User talk:Stemoc

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello Stemoc, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing!

Superprotect letter update[edit]

Hi Stemoc,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:14, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion[edit]

Hi Stemoc. Thanks for this. And I wondered, have you ever thought of requesting GR? (Or maybe even GS?) Trijnstel_talk 10:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was a GR before I left 5 years back (they didn't have GS then) and yes, I have considered it but not sure if I would qualify for either..definitely something I wouldn't mind having as i usually end up tagging 50+ spam a day around wikimedia..you could have asked me this on IRC you know :P ..--Ste moc 00:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I missed this resysop request, however, I would be happy to nominate you for admin again on Meta. Just say so and I'll open an RfA. You only need to accept it then. GR and/or GS can only be requested by you; you can't be nominated by someone else. Personally I'd advice you to request GS, with automatic GR - which means that after two weeks (and let's assume you will get enough supports) you would be granted the GS rights together with GR. If you won't mention it in your request, then I sure will in my comment. :) (And yes, I intended to approach you on IRC, but when you're online, I'm not and vice versa.) Trijnstel_talk 12:35, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I became an admin here the last time for the same reason, to help wikimedia globally and not just be a "slave to one" :P ..Ok, i accept your offer... :)--Ste moc 00:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Meta:Requests for adminship/Stemoc. Please confirm on that page that you accepted it. Trijnstel_talk 22:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Dear Administrator![edit]

Stemoc, congratulations! You now have the rights of an administrator on Meta. Please take a moment to read the Meta:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat, and Meta:Requests for deletion, but also Talk:Spam blacklist and Talk:Interwiki map), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings, or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-admin @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading although it doesn't always completely apply here at Meta.

Please also check or add your entry to Meta:Administrators#List of administrators and the Template:List of administrators.

I found no rule against templating the previous, so :P --MF-W 22:25, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

its a bittersweet win tbf...but ok, hehe, yeah commons actually pays very well but I don't do it for the 'hype/money', I do it because i'm passionate about it...Thanks for having me, even if it took 8 days lol. :P --Ste moc 02:20, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the CentralNotice-admins list[edit]

Hi! This bulk email is to let you know about a mailing list used to communicate bug reports and new features in CentralNotice, and to facilitate conversations between the admins. This message is being sent to you because you have the privileges to use the CentralNotice admin interface.

If you use CentralNotice to post or modify notices, please consider joining the list by visiting this page and subscribing yourself:

   https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/centralnotice-admins

Thanks,

Adam Wight (talk)

00:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Fundraising Tech,

Wikimedia Foundation

Deletion of User talk:Herbythyme[edit]

Please be a bit more careful next time when doing deletions. That page had lots of revisions before the spam edit and a revert would've been enough. Regards, --Glaisher (talk) 12:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that, I knew Herby from back in the days, when he left he had his user page deleted so when i saw the spam link, the page was tagged for deletion by a trusted SWMT member, I figured the spam was added into a deleted page (which spambots prefer to do) or that member would gave reverted it, thus the deletion...--Ste moc 20:10, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year 2015![edit]

Happy New Year to you Dear Stemoc --Grind24 (talk) 23:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/213.113.138.3[edit]

I would appreciate clearer block reasons, not that it isn't obvious why you're blocking, and I wonder whether you could eleaborate on why you thought it necessary to revoke his talk page acces. In any case, I would also like to make juse of the ocassion to wish you a happy new year. With kind regards, Sa vh ^ñ 11:57, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked him for the same vandalism a few days ago (different articles) and apparently he vandalized a few other articles across wikimedia and thus the extended 2 weeks block...didn't really see the need to allow him to post on his talkpage for the duration of his block or he might add the 500kb "nonsense" to it..oh, and a HAPPY NEW YEAR! to you too :)--Ste moc 12:03, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism proof Diff Thanks and Regards --Grind24 (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GlobalCssJs migration script[edit]

So the actual migration script did not register an account, and some user (I have no idea who) registered the account, so I asked a steward to lock it since the script would continue to function even though it was locked. Legoktm (talk) 17:46, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock, mw.org[edit]

I am not a spammer. I am a legitimate user from a site that has involvement with mw.org. 2600:3C00:0:0:F03C:91FF:FE50:DA73 06:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC) Катюша Р-36М (talk) 06:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

reflinks[edit]

...is back up! Legoktm (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Hi, thanks for giving me this user right! --Dyolf77 (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A user page deletion[edit]

Hi Stemoc! I've been reading about the Inspire campaign as a curious observer, and I saw that you deleted the user page of an Inspire campaign committee member (see Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire/Funding) with the reason of "new users should not be adding personal links/spam". I don't know what their userpage had on it when you deleted it, but it seems unlikely to me that it was spam, since they're here on the meta-wiki for constructive purposes. Linking to a few personal webpages from a user page is ordinary and friendly behavior, including for new users. Please be careful with deleting user pages - as I'm sure you can imagine, accidentally deleting the user page of a legitimate new editor can be unnecessarily discouraging for that editor. Dreamyshade (talk) 16:21, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually " Linking to a few personal webpages from a user page is ordinary and friendly behavior" is not true. That user is not only new to meta but to Wikimedia and as such, is not allowed to add external links to his/her userpage as its considered spamming. He/she even mentioned they were on the Japanese wiki which is a lie as you can see by the link above...We allow established editors to add personal links, not new users..On meta we do not discourage new users, and I'm happy to see her page was recreated without the unnecessary external linking..--Ste moc 01:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link me to the guideline that says this? Help:User page doesn't say anything about personal links, and it links to Wikipedia's user page guidelines for more information. The Wikipedia user page guidelines say "You are also welcome to include a simple link to your personal home page, although you should not surround it with any promotional language", without any constraints on new user pages compared to established editor pages. It discourages "Extensive self-promotional material, especially when not directly relevant to Wikipedia", without making a distinction between new editors and established editors; this is a matter of judgment, but it seems unlikely to me that linking to some personal context would qualify as "extensive".

If a person says they're on the Japanese Wikipedia and their username doesn't seem to be registered there, saying that they're lying is assuming bad faith instead of good faith - maybe they edit anonymously on the Japanese wiki or have a second username there. It's possible they didn't know that they can use the same account across multiple Wikimedia sites, or that they have a legitimate reason to keep Wikimedia volunteer work separate from Wikipedia editing work. If a person is not doing anything terribly wrong and seems to have something odd in their user page, it's a lot friendlier to post a note on their talk page explaining the problem than it is to delete their page. Dreamyshade (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreamyshade: Excuse me, since when Meta-wiki use Wikipedia rules? It's all new to me.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 19:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Aldnonymous: I'm going by what Help:User page says, which is "For more information about appropriate content for a user page, see" with a list of links to Wikipedia user page guidelines in various languages, which seems to indicate that Wikipedia user page guidelines are relevant here. It looks like that was added in August 2004. Looking for more guidance for meta-wiki, I see on external links policy a general statement of "Adding external links to an article or user page for promotional purposes is disruptive, and is considered to be spam", which seems consistent with the linked Wikipedia guideline. Dreamyshade (talk) 20:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Totally in agreement with Dreamyshade here. I don't see any policy stating that new users are "not allowed to add external links to his/her userpage as its considered spamming" - and calling the user's behaviour a "lie" from the get-go does not seem to be demonstrative of bad faith. On the contrary, Stemoc, you do seem to discourage new users - you deleted their userpage, calling it "spam", without even having the courtesy of leaving them a talkpage message, and in your message justifying it you say that different types of users are allowed different content about themselves. That seems pretty discouraging.
So, is there a reason why the links couldn't be added back? Because I'm not seeing an actual policy problem, here. Ironholds (talk) 21:07, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular reason you decided to delete the user's page without attempting to contact them first? I don't see anything in their contribs that would suggest they need to be treated like a vandal. Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surely because there were no edits except the userpage edit when the page was deleted. --MF-W 21:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except that's not the case. Stemoc's rationale that this is a new user, and your rationale that there were no edits, is kind of undermined by the fact that the user had made contributions to meta - contributions that identified them as a member of a WMF funding committee. Ironholds (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "Deleting others' user pages" section of the linked Wikipedia user page guideline strongly discourages speedy-deleting other people's user pages even if a user page is the person's only edit, except in serious/blatant cases of misuse. Dreamyshade (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
They also made a dozen substantial translation contributions. Do only translation admins see those or something? Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, they contributed translations after Stemoc deleted their user page. However, the fact that they had added themselves to the list of campaign members (and remained!) should have been a sign that they were a member of the community and not some random spammer. Fhocutt (WMF) (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but when someone appears out of nowhere and makes one random edit and their 2nd edit is to add "external" links to their userpage, I always query via CentralAuth to see if its a legitimate user or a newly created account, if i find it to be a new account but not a spambot, i generally do delete their userpage with the rationale mentioned above and I generally BLOCK spambots which any SWMT member would tell you is quite a common problem now. Meta is a global wiki now which means any edits to their userpage here will appear on all wikis they are centrally authenticated to so its now a very easy way for spammers to vandalise multiple wikis at once..We do not give people special treatment here like on other wikis, if we think their edits is not justified or relevant to the wiki, it will be removed or deleted..the account only has 15 edits across wikimedia and only 2 when i deleted their userpage....I was not being BITEy, I did what any other admin on this wiki would have done, lots of new users come to meta on a daily basis, not many of them even stay on meta let alone any other wiki on the project, should we allow all of them to add personal links to their userpages?--Ste moc 22:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Since it's now established that this user is here in good faith, is it possible to undo the deletion? Fhocutt (WMF) (talk) 23:03, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done, though i hope it doesn't set some sort of precedence as meta user pages are global and abuse of this is very likely...May be worth noting that we prefer new users to avoid linking to personal sites or adding very personal information..--Ste moc 23:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Most people aren't here as part of their Wikimedia committee work, so I don't think this will set a broad precedent. If you're still concerned about the outside links, I'd generally encourage engaging on the talk page when possible. Fhocutt (WMF) (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stemoc, I suggest starting a process of some kind (an RFC or whatever the appropriate process is here) with your fellow admins to update Meta-wiki user page guidelines to reflect concerns about spam, and to make those guidelines very visible to new editors (such as with a note on the "create your user page" page). To me it seems fine for people to have a small number of personal links on their Meta-wiki user page, even if they don't edit here often, if they're posted in a friendly good-faith spirit instead of being an effort at commercial/promotional spam, but it makes sense for you and other admins to work out a guideline based on your experiences and to make it visible and easy to find. Dreamyshade (talk) 00:48, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think we have ever needed a guideline on that, if a user feels that another user account may be promotional or spammy, they can report them or tag them for deletion. Its actually a very common practice to use the wikis as an easy 'self promotional' site, sometimes 100s of accounts are locked daily by stewards for doing just that and we actually do have a policy on that in our Inclusion policy and userpages like this one will always be categorized as spam and/or spambot account on any wiki. WMF is currently working on the new "Global User Page" and I'd make sure add my input regarding linking of personal sites and/or other websites to userpages there..--Ste moc 03:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So to summarise; adding links is against the rules. We don't have any rules on adding links. Did I get that right? :) Ironholds (talk) 18:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how many mediawiki wikis (non-wikimedia or wikia) you have visited over the last few years but they all are infested with this spam problem..its no longer just direct spamming like in previous years but nowadays they make these userpages look legitimate and thus harder to detect and moreso delete. Our abuse filters and spam blacklist can catch some of these but most go undetected. Some spambots do not even even add external links anymore but do try to promote whatever they are selling and yes to sum it up, we have no direct rules against spamming on meta because its less of a rule and more of a commandment ("Thou shalt not Spam")..--Ste moc 01:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know how many wikis you have visited, but they are all infected by the same high handed, censorious deletion of user pages. i see you are continuing with this disruptive behavior at User:Alexandre Hocquet. you do not have a meta policy or consensus for your actions. you might want to stop until you get one. Slowking4 (talk) 03:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Hello Stemoc, thank you for all the deletions! Kind regards, --Brackenheim (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

91.152.113.31[edit]

Hi Stemoc, I think this vandal needs a range block.--Syum90 (talk) 12:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for adding me to the autopatroller user group. Much appreciated. --Meno25 (talk) 10:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nepali Language Home Page in Meta[edit]

Nepali language homepage should be मुख्यपृष्ठ but it takes user to गृह_पृष्ठ . I had redirected गृह_पृष्ठ to मुख्यपृष्ठ but you deleted it on 05:04, 4 April 2015 . We'd appreciate if you could help fix this issue .I do not have sufficient privilege in this wiki to change mediawiki to fix this issue.Thanks in advance . --सरोज कुमार ढकाल (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CoFounder.png[edit]

Can you please go to Translation_requests/NL-1/En: and change "Founder.png" to "CoFouner.png". The page is protected, so I can't do it myself. On Commons, "Founder.png" depicts someone completely different. Also, I saw your comment. I wish that there was a "thank" button for log entries :) --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fckeditor4.png[edit]

Can you please restore FCKeditor4.png? I moved File:Fckeditor1.png, File:Fckeditor2.png, and File:Fckeditor5.png to Commons, and I would like to move Fckeditor4.png to Commons as well. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

done for both, ironically FCKeditor4.png was deleted by me nearly 7 years ago..hehe.. :) --Ste moc 13:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know; that's why I asked you. It turns out that "Fckeditor4.png" is a duplicate of Fckeditor2.png, so you may re-delete it. Thanks for the help. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Open_Source_Water.jpg[edit]

Same drill as before. Translation_requests/NL-1/En: is protected, and "IMG_3033.JPG" needs to be changed to Open_Source_Water.jpg. Actually, it might be helpful to unprotect the page, if you can, since the problem might pop up again. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

technically not allowed to change protection level of translation pages (cascade protection), but i fixed that link, don't hesitate to request more here :) ..--Ste moc 13:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, and thanks. Also, same page: this time, change "Itsukushimajinja-2.JPG" to "Itsukushimajinja-5.jpg". --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

done :) ..--Ste moc 22:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Polyphemus moth white bkgrn.jpg" needs to be changed to "Male_Emperor_Gum_Moth.jpg". --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About IP block: 118.172.40.243[edit]

Hi,

Can you global block it too or does it have to be more than two projects? DivineAlpha (talk) 05:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

my name badr[edit]

hello-marhhaba @Stemoc:Iam happy by your message and sorry,if caused problem for you ،i will translated those sections where i am comfortable,and the wikimedia will be better for we world، , i do best when the occasion will be suitable en future, finally my English its not good ،sorry for that finally، thanks ،،،،Badr alkabir ☯ (to take care) 5 15:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HTTPS timeouts[edit]

Would be interesting to see if such things help you as well. --Nemo 17:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nav popups[edit]

Hi Stemoc,

Regarding Special:Diff/15135885, I don't appreciate this revert and expect better from an administrator such as yourself. Your edit summary is simply untrue. There are lots of other people using this gadget. We even have these numbers publicly available now at Special:GadgetUsage. 1753 users have this gadget enabled, 142 active of which were active this month. As for your personal preference for the background colour, I'm not sure what you're referring to but I would encourage you to either discuss this with the maintainers of the gadget on English Wikipedia, or override it on your personal stylesheet instead. Substituting the whole stylesheet just to override one tiny rule is irresponsible from a software engineering perspective as it means the gadget JavaScript and stylesheet come from different sources, thus causing a malfunction when the JavaScript code changes due to a version mismatch. I also see you were recently blocked on en.wikipedia.org for edit warring. I kindly ask you to reconsider this revert. --–Krinkle 20:04, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krinkle: No, the popups are a widely used gadget, across wikimedia actually and devs at enwiki decided to change it without even asking for the community's input and the reason we got was that they are trying to accommodate for the introduction of Hovercards which was going to supercede Popups somehow..this was 3 months ago, no hover cards yet and still they refuse to change it back to its default settings. Enwiki does not run wikimedia and i know many users here on meta that prefer the original un-touched version of the popups to the new one which disappears in the background making it harder to see..I gave people an option, they can use this version across wikimedia by linking to their Global.js page but if they wanted to use the enwiki version, they can link to the enwiki version on their global.js page... I'm sorry, but wikmedia was supposed to be a democracy but there have been many "forced" changes made by the devs over the last 5 years for which the contributors can do nothing about..this is SOMETHING we can do something about. There is no need to change it, again, Enwiki does not run wikimedia, users on every other wiki use the original version of the Popups and Meta is a global wiki and we should not be accepting every idiotic change made at enwiki as our 'default' settings.--Ste moc 01:58, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect User:Jimbo Wales[edit]

You protected the page in 2008 without expiry. I need to change the category. Nemo 09:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Nemo 20:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page[edit]

Hi Stemoc, can you please semi-protect my Talk page? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. BTW, as far as I know, the only posts to my talk page here are from users I blocked en-wiki and who can't do much there, so they come here to harass me. If you happen to notice that the disruption continues after the protection expires, feel free to semi-protect the page for as long as you like. I can't think of any non-auto-confirmed user wanting to post something legitimate. Indeed, I can't really think of anyone wanting to post anything. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 15:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lol i'm aware, I do watch your talk page here and yeah if it persists, I'll add an indefinite page protection..--Ste moc 15:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

for that recent deletion in the Grants:IdeaLab space. Appreciated, Patrick Earley (WMF) (talk) 03:05, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Might need a set of eyes[edit]

I'd posted about this MarcoAurelio's talk page, but I saw that you'd edited more recently and I'm not entirely sure if this is something that needs to be looked at now or not.

Long story short, I was looking at the Idea Lab suggestions and came across this proposal which looks to be less an idea as much as it's a way to complain about one specific admin and one specific situation. That's not uncommon with these sort of things and it's not the first proposal I've seen that looks like it's geared towards a very specific situation, but this one is more of a rant and even names the admin and WikiProject. Another editor has also come in and named another editor that they say has harassed them, so I'm kind of worried that this will be used as a place to specifically name people and accuse them of harassment. (Offhand the block of the proposer seems to be reasonable based solely on what they wrote on their proposal, given that they were on a foreign language Wikipedia where they didn't speak the specific language and called an admin a moron prior to receiving a block.)

I don't know if you guys want to delete the proposal or not since it kind of seems like it's an indirect way of harassing the admin and anyone else named on the page. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reaching Out[edit]

Hello Stemoc,

I've been trying to reach you but being blocked prevents me from using the conventional channels. My username is Serra Docent. My IP address is 96.85.129.209, and the block ID is #68913.

Please, If it's at all possible to retrieve my content to use elsewhere, that'd be amazing.

cheers

Stewards requests global[edit]

Let me guess. the edits you hid were of the AlveroMolina troll? Pyrusca (talk) 14:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit summary...[edit]

made me chuckle. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing a new mailing list for Meta-Wiki administrators[edit]

Hello!

As a regular administrator on Meta-Wiki, you're allowed to subscribe to the recently created metawiki-admins mailing list. This is a closed mailing list for announcements, asking for help and discussion between Meta-Wiki administrators. If you wish to subscribe, please fill the form at this page and then contact Savh or MarcoAurelio via Special:EmailUser using your administrator account so they can verify the authenticity of your request and address. You'll find more information on the mailing list description page. Should you have any doubts or questions, feel free to contact any of us. We hope that this tool is useful for all.

Best regards,
-- MarcoAurelio and Savh 12:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Mailing list administrators for metawiki-admins mailing list.

Message sent to members of Meta:Administrators/Mass-message list. Please see there to subscribe or unsubscribe from further mass messages directed to the whole group of administrators.

Deletion of User:TIB-NOA[edit]

Hi Stemoc,

I've created my userpage at Metawiki, because it will be shown in all projects (Global user pages). IMHO my user page was not looking like a test page, but explaining what I'm gonna do. May you be so kind to restore it? May you additionally please send me the content of User:TIB-NOA/Charts? I hadn't thought, that it would be controversial. Such an overview is just part of my work and not harming anyone.

Yours sincerely,
--TIB-NOA (talk) 12:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TIB-NOA: - Meta is not really a test wiki and the information you added to your userspace is off-topic and should not be added here in the first place, It may be part of the Global user page but unfortunately, using your userpage to promote any idea or articles or graphs which has nothing to do with this project (meta) is not really allowed. I will restore the charts page for a short while and you should move its contents to another wiki where its on-topic...--Ste moc 12:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My project will work in Wikisource, Commons and Wikidata. I thought, that nothing would fit better than a global userpage. It's a public funded project to benefit these Wiki projects, I'm not promoting any obscure ideas.

The Module:Formatnum is a dependency of Module:Wikidata (already here since February 2016‎), necessary for using some of the documented features. When I tried it out, I noticed, that this library was missing:

local formatNum = require 'Module:Formatnum'

The creator just has forgotten to import this dependency, which I've done then.--TIB-NOA (talk) 12:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can post it in all 3 of those wikis, its is allowed and relevant (on-topic), it can be seen as spam or off-topic on other wikis thus why it should not be used on your userpage here cause it will appear on every wiki you log into and even if you are not promoting it, it will be seen as such.--Ste moc 12:58, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with you, that promotional content should be deleted, but I have to disagree, that my userpage was promotional in any kind. It just contained a description of what I'm going to do. No fancy nonsense infographics, just a simple table. No logo, no overly promotional language, no promotional links (just a link to a vague press release). BTW I don't object in deleting the charts page.

I have to announce my project, that nobody gets surprised if I start with mass imports / uploads, but IMHO I haven't done this in a promotional way.--TIB-NOA (talk) 13:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please undelete they are not clearly speedy pages. The page is within scope for Wikimedia, and this is the place for global user pages. It would seem that number of pages that deleted may have been better to go through a deletion process of the community rather than executive action. I invite you to undelete the pages then take that process put in place by the community now that the user has challenged you on your actions. — billinghurst sDrewth 19:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The user recreated the others , i restored one but I do think Billing that its definitely off-topic, seems more like it belong on wikisource or wikidata than here--Ste moc 00:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I read Meta:Inclusion policy to allow project work to be here, just not project content (main namespace). Anything that is grey I would hope that we would engage in contact and discussion and follow process. We are all aware that administrators taking executive decision-making is problematic, and often seen as autocratic and we would do well to not speedy delete grey areas. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for undeleting my userpage. I've filed a deletion requestion for my subpage, I would not have expected, that it would be so problematic.--TIB-NOA (talk) 09:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Best Wishes !![edit]

Best Wishes, Stemoc!
Hi Stemoc, I wish you and your loved ones Happy New Year 2017. Dear, Have a great time !!

— TBhagat (talk) 04:15, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My user page deletion[edit]

Hello You just deleted without any warning nor justification my user page. Can you please :

explain to me why you violated WP:NOBAN specifying that users should refrain for modifying (even more globally deleting) other users pages
explain what justified such an action instead of contacting me and explaining to me what issue you have with my user page as in WP:USERTALKBLOG
revert your unilateral deletion, and if you feel that there are valid reasons for my user page to be deleted, please use the normal WP:MFD procedure so that anybody can understand and debate about it, because there was in my user page absolutely nothing that would fall under the criteria of speedy deletion as in WP:SPD. --Alexandre Hocquet (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:UCLA is lame[edit]

He vandalized my user page and one of his socks made a spurious report, did he not? God, will no one rid me of this turbulent priest! BTW, while I have you on the line, could you semi-protect User:Purplebackpack89? Purple backpack89 01:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Ste moc 05:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Requests for comment/Extreme abuses at the Romanian Wikipedia[edit]

Hello. May you please undelete just the revisions of Talk:Requests for comment/Extreme abuses at the Romanian Wikipedia before the redirecting? Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 04:38, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User talk : Gemisfly[edit]

Im a new user , I want to create a profile for my project - I can see how Stemoc is a wiki commons member, and i is being called spammy and deleted it . is there any suggestion other than delete.

You were blocked on english wikipedia for the same reason, so no, you are not allowed to spam, if you do it again, we will block you here too.--Ste moc 23:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Community health initiative/Community health initiative Newsletter[edit]

Why was this deleted? Other pages link to that. Why do You think, it was necessary to delete it? --Manorainjan (talk) 11:07, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Blocking tools consultation[edit]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting all Wikimedians to discuss new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools in December 2017 for development work in early 2018.

We are specifically contacting you for your ideas because you are one of the top users of the blocking tool on Meta. We think that your comments will help us make better improvements. You can post to the discussion in the language that you are most comfortable expressing your ideas.

Other ways that you can help[edit]

Spread the word that the consultation is happening; this is an important discussion for making decisions about improving the blocking tools.
Help with translation.
If you know of current or previous discussions about blocking tools that happened on your wiki, share the links.
Help summarize the discussion to share back to your wiki.

If you have questions you can contact me on wiki or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for posting in English.
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Reminder about Blocking consultation[edit]

Hello again,

The discussion about new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools is happening on meta now and is in the final days.

We contacted you because you are one of the top users of the blocking tool on this wiki. We think that your comments will help us make better improvements. There is still time to share your ideas. You can post to the discussion in any language.

Thank you if you have already shared your thoughts. You can also help out by sharing a link to the meta discussion with users on other wikis. Or you can translate the summary of the discussion and share it on another wiki.

If you have questions you can contact me on wiki or by email.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very sad[edit]

I had no idea that you have retired from Wikimedia (or at least from metawiki, I see that you have made a few edits on commonswiki). I knew you haven't been active lately, but I never looked at your user page and didn't see when you got your access removed by -revi (or I don't remember it right now). I remember I was looking for you on IRC many times in order to tell you I got your ping on IRC due to that summary on MediaWiki hahaha. Oh well, it's sad to see this. Matiia (talk) 00:27, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Matiia:, heh, yeah I didn't choose it, but this site (wikimedia) has been spiraling downwards anyways and i would have never retired even if this site existed till 2050 lol but being blocked on enwiki gave me that little bit of nudge to just let it go ..I'll still randomly add to commons cause i made ties with photographers on flickr back when i was active and i promised to keep those so throw me a line via PM or message on commons whenever you want to :)--Ste moc 01:34, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]