User talk:~riley/Archive 1

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

AJAX patrol

Hello, I see that you use AjaxPatrolLinks. I have good news for you: AJAX patrolling is now in core! On Wikimedia projects, it should arrive with MediaWiki 1.21wmf5, between 2012-11-26 and 2012-12-5. You should disable this gadget when the new feature change is enabled, because it will become redundant and to avoid double patrolling. Thanks, Nemo 08:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Election of stewards

Hi Riley, i saw you rejected my vote here on , i knew that i did not complete 300 edition this year but I would like to submit a proposition about conditions of eligibility to vote steward election, IMO the rule of 300 editions is not just, how about to complete with other rules about quantity of data edited or illustrations uploaded ?

Cheers --Rami75013 (talk) 09:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Rami, unfortunately, I have no authority when it comes to this, I was just following procedure. @Stryn: and @Shanmugamp7:, perhaps you can advise? Riley Huntley (talk) 02:02, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Appeal: Request for voting rights

Dear Sir,
I have been working here for eight years. Last year, probably in April, my username Shahab was forcefully changed into an ugly username Shahab~urwiki for the sake of unified login/ Global account policy, by wikipedia management. Getting dishearted, I started using my another username which is شہاب, and requested to kindly merge my two accounts, about one year ago (see here- serial number 55). My request is still pending due to unavailability of merging tools.
Now, when I tried to cast vote for steward elections as شہاب, I was labelled "ineligible" by you. If my both username would have been merged, I becomes eligible to cast vote.

I have 2925 edits before 01 November 2015 on urdu wikipedia as Shahab~urwiki (only 600 required)
I have 408 edits between 01 August 2015 and 31 January 2016 on urdu wikipedia as شہاب (only 50 required)

I therefore humbly request you to kindly assess my eligibility to cast vote for steward election by manual means (instead of using some bot).

previous name: Shahab~urwiki
current name: شہاب --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shahab~urwiki (talk) 15:05

  • Shahab~urwiki: Hello, thank you for your message. Please remember to sign your messages with ~~~~. Please note that you're eligibility was not assessed by "some bot" but instead myself personally. You're userpage on ur.wikipedia does not identify that Shahab~urwiki is also your account, giving us no information to identify you are using two separate accounts. In any case, I have marked your account as eligible. :) Cheers, Riley Huntley (talk) 22:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

  • Thank you!

really grateful
Shahab~urwiki (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Global CSS/JS migration

Hello Riley Huntley. You have global scripts in User:Riley Huntley/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 20:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Global rollbacker

Welcome! :). Matiia (talk) 01:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Revert wars and LTAs

Please do not enter into revert wars with LTAs, especially on user talk pages. I really shouldn't be needing to have this conversation about feeding trolls. Just proceed with total indifference.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

  • billinghurst: While I hear where you are coming from and quite frankly, completely understand what you are saying, I encourage you to adjust your expectations if you find yourself saying "I really shouldn't be needing to have this conversation" if it's not been explicitly discussed. I hit bot rollback on a single edit to your talk page after seeing the edit pop up in a cvn channel and had no knowledge there was an ongoing revert war. As soon as I realized there was, unlike the other people who knowly entered into revert wars on your page (and continued??), I took my finger off the mouse and moved on from your talk page. I am sorry I didn't meet your expectations with that revert and especially after this conversation, I'll be more mindful moving forward. I will admit, I am usually in the position to hit rollback and then my next step is to hit block and the revert is over - it takes me a moment sometimes to remember I am not on my home wiki. Thanks again and appreciate you dropping me a line to have this dialogue. ~riley (talk) 10:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, and for listening elsewhere.

There was a message there for quite a while. I have put up an overt version now. 👍  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:19, 29 December 2019 (UTC)


If you could elaborate what package you would like (e.g. block with talk and email disabled + nuke etc.) I can make one for you :) And also you may look at User:WhitePhosphorus/all-in-one, if there are something not clear enough please let me know. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@WhitePhosphorus: Thanks for the instructions, I misread it the first time but now understand it! Did you get my IRC note about AutoUndo? ~riley (talk) 07:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


Hello riley,

I don't meant to be authoritative or something but this clearly isn't constructive. Constantly undoing them is just all they were looking for. If somebody don't stop after 1/2 undo/rollbacks it's good to call someone who can stop them or just simply wait for someone to pop-up. I hope you get what I am saying. Have a happy new year! Face-smile.svg ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:50, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

  • @1997kB: Woah! I was mobile when we talked on IRC so I didn't open the link; disregard what I previously said - I 100% agree with what you are bringing up! My apologies. I was running AutoUndo because this LTA's motto was to go to new pages rather than rehitting the same one (happened max 3 reverts once) and the tool was being very helpful with them hitting multiple wikis at once. Revert wars are not productive and this is not something I would consciously do. I have messaged WhitePhosphorus, who made the tool, to consider adding a maximum revert clause to it to prevent this from happening otherwise I cannot consciously run the tool knowing I could be getting into revert wars. ~riley (talk) 07:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | Nederlands | português | русский | edit

Mop (less heavy).svg

Congratulations, ~riley! You now have the rights of an administrator on Meta-Wiki. 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-adminconnect. 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. You're also allowed to subscribe the metawiki admins private mailing list. Again, congratulations and welcome to the team. Matiia (talk) 05:11, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations!! --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:05, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
+1--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you all! :) 07:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Congrats! Trijnsteltalk 21:33, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Revdelete, remove username (koavf)TCM 06:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Patroller granting


I am not overstepping or whatsoever, please do not feel offended in any way. I noticed you granted patroller to several users, no doubt they are very competent but according to Meta:Patrollers, they do need to make a request at RFH or at times any admin talkpage for the right. In the RFC I recalled that there are consensus against unilaterally giving patrol without they asking for it.

I hope you don't take this against me and Best Regards,--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

@Camouflaged Mirage: I value your approach to this comment, but am also sad you feel the need to be so gentle with giving critical feedback - I think that's a reflection of how much users can bite.. While I did note walking into Meta with a new hat that this isn't my homewiki, I went off the precedence that I was used to - I was given patroller without a request on Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Thank you for bringing to my attention, especially with a read through the RfC, that granting at an admin's discretion is not a secondary option per the policy. Thanks for approaching me and please feel free to do anytime. ~riley (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply, was unaware you were granted patroller then without a request at RFH. Maybe one day a new RFC maybe in place as I personally am fine with admins granting per discretion. The reasons opposing this approach is valid too on the other hand. I know commons and many other wikis allow admins to grant directly, my homewiki too (before I handed in the mop). Have a nice week ahead. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: Not an excuse, just wanted to provide where my ignorance was coming from. Really appreciate you having this dialogue to set me straight. FYI, you can also reach me on irc in #wikimedia-stewards as rileyh or theNorth. You too! ~riley (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and translation done

A thank you note, your push made me translate it, bravi! Have a beautiful day, --Omotecho (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

  • @Omotecho: No, thank you! Appreciate your contributions! :) ~riley (talk) 15:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-03

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


What is the point of this? As we discussed in IRC, think maturity. Don't be the fish.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

  • @Billinghurst: Wikipedia:Revert, block, ignore was the intention, however, you are right that the content was not harming anyone and removing could encourage the user. ~riley (talk) 23:32, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    Sometimes ignore needs to come first, or be the action, especially on another's talk page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
    I'll have to admit, I am still adjusting to the whole "another's talk page" thing as I don't take much ownership over who removes from mine and admittedly, I just thought "I would have reverted it if it were my talk page" and while it took a second for the light to come on, the lightbulb did light up and realize the key point here is that it is not my talk page, but yours. I appreciate these frank and transparent conversation as you are one of the very few users that takes the time to give feedback; you can call it what you like, but I view it as mentoring and I will say that I have found it to be impactful in my decision making. I'll be the first to admit I make mistakes, and sometimes the smaller things (perhaps due to devaluing the importance?) take more than once to fully understand, but I get there and it sticks. Thank you, billinghurst. ~riley (talk) 09:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Re:User talk:MCC214/Talk page archive#Patroller and feedback

I only composing this page,because I feel this page is very orderless.

But if you don't like I do this,I can stop it.

--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@MCC214: Please limit your edits to adding requests, adjusting whitespace is not necessary even if it appears orderless. ~riley (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Marking the translation group as Published

Hi, ~riley

could you help with marking this group of translations as Published. It seems that I can't do this by myself, strange, because I have sometimes been able to do this.

Many translation efforts were not visible to the local communities because of the lack of persons who would mark translations as checked/reviewed and then mark the entire group as Published.

Some pages display properly even if not marked this way, but some seem not to.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Best regards, -- Nesmir Kudilovič -- Несмир Кудилович (разговор) 03:07, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@Nesmir Kudilovic: I can't figure this one out.. I think it is because it is a CN translationn - I am attempting to get support from CN admins on IRC. ~riley (talk) 03:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done with some help. :) ~riley (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Threats via IP

Same message that I send to Tegel I send to You, since You both were on the action on the same page (removing vandalism, protecting). This IP maniac [6] has a fixation on since August 2019. Early this night he was on from the other IP.[7] . He appears regularly, every day. He focuses on the users that remove his vandalisms and the users that are in the correspondence with the targeted user; e.g. I write You something here, then he makes such aggressive edits. He spreads (or at least he tries to, by random guessing) personal information in the threats. Kubura (talk) 00:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for my talkpage. That IP is not the guy that had fixation on Antandrus, it is some other person. That IP user is persistent, and more and more graphic violence. To shorten with the translations, most common verbs are "slay, rape, f**k, impale". This night's vandalism on contained "imadu kite u tvome šupku kurvin sine rvacki retardirani dalekovidni" = they have cocks in Your asshole You son of whore Croatian retarded far-sighted". Sorry for the rude language on Your page, but that's the reality we've been facing for six months. And the sick guy does not show the signs of being tired or annoyed of doing the same thing on daily basis, he's getting more rude and daring. And as You see, he is hounding us everywhere. Kubura (talk) 01:06, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

  • @Kubura: Thank you for bringing this to my attention - I have experienced on and off wiki harassment in a similar way so I can understand that it is both frustrating and hurtful. I recommend you email WMF's Trust & Safety team so they are aware, at as they have better resources to deal with this. I will keep an eye out for this guy! ~riley (talk) 01:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-04

19:41, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Korean LTA

Hi Riley, there is a list of the LTA on my sandbox page on commons. I don’t have the time to check and report accordingly so I’d appreciate if you can do it. Minorax (talk) 04:44, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done Good work, Minorax! ~riley (talk) 05:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Is there any specific LTA to mention when reporting or should I just follow what you wrote? Minorax (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Can you please explain which Korean LTA is? They appear to be different from the account creator who previously had been in kowiki. Or is it temporarily named Korean LTA? --Sotiale (talk) 13:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
    • @Sotiale and Minorax: Temporarily named Korean LTA, referring to 김괘걸/gimgwaegeol from hereon. ~riley (talk) 19:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
      • Oh, I understand. If so, could you please tell me why he is the target of global lock? It is true that he created multiple accounts in commons, but I wonder if he has used vandalism or any abuse action in addition to creating these accounts in commons. I remember he only has accounts in commons and no other wiki accounts in his SUL. If he is similar to the existing cross-wiki LTA, he is subject to global lock, but I have not yet found a pattern. Global locks generally require vandalism, abuse, or indefinite block on multiple wikis. Perhaps there is some information I missed, so please let me know the information that makes him the target of the global lock. Thanks! --Sotiale (talk) 00:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
        • I will not go into specifics of their MO to avoid copycats, however, I can confirm the disruption previously has been crosswiki, disruptive and those accounts were locked accordingly as they met the locking criteria. Looking forward, any accounts that match the MO/behavioural evidence are considered lock evasion and long-term abuse which are continued grounds for global lock. I am happy to answer your questions, but I am not understanding how this pertains to you (no offense intended). It just seems odd that you are educating an experienced SWMT member on what is required for a global lock. If stewards need more information because they do not know the history, it is available :) ~riley (talk) 01:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
          • I think you've jinxed it because they have now moved account creation to eswiki ;) ~riley (talk) 02:07, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
        • I have no intention of teaching anyone, and I have no capacity to do so. I'm sorry if you accepted that, but I only wanted to know where they were doing cross-wiki abuse. I was surprised that you accepted that way. Perhaps you were in a bad mood when I mentioned the criteria for global lock, which simply meant to let me know which criteria he met. I'm sorry if you felt that way. I do not intend to point out that there is a problem with your request or judgment. And I do not have focus on it. What I'm interested in is what you know about him.
          • It's a fact you know well that there was an attack on account creation recently on kowiki. I was watching to see if the commons account creator had anything to do with kowiki's account creator. But as I watched, they had different patterns. So I asked what you think of the LTA whom commons account creator is. If you have time, I hope you let me know the past case. If this talkpage is inappropriate, please let me know via email. I'm concerned that he's potentially attacking kowiki, and that's the concern of kowiki admin. --Sotiale (talk) 04:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
            • @Sotiale: Sorry Sotiale, lets rewind! While we both understand what each other are saying, I think tone is just being lost in translation (literal); this doesn't happen often for me when working with ESL users. Your approach to the conversation appeared as if you thought the locks weren't jusitified, I did not interpret it from a trying-to-protect-my-wiki perspective as the vandal, to my knowledge, has no connection to kowiki. While you think I know well about the kowiki account creation attack, I did not know about it until now. I am more familair with ja/zhwiki LTAs and trends. As you can see on SRG, I deal with a lot of cases so it is going to take me some time to dig into this one as a lot of my lock requests are made on IRC. I will try to send you what I know this weekend, offwiki. ~riley (talk) 04:38, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-05

18:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)