Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2024-01

Report concerning User:169.61.84.147

169.61.84.147 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Obvious LTA 94rain ^Talk 01:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 02:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 02:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Mahmud005

Mahmud005 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 06:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

User talk:2A0D:5600:13:5A:2B6F:3AB1:41EC:24

Consider delete and protect this page. Reason: Vandalism. Hide on Rosé ^t 14:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Done revoked talk page access. Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning Olivelana98

• Olivelana98 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Vandalism. Hide on Rosé ^t 14:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked by Syunsyunminmin, globally locked by Masti. Hide on Rosé ^t 14:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Hide on Rosé ^t 14:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:69.127.228.206

69.127.228.206 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism/sock of Andrew5. EPIC (talk) 19:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by WikiBayer. EPIC (talk) 20:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 03:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Protection request

Hello there, could an admin place a semi-protection on these page titles for some time (after they have been deleted):

1. Every single day I wore a hoodie at camp
2. Every single day I wore long sleeve shirt and pants during summer (6/1-9/21 time period)
3. List of days I crapped my pants in 2023
4. List of days I was touched by someone wearing a dress/skirt
5. New York Jets

Repeatedly recreated pages by sockpuppets of Andrew5. EPIC (talk) 00:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't overly fuss it, the deleting admin can make the call. LTAs in that case will just make a variation of the name, it won't stop a creation for a deletion. Sometimes it useful to watch those pages as an indication of the troll at work.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

They have been deleted 4-5 times each from different sock accounts/IPs of Andrew5 - considering all these recreations of titles which will not be used for something serious I would say it qualifies for semi-protection. If it will result in them making variations of the name is up to see in that case. EPIC (talk) 00:46, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Marking as Not done for now unless an admin makes a different decision. EPIC (talk) 01:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

As I said, the deleting admin can make the call, as the admin sees the deletion history when they are deleting it. I usually make the call about protection at the time when I am deleting. Re the re-creations and protection, I am not making any decision for any admin on this point, that is just my opinion from my experience. I find it best to be bored and not to feed the troll.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: EPIC (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A0D:5600:13:4F:9F3:D995:33B3:D

2A0D:5600:13:4F:9F3:D995:33B3:D (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Abusing talk page, please remove talk page access MathXplore (talk) 02:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Already done  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 03:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A0D:5600:13:5A:2B6F:3AB1:41EC:27

2A0D:5600:13:5A:2B6F:3AB1:41EC:27 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Abusing talk page, please remove talk page access MathXplore (talk) 13:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 13:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 13:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:185.135.86.66

185.135.86.66 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Abusing talk page, please remove talk page access MathXplore (talk) 03:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 03:25, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 03:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Veer Lakshya Party

This user appears to be only here for self-promotion. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 06:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Changing autoconfirmed users rights in cawiki

Last week, the Catalan Wikipedia community unanimously voted to modify the requirements for achieving autoconfirmed user status. Previously, in our wiki, users needed to be registered for 4 days or make at least 10 edits to become autoconfirmed. The new requirements are that a user's account must be at least 5 days old and have made a minimum of 30 edits.
As administrators of the Catalan Wikipedia, we are uncertain about the procedure to implement these changes. If this is not the appropriate forum to discuss this matter, please direct us to the correct location for submitting our request.
Thanks, KajenCAT (talk) 07:59, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This is not the right place. You can go to Phabricator to create a task for it. Please follow Requesting wiki configuration changes when creating the task. 94rain ^Talk 08:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @KajenCAT for notice.--Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 08:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 08:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:SUKKA DAVID Messianic Israelite Movement has Piermark among its members !

SUKKA DAVID Messianic Israelite Movement has Piermark among its members ! (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: LTA TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by M7, thanks! TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:21, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:21, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Request for RevDel

Could an admin hide this? (personal information) EPIC (talk) 12:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 12:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 12:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:189.238.134.151

189.238.134.151 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Not done it has stopped, the abuse filter short term block did its job  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning Hicago Hicago

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

Vandalism. Account already blocked on enwiki and plwiki. EPIC (talk) 12:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Done as account has been locked. EPIC (talk) 12:15, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Jhonathan115

Jhonathan115 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Spam only account, continuing from enwiki --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 06:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Glocked by AmandaNP Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:5.90.109.149

5.90.109.149 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Spam TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 12:08, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Johannnes89 Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Yehoshua spoke in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and Latin

Yehoshua spoke in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and Latin (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism / Spam TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 12:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Johannnes89 Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 12:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Link whitelist request

I've placed a request to have a link whitelisted at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#Whitelist for a singular translated.turbopages link. Could an admin/crat help with this? Thanks! Firestar464 (talk) 17:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Hoanghuy7890

Hoanghuy7890 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism only account, blocked on mediawikiwiki already --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 22:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Chatgptx

Chatgptx (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Crosswiki nonsense, blocked in enwiki and frwiki TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:52, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Done locally. Please escalate to Steward if needed. --M/ (talk) 07:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@M7 already done: [1] :) TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 07:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:212.102.63.41

212.102.63.41 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Open proxy MathXplore (talk) 11:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:212.102.63.49

212.102.63.49 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Open proxy MathXplore (talk) 11:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

212.102.63.54 also seems to be an open proxy. MathXplore (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:212.102.63.48

212.102.63.48 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Open proxy MathXplore (talk) 11:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:45.67.35.41

45.67.35.41 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandal: please block the ability to edit own talk page TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 15:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 17:48, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 209.58.185.92

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

Revoke talk page access and delete user talk page. EPIC (talk) 20:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: -𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 20:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:WashingtonFan2

WashingtonFan2 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: VOA Leonidlednev (talk) 02:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 02:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 02:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:183.171.65.68

183.171.65.68 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 04:15, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Done--Mtarch11 (talk) 04:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mtarch11 (talk) 04:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:109.107.227.86

109.107.227.86 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 07:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 07:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Ынфыуз

Ынфыуз (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Nonsense TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Request for mass-message-sender right till June 2024 for Wikipedia Asian Month 2023

Hello,

I am the new Project Specialist for Wikipedia Asian Month User Group.

I am writing to apply for a temporary right to send mass messages from now till June, 2024. The purpose is to send mass messages to juries and organizers participating the 2023 Wikipedia Asian Month.

Here are the List of Receivers and Mass Message Content.

I look forward to your assistance.

Thanks so much!

Crystal Liu Theredunicorn (talk) 03:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi~ Admin, I am the exacutive officer of the Wikipedia Asian Month 2023. @Theredunicorn is assisting us with the community communication of the campaign. Let us know if there is anything need adjustment from the page she prepared. Thank you. Joycewikiwiki (talk) 08:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Theredunicorn and Joycewikiwiki: you might want to check MassMessage#Global message delivery:

• The wikilinks at User:Theredunicorn/WAM2023 message to organizers won't work as soon as the message is send across different wikis -> use e.g. m:Wikipedia Asian Month 2023 instead of Wikipedia Asian Month 2023
• Make sure to wrapped the message in <div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"></div>, include a valid signature etc.

Johannnes89 (talk) 17:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Johannes,

I just edited according to your suggestions.

Please let me know if it works.

I am looking forward to send mass messages in the future.

Thank you! Theredunicorn (talk) 03:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

seems ok, I will grant mass message permission until June 2024 as requested. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 08:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

User:CR-FluxxBot is converting a working interwiki link to a non-working link.

Please see this change where User:CR-FluxxBot changed a working interwiki link en:WP:UV ([[en:WP:UV]]) to a non-working link WP:UV.

Peaceray (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@JSutherland (WMF): to note ^^^  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm not sure why I was pinged here -- am I missing something? :) Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I am reporting this here as per the instructions at User:CR-FluxxBot: Non-administrators can report a malfunctioning bot to Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Peaceray (talk) 01:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The administrator can stop the bot by blocking it, but cannot change the bot's program.
Ping also to @DSaroyan. Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 02:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

user:Peaceray fully understood why you were reporting it. I was seeing no need to currently block it, when a ping and wait may be suitable. Fairly easy to revert and put the bot around again; it isn't doing tens of edits a day, and WMF people can own the fix and resolution.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Peaceray, thanks for reporting it. The grant application pages on Meta should match the original application on the grantmaking software. Any changes made on the grant pages are removed by the bot when synchronizing the pages (see the top message in grant pages). I made this change on the original application and this will be reflected on the linked page soon. You can ping me for anything else related to the bot next time and I'll be happy to help. DSaroyan (WMF) (talk) 07:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@DSaroyan (WMF), Billinghurst, and Syunsyunminmin: Thank you! Peaceray (talk) 15:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 08:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:103.60.9.18

103.60.9.18 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Attack and vandalism. Already globally blocked as an OP on the /24. Estrellato (talk) 11:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:37.39.132.191

37.39.132.191 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism. Turkmen ^talk 13:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 13:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 13:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning Justice Comes First

• Justice Comes First (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Long-term abuse. EPIC (talk) 14:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Done. Sgd. —Hasley 14:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 15:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Protection request for U4C charter page (2)

Hi sysops, requesting this (again): Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Charter and Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Charter/Voter information are featured prominently in the main page, and the draft charter page are already vandalized. Since these are texts that are formulated and approved for stable release by the U4C Building Committee and will be distributed widely to village pumps globally, it will be high-traffic pages with high chances of vandalism. Requesting semi-protection (plus other measures that you see fit). Cheers, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 02:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Done semi-protection for three months --Johannnes89 (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Apple input

Apple input (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism-only account. Cross-wiki abuse. SCP-2000 04:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked --Johannnes89 (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A02:C7C:8AD7:6300:864A:862E:5DE0:E2A3

2A02:C7C:8AD7:6300:864A:862E:5DE0:E2A3 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Abusing talk page, please remove talk page access MathXplore (talk) 14:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Already done these truly don't need reporting here, please just mark them with {{delete}} and move along.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 20:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:12.74.238.38

12.74.238.38 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism Leonidlednev (talk) 19:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2A01:B747:910:344:1C95:E7AF:85E6:E2A0

2A01:B747:910:344:1C95:E7AF:85E6:E2A0 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 12:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Already done  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Please delete Translations:Meta:Internationalization guidelines/87/de

Please delete Translations:Meta:Internationalization guidelines/87/de: Test translation. --Julius 12345 (talk) 13:50, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Julius 12345 … TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

seriously? TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't see this being a test translation. It was created by an experienced user with German as their mother tounge, and "Vorlage" is the correct German translation of "template". Either way, for actual cases of speedy deletions, please use {{delete}} instead. EPIC (talk) 13:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Okey. Thank you for the answer! Julius 12345 (talk) 13:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Please take a closer look on the translation and the user who put it in next time. Thanks. TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Okey. Thank you! Julius 12345 (talk) 13:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Please close Meta:Requests for comment/Temporarily stop MinT translation

Reason: initiators have reached the consensus of closing this RFC. Lemonaka (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Comment I don't see that this has been raised at either Meta:Babylon or Meta:Babel, hence notifying those community of it being open, nor the proposal to close it. RFC should be broadly announced to the impacted parties, especially where we are talking available tools. Meta:Babylon I would see as a necessity.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:46, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Mass account creation

There is some sort of mass account creation going on at the moment locally. I'm not sure if these are spambots or what exactly they are but the usernames certainly look consistent with that. Anyway, it possibly needs some looking into and handling unless it's for some kind of project that was announced beforehand that I'm unaware of. Estrellato (talk) 08:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems to have started at 19:58 UTC last night and about 2 750 accounts has been created since then. Most have been locked since except for the recent ones. Is there any way to halt this? Estrellato (talk) 09:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Estrellato: Not much that local admins can do. Concerns like this belong with the stewards who can quickly checkuser and globally manage it. So either catch the stewards in IRC, or drop them a note at SN.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Not in scope of local admins. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Assifbus

Assifbus (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Harassment. Create attack userpage. They have already blocked on zhwiki due to troll and NOTHERE. See also previous request. Thanks. SCP-2000 04:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

nothing recent with relation to editing. If you believe that there are problematic pages, then please list them for deletion, or deletion discussions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:96.57.76.226

96.57.76.226 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 13:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Requesting speedy closure of RfC

Could someone speedily close Requests for comment/Drama created by the only active administrator of viwikipedia? It was created by an LTA, and it has definitely outlived its usefulness, with its contents being little more than incoherent drama. Firestar464 (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

billinghurst Apparently there's this comment by DefenderTienMinh in the comments field of the RfC template. It's hiding your comment, and I'm not sure how appropriate that is. Perhaps it should be moved? --Firestar464 (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

My mistake, fixed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Please close the ruwiki RfC

Please close Requests for comment/"Putin khuylo!" on the main page. Consensus is that OP violated policy for other reasons. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Request

Please grant autopatroller to User:Munazza (DCW) so that her edits on DCW's pages don't get into the patrolling queue. The account does not make any edits beyond DCW pages and I'll appreciate if the flag is granted. Best regards and thanks, ─ Aafi @ DCW (^talk) 20:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 11:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 11:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:MEDJHAMFARKASa

MEDJHAMFARKASa (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism, see also [2] TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Protection request

Please protect Steward requests/Username changes and block Special:Contributions/2404:160:8130:ce79:1:0:34cc:68f0 and Special:Contributions/2404:160:802B:9F0F:1:0:5DD2:3CAF. Thanks, TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 09:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

 Request withdrawn --TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:MICHAELA PORRO (Chiesa Vita Nuova) Via Leonardo Da Vinci 4 21023 Besozzo (VA)

MICHAELA PORRO (Chiesa Vita Nuova) Via Leonardo Da Vinci 4 21023 Besozzo (VA) (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Spam TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 09:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Masti (global lock), thanks TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 10:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 10:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:人之初搓老泥泥鯭魚魚肝油油麻地地中海海龍王黃大仙仙人掌

人之初搓老泥泥鯭魚魚肝油油麻地地中海海龍王黃大仙仙人掌 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: see Special:CentralAuth/人之初搓老泥泥鯭魚魚肝油油麻地地中海海龍王黃大仙仙人掌 TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Stryn TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 09:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 09:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning Asorev

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

Trolling. Per edits on others talk page, obvious trolling and harassment. Lemonaka (talk) 07:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Also pinging @Sigwald. Lemonaka (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I would like to note that it was particular Lemonaka who gave me piece of advice to start the RfC here (on Meta). And now Lemonaka accuses me of trolling and harassment. This is very strange being. Asorev (talk) 22:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@Asorev You can start the RfC, but you cannot troll others on their talk page, that's incivil. Lemonaka (talk) 00:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I asked local administrators about local rules on their talk pages. It cannot be incivil or trolling. Asorev (talk) 00:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Asorev: Please see meta:civility, and please maybe heed the concerns that have been expressed about your approach. We all fail at certain times, and when that occurs, we try to learn and improve.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Billinghurst, thank you for the link to the rule. What do you think about the fact that Sigwald named me as a troll? Is it a violation of the rule? Asorev (talk) 07:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Asorev: I believe that I am giving you advice here in relation to the report about your actions, not someone else. Please read the whole line that I typed, not pick out the link and try to focus on one line on that user's talk page, when it was you who was there. <shrug>  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu Lemonaka (talk) 11:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

They were and are pursuing a weird line of comments that I could only describe as CIR and refusing to take in others' comments, but I don't think they're active enough across meta to warrant a block now. Maybe a page ban from Sigwald's talk page? Aaron Liu (talk) 14:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I am hoping that I don't have to put any block in place, and I am hoping that people will look to uplift their approach. If there is an ongoing issue that needs an admin's intervention, then we can go there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

AGF, and adulting tried as primary response.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:62.228.40.206

62.228.40.206 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism, globally blocked but not locally --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 02:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Stryn TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:210.99.134.156

210.99.134.156 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism - two edits, see also deleted contributions TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Stryn TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 07:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Rickevans12

Rickevans12 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Linkspam & Manipulating Discussions. @User:Johannnes89 fyi TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

reminds me of Duarani (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA). TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 13:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked + global lock requested --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:田所先輩の甘くて強引な命令に困っています

田所先輩の甘くて強引な命令に困っています (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Out of scope user. A user misused the global user page to post information that violates privacy and is subject to deletion by JAWP (ja:WP:DP#B-2). Daraku K. (talk) 22:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 02:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 02:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Unblock appeals and other recourse.

I've had an unblock appeal [3] pending on Wiktionary for over a month now. Perhaps they're simply backlogged, but I feel it's more likely that my appeal is being ignored. I'm also blocked indefinitely from en.wiki. I feel this block was also undue and in contravention of policy, yet my unblock requests are typically rejected and closed without any sort of dialog. My question is, what recourse do I have at this point? Would it be appropriate to start an RfC here? Is an RfC likely to be productive? AP295 (talk) 01:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

An RfC likely wouldn't go anywhere, those blocks are well within the jurisdiction of the local admins and absent a systemic issue an RfC won't be able to override that. I'll also note you aren't helping yourself with the unblock appeal and subsequent comments on enwikt - calling the block a farce and such is very unlikely to help. If you want to contribute somewhere in the Wikimedia world, I recommend you go work at another project, be a model editor/don't get into any conflict, and in a few months go back, apologize, and request unblock again. – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I contribute regularly at Wikiversity. I notice you responded to the tone and not the contents of my appeal. I don't expect you to examine the circumstances in depth or anything, but it would be quite apparent if you were to do so that the block is absurd and capricious. I won't validate the block by pretending otherwise or apologizing when by all rights I'm owed an apology. In short, I was blocked on false grounds. That's part of why I'd appreciate impartial opinions. What accountability is there otherwise, if not public scrutiny? AP295 (talk) 04:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Seconding Ajraddatz: an RfC is unlikely to be productive, especially considering that you were blocked on the English Wikipedia in 2021 on similar grounds. It's probably best to just continue working on other projects, stay in good standing there, and appeal later. Regards, Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

And I'd do just that, but as you've said it has already been three years. If they were going to unblock me from Wikipedia they'd probably have done so by now. I have no reason to believe they'll be any more forthcoming at Wiktionary. One may supposedly avail themselves of the standard offer after seven months or thereabouts, yet my appeals on Wikipedia are always dismissed without further comment. If nothing else I'd appreciate a few more eyes on the issue. AP295 (talk) 04:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not a disruptive editor. By any reasonable interpretation of Wikimedia policy, the blocks should not have been issued in the first place. Yet I'd be more than happy to take your advice except that several years experience suggests my appeals won't be considered any more fairly a month or a year from now. I hope you can appreciate my exasperation, as I feel that I'm being lead on. AP295 (talk) 04:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Considering the above, I suppose I'll try an RfC so long as that's an acceptable venue for such a discussion, which seems to be the case as others have made similar RfCs. AP295 (talk) 09:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@AP295 a global RFC is not going to be useful to appeal your block - it would only be useful in the case where you are trying to show that there is a systemic failure that has caused the collapse of the ability for a project's community to administer themselves. There is 0% chance that is going to work on the flagship project enwiki; and enwikt also clearly has a robust community. You may try to start it, but your best course of action is to move on to other projects, and after some time (perhaps a year) re-appeal your blocks. That being said, we've provided the information and there is nothing else for the meta-wiki admins to do about this. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I realize that an RfC is not an appeal. Whether there has been a "collapse of the ability for a project's community to administer themselves" or a "systemic failure" I cannot say, but I'm quite sure that my blocks are unjustified and in direct contravention of Wikimedia policy. At least in Wikipedia's case, I've already tried to avail myself of the standard offer without success and it has been several years since my first block. Considering they haven't even the decency to address my appeal at all, it doesn't seem like I'll have better luck with Wiktionary. I've asked for help because these things have not worked and because the involved parties do not seem objective nor accountable to site policy. I wouldn't bother you people otherwise. I am at a loss. If you haven't anything more to say then fine, but I do believe there's a lack of accountability and that I've not been treated decently. AP295 (talk) 22:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I should also say that I'm prepared to defend every point I've made in my appeal. It was ignored for a month before I said anything about the block being a farce (which it was and is). I'd think it should be of interest to someone that a formal appeal is being ignored outright, no? AP295 (talk) 00:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

• This page is for request for the local admins here on the meta-wiki to do something about pages or users here on meta.wikipedia.org; we can do nothing about blocks on other projects. Please move on. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 01:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@AP295: See Block appeals, you can try to ping the blocking admin (-sche) at Wiktionary or email the blocking admin here.--GZWDer (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you meant by email them here, but I'll give them a ping (@-sche:) since they're involved. I don't want anyone thinking that I'm talking behind their back. Presumably though, the blocking sysop should not generally issue a decision on an appeal, for whatever that's actually worth. I suppose I'll wait a while and see if they leave me a message (on my Wiktionary talk page, please). If not I'll probably post an RfC here to document both blocks and solicit comments/discussion. AP295 (talk) 03:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Alifsamad1

Alifsamad1 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Random removals of contents and links, inserting noise, changing others' signatures, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Evidently a sockpuppet of Muhammad Alif Adha Bin Samad (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Stryn @User:Mtarch11 because you were active this morning TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 09:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks --Mtarch11 (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mtarch11 (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2409:4064:19E:A617:AABA:26C:F3DA:D2B5

2409:4064:19E:A617:AABA:26C:F3DA:D2B5 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:31.14.14.70

31.14.14.70 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:37.248.153.124

37.248.153.124 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 07:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Billinghurst TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:33, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:180.241.46.143

180.241.46.143 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Done Blocked. Edits were already reverted. Thanks for reporting!

This section was archived on a request by: Daniuu (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 108.6.224.205

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

Andrew5, already globally blocked. EPIC (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Done locally blocked, so this can be marked as resolved as well. EPIC (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Revdel request

Inappropriate personal information: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&diff=prev&oldid=26109356 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:29, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --DannyS712 (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 181.46.137.235

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

Long-term abuse, and ban evasion. – 64andtim ^(talk) 02:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --DannyS712 (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 02:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning AP295

• AP295 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Troll. On Requests_for_comment/Global_ban_for_Guido_den_Broeder#Questions, cast aspersion, filibuster, Ad hominem etc. Lemonaka (talk) 12:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended content
Dan Polansky and I refuted Guido's eligibility for a global ban, and since then the RfC's author along with this user have been putting words in our mouths and making facile, question-begging accusations like those above. All my replies are on-topic, sincere, and solicited as the topic is an RfC. Any impartial reading of the RfC would show that this report against me was made in retaliation for scrutinizing and questioning their argument, which is the whole point of an RfC in the first place. This report is wholly and transparently bogus. I remain at the mercy of whoever handles this. AP295 (talk) 13:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC) I notice they've linked the #Questions section, but also consider our comments in Requests_for_comment/Global_ban_for_Guido_den_Broeder#Comments, which were made earlier. At any rate, the only abuses in the RfC are theirs. For instance, Dan expressed concern that most of the supporting "comments" were really just votes without much substance, to which Lemonaka responded [4]. What kind of fucked-up reply is that? (You'll also notice my reply to this bizarre comment was quite measured, despite my mounting disgust.) Does this not demonstrate blatant contempt for due process? It seems quite plausible that had Dan and I not been there, they'd have actually issued a global ban based on little more than a majority vote in an RfC. If global bans can be issued on an open majority vote then let Global ban say as much. That would be absurd, but still better than letting someone maintain the pretense of fairness and openness while issuing global bans on a whim. There are other examples, such as SHB2000's persistent attempts to deflect the refuting argument by acting like it disputes the common definition of the word "ongoing" when that's clearly not what we were saying, and continuing this intentional misreading well after I pointed out that the argument does no such thing [5],[6],[7],[8]. He makes a transition from wheedling to deflection and now from deflection to outright thuggery by calling us trolls and with Lemonaka acting as his mouthpiece to make this report while he puts on a comically superficial air of concern for impartiality. He must not have thought it would stick to Dan, but he saw I've been sanctioned in the past and probably decided I would be an easier target. Lovely individual. Bear in mind that Guido, the user in question (whom I was not even aware of prior to this Rfc) , has already been blocked indefinitely for the alleged recent abuse on commons. SHB2000 and Lemonaka complain bitterly about Guido's (apparently minor) abuses but seem to have no scruples about abusing others, if they don't relish it. AP295 (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC) AP295, you're doing the same sort of insufferable wikilawyering that's gotten you blocked on two other projects. I know this request will likely fall on deaf ears, but please stop. Rather than getting into endless arguments with people, express your opinion (once and concisely) on discussions you are interested in and then leave it to other people. Find some way to collaboratively and constructively contribute, or you'll just end up blocked here as well. I truly have nothing against you, which is why I'm giving a final chance (though other admins are not bound to that). Please do some self-reflection and try to understand why people keep negatively reacting to your contributions. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC) Fine, I won't comment on meta anymore as I mainly use Wikiversity anyway. SHB2000 made colloquium on Wikiversity asking us (Wikiversity users, that is) to participate here. I did not go looking for an argument, they invited us to comment. If you have nothing against me then surely you can see how utterly two-faced they're acting and that to write off my side of the story as "wikilawyering" without even addressing a single point I've made is unfair. If I were wrong and they were right in any substantial way, you'd be doing the Sgt. Schultz bit right now; i-see-nothing-of-value-in-your-contribs, i-see-nothing-to-show-you-shouldn't-be-blocked, NOTHERE, so on and so forth. AP295 (talk) 17:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) AP295: Just to clarify, nobody asked you to participate. The posting was just the required notification (made on all projects where Guido had made one or more edits) to inform about the discussion on Meta, since it conceivably could have an impact on the project. --T*U (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC) Now this is wikilawyering. Is an RfC not intended to solicit comments, and therefore an open invitation to participate? If my comments aren't actually wanted on meta then fine, but don't act like I came here just to cause problems. AP295 (talk) 17:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC) T*U isn't wrong. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 18:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) Am I? Just look at SHB2000, trying to bait a response from me in the RfC as we speak. As if it would absolutely kill him not to have the last word. AP295 (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC) I have to agree with everyone else here. Your behavior is totally insufferable wikilawyering and I say that as someone who's done plenty of it myself over the years. Just as a small data point, you've made 32 comments in the discussion, which is slightly less then the person who opened it and 3 times more then there are people who actually oppose the ban. Usually A good indicator of if someone has bludgeoned their side of a discussion is the ratio of how many people agree with them to the amount of comments they have made. In this case you've clearly lost the plot if it's 1/3 and you've left triple the amount of comments then there are people who oppose the ban. Maybe people were asked to comment, but no one asked you to specifically. Let alone repeatedly and/or in a way that is clearly tendentious wikilawyering. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2024 (UTC) See [9]. You're at yellow. AP295 (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC) Acting like the substance of a person's argument isn't being addressed or dismissively acting like counter points are just "tone policing" is a pretty common tactic people use on here to deflect from acknowledging criticism. I hate to say it, but you should really just be blocked as NOTHERE since your clearly unable or unwilling to get what the issue with how your acting is. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) I'm deeply blue about your future on this project. You are clearly not here to build, or even discuss. Lemonaka (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) A frivolous accusation right there. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 22:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) I think that's enough piling on the reportee, the message has been communicated quite clearly at this point and honestly further points are doing little more than baiting a response. The user has been given a final warning, time to move along. Both the message and how it is delivered matters, and having multiple people piling on is not a good look if you're trying to say that another user is behaving in an uncollaborative manner... – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2601:2C3:897F:5900:111B:F527:FEC4:4062

2601:2C3:897F:5900:111B:F527:FEC4:4062 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 20:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked by Masti. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder

• Guido den Broeder (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)

Would it be possible if an admin temporarily unbanned Guido den Broeder until the duration of Requests for comment/Global ban for Guido den Broeder? TIA, --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 05:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Billinghurst. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 06:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder request for unblock

special:diff/26062719

I would like the ability to edit my user page as it is used on many projects where I am in good standing, and it needs maintenance. It has been more than 5 years. At the time I was hurt and emotional because of mean things that were said about me both on- and off-wiki, of which you could only see a small part. My behavior in response to this was subpar, for which I apologize. I have no wish to edit anywhere outside my user space. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guido den Broeder (talk)

Comment I said that any request for unblock would be put before the community for consensus.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

•  Support temporary unblock,  Oppose permanent unblock. I only support a temporary unblock, purely so they can respond directly in the ban discussion, but otherwise I'd oppose an unblock for almost all other grounds. Their apology seems half-hearted at best and too bad they lost their privilege to edit their Meta userpage through bad behaviour. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 06:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

  Their unblock request appears to be solely about wanting to edit their userpage. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

• I'd say that depends on what said "maintenance" is, although the implicit soapboxing and bragging résumé currently on display could use a replacement. --HyperGaruda (talk) 09:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

  • Butting in here as it appeared on my watch list, but would it satisfy appellant's needs to just delete the user page ("implicit soapboxing and bragging résumé ") as out-of-scope? Best

  --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose However, would accept a reasonable edit request for that page - especially if it is to delete it, mark it noglobal, or replace with some sort of x-wiki link to whatever they consider their now-current homewiki. This does not impede the user's ability to make local user pages on sites they are in good standing. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Jermboytold

Jermboytold (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: LTA Jermboy TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 11:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked --Johannnes89 (talk) 11:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 11:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:71.86.144.198

71.86.144.198 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism MathXplore (talk) 11:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Done--Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 11:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 11:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Requesting protection of my user talk page

Hello, I'd like to request my user talk page to be protected for a while, as it's been the target of persistent vandalism for about 2 weeks now. Thank you. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --Mtarch11 (talk) 13:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mtarch11 (talk) 13:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Renewal of Massmessage sender flag

On Jan 13th, my authorization as massmessage-sender expired. Can you please reactivate it? I still need it as part of my activity with Wikimedia Italia. Thank you.-- Ysogo (talk) 17:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

• Done for another year. --❄️Mykola❄️ 20:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --❄️Mykola❄️ 20:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Lions2023

Lions2023 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: vandalism only account --*Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page ♮ 00:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:ダッド達

ダッド達 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Blocked in jawiki, self identifies as WMF-banned on userpage TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 08:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 09:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 09:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 2.140.225.92

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

Vandalism. Translation vandalism. Lemonaka (talk) 01:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

IP has stopped for hours now - good report but stale at this point. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Update version and callback url for OAuth consumer

I would like some help from an OAuth administrator. I created this OAuth application: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:OAuthListConsumers/view/d9458b31282bc66fb3ae461c51665d00 and I would like to change the following properties:

• version: 0.5
• callback URL: https://spacemedia.toolforge.org/login/oauth2/code/wikimedia

Unfortunately I cannot update them by myself (these fields are not editable by non-admin users) and cannot create a new entry, as the version number is lower.

By the way, the mediawiki documentation states we should be able to disable our applications ourselves, but that's not the case on Meta, see this question.

Thank you. Don-vip (talk) 20:01, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Don-vip: Hi. This is not managed by admins or 'crats at metawiki. Please see the list of OAuth admins to whom to seek assistance.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

• See Steward_requests/Miscellaneous#OAuth_permissions for OAuth requests. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 10:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Jack User

Jack User (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Evidently only a troll account; that is, all of their edits on Meta-Wiki since 2021. Could an admin please look into their behaviour? SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 22:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@SHB2000: I would suggest that this is not words to be used, nor an approach that you should take. Be chill.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Eh, I'll defer to you and lean back, but surely "Ban all Hat- ehm [sic] Supporters [sic]", "Too many German Haters [sic]... Stränge [sic]...", and "A Tet Offensive i [sic] will never support. Give me liberty or give me wikihate..." count as trolling. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 02:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

You started the conversation there and they are typically robust conversations as you proposed our highest sanction against a user. That brings some of the strongest advocates on both sides, and an inevitably emotional debate. [So when you walking through the cow paddock, always wipe your feet before coming indoors, so again I don't think that the above additions here on this subject are particularly helpful. d:Q15282326 Think strategic, act tactical. All is situational.]  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:36, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

nothing to do here  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Billinghurst I consider myself involved, as the user is from my home wiki (where he got banned by our ArbCom after years of attacks against other community members), so I won't take any action, but I recommend taking another look and at least issue a warning.

Even if you dismiss yesterdays edits as „robust conversation“ and don‘t take into account his edits from previous years which oftentimes violated Meta:Civility as well, todays comments (especially this one [10]) should not be tolerated in my opinion. Johannnes89 (talk) 21:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Johannnes89: At the time of the complaint, the user had made two edits in 15 months. The first was an oppose with a line of comment. The second was a change to their user talk page about their status. If people had wanted to deal with the person's earlier edits, the time was then. If they have since escalated their behaviour then it is dealt with when escalated, not due to heavy-handed administrators.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

And now the user just said "fuck you" to Prosfilaes. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 21:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, M/! --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 22:57, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2600:8800:5084:2400:C592:814A:2C95:3187

2600:8800:5084:2400:C592:814A:2C95:3187 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Also see Special:Contributions/2600:8800:5084:2400:AC51:AE24:B3:BC9A.

Done It looks like a /64 managed it. We will need to see if they can wander further. I think that what can be deleted has been, and reverts the rest. Not planning on revdel unless there is specific issues that need managing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 07:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Mosspa 443,108 miles

Mosspa 443,108 miles (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Spam XReport TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 10:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Done by Johannnes89 --M/ (talk) 10:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 10:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:188.212.102.18

188.212.102.18 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Abusing talk page, please remove talk page access MathXplore (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Already done by Tegel Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 15:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 15:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning Fahggets$ukDeezNuts

Fahggets$ukDeezNuts (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Philipnelson99 (talk) 00:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 00:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Daimona Eaytoy (Talk) 00:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concering P nis p nis p nis

P nis p nis p nis (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Philipnelson99 (talk) 01:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Already blocked and locked. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

7 year block for spite by MelanieN

Hi, I donate to Wikipedia regularly. However, they are still holding an unjustified grudge against me for 7 years now. I wont edit anything, but I'd like to be unblocked. I havent vandalized any page, so this block is unjust and unnecessary. Please help? 😀

Yours,

Robert

My article; (saxophonist Robert Stewart) 2600:1010:B032:4902:8CB8:40FA:F890:89A5 01:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Comment For context, I believe this is en:User:Professorreason. Their talk page access was restored so they could make an unblock request. I'm not sure what a sysop or crat could pr would do in this situation. Philipnelson99 (talk) 01:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Robert, Meta-Wiki admins have no jurisdiction over the English Wikipedia. You'll need to try to appeal your block there. All the best, – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 02:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

• Please semi-protect User:Leonidlednev/LTAs indefinitely due to vandalism. --Leonidlednev (talk) 00:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --M/ (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Block request

I will drone strike the user to block or lock this account (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Done--Mtarch11 (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Mtarch11 (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

My IP Adress was blocked 172.56.201.192

172.56.201.192 is my ip address was blocked because I pressed the edit button on the page of Dr Chris Hatcher. Why even have an edit button icon if no one can use it and then will be blocked for a year. I was only trying to contribute some more detailed factual information pertaining to Dr Hatcher because he was my father’s best friend and colleague. But instead I’m blocked for being abusive and offensive etc when I didn’t even do anything wrong. 2607:FB91:1E30:5750:40FA:ADBA:C6C0:7236 19:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

nothing to do here This wiki has no block on that IP address, nor do we have encyclopaedic articles. I would suggest that you discuss this at the wiki where you were trying to edit. If it is English Wikipedia where you were editing, then maybe start at w:en:WP:UTRS  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 02:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2601:2C3:897F:5900:492A:16B3:A542:E368

2601:2C3:897F:5900:492A:16B3:A542:E368 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism XReport Leonidlednev (talk) 01:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Done blocked, cleaned up. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 02:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Offensive names and associations

Request to remove and hide offensive names and contributions. ("1", "2", "3") Please remove these three offensive usernames, and also neutralize and hide their contributions on several Wikipedias, all of which are offensive and racist (their contributions can be seen in the three links are). All these three user pages have placed themselves in the place of another user and their name is that user's name plus insults, also their contributions on their own user page are disrespectful and insulting to the main user, and they have committed racist acts (See the links above). Thanks. 2A01:5EC0:7809:8C3F:9504:C9C1:2D5F:838B 01:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Not done the local administrators here can't do anything about contributions on other projects. If a username is excessively abusive you may request a global lock here: Steward_requests/Global#Requests_for_global_(un)lock_and_(un)hiding. You will need to ask the project administrators on local projects to remove contributions that violate their policies. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Xaosflux I can't edit on the page you posted please help. Rairfh (talk) 10:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rairfh start with your local project administrators; you can also file an edit request on that page's talk. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 01:58, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 69.119.89.11

69.119.89.11 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Philipnelson99 (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 05:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Request for the patroller right (64andtim)

Hello, everyone.

Today, I am requesting the patroller user right; this will allow me to revert vandalism and other disruptive edits much faster. I am familiar with the patroller policy here and some rollback policies on other projects where I have the rollback right. I did a previous request, but I had to withdraw it as I might have been inexperienced at the time. I had a relevant discussion about the patroller user right with a user here.

As for the ability to mark others' edits as patrolled, I will try not to abuse the patroller right by repeatedly marking bad edits as patrolled, and using the rollback function to edit war or to gain the upper hand in content disputes.

Thank you for your consideration. – 64andtim ^(talk) 04:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

For the record, prior request is at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2023-08#Request for patroller right --DannyS712 (talk) 05:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

The user has rollback permissions on enwiki, eswiki and simplewiki and 100+ reverts / speedy deletion requests on metawiki [11][12] which look fine to me, so I tend to grant patroller rights if there are no objections.

Looking at edits like these [13][14][15] I will nevertheless remind @64andtim that it's usually better to follow en:WP:NOROLLBACK and wait for an admin to block a vandal instead of reverting again in again when the vandal is clearly not going to stop. Johannnes89 (talk) 15:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Johannnes89. --M/ (talk) 15:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I will explain what have happened: all of those constant reverts happened on user talk pages, and one of them involved harassment against a trusted user, and the next one involved an LTA on my talk page. Anyway, I agree with y'all that if there are indications that the vandal or LTA in question isn't going to stop vandalizing pages despite reverts, let's just wait for an admin to block them indefinitely. – 64andtim ^(talk) 15:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

per discussion done --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 16:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 16:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Sugi moyo

Sugi moyo (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Ranting on my User talk page. This user is resentful of being indefinitely blocked on Japanese Wikipedia. Rhcnisoll (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

• PBLOCKED from your page, given a warning about WM:URB. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — xaosflux ^Talk 11:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Delete Template:PPCpage/styles.css

Please delete Template:PPCpage/styles.css since it is no more used. It was previously used in Pilipinas Panorama Community and its subpages. -- Pols12 (talk) 00:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Please also delete Template:Kashmiri Wikimedians User Group/styles.css (never used templateStyles sheet). Author agreed in talk page. -- Pols12 (talk) 16:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Done --Johannnes89 (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Please also delete Template:GLAM Wiki Conference 2023 Program/styles.css (never used), its author agreed in talk page. --Pols12 (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Idem for Template:Arabic_Wikimedians/Header, Template:Arabic_Wikimedians/styles.css and Template:Maithili_Wikimedians_User_Group/style.css. -- Pols12 (talk) 22:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 09:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Abdullah803

Abdullah803 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Spam and I'm pretty sure sockpuppet of similar spammer with a similar user names based around the name "Abdullah". I could be wrong and it's possible this is one-off weirdo spam. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Koavf: could you link similar examples you have seen please? --Ferien (talk) 17:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm thinking of https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat&diff=prev&oldid=26092201 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, based of what I can see as a sysop I don't believe they are related. There's only been one spam edit and they've stopped for now, so this is Not done right now. No objections if another admin wants to block. --Ferien (talk) 22:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Ferien (talk) 22:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Request autopatroller flag in Meta

Hi everyone, I'd like to request autopatroller permission in Meta. Recently I started participating in patrolling the wikis with SWViewer (I also patrolling wikis with TW Global), I'm patroll all the wikis including Meta. I have experience patrolling other wikis (like viwiki and also cebwiki, I'm currently working as sysop in cebwiki). I'm familiar with Meta's policies and Wikipedia's policies. I hope the steward consider my request. Thanks! ~~ Halley ^{luv Filipino ❤} 07:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Như Gây Mê I think you have a few things confused here. First, stewards don't deal with this sort of thing, second what are you trying to accomplish? Autopatrol is about your own edits. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

(non-administrator comment) In addition to the above, users can be granted autopatroller rights on this project by admins at their discretion without a request on RfH. – 64andtim ^(talk) 15:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Additional: we manage autopatrol and patrol rights to a different standard and process locally. We are not a standard content wiki, so we have configured approaches to also leverage some permissions to work on the site as required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrol is generally assigned when user's edits do not need to be patrolled. Thank you for your work on meta.wiki, but the request isn't going to be dealt with at this time. Please feel free to keep patrolling on this wiki. --M/ (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: M/ (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:2407:c800:2f22:6f8:1852:e163:63ed:c020

2407:c800:2f22:6f8:1852:e163:63ed:c020 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: He continues to rant on my conversation page. This user is the IP address currently being used by Sugi moyo‎ (talk · contribs · CA), who was recently blocked, and has been blocked by Checkuser on the Japanese version of Wikipedia. Rhcnisoll (talk) 09:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked --Johannnes89 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning User:121.103.23.139

121.103.23.139 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: He continues to rant on my conversation page. This user is the IP address currently being used by Sugi moyo‎ (talk · contribs · CA), who was recently blocked, and has been blocked by Checkuser on the Japanese version of Wikipedia. Rhcnisoll (talk) 09:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Blocked --Johannnes89 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Request concerning 5.124.87.173

5.124.87.173 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) Reason: Disruptive editing. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Johannnes89 (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Report concerning 197.210.85.145

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

Creating not a translation pages —MdsShakil (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The user has noted that sometimes a direct/lack of translation is perfectly understandable and fine, and has translated other sections. This doesn't look like vandalism to me. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I dont know pcm but compare to pcmwiki, Translations:Wikimedia committees/1/pcm doesn't seem a legitimate translation. —MdsShakil (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Fair point, it looks like the translations are about half-way, using some pcm words but then sticking to English in others. I've asked the IP on their talk page if they are doing partial translations, would still like to give some benefit of the doubt here before blocking. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

They seem to have returned with a new IP, see 197.210.85.15. According to WHOIS both are Nigerian IPs, so the translations might be correct. EPIC (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if it's an issue of regional dialects as well - looks like there are plenty and some may be closer to English than others. Either way, I think I'm comfortable leaving the IP(s) to do their thing for now - at worst, the translations are only slightly useful and can be expanded by other speakers of the language. Thanks for reporting and the input. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

• 197.210.0.0/16 seem to be making a mix of translation qualities - but not sure as I have no experience with Nigerian Pidgin -- I'm assuming that any term (e.g. "committee") that doesn't exist just becomes a loan word? — xaosflux ^Talk 11:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

  The current outputs on pages such as Wikimedia_committees/pcm are not helpful for readers though, some sort of cleanup is needed. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Transitioning Event Organizer Rights Management to Meta-Admins

Hello Meta-Wiki Admins,

We are reaching out to discuss the Campaignsevents-beta-tester right, granted to users for organizing events via the CampaignEvents extension, currently enabled on Meta-Wiki.

First, we are changing the right's name from "Campaignsevents-beta-tester" to "Event Organizer." This change reflects the completion of the beta testing phase and the formalization of the role within our community structure.

Secondly, we are also transitioning the responsibility for granting and revoking the rights from stewards to you, the meta-admins. Previously, stewards were the sole authority in managing these rights. However, as the role progresses from its initial testing phase, represented by "Campaignsevents-beta-tester," it's appropriate to give these responsibilities to the local administrators. As part of this process, we propose that organizers request the right on Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. You can learn more about these rights and our recommended criteria on Meta:Event Organizers. You can also see everyone who currently has the right on Meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=campaignevents-beta-tester.

Additionally, we think it would be beneficial to create a sort of "super organizer" right for users who could grant (but not remove) the organizer right to others. At present, there are numerous organizers without the organizer's rights, and we think adding this right could help avoid overburdening admins with granting future requests.

Overall, our goal is to make requesting and managing Event Organizer rights more efficient and community-driven. Your input and participation in this transition are crucial. Please share any feedback or questions you might have regarding these changes. Thank you for your continued dedication and service as admins. Udehb-WMF (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Unless we are overwhelemed with requests I don't think there is any reason to build an organizer-organizer group right now. It could always be requested later if needed. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @xaosflux, for your thoughtful feedback. We agree with your perspective on the proposed "super organizer" role. At this stage, it does seem more practical to monitor how well admins can handle the incoming requests for the Event Organizer rights. If it becomes too much, let us know and we can implement the super organizer right. -Udehb-WMF (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Comment @Udehb-WMF: If you are wishing to involve admins into a conversation about things that you are wishing all of us to do, then diverting the conversation elsewhere is less useful.

This presupposes that people know about Campaigns. The purposes and goals, guessing that numbers of admins here will not be around the subject. I don't think that I am comfortable granting those rights based on the criteria expressed and the information that is presented, it still seems like a specialist right to be allocated.

Essentially only 300 edits is required, no other criteria or recommendation; no clarity on what is being assessed. Based on what I am currently seeing, and having the requests on this page it will essentially be a tick and flick exercise. Should rights be periodical or infinite? How are rights lost or removed? What does an abuse of those rights look like? II there is a level of assessment, then rights allocation would be better managed at a different page; as if there is any assessment, any community comment and any accountability, then Meta:Requests for adminship may be a better place. I think that the Campaigns teams needs to better express what they are looking to achieve so that admins can better assist achieving the goals.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm assuming this is a whole 'devolve this to the community' event; so all those thresholds for standards are up to whatever we want them to be. Looks like it is currently being managed by sysadmins and the current rolls contains all sorts of users, including ones that don't even meet the initial requirements. No idea what the "No active blocks on the wiki on which you are applying for the right" part is, isn't this exclusive to the meta-wiki? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF: is that general concept correct? That this will be a community managed system, not something staff manages via sysadmins? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I understand the handover concept. it was that the whole aspect of "Campaigns" is not one that many of us have been involved, so we either need to have a concept presented to us, OR, we are expected to go and bury our heads in all the detail. Campaigns is not something has been discussed here, nor requested. If they wish to set up their own management, and put their requests to us, sort of like the old OTRS did, then fine. I can assist with the presented concept, and have next to no interest in embedding myself into the Campaigns scene.

Also, I typically feel that it is harder to impose restrictions, then to relax them, so I would much prefer that reins are kept tighter and eased as confidence in the system and understanding of the process is to occur. If that is the approach, then Meta:RfA is a better place for those requests than here, IMNSHO.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

That may be the best venue, mostly was asking WMF if they are now going to be hands-off on this; and also are they going to clean up 'testers' that didn't test, etc? — xaosflux ^Talk 10:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to see a better overview of what the goal of Campaigns are as well, and how they intersect with the other parallel campaigns (e.g. Programs and Events system, Outreach wiki system). — xaosflux ^Talk 10:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello Billinghurst, hello Xaosflux,

Thank you for your valuable comments and questions. Firstly, to address Xaosflux's query, yes, the intention is indeed to transition this to a community-managed system, moving away from staff intervention and allowing the community to take the lead.

Billinghurst, your concerns about the familiarity with Campaigns and the depth of information provided are well-taken. The Event Organizer right, as outlined on the EventCenter Registration Instructions page, is designed to be a straightforward, non-specialist right that facilitates the organization of Wikimedia events. It's primarily about enabling on-wiki registration and management of event participant lists, offering an easier and more integrated experience for both organizers and participants. The right doesn't confer extensive technical privileges or access, making it relatively harmless in terms of potential misuse.

However, we understand the importance of clarity and guidance for admins who may be new to this aspect of the Wikimedia ecosystem. We will work on providing a more detailed overview of Campaigns and how they interact with other initiatives. This will help in ensuring that admins are well-informed and comfortable with the process of granting these rights.

Regarding your preference for a tighter initial control, we appreciate your caution. While we agree that it is easier to relax controls than to tighten them later, we also believe that the nature of the Event Organizer right allows for a slightly more open approach from the start. The right, by its design, poses minimal risk, and a more open initial approach could encourage broader participation and innovation in event organization within our community.

With this in mind, we would hope that all organizers who currently have the right can maintain the right, so they can use it for potential events they may organize. Similarly, we hope that people who request the right can have the opportunity to try to use the tooling and demonstrate that they can create events in good faith.

We provided some initial suggested criteria for granting the future right so there could be some helpful guidance, but we also want this ultimately to be a community-led process so we see it as something that can evolve over time. -Udehb-WMF (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF: Thanks for the reply. Good to know that there is little technical risk, and that the scope of allocation of rights. If the allocation of these rights is meant to have any responsibility lying with the granting admin, there needs to be that ability to justify a "yes" vs. a "no". If it is solely mechanics (ie. no justification) of tick boxes, then that clarity is helpful. My personal preference is that Meta:RfA is the place for these, though if the "Admin" nomenclature is problematic or confusing, then I am very open to pushing for that page to be known as ""Meta:Request for Rights" rather than admin status, as we have long moved beyond ADMIN only on that page as wikilife has matured. Firstly, we can have a standing section for those rights, and if there is ever a requirement for discussion over rights allocation, that is definitely a better place  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your insightful feedback. I like your suggestion to use Meta:RfA (potentially renamed to "Meta:Request for Rights," or something else) as the venue for these requests. I think it provides a familiar and structured environment for both requesters and admins.

Regarding the allocation of the rights, our intention is indeed for this to be a relatively mechanical process, as the right is low-risk. Do you have thoughts or feedback on how we’ve presented our recommended criteria on the policy page? - Udehb-WMF (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Just a quick note: Several organizers are eagerly waiting to use the tool, and currently, granting access is on hold until we finalize these discussions. Hopefully, we can reach a consensus and wrap up this discussion by Friday. Your thoughts and feedback would be immensely helpful for us to move forward.

cc.@Billinghurst@Xaosflux - Udehb-WMF (talk) 06:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Just want to note that MassMessage sender permissionos are currently being given by request on this page. If the event organiser permissions are being granted via RfA (or request for rights), we should move massmessage permissions to the same page (and probably write down some of the informal criteria we are currently using, e.g. for requestors to provide an example message + example delivery list).

If we continue to grant MM permissions via RFH, I don't see a reason not to give event organiser permissions (which possess much less technical risks) on this page as well.

I'm by the way fine with the proposed criteria. Johannnes89 (talk) 07:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

What work page and process the admins want to use doesn't need to be attached to the permission changeover - it can build as needed. — xaosflux ^Talk 09:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Got it, Xaosflux. We will begin the engineering changes for shifting the rights management to you, meta-admins. I will ensure to update you all once we have implemented the changes. Thank you!- Udehb-WMF (talk) 09:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Comment I have suggested to the community that we move the page for RfAs to "Meta:Requests for rightspermissions". Re the remainder. I am just a single admin with a single opinion, I see an indicator that there is something like 31 of us active. Plus, this should be more than just admins opinion, in the end the consensus of the community will rule. I just broom :-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

[Update]: Hello Admins, I'm excited to share that the engineering changes for transitioning the Event Organizer rights management have now been implemented. With these updates, you, the Meta-admins, now have the ability to grant Event Organizer rights. To kickstart this process, may I suggest starting with the review of pending requests from users awaiting these rights? For a more detailed list of pending requests, please see Campaigns/Foundation_Product_Team/Registration/V1_Summary#Become_a_beta_test_organizer

Thank you for your continued support.

cc.@Billinghurst @Xaosflux @Johannnes89 - Udehb-WMF (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF I'll process the pending requests today. May I suggest updating all relevant pages in order to explain the new process for requesting Event Organizer permissions? Just yesterday there was a new request [16] and there have been several other requests in the past couple of days [17], I'm assuming because the old page is still linked at Event Center/Registration#Who should use the tool, EventCenter/Registration/Instructions#Requirements to use the event registration feature, EventCenter/Registration/FAQ#Which users can use the tool? and probably some other pages as well.

By the way this link [18] should probably point at Meta:Event Organizers for users to get detailed instructions on how to request the new permissions and the section #Become a beta test organizer should be removed (or rewritten) once the pending requests are done in order to stop users to add their name to that list. Johannnes89 (talk) 08:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Johannnes89, for jumping on this. I will work on fixing the relevant updates. - Udehb-WMF (talk) 10:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Done processing the old requests. Campaigns/Foundation Product Team/Registration/V1 Summary#Become a beta test organizer should now be rewritten in order to no longer instruct users to add their username to that list (or just remove the section entirely). Johannnes89 (talk) 11:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you once again, Johannnes89. Regarding the "Become a beta test organizer" section, it's now archived. - Udehb-WMF (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 15:20, 4 February 2024 (UTC)