Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2020-11


Please delete User:Fashionista Malerkotla and block said user for spam. –MJLTalk 07:54, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 08:42, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

w:Gadget:Past as Future

There is currently a discussion (see here) regarding how to creating the page w:Gadget:Past as Future. Only staff are allowed to create gadgets, can someone help create the page? --Ituafmq (talk) 23:39, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: This is a page for assistance from admins here on the meta-wiki, you may want to contact your community liaisons. — xaosflux Talk 00:11, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for AWB use permission

Greetings, I would like to have permission of using AutoWikiBrowser on Meta-Wiki (Meta:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage). I have several years' experience of using AWB on English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.

Type of work: AWB has two good qualities, one is of course making quick edits, however that is not reason I am looking for the AWB tool on Meta-Wiki. AWB has many in-built quick fix options (such as CheckWiki, Regex typos fix, section reorder etc.). For different purposes I need to create or manage pages, it would be very useful if I can use tool. There won't be many edits, however it will save a lot of time. Regards. -- টিটো দত্ত/Tito Dutta (কথা) 16:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

I am not too sure so it's here, seems LTA-ish, nsmutte, but unsure. The name is closely related to Bonadea. Ideas? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Seems stale. Archiving. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

The user (talk · contribs) has resumed the cross-wiki vandalism after a 24 hrs block. Tbsock (talk) 21:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The IP is global blocked and not in meta aktiv-𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 22:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Nothing to do here for meta. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Block request

  Already done. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:01, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 13:05, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

IP Block Exempt

Hi, I'm editing from a public pc because my phone is broken. I worry that I will be blocked because the ip may have been used for vandalism. Could you grant me an ip block exempt? Thanks --C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 03:09, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

  Not done You already have a global IP exemption, that should be sufficient.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:12, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for Patroller

Hello! I reject dozens of Vandal's cross-wiki edits with SWViewer every day, I want to apply to be a Patroller because considering that many users with Patroller rights are already infrequent or inactive, therefore I want to apply for this right as well as patrol the rtrc on this wiki and return the edits which breaks quickly. Thanks. FBN122645 (talk) 14:05, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Abuse filter false positive

Could an admin please look at w:User talk:Pppery#Opting out of AfroCine notifications? Someone removing themselves from MassMessage/Lists/AfroCine got incorrectly marked as spam by an abuse filter. * Pppery * it has begun 23:45, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

This is phab:T264562 DannyS712 (talk) 23:49, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
The filter should probably be modified to ignore mass message lists if it can't handle them properly. * Pppery * it has begun 23:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  Done - Special:AbuseFilter/history/118/diff/prev/3496 --DannyS712 (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Caca55caca55caca55

Caca55caca55caca55 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Spam. Pols12 (talk) 14:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done Blocked indef. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Sgd. —Hasley 14:53, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning Paolo.marraffa

Hi, Paolo.marraffa is a blocked user on itwiki ad enwiki. He try to create socks to dispute sysops work. Yesterday he wrote in his UP and talk on meta, criticizing the work of various administrators. He wrote things like "I have suffered cyberbullying episodes on wikipedia" or "Wikipedia is manipulated". I see also legal threats in talk. He said "I have been offended by other more experienced users and for this we can speak of cyberbullying with personal and penal responsibilities that go beyond the miserable usernames". Can you please intervene? Thanks --Superpes15 (talk) 12:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk page + user page deleted--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 13:13, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
They now posted this, is it time to sidewide block them indef? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Upon further review, I think they had been given ample warnings, changing the block to indef + sidewide. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:39, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Camouflaged Mirage Thank you for the block--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 17:52, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: User has been locked. Sgd. —Hasley 18:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for Massmessage rights

Hello, I am Nitesh, working with CIS-A2K (The Center for the Internet and Society) who is dealing with Indic communities and National level events. Last month, I organised a mini edit-a-thon to celebrate Mahatma Gandhi birth anniversary. That time, I faced difficulty to send messages on VP and users talkpages. Now we are going to plan a national level event for February. Before the event we have to send some important notifications, updated and Newsletters on VPs and talkpages (Please visit here to get more information). So, I would like to request you that give me Mass message rights so that I can use these rights for sending messages to communities. Apart from, Mahatma Gandhi edit-a-thon, I am planning to organise more mini edit-a-thon for the next months as well. If you want more information or clarity please let me know. --Nitesh (CIS-A2K) (talk) 07:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

@Nitesh (CIS-A2K): Can I have a MMS sample and target distribution list please, thanks so much. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Sure! Camouflaged Mirage. Please visit here for the list. When users will add there name then the list will expand. Thank you --Nitesh (CIS-A2K) (talk) 06:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
@Nitesh (CIS-A2K): Thanks. How long do you need the right for (i.e. how long should I grant). Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:25, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Camouflaged Mirage, I want Mass message rights till 28 February 2021. Thanks much --Nitesh (CIS-A2K) (talk) 12:28, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
@Nitesh (CIS-A2K)   Granted for 6 months then. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:38, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Camouflaged Mirage, Thank you so much --Nitesh (CIS-A2K) (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:40, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Can page User:NRuiz (WMF) be a redirect to User:Nurieta

I have finished my appointment at WMF but will continue my work as volunteer, can my WMF page be deleted/archived? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nurieta (talk)

@Nurieta: We can delete the page, without an issue. Whether it should be a redirect is something that I would prefer to hear from WMF about what they wish in that space for (former) employee account. @Whatamidoing (WMF): Is there guidance from WMF?  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Why don't you simply change it to a redirect to your personal user page yourself? Replace the current text with #REDIRECT [[User:Nurieta]], best with your role account itself, and that's it. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 19:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
These normally just get tagged with Template:Former staff; certainly fine to have a pointer on it to a volunteer account. — xaosflux Talk 20:31, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed per Xaosflux. I will think a redirect + Former staff is appropriate. @Nurieta: I had added autopatrol on your account as you are clearly trusted and this will allow you to edit the staff page from your volunteer account. In this vein, I had also removed the autopatrol from your staff account as it's not needed anymore. Hope this helps. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:57, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Close request, or in fact 3 close requests.

Good day to all,

In light of the recent closure of Requests for comment/Should the Foundation call itself Wikipedia I think it would be appropriate to close the three sections of Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project/Community feedback and straw poll as well.

While not an official RFC it was treated similarly to one; there have been almost no comments for two months. Perhaps something along the lines of A significant majority of the community finds that any survey about naming proposals should include the status quo as an option, with the same prominence as proposed new names for the first section with the others also closed following the same formula.

Posting this here instead of on the stewards' noticeboard since it doesn't really need to be closed by a steward.

I won't be around much the next few days, or weeks really, so apologies in advance if you have any questions and I'm not there to answer them.

𝒬𝔔 16:48, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

  •   Question Do we have to really close this, and since this isn't technically a RFC, any community member can close if they think they can read the consensus. I don't see the value of closing such a page which is just a straw poll and the numbers itself can tell the story, any additional commentary isn't going to sway the decision in any significant way. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
    • @Camouflaged Mirage: Thanks for your question, the primary reason a close is desirable is that it becomes easier to use the discussion as a succinct data point once it has been summarized by an independent observer, see for example how Requests for comment/Should the Foundation call itself Wikipedia is now being employed at Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project, whereas as long as it's open its still possible to aver that an important comment giving deeper insights may yet still change the whole course of the discussion.
      A secondary consideration is letting contributors know that the discussion has run its course, and they don't need to invest personal time resources into reading through everything to make an informed individual assessment that will be useful in building consensus.
      Now I'm not saying a closes are always desirable. Take for example Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer. In that case there is no value to any type of closure because the petition is already its own summary, and there's no oppose, neutral, or other option, hence no possibility of a change to the course of the discussion. Further there is minimal tax on the time of a contributor, you either choose to sign it or you don't; no further discussion is needed. I suppose potentially an opponent could be induced to start a counter-petition, but even in that kind of hypothetical case the extra time commitment is still restricted to a comparative handful of individuals.
      To your second point, I agree that the policy on RFC closes does not apply here as currently worded, and any community member may therefore close it. However I am involved and thus unable to do so myself. The request was posted here because this is as high-profile a page as any around to request an independent closer, although I have no objection to a cross-post to babel if thought desirable. I still believe it would be best if a long-time trusted member of the wikimedia community closed it to minimize any doubts that foundation staff may harbor and preemptively blunt objections that might otherwise be raised based solely on the identity of the closer.
      𝒬𝔔 22:40, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
      • For the first point, this, unlike superprotect, isn't so clear if community protest will change their minds. Here the foundation have the right to rename itself no matter whatsoever we wants. To be clear, even in the superprotect case this is their website, they could do whatsoever they wanted. What is different in superprotect is that we can have some leverage in terms of it's content issues and local communities can police them, in this case, there is no way we can act. No matter whatsoever, if one landslide vote of opposition cannot sway the foundation, I don't think an additional of a statement will. Now to the other points, this should be discussed at the page if there is any closure and if there is a consensus to support closure, it will be useful. This need not to be closed by a sysop, so feel free to post it at Meta:Babel, you are right in this. Lastly, as of trusted member, I don't think meta sysops are considered trusted enough sadly, the partial foundation actions RFC the foundation require a steward to close, calls to allow meta sysops to close isn't accepted by T&S, I don't see how this is different. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
        • Thanks for your thoughtful response. I suppose I should be surprised the foundation places so little confidence in some of its hardest working volunteers, but I'm not; mostly just saddened. In any event I've gone ahead and cross-posted to Babel per this discussion. The number of neutral closers for this is probably small, so even with a cross-post it may be a while before a volunteer steps forward, but this is not in anyway urgent so that's not really much of a concern.
          𝒬𝔔 17:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
          • Sure, hope someone can response there. Regards, Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:24, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
            • @Camouflaged Mirage: if you don't mind doing me a favor, when this archives in 24 hours or so could you update the link to this discussion in the first line at Meta:Babel#Close request. You have my permission to edit my post as odds are fairly low that I'll be around to do it myself, thanks.
              𝒬𝔔 17:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
              @Quantocius Quantotius Why not you just add the permalink of my current diff which might also do the same purpose. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


@Camouflaged Mirage: Good point, I didn't think of that; just disregard then something just came up, but I'll update it in about 10-15 minutes here, thanks for the suggestion.

Now,   Done and again I appreciate your help here. 𝒬𝔔 17:51, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:24, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Would a sysop or autopatroller please restore to revision 20664776 as Special:AbuseFilter/150 prevents other users from doing so since a user's signature contains too many emojis, thanks.

𝒬𝔔 19:22, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done --DannyS712 (talk) 19:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 19:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Block request

Can someone track my reverts and block all the users I reverted, long term abuse, etc. Lock too as xwiki abuse.CM-Public (talk) 22:11, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

globally locked by Bsadwoski1. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 23:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
There are still some but I'll handle it myself when I am back to a secure connection. Thanks all :) CM-Public (talk) 23:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 23:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


POWERFUL 245 (talk · contribs) is currently disruptive-editing multiple pages of multiple projects.

There is an open report at English Wikipedia's ANI [1] about Powerful questionable edits ([2], trying to replace 1991's Dangerous with a 2016's version of it, without even explaining himself); or replacing 1987's Bad[3] with Bad 25 despite the fact that Bad 25 [4] does have an article.

I checked their global edits, and they are doing the same with the Spanish and the French wikis, and are already blocked at Commons for persistently uploading copyrighted pictures to use them in the articles they are editing. There are no intentions from this user to stop and discuss despite the long list of warns.[5][6] Tbsock (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

What does this user have to do with meta? This user hasn't edited here and is only blocked on Commons at the moment. What action do you want meta sysops to take? —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 02:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I think disrupting editing at 4 wikis, 0 summaries, 0 talk page contact, and reverting solely because they want to revert is enough evidence this user will continue disrupting unless any kind of global block is performed. Yes, I can take it to French and Spanish noticeboards, but the outcome will result in the same in every wiki they edit, the user getting temporarily blocked every time for not attempting to engage in any way until they are indef. The user will be unblocked in a week in Commons and once that happens the user will continue uploading files there. What's the point of wasting everyone's time with users that don't even attempt to interact with others (and no, I can't edit the Global block noticeboard as that page is protected). Tbsock (talk) 05:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
@Tbsock: This is a page for request admin attention related to metawiki only. Global b?lock needs to be requested at SRG and if you are unable to edit it try edit request on it's talk page. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
  •   Not done No disruption on meta, hence, we meta sysops doesn't have remit over this case. If you think the account needs a global lock, do request at SRG, unable then email stewards Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism of translations

Special:Contributions/2600:387:6:982:0:0:0:30 - adding gibberish to translation pages, please apply a block. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

It already stopped. Pages deleted. --MF-W 16:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: MF-W 16:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Request for MassMessage

Hi, I'm organizing Movement Strategy Call in Bangladesh, that's why I've to send message on several talk pages and several times. I also serve as an EduWiki Outreach Collaborator (newsletter publisher) for Wikimedia Education. If someone could assign me MassMessage sender rights it would be very helpful, or send a message on behalf of me at this time. And I'll ask here for the same to send messages.

Thanks in advance. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 17:33, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@ZI Jony How long do you need the rights for? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Camouflaged Mirage, As an newsletter publisher until demission, and for strategy call till we complete. Specifically I can't announce the deadline. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 17:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
@ZI Jony So is it once off message or how many messages you expected to send over the course of this, is a 6 months grant adequate? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Camouflaged Mirage, It's not once off message, maybe this week or earlier next week will need to send another message. But, 6 months grant is fine for me at this time, if required will request after 6 months. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 18:03, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
@ZI Jony Granted for 6 months. If you need an extension, do drop by here. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Please undo edit on other's user page

Please undo latest edit on User:starburst1415, it doesn't fit scope. --Semi-Brace (talk) 22:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Filter has to be modified, it cannot be autopatrolled users like my valid alternate can't edit such pages. CM-Public (talk) 23:01, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Reverted and protected.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:24, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Semi-Brace (talk) 23:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)


How can I enable cookies on enwiki and itwiki? I tried, but I still cannot login to enwiki or itwiki and it says "this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking." How can I enable cookies in my user scripts? --Gmcgk log WgfdU (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I would guess that you have something in your browser settings. Check whether you have blocking technology in place, or configured your browser. Definitely purge your case on those pages first.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:26, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

A proposal

Hello, I am Gmcgk L. Wgfdu, and I have a proposal. Anytime a non-existent project is entered (e.g. n:aa:,) it redirects to Incubator in the format: (project abbreviation on Incubator)/(language code), in this case, Wn/aa. Wikisource and Wikiversity are not hosted at Incubator, so s:aa: would redirect to oldwikisource:, and v:aa: redirects to an HTML site that says that this wiki does not exist. Can we change the redirect target of non-existing Wikiversities from going to the HTML site to redirecting to betawikiversity:?

Rationale: Many Wikiversities in other languages don't exist yet. Instead of making an HTML site for each one, it would be a lot easier to redirect to Beta Wikiversity and to start the project there. --Gmcgk log WgfdU (talk) 23:06, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gmcgk log WgfdU: This is not a topic that is relevant to this page. You would be better to insert phabricator: tickets.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)


InteGraalityBot has been running for a while, but I'm not sure it was officially approved. If it was and I missed it, I suggest flagging the account as a bot (or at least an autopatroller). CC @Jean-Frédéric --DannyS712 (talk) 03:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I’m fine either way. It’s been making quite a few edits as it was configured to run daily, but that was a left over (phab:R2566:4cb6a5ad0). I just demoted it back to weekly updates. Jean-Fred (talk) 10:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
  Done As it is an account ran by a trusted user, I added the autopatrol flag. I don't see an approval in Meta:Requests_for_adminship/Archives (sic!). If a bot flag is wanted, request should be made at Meta:Requests for adminship (sic!) rather than here. Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:07, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request for copyrighted content.

Special:Diff/20684702 introduced content from [7] word-for-word. Extensive quotation like that should obviously be avoided (especially if it is non-sequiturs about WW2 and how the Ustaše (literal fascists) were treated. –MJLTalk 01:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

  Already done  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:47, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Report concerning User:Silveredgecasinogame

Silveredgecasinogame (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA)Reasons: Special:diff/20688060 1233 T / C 18:24, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@1233 Blocked. Thanks for reporting. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:54, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Looks like Vandalism-only account, also see Special:GlobalRenameQueue/request/70063. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:35, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks for the report, @CptViraj:. --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:57, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: TheSandDoctor Talk 06:57, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Requesting help at en.wikinews

The project is getting spammed by a currently unblocked user and it doesn't appear that any active admins are available. Would appreciate a global lock of this user, thanks. The Irate Communist (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@The Irate Communist: Hi. This page is for asking help from Meta-Wiki admins, the people who can perform global locks are stewards. They can help you but English Wikinews isn't a GS wiki, it is big enough to handle their things locally. If the user you want to report is spamming cross-wiki (on multiple wikis) then you can post lock request at SRG. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 04:55, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 14:07, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandalism only account. (`・ω・´) (talk) 06:28, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done.—Teles «Talk ˱C L @ S˲» 06:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: TheSandDoctor Talk 06:41, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, this complain IMO shouldn't be on global userpage, without objections, I will move to user - subpage. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:17, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Or maybe just add __NOGLOBAL__? That'll disable the global user page (until he/she removes the magic word). —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:28, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I moved the text to my talk page. It is just a draft and will be removed soon. Is this okay now? sen (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Fair. True too. I am just wanting some consensus before doing anything, to prevent something like User:Ruhubelent happen again. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 18:35, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
For the record, I   Support deleting (or restricting visibility) of this user page. An user page traditionally serves to introduce oneself as a wikimedian, not as a place for complaints.
I also think this is getting close to a block, given their only contribution is sending complaints everywhere, see a comment by Ladsgroup at my talk page. Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Yup, sock puppetry, causing continuous issues in fawiki. I support deleting the page or blocking the user. Amir (talk) 19:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Neutral for block. Support for delete the userpage--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 19:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
I am stuck in a bad situation and need help. I am Not a puppetry and I did everything I could to prove this. I thought that check users are reasonable and polite people. I did not do anything wrong and I am here to see justice. However the check users do not need to prove their claim. I had a meeting on skype  with two of the fa.wikipedia stewards. They showed me the way of going out of this situation by complaining in Meta. We think a strange problem has happened in usercheck and we have only asked for recheck. @Amin(امین): @Rskhshe sefid: @Huji: @Ajraddatz: sen (talk) 21:53, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Please be informed that something strange is happening on fawiki. Four accounts have been blocked due to sock puppetry while there are good reasons to believe they belong to different people. At least one admin has tried to help them and he is being de-sysoped. Two other accounts who have spoken against the blocks have been blocked themselves. Blocking at this moment is a poor decision. This may need to be discussed at Wikimedia Forum or an RFC. Fawiki is on the verge of becoming another azwiki. 4nn1l2 (talk) 06:43, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
      Comment Heeding user:4nn1l2's warning of events in faWP, I think that this should be allowed to develop on a subpage in the user's ns; it is not our job to stop reasonable complaints and investigations. The requirement for all compilation of evidence is civility. If there are problems at faWP there are enough trusted users through that space for Stewards to get an understanding of what is happening through informal means.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:09, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Marking this section as resolved. It has not been edited in 8 days and the userpage is now blank, making it sort of moot. However, I went ahead and deleted the userpage as it was blanked in good faith by, which I took as G6. In the event that you want it back somewhere as a subpage and have not already done so,, please ping me (or drop a message on my talk) and provide a location where you would like it moved to. --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: TheSandDoctor Talk 03:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Per the global ban policy, we technically need to inform literally every wiki Kubura and his alternate accounts has ever edited.. right? If that is the case, can I just request a MassMessage sender do it? –MJLTalk 22:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Give me the list of the community noticeboards to send it, and I'll send it for you. — regards, Revi 22:52, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Extended content
w:fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs
w:es:Wikipedia:Tablón de anuncios de los bibliotecarios/Portal/Archivo/Miscelánea/Actual
w:ru:Википедия:Форум администраторов
wikt:en:Wiktionary:Beer parlour
w:pl:Wikipodróże:Pub podróżnika
w:hu:Wikipédia:Adminisztrátorok üzenőfala
w:ca:Viquipèdia:Sala dels administradors
w:tr:Vikipedi:Hizmetli duyuru panosu
w:ro:Wikipedia:Afișierul administratorilor
w:sl:Wikipedija:Pod lipo
w:ar:ويكيبيديا:إخطار الإداريين
w:io:Wikipedio:Generala debato
w:sv:Wikipedia:Kommentarer om administrationen av Wikipedia
w:fi:Wikipedia:Ylläpitäjien ilmoitustaulu
w:nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg
w:no:Wikipedia:Administratorenes oppslagstavle
w:id:Wikipedia:Permintaan perhatian pengurus
w:rue:Вікіпедія:Портал комуніты
w:sk:Wikipédia:Nástenka správcov
w:zu:Wikipedia:Umnyango wamgwamanda
w:gl:Wikipedia:Taboleiro dos administradores
w:ko:위키백과:관리자 알림판
w:oc:Wikipèdia:Coordinacion dels admins
w:ur:ویکیپیڈیا:تختۂ اعلانات برائے منتظمین
w:yo:Wikipedia:Abẹ́ igi
wikt:cs:Wikislovník:Nástěnka správců
wikt:id:Wiktionary:Warung kopi
wikt:hu:Wikiszótár:Adminisztrátorok üzenőfala
wikt:ms:Wiktionary:Kedai Kopi
wikt:ru:Викисловарь:Организационные вопросы
wikt:nl:WikiWoordenboek:De Kroeg
wikt:tr:Vikisözlük:Köy çeşmesi
wikt:az:Vikilüğət:Kənd meydanı
wikt:fj:Wiktionary:Soqosoqo toso
@-revi: Not sure how to notify koiwiki, bewiki, mgwiktionary, kywiktionary, lbwiktionary, lowiktionary, chrwiktionary, uzwiktionary, bewiktionary, iowiktionary, or tgwiktionary.
MJLTalk 05:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I tried moving the list to Requests_for_comment/Global_ban_for_Kubura/wikis, but it doesn't seem to like me. –MJLTalk 19:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I know @Blablubbs did send some ban notifications, so please be careful about possible duplicates. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:15, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: I notified most wikis that Kubura has had a significant level of activity on; the full list of notifications is in the RfC. Best, Blablubbs (talk) 22:54, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
We don't want to send duplicated messages, so can you remove the wikis where you already sent the message? Also please provide us the "subject" and "body" of the message as well. Thanks. — regards, Revi 10:57, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
And if there's no Village Pump or Admin's Noticeboard, Community portal or talk page of main page might work too. — regards, Revi 11:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
@-revi: On it. MJL and I will ping once we're done. The message I used for noticeboards was:
== Global ban proposal for Kubura ==
Hello. This is to notify the community that there is an ongoing global ban proposal for [[Special:Contributions/Kubura|Kubura]] who has been active on this wiki. You are invited to participate at [[m:Request for comment/Global ban for Kubura]]. Thank you. ~~~~
Best, Blablubbs (talk) 11:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
@Blablubbs: Probably best to not link Kubura's name like that in order to avoid the ping. We could replace it with [[Special:Contributions/Kubura|Kubura]] to make it more clear who this user is to them.
@-revi: This list does not include anywhere that has previously been notified. –MJLTalk 15:46, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
@MJL: Thanks, I've made the change above. Blablubbs (talk) 16:05, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
doing... — regards, Revi 16:38, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Fired: (Mass message log) 01:39 -revi ( talk | contribs | block ) sent a message to Requests for comment/Global ban for Kubura/wikis ‎(Global ban proposal for Kubura) — regards, Revi 16:40, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
@-revi and MJL: I took the liberty of notifying the proposal on itwiki since the procedure for writing at the bar is a bit particular :) Regards --Superpes15 (talk) 18:11, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: TheSandDoctor Talk 03:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, per the main hrwp RFC, this is also plagued with anon / non-autoconfirmed vandalism / unproductive inputs, shall we semi protect this per the main hrwp RFC. Indef if needed but at this moment maybe 1 weeks? Reluctant to unilateral protect is I am afraid that there might be constructive hrwp editors not autoconfirmed here wanting to contribute, but well they can use the talkpage if needed and the talk is being monitored closely. Some consensus will be good. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Not sure if this discussion is only meant for admins/crats, so I'll offer my 2c. Semi-protecting the main Kubura RfC page is certainly a good idea. I have not seen any constructive contributions there from IPs and non-autoconfirmed users and plenty of examples of non-constructive contributions, including sockpuppetry and vandalism. Nsk92 (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
I think it's manageable so far. For me, having non-confirmed hrwiki editors able to voice themselves is more important than the (manageable) level of vandalism. I'm slightly opposed to protecting at this point. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Martin Urbanec. For now it seems like it can be managed. Nadzik (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Vandalism can be removed with a single press of a button. There is, however, no combination of buttons one could press to retrieve the comments of those constructive editors prevented from participating by a page protection. RfCs, in my view, should generally never be protected. Vermont (talk) 21:30, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Meta is not Wikipedia and there are no true "newbies" here. Everybody arrives knowing how to use a talk page. The RfC has been open for 12 days and we have yet to see a constructive contribution from an IP or a non-autoconfirmed user. In the meantime, sockpuppetry and vandalism continue, including some edits requiring not jut reverts but revdel, such as the one that happened just a few minutes ago[8]. If at some point a constructive IP/non-autoconfirmed contributor does materialize, they can comment at the RfCs talk page, and if they make a vote edit protect request for the RfC itself, their vote can be added to the survey as well. At least semi-protection will give the main RfC page itself some peace. Nsk92 (talk) 21:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
And in the few minutes since my previous post here, we also have this[9]. Nsk92 (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
One edit from an IP that was immediately stopped? --MF-W 23:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  •   Not done then, I am raising it up primarily due to this, my primary reservation, per Vermont and Martin Urbanec is that good faith, non-autoconfirmed users might be unable to participate. There is consensus against protection for now from the admins that participated here. We will manage by blocking, removing the vandalism. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:39, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: TheSandDoctor Talk 16:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC) and email block

Please block the email feature only for these two subnets. It's a LTA flooding special:contact with his gibberish. --Vituzzu (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

please remove my permissions

Hi. I no longer publish The Signpost so I no longer have need of my global massmessage permission; please remove it from me. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done --DannyS712 (talk) 01:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: DannyS712 (talk) 01:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Editnotice not working?

Hello, I recently created Template:Editnotices/Page/User:AJ1m3,zsd./sandbox as an attempt to make an editnotice for my sandbox. I created this as a plan to have a test editnotice. It doesn't seem to be showing when I edit User:AJ1m3,zsd./sandbox, so is this a bug or something? How to fix? --AJ1m3,zsd. (talk) 03:19, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello @AJ1m3,zsd. Meta isn't ground for testing, given your SUL, you had very little significant contribution elsewhere, I don't see why we shall allow you to test here on metawiki. I had deleted the template. Please observe Meta:Inclusion policy which states the scope, these pages for testings / sandbox are more suitable for use in testwiki, which you had some edits already. In addition, there is no reason for you needing sandboxing here, I will recommend you to visit one of our content project, either to contribute to the content or fight some vandalism. Well wishes. In addition, this is no need of admin intervention. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I will add that a project like Wikipedia or maybe testwiki with build in sandbox capablity (i.e. there is sandbox activated by default) will be easier to experiment, and there are plenty of editors there which can guide you in building the edit notices and sandboxes. I hope you will find help in their help desks there. :) For meta, this can be better answered if ask in Tech or Meta:Babel I guess as those are more of community boards rathe than this which is for admin actions. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:28, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
@AJ1m3,zsd: You will be wanting to create user talk:AJ1m3,zsd./Editnotice if you want an edit notice in your user talk space and utilise {{editnotice}}. You are trying to make things harder than they need to be.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:51, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Further noting that Editnotice is a bit of a complex beast and to get it working easily the admins need to put in the parts of componentry to make it work sweetly.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
@AJ1m3,zsd. Helpful link: Please use User talk:AJ1m3,zsd./Editnotice as their username have a dot behind it, I am also fixing the ping for this one as the ping above won't reach him. I am trying to be helpful by providing these (fixes in ping / page names) and all the advices above, certainly not making things harder. Surely this is what is needed, and there is clearly no admin intervention needed, whosoever who know this, I admit I don't, can provide without needing it to be an admin. Your message on my talkpage saying "Well it seemed they got a bit of a slap" I aren't for what is worth. "guiding hand in the direction of what was available." is also untrue, I had tried my best to redirect them to places here on meta. I don't think this statement is correct and fair to me as the 1st responding admin here. I admit that my first respond may not be ideal and I will learn more. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:24, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Now you can use both links already as the above incorrect one seems to be fixed here, so any one should work for now. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Back to the topic, they seems to want an edit notice for their sandbox, the above given link is for their talkpage, hence, the sandbox link should be User talk:AJ1m3,zsd./Sandbox/Editnotice (I think you have to set the sandbox into user talk namespace and not user, not too sure on this - I really don't know edit notice that well). Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 14:40, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: When I attempt to edit the editnotice for my sandbox talk page, it says: Warning! It seems you're editing an editnotice with an invalid name. What should I do? --AJ1m3,zsd. (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
@AJ1m3,zsd. Need to move that sandbox to user talk namespace, if you need help I will help you move. I.e. User:AJ1m3,zsd./sandbox move to User talk:AJ1m3,zsd./sandbox. I hope this clarifies. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@Camouflaged Mirage: Never mind, I think I can test on testwiki. You may delete my editnotices and sandbox. --AJ1m3,zsd. (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@AJ1m3,zsd.: Sandboxes are sandboxes. No real value in deleting, just blank it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Please lock my user and talk page


Can you please protect my user and talk pages on Meta and Commons, so that IP-users cannot edit it anymore? I recieved rape-threats and horrible personal attacks from an LTA IP-user, who is known on the Croatian Wikipedia for doing such things, but also leaking private informations of users that remove his vandalism. The IP has countless times been globally blocked.

Thanks in advice! --Koreanovsky (Ča–Kaj–Što?!) 12:08, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

  Done Meta user page is protected by abuse filter, akin to ongoing soft protection. I have protected your metawiki user talk page here for a month. Commons requests would need to be actioned by Commons admins, rather than by requests here to meta administrators for metawiki business.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: CptViraj (talk) 14:38, 3 December 2020 (UTC)