Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat
| ←Requests and proposals | Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat (at Meta-Wiki only) | Archives (current)→ |
|
Meta-Wiki has a small active community. When a normal user requires the assistance of an administrator or bureaucrat for some particular task, it is not always easy to find one. This page helps users find one when they need one; asking specific admins directly via their talk pages is one way to elicit a fast response. It is only for assistance required at Meta-Wiki, help for other wikis needs to be requested at those wikis.
See also: Stewards' noticeboard, Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard, Category:Meta-Wiki policies, Category:Global policies |
General requests for: help from a Meta sysop or bureaucrat · deletion (speedy deletions: local · multilingual) · URL blacklisting · new languages · interwiki map
Personal requests for: username changes · permissions (global) · bot status · adminship on Meta · CheckUser information (local) · local administrator help
Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation
- Assistance with Meta-Wiki maintenance is always welcome.
- Many files awaiting review for basic
{{information}}, source and license.
- None currently.
Please find answered requests in the archives (this month).
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 10 days.
|
Report concerning User:Honooo[edit]
Honooo (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: This user has just been blocked indefinitely on the Japanese Wikipedia for unignorable misconducts involving derogatory, insulting, and vulgar languages, and now doing cross-wiki abuse on their user page. User:Honooo/特設ページ 日本語ウィキペディアにおける私への批判に対する返信 is a copy (or continuation) of ja:User talk:Honooo and they keep insulting jawp editors there. They are not blocked on any other projects so I wasn't sure if I should forward this to SRG, so I thought I'd take this up here. I believe this suffices to block them on meta too. Please check it out. Dragoniez (talk) 11:14, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry I overlooked the fact that they are blocked on enwikt for cross-wiki abuse after getting blocked temporarily on jawp in January. I'll think about taking this in to SRG as well. Dragoniez (talk) 11:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
I deleted the attack page and blocked the user on meta. --Johannnes89 (talk) 12:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Johannnes89 (talk) 12:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Request for semi-protect[edit]
- Query - Persistent vandalism.
Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 07:07, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Tulsi 24x7 07:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC) A newbie created this ill-considered RFA which should be speedily closed (or deleted) in my opinion, despite Meta:Snowball. I already left the user a note regarding our RFA policy [1]. Johannnes89 (talk) 14:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you look the deletion logs, you can see that I and few other admins deleted RfAs many times already which have been created by newbies or not have serious global edits. In my opinion: this RfA will be deleted, even @Johannnes89: can make it. --Uncitoyentalk 15:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! I was almost certain to remember similar speedy deletions but wanted to make sure... Deleted the page now. --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Johannnes89 (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Protection for ToU pages[edit]
Hi admins! I'm requesting protection for the proposed update to the ToU and its explainer page, as these are pages showing the Legal Department's current version and position; we've asked Wikimedians to put their comments on the talk page and not directly editing the page to avoid confusion. Will defer to your judgement whether this merit a full or semi protection. Thanks! RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 18:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Done (51667063, 51667064) - I've fully protected both of these pages. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 18:15, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! We may want to do a final update to the pages at the end of the feedback cycle late next month -- forgive my ignorance, but would it be possible to allow edits for admins + certain users (for now, that's probably going to be all (WMF) folks in the revision history)? RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- That wouldn't be possible without the use of an edit filter — as it stands, only administrators can edit the page. As you are already an admin (and any other members of staff can request admin rights), will this be okay?
— TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 18:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Erm, I'm a temporary translationadmin, not an admin :) alternatively, depending on where the thing stands with possible disruptive edits to the pages, would it make sense to reduce the length from indefinite to say, 2 weeks? The feedback cycle ends on April 24. Thanks! RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- That wouldn't be possible without the use of an edit filter — as it stands, only administrators can edit the page. As you are already an admin (and any other members of staff can request admin rights), will this be okay?
- Thank you very much! We may want to do a final update to the pages at the end of the feedback cycle late next month -- forgive my ignorance, but would it be possible to allow edits for admins + certain users (for now, that's probably going to be all (WMF) folks in the revision history)? RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Done (