Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2022-02

User:Idris sanusi

This user keeps editing Grants:Project/Rapid/Apply/Steps after warning. Can someone please stop them? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Request withdrawn User stopped. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 18:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Block

AuikJuluR (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) LTA. Cheers --MeganB... _{…till the end} 15:28, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 15:30, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hulged (talk) 02:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

RfGP

Please add to Votings-global new request for GR permission. --Mykola7 (talk) 22:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. stanglavine ^msg 22:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hulged (talk) 02:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Talkpage protection

Hi, Could an admin semi-protect my userpage and talkpage please?, Unfortunately some sad troll keeps vandalising my talkpage, I don't edit and have never recieved any messages off of newbie editors, Many thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 11:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Done @Davey2010: If this is happening xwiki, then for the small and medium wikis I have a global AF that will slow these users down, that would just mean that you would need to seek protection of user/usertalk pages at the large wikis. Thanks for letting us know.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Billinghurst, Brilliant many thanks for your help it's greatly appreciated, Sorry if I'm sounding dense but what's an AF?,

Tbh mate if they start elsewhere then my plan is to have all talkpges protected irrespective of whether the troll's vandalised it or not but guess we'll cross that bridge if/when we get to it, Thanks again for your help :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Davey2010: it's the "abuse filter" - globally it can apply to lots of small projects, for example if you started getting harassed at the Walloon Wiktionary and the Assamese Wikisource. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Xaosflux, You (and Billinghurst) are amazing thank you!, I never even gave abuse filter a thought, If this gets worse than the AF would be a massive help for the smaller wikis most definitely. Would hope it doesn't reach that stage tbh, Thanks Xaosflux for kindly explaining that, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:58, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Added as a term to AF/181 and will watch for false positives it sort of acts like a global protection for user/usertalk. For large wikis you will need to seek their application of protection locally.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:173.184.132.157

173.184.132.157 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism. Need a local block too. Mykola7 (talk) 12:48, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Vandubadu

Vandubadu (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: vandalism Zabe (talk) 12:03, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Done indefinitely. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 12:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:217.199.97.42

217.199.97.42 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Someone is very unhappy. Mykola7 (talk) 15:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Already done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:47, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:47, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Translation in Twi

Hi, translation in Twi has been made for this banner The steward elections have started. Please vote. Thank you -- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 16:54, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Robertjamal12, thanks for letting us know. I've published the new translations. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for confirmed right

Hi! Could you grant me please status of confirmed user? My main account is User:Renvoy, where I am autopatrolled but I use this one solely for working purposes.--ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk) 10:00, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

FTR, I gave autopatrolled flag. Unfortunately, I can't myself give out the +confirmed, as I'm not a bureaucrat here (I support giving it out though). Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:13, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, this right is also useful, but confirmed status is still needed because I get caught in CAPCHA and cannot move pages.--ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk) 10:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@ValentynNefedov (WMUA): Done. Granted for two weeks. Should be time enough to get autoconfirmed status automatically :-) Sincerely, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:13, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Block

125.165.104.176 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Persistent vandalism --MeganB... _{…till the end} 08:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Done for 2 days. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 11:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 11:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Block

Please block User:AymanSaadAbbas (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) and delete their pages for spam and promotions. Thanks --MeganB... _{…till the end} 12:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Done —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for mass message delivery rights

I would request administrators to grant me with the mass message delivery rights as I am a member of international team and co-ordinator for Feminism and Folklore 2022 project. Also with this rights it would become convenient for me for sending messages (in bulk) to inter-wiki users inviting/acknowledging them for participating in projects. Rockpeterson (talk) 08:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Rockpeterson, thank you for making the request. Before making a decision in your case, can you please provide an example message and a mass message list (formatted according to MassMessage's expectations) that you would like to use for bulk mailing? Thank you, Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:14, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec Basically the target users will be these.The format which I would use will be as below
{{target | user = Rockpeterson (Username) | site = mr.wikipedia.org (site of Wiki) }}

Here is the sample message
Dear Organizers ,
Congratulations on successfully organizing Feminism and Folklore 2022 on your local Wikipedia language. Now whats next ? Please refer to the set of rules and guidelines from here. During the contest if you face any issue or have queries regarding the project please feel free to reach out to us on out on Contact Us page. Our International Team will be assisting you through out the contest duration. We thank you for your numerous efforts which you have put in for making this project successful.

Best wishes ,
Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 International Team Rockpeterson (talk) 12:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Done @Rockpeterson: Sounds good to me. Granted for 2 months, as the contest ends on the end of March. In case you need the rights after the contest ends, please feel free to re-request. Should you have any questions about usage of mass message tool, please feel free to let me know. Best wishes, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec Great , I respect your decision . Thank You Rockpeterson (talk) 15:07, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MdsShakil (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Common.js#L-428 (archived discussion)

Hi, since no one opposes, please gadget-ify "Add topic". Thanks in advance. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 09:00, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

This needs a local interface administrator. @DannyS712: Would you be able to help? Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Doing... DannyS712 (talk) 00:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh @MarcoAurelio Done, please let me know if there were any issues - enabled by default and removed from common.js, gadget is at MediaWiki:Gadget-AddTopic.js --DannyS712 (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

┌──────┘
Thanks a lot. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 01:14, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 01:14, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

MssHninWuittYi

• MssHninWuittYi (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Translation releted vandalism. -- MdsShakil (talk) 12:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Blocked for 31 hours. I do not mind extending to indef. if needed. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:35, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MdsShakil (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2603:7080:C43E:B500:59E4:8BEC:162E:30BD

• 2603:7080:C43E:B500:59E4:8BEC:162E:30BD (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)
• Reasons: Please also block this range on meta. Stang 16:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

  Done by Tegel. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:47.32.120.70

47.32.120.70 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: crosswiki vandalism, also reported at SRG but needs local block too Johannnes89 (talk) 23:35, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. Sgd. —Hasley 23:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 23:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

personal js and css files should just be emptied by users and not deleted

Can I say that for most requests for deletion of js/css pages, that these users should simply blanking them, which is more efficient than asking for an admin to delete them and equally as effective. I don't think that we should be bothering deleting in normal cases, and our deletion information should point them to such an action.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with leaving that advice, but have no issues with speedy deletion still applying to these just as with any other single-author userspace page; not like Category:Deleteme has a big backlog. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Pointless exercise that is all. People come and play, and there is typically no point in deleting. It is make work exercise, and educating the users is far more useful.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm not sure this is necessary. As @Xaosflux says, the speedy deletion category isn't one of the backlogged processes. From my point of view, standard personal subpages and JS/CSS subpages are very similar (if not equal). I don't understand why should we tell users to blank one of them (and to fully delete the other type).

We can certainly advertise it's an option (if we don't do that yet), but I don't think we should require it. Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:46, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps a hint in MediaWiki:clearyourcache. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Nimish-shoulders-190px.png

Could an admin please delete File:Nimish-shoulders-190px.png? It's been tagged as {{no license}} for more than a month and I can't add {{delete}} as I usually would since the page is protected. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 02:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Done original uploader has not answered to the missing license information, so therefore I've deleted it. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:5.150.116.154

5.150.116.154 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long term abuse. See also block log. SCP-2000 15:20, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Already done by MarcoAurelio --DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Doboshapan

Doboshapan is sending abusive emails. Please revoke their access. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Sweet Wikipedian

Sweet Wikipedian (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Only vandalism. Mtarch11 (talk) 04:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. Sgd. —Hasley 04:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2001:1640:5:0:0:0:2:35/64

• 2001:1640:5:0:0:0:2:35/64 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)
• Reasons: Insult. Stang 12:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

rangeblocked with gblocking (xwa). --Sotiale (talk) 12:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:183.171.94.150

183.171.94.150 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: All of the pages created by this IP should be deleted as they are not a translation. Johannnes89 (talk) 12:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Johannnes89 Done. Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Thanks --Johannnes89 (talk) 12:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:37.111.2.7

37.111.2.7 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: vandalism Johannnes89 (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Done —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 13:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Thanks! --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2001:44C8:43FC:FBE0:0:0:0:1

2001:44C8:43FC:FBE0:0:0:0:1 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandal. Mykola7 (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Done by Tegel. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:171.250.159.132

171.250.159.132 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: nonsense / test edits Johannnes89 (talk) 20:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Has been deleted/reverted. --Johannnes89 (talk) 07:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:196.191.50.90

• 196.191.50.90 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)
• Reasons: translation vandalism. Stang 23:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry that this was not addressed earlier. The block is no longer required though. Thanks for reporting. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:110.150.68.49

110.150.68.49 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Block and lock evasion – Te Reo Ahitereiria SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 07:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry that this was not addressed earlier. I don't think a block is needed now given that the IP does not edit since February 14. Thanks for reporting. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 14:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

MassMessage delivery

Hello! I would like to ask for admin of Meta-wiki or MassMessage sender to perform two message deliveries. They are connected to Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2022 that starts today. For both deliveries subject is "Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month: We are back in 2022!". For the first delivery (here on Meta): body of message, list of recipients. For the second delivery: body of message, distribution list (to all Wikipedias). Thanks in advance.--ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk) 09:10, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Valentyn, I have sent out the first one. For the second one, however, I am curious about the wording of the message: it sounds as if the banner will be set in each wiki, meaning 260 wikis in the list. Will it be? --Ата ^(talk) 20:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the first delivery. About second one: I think I have overestimated things a little bit. Anyway, I already handled this request myself.--ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk) 11:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

global

i was globaly locked and i dont know why Juuudfufhbf is the username pls help Mmmm hjvhgh (talk) 18:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@AmandaNP globally locked your account [1][2], all of your edits were nonsense / test edits only [3]. Johannnes89 (talk) 18:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@AmandaNP fyi the user's latest account is Special:Contributions/The destroyer of snails (compare his style of writing [4][5]). -- Johannnes89 (talk) 19:48, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, i've dealt with it. -- Amanda (she/her) 21:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 14:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Block

MBE INDIA (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Spam after warning --MeganB... _{…till the end} 06:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Locked globally. Also spamming on Commons. Stryn (talk) 06:31, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Magogre (talk) 06:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Revision visibility

Hello, can the visibility of this revision, be removed. My personal info is visible in it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 08:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Please delete two pages

User:千村玲子 and User talk:千村玲子, cross-wiki abuse and LTA 千村狐免 sock vandal,cross-wiki PA,thanks.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:46.133.101.199

46.133.101.199 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandal. Mykola ^talk 23:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Already done. Sgd. —Hasley 02:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 02:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2001:2D8:6F44:9B00:6A27:FB8F:DF15:A753

• 2001:2D8:6F44:9B00:6A27:FB8F:DF15:A753 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)
• Reasons: False or meaningless translation. Stang 23:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

  Done. Sgd. —Hasley 23:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Magogre (talk) 01:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Request to be made patroller

Hi! I’m currently a patroller on Wikipedia, temporary sysop on Wikibooks (norwegian versions), and a regular translator of TechNews. If there's no objection I could make use of patroller rights to easily protect norwegian pages. -- Wkee4ager (👨🏼‍💻💬) 09:11, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Wkee4ager, only administrators can protect pages here. Can you clarify what do you intend to use the patroller flag for please? Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh… sorry bad wording. I meant patrol them and revert vandalism ("protection" in a wider context). -- Wkee4ager (👨🏼‍💻💬) 10:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

RFPP for Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2022

Please semi-protect Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2022 this page as IP and new users vandalism. Thanks. SCP-2000 02:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --DannyS712 (talk) 04:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 04:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Block request: JoscarHumphrey

User: JoscarHumphrey (talk · contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Reason: Vandalism; crosswiki abuse. JavaHurricane 06:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --Uncitoyen^talk 08:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Magogre (talk) 06:56, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Please delete two pages

User:盛树繁花 and User talk:盛树繁花, cross-wiki abuse and LTA 千村狐免 sock vandal,cross-wiki PA and harass,thanks.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 08:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --Uncitoyen^talk 08:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Magogre (talk) 06:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:94.245.129.191

• 94.245.129.191 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)
• Reasons: Unconstructive edits on SRP. Stang 08:43, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. 94.245.129.191 xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • ST • IP info • WHOIS • robtex • gblock • glist • abuselog • bullseye seems problematic crosswiki, and see ranges from /23 to /19 blocked on ru and bg projects. Shall we mirror any of these here? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:33, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Report User AlgoritX3

User:AlgoritX3 accuses me of lies and abuse and spreads other unwares. I ask you to stop this slander. Background is a Request for help on dewiki and after this a Request for a lock check. Next step is Arbcom on dewiki, but not spreading untruths crosswiki. Thx. --Itti (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I see that the rule breaker continues her wave of attacks against people she does not like here. This person is abusing her rights with the support of a few others, has violated Number 3.1 and 3.2 for abuse of power and hounding against the UCoC. Saying that publicly is allowed. She has already been reported to Trust and Safety. Next may be an official letter to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

The case can be closed, this person needs to be able to bear having their arbitrary behavior addressed publicly. AlgoritX3 (talk) 09:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Addendum: To make it clear to strangers, in less than two hours has permanently banned an account with editorrights without own rule violation, without fair trial, without due hearing. Behind this is a huge personal dislike of the person Itti against me, in which a few other administrators are involved. I understand that criticism can sometimes be harsh and not nice. But for this to permanently block a diligent author on the German Wikipedia because of manipulation and abuse of power. That needs to be made public. AlgoritX3 (talk) 09:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

As for the German arbitration court. I have lost my complete trust in a fair procedure and an appropriate decision regarding the German Wikipedia. After all, I am a German lawyer and represent people in real life, it is not easy for me to write something like this, but my trust in the revision procedures of the German Wikipedia have been deeply disappointed several times. So I hope for the help of the Wikimediafoundation itself. AlgoritX3 (talk) 09:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Last addendum: I can't prove it, but I don't think the main reason for the irregular blocks is just a big personal disagreement. In my opinion, the admin group that arbitrarily banned me is aware that I have sensitive data about the structures behind the German Wikipedia of this group. In a nut shell: This is just an attempt to get rid of a possible major critic from German Wikipedia. AlgoritX3 (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Tldr: [AlogritX3 is] Clearly not here to contribute to the encyclopedia / project. It's only about complaining about the stuff from de wiki. --Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 13:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Had trusted you once. Very unfortunate that you now support this hunt against honest authors. AlgoritX3 (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't support your "hunt" against author Itti. Neither your hunt against DerHexer. Else, I'm here to contribute to the encyclopedia. You know it. Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 14:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

You are knowingly reporting things incorrectly. There is no "hunt" against Itti, also not against DerHexer. Itti is allowed to do anything in the German Wikipedia, to block anyone, to provoke or personally attack anyone until they give up or are blocked by their helpers. Users who criticized this have all disappeared. I guess I'm next. But at least now everyone can read it here that very questionable processes take place in the German Wikipedia. AlgoritX3.1 (talk) 07:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

A similar opinion: A comment in the bureaucrat election by Itti -> "viciarg414 08:47, 1. Okt. 2021 (CEST) Ich mach mir keine Hoffnung, dass diese Stimme irgendeine Bedeutung hat, denn sie darf in diesem Projekt alles, daher ist jede Kritik vergebene Liebesmüh." In eng: "because she's allowed to do everything in this project, so any criticism is a wasted effort." AlgoritX3.1 (talk) 07:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Please stopp the Personal attacks there and here. Thx. --Itti (talk) 13:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

The right to freedom of speech is not something that works only in one direction. If more respect is shown to people in his home wiki and they are not threatened with harsh measures or occupied, then we also do not need to stand here and defend the right to speak freely, to the last minute. AlgoritX3 (talk) 13:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Du hast dir deine Sperren eigenständig erarbeitet. Zu versuchen, es anderen in die Schuhe zu schieben ist jämmerlich. Nicht ich habe Kontakt zu dir gesucht, du spielst mich permanent an. Irgendwann ist gut und das hast du ausschließlich dir zuzuschreiben. --Itti (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to discuss this with you any further. I'm sorry to say that, I lack any trust (AGF) in your person. You could have done all this before, when we still had the chance to clarify everything peacefully. Yesterday, you deliberately banned my account in violation of the rules, in which others were involved. Fact is: You denounced me on your site, previously sabotaged my restart, although you contributed significantly to the abandonment of my former account. All this is only possible because you, as a bureaucrat and trusted person, have a higher authority than others. My hope is an intervention by the Wikimedia Foundation, especially to preserve the UCoC and to protect other authors in the German Wikipedia. AlgoritX3 (talk) 14:45, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Blocked --MF-W 14:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi MF-Warburg, will you please block AlgoritX3.1 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) too because of block evasion. Thanks, Magogre (talk) 10:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. -- MF-W 10:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg please have a look at the last edit here and this. Regards Itti (talk) 21:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Done, blocked, removed the newest incoherent ramblings. --MF-W 21:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:97.47.66.39

97.47.66.39 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Personal attacks. Mykola ^talk 13:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

As these were only two edits and have stopped already, I think a block is not needed at the moment. -- MF-W 10:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:37.145.60.216

37.145.60.216 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism. Mykola ^talk 02:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

No need for a block atm. -- MF-W 20:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Report concerning User:72.64.4.222

72.64.4.222 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Personal attacks again. Maybe semi-protect Ferret user talk page. Mykola ^talk 02:17, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Duly blocked by other admin. Protected Ferret's talk page for 2 weeks. — regards, Revi 02:33, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: कन्हाई प्रसाद चौरसिया (talk) 16:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

requested for patroller

नमस्ते! मैं (कन्हाई) आपसे पुनरिक्षक के लिए निवेदन करना चाहता हूं क्योंकि मुझे बर्बता हटाने में कई स्क्रिप्ट का प्रयोग तो करता हूं, पर समय पर अपने को अक्षम पाता हूं। यदि आपको लगता हैं कि बर्बरता की सही पहचान करने में सक्षम हूं, तो कृपया मुझे इसकी सुविधाएं प्रदान करने के लिए अनुरोध करना चाहूंगा। -- कन्हाई प्रसाद चौरसिया (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 20:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for patroller flag

Hello I'm currently sysop at it.wiki and patroller at it.wikt and Commons. I do intend to make several translantions of UCOC and Glossary related pages and study some mediawiki documents. In the meantime I'll be happy to patrol recent changes here on Meta so I would like to ask the patrol flag since I can't filter unpatrolled edit. If you don't disagree and if you feel confident in entrusting me with this task, of course. --Pierpao (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

For me, as long as someone understands this Meta Wiki policy page and is reasonably active on Meta Wiki, they should/could be granted the patroller flag. Dmehus (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 20:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 20:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

huwiktionary steward election sitenotice

...has been translated. (I am just the messenger.) --grin ✎ 08:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@Grin: I don't understand :-) CNBanner:Stewvote-text1/hu is unchanged since 2017. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

There was another message, required to be translated, but you're right: I should have been included which one. I can't guess now. :-) grin ✎ 11:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

grin: Maybe the nominations banner then. I see one untranslated message at the board. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the translation. I've published it (maybe we can reuse it for next year). Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

user:172.58.230.233

This ip user keeps attacking sysops using f-word in his user page,I came here to request a partial block for him. Pavlov2 06:50, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Comment This is globally banned user Rgalo10; Special:Diff/22889184. --jdx ^Re: 07:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Already blocked. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:59, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for the patroller flag

I would love to help in patrolling meta pages and marking them as patrolled. I understand meta's inclusion policy and other policies. Thank you --MeganB... _{…till the end} 15:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 15:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 15:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Some banners will produce a huge scrollbar horizontally

Hello, I noticed that some banners (i.e. that one related to Commons:Wiki Loves Folklore 2022) will produce a huge scrollbar horizontally. I think the banner CSS pages should be create on meta. I think the mistake is text-indent: -1000em; in MediaWiki:Centralnotice-template-wikilovesfolklore2022, which is produce that huge scrollbar. Click here to see a list of pages with that line. Please someone fix it. Thanks! Aram (talk) 20:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Martin Urbanec as creator of the code and CNA. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Updated translation

I first replaced a spelling mistake here, but ended up doing a more natural translation.

Please leave a note at the administrators' noticeboard if you create or update a translation for this banner so it can be published. Thank you.

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 02:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

User:A.Savin

Very vulgar language on user page. SummerKrut (talk) 00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd request that A.Savin tones down the user page message, as user pages "should not contain content considered inappropriate on projects where it will be displayed" per Global user pages#Content—I do however empathise heavily with the message. I Stand With Ukraine -- TNT (talk • she/her) 00:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The only project where this content is considered inappropriate is the Russian Wikipedia and they have already censored it by overwriting with a blank page as local version and full-protecting it. Therefore there is no reason to change anything on Meta at the moment. Regards --A.Savin (talk) 02:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

That protection is rather concerning. I have never seen local action of that sort. It would need to be remedied locally, though, and I am not sure the processes for that. As for your Meta-Wiki userpage, I do not believe it is problematic. Regards, Vermont (talk) 03:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

You consider mass spam of "dick" on a user page appropriate? SummerKrut (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

We do not clarify whether this page is appropriate for the target. This page does not violate WM:CIV and does not attack any user or group. We have no rules that prohibit this 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 07:59, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

“F**k war” is an absolutely inadequate translation of the phrase that appears in the Russian original. This phrase is much more rough in terms of vocabulary. Since this user page is on the Meta, it is displayed in all projects where this user doesn't have his own user page. And this is not only the Russian Wikipedia (which is already enough), but also 30 editions in the languages of the peoples of Russia, as well as more than a dozen editions in the languages of countries with a large number of Russian speakers. A.Savin is also the Commons administrator. Soul Train (talk) 08:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Soul Train ВОЙНЕ = WAR and condemning a war is not prohibited. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 08:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm talking about another word in this phrase. Soul Train (talk) 11:53, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Es gibt einen Unterschied zwischen den „Nein zum Krieg“ und „Fotze [oder Affenarsch, oder Pimmel] zum Krieg“. Soul Train (talk) 12:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Der Krieg ist kein Mensch und keine Gruppe von Menschen, daher ist das erlaubt auch, wenn es nicht gerade zielführend ist. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 12:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't wish any actions to be taken against A.Savin (because I understand his feelings), but I'm shocked by the comments here. Are you seriously stating that profanity language and strong political statements should be now the norm in Wikimedia projects? I believe it's the way to destruct our common mission to disseminate free knowledge. And I know for sure it's still not the norm in a lot of Wikimedia projects editions. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 12:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I have noincluded the page as it is outside the scope of global user pages, though edge case for acceptability here, judging by some of the expression that it is problematic. I have left them a message beside TNT's to see if we can find something in the middle. And to the action by ruWP I am surprised and would be interested which part of the message is truly problematic.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! In Russian Wikipedia both aspects of the discussed user page are problematic. 1. Profanity language (and even euphemisms) is strictly forbidden, unless it is absolutely necessary for discussion about external subjects already containing the profanity. 2. Campaigning, strong political statements are forbidden in user pages. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 13:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I understand the issue with profanity, and I understand the differing strength of that word in comparison with English. It would be optimal if they used different phrasing, so as to limit direct offense. However, I fail to see how opposing this war is a “strong political statement”. Vermont (talk) 14:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Russian wikis have really strong rules on userpages. I once had the message "black lives matter" on my userpage and found myself being reported to the administrators noticeboard . This forced me to change my userpage entirely. MeganB... _{…till the end} 15:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's a right place... But ok, not for discussion, just a description. In the context it is a strong political statement because it is not a general protest against wars, but a protest against something that a significant amount of people perceive as a forceful peacekeeping operation. They perceive that the Ukraine had eight years to stop killing people in Donbass (and those who oppose the war now, didn't care to stop it), and so no options left. No matter, are they wrong or right, the society is divided and so the discussed phrase is a strong political statement, implying a lot.

Do you remember when this phrase was invented? t.A.T.u. printed it on their t-shirts in 2003 to oppose the invasion of Iraq (this invasion is perceived unjustified by a lot people in Russia, BTW). But it was prohibited to wear those t-shirts at the Jimmy Kimmel Live! show at ABC, just because it was a strong political statement...

Hopefully it makes the problem more clear. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 17:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Drbug "but a protest against something that a significant amount of people perceive as a forceful peacekeeping operation" Corona is also perceived by a considerable number of people as non-existent. We also have many articles about corona. Do you think they should be deleted then too? This is a war, and you can call it that, even if there is fake news that says otherwise. In Wikimedia projects there is freedom of speech, everyone can say anything as long as he does not harm anyone else. It is also allowed to condemning wars. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 18:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles are articles, user pages are user pages. "Wikipedia is not for: Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, scientific, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise." Maybe some Wikimedia projects allow "advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment" on user pages. Russian Wikipedia forbids it there. And the discussed phrase is considered to fall under this prohibition. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 05:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

As for me, I praise that a Covid-19 deniers' propaganda is prohibited on user pages in Russian Wikipedia. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 12:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably bad comparison, since the existence of a virus is based on science, while the justification of a war is based on opinion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the context. I am aware of the stated reasoning by Russian state media, and do not blame people for simply believing that which their government states as true. And projects, of course, have every right to impose policies against content they deem offensive, whether it be on userpages or elsewhere. I would hope, however, that these policies are enforced equally and equitably. Regards, Vermont (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I hope too. As far as I see, so far it seems to be the case. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 05:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Comment Any opinion is political or personal. I would hope that any elements of polite pacifism would be acceptable at any wiki. I would hope that any elements of humanism would be acceptable at any wiki. If ruWP is stopping that level of polite personal comment on a person's user page then the wiki should be ashamed as that in that it is imposing a political or personal imposition. I don't have to like or agree with polite personal opinion, but if it is simple and on a user page then so be it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Polite non-agitating statements on political events, like "I'm against 2022 war in Ukraine" are tolerated at user pages in Russian Wikipedia (they however should be hidden by default). (This regulation is an outcome of several harsh conflicts.) Also, they are tolerated in the relevant discussions at forums. There was even a poll on setting a site notice banner against the war in Russian Wikipedia (failed to reach 66,67% consensus: 116 pro, 77 contra). I would like to note that to my best knowledge no other Wikipedia editions even broadly discussed such a banner, including one in Ukrainian.

The polite real pacifism, like "I'm a pacifist" or "I'm against all the wars" are allowed on the user pages without limitations. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 12:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Drbug: please acquaint yourself with w:en:The lady doth protest too much, methinks as that is how it is seeming to me.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Ok, please check with other Russian Wikipedians if the statements I made are correct. I'm leaving this topic, because you are right, there are too many my messages here. Thanks a lot to all for the conversation and consideration! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 13:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

---

User:A.Savin has updated their userpage, and although it still references the Russo-Ukrainian War it seems to be on the acceptable side of the civility policy. All users are reminded that Global user pages should not contain content considered inappropriate on projects where it will be displayed (including the meta-wiki itself); and that any local projects may administrate their pages as supported by their community. Constructive contributors are given some leeway in putting personal opinions on their userpages. This topic, and this discussion, is a globally sensitive matter, but by being respectful of other contributors we should be able to focus on our primary goal here: Coordination of Wikimedia projects. Barring any specific new objections, I think it is time to close this discussion and move on to other business. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:51, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 17:56, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Low quality translations from user:Ohvet

Hello

user:Ohvet published some translations that were not including the links and that couldn't be fixed. At examples I saw, I'm not even sure if the text is a translation of the source (see this example). Several translations from this user have already been deleted (for instance the last 2 weeks of Tech/News for ak language). This user has been warned several times. They haven't taken the advice given into account.

@MarcoAurelio suggested that you sysops could have a look at this case.

Thank you, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for posting @Trizek (WMF). If @Ohvet's translations are low-quality or non-translations and they ain't paying attention to the messages on their talk page, we could partially block their account from editting the Translation namespace. I wonder, however, if there's a language barrier here? On the other hand, if they're translating from English to ak I'd assume they have at least some understanding or, to the contrary, they're using the computer "translations" the system offers (which are awful most of the time and should not be used). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I have notified Ohvet on their talk page about this discussion. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ohvet wrote that they would stop translating Tech News. Now, FYI, they are translating the Universal Code of Conduct without any formatting. As we know now that this user replies to messages, I left them a message in order to explain the syntax. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 14:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Trizek (WMF). I am happy to read that the user is being responsive. If you see that Ohvet still don't understand how to properly translate, we may have to look at a partial block from the Translations namespace. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:31, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Cryptos RfC

Requests for comment/Stop accepting cryptocurrency donations is turning one month old tomorrow and I think it has had enough participation and visibility to consider a closure. Per Requests for comment/Policy RFCs can only be closed by admins or stewards. Is anyone willing to volunteer to close it? Considering the level of participation and extension, maybe a panel of 3 admins would be most appropriate rather than a single admin handling it. Thoughts? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

+1 to this probably being ready to close at some point soon (disclosure: I opened it). Conversation/voting has definitely trailed off lately. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Aye to that. Dronebogus (talk) 10:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Bumping this thread to prevent archiving. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Recusing, seeing as I voted in the RfC -- TNT (talk • she/her) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

+1 Another month has passed since closure was requested. This is well overdue for closure and there has been no vote or comment for the last 4 days. Keeping this open longer is pointless and counterproductive. I disagree that more than 1 admin is needed to close it, as there is a super-majority of support, nothing contentious in such a closure. --Anstil (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

+1 Please close the RfC. --Ameisenigel (talk) 11:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

• Agree, it probably needs closing - a VERY QUICK glance shows it is running at about a 65% support. It does seem to suffer from a premise problem: It states that "The WMF does this", then it says "we (the volunteer committee)" should "not do this". The problem is that "we" aren't the ones doing the thing that we want stopped. Perhaps a closure along the lines of "The community RFC shows that ~65% of respondents oppose x" - which could be delivered to the WMF would be the best way to close this? One challenge with closing is that many of our more frequent closing people contributed. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

  @Xaosflux: Agreed that the only way this can be closed should be along the lines "the community recommends/suggests/requests X to the Wikimedia Foundation". —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:39, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

  I voted in that RfC so don't want to take on the closing, would @MF-Warburg: and @MarcoAurelio: mind taking a stab at it? None of our other admins have jumped up for this yet. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:12, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

  I'm preparing to do a sort of the votes mid next week, and a closing summary of the results. If anyone else would like to join on it please let me know. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

  Willing to take a look at it if you find me useful. Agreed on MarcoAurelio wording. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:53, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

  User:Vermont, User:Camouflaged Mirage: I think the community would very much appreciate if you go forward with this. -- MF-W 18:08, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

  @MF-Warburg To clarify, I mean I am okay to join Vermont efforts in closing the RFC. If they are intending to do it alone, I won't want to interfere to prevent me from impeding the closure. Honestly, I don't have too extensive experience in closing RFCs per say and am uncomfortable to do a solo closure. What a brief read the last round I see around 65% consensus to stop crypto donations, and the grounds for both opposing and supporting seems valid, and after extensive discussions on both side, I don't see both sides coming to a neutral conclusion. In addition, to address the canvassing issues, I do admit that there are editors that might be canvassed but there are established names on both sides, and it's hard to proof conclusively that canvassing had taken place. If we deduct the votes from low participation users, I still can get a rough consensus in favour of stopping. This is my preliminary reading from the RFC and if you will ask me to close, I will state the majority of the community, noting sizeable dissent, is against accepting crypto donations.

  Ideas of improvement of the close will be appreciated and my 2 cents here: I will recommend a RFC to ammend RFC policy to allow non-admins to close RFC when no active admins are suitable to close RFCs. I am just afraid given that we have so few active sysops, we might end out all be involved in one RFC and this will be hard to resolve. Just a suggestion. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

  The fix is to get more admins, not to give non-admins the ability to do admin tasks. Anyways, I'm working on it now. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 22:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

  True. I also hope for more admins. Anyway, seems closed by Vermont. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:17, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I think we are well into the long tail of responses to the RfC—there have only been four edits in the past week (and only three substantive ones, discounting the one edit to fix an unsigned comment). Can this please be closed soon? GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

There have been no edits (substantive or otherwise) to the voting section of the RFC since the afternoon (UTC) of 28 March. That's 9½ days ago now, so I think it's clear that even the long tail is over. Thryduulf (talk: meta · en.wp · wikidata) 01:01, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Done by Vermont. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)