Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2017-01

Template:Foundation wiki feedback header needs updating

Greetings all. Template:Foundation wiki feedback header needs updating to include the Archive for 2016. I created the archive page and I updated the code for the English version of the template here but the page is restricted so only an admin can update it so I leave this here for you. Someone will need to update for the other languages too. :-) Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and added 2017 to the sandbox template code as well so we don't have to do this again in a couple months. Reguyla (talk) 02:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 14:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 14:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Help

Hello, I've marked Template:Maithili Wikimedians header for translation. Actually, I realized that translation not necessary for the template. So that will someone please delete these translation pages? Unfortunately, Translation Administrator can't delete translations namespace pages. — TBhagat (talk) 16:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Done. Regards.--Syum90 (talk) 10:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you :) — TBhagat (talk) 10:30, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: — TBhagat (talk) 10:30, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Unblock User:NatigKrolik in Armenian Wikipedia

Please unblock User:NatigKrolik in Armenian Wikipedia. --NatigKrolik (talk) 12:49, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Comment - This page is for resolve local issues on Meta, you can contact to local admins on these wiki for unblock. --Ks-M9 ^[disc.] 13:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC).

Not done, as Ks-M9 said, local Meta-Wiki admins can't help you here and you should discuss the matter with hywiki admins. Thank you for your understanding. —MarcoAurelio 14:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Semiprotect User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist

Please semi-protect User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist. This page is used by bot as a blacklist of sites to ignore for possible copyvios. eranroz (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Import en:User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist

Hi, peer phab:T154690 (diff from the bot owner), the page en:User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist should be on meta instead a particular wiki, since it's used in many languages. So please import it here on meta, at User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist. Please let the old page on enwiki until the bot code is deployed. Thanks --Framawiki (please notify !) (talk) 19:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit conflict with ערן :) Can you import the history to User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist, that is a copy of en:User:EranBot/Copyright/Blacklist ? Thanks ! --Framawiki (please notify !) (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Mass Message Sender Right

Hi! I am leading community communications for commons:Commons:Structured data, and need to be able to deploy messages to the mailing list at Global message delivery/Targets/Structured data for multimedia. Can I please have the Mass message right? Astinson (WMF) (talk) 20:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Matiia (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Bulgarian Wikipedia needs help

• GolDaGoBara6Jingiby (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Hi. I have also asked for help on Vandalism reports#Bulgarian Wikipedia needs help. I'm not sure where is the most correct place for such request so I also write here.
  

We have a long-running vandal, sockpuppet lord. See for example https://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Беседа:Юеджи&action=history. We could get some help from a checkuser-steward to find all sockpuppets, their IP addresses, and block them from creating new accounts. We are having 10+ new sockpuppets per day. Also their usernames are mocking or name-calling other editors. See Block log. Петър Петров (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

FYI this has been answered at Vandalism reports, thanks. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 15:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 22:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

EpochFail behaviour on Meta:Babel

I kindly ask that any administrator warns EpochFail to cease and desist his constant references towards me that I'm acting or have acted in bad faith on the discussion happening at Meta:Babel#Improper_closing_of_discussion. While he or anyone else is free to challenge my closure and demand explanations, I do not think it is right that he continues to make personal remarks against me about a suposed bad faith comming from me, repeatedly, after I have asked him several times not do do so. As you all can see in the thread my closure was explained, and later confirmed by fellow bureaucrat MF-W^{[in fact, my closure at 24 December was futile, since the Flow team decided to enable Flow on that page nonetheless on Dec, 19]}. EpochFail and everyone else is are in their right to continue to disagree, but his continued remarks about my suposed bad faith are certainly not okay, in fact are insulting and he should drop the stick he's been wielding against me since then, or so I feel. I had hopped not to come here, but this is getting quite cantankerous. In fact, I'm feeling harassed and I would like this put to an end. If EpochFail is not able to address me in a respectful way, I think he should not engage in communication with me no more. Thank you, —MarcoAurelio 22:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't feel like I have accused MarcoAurelio of behaving in bad-faith at all. Instead, I have questioned the actions that he has taken. I could see how he might have interpreted my original remarks as accusing him of acting in bad-faith, so I made modifications to those remarks and included a note about why those modifications have taken place. While I feel as though I have made the distinction clear, he persists in asserting that I am insulting him personally. I feel like I should be able to question someone's actions without being accused of engaging in personal attacks. --EpochFail (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Reading the discussion, I don't have the feeling this is a one-sided argument. For example, you continued to argue about comments which were older than the "modifications" by EpochFail, even after these modifications were made. I suggest to calm down, such heated (almost ad hominem) discussions are the last thing we need in this situation. Thank you. --Vogone (talk) 23:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

@Vogone: To clarify, I come here due to Special:Diff/16201712 dated yesterday where in summary he tells me that I think he does not deserve fairness from me, and lectures me again about good and bad faith, after I have told him not to continue. I decided not to reply and come here instead. I do not think throwing more gas to the fire will be any productive.

I have and never had no issues with my actions being questioned, it comes with the "job". I have already explained why I did closed the way I did, and another admin confirmed it. He's of course still free to disagree, but persisting in that is not helpful IMHO. I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or bad behaviour comming from myself, really, and I admit I might have been harsh in some of my comments to which I'd like to apologize, but I find all that section about my suposed bad closure a bit condimented with hypocrisy to be sincere. The closure of the discussion came implicit with the conversion of that talk page to Flow while the discussion was already running on December 19; and not by me. But it is me who is being blamed. I closed and later added the closure template so it became obvious. I was asked to explain, I did. Another bureaucrat confirmed the closure. What's the point in continue to pick on me? As I've said and I can repeat indefinitely, I never had any concerns with my actions being questioned, but when I perceive that some people is assuming repeatedly bad faith on my actions here and elsewhere I do have a problem, because it is not true and that's what it is happening here. If I'd have felt that the discussion were successful, I'd have closed it as successful as I've done with several other proposals on other topics discussed in Meta.

—MarcoAurelio 14:49, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

And again. —MarcoAurelio 15:59, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@EpochFail: please stop. Your recent comments on the page in questions are disruptive. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

+1. --Vogone (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

(EC) Steinsplitter I've just saved a comment. I'll stop at this point. Can you clarify what is disruptive about my discussion on the page? --EpochFail (talk) 16:37, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

MarcoAurelio gave a link, in light of this section this was an unnecessarily provocative and disruptive comment. The fact that we have so many diverging opinions on this page and that a second bureaucrat confirmed the closure already show there was "no consensus" for this software change. If you still think the closure was improper, you are free to, but you have made that clear already elsewhere. --Vogone (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I see Vogone. I'm sorry. My intention was to speak clarity to what I feel is a mischaracterization of the past put forth by Marco. I didn't intend to further engage Marco but rather to make sure that a false assertion was addressed for the purposes of the discussion. I see now that it will not be tolerated for me to speak about this specific issue (my feelings of improper closure) again. But I'd like clarity so that I may still continue to participate without further sanction. Can you help me draw a line around the specific behavior you'd like me to stop? --EpochFail (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@EpochFail: Regarding your question: Are you serious? You are a meta admin and a WMF staffer, and i think you know (or at least i hope, otherwise you would be unfit for such a position imho) very well what is allowed and what not. Please don't play the system. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Steinsplitter, we got here because of a misunderstanding, so I'm seeking clarity. As any good Wikipedian, I respect process. I am more than willing to learn from and side with an independent 3rd party's judgement of my actions. But I'd like to continue to participate in discussions that affect me and my work without worrying that I'm going to be sanctioned again for my next disagreement. Is it too much to ask for clarity so that I can know, specifically, what you want me to avoid? E.g. am I allowed to continue to discuss the use of Flow on Meta? Am I allowed to respond to Marco when he addresses me? I don't want to violate my sanction. --EpochFail (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

This is wikilawyering. Please read w:WP:STICK. Relitigating the closure is disruptive, especially since well, you went and supervoted to get your way anyway. I find it concerning that a Meta admin is unable to understand how to collaborate effectively with other Wikimedians. (And a WMF staffer, but we only have control over Meta). --Rschen7754 01:15, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Rschen7754, I am unsure what you mean by "supervote". I had nothing to do with Flow actually getting enabled beyond the original proposal and my comments on Meta pages. --EpochFail (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

That may be, but you are arguing at the minor details and my point still stands. --Rschen7754 01:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

While I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment, I accept it. --EpochFail (talk) 01:52, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for MassMessage Sender role

Hi, I would like to get access for MassMessage Sender role. I am part of the Global Reach team at the Wikimedia Foundation. This access will help us to push communication from our team to the global communities. For example, we have an upcoming office hour for the South Asian region, and we would like to post an invitation in village pumps specific to the communities in this region. Thanks.--RAyyakkannu (WMF) (talk) 12:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Done ~ Nahid ^Talk 14:21, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Nahid.--RAyyakkannu (WMF) (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Reset password

Hi, I signed up in September 2016, but I have forgotten my password. I haven't created/edited any pages yet. Unfortunately, I didn't enter my Email, so I can't reset my password by myself. I don't want to create a new account - I want to save my username. What can I do? 77.138.186.227

There is no posibility of password reset for accounts without a registered email address. Sorry but I think you've lost the account. —MarcoAurelio 14:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

No open proxies

Просто какой-то оголтелый «нацизм\тоталитаризм\демократия» блокировать за прокси! Я не про себя – смотрел историю изменений, где QBA-bot периодически банит IP которые и вандализмом не занимались – только по адресному признаку. Ну, как тут люди, а в у вас там в Израиле нет. И притом Википедия сама-то в интернете, но не принимает пользователей, окромя тех у кого нашита звёздочка поясняющая! Поняли? Ещё и на английском. -??? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 185.182.81.18 (talk)

Тише, пожалуйста. NOP — это вынужденные меры, без этого правила любые блокировки зарегистрированных или незарегистрированных участников не имели бы ни малейшего смысла — обход блокировки был бы делом нескольки кликов, безконечное количество раз. Было бы хорошо никого не блокировать, но увы не у всех кто приходит в проект, который может редактировать каждый, хорошие намерения. Опытные зарегистрированные участники имеют возможность запросить специальный флаг разрешающий обходить блокировки айпи-адресов, а также использовать Tor, в случае если они могут представить любые здравые аргументы зачем им это. P.S. Физически проекты Фонда Викимедиа в США, а не в Израиле. --Base (talk) 20:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Quarry crashed?

I don't know where to ask, mw:Talk:Quarry seems not to be read by any admin. Quarry has crashed or is running extremly slowly once again. The latest queries are "running" though they don't. Whom or where should one ask for a resetting Quarry and killing dead queries? The oldest query I know of is still "running" for half a year. See also 2016 Community Wishlist Survey/Categories/Bots and gadgets#Quarry maintenance. --Achim (talk) 20:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

You could try asking at #wikimedia-labs^connect or file a new Phabricator task tagged with quarry. --Glaisher (talk) 15:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Just FYI, Pretty much the only one that can do anything if Quarry goes down that I know of is Yuvipanda. Reguyla (talk) 02:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for MassMessage Sender role

Hi, I would like to get access to the MassMessage Sender role. I am in the Technical Collaboration team at the Wikimedia Foundation. I need this urgently in order to be able to promote the Developer wishlist survey to the Technical Village Pump. Thanks -- SSethi (WMF) 6:08 PM, January 20th, 2017 (PST)

Done. Matiia (talk) 02:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Please ban the offensive vandal Wengier Wikingier

He was vandalising and cursing on ES. L3X1 (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

That account is already locked. You can see the status of an account on its contributions page. Also, please don't call vandalism-only accounts "punk hat"s or anything like that - seeing wiki people getting worked up over vandalism is half the reason why these people do it. See w:WP:DENY for more info. – Ajraddatz (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

it.wikiversity on Www.wikiversity.org template

Serves an admin here --Samuele2002 (talk) 08:01, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I've created phab:T155952. Matiia (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much --Samuele2002 (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Archive a request for comments

Please close and archive Requests for comment/Swedish Wikipedia blocking policy violation and Administrator abuse. See Talk:Requests for comment/Swedish Wikipedia blocking policy violation and Administrator abuse. Yger (talk) 10:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Checkuser abuse on the Spanish Wikipedia

Hi all, I'd like to share the RFC with you. To sum up, a CU at the Spanish Wikipedia has carried out (again) a rogue verification, claiming that I've been evading my block by using the Atón account. I'd like to ask, again, for a CU verification by an involved CU (considering the wikis I'm active in). Any help from your side? --Discasto (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

This is quite out of scope for an RfC. You say you've already asked the Ombudsmen in the past, but they are the appropriate group for raising concerns with use of the CU tool. – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for Site/CentralNotice adminship

Hi, I would like to gain admin rights to the Site/ CentralNotice banners and campaigns. I am in the Technical Collaboration team at the Wikimedia Foundation. I need this to promote the Developer wishlist survey. Thanks -- SSethi (WMF) 7:32 PM, January 20th, 2017 (PST)

@Jalexander-WMF: --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @Steinsplitter:, SSethi (WMF) reached out to us via internal channels and won't need these for now. If needed in the future for work purposes we'll of course ensure she gets them. Jamesofur (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Update deprecated code in CN banner

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralNoticeBanners/edit/stewnoms&template=stewnoms uses global variables wgUser and wgUserGroups (twice). This should be updated to use mw.config.get('wgUser') etc. Currently, these uses log deprecation warnings to the browser console on all wikis. --Schnark (talk) 09:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Requesting page protection

Please protect the page The Wikipedia Library/1Lib1Ref for the duration of the campaign i.e., until 3 February 2017, since it is a high traffic page and has seen several unconstructive edits in the past. Something similar to the semi-protection in en should do the trick. Regards—UY Scuti ^Talk 17:57, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Done. --Vogone (talk) 18:02, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Requesting my IRC ban be lifted

The following discussion is closed: Not a meta issue. Savh^ñ 21:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

---

I am again requesting my IRC ban be lifted. My last request was on 12 December 2016.

A ban was placed on my IRC account on the Wikimedia channels Az1568 (AlexZ) and I am requesting it be lifted. AlexZ is currently the only IRC group mod active and after previously agreeing to unblock my account he now refuses to do so or even acknowledge me me.

After speaking with others in the past, this is the closest thing to an appropriate venue to request my IRC account be unblocked. Since AlexZ refuses to even speak to me on the issue my only avenue is for the community here to discuss it and perhaps vote to lift it so that I can participate. Reguyla (talk) 18:50, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

While I am not a sysop or a bureaucrat, I have been active on IRC for awhile and from what I've seen personally, a ban was placed on your IRC account for good cause. You've failed to acknowledge the disruption you caused before the ban, and also failed to acknowledge the disruption you caused in your ceaseless attempts to be unbanned (if I'm wrong, please provide diffs). You've previously characterized it as some kind of noble fight against a great conspiracy against you, where you won't give up on principle. I'm just not sure you acknowledge the reason you were banned, or why it hasn't been lifted. You've been told, quite clearly, to AT THE VERY LEAST drop the stick for awhile - but you can't even do that. It hasn't even been two months, you continue to complain on IRC to whomever will listen (including non-WMF channels where you continued despite repeated requests for you to stop), and there's these repeated posts in the incorrect forum - as this forum is still not the correct venue (not sure who these "others" you speak of are). As such, I still cannot support any unban at this time. You've been told that the correct venue for appeal is the IRC Group Contacts. AlexZ is not the only group contact, nor is he the "primary" group contact (the "chair"). I suggest you truly drop the stick and consider WP:OFFER as a guideline for when you make your next appeal, and that you acknowledge (at that time) the disruption caused both before your ban and also after your ban, and state why it was inappropriate. If this is so important to you, surely you can do that? Waggie (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree completely with Waggie's analysis of the situation. You haven't shown any willingness to drop the stick and have even gone as far as to get yourself banned on Wikia for harassment of the IRC operators and Community Staff there. Such behavior is unacceptable and repeated attempts to cause disruption here will not result in the outcome that you desire. --Az1568 (talk) 20:39, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Obviously I disagree and since you have both stated previously you want me blocked there as well as here on the Wikimedia projects it doesn't come as a surprise that you would oppose this request but there really is no stick. I am merely asking to be unblocked on IRC and Alex, as the only active group contact, refuses to even discuss it. Aside from that, Alex already agreed to unblock me and then refused to do so when I refused to allow him to include the Commons channel. He was upset the Commons community unblocked me there and refused to go through with the unban unless I agreed to include the Commons channel. He additionally asked his friends on Wikia to block me on their sites as well. So yeah, I do admit I am upset and have issue with that and anyone would naturally feel the same way about being bullied. You can refer to it as a stick if you like but I am merely standing up to Alex's bullying plain and simple.

I also obviously cannot provide diffs because IRC is not wiki and the history is not retained. Some "ops" retain logs of the history, but unfortunately being blocked I do not even have access to the channel let alone the logs. But anyone can see Alex's baiting and trolling me on the last request alone let alone other interactions in the past. It's really quite obvious.

As further supporting evidence of my conduct, since being unblocked on the Commons channel there has been no problems and I am still able to access several WMF related channels as well that Alex didn't block and haven't had any trouble there either. The only problems are caused from Alex and his vendetta against me.

Also, since Alex brought it up, that ban on Wikia he mentions is because he asked his friends there to ban me on their IRC and Discord channels and I made it public that there are Wikia ops using their access to do favors for friends. It's unfortunate that the Wikia staff decided to block me to protect that problematic behavior but not entirely surprising.

Now I realize that some people here do not like me and that's to bad considering all the work I have done for these projects over the years, but is the conduct displayed by Alex really the conduct you want to encourage in your ops and functionaries to do on the WMF projects? I would hope not. So it should come as no surprise why I am upset about it. Reguyla (talk) 21:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from discussing these off-topic matters here. Whatever people do on other places (be it Wikia or IRC) is of no concern to meta sysops or bureaucrats, so this is therefore definitely not the place to hold such a discussion. Savh^ñ 21:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Crat-promoted plagiarism on a small wiki

Dear Sirs,

My name is Farhad & I'm mainly active on Meta around Wikipedias in the languages of Russia project. This is a request for guidance on the issue I am not quite confident how to address.

About a year ago I discovered that all of my homewiki bureaucrats (past and present) do not recognize not only Founding principles (we have a formal vote results for this), but also Terms of use & Licensing policy, as they have been actively growing ttwiki by Copy-Pasting copyrighted materials from elsewhere, and are against deleting this material now. (my best estimate is up to 3000 articles contain significant segments).

My community didn't seem to care, whilst I got some bans and some threats, so I brought some Russian-speaking people from other wikis (with admin, bureaucrat and ArbCom experience in RuWP/WN/WMRU to talk with the current bureaucrat (he ignored). My efforts to try following the procedure prescribed by the newly adopted local policy on removing Copyright violations was to no avail: local Copyvio Noticeboard's history witnesses to entries being reversed by the bureaucrat, who meanwhile continued adding copyvio content himself.

I feel I will certainly have to stop logging newly discovered suspect articles into Copyvio Noticeboard, as the bureaucrat in question has just given me a warning by blocking me for a week for adding one more Earwig's Copyvio Detector-confirmed entry thereto, classified my procedural persistence as harassment of admins on my part, and threatened with a permanent unilateral ban should I continue.

From whatever I've found on Meta (and it's here that I need your help), I am unable to conclude if:

1. this deserves an RfC,
2. if a different avenue is best to address the issue (as I wouldn't want my homewiki being deleted & its community losing faith and interest in Wikimedia projects) or
3. if it's best to put a stone on declared WMF principles & policies, and just do other things to grow my homewiki & its community with the hope that eventually things will get better.

Thank you in advance.--Frhdkazan (talk) 20:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Disclosure: I am unable to comment on the copyvio issues, not speaking the tt language.

However, just reading through what you have written, you could try a meta RFC. There are a few that result in all admins being desysopped on a wiki. That being said, there are many that are closed as inactive after 2 years. If you do that, be short and to the point; it is hard enough to get people to care about smaller wikis, and if it's too long to read, nobody will read it.

If you have enough community support, you could nominate the admins/crats to be removed and stewards would honor the request.

You could contact WMF to intervene if you think the copyvios are bad enough and rise to a legal issue.

Or, if you think the copyvios are bad enough and want the project closed, you could go to PCP. The copyvios would be deleted and the rest would go to Wikimedia Incubator.

It's a difficult situation and none of the above options are guaranteed, but I hope this helps. --Rschen7754 21:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm grateful for being heard & encouraged. I indeed notified legal — to put this on their radar, as this might also be true for other small wikis. When CopyPatrol or similar tools become available for all wikis (thanks to Tech team efforts), even manual logging of Possible Copyvios (like this one Earwig's Copyvio Detector-confirmed) would evidently become obsolete. On a side note: In case of aboriginal or traditional cultures, this is mainly seen through the lens of moral rather than legal offence (even when operating within modern legal systems), thus having different implications for the way the project is perceived by the larger linguistic community. I'll choose to take my time to weigh these factors before any further steps. Thanks again. --Frhdkazan (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)