse e-mail était accessible via mon ancienne page Claude PIARD. Celle-ci est certes effacée et je suppose que vous avez les outils nécessaires pour la ré-ouvrir. Néanmoins je me permets de vous la confirmer : email@example.com
Merci d’avoir pris le temps de me lire et bonne semaine. Envoyé depuis une adresse flottante, faute de pouvoir le faire plus régulièrement.--184.108.40.206 16:22, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Je découvre que ma connexion n'est pas bloquée sur Meta-Wiki et vous confirme donc totalement ce qui précède.--Claude PIARD (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Désolé, mais les Stewards ne peuvent pas servir de «tribunal d'appel» d'autres projets QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Dommage et merci pour votre réponse : cette version archivée avant effacement de ma page de discussion confirme et explicite ce qui précède. Elle démontre également que j’ai épuisé tous les recours avant de vous solliciter. Sans résultats autre que provoquer une demande de bannissement. Indifférence générale ? Complot ? Quoiqu’il en soit le remplacement du respect des principes fondateurs et des recommandations écrites par le concept de « décision communautaire » ( i.e. « au soviet ») a de quoi inquiéter pour l’avenir de Wikipédia francophone et ma démarche aura eu au moins le mérite d'attirer l'attention sur cette dérive.--Claude PIARD (talk) 09:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC).
- CheckUser data is not retained long enough to re-run the check. However at the same time I locked six other accounts operating on the same IP address as yours. Therefore I can confidently say that your account was locked as a probable spambot based on the CU data. That's not to say that it was a sleeper just that the evidence suggested it was.
QuiteUnusual (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Help design a new feature to stop harassing emails
The Anti-Harassment Tools team plans to start develop of a new feature to allow users to restrict emails from new accounts. This feature will allow an individual user to stop harassing emails from coming through the Special:EmailUser system from abusive sockpuppeting accounts.
We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you have experience dealing with abusive sockpuppeting accounts and you work across many wikis. We think that your insights will help us build a better feature.
It is important to hear from a broad range of people who are interested in the design of the tool, so we hope you join the discussion and let us know how it would work best for you.
For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
- Just stop using it. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
JSTOR account redistribution (The Wikipedia Library)
Hi - according to our records you received a free account for JSTOR through The Wikipedia Library. Because we’ve used up all of our allocated accounts, and it’s been some time since they were distributed, we want to redistribute any accounts that aren’t being used to users on our waitlist.
If you’re still using, or plan to use, your JSTOR access, no problem! Simply head over to the Library Card platform, log in, and request a renewal of your account. You should be able to do this from your user page, or the JSTOR signup page. If you can’t find the renewal button, or have any other issues or questions about this, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. We’ll begin redistributing inactive accounts in September; if you request renewal after then we will only be able to reactivate your account if we have spots remaining. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Samwalton9:. I returned my JSTOR account many years ago. Are you sure you are using the list of current users for this massmessage? QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:15, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Emergency in KaWiki
Please read my explanation thoroughly. It is about an inexorable situation in the Georgian Wikipedia, the long-established. Every attempt to solve the problem locally fails again and again. So, please, do not be indifferent.
The requests are extraordinary, so I do not write on a general page, but personally.
Best regards, Deu. 18:05, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
My suspicion is that this a Sockpuppet or a disruptive user, however, it is safe to assert a vandalism-only account. I see no constructive edits either relating to content or technical maintenance, "gnome" working, etc. So I also see no benefit in allowing them to continue with edits like these: "Hello."; "Hi.". Ridiculous repetition of characters: "Mkmjhfdszx". And now vandalising meta with same incoherent text: Mjeavklgdw, I tagged it for speedy deletion. Another instance of incoherent information with nothing else than random text: Rggfhtjghgcgdgdf. At meta, creating non-translated pages too: history of page. Please lock them to avoid further disruption (as evidenced above) to Wikimedia projects. Thanks a lot. To note: this edit filter is ridiculous and blocking me from making the changes; tweak the regex expression, please. --220.127.116.11 16:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- I will try to be more useful here in the future. I would really like to not be locked, please. Acquiescence88 (talk) 17:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I can't edit wikibooks:Wikibooks:Reading room/General because the AF is blocking me. The description is "TIP vandalism". I tried to report the error on wikibooks:Wikibooks:Edit filter/False positives and AF blocked it again, "TIP vandalism".
- "TIP" stands for "Turkish IP" vandalism. It's a new filter put in place to block a particular crosswiki vandal. At first look, I don't think your edit should be being caught by the filter so I am a little puzzled. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
Of course, I encourage you to do it because can’t remember any relation of yours to controversies around me. But you will have to interact with some boring and unpleasant persons, at very least to offer them a chance to present their (supposed) evidence against me. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- okay. This won't be quick because I have a very busy day job at the moment, but I'll let you know how things go. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps you should verify that, at least, major actors received and took seriously your notice. Unsure that you are about to make such a great job, but I’d prefer all these Jeff_G., Masumrezarock100, T_Cells, Ammarpad, Andy_Dingley, Rschen7754, 1989, Praxidicae to obtain a chance to present their case about the “untrustworthy person Incnis Mrsi” before you made the public statement envisaged. Their side should be listened. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I guess that some of those involved did not provide their replies. But for each person who ignores a Wikimedia steward for months or replies with insults upon me (instead of arguing for their cause) wouldn’t be reasonable to conclude that the person forgone his/her opportunity to speak in front of you? Anyone of those who are late will be able to request another review in the future, but as of now they are late. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- You are misunderstanding my intention. I am not conducting some kind of quasi-legal review, I am not a judge and I am not compelling "witnesses" to make "statements". This isn't a court. I am simply looking at if the circumstances that led to the removal of the advanced rights were reasonable.
- I think this is a cut-and-dried case. With you being indef blocked on multiple content projects, it's clear that if you were to ask for advanced rights now, then these would be declined. While there is nothing specifically in the policy to cover the "loss of trust" situation, it is established custom and practice that Stewards can remove global rights, including global rollback and global sysop, where there is a material issue. I can see no evidence that you have been victimised or treated unfairly, and the rights removal seems reasonable and not driven by a personal agenda or malice. QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:10, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps no “quasi-legal review”, but do you see any problem related specifically to the position of global rollbacker? You deem reasonable their established practice, and I have no intention to argue, but you can at least state (on user_talk:Incnis_Mrsi) that Trijnstel’s thing was founded on my conflicts with users on en.WP and Commons, and nothing more. Otherwise the story will be used to bash me, because abuse of rollback looks like a plausible conjecture in this condition. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)