Open main menu

Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat

(Redirected from Meta:RFH)
Requests and proposals Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat Archives (current)→
Meta-Wiki has a small active community. When a normal user requires the assistance of an administrator or bureaucrat for some particular task, it is not always easy to find one. This page helps users find one when they need one; asking specific admins directly via their talk pages is one way to elicit a fast response. See also: Stewards' noticeboard, Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard, Category:Meta-Wiki policies, Category:Global policies
Meta-Wiki maintenance announcements [edit]
General maintenance announcements:
(as of 21 October 2019)

Discussions:
(as of 21 October 2019)
None currently.
(Last updated: 2019-06-26)

Please find answered requests in the archives (this month).

Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 10 days.


Tagger scriptEdit

Would someone mind following the instruction at User talk:Hoo man#About your tool "tagger.js" to fix it? We GR and GS are unhappy. The tagger script is not working. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 07:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Specifically, per phab:T233442 the use of "editToken" should be replaced with "csrfToken" on line 495 of User:Hoo man/functions.js. Such an edit would be within the scope of a global interface editor (or local interface admin) --DannyS712 (talk) 07:28, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
It has only been two days since you asked Hoo. Please have the courtesy of waiting up to a week for a fix of a script before jumping up and down. It is not an essential tool, so intervention in someone else's scripts is not an immediate priority.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  Alright! Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 13:16, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
I sent Hoo man an email on 13 October. I agree with Billinghurst in allowing Hoo man the courtesy to fix the script himself in his own user space, however I think he's very busy ATM IRL so we might have to fix it ourselves anyway. Ping -revi as int-admin. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done as an interface admin, I apologize for touching your user space. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec: What? Oh come off it. Sorry, #notsorry, not worth 2 rubs of a stick. What is the point of having user namespace with restricted permissions and people with their scripts in them that they maintain, if you just go and edit it. Two people with the rights to edit asked for a modicum of patience, and you just go and edit it with the rights that you gained the day before. If you disagree, then politely have that conversation, not just ignore. This is a team environment based on consensus.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:34, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
It's a widely-used script that required a purely noncontroversial change to make it work again. I think it's reasonable to enact such a change after 5 days of waiting for a response. However, as you previously asked for a week, I do concur with you that it would have been more appropriate to discuss with you prior to making the change. Vermont (talk) 20:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, scripts and stylesheets are protected for security reasons - there is no other reason. Since this is quite widely used, ~200 users only at meta, it's more a gadget than an userscript. Hoo man is currently quite busy looking at his contributions, and this is really a trivial fix - it's not a feature addition nor anything else, it's just a trivial bugfix. Feel free to revert if you want, but I guess now-happy users of the tool wouldn't like that action. Sincerely, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:13, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
This is a script in a user namespace, not a central script, nor a central gadget. It is a script provided as a gesture of the user. These are the consequences of the placement of such pages, and their management, we all know that. I understand the convenience of the script, and I understand the work of GR and GS, I have been one for many years. As I said, if you had an issue with the process suggested, then broach that matter, not just ignore people's comment, and then add some false apology. Plus please don't try to divert the conversation with a populist approach to users, the complexity of the fix, none of that is pertinent to the points that I am making.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:26, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
It is a script in user namespace/NS_USER/NS 2, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is (in fact) an user script. Scripts included by that many users are more gadgets than user scripts, as they affect comparable amount of people. May I ask you who was harmed by my change and/or who and how would benefit from further waiting? --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for being bold and just fixing the problem, I don't see any issues with such uncontroversial changes (that don't alter functionality).
I plan to re-write tagger and some of my other tools soon-ish, so that they follow the current coding style more closely, are simpler and hopefully work for many more years. Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 15:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Tagger is much used and script is fixed. However, Hoo man has the last edit about 3 months ago. - MrJaroslavik (talk) 20:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes, so? The user in question is a current steward, and one who made commentary about his role when he asked for confirmation. All pertinent to this matter.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:31, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
So related to this discussion, this is sort of what happens when you depend on someone else's personal page to do something. If these scripts are useful and will be widely used, we can make them gadgets, or at the very least move them to a community managed page. — xaosflux Talk 22:00, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Re-add removed emailEdit

Hello. I have recently removed my email from my account. But I now forgot my password. Is there a way that the system re-add my email, so I can use it to change the password? Or I have permanently lose my account? Thanks. 213.140.215.168 18:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Officially, nope. If you have some huge number of contributions, or are a functionary of a project - then the Trust and Safety department might look in to it, but otherwise, just create a new account. — xaosflux Talk 00:39, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
How can I communicate with Trust and Safety department? 213.140.215.168 01:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Send them an email: ca@wikimedia.org Vermont (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. 213.140.215.168 02:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
If you removed your email very recently (<90 days, IIRC), your email can be still in the logs (and thus, is easily recoverable). Feel free to email me, I'll be happy to look into that for you. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Request to protect my user pageEdit

Please protect User:PlavorSeol page as "Allow only administrators". - PlavorSeol (T | C) 08:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

@PlavorSeol: another admin has done this for you, however I strongly suggest we make an adjustment. The page you included, User:PlavorSeol/global.css is a special global page, if you want a "hack" around page protection it would be better to use any other title there (e.g. User:PlavorSeol/userpage.css). Would you like that moved? — xaosflux Talk 13:46, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Well, I aware User:PlavorSeol/global.css page is for personal CSS to apply globally, but I wanted to put contents of my user page on a "functional" CSS page, not arbitrary one, so current transclusion is suitable for me. In my personal view, it will bring me some minor advantages such as ability to edit both personal CSS and contents of my user page at once, request for deletion of my user page more easily (if necessary), etc. It will be fine to distinguish what should be on my user page with onlyinclude. Therefore I would like to keep current transclusion, though your suggestion deserves consideration. - PlavorSeol (T | C) 13:03, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
I am not even certain why a newly created user page needs protection here at metawiki. Firstly, admin level protection means you cannot edit it, which becomes administrative burden. Secondly all user pages have a level of protection through abusefitlers such that only autopatrolled users above can edit. Thirdly, what evidence of abuse is there that requires the protection?  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Antispam false positiveEdit

I was trying to add :en: to the beginning of the final link in See Also (edit to clarify, 21:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC): this link: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Inclusion#Templates|Userboxes and other templates for inclusionists]]) on this page, as without it the link pointed to a dead page (because "Wikipedia" wasn't being read as the namespace). Despite turning off my VPN and leaving an edit summary, I was prevented from saving the edit. Anthologetes (talk) 21:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

  Added, see Special:Diff/19474247 --DannyS712 (talk) 22:09, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Protection of WMFR vandalized pagesEdit

Hello! The following pages have been vandalized several times on the last few days:

As they are essentially kept as archives, can you protect them please? — Envlh (talk) 09:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done. Semiprotected for one year. I hope that is enough. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)