User talk:Trijnstel/Archive/2011

This is an archive of User talk:Trijnstel

Deletion request

Hi! Just wanted to ask you if you remember where the link here was supposed to point to? It seems the bot has some difficulties with right-to-left text, resulting in confusingly broken links. Also, good luck in your RfA :) Jafeluv 15:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jafeluv. It was supposed to point to دستور مصري مقترح, but Hoo man already deleted it on 13.38 so the request isn't necessary anymore. Kind regards, Trijnstel 15:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

nlwiki block question

Hey Trijnstel, a user by the name of Juvarra was on the blacklist and spamming the #cvn-commons channel by making lots of constructive edits, so I removed that user from the global blacklist. I also checked their global contribs, and it doesn't appear that they've done anything wrong on the three other wikis that they have edits on.

I ask you about this because the user was indef. blocked at nlwiki for sockpuppetry, and I was wondering if you knew anything about the nature of why the user was blocked/history of cross-wiki abuse, etc, or if you'd be able to find such things out. I'd hate to remove a troll from the blacklist, but I'm not seeing that from that account right now.

Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 03:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ajraddatz. Sure I can tell you something about Juvarra and its history. Juvarra has extreme right views and is harming the neutrality of the articles by expressing this POV. Besides this he was also involved in editwars and misused sockpuppets (proven by several CU's) to continue with this vandalism. He got in November 2010 a one time way out, but he continued with new sockpuppets. See also this file in English on nl.wiki. Therefore you will understand my concerns about him and his edits. I prefer him on the global blacklist to see what he's doing. Of course he does some good things, but most of the time he doesn't. Is this enough explanation for you? :-) Kind regards, Trijnstel 17:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

That is definitely a good reason. Thanks for letting me know, I've re-added that user onto the blacklist. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

YL

Hoi Trijnstel, je stelde een aantal vragen op http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verzoekpagina_voor_moderatoren/Sokpoppen#Nieuw_IP-adres_Yuri_Landman Waarom blijf je hier dan doorgaan met het aanmaken van accounts en het bewerken en aanmaken van artikelen? En waarom heb je in het verleden dan niet gebruik gemaakt van de ontsnappingsclausule toen het kon? (nu kan het niet meer nee) Want met het doorgaan blijf je wel mensen flink bezighouden zo... Trijnstel overleg 24 mrt 2011 13:04 (CET)

Omdat ik in blokkade sta en niet kan reageren, hier een antwoord in de hoop dat dat je eea duidelijk maakt. Ik blijf doorgaan met het aanmaken van accounts, omdat ik niet op een andere wijze kan bijdragen sinds de OT. Er wordt mij geen oplossing aangeboden, dus is er geen reden voor me om dat niet te doen, totdat er iemand met een logisch voorstel komt. Op geen enkele andere wikipedia heb ik dit probleem, enkel op NL, in hoofdzaak met MM vanwege haar prominente aanwezigheid.

De ontsnappingsclausule volgen hield onder andere in dat ik een paspoort-kopie moest opsturen (terwijl het duidelijk was wie ik was omdat ik in de hoofdnaamruimte sta). MM gaf per mail aan dat daar niet vanaf geweken kon worden. Ik vond dat element in het verzoek onnozel en overbodig in mijn specifieke geval (je weet immers wie ik ben) en ik twijfel aan de legitimiteit van zo'n verzoek. Enkel douane/politie/conducteurs wil ik zo'n document afgeven, niet een online forum met een ondoorzichtige hierarchie waarbij niemand een duidelijke aansprakelijkheid heeft of mij een garantie wil afgeven dat ze netjes met mijn prive-gegevens omgaan.

Ik blijf mensen inderdaad bezighouden en dat betreurt me. Ik wacht nog altijd op een toenadering van Wikipedia. Ik heb tientallen malen getracht om een overleg/mediation traject in te gaan. Ze geven gewoonweg geen antwoord. Mij lijkt de meest logische oplossing dat ik onder toezicht in een testperiode edits mag doen, goedgekeurd door de moderator, zodat duidelijk wordt dat er weliswaar een COI is, maar dat ik niet primair malafide ben tov Wikipedia. Hoe om te gaan met die COI zonder dat dit problemen geeft is uiteraard iets wat vooraf besproken moet worden met die moderator. 94.210.224.141 07:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Dag Yuri. Ik waardeer het dat je zo'n uitgebreid antwoord hebt kunnen geven op mijn vragen, maar ik heb toch nog wel enkele op- en aanmerkingen. Laat ik eerst even ingaan op wat jij beweert. "Ik blijf doorgaan met het aanmaken van accounts, omdat ik niet op een andere wijze kan bijdragen sinds de OT." - Denk je niet dat daar een bepaalde reden voor is? Je bent geblokkeerd vanwege vandalisme en misbruik van sokpoppen. Dan is het niet de bedoeling dat je door blijft gaan met bijdragen, want dat moet hiermee juist voorkomen worden. "Er wordt mij geen oplossing aangeboden (...)." - Dat is niet waar, want er zijn je in het verleden meermalen oplossingen aangeboden. Alleen beweerde je mee te willen werken om het vervolgens niet te doen. Daarom ben ik van mening dat je je kans gehad hebt en dat het ook volledig je eigen schuld is. "Op geen enkele andere wikipedia heb ik dit probleem, enkel op NL, in hoofdzaak met MM vanwege haar prominente aanwezigheid." - Dit is ook niet waar; recent zijn alle accounts van je globaal gelockt en kun je dan ook nergens meer ingelogd bijdragen met die accounts. Daarnaast vind ik het niet netjes van je om haar de schuld te geven. Per slot van rekening heb je dit volledig aan jezelf te danken. Dan nog even over de ontsnappingsclausule. De belangrijkste reden dat die ooit ingevoerd is, is om mensen die geblokkeerd zijn wegens sokpopmisbruik de kans te geven om opnieuw te beginnen. Daarvoor moet je inderdaad een kopie van je paspoort of id-kaart opsturen, maar dit is met reden. Ik geloof best dat je bent wie je zegt te zijn, maar juist omdát het een drempel is (je geeft toch wat van je privacy prijs) kunnen wij er wat zekerder van zijn dat zo'n persoon vanaf heden wel goed bij zal gaan dragen. Dat je daar niet aan mee wilt doen, prima, maar dan kun je van ons ook niet verwachten dat wij je als een uitzondering beschouwen door tóch een apart begeleidingstraject in te gaan. Nomgaals, je hebt je kans gehad en ik vind niet dat je toenadering mag verwachten van wie dan ook van Wikipedia. Ik ben niet van plan om hier nog verder op in te gaan en raad je sterk aan om te stoppen met je pogingen om op Wikipedia bij te dragen. Het gaat gewoon niet meer. Trijnstel 17:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Comment See the reply of Yuri here which he later that day (25 March 2011) self-reverted, see here. Trijnstel 17:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

;)

Edit conflict Anyway, thanks for your help. mickit 20:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

• Lol, sorry, I thought you were finished an had forgotten to add the {none}-templates. ;-) Trijnstel 20:43, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Never mind :) Do you know why the counter shows that there are three requests for deletion? I see only two. mickit 20:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Yes, you can see here three nominations. Template:Global sysops-status is the third one, although not mentioned on the deletionpages. Trijnstel 20:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Correction, it wás mentioned (now archived by you), but Fr33kman decided to keep it (but may have forgotten to remove the template). Trijnstel 20:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
      • Oh, now everything is clear :) BTW, about this voting: so far, so good :) mickit 21:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Gefeliciteerd, beste moderator!

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | Nederlands | português | Türkçe | русский | العربية | Tiếng Việt | edit

Om Meta op te poetsen :)

Een welkomstgeschenk voor onze nieuwe moderator van jouw collega's... (ons budget is kleiner dan dat van Commons)

Trijnstel/Archive, gefeliciteerd! Jij hebt nu de moderatorrechten op Meta.

Maak alsjeblieft even tijd voor het lezen van de Meta:Administrators-pagina en voor de door de volglijst verbonden pagina's (vooral Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat en Meta:Requests for deletion, maar ook Talk:Spam blacklist en Talk:Interwiki map), voordat je begint met paginaverwijderingen, accountblokkades of paginabeveiligingen. Een groot deel van de bewerkingen van een moderator kan door andere moderatoren ongedaan worden gemaakt, behalve het samenvoegen van de artikelgeschiedenis, want dat moet behandeld worden met speciale aandacht.

Een tip: Voeg deze pagina Meta:Administrators' discussion index toe aan je volglijst, het laat de laatste activiteiten zien rond vele belangrijke pagina's.

Voel je vrij om op IRC te komen: #wikimedia-admin @ irc.freenode.net. Misschien vind je de Moderatorschapsgids handig om te gaan lezen, ookal gaat het niet altijd hetzelfde op Meta.

Controleer alsjeblieft ook of je op deze lijsten staat: Meta:Administrators#List_of_administrators en Template:List of administrators.

Alex Pereira ^falaê 14:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for giving me sysoprights on Meta, Alex, and thanks to all for your trust. :-) Trijnstel 15:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ook een dikke proficiat van mij, en je zwabber staat al klaar ;) Kthoelen 16:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Hahahaha, dank je wel! Trijnstel 16:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! mickit 21:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks my dear colleague! Trijnstel 21:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I2

Hi Trijnstel, have you noticed that the I2 speedy criterion only applies to orphaned files? For example, File:Ford Foundation.png still has image links in the mainspace. Images that are still in use should generally go through WM:RFD instead. Regards, Jafeluv 12:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, no, I did not notice that. Thanks for correcting me. I will restore the non-orphaned files and nominate them for deletion on the normal way. Greets, Trijnstel 12:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

We should probably get rid of some of the most orphaned images. However, it's quite a backlog and is going to take some time just filtering through all the images actually located on Meta. Here's a few links to get started though: Category:Images with unknown license, Special:UnusedFiles and http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/OrphanImages.php?wikifam=meta.wikimedia.org&img_user_text=&filter=all&order=img_timestamp&max=100&format=html. I do think we should be a bit more careful about deleting files though. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I will filter the orphaned images the next weeks, when I have the time for it, as good as I can. And again, I'm sorry. I made a stupid mistake (which I usually don't make, so I don't know why I did it now) and I promise I won't do it again. Greets, Trijnstel 20:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey, no harm, no foul. Thanks for paying attention to it though. :) :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 21:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry and thanks

A Neapolitan pizza for your work .. :-)

Many thanks for updating the list of global sysops. And very sorry, I forgot to inform you (you were lost in the 20+ tabs of Firfox I think.). But hey, see what I have brought to you! :P — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 03:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL. Thanks for the delicious pizza and you're welcome of course! Greets, Trijnstel 11:54, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Renaming

Hello! According to this. My username has been changed at my home pl Wiki, so I wanted to move my userpage into present name. It was not renaming, but only moving. With all respect, Adonis 13:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Adonis. I see that your account was indeed renamed from Patryk91 to Adonis on plwiki. There's only one thing: those changes doesn't work out for all wiki's. You should ask for renaming on every single wiki where you edited. Here you can see a list of the wiki's where your former account is active and here is a list of your new account. Please note that all the "red ones" are other users (of Adonis). You can request for renaming on every wiki (I can help you if you need help). Meta:Changing username is only for Meta and Steward requests/Username changes is for wiki's without active bureaucrats. Unfortunately you're not able complete the SUL account of Adonis, because of several other users who are sharing the same name as you. It will get difficult for you, I'm afraid. (Btw, you really have advantages of one name on all wiki's - which you had as Patryk91...) Please give me a sign if you need help. Otherwise I wish you good luck and have a nice day/night. Greets, Trijnstel 22:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help. I'm requesting on wikis and it will take a pice of time, so I will message you when I finish it. Thank you again, Adonis 07:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, than I'll hear from you. Greets, Trijnstel 22:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Solomanno1

Hi there. I got an unblock request in email from the above editor. Looks like he was blocked indef for spamming. Having said that, it looks like he's a new editor who's simply confused and probably needs some direction as to what Meta is for. Just FYI - maybe you might want to review/reduce your block? - Alison ^❤ 05:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, I don't know. Meta wasn't the only place where he spammed links. He's also blocked on enwiki, commonswiki and testwiki (see here) and he's globally locked (and here). Some edits were just vandalism, see for example this edit on enwiki and this edit on commonswiki. Wikipedia is not a game. I wouldn't recommend an unblock. Greets, Trijnstel 19:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Flood flag

Thanks for the reminder :) Ill remove now. Jseddon (WMF) 16:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. Trijnstel 18:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

User:SMESH link

This is neither spam nor commercial, so why did you remove this link to my homepage? it's in every wikimedia project I'm registrated. - SMESH 08:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Because it's not allowed to link to other sites with no connection with Wikimedia. And that applies to all Wikimedia projects. Trijnstel 13:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

For this, I gave to him (Tenan) an IP block exemption on the es-wiki after he requested to me by mail, but without the ip info I cannot ask here for a global unlock. Seems to be a proxy from zscaler, but not an open proxy. How can I ask for unblock? Thanks! --RoyFocker 15:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi RoyFocker. You're welcome. You can request a global unlock on Steward requests/Global#Requests for global (un)block. If that won't work (because the IP appears to be an open proxy), you can request a global IP block exempt for Tenan on Steward requests/Global permissions#Requests for global IP block exemption. Hope that helps. Good luck! Kind regards, Trijnstel 16:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for Tenan

Thank you very much for your help and your work in wikipedia! Yours,--Tenan 17:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. :-) Trijnstel 17:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks ;)

I forgot that. --თოგო ^(D) 10:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks for helping the community here as admin and crat. Please request it again if you have more time. :-) Trijnstel 10:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Re:

Well, the next step is the World ^^ --Vituzzu 22:22, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

For me? You? Or...? ;-) Trijnstel 22:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but being Italian I *must* answer ...for us ;p --Vituzzu 23:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiLinkBot

hello, you had blocked this bot, I just unblocked it, if there is any reason please let me know Mardetanha ^talk 21:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Already discussed on IRC. Thanks for informing me though. Trijnstel 21:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Spam blacklist

Just a quick note: I reverted this edit of your on Talk:Spam blacklist. My first report is an extension of essayhelppros.com as Abd didn't find all the spam and should be considered as one request. The second one (digrii.com) is also only one report, to which the list of spammers belongs. It was a copy/paste from en.wp, where {{LinkSummary}} looks like this.

The essay mill stuff is pretty uncontroversial, it's an internet-wide spam problem. MER-C 13:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see. That's OK, of course. Sorry for "fixing" your edit. Regards, Trijnstel 19:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion on si.wiki

pls verify before delete. -- බිඟුවා ^{සාකච්ඡාව} 11:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

About what page are you talking? Assembly of god ganemulla is the last page I deleted on si.wikipedia (see here). Trijnstel 11:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I think you meant this. I only deleted three pages there. Trijnstel 13:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

/16 Range block

Are you sure blocking 65,000 IPs for two weeks is really necessary? /16 range blocks should rarely be used and only for very short periods as far as I know. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, I don't know what else I could do to stop him. Please take a look at this file: Vandalism reports#Alberto Emilio Lopez Viñals. He created lots of accounts and uses highly dynamic IPs. With most accounts and IPs he vandalises user and user talk pages from everyone who tries to stop him. On ia.wikipedia an abuse filter was created (request on Bugzilla) to stop all the edits from the various ranges, but that won't prevent him to create (more) accounts. I think only a (global) block will prevent him from contributing for a while, but it's just a temporary solution I'm afraid. Although feel free to change the block if you think that's better. I only hope he'll stop after that (but I doubt it). Kind regards, Trijnstel 16:30, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

FYI, I've thought about it and I've changed the blocks of all ranges to three days instead of two weeks. Trijnstel 16:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

(ec) In the event of an emergency (& I agree this was close) I have no issues with a /16 block but two weeks blocking of 65,000 IPs who might contribute for one idiot vandal is something I would not do. I'd be somewhat concerned about the /17 ones too (each blocking 32,000 IPs). Is it not possible to focus the range better? Two weeks on a project like Meta which attracts edits for a wide range of people seems a lot. While I realise it is not a hard block there are quite a lot of users on that range which suggests it is used positively (I haven't looked at the /17 ranges). --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

after ec - ok. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Also :)

Thanks for catching the spammers - you missed one but I got it and the underlying IP (previously abused) is reblocked. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. :-) And thanks to you for blocking the remaining account and underlying IP (sorry for this very late answer; I was away yesterday evening). Trijnstel 11:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks my brain is not quite working properly today. :-) fr33kman 23:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! Trijnstel 09:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: WikiConference India 2011/Submissions

Deleted submissions? I never deleted any :S If there are any deleted one i have nothing to do with that (even that i had desires to press the button in some), but if some of the guys from India request the deletion, i think might stay deleted. After all, they are in charge ;)

Best regards, Béria Lima ^msg 18:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't say *you* deleted them. Others deleted some submissions (including myself), probably thinking they were out of scope or having no meaningful content. I restored all pages I deleted and restored some others too. But there were also almost empty submissions, deleted by others (I know, it's difficult). Should I restore them too or not? Trijnstel 18:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Btw, no one from Wikimedia India requested the deletions. Trijnstel 18:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I will look at them and tell you something after :D Béria Lima ^msg 19:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Trijnstel 19:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Edition on my discussion page at pt.wikipedia.org

Hello Trijnstel. I've read your explanation. It would had been nicer if you had explained it at summary. Thanks anyway. Best regards, --Georgez 13:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

You're right. I will do that in the future. Kind regards, Trijnstel 13:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

About the Brox RfC

That RfC for Brox is indeed a mistake. If Brox is being disruptive elsewhere, it will come out. However, I've spent, now about two days researching this. The NL wiki behavior of Dendrolo was indeed a problem. I'd have blocked. But only for 24 hours. At first. The whole thing got more complicated with the sock puppetry claims. Maybe he was socking and maybe not. But Dendrolo was quite embarrassing for Brox. The point, though, is that it's almost always a bad idea to attempt to humiliate users elsewhere, and MoiraMoira going around to all those wikis with her notice about nl.wiki was a Very Bad Idea. That's cross-wiki disruption! Coming here to try to get a lock, after threatening him, which she did, I hope you looked at that diff!, and then filing the RfC with no more evidence than was in the lock request, same text, just copying the claims, is "forum shopping." Disapproved.

Dendrolo was disruptive. One day of disruption, though, not even a hundred edits, worth a 24 hour block and some close watching. Not massive cross-wiki attack! If he was socking there to block evade, okay, indef. But that's completely unclear, and did not involve Brox or Dendrolo, not clearly. Look, I *really* don't want to second-guess admins at a local wiki. It's when stuff comes here that it concerns me.

Yes, I write a lot. But I did do days of research and I could write much more. I'm cutting most of it out. Bottom line: if MoiraMoira is your friend, a kind word from you may do much more good than warnings from me. I suspect she was upset because Dendrolo refused to listen to her, I can understand that. But this stuff shouldn't come up to meta. I'd recommend she withdraw the RfC, close it, if we all support that, it's not too late. Otherwise it may turn to her behavior, which was here as well as cross-wiki. Thanks for considering this. --Abd 21:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Abd. MoiraMoira is on a holiday atm and can't respond for two more weeks. I suggest you leave this alone for now, because it's unfair when you are saying all these things about what she said while she cannot respond. I won't change blocks and ask MoiraMoira to leave a reply here when she's back. I shall not inform her now, because I don't want to ruin her vacation. Unlike you, I didn't do much research about Brox/Dendrolo and I don't know much about the case. So this is the last thing I said about it. You know all the links to the files and checkusers and I will await the respons of a neutral steward. Kind regards, Trijnstel 22:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I can understand. I have no plan to pursue this, but the RfC remaining open can draw flies, and it could become impossible to close. I don't see any blocks you need to change, nor did I suggest changes. This is entirely up to NL wiki. I've made only a general suggestion about block length, because immediate indef blocks encourage users to sock! If it's a short block, they are much more likely to wait it out, and possibly cool off!

Okay, a specific suggestion. Close the RfC temporarily, saying that MoiraMoira is on vacation and it seems premature. If she wants to reopen it when she comes back, that would be up to her. Just an idea. Thanks for your consideration.--Abd 22:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

[1]. I'd deliberately not moved it to closed, because the close is possibly "temporary," but it's great that you indicated your acceptance of my closure. Thanks. --Abd 00:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI, I moved the request to the "closed" section, because you temporary closed it and I didn't want it to be forgotten. MoiraMoira is (as she started the RFC) still free to re-open the request when she's back from her holiday. So this has nothing to do with my personal (dis)agreement of it. Kind regards, Trijnstel 18:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiThanks

I just noticed your rename request on my behalf. I would like to thank you for this. SUL rename is indeed a long and painful process and people like you make it more bearable. Your efforts are much appreciated, keep up the good work! Dankjewel! -- Cat ^chi? 12:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for all the nice words and you're welcome of course! Trijnstel 16:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Guidance

hello, excuse me. I have question about change time and date. we wanted change time and date in ckb.wikipedia(for example: "٢٣ ئاب ٢٠١١" to "٢٣ی ئابی ٢٠١١" ). But we do not know where to apply.Merkhas 14:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I've asked others and they said you have to go to Bugzilla. Please file a request there and wait for a reply of the developers. Kind regards, Trijnstel 17:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

IRC

Hoi Trijnstel, Hoe lang blijf ik op IRC geblokkeerd? Groet, Tjako 23:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Voor hoe lang het nodig is. Jouw blokkade op nlwiki loopt af op 19 oktober 2011 en ik denk dat de blokkade op de chat er niet veel eerder afgehaald zal worden. Overigens is dit niet alleen mijn beslissing, mocht je dat denken. Ik heb overlegd met de andere operators en die waren dezelfde mening toegedaan. Groet, Trijnstel 10:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Je wordt bedankt. :( Tjako 10:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Het is anders niet mijn schuld dat je geblokkeerd bent... Trijnstel 16:56, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Ook niet (niet bewezen!) de mijne.... Maar goed, ik zit m'n "STRAF" wel uit... Tjako 21:33, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Er zit weinig anders op vrees ik. En trouwens, je bent alleen geband in #wikipedia-nl. De rest van de kanalen kun je naar mijn weten wel gewoon in. Trijnstel 22:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Ik blijf alleen zitten met het probleem dat er met 2 maten wordt gemeten.... Heb jij jouw privacyschending van Amarant zelf al teruggdraaid? Tjako 22:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ha, laat me niet lachen. Wil je nu écht beweren dat dit privacyschending is? Laat ik dan eens even uitleggen wat ik privacyschending precies inhoudt. Dat betekent dat je bewust de privacy van iemand schendt door het noemen van diens volledige naam, leeftijd, adresinformatie et cetera zonder dat diegene daar om gevraagd heeft. Die bron die ik plaatste bij Amarant verwijst naar de tekst van een artikel wat gestaan heeft in een computerblad jaren geleden. Ze heeft dus zelf toestemming gegeven voor die informatie en bovendien wordt er niets vrijgegeven. Jij plaatste echter meermaals een link naar een weblog waar zonder toestemming van RJB zijn persoonlijke gegevens te lezen waren. Dat is iets heel anders. Ook nu de website niet meer in de lucht is, blijf ik dit zeer ernstig vinden. Trijnstel 22:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

We denken er blijkbaar anders over. Maar toch zou IK in jouw geval zeker als actief-wikipediaan-op-zoveel-wikisites NOOIT Amarant's leeftijd en geslacht via zo'n externe link publiceren. OOK dat is (als je jouw redenatie volgt over mijn vermeende 'privacyschending' ingeval RJB) privacyinformatie, waar niemand om vroeg, die je dan per ongeluk herpubliceert door een externe link. Wellicht was je je daar toen niet van bewust, net als ik me er toen niet van bewust was dat RJB eventueel viavia aan zijn RL naam, voormalige politieke functie en voormalige woonplaats was te linken doordat toevallig een commentator op dat blog - waaraan ik om volledig andere redenen refereerde - iets schreef waaruit wellicht een relatie gelegd kon worden. Overigens bleek mij (tot mijn grote schrik!) dat juist RJB zelf zijn privacy schond door te roepen dat dat privacyschending zou zijn. Immers gaf hij daarmee ook de juistheid van die mogelijke relatie toe. (Dezelfde RJB die wel zijn volledige naam heeft geregistreerd in zijn wikipedia-emailfunctie -hoe zot kan men handelen?, en die aan zelfpromo deed door <information that indirectly violates privacy has been removed>....) Ik zie dus prinicpieel geen enkel verschil tussen JOUW vermeende 'privacyschending' en MIJN vermeende 'privacyschending. Alleen word IK ervoor "gestraft" en worden mijn overlegmogelijkheden me ontnomen en jij komt er uiteraard mee weg. Net als Robotje, die notabene een handleiding gaf om iemands privacy lekker makkelijk op het internet te kunnen opsporen overigens... Maar goed, ik maak me er niet meer echt kwaad om... maar vind wel dat mij elke kans ontnomen is me te kunnen verdedigen tegen aantijgingen die men mij meent te moeten voorschotelen. Kwalijke zaak, dat de arbcom deze zaken niet heeft willen onderzoeken. Verder niets persoonlijks tegen jou, maar de zuiverheid van e.e.a. is erg ver te zoeken, en ik beschouw mijn imho volledig onterechte blokkades nog steeds als een van de grootste aanfluitingen voor de dienstdoende mods van toen op het project! Desalniettemin: vriendeljke groet, Tjako 22:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

p.s. Toen ik linkte naar dat blog stonden er m.i. geen privacyschendende of linkbare gegevens op die site. Maar goed, de discussie verder heeft weinig zin. Zinloze blokkades. Puur straf voor een niet begane overtreding.Tjako 23:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Vertalingen van statements kandidaat-stewards

Hoi Trijnstel, ik heb gisteren en eergisteren vier statements voor de aankomende steward-verkiezingen vertaald naar het Nederlands: Ezarate, Mys 721tx, Quadell en Teles. Zou jij die vertalingen willen nalezen? Met name bij die van Teles heb ik het gevoel dat die nogal haperend en onduidelijk is... Met vriendelijke groet, Mathonius 11:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Is goed. Ik zal er vanavond even naar gaan kijken. :-) Met vriendelijke groet, Trijnstel 16:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for my mistype

I must apologize to you for my mistype of your name... I'm so sorry. I hope you will be a good steward. Kind ragards.--akasen 13:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That's Ok. :-) And we'll see. I'm not a steward yet; I have to wait for the votes. Thanks for your translation though! It's really appreciated. Trijnstel 13:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

hi

hi.How are you.I need your help.I have a few questions.

1. We users azarbayjan iran turk want language .We request a wiki--E THP 09:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

What kind of help do you want from me? Here you can request a complete new project and here you can request new language wikis of existing projects. Perhaps this was what you meant? If it's not, please let me know. I would love to help you, but of course I need to know what you expect from me. ;-) Kind regards, Trijnstel 20:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I thank you very much.Your help was excellent.Good luck.

you can help create new wiki. In the coming days/Dear Friend/؟ --E THP 07:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Casino spammer

Hoi Trijnstel, bedankt voor de hulp op xh.wikipedia. De casino-spammer heeft met een aantal andere accounts (allemaal non-sul) op andere kleine wiki's toegeslagen, zie dit overzicht (onder het kopje "Casino spammer"). Zou je daarnaar willen kijken? Met vriendelijke groet, Mathonius 15:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hoi Mathonius. Dank je wel voor het overzicht! Ik heb alle pagina's die jij vermeld had verwijderd en tevens de accounts lokaal geblokt. De accounts Elipe xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • ST • IP info • WHOIS • robtex • gblock • glist • abuselog • bullseye, Entti xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • ST • IP info • WHOIS • robtex • gblock • glist • abuselog • bullseye en Intta xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • ST • IP info • WHOIS • robtex • gblock • glist • abuselog • bullseye waren alledrie in het verleden al op een ander project aangemaakt en zijn dus non-SUL. Ik denk dat Markviduk86 xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • ST • IP info • WHOIS • robtex • gblock • glist • abuselog • bullseye niet bij dit groepje hoort. Qua naam past hij niet in het rijtje, maar hij maakt ook reclame voor een heel ander product: een winkel waar je allerlei spullen kunt kopen voor in de bed- en badkamer. Terwijl de andere drie reclame maken voor een casino, verzekeringen enzovoorts. We moeten het voorlopig maar in de gaten houden en als het echt de spuigaten uitloopt een checkuser aanvragen (kan wmb nu ook al wel). Dan kan de vandaal definitief tenminste gestopt worden. Met vriendelijke groet, Trijnstel 15:29, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Goed idee! Heel veel dank voor je input en alle hulp. Ik zag Markviduk86 in #cvn-sw^connect door jou geblokt worden en vermeldde 'm daarom in 't overzicht met een vraagteken. Entti had (geloof ik) eerder ook al gespamd op zijn/haar homewiki. Ik zal zodadelijk een apart overzicht aanmaken op meta, waarbij ik Mark weg zal laten , en vervolgens de nodige CU-verzoeken indienen. Mvg, Mathonius 15:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Is goed. Ik denk dat er namelijk nog wel meer losse accounts (met bijbehorende pagina's) rondzwerven. Trijnstel 15:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

NGC 488x

Hello! I may miss some point or be unaware of other activities of that proxy user, but what was the exact reason for this reversion and a series of same edits crosswiki, where the correction looks accurate? Periodically he seems to reappear in ukwiki with making equivocal changes to astronomy articles, so I'd like to know when his edits are subject to reverting. Thank you. --Microcell 20:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Microcell. Hmm... I guess you're right. Though my opinion is that this article on dewiki (NGC 4889 instead of NGC 4884) has the wrong name. (After some research) I see now that on 26 September Rbrausse changed NGC 4884 in a redirect to NGC 4889 (see here and here). I don't know what's correct now... Kind regards, Trijnstel 20:58, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Comment See for more information about this user the following file on dewiki: de:Benutzer:Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5/Astronomietroll. Trijnstel 19:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

My Request

Hi Trijnstel. Since I haven't replyed yet, I do it now. First of all, excuse me if I didn't talk about my blocks on .it Wikipedia. Yes, it's true that until last year I made some mistakes on .it, but as you can see, now I'm changed. Now maybe you cannot understand why and I don't want the rollback flag anymore, but I want to tell you, thay you should considerate my positive edits as well. We cannot grant the global rollback flag to a sockpuppeter; well, I'm not a sockpuppet and on the other hand, if I already had the local flag on other wikis, maybe I'm useful now. Regards, --Frigotoni ...i'm here; 12:33, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

So you're saying "I'm not a sockpuppet"; than why were you blocked on it-wiki for sockpuppetry (block log)? Kind regards, Trijnstel 21:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I removed rights templates on a page and then created an edit war, more than one times. But we are talking about one year ago, and it's from January 2010 that I'm active as a patroller. Anyway, I know, that I have to recapture the trust from Italian's community.--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 11:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Not just the Italian community; also the international users I'm afraid... Regards, Trijnstel 13:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so... Why do you think that in some wikis I had already the tool? And What ought to I do in your opinion?--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 16:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Good luck...

Congratulations!

---

Based on the results of the vote, according to the percentage obtained, ensure that you have been elected as a steward. Hopefully you can carry out the mandate of the international community with the wise and prudent.

Personally I am very pleased and proud with the results you achieve. Let us work to advance the Wikimedia Foundation. Regards. Wagino 20100516 00:56, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for these nice words. I'll do my best and hopefully that means I'm doing well. ;-) Kind regards, Trijnstel 06:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations and welcome new steward!

Get ready to be vandalized!

Welcome to the team. As you already know great access come with great responsibilities, so lets talk about some of the places you should have access but you may not have yet (yes, that means you need to ask someone). Being a new steward myself, I also do not know all of them or what I know might be wrong. This is just a personal congratulation message from me to you and the purpose is to introduce (yet again, yes!) with my damn good helping intention and irritating sense of humor!

You all have been added to steward list and chart here on Meta by me (please check if I have screwed myself there). You are eligible to make your intrusion to private IRC channels #wikimedia-checkuser and #wikimedia-privacy. You should have the access already, but if you do not have it yet please bother Barras or DerHexer for your bit (and aye, you should have a registered nickname with a cloak for that). You also have the right to have an account on some private wikis like steward wiki and checkuser wiki (to vandalize of course). Pardon me Your Majesty, but I have no damn idea about who to ask for access in these wikis, ask an existing steward instead. And last but not least, checkuser-l (yell at Mardetanha or Matanya for access) and stewards-l (pay Dungodung for the access) are two private mailing lists that you should have access to screw each other privately.

Thank you very much for being patient!
Pardon me in case you already know all of these!

Lets shut up and abuse our gumdrop buttons!

An open call from Tanvir the no0b stew!
Thursday, 40th week of the Anno Domini 2011, 20:15
Do not think you have been promoted yesterday, actually it is the correct standard time in Papeete! o.O

Because of my troublesome flash memory, I forgot to tell you that I have shoved you in StewardBot's brain, but not in its mouth so you might not get the ping, but it will remember you as a steward. To get the pings with !steward and @steward you have to pay Dungodung again (it is a shame I know)! — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 07:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tanvir! Thanks for being so kind for welcoming me. Congratulations to you as well of course. The above information is almost complete as you seems to have forgotten the very private ##stew^connect-channel. Good luck with the new possibilities, have a nice day and take care! Kind regards, Trijnstel 07:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I did not forget and you just violated a law. The name of that channel is also secret! !steward Oversight and lock + hid Trijnstel! — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 07:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The name of the channel isn't secret at all, as it's mentioned on List of communications channels. Trijnstel 17:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

New steward!

I congratulate you! --►Safir yüzüklü Cekli^mesaj 08:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for these congratulations. Regards, Trijnstel 12:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

• Congrats. It takes a lot to become a Steward. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 16:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Trijnstel 17:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Alexa

Hello Trijnstel, I just reverted your edit on the page Wikipedia.org is more popular than... The weekly average is now 5, but the 3 month average is still 6 (was 7 for quite some time) so there was no new milestone for the 3 month average. Number 5 on the 3 month average is still the Chinese site Baidu.com. Best Regards, Robotje 08:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't notice the phrase "3 month average". Of course that's Ok, thanks for correcting me. Kind regards, Trijnstel 08:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, let's hope one day Wikipedia really reaches the number 5 position for the 3 month average. We now have a number 5 position on a weekly basis but maybe that is caused by the National Day Golden Week holiday in China (number 5, Baidu.com, is a Chinese site). - Robotje 10:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, let's hope so. I wondered indeed about the fifth place of Baidu.com; I don't even know this website. Trijnstel 12:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

End dates

Just an fyi, the policy says: "Requests should be listed here for at least seven days". On most Wikis, more than 10 days is required for sensitive privileges, including OS and CU. The procedure says to "Please add a minimum ending date to the election" but the actual entry is what you put. It doesn't say minimum on it. I find that a little odd. Perhaps the word minimum should be included to be consistent? I don't know. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, good point. I don't know that either. I compared this RfOS with older requests, but none of them had an end date on it (imo it's useful though). Anyway, feel free to revert me if you disagree. I don't have patent on everything I do and I'm not always right either (it would be nice if I were btw). ;-) Kind regards, Trijnstel 22:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

One more thing though. I chose for a period of 7 days because of two things: 1) I read about a regular RfA the following "Please add a minimum ending date to the election, allowing a full 7 day period from the first timestamp: " and 2) for a RfOS "Oversight: please read the Oversight policy and add your request below under the oversight section, in the same way as an admin request." (source: Meta:Requests for adminship). That's why I assumed there is a same period of "voting" for a RfOS as for a RfA. Kind regards, Trijnstel 22:38, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You did 100% the correct thing - the instructions for OS say to follow the instructions for admin. I just think it is odd how the instructions seem a little inconsistent. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 22:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You're right. It's odd indeed... Trijnstel 23:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You may have noticed, the minimum ending date was something that was not respected and I just don't understand why people are so casual about letting all of these rules be broken when regarding a very sensitive bit. Any other small Wiki would have been scrutinized and told to wait longer, get more people, not count the canvassed votes, etc. What is going on with Meta lately? I've worked on this project for over 2 years and it wasn't until this summer that so many problems have been popping up everywhere. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. I was surprised as well when I saw the RfOS was closed a couple of hours early. This would have never happened on nlwiki (my homewiki), because everyone waits until the last minute of the voting. I'm used to early closing of requests for GR and GS, but there were rules created that they shouldn't be closed after respectively 5 and 14 days. To be honest I hope this early closing of now is just one incident and that it won't happen again. Kind regards, Trijnstel 19:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Sigh. I'm more worried about the 25-30 minimum votes. This gives more justification to have only Stewards as local OS and CU here and give them all that by default. After all, much of the hidden material would be Steward global locking (i.e. hiding names) and it wouldn't be right to have people only here with -local- access seeing things with a global importance. What do you think? Ottava Rima (talk) 02:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

There were 28/29 supports and 1 oppose for Courcelles, so he clearly had enough supports as 25 supports were needed (Meta:Requests for oversight/Courcelles). This was also the case for RfCUs and RfOSs in the past (take for example a look in the archives). Kind regards, Trijnstel 08:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Theo's was counted when it wasn't a support. There were also many people who regularly vote who did not vote and who tend to wait for the last minute. There were also 6 people with no real activity and were stated by multiple users to having only an IRC connection to the vote. Normally, that kind of thing causes Bureaucrats to extend the vote and to deal with other issues. If he was a definite pass then there would be no reason to close it so quickly, right? Ottava Rima (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

That was why I said 28 or 29 supports. ;-) Anyway, I'm sure Fr33kman acted in good faith. He didn't close it quickly, because of possible problems Courcelles could have. It just becomes more and more common to close these requests early (something of which I'm not very fond of). In this case it would have been better to wait until the end, but well, Courcelles should have been promoted anyway. The fact that people with no real activity on Meta voted isn't a big problem here as stated: "All editors with an account on Meta, at least one active account on any Wikimedia project, and a link between the two, may participate in any request and give their opinion of the candidate. However, more active Meta editors' opinions may be given additional weight in controversial cases." (and this was not really a controversial case). Kind regards, Trijnstel 15:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't blame Fr33kman - I think everything is being rushed lately. I don't get why Meta went from being a project that was slow and deliberate to a project that is rush rush rush. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Probably because of some new stewards/admins + crats who don't care about a few hours or days...? Trijnstel 16:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Bad name block

Nothing else on that IP and nothing obvious cross wiki in case you were wondering about it :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! I found it indeed a bit suspicious. Luckily it's nothing. Regards, Trijnstel 15:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC) Btw, I do my best as a steward and I hope I didn't disappoint you 'til now.

Cloak

Hi Trijnstel, first of all I apologize for my connection, that lately is very slow, and cause me many problems (for this reason often I come and go on IRC). Then, about my Cloak: I tried to get one, but I've a problem, my username seems already registered, and I don't know what to do. See you. --Reder 18:20, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Reder. In that case I would advice you to choose another username to use on IRC (only on IRC, not onwiki). You could for example choose for Rederwiki and then register the cloak with this form. You can find more information on this page: IRC/Cloaks. Good luck and if you need help with it, feel free to ask me. Kind regards, Trijnstel 18:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Open proxy

What is the problem? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 173.254.216.69 (talk) 02:43, 26 October 2011‎

I globally blocked your IP adress (link) for being an open proxy. Please read this and if you still have questions for me, feel free to ask them. Trijnstel 07:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Another account

Hey, Trijnstel! One of IP used by ia.wiki vandal was related with another account on es.wiki (block log). Do you think we need to report it here on Meta?” T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 06:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh... nevermind. It was already done. : ) ” T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 06:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Yup. Good morning! ;-) Trijnstel 07:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Never-ending Spam accounts

Hey, Trijnstel! There is at least one account on Strategy that seems to be related with those you've just locked. You might want to check 'strategy:user:Angrybirdsonline2'. I'm not sure, but 'strategy:user:Fdaluiktu3643' might be also related. Thanks!” T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 12:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I've globally locked Angrybirdsonline2 as it's a clear sock of Angrybirdsonline; I don't think Fdaluiktu3643 is related. I'll checkuser on mediawikiwiki and strategywiki, maybe that'll help us. He probably used open proxies, but you never know. Anyway, many thanks for notifying me about this other spamaccount! Kind regards, Trijnstel 12:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

After a checkuser I found and globally blocked the underlying IP. Together with this I found more spamaccounts (not related to this one). Trijnstel 13:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

/me smiles at Trijnstel.” T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 13:19, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Trijnstel 13:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

self-requested global block?

Hi Trijnstel, coming over from Commons, where most of the crats seem to be offline for quite some time. 2 days ago Commons User:Blue Marble a.k.a. Quan has resigned for personal reasons and asked to be globally blocked[2]. After waiting for 36 hours, I have indef-blocked (with a note "by own wish") him on Commons. Are you able and willing to perform the global block based on his aboved linked request? --Túrelio 21:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Done, I globally locked Blue Marble. Please note that Hoangquan hientrang (his previous accountname) is still open. Kind regards, Trijnstel 22:11, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Túrelio 22:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Copyright

Hello Trijnstel, can you delete these pictures from Armenian Wikipedia that violate copyrights or notify admin about it. Many of them have a template for a very long time, but not all admins are very active and therefore they are not deleted.--46.241.189.99 12:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. You can find here a list of all local sysops of hy.wikipedia. Please contact them first. I'm busy lately, but I promise I'll take a look at it soon. Regards, Trijnstel 20:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Admirable restraint

Well done with your polite deflection to an unuseful response elsewhere. My response would have been sardonic or highly sarcastic. :-) billinghurst sDrewth 10:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks! Trijnstel 10:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment on administrator conduct

Hello Trijnstel, I'm from Armenian Wikipedia, what if the admin does not go to any compromise, and uses his status to advance his own opinion. How to counteract that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 178.78.167.75 (talk) 15:12, 12 November 2011‎

Hi. Difficult question. In general it's undesirable to use a status of admin to press your own opinion. But I don't know the background of it, so I can't give you a solid answer I'm afraid. Do you have a personal conflict with this user or is he doing this with everyone? Please try to solve this issue with himself. If that doesn't work, you're always welcome to come back and ask for more advice of course. Good luck. Kind regards, Trijnstel 15:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

The fact is that in such a small wikipedias has no control over the admins, there is no arbitration committee to solve such disputes.--178.78.191.2 15:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

That's true, but an arbitration committee isn't always necessary. Trijnstel 16:28, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

RE: Global rollback (2)

Hi Trijnstel. I realised that Striker is a unsustainable username. This request will be declined since commons' bureaucrats don't usurp accounts with edits and commons:User:Striker has 1 edit which is own work. One of the bureaucrats has even said that it'd have been a good idea to actually check all needed usurps before starting to usurp. Due to this I decided to pick another name. In order to accomplish this I renamed only the account on ptwiktionary to be able to request usurpation of all these unattached accounts. When the usurpations are all done (this time I'm confidend they will be) I intend to rename all my Striker accounts with more than 3 edits to Defender and then get a 100% unified account. For now Striker is the most active account and use GR with it. I don't know if it's a good idea to start renaming accounts at this moment because, among other reasons, I have an open RfA on ptwikiquote. By the way, could you perform the usurpation of vi:b:User:Defender for me? Vietnamese Wikibooks has no bureaucrats and that account has no edits. Best regards, Striker ^talk 20:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Striker. I wasn't aware of all these buzz around your rename requests for Striker. I can understand that you would like to use global rollback for this name. Could you please inform us when the usurpations for Defender are done? We could then move your global rollback flag to Defender, after which you can use this flag for your new name as well. Good luck in advance. Btw, the renaming on viwikibooks is Done, see also here. Kind regards, Trijnstel 22:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Plus

Another one in the series you were blocking recently :) Two IPs - let me know if you want more info. Regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:50, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Herbythyme. I was about to request a checkuser on Meta, so thank you for giving me this information! I've globally locked this account and I'll checkuser on en.wikiversity. Maybe I'll find more on that project. Could you please send me the two IPs (or more information you have) per email? Thanks in advance. Kind regards, Trijnstel 15:59, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

FYI: I found four more socks on en.wikiversity: Mikeleachmikel, Tommillertommi, Markrangelmark and Tracysargenttr (the last two were created on Meta). Trijnstel 16:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

On it now - I'll post the info to the list I think - others may wish to check. I mailed you earlier with the first ones. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Posted to list :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Just saw it coming by. Trijnstel 16:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Not an SUL

Here you said the account did not have an SUL. This says no, of course. However, this has two, and only two, accounts on the page and does not have the pink box to say they are not connected. The edit from kowiki is not there of course. Odd, no? They do contradict each other. Also, how can there be a new account accidentally not created with an SUL? I find that a little odd. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ottava Rima. Rosenberg is definitely a non-sul account. The first account ever was created on the German Wikipedia before 2006. This link just sums up all crosswiki contribs (not necessarily made with a sul account; non-sul contribs are included as well - it doesn't show whether accounts are sulled or not). The account on the English Wikiversity (the last "Rosenberg" account as we speak) was created on 14 August 2011 and is therefore not "accidentally" created without a SUL. Kind regards, Trijnstel 20:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

If you click on the second link, it clearly says that the Wikiversity account and the Polish account are united. This is either a major click with toolserver that has been ignored, or it means that there is an SUL account that was created later (2009) than the other accounts and it the one measure of an SUL merely says there isn't one because the earliest accounts were never the ones to create the SUL. Otherwise, there would have been an SUL account created from the Wikiversity account and it would have listed the Polish one with a big pink thing that says "this is unattached". You can create new accounts to try it out and see - you will find that it fits the above. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Spam blocks

Can you also lock this user? Still reviewing - mail will follow :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:52, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure and it's already Done. ;-) I already answered your email earlier today. Thanks! Regards, Trijnstel 19:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

E-mail sent

Hello Trijnstel, I have sent you an e-mail message regarding my concern that I'm having. If you have any questions kindly respond to me by e-mail. Thank you for understanding :) Regards --Mohamed Aden Ighe 15:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I received your email. I will respond to it tomorrow if you don't mind. Kind regards, Trijnstel 23:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your appreication! --Mohamed Aden Ighe 00:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

testwiki

Hi Trijnstel, what's the reason for removing flags on my testwiki account?? a×p_de^Hello! 15:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Axpde. "The Wikipedia Test Wiki is for developers to test their code [..]" and "The Wikipedia Test Wiki is not an arena to play with administrator's tools. If you are looking for that, see Wikipedia:Requests/Tools." (source) You are not a developer as far as I know en there is absolutely no need to retain these unused rights. Fourteen local flags (steward and checkuser not included) are really too much, especially since you haven't used these ever since you granted them to yourself a month ago. I've left the four flags PeterSymonds granted to you in June (bureaucrat, editor, reviewer and administrator). Hopefully you can understand my arguments. Kind regards, Trijnstel 19:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Global lock of Phanaurch855 socks

Thanks for locking Phanauruch8555, Can you also lock these users who are abusing multiple accounts on en.wiki?

The users who are related to User:Phanuruch855 are:

• McCawOGara
• Jane2300
• MtGp2012
• ИЙиЇй
• 文字化け

Note: All of them were blocked per checkuser evidence on en.wiki. Please do so if you can to these users. Thanks --Katarighe 01:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I indeed locked Phanuruch8555 and Doppelganger000 on 31 October. Now those five are Done as well. Thanks for notifying me! Trijnstel 10:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh okay

Sorry about the mistake, was not aware. It's kind of odd not having a link to him on any lists though. Do you think there could be a third new list like 'temporarily absent stewards'? 174.115.128.87 00:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that you were very active (seeing many of your edits on #wikimedia-stewards) and also on SRGP and I was wondering if you'd review SRG#ty? 174.115.128.87

I wouldn't support a third list with the "temporarily absent stewards" as Thogo is an exception. He is included in the stewards list btw, though not visible (see here and search for Thogo). As I explained to you earlier, Thogo is a member of the Ombudsman commission from February 2011 til February 2012. He will continue with his work as a steward when his term of member of the ombudsman commission ends. I've seen your unlock request for Tyciol (which is probably you), but I don't have sufficient knowledge about the history of this user. Hope this helps. Kind regards, Trijnstel 21:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

There are people impersonating you!!!

Please lock User talk:Trijnstel2 now!!! --223.205.138.36 08:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Done by User:Herbythyme. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 12:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

de:User:Joy

Regarding what you wrote in Steward_requests/SUL_requests#Joy:

w:de:Joy 4 edits, 5 crats <- wait a sec, four edits?? I see much more here. Trijnstel 22:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The problem of the German account is a separate issue I raised at Meta:Babel#importing_edits_and_then_refusing_to_attribute_them_properly. JFTR. --Joy 11:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me, but I can't do anything right now I'm afraid. Kind regards, Trijnstel 23:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on ACE2011

Dear Trijnstel,

On behalf of the en.WP community, I'd like to thank you for ensuring that the results of the election were accurate and fair.

Please have a nice end-of-year break.

For the election coordinators, best wishes,

Tony1

Dear Tony1. Thank you for the beautiful flower! Best wishes from me too to the whole team. It was a pleasure - and a unique experience - to help the community of the English Wikipedia in confirming the results of the ArbCom elections. Kind regards, Trijnstel 14:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Also, thank your for the help with the ACE2011 elections this year along the other three. Happy Holidays! --Katarighe (Talk · Contributions · E-mail) 19:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you and Merry Christmas to you as well! Trijnstel 22:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Spam stuff

Worth watching the new filter I've created for edits to user talk pages maybe? I've not made it "disallow" for now just to see if there are any legit edits being made. Best --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean this new filter on commonswiki? Yeah, could be a possibility, but if you need more help with this filter. I created it here and on other projects with lots of spam, but MF-Warburg and SPQRobin are the ones who created it in the first place on incubatorwiki (see incubator:Special:AbuseFilter/18. Perhaps they could help? Kind regards, Trijnstel 16:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

No - this one (although the one on Commons is the same). That is how I picked up the latest xxxxblack account. Best --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I didn't notice this one. Great job! Trijnstel 17:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

For info there were two more in the xxxxblack series spammers here today. It must be a bot as the 2nd one editing their user talk after the block (I don't usually block tp access). I think I'll try locally blacklisting the links and see what happens tomorrow otherwise I may range block for 24 hours or so. Best --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:04, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I locked both too. Blacklisting could work, though I'm not sure as he uses different websites each time. I think a rangeblock has more effect. Trijnstel 12:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Looking further there are two sections to the spamming effectively

1. Some websites which (in the 3 I looked at) not repeated
2. Some "profile" websites which are

I've bl'd them separately for now as the fact they are putting in the profile ones each time should mean that they are unable to save the page everytime regardless of the other websites included. Might stop them for now :) If not I'll try the rangelblock (but it is /17). Thanks & best --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'll keep an eye on it. Trijnstel 12:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi hum - and more. Check your talk on Commons but also my recent blocks here. Pattern accounts I think. Don't seem to be directly related as all teh accounts were on one IP here. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. I see. I responded on Commons about that case. How did you find these accounts on Meta? (As I can't find any edits.) And only MadelynHouston was crosswiki "active" (no edits); the others were only locally. I'll keep an eye on these accounts. If he continues, a global lock could be useful imo. Kind regards, Trijnstel 16:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

We ought to start a special page :)

I just blocked another xxx3g account here and they were operating via an open proxy (according to en wp) - see my block here. I have also now found 2 spammers here with user names Xxxxaa1 where the "aa" is a repeated alpha character - bots are busy currently! Mostly for info & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Good idea! :P But ehm, I globally locked Touhid3g as he already created an account on enwiki. Was Rakibul3g related to these? Trijnstel 14:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Three accounts - one IP (open) - mail next :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:59, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I do wonder if a page on such bot created accounts might be useful. That has to be at least 6 series of such accounts over the past month. Drini used to have a page relating to IPs used by bots I think. I'm guessing other may watch this page (:)) so they may wish to comment. While the CU list is an option some CUs do not see such issues as relevant to them (& that has always been the case). Obviously privacy would be an issue with CU derived info however there is no real need to declare anything publicly and by abusing Foundation projects I'm not sure privacy would be top of my list of things to worry about.

Just thinking aloud mostly - regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 17:40, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I have an idea. Will send you an email. Trijnstel 18:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Your temporary access is going to expire soon

{{talkback here}}Sbblr0803 07:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Responded overthere. Trijnstel 17:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)