Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2010-08

Policy

Hello,

I'm wondering what the policy about giving tools back here on Meta, I used to be a crat and a admin here and have global rollback but I left it because there was why to much drama here on this wiki and I was moving to a new job and home...

Things are being more stable now, the drama seems to be gone away, my stalker has left the wiki so it would be nice to have my tools back so I can get working on the spam black list. I do not think I will be very active in patrolling and stuff like that but I can help with emergency stuff asked on irc and keep a eye on the request pages and on the spam black list.

Should I request the tools back by a rfa, rfb, rfgr or can it just be granted?

Best regards, Huib talk 16:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

If no one objects, I'll give them you back, since you are gone in good standing. -Barras 16:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, it would help me getting back to do some little jobs, I cant promise that I ever will be as active like the old days but every little bit helps. Huib talk 16:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

With regards to global rollback, there is really no precedent. It may be a good idea to go back through a rfgr. Tiptoety ^talk 19:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

• I've given him the local sysop bit back since he left not under controversial. The global flags is a steward related thing where I can't make a decission. -Barras 15:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Please put in a request on the Global permissions page, mentioning your resigning the bit previously and any applicable circumstances. I can't imagine that it would be rejected. Kylu 05:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thank you Huib talk 09:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Problem of references to researches

Whether can Wikipedija delete references to researches in Wikiversitete? SergeyJ 18:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

That's up to each Wikipedia project to determine if they consider Wikiversity a reliable source or not. It's not a pillar related issue, so we have little reason or means to influence that decision. Kylu 00:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

But what means "reliable source". Research in Wikiversity by definition is original and why Wikipedia should delete references only on the ground that this original research? SergeyJ 05:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not tell Wikiversity what policies to use, Wikiversity does not tell Wikipedia what policies to use. If you disagree with the policy, debate it with them on that project. This is not an issue for Meta to resolve. Kylu 05:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Request to unlock

Could the page Requests for comment/Save the Siberian Wikipedia be unlocked, even if only briefly, to close it properly? Thank you so very much for your attention.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 18:27, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Done - Please let me know when you are done. Huib talk^Abigor 18:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thank you so very much. Vapmachado 18:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Another one: Requests for comment/Canopus Kilya Blocking. Vapmachado 18:53, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Done Huib talk^Abigor 18:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. That's it for now. Thank you so very much for your cooperation. Vapmachado 19:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome, thanks for your hard work. Huib talk^Abigor 19:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

"updated since my last visit" in the history

Hi !

Could an admin add the following code on MediaWiki:Common.css please (after Vecto integration) ?

/* To color the mention "updated since my last visit" in the history */
span.updatedmarker {
	color: black;
	background-color: #0f0;
}

See also this discussion on Commons. Thanks !--Bapti 11:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

• Done - Huib talk^Abigor 11:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Possible case of vandalism

The following discussion is closed.

• 188.81.140.145

The only edit of 188.81.140.145 diff was the removal of two windows that, as explained in the text above, on that page, are used with the single purpose of reproducing what was on the original page. Without that the information would be incomplete and misleading. I would assume it would be an honest mistake if not made as the only edit of an IP. Please take appropriate action and advise.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 19:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

I give a warning and will be watching. Huib talk ^Abigor 19:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

• Same edit diff done by another user with a good excuse because of only an intermediate knowledge of English. One should not expect full understanding of what is written from people who have that kind of limitation.

• Assorted edits diff and diff done by a meta administrator, without any clear criteria, and who would rather delete than engage in an intelligent and intelligible dialog. It seems that administrators can do whatever they want. If you want to have any future here, don't mess with it, just be smart about it. This is not a complaint, a personal attack, or whatever you may think of. This is just a user's "personal opinion".

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 00:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Ouch, Kylu has cited perhaps my favourite page (I'd add ReactLater, though), so now I'm forced to DefendEachOther. I've moved and partially restored the example to this user subpage. The RfC is not the correct place where to put such an example, if you don't want it to be modified (and anyway it's too big and annoying). I think that it's useful to see what we are talking about, but there's no need to actually publish the controversial infos and links to let us understand what kind of data was originally published. --Nemo 07:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC) P.s.: I think that this non-request could be closed, now.

Yep, closed it. Meatball was great, but its lessons tend to be ignored most places. I find myself spending more time on the tvtropes site more than anything, lately. Kylu 01:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Thogo

Discussion moved to Talk:Requests_for_comment/Public_or_non-public_personal_information#On_Thogo.27s_comment; offtopic omitted. 08:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Not done, since there's nothing to be done, also according to requester. --Nemo 08:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Entire thread removed due to reposting, please see RfC talkpage linked above for the discussion and outcome. Kylu 01:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

a couple of cross-wiki-trolls

• User:NotAnybody made two trolling posts to my talk feigning to be User:A Nobody
• User:Rev. Ian Cook continued the thread, copy-pasting NotAnybody's last post, +indent, -timestamp.

Both accounts are unified. See:

• w:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User's talk page blocked for no good reason

for Josh's CU comments dinging Cook as a serial account abuser; he also gave these as socks:

• User:Reverend J. Connolley, User:Pmoultrie, and User:TheRevC, but they've not come here.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Done I've blocked the two supposed socks, this should be enough; if you want further action on the last three users ask in SRG (I suppose it's not needed, anyway). --Nemo 08:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks; it's one of the usual en:prats. I'll let folks know if I see more. I posted at en:ani, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at their block logs; I don't think is was User:A Nobody, who is en:banned, and blames me. It's some troublemaker playing games. en:wp is full of them. wikt:feign, an impersonator. Sorry. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I had understood. This is what I meant with that "supposedly" (sorry for my bad English); and that's why I didn't put any warning on A_nobody's talk. --Nemo 09:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Kewl beans. English is an overrated language. I just pointed en:ani at this thread, someone may comment... Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Secret block

Wikix has been blocked for many months by User:Abigor without any kind of notification. The only recent edit by Wikix was a request on User:MADe's talk page, several days ago. MADe answered in a friendly manner and made no complaint; the discussion ended at that point Abigor also edited MAde's talk page by removing Wikix' last, equally friendly, comment. Therefore, I fail to see any purpose to this block. Regards, Guido den Broeder 16:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

If I understand the block reason correctly, Abigor says that Wikix brings over the problems from nl.wiki to meta. This is (for me) a good reason to block here as well. -Barras 16:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikix's talkpage appears to have the history that Abigor's prior warning was simply blanked, and (of course) the log shows in the block log normally. Presumably, Wikix has been around and is aware of how to read the block log to determine why, so why is this a "secret" block? Kylu 16:29, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Per Barras and on "secret" per Kylu - hardly a secret when it is in the block log. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:30, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Barras: how can he import anything if he makes no edits? He was just having a short conversation with MADe, several days ago(!), who had no problem with that. Guido den Broeder 17:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I see this as a simple case, Wikix is warned that he should not come to meta and ask for nl.wiki blocks to be removed, I warned him if he would continu he would be blocked on Meta as long as the Dutch Wikipedia block is there.

Today I recieved a note that Wikix didn't stop, and I placed the blocked where he was warned for, he asked for unblocks by several admins here on Meta and yes maybe he found a Dutch admin willing to talk but that doesn't mean the warning doesn't count anymore. He removed my message on his talkpage so he has read that message. He was warned and played with fire now he has to wait untill he is unblocked on both projects. He tryed asking for a unblock on the OTRS system also... Its not okay to go to other projects and ask random mod's for unblocks, multiple users already told him they didn't like his behavior. Btw it isn't secret, there is a blocklog in dutch so that I'm sure that he understands what I'm talking about. Huib talk ^Abigor 18:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The warning you gave, four weeks ago, was against spamming, as I read it, and as such justified. It was also heeded. He only made two edits since, both on MADe's talkpage, the user that had last blocked him on nl:Wikipedia. We see that all the time here and nobody ever gets blocked for it on meta, simply because nobody is bothered by it. There is no rule against it either. Rather, I prefer this strongly over a frivolous RFC, as you advised. Nothing is imported, this is just two users having a normal, friendly conversation. A block of several months for something that is already well in the past is outrageous anyway. A warning is not a free pass to block at will. Guido den Broeder 18:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)