Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2010-04
 | Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in April 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index. |
Rename the Wiktionary namespace at be:wiktionary
Resolved. Not a local request. This page is for Meta-wiki requests only. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)The Belarussian word for Wiktionary is Вікіслоўнік, so this namespace should be renamed accordingly there. --Al Silonov 21:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
- Firstly you need to request renaming Wiktionary to Вікіслоўнік, as {{SITENAME}} is set to Wiktionary at the moment. You should make a bugzilla: request (like bugzilla:5729) to do it — NickK 07:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
A bureaucrat is needed to review the list before confirmations starts. Thanks, — Dferg (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'll do it. vvvt 18:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. It seems that some of the admins listed there should not be. See here and the talk page of the removal page. — Dferg (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Dupe accounts
Looks to me as though StarChristy (talk · contribs) is also Star Christy (talk · contribs) and thinks the project is for their use (across wiki in one case). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 14:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- As both users are warned now and it's a bit DUCKish that both users are related; I'll be monitoring them and if any of them post off-topic content again I'll consider a block/lock. Thanks for reporting. — Dferg (talk) 14:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Comments are beginning to taper off. I intend to close and archive this discussion in 7 days unless I see a compelling consensus to keep it open or I see a sudden flood of comments. --A. B. (talk) 16:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Not just for this one. As a RfC on meta is the only way to show up for things that can´t be solved in the community, I will prefer to leave it open (every RfC) untill any solution is coming up. Also, IMO, stewards should have the last word, even if this is against the Steward policy (don´t decide, perhaps to change pasus). We have no other instances behind RfC (will support implementation of global ArbCom) when all tries in the community have failed or we can´t expect a neutral solution. --WizardOfOz talk 16:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's unclear what our process is for handling RfCs on Meta, which is why I've posted my intention here for comment by others.
- It's becoming apparent that, barring some change in sentiment, a much larger number of commenters favors keeping Wikiversity open than closing it (6 vs. 42).
- A second, newer RfC, Requests for comment/Improve Wikiversity, has been opened but has not attracted comments. I do not propose to close it for now.
- I believe the topic is contentious and there is no solution that will make everyone happy.
- Finally, I'll note that our normally route for closing projects is not via RfC but rather using the Proposals for closing projects process.
- As for the need to have a steward instead of an admin close this RfC, I don't see that it's required but if others disagree I'll certainly step aside. --A. B. (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- It doesn't need any userright to close a request. The closer should just be neutral and should not have been one of the discussing people. I don't know if there is a rule or something, just my opinion. Barras talk 20:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Per Barras, everyone can close it if he is neutral. It was just my opinion and I would like to see a Steward closing such sensitive things, perhaps with comment "concensus is obvius" or something like that. --WizardOfOz talk 20:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I have gone ahead and closed this RfC as unsuccessful. Opposition was overwhelming (8 to 1) and the discussion had tapered off so I concluded it was OK for any meta admin to close.
If I was wrong to do this, I'm sure I'll hear about it!! --A. B. (talk) 14:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Maybe
In a moment of madness I now have admin rights on Commons. If anyone feels like letting me have them back here I'd probably make use of them. However it has been a while so if anyone thinks an RfA is worthwhile that is fine with me. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 18:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think its better to let you run for a rfa since I don't know you...
- Wait you are herby, the herby.. you rock!!
- Welcome back :-) Huib talk 18:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- There are local 'crats on Meta or I'd have re-bitted you in an instant :) -- Avi 17:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)