Talk:Global sysops

Archives

---

1, 2

• 2008
• 2009
• 2010
• 2010 (vote)
• 2011
• 2012
• 2013
• 2014
• 2015
• 2016
• 2017
• 2018
• 2019
• 2020
• 2021
• 2022
• 2023

A proposal for assisting global users on various local wikis

Hello there, everyone, in order to assist our invaluable and diligent GS/GR/SWMT members, if/when they get into unfortunate situations on a particular local wiki, I propose that we set up a dedicated global support/help (sub)page/(sub)section on Meta-Wiki for reporting and handling such unwanted scenarios. For this very reason, I pioneer, volunteer and thus nominate myself to the position of a local helper on 6 (six) different Serbian Wikimedia projects. Local administrator of the Serbian Wikipedia, نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

+ Comment Moved from: Steward requests/Global permissions#Global sysop for Ternera, so please consult this previous discussion below. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 17:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

discussions on نوفاك اتشمان's repetitive reminder. Collapsed for obvious reasons.
. Comment Thank you for volunteering, and please familiarise yourself with the local sr.wiki policy concerning the global sysops. Local administrator of the Serbian Wikipedia, نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 21:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC) There is no need to repeat the same message to every global sysop applicant, especially since prospective candidates are expected to be familiar with the policy anyway. Leaderboard (talk) 16:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Leaderboard, of course editors are allowed to inquire about the matters within the GS scope, while that particular wiki in fact is no regular GS/SWMT wiki (as she's somewhat similar to uk.wiki/the Ukrainian Wikipedia, I guess...). نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 18:59, 7 January 2025 (UTC) Still, it gets irritating quickly. You're just giving an (unnecessary) reminder, not enquiring about anything. Leaderboard (talk) 04:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Leaderboard, I appreciate your feedback. Hm, perhaps I should send a more general reminder next time. نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 06:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC) To be honest, I don't think that any reminder is needed. Global sysops have to familiarize themself with the global sysop policy before they run for GS, that includes all relevant local policies. TenWhile6 19:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC) نوفاك اتشمان, I agree with Leaderboard and TenWhile6 here that your reminders are not needed at all, because regarding the Serbian Wikipedia's policy about global sysops, it's obviously listed on the global sysop page regarding some projects' local policies. Thank you. Codename Noreste (talk) 00:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Leaderboard, TenWhile6 and Codename Noreste, I appreciate your feedback. Assuming that a GS/GR/(successful) candidate for these global user rights indeed reads a relevant local policy (which one can't really verify, btw), let me ask a more practical question about a realistic situation, then. For example, a global user/SWMT member starts to combat vandals, spammers and LTAs, both local and cross-wiki-like, on a wiki, yet a local administrator/patroller/rollbacker reverts (No. 1) an obviously valid edit/action of theirs (No. 2), due to unspecified or unknown reasons. That's why the injured party proceeds to contact the reverting local user (No. 3), but they receive no meaningful or no direct answer (excluding a possible unhelpful "thank-you" notification), and/or they get no help from another local administrator (No. 4)/patroller/rollbacker (No. 5) at all, while their edit/action still remains unjustly reverted (aka not restored). So, how [w/sh]ould a global user/SWMT member act in such a scenario? Also, [w/sh]ould they continue to combat abuse there, possibly antagonising local users and thus knowingly putting themselves at risk? In addition, I should note that these circumstances in fact are very much real, and they are known to have happened before as well, whilst even resulting in tragic local blocks of the affected, innocent global users/SWMT members. نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 06:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC) + Comment Hm, could we have a dedicated global support/help (sub)page/(sub)section on Meta-Wiki for reporting and handling such unwanted situations? نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 08:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC) @نوفاك اتشمان The edits appear to be revision-deleted, so it is hard to tell further. But: if the community disapproves of a global sysop, they can always tell them to stop operating there. That's how it works in the wikis I look at. But otherwise, the GS hasn't done anything wrong as long as the policy allows this - it is one thing if the GS does not follow a wiki rule, but they cannot be expected to follow rules that are unwritten. Leaderboard (talk) 10:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Leaderboard, yes, indeed, these 2 (two) specific edits (No. 6 & No. 7) have already been rev-del-ed, but it's actually the regular, typical attack page/link spam of that LTA "Rocky/GRP" from Chicago. So, while this particular story about the GS Tanbiruzzaman did receive a double happy ending after all, one may not always get a good ending – unfortunately. نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 12:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Got it, but I see no fault of the GS itself - so what do they gain from the reminder? Leaderboard (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Hi, maybe we should take this to the talk page of this page or somewhere else. This has little to do with this request itself and it's shaping to be a longer discussion. BRP ever 14:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, BRPever, hm, perhaps simply move this whole discussion to here: Talk:Global sysops? نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Leaderboard, of course it's true that the GS is innocent, but they were very lucky that one time, so there ought to be an effective and comprehensive method for preventing such unfortunate cases. As for that reminder of mine, I'll simply replace it with a more friendly welcome-message next time. نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC) My two cents: feel free to nicely incorporate the reminder in your support vote - conveniently. I have myself felt irritated, at all times I saw this repetitive reminder. The global sysop policy page is enough and all GS candidates come after going through it, the local policies are there. Aren't they? signed, Aafi (talk) 10:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, Aafi, are welcome-messages and other standardised notifications irritating and repetitive? Do they need to be diversive and creative instead? Should I send that repetitive → standardised reminder of mine to a volunteering GS the first time that they make an edit/action on sr.wiki, possibly interrupting their anti-abuse efforts there/elsewhere and demotivating them in the process? Yes, I'm very able to modify my reminder, however, its essence won't change that way. Also, I should note that various short and simple voting rationales ("trusted", "experienced", etc.) in fact can pretty much quickly become repetitive and potentially irritating. + "[...] Assuming that a GS/GR/(successful) candidate for these global user rights indeed reads a relevant local policy (which one can't really verify, btw), [...]" If I'm going to patch up an issue (again), it is desirable and helpful to have some kind of an explicit confirmation that (at least) one side reads and follows that stuff, then. Of course I'm very open to better and less annoying (?) possible solutions and preventive measures, which promote and bolster mutual global-local combat against abuse, as well as which avoid and mitigate the unnecessary divisions between those 2 (two) birds of a feather. And, finally, that is the gist of that reminder of mine. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 15:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Hello. Should I send that repetitive → standardised reminder of mine to a volunteering GS the first time that they make an edit/action on sr.wiki, possibly interrupting their anti-abuse efforts there/elsewhere and demotivating them in the process? - as mentioned, you actually don't need to send it at all because the applicants read it anyway. AramilFeraxa (Talk) 15:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC) Comment Hello, AramilFeraxa, thank you very much, I really appreciate your positivity concerning this matter at hand. Unfortunately, my personal experience with various people doesn't necessarily support such idealistic and hopeful assumptions and expectations about others... :-( --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 16:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I'd support such a help page. There are some small wikis out there known to be quite hostile and unfriendly to global sysops (etwikiquote, bswiki and ttwiki are some of the first that come to mind) – I suppose a dedicated help page could alleviate some of the concerns. --SHB (t • c) 05:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I am still unsure on what exactly is being proposed. To me it sounds like the local community should work together to desysop sysops that cause unnecessary issues to global sysops? Either the community should all be on board or the wiki should be opted-out of GS. Leaderboard (talk) 15:36, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, my idea is to start a general and unified place for coordinating and organising global users facing difficulties from local users, instead of leaving them confused there or having them go to various places (for example, SRM, and IRC) in order to seek help. Namely, such a dedicated place would also handle much more serious matters, like facilitating removals of both accidental and abusive local blocks directed at global users – I can provide links to some of these examples, if necessary, that is. In addition, that specific instance has already been successfully dealt with, while the wiki in question still is actively and closely being monitored. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 09:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Why can't this be done at SN or similar? Leaderboard (talk) 10:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, to be honest, that's a really good question. So, are the stewards the default address for that stuff? And, if yes, are there some kind of guidelines/instructions for global users, then? --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Generally yes, if any issues have come up, SRM is usually the de facto go-to venue (recent examples include this, this or this). --SHB (t • c) 11:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, if that's the case, let's add a line or two of text to some appropriate pages on Meta-Wiki, such as GS/GR/SWMT, then. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Removed & DENY Velimir LTA. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 05:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

What? --SHB (t • c) 05:03, 16

Hi, this is actually that LTA Velimir from Serbia, who is constantly attempting to open new, active fronts and to expand old ones (aka attrition warfare) against Serbian/other South Slavic local users and global users aiding them (+ 2 examples from yesterday concerning 2 global users). + "WP:DUCK" blocks are allowed, while tagging suspected sockpuppets is being practised. --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 06:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Automoderator for small Wikipedias

Hi, I'm the Product Manager for the mw:Moderator Tools team. You may be aware that we've been working on a product called Automoderator, anti-vandalism software which uses a machine learning model to identify and revert vandalism. We want to provide the opportunity for trusted global contributors to use Automoderator on small Wikipedia projects (see T372280) for an overview and some prior discussion. To that end, at last week's Stewards/Foundation call we discussed piloting Automoderator on a handful (5-10) of small projects, so that you could discuss configurations and evaluate effectiveness. I've filed a detailed Phabricator ticket at T388254 with the specific questions that need answering for this pilot to proceed. Please take a look at the ticket and post answer to any of the questions that you have opinions on. I'm happy to answer questions about Automoderator here or on Phabricator. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)