Requests for comment/Bots on Chechen wikipedia
The following request for comments is closed. Outdated request no longer an issue. See also Requests for comment/Massive sysop abuse in Chechen Wikipedia
User:Girdi, bureaucrat on Chechen wikipedia, has indef-blocked several interwiki bots including User:VolkovBot without giving any reason, reverted its edits that were in fact correct ([1] etc. - for some unknown reason he doesn't like Esperanto [2]) and refused to unblock the bot [3]. Isn't it against a common policy? Any comments? Thanks. --Volkov 18:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- From my point of view, removing Esperanto interwikis is a 100% trolling. I'd like stewards ask him not to do that. Baning unapproved bots is OK, and rejecting interwiki bot requests is also OK (though it's a very bad idea IMO) — VasilievV 2 18:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Despite knowing English user has refused to explain himself ce:Юзери дийца:Girdi#Bot flag request for User:WOPR. User's remark stating that there are enough bots is not backed by any kind of consensus. No one established a bot quota. Such a quota would be very unwiki. -- Cat chi? 18:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a note, he flagged your bot right after you requested it and said "Your bot is flagged now" in Нохчийн. Cbrown1023 talk 02:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Very strange. He could have said so. He deleted his talk page so most of the basis of this is gone or at least not visible. -- Cat chi? 11:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Aww, it turns out he just translated your name into three more languages too! Cbrown1023 talk 15:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Very strange. He could have said so. He deleted his talk page so most of the basis of this is gone or at least not visible. -- Cat chi? 11:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just another note: he actually granted bot status to User:VolkovBot [4] and indef-blocked the flagged bot that was functioning correctly right afterwards [5] without giving any reason in block summary nor on bot's or botmaster's talk page. The same story was e.g. with User:TXiKiBoT. He then deleted his own talk page [6] so that all discussions re: bots are not available now. This behaviour seems to be very strange to me. --Volkov 07:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a note, he flagged your bot right after you requested it and said "Your bot is flagged now" in Нохчийн. Cbrown1023 talk 02:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Despite knowing English user has refused to explain himself ce:Юзери дийца:Girdi#Bot flag request for User:WOPR. User's remark stating that there are enough bots is not backed by any kind of consensus. No one established a bot quota. Such a quota would be very unwiki. -- Cat chi? 18:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is all very unhelpful, but surely it is a matter for the local Chechen community. Do we have any right to intervene?--Cato 15:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems to be a single person's arbitrary decision (shall we call it abuse?) not the community decision. At least no links to the discussion within Chechen community have been provided. --Volkov 19:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ты не понимаешь чеченский язык Волков. Мы чеченскые участники рассказаем в Скайпе или МСН часто, и мы не хотем много ботов на чеченской Википедии, спасибо. У наш боты, которые делают что твой бот делает. Get over it and stop making a big deal. --Girdi 20:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Imho this is not acceptable, a block is to prevent damage only, the bot should be unblocked now, even if the bot-owner decides not to run his service on that wiki. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 12:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Current status
This request has been lingering here for more than two years now. My first priority is to find its current status. Are the users named above still active? Are there still some unresolved issues? I'll try to ask them to please report back on this page. I'll post my own report on the progress made on my attempts to contact the editors. If you are interested in this matter and have not been contacted please leave me a note or go ahead and post any comments, suggestions, or observations you might have.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 01:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I received a personal message from the user who opened this request for comment agreeing that it can now be closed. That I'll proceed to do. I hope that I handled this matter to everybody's entire satisfaction. Thank you all so very much for your cooperation. Vapmachado 18:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]