Open main menu

Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2007-04

Rename User:ZJH to User:Zachary

Can I be renamed to Zachary? Account is unregistered. Thanks, Zachary talk 10:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done Redux 17:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Rename User:Viele-baeren to User:ABF

Hi! Please rename me from User:Viele-baeren to User:ABF, because my Nick is so in de.wikipedia. Thanks, ABF 18:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done Redux 17:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Rename User:香港賓拉登 to User:黑武士仲尼

Hi! Please rename me from user:香港賓拉登 to user:黑武士仲尼, because my nickname is so in zh.wikipedia , thanks w:zh:user:黑武士仲尼 --香港賓拉登 10:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done Redux 17:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Bot flag request for User:COIBot

Please see Requests for bot status#COIBot. --.anaconda 21:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done. MaxSem 05:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Pages to be "protected from recreation" suggestion

As you had a mumfum vandal today I see that among the pages that were deleted were Template:Door & Category:Pelican shit. Based on my experience on Wikibooks these pages are usually created by this vandal and are worth protecting? I can let you have a few more or checkout [1] for our full list to date - thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added the template to WM:SALT, some things are already there. Can't remember if something else was deleted more than once. MaxSem 15:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - I imagine it is safe to add the category too - unlikely to be needed I imagine! Category:Prophecies of Mumfum has also been a popular one (!) on Books --Herby talk thyme 15:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
It has been done (not by me). Cbrown1023 talk 20:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Transwiki Office Actions from Wikipedia English to Meta

Since this policy applies on all Wikimedia projects, shouldn't it be listed on Meta for the wider community to view? Thunderhead 05:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

  Not done This needs discussion prior to completion. I suggest you bring it up on Foundation-l (the Foundation mailing list). If it is transwikied to Meta, it will become official Foundation policy, not just English Wikipedia policy like it currently is. Cbrown1023 talk 21:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
This page does not apply cross-projects, only on English Wikipedia. If this policy is to be applied cross projects, it will originate from the office itself. Cary Bass demandez 15:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Exactly, and if that happens, it should be done by an Office member acting in an official position. Cbrown1023 talk 20:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit war

This is a forest fire that unfortunately has come to meta. There is an edit war over Polling is evil; an editor who thinks voting is a good idea and has been trying to push that opinion on enwiki for the past weeks is trying to bowdlerize this long-standing page. That is unhelpful as ther already is a counter-essay that says the opposite. Radiant! 11:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I protected it before noticing this post. MaxSem 11:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your time. Note that Netscott is continuing the move war even now. Radiant! 11:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Talk page protected. --.anaconda 11:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I would strongly advise folks to read Talk:Polling has its problems to understand my editing on that essay. I have explained with good logic my edits and page moves. I think it is evident that the page sat for six days after my initial move that there has not been much dispute about that. User:Radiant! failed to join the talk there prior to reverting my edits and page move. That is unfortunate given that others had engaged the discussion. Netscott 12:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • There isn't any actual discussion on the talk page, just a few statements by Netscott after he made changes to the page, and a one-liner response by Hillgentleman. I'm not on meta every day so I was unaware of the change (and judged by the almost complete lack of reactions so far, neither are most other people). Radiant! 12:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • User:Hillgentleman was agreeing that "Polling has its problems" was a better title than "Polling can be problematic". He also engaged me in discussion on our talk pages. Netscott 12:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • It does not matter what the reason is, you were edit warring and even moved the talk page when you couldn't move the main page! That is defiant and very counter-productive. Cbrown1023 talk 19:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Now, what you did on Babel is very productive and the right thing to do. Cbrown1023 talk 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

User pages

Not sure what "policy" is here on what is admissible however it is possible that someone may wish to look at Christopher scum's contributions to Meta. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

User and talk pages deleted as spam.--Shanel 15:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks - sure it will happen but maybe a block in case they don't get the message <g> --Herby talk thyme 15:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Pastoral1

I have a feeling that this user's contributions should be reviewed. I'll mark one or two for deletion I think but they may have the wrong idea about Meta - thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

All of his edits except for the Request for new language were deleted. Cbrown1023 talk 14:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

User:DLoucks

User page I know but I see this as spam. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Done by MaxSem. Yonatanh 11:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
They didn't understand - page is back again --Herby talk thyme 12:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your notice, Herby. Page deleted, account blocked indefinitely. --Aphaia 12:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Rename User:Wikimedia Foundation Role Account

This account was used by a vandal and is now blocked. Anyway, I think it can be renamed to a random name. --.anaconda 15:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I prefer to keep it as vandal account, lest it will be taken in another malicious intent. Just thought. --Aphaia 15:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah - we can anyway rename it and recreate the account (then block it). Just to remove his edits under "Wikimedia Foundation Role Account". --.anaconda 15:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I second that. This username may be misleading and confusing when encountered in page histories. MaxSem 16:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I've renamed it "Renamed vandal account", recreated the account, and blocked that. Angela 22:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Name to keep an eye for

Not assistance but heads up - User:Nintendude was blocked here a couple of days ago and vandalised Wikibooks at the same time. Earlier today user:Nintendough (imaginative! and not on Meta yet) vandalised Wikibooks - same IP address. --Herby talk thyme 07:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

WM:SALT issue & uploaded graphic

I just went to place a deletion tag on Image:WinXP warn.png but got the message that it was protected to prevent recreation but it is there! So it needs deleting but I'd love to know how it came to be recreated as we have the same file in two SALT lists that I deal with - thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Uploading user may require "attention" too! --Herby talk thyme 09:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Cascading protection has no affect on uploading files - a bug has been filed but there's been no response. Majorly (hot!) 11:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I have salted it the old way. MaxSem 11:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure it's not just the page that is protected? I'm sure uploads from it will still be possible. Majorly (hot!) 11:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Majorly & Max - I had issues with this on Books so I'll go look at it there but Commons has quite a few image files that we think are protected too! --Herby talk thyme 11:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes - I tested it with a non-sysop account. MaxSem 12:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Btw, I created a warning template for such users - {{upload warning}}, with shorter alias {{upwarn}}. MaxSem 07:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

User:156.52.158.60 and User:156.52.158.21

Blocks would be useful if anyone is around - thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done, thank you.--.anaconda 10:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

User talk:129.2.151.202

Block please - thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

given up thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

User:195.188.152.16

Request for review on blocking on User:195.188.152.16.

It is a pre-emprive blocking. I heard on English Wikiquote this IP has been identified as that used by 'Willy on Wheels' (see q:WQ:AN). The edits from this IP addresses seem not to be contradicted with that information, so I blocked this IP address, while the last vandalism froh it happened on this March. If you think me overreacting, feel free to unblock it. Thanks. --Aphaia 22:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I only saw one bit of vandalism, from July last year. All the other edit are fine. Majorly (hot!) 01:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Maybe checkout [2] this before deciding anything? --Herby talk thyme 08:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Brain in gear - CU log indicates that unblocking may be unwise - maybe chat to a CU (even me!) mail or whatever --Herby talk thyme 08:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
To Majorly, WoW mainly creates accounts and vandalizes throuth them, so we can assume there are vandal accounts using this IP. So I am not surprised this bare IP address contains only few vandalism. If necessary, CU/developers can provide us accurate data. --Aphaia 23:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
This IP has made some good edits here, but if checkuser shows it is Willy, then so be it.. Majorly (hot!) 23:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


83.238.180.4

Would someone care to block 83.238.180.4? Please see its block log on enwiki, where it has been blocked as an ip being used abusively by a banned user. The ip has now begun harassing users at Meta talk:WikiProject on open proxies and is wearing my patience thin. AmiDaniel 04:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I would have appreciate you to give special:Contributions/83.238.180.4... it is not pretty appropriate in my opinion just demand to block an IP address without evidence. Anyway, done (1 week). --Aphaia 07:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I apologize for not providing the link. Thanks for the block though. AmiDaniel 18:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

208.190.24.3

Please block this IP for a while. Reason: vandalizing. He has already been told to stop, but he continues. Thank you, --Thogo (talk) 15:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

  Done
Thank you. --M/ 15:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Mark Ryan

Please do not archive this section. It needs to remain for several weeks.

Hi. With the help of a Meta bureaucrat I'd like to change my username here on Meta from Mark Ryan to Mark, to match my account name on all other Wikimedia wikis where I have an account. That account has been registered but completely unused, and has been that way since at least early 2004, maybe even 2003, so chances are any deleted revisions of the user are long since lost to the sands of time. I had a good look around but couldn't find any specific username changing page on meta that was specific to Meta, so I thought I'd put my request here. - Mark Ryan 03:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment I assume it is assigned to Mark Bergsma, developer & Wikimedia employee. He is known with this username too, on several wikis, as far as I know. Personally I prefer to ask you to keep current username for preventing further confusion, though I am not a bureaucrat. --Aphaia 04:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not aware of any of the major wikis on which Mark Bergsma's username is "Mark". On closer inspection, the username "Mark" here on meta has been registered but blank since at least December 2003, which was when I changed to the username "Mark" on en.wikipedia. I had wanted to change both meta and en at the same time, but Tim Starling only ever got around to doing the en username change. The earliest activity I can see from Mark Bergsma on any wiki is during 2005, so I highly doubt he came along and reserved it for himself. More likely than not it was registered by a vandal in the very early days, and whatever pages they created or edits they made have since been lost.
    • I have "User:Mark" on en.wikipedia, commons, fr.wikipedia, en.wikinews and wikisource. - Mark Ryan 04:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I suggest you to ask both Mark Bergsma and Mark if they don't mind. If there will be no reply for some time, I'll perform the usurpation. MaxSem 19:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I have spoken with Mark Bergsma on IRC, and he has confirmed that he neither owns the "User:Mark" account, nor does he have any objections whatsoever to me taking that user name here on meta. I have also left a message at User talk:Mark for just in case anyone has been silently using that account all this time. I guess now we just need to wait for a few weeks to see if anyone turns up using that account. - Mark Ryan 10:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The user Mark has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users.
I suggest to wait seven days from the request (expires May 11th), as it is current on the English language Wikipedia, and then perform the usurpation. --M/ 10:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I doubt 7 days is enough on meta. Most people here wouldn't notice it at all when you would ask them something and want a respons in seven days. It is not that high traffic here. I suggest to wait at least a month, or else just wait for the SUL (aka Godo). It would be done then automaticly. Effeietsanders 11:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I agree. A month is fine by me. I'm in no rush at all. - Mark Ryan 15:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Whoever owns this account, maybe he is not editing but how we can be sure that he is not logging in? Maybe he uses watchlist as favorites. Or he has a language specified that when he enters meta, see the meta in that language. Maybe he likes to see dates "15 July 2005" format. I don't know if ownership of the account is only valid by some edits. --Dbl2010 21:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
    • That's true, which is why the delay of a month, to give them time to come forward and say they are using the account. As I said above, though, this account has been sitting registered and completely unused for editing for at least 3 years now, probably much longer. So the chances of that being the case are very very slim, I'd say. - Mark Ryan 11:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not archive the above section. It needs to remain for several weeks.

User:Micke-sv

Hello I would like to usurp "my" username User:Micke that I use on svwiki (where I am a sysop) and on commons. I have a similar request in process at mw:User:Micke-sv and on enwiki, as well. The name Micke has been registered but have no contributions since the account was created the 29 of november in 2005. I saw the request on top of this page, and a month waiting-period for usurpation would be acceptable to me as well. I hope someone can help me with this. --MiCkEdb 04:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Please ask him if he agrees to usurpation. MaxSem 13:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I have left this message on User talk:Micke. No e-mail was left by the user upon registration. --MiCkEdb 13:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Siberian Wikipedia

Hi all. Could you please observe this discussion a little bit? The tone is getting harsher and I fear that Johannes' last comment could cause some reactions... Thank you, --Thogo (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the best advice regarding the actual closure I can give you is what was said in an earlier request: Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2007/02#Request for vote mediation. Regarding the civility, I see another admin has already commented on the talk page - is this what you were looking for? Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, exactly. (Thank you, Lar.) I follow this discussion normally, but on that day I had lots of work and was afk for some days afterwards, so I had to put it here. --Thogo (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Can someone else review this?

Special:Contributions/212.166.203.133 - it looks to me as if some of the pages are copy & paste ones - Help:Public domain for example (not import, should they be?) and the work on categories looks a bit circular in places (Category:Categories & Category:Wikimedia categories for example). I'm too new to be too bold! --Herby talk thyme 13:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Help:Public domain appears to be a direct copy of en:Wikipedia:Public domain. Not sure what I should do here - delete the Meta article? Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
The idea of a help page that discusses what public domain is and how it applies to our projects seems useful, but if the text is just a copy of the en:wp text with perhaps just a quick find and replace of wikipedia with wikimedia, perhaps it would be better to replace it with a short note that points to the article there? (that is what I have done on some other non WMF wikis). The original poster could explain what they had in mind if they didn't think that was the right approach. I have done this, leaving just a stub and pointer. If folks don't feel that was a good approach I certainly would support outright deletion, but it struck me as worth a try. ++Lar: t/c 19:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Bot status for User:RBSpamAnalyzerBot

Please see Requests for bot status#RBSpamAnalyzerBot. --.anaconda 17:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC) Requests for bot status/Archives/2007/05#RBSpamAnalyzerBot --.anaconda 15:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for posting that there, I spent a day looking around and that page was the only one that talked about bots :-( If the request needs to be put here, I will move it at once. -- ReyBrujo 17:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome Bot, was Welcoming Users

Hello

I was wondering if I can use the bot to welcome new users by adding (substituting) the {{welcome}} template to their user talk pages..I will use the same script that is used in commons and other Wikipedias, welcome.py from pywikipedia..what do you think?--The Joke النكتة‎ 03:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Here is some opinions:

  • timichal hates bot welcomes.
  • guillom don't like them.
  • zocky thinks it defeats the purpose.

As I said..I see it important to welcome new users..I don't see it defeating the purpose (using the bot to welcome people) when the user finds with the welcome message a signature of a human individual willing to answer their questions..I see no problem except perhaps that the name of the bot is visible in the history page..I tried to welcome new users by manually editing each talk page (many users everyday)..it isn't efficient I can tell you (and I may ask later for a bot flag for user:alnokta :P).. of course if no one changed their mind..I will stick to the manual method..salam--The Joke النكتة‎ 12:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any need to welcome users to this wiki. Meta is a workplace for multiple wikis and I just don't think it's effective to waste time on welcoming users here. Naconkantari 18:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
But not all people coming here know where the help desks are or what this wiki is for. The welcome template tells that to them. But anyway, I would not support a welcome bot, welcoming should be a little bit more personally, I think. --Thogo (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

If the time is the only problem you see..don't worry..its my time that is wasted..not yours..

workplace for multiple wikis or not (its being used in Commons for your information), its always nice to be welcomed in any place..

The bot will be very personal..because it won't sign the welcome message with its name..but will use a list of signatures of people who are interested in welcoming their fellow new users..the list could be big...everyone can participate..thanks..--The Joke النكتة‎ 20:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Personally, I hate the idea. We don't really need a bot welcoming vandals afterall. xaosflux Talk 03:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)