User talk:Iliev/2019

"Who Wrote That" project update

Hello. I'm reaching out to you as you participated in the 2017 Community Wishlist proposal for "Who Wrote That" project (previously known as "Blame Tool"). The Community Tech team is kicking things off on the project and we have an early-stage mockup available for you to look at. I invite you to follow that project page, where I will be posting periodic status updates for the project. You are also welcome to provide your thoughts on the talk page. Thank you. -- NKohli (WMF) (talk) 22:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Блокиран потребител - Enarei

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The block that was initially discussed has been lifted, and since article content itself is best discussed within the wider community, let's continue this on bgwiki, please. — Luchesar • T/C 10:16, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

---

Илиев, виждам, че си ми удължил бана на една година, заради публикацията в Уикиизточник. Много добре знаеш, че вие бяхте премахнали публикацията за детандерите и аз видях начин за запознаване на българския читател чрез Уикиизточник. Някои даже си позволяваха да трият пасажи, като не показват с нищо, че разбират от тези важни, С ВИСОКА ЕНЕРГИЙНА ЕФЕКТИВНОСТ, машини. Дори не изявяват желание да прочетат посочените източници, а искали източници. В самите чуждоезични публикации за детандера в Уикипедия си пише, че се използват в химическата и нефтопреработвателната промишленост - "навсякъде, където има изпаряване", а Юл Браун, нигерийките и мн.др. ви демонстрират и за електролизата. Но "специалистите" не желаят да си направят труда да прочетат.

Ще отнеса казуса до по-горна инстанция на "Уики", ако не отмените едногодишния бан!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enarei (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2019‎ (UTC)

Enarei, your homophobic edit summaries had been enough grounds even for an indefinite block on their own, even ignoring your continued uncivilized behaviour on your own talk page (which lead to the initial 1-month block to be extended to 3 months) and your abuse of Wikisource to, effectively, avoid the block on Wikipedia (which lead to the block being extended to a full year). There usually is no “higher instance” in the projects, but you could always try asking the stewards for help, posting on the Board of Trustees noticeboard, or even contacting Jimmy Wales directly. I must warn you though that such actions are not guaranteed to produce any result and, if done inappropriately or in an uncivilized manner, may lead to having you blocked here too.
— Luchesar • T/C 11:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

And as for the content you were trying to contribute, my colleagues and I believe it to be of sufficiently dubious quality, that there's little reason—if there is any regarding hate speech—to further tolerate the above actions as well as your generally disruptive behaviour.
— Luchesar • T/C 11:56, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Господин Илиев, има... хомосексуалисти, които се гордеят между свои, че са такива. Дори всички! На мен обаче не ми е позволено да се гордея, че не съм. Намирам това за неравноправие, но както и да е.

Претенцията ми е, че продължаването на блокирането ми на една година е необосновано. Enarei (talk) 12:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I hear what you're saying, Enarei, but your own right to take pride in not being homosexual yourself—which right of yours I fully recognize and very much respect—has nothing to do with the problem here (not directly, at least). That being said, if you'd be willing to apologize in public (and sincerely so) on the bgwiki village pump about those comments of yours, I'd be myself very willing to at least review your block (the problem with the quality of your contributions also remains, but it's of secondary importance and a possible matter of further debate with the other editors). Thank you.
— Luchesar • T/C 12:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I should probably also note that at this very moment I don't have administrative privileges on the Bulgarian Wikipedia at my disposal, as I've voluntarily given them up and asked the community to re-elect me. So, at least until the voting is over, I won't be able to take any administrative action myself, but I can still ask my former admin colleagues for help. I fully expect that they would honor possible recommendations on this case from me.
— Luchesar • T/C 13:01, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Опитах да гласувам, но и там банът не позволява да се пише. Извинявам се на засегнатите. Трябваше и трябва да довърша публикацията "Детандери" и се ядосах за някои от рестриктивните мерки. Много от критиките взех под внимание в публикацията.

А смятате ли, че казионните медии, мълчейки за ВИСОКИТЕ ЕНЕРГИЙНИ ЕФЕКТИВНОСТИ предлагат истински новини.? Та климата на Планетата ще пощурява още повече от безобразното и неурегулирано ползване на съоръжения за такава ефективност. Примерно, обличането на сградите с иначе силно пожароопасни материали е опит да се прави нещо във въпросната посока, ама много хора недоумяват, защо трябва да се прави, като ги "пази Глобалното затопляне"... Enarei (talk) 16:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

За детандерите трябва да бъде упоменат важният и объркващ разбирането факт, че по аналогия на Д-Т ефекта, съществуват пари на вещества, които се държат особено при детандиране(адиаб.разширение) - нагряват се и не се втечняват така. Но тези вещества също подпомагат ЕНЕРГИЙНАТА ЕФЕКТИВНОСТ. Има българска книга по Темата, изнасяни са и лекции от авторите и техни колеги. Enarei (talk) 08:58, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Enarei, благодаря Ви за обясненията и оценявам това, че съжалявате за онзи изблик. Мога ли да разчитам, че в своите редакции ще се съобразявате също с мненията на своите колеги редактори? Въпреки, че всеки може да редактира Уикипедия, и то дори е насърчен да редактира смело, не забравяйте, че енциклопедията също работи на принципа на консенсуса и неутралната гледна точка. Затова е особено важно възможни противоречиви текстове да бъдат първо обсъждани на съответните беседи на статиите (често може да става дума просто за недоразумение или да има нужда нещо да бъде уточнено), и едва след това да се редактира. Ако дадете думата си, че няма да се опитвате силово да вкарвате в статиите своето виждане, когато има несъгласни колеги, а ще дискутирате първо с тях различията в гледните ви точки, ще помоля наистина администраторите да свалят блокирането Ви. Благодаря!
— Luchesar • T/C 09:03, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Ще гледам да си сдържам нервите. Виждам, че има и добра опция за възстановяване, срещу триещи вандали.

Въпросната книга може ли да се посочи в някакъв библиотечен регистър, вместо сайта на книгоразпространители. Ако да, кой? Enarei (talk) 11:38, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Enarei, благодаря Ви! Ще пиша след малко на колегите. Относно цитирането, всъщност правилното е подобни източници да се цитират както е посочено в У:ЦИ, посредством {{cite book}}. Ето и конкретен пример, за да е по-ясно:

Съществуват пари на вещества, които се държат особено при детандиране.<ref>{{cite book | title = Технологична термодинамика | last = Митев | first = Димитър | authorlink =  | coauthors = Димитър Русев | editor =  | editor-link =  | year = 2013 | edition =  | publisher =  | location = Бургас | isbn = 9789548422895 | doi =  | pages = 15 | url =  | accessdate =  | quote =  | lang-hide =  | lang =  }}</ref>

Как това би изглеждало на практика в статията (естествено, в случая само като извадка) можете да видите тук. Обърнете внимание, моля Ви, че е особено важно да се попълни също точната страница, особено за книги, които имат голям обем (ако повече страници имат отношение към съответното твърдение, след което е направено позоваване на източника, може да се използва подходящо записване като „15-18“, „15, 22, 135“, и т.н., според случая).

Също така, над полето за редактиране има падащи менюта, сред които в „Шаблони за статии“ конкретно ще намерите вече подготвен за попълване шаблон (въпросното {{cite book | title = и т.н.), както и други подходящи за статиите шаблони. Ако срещнете някакви затруднения, освен на съответната беседа на статията, можете също винаги да потърсите помощ на Уикипедия:Разговори, където доста повече редактори биха обърнали внимание.

Надявам се да съм Ви бил полезен. Поздрави,
— Luchesar • T/C 12:06, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Enarei, писах на w:bg:Уикипедия:Заявки към администраторите/2019/38#Отблокиране на потребител Enarei. Междувременно, понеже бяхте споменал „триещи вандали“. Не съм сигурен напълно кого имате предвид, но ако става дума за други редактори, подобни квалификации са абсолютно недопустими. Много Ви моля, преди евентуално да продължите да редактирате, да прочетете особено внимателно ръководството „никакви лични нападки“, и да се убедите, че сте го разбрали добре. Неуважителното отношение към останалите редактори поначало се смята за едно от особено сериозните „прегрешения“ в Уикипедия (и останалите проекти), и съответно бива санкционирано доста безкомпромисно. Ако се чувствате ядосан някому, просто оставете спора за следващия ден. Също избягвайте да връщате чужди редакции безразборно, тъй като това може да бъде сметнато за редакторска война, която също, ако не бъде спряна по друг начин, може да доведе до блокирания. Конкретно във Вашия случай, опасявам се, възможни проблеми може дори да доведат до възстановяване на едногодишното блокиране.

Затова, наистина Ви моля да бъдете особено внимателен и търпелив. Благодаря още веднъж и Ви пожелавам успех!
— Luchesar • T/C 12:49, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Благодаря за кода! Ще може ли книгата да е и в Източници(със страници) и в Литература(без стр.)? Тя цялата е относно тези "странни", "недетандируеми", но важни за ЕНЕРГИЙНАТА ЕФЕКТИВНОСТ пари("ламбда"). Същите изнасят и лекции на международни конференции по ЕЕ, до кончината на проф.Митев. Има и чуждестранни автори пишещи за тези пАри. Аз засега не мога да се оплача, че се трие из публикацията ми. Опасявам се, че може да довтасат външни... "вандалчета", защото публикацията касае из основи парИте - и крипто(електричество) и казионни(петро-валути). Примерно онези от "Мазето" с голям кеф биха я изтрили. Там изтриха всичко за детандерите. И не само там. А за учебниците създадохме беседа. Там не написахме за Ленинградското дело, с което са репресирани(че си приписвали заслуги) управници от времето на Блокадата - ползвали технологията "на Вълков", с ДВ(Г), за водорода на защитните балони. Разформировали и музея на Блокадата. Да се надяваме, че покрай отричането на Вълков няма да махнат и апаратурата му от Политехническия. Въобще, детандерите са ползвани на пълна пара през Войните. Истинският сюжет на "Последния самурай" касае спирането на Япония да купува оръжия и метали от чужбина и... усвояването на детандерите за собствено производство - чистият и изобилен кислород бълва метали(и въобще). Enarei (talk) 14:53, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Благодаря!

Ще може ли да погледнеш опита за картинка в бележките при Детандер? Не искам пак да има проблеми. Ако трябва да я оставя като линк? Избягвам да качвам картинки и илюстрации тук. Базовите са си качени.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enarei (talk) 11:39, 22 септември 2019‎ (UTC)

Enarei, след като вече не сте блокиран, можете да ми пишете и просто на беседата в Уикипедия. Още по-лесно е даже да използвате {{пинг}} директно от беседата на съответната статия, за да обърнете внимание някому:

{{пинг|Iliev|Сале}} бихте ли погледнали двамата опита за картинка в бележките в статията? ~~~~

В случая се използва „Iliev“, защото това е потребителското ми име, макар да се подписвам „Luchesar“. Иначе, ще опитам да хвърля едно око, когато ми остане достатъчно време. Можете и просто да помолите всички колеги на Уикипедия:Разговори (там има даже раздел Детандер). Вероятността така някой да намери време (макар сега да са празници) е най-голяма. :)
— Luchesar • T/C 17:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Subsequent comment by Enarei from 28 September 2019‎, 13:28 (UTC) moved to bgwiki VP. — Luchesar • T/C 10:09, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Get to it

Feel free to get started. The sitenotice is at User:StevenJ81/sandbox/bgnewsheader. If you finish quickly, we can just forget about this issue with the stewards and close down.

Concerning copyvio: I'd like you at least to template obvious ones, if you think there are any. But don't do anything you're not comfortable with.

Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:16, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Steven, regarding copyvio, I'm afraid I really don't feel competent enough. My colleagues, who know the project from its beginning, think there are some very likely copyvios remaining from that time, in particular by Seraphita~bgwikinews. And it is now clear, especially from George's investigations, that the contributions in the last year are also likely not without problems. But I feel that proper identification of such problems is beyond my expertise and, in any case, would require substantially more time. Last but not least, it would indeed be probably fairest to have my rights also revoked as earlier as possible—I'm happy to help, but certainly wouldn't like to also cause needless controversies.

Anyway, I'll write again when I'm ready. I'll need probably half an hour to an hour. Thank you!
— Luchesar • T/C 19:45, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

VG. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:57, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Steven, I'm ready:

• n:bg:MediaWiki:Sitenotice has been updated (and sitenotice ID bumped);
• The main page has been reverted to the condition it had since 2011 till 18 September, and the notice was put there too;
• the sarcastic editorial on the Bulgarian News Agency has been deleted;
• the voting from 9 July has been closed;
• the ~1200 articles from that voting and the associated category have been deleted.

I think this concludes it on my part, but, of course, the Bulgarian community (and I) will be glad to help when possible further cleaning is discussed.
— Luchesar • T/C 20:45, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm just worried if Martin went to bed. But you should, too, in any case. We'll all keep an eye. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:25, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Haha, thanks, Steven! The benefits of living on a spherical planet... Though, of course, some people doubt it. :)
— Luchesar • T/C 21:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey again, and thanks for the pings and many other thanks you've given me. :-D If I see more copyvio content, do I address my concerns to you or the stewards? George Ho (talk) 04:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey, George, you did a really marvellous job that few people would have the patience, thoroughness, and attention to detail to perform properly. I suppose Steven may answer your question best, but what I think is that probably a list of identified copyvio that are still on the wiki may be compiled somewhere here (probably Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Bulgarian Wikinews/Copyright issues or Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Bulgarian Wikinews/Identified copyvio) and at some point a steward may be asked to just delete them—the wiki should now be (or very soon will be) locked with only stewards and system administrators still having access. Deleting shouldn't be too much work, as tools like Pywikibot support reading a list of pages to operate on from a file. Of course, I'd be glad to help if deeper knowledge in Bulgarian may be required (or with anything else). Thanks a lot again!
— Luchesar • T/C 08:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for the hard work and effort you've done especially for your community. George Ho (talk) 09:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@George Ho: My thanks to you in parallel to Luchesar's. That's fantastic work you've done.

I think for the moment, let's keep it a little low-key. Make it a subpage of your own userpage for the moment. How many pages are we talking about here (roughly)? After Luchesar finished with the cleanup, there were something like 440 content pages left. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, George ... are you sure enough that if you were a sysop you'd delete as a copyvio, or are you thinking you'd tag them as "probable copyvios"? I ask this because the question is what we ask the stewards to do: delete or template. Luchesar, is there a "probable copyvio" template there already? Otherwise, you can draft one on the same subpage where I originally wrote the site notice, and we can have the stewards use that if need be. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Steven, I had actually started copying n:en:Template:Copyvio when I realized that there's that problem with the different copyright notices on the wiki. I wasn't sure what should the template say and even what should be the assumed license. I suppose we could just assume that at least the contributions themselves must've been made under CC-BY 2.5, as that's what n:bg:MediaWiki:Edittools was saying, and what the default license for Wikinews seems to be, anyway. What do you think?
— Luchesar • T/C 15:45, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh, well, also... A few days ago I did some preliminary cleanup of the templates and the help info. I knew there would be more things that I had missed. Like now here, on the very Welcome page, all the social icons lead to... yes, the Russian Wikinews social accounts. Technically, my sysop rights are still not revoked and Martin hasn't yet locked the wiki for stewards only, but I'm hesitant to make corrections. Probably those icons should be just deleted. And, I don't know, the wiki may need to be searched for certain external links, but I also noticed that n:bg:Special:LinkSearch says “This special page is disabled for performance reasons.”—not sure if because of the lock or for other reasons.
— Luchesar • T/C 18:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, w:bg:User:Iliev/bgwikinews
— Luchesar • T/C 06:13, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

I've also asked my Bulgarian colleagues to add problematic content to it if they know or find such.
— Luchesar • T/C 06:54, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

@George Ho: Great work. Thank you. We'll see what they do.
Luchesar, for translating the template, definitely go with CC-BY 2.5. But as to how much to put in the template, I'm thinking to replace the part between the URL and the horizontal line with something simple like "Any project incorporating this page must rewrite it in a way that does not violate the copyright, must delete it, or must provide proof of permission to use it (as explained below)." It's not as if we have admins on hand who will "delete it if not revised in 24 hours", after all. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome, Steven. Iliev, is Meta RFC necessary to discuss ru.wn's proposal to have the remaining content transferred to ru.wn? George Ho (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

George, I guess that nobody could really stop our Russian colleagues from taking the content without even asking anybody—if they wanted to. The content is available under a free license (well, should be, anyway), and I'm not sure if there's any policy that could prohibit such transfer. I suppose they could even transfer, say, the Bulgarian village pump and just keep it at their place, though that might already be somewhat questionable, as the projects, after all, are not just some free web hosting where absolutely anything may be kept. One particular thing that I'm not quite sure of is how is the attribution supposed to be handled with such transferred content. If one would prefer variant (c) from here, and the content is transferred without the edit history, what would happen? In any case, Steven is the much more appropriate person to ask here—if this falls under anyone's authority, I guess it must be LangCom's. And since I've already pinged you, Steven, I'll finish that template tomorrow. Cheers,
— Luchesar • T/C 22:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

1. I don't think we need to (as Luchesar said above).
2. I damned well (pardon me) don't want to do it before the copyright stuff is resolved by the stewards, because I don't want to bring any attention to it that would tempt them to come take things now.

Once the copyright stuff is done, I'm going to have an archive file made, if possible with all edit history, and then people can use that as they will. StevenJ81 (talk) 23:05, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

The template is in the sandbox. “Copyright infringement” links to the enwikinews policy; the Bulgarian Wikinews don't have any appropriate page (by the way, the fact that enwikinews materials had been published in the public domain before late 2005 might also explain that discrepancy in the Bulgarian project). Was thinking of adding the same text in Bulgarian, but English is probably universal enough. The template itself does not rely on other templates (it's just a table with custom style), so I expect it to work without problems. Unlike the original, it also supports more than one URL if needed. The first one must always be supplied, as either url = or url1 =, and two more may be added with url2 = and url3 = (adding support for even more in the template is also trivial). I'll also try to have a look later in the evening at what George has added today and see if I could somehow help too.
— Luchesar • T/C 16:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

TY. I made a small copyedit, but it looks good. I think probably for the sake of good form, the top line should also be written in Bulgarian (and probably put on top), though the link to policy would still go to English Wikinews. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Steven, done. :)
— Luchesar • T/C 17:08, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

By the way, although the parameters are named “url” (I took it from enwikinews), they actually accept any type of wiki text, including external links (may be helpful with some very long and/or ugly URLs).
— Luchesar • T/C 17:19, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

@Iliev, George Ho, and StanProg: My personal opinion is that you shouldn't respond to Grigor on the deletion page. Let him have the last word. The project is now closed, and responding won't do any more than to keep the argument alive. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I really respect your opinion and absolutely understand and agree with what you say. But—I'm sorry—I also felt that I must say a few final words too. If only to explain how I see this story now, when it's over.
— Luchesar • T/C 17:55, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

BTW, still very much planning to help with my Bulgarian (if I could) in George's already fantastic work—just can't get to it, but hopefully again later this evening or tomorrow.
— Luchesar • T/C 17:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Note to both: I am always offline on the Jewish Sabbath. (For most of the year, given where I live, this approximates midnight-to-midnight UTC Saturday.) But our holiday season is coming up, and I will be offline quite a lot–starting approximately midnight Monday UTC to midnight Wednesday (48 hours). I think this issue is winding down, but don't worry if I don't answer so fast. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:10, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I am blocked on bgwiki

Is User:PSS_9 your bot? Why it blocked me out of the blue there? I was blocked because I tried to tag a self promo/out of scope page for deletion. Please unblock me asap. Masum Reza^☎ 17:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Masumrezarock100! Thank you for helping out the Bulgarian Wikipedia and sorry about the bot blocking you. The reason is that in general we don't allow non-autopatrolled users to edit other users pages due to recurrent vandalism. I've added you to the bot's whitelist, so it won't bother you again, but in general, if you find inappropriate content on other users' pages, it may be better to just inform the sysops, rather that putting templates. Again, many thanks for the help!
— Luchesar • T/C 17:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I am not gonna wait and inform a sysop when someone is spamming their userpage. If I find inappropriate content that needs deletion I will tag them without hesitating. By the way, your bot went straight to revert all of my edits after blocking me. It restored blatant vandalism, spam! It didn't even leave the image replacement edits (After I move files on Commons, I replace file names) alone! I had to revert some edits your bot had made. I talked with other SWMT members today and some of them replied they also had faced the same problem. IMO, your bot should detect global contributions count rather than local as this can reduce false positive. Good day to you, Masum Reza^☎ 20:38, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Masumrezarock100, thank you very much for your feedback and once again sorry for those problems. I'll make more changes to the bot code to reduce the false positives. There's one thing I don't understand though, and which apparently also confuses the bot. Recently, there's an increased number of obviously non-local editors who “revert” vandalism and who are not global rollbackers, sysops, or stewards. Do you know what the reason is? I mean, bgwiki isn't a small wiki to be under the SWMT scope. Of course, this help is really appreciated, but somewhat unexpected too. Thanks. P.S. I receive notifications when someone posts to RfAA and so could react even immediately if I'm at my computer and reading my mail. A speedy tag could sit there for days. Just saying. As long as you follow the local rules, do whatever you find most convenient for you.
— Luchesar • T/C 22:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the harsh tone there. I lost my temper.

Sudden increase of non-local editors who revert vandalism might be because of the recent changes in some SWMT tools. SWViewer, which is one of the tools that SWMT members use, was recently updated and now users with rollback right on one Wikimedia project (who are not GS/GR/Stewards) can also use its features. Also there are other tools as well that SWMT members use such as Global Twinkle and Tagger.js. As time goes on, the member number of SWMT increases. I am not sure why do you think bgwiki is not within SWMT scope. It and many other projects are listed at Small_Wiki_Monitoring_Team/Groups. Some users who want to patrol other wikis, add those wikis to their queue. I for one, watch some large wikis including French, Italian, Spanish and German Wikipedia.

Now the reason why some of us prefers to tag pages for deletion instead of contacting a local administrator.

1. Most of us aren't familiar with small wikis individually. So it is hard for us to find where to report vandalism, request deletion etc. In GS wikis (where Global sysop group is enabled), we prefer to contact GS instead of a local administrator.
2. Language barrier.

I hope I have clarified things for you. Again, thanks for your help and sorry about my rudeness. Masum Reza^☎ 23:20, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much again, Masumrezarock100, this information is indeed very helpful and especially important for the future development of the bot. It's now clear that my assumption of having a predictable community of editors, including the specifics of newcomers, is outdated at best (the bot is “suspicious” of new users without global rights who immediately engage actively in reverting—such users had been in the past exclusively vandals—sadly, the bot is not yet intelligent enough to determine reliably if the revert itself is justified, but I'm working on that too). And you were completely justified in your frustration and resentment—seeing how we are all volunteers, I also know too well how precious our time is. Been through such things myself with bot-edits from other users, so I totally understand your feelings—no need to apologize for that! Well, just sometimes I kinda feel that with each passing year the atmosphere in the projects is getting more and more tense... But maybe it's just me. :)

Anyway, really appreciate your time and help! All the best,
— Luchesar • T/C 23:38, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Wrapping up deletion of bg Wikinews

@George Ho: Nothing really ever happened with the cleanup activity, did it? So I guess at this point we ought to proceed with a full deletion. Any disagreement? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

StevenJ81, totally fine by me. :)
— Luchesar • T/C 16:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Since stewards haven't done much as of date, I would oppose giving the content to ru.WN. But I have no objections to full deletion without transfer. George Ho (talk) 20:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Good point, George. StevenJ81, by the way, if it's possible to leave n:bg:Уикиновини:Разговори and n:bg:Уикиновини:Гласуване accessible together with their histories, this would prevent breaking the plenitude of links to them in the discussions on the project fate here. But I'm not sure if that's really that important now, as those events get more and more distant. And the last revisions of the pages are on archive.org (and in the dumps) if something would so badly require cross-checking.
— Luchesar • T/C 22:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)