Open main menu
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Miscellaneous) Archives
This page is for Wikimedia wikis having no active administrators. Requests can be made here for specific administrative actions (such as page deletion) to be performed by a steward or global sysop. In other cases:
  • If the wiki does have active administrators, file the request with one of them.
  • If the wiki has an active editor community, any potentially controversial action (deletion of actual content, edit to a protected page, renaming of a protected page, etc.) should receive consensus from the wiki community before being requested here, and a link should be provided to that consensus in the request.
  • For global lock/block requests, file a request at Steward requests/Global.

To add a new request, create a new section header at the bottom of this page (but above the See also section) using the format below:

=== Very brief description of request here ===
{{Status|In progress}}
Give details about your request here. --~~~~

It is helpful if you can provide a link to the wiki (or the specific page on the wiki) in question, either in the header or in the body of your request.

When reporting cross-wiki vandalism, the following template calls can be used to link to a user's contributions across all Wikimedia content wikis (these are for logged in users and non-logged-in users, respectively):

* {{sultool|Username}}

* {{luxotool|IP.address}}

Template {{LockHide}} can also be used in appropriate cases.

To request approval of OAuth consumers please use {{oauthapprequest}} (see the documentation before using).

Old requests are archived by the date of their last comment.

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Manual requestsEdit

Please see a list of pages nominated for speedy deletion via {{Delete}} and/or the local equivalent. You can also filter by wikis whose admins are less than X or have not delete since Y.

Copyrighted works on the Esperanto WikisourceEdit

Status:    On hold

The works of Kazimierz Bein (Kabe) are not yet in public domain. The author died in 1959. The pages should be deleted now and undeleted in 10 years. There is no active community on this wiki and there are no admins.

Pages containing copyrighted material:

Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 14:11, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Robin van der Vliet: As these works have been there for years (2012), they should at least have the semblance of a deletion discussion with whatever community may be there, and for at least a month so allowing suitable opportunity for comment. Though it will be a forlorn hope, please ping the contributor.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
I informed the creator of most of those pages here, but I don't really see what we should discuss. The pages constitute a clear copyright violation. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 15:42, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
They have been there six years, waiting through a discussion is not problematic. The community should be given the right to have that discussion. It allows a local record to exist for others to see, it educates, it informs and allows a community to be a community. It allows a local permalink to be used on any deletion, and a clear authority for people to act to delete. What is so urgent or imperative that a discussion cannot be held.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:10, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Also noting that some of the works have been added by Frglz (talk · contribs), so please ping them in the discussion. Thanks..  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
I also pinged them in the discussion. For me personally it's not a problem to wait, I am just accustomed to how copyvios work on Commons. When I nominate something there, it gets deleted in an instant without any discussion, that's why I was surprised when you said "at least a month". Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
I moved the discussion to this page, because there are a lot more copyrighted works stored on the Esperanto Wikisource than I first noticed. I linked all I could find in that new page. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 13:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Wikisources work differently to Commons, especially in sporadic editing. I am also unsure exactly the copyright rules they apply, it may not be Commons rules. Being pre-1923 works, if eoWS are working only to US copyright alone, they will not be copyright violations. This is why the community conversation should be taking place by those who know the local rules, rather than applying another wiki's rules.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:40, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
If they require the texts to be PD also in the first publication country, the texts should be moved do Multilingual Wikisource before deletion. Ankry (talk) 14:01, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • What is the status of this request? I am ready to import files to oldwikisource, but I will not do that if their deletion is not due or if it is not to be performed soon (to avoid duplication). Ankry (talk) 06:25, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Cross-wiki vandalsEdit

Status:    In progress

On the advice of @Tomybrz:, it's enough to have my user pages & my talk user pages being vandalized because i'm a sysop on the french WP. I'm looking for where asking in one go the definitive Extended confirmed protection for all my pages on all projects. Thx for answering. OT38 (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Note for information : I talk with Billinghurst on irc, and he tell me to "get them to leave a note on my user talk page, I already have the bones of such a filter". Regards Tomybrz Bip Bip 17:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
There is no such thing as "extended confirmed protection". Ruslik (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
It exists only on the English Wikipedia. Vermont (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

  Comment @OT38: As the conversation is here, let us continue it here. It sets some general conversation about similar cases, and looks to manage some of the precedence. As has been mentioned, we can write global abuse filters, though they do not cover the large wikis (frWP and enWS are different as they accepted global filters), and this can cover a range of actions from creation and editing with the flexibility of the components of abusefilters. That said we don't want to get overly complicated in the schema, it does allow us to utilise it for numerous cases of xwiki abuse and harassment.

We can do something like where page does not exist, do not allow non-autoconfirmed users to create a page. We can go stronger and apply for all wikis and write the pages into title blacklist and use the <autoconfirmed> though that becomes a very big and unwieldy stick with little in the way of finesse.

This could become a can of worms and setting a lot of global work if many people started requesting it. So this could be something that may involve SPoore's anti-harassment project as a more holistic response to such problems.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

billinghurst, letting you know that I saw your comment. Do you know if anyone has started a phabricator ticket describing the problem we're trying to solve and possible solutions? If not, we need to that to get it on the record. SPoore (WMF) Strategist, Community health initiative (talk) 15:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@SPoore (WMF): probably not been put into a phabricator ticket. When I have some time ...  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@SPoore (WMF) and Billinghurst: This night my user page & my talk user page has been vandalized 85 times on 30 different projects. Besides ignoring it, what can I do now ? OT38 (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
For now a global title blacklist that prevents non-autoconfirmed users from creating your user and user talk pages may be a solution (for the ones already created and you don't need, you may request to have them deleted too). This might be hard to do because the cross-language namespace could be tricky. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 04:42, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
@PlyrStar93: Where a global title blacklist can be requested ? Can this title blacklist be applied on user talk pages too ? OT38 (talk) 05:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Request at Talk:Title blacklist. The syntax I can think of would be something like .*:OT38 <autoconfirmed> to catch language variations on namespaces (including user and user talk namespaces) and the page name without namespace to be exactly "OT38" so there won't be much overkill. Existing pages can still be edited, but non-autoconfirmed users will not be able to create new page. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 05:17, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@OT38: I am going to hasten slowly on this construction if we are utilising title blacklist. This addition will stop editing and creation by non-autoconfirmed. If we have the issue on so many wikis, and you have existing user or user talk pages, then we need to manage those as well. Now, as I have hard-coded user/user talk, I am pretty certain that it will only function on default English language wikis, though let us test it for function prior to expanding. I do wish to minimise possible negative consequences of that big ugly stick.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thx a lot for the time you give to my request. OT38 (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
The magic word hasn't worked. Page creation by new users is still happening. Not sure if it's because the conversion only happens at Meta so page names in other wikis will have to match the converted result at Meta. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 15:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

css request for yi.wikipediaEdit

Status:    In progress

MediaWiki:common.css at Yi.wikipedia needs some modification so that references can be given non-numerical tags. Something like (but not sure whether this will actually do the job)

/* Make the list of references smaller */

/* Keep in sync with Template:Refbegin/styles.css */

ol.references,

div.reflist {

font-size: 90%; /* Default font-size */

margin-bottom: 0.5em;

}

div.reflist ol.references {

font-size: 100%; /* Reset font-size when nested in div.reflist */

margin-bottom: 0; /* Avoid double margin when nested in div.reflist */

list-style-type: inherit; /* Enable custom list style types */

} --פוילישער (talk) 11:03, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@פוילישער: is there a consensus in the community for this? Discussion somewhere as reference?  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
As I said, I do not even know whether this will work. But there is a problem which needs to be addressed. Preferably someone with the technical knowledge should advise. --פוילישער (talk) 13:13, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 פוילישער, what do you mean by non-numerical tags? If by chance what you are trying to achieve is that what on w:yi:User:Base/References says 1.0, 1.1 would say a, b what you need to do is to edit w:yi:MediaWiki:Cite references link many format. See it in English Wikipedia for an example. See also the documentation. If that is not what you are trying to achieve though, could you elaborate more please? --Base (talk) 22:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
Does not seem to help. See the page yi:וויליאם שייקספיר where the tag [a] becomes 1 in the footnote. --פוילישער (talk) 21:58, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Am.Wikipedia add to GSEdit

Status:    In progress

amWiki has one active Admin with last log action on 2019-06-18 00:58. many deletion requests have been open for months. (old consens to Opt-out)--WikiBayer 👤💬 19:49, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

See Stewards'_noticeboard/Archives/2019-04#Add_am.wikipedia.org_to_GS_wikiset. Ruslik (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Ok thanks this discussion I did not know --WikiBayer 👤💬 14:45, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I've notified amwiki community about this proposal. I'm in favour of processing this unless the community explicitly objects. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
As per my comment on SN, can this message be posted in am language? I really wish to engage the community to hear what they wants, given we banned one of their longstanding administrators as a global community (a decision I supported too if I remembered correctly) and the community is quite adverse to SWMT interference. I know there are vandals running free there, but I hope we will be seen as helping and not encroaching. Best Regards,--Cohaf (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Not really sure what community you're talking about, the only edits there in the last 30 days are by TE/CS banned socks, spammers, vanity spammers and a handful of non-constructive edits. I would think this would qualify under an emergency procedure at this point.Praxidicae (talk) 17:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, then I concur that this is sort of an emergency. I know this isn't here but can we define some sort of emergency proceedures to make it clearer when we can add and how (like how many days notification). If there is no objection locally to add, I will think that we leave them a message explaning why we are adding and how they could remove themselves from the system if needed. --Cohaf (talk) 18:10, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

ːThe Admin that was banned was a very big asset to Amharic wikipedia. I guess that is a moot point now. However, being part of that wikipedia, I support the participation of global Sysops to tidy it up. One thing I want to caution is, some of it is not vandalism. It is just people learning how to participate in wikipedia. Sysops need to be careful not to discourage those who want to contribute positively but are not yet skilled. It could be discouraging when the little you post that you can improve upon another day is deleted. Hgetnet (talk)

Semi-protectionEdit

Status:    In progress

There are problems on navbox u navbar templates in Zazaki Wikipedia, we should transfer English Wikipedia's mediaWiki messages to Zazaki Wikipedia. I'm admin of Zazaki Wikipedia but I'm not entitled to do this. We use English language on templates. May someone help and solve that problem? Vuzorg (talk) 10:06, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

MediaWiki messages can be edited by any local admin. Ruslik (talk) 18:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
that's true but Zazaki Wikipedia has some problem. Some Templates and Module not work. I think some templates need upload again. If one Steward upload all system messages maybe this problem be fixed Xorasan (talk) 13:16, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
May you help? Vuzorg (talk) 19:32, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
I do not understand what you want us to do? Please, provide exact instructions. Ruslik (talk) 17:56, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
We've fixed the problem, thanks for the interest you have shown. Vuzorg (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Further cleanup issues related to the closure and deletion of Bulgarian WikinewsEdit

@User:George Ho has done a lot of work looking at this, as you will see below. Because of the possibility that some content from here will be incorporated into a different Wikinews project, we are looking to finish cleaning up policy problems before making the content available, and before otherwise (effectively) deleting the wiki. By all means delete the pages that George describes that you think should be deleted. If you think some of the pages should be templated as "possible copyvios" instead, we will make a template available for that purpose. Thank you. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

It is difficult to check if they are copyvios or not. It is better to have sentence to sentence comparisons. Ruslik (talk) 17:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Post the comparisons on-wiki or off-wiki? George Ho (talk) 18:51, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
On wiki. Ruslik (talk) 19:05, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
How many sentences per article may I sample without risking copyright infringement? –George Ho (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Sampling for this purpose is not a copyvio, especially since you are directly comparing to original source. But I'm thinking this ought to go on a subpage, because it's really going to clutter this page up. @Ruslik0, what do you think? The preceding unsigned comment was added by StevenJ81 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 3 October 2019‎ (UTC)
Yes, subpage is better. Ruslik (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Sampling the first bundle... George Ho (talk) 06:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Possible copyvio content at bg.wikinewsEdit

Status:    In progress

Now that bg.WN is closed/locked and that there are no admins as of date, before transferring remaining content to ru.Wikinews, I would like you to draw attention to the below list of articles that I think are likely copied from third-party sources, like BBC and CNN. The ones that I'm unsure about would be mentioned in separate subsection.

Copied from one of my subpages:

List of articles mentioned in Proposals for closing projects/Deletion of Bulgarian Wikinews:

Most likely

More likely

List of Григор Гачев's (Grigor Gachev's) remaining created articles:

Definitely / Most likely

More likely

Likely

Slightly likely

--George Ho (talk) 01:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

More articles seen in another revision:

Definitely / Most likely

More likely

Likely

Slightly likely

--George Ho (talk) 01:50, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

More articles taken from another revision:

Most likely

More likely

Likely

Slightly likely

  • n:bg:Тръмп ще направи опит да купи Гренландия — (detector) most of content looks similar to portions of either mediapool.bg or dnes.bg. The articles were posted on the same day, 19 August 2019. However, bg.wn article was created on 16:47 UTC; the mediapool.bg one was published on 07:28 local time (04:28 UTC), twelve hours prior; dnes.bg one, on 07:40 local time (04:40 UTC). Also, the article summarizes Danish PM's response characterizing Trump's idea of buying Greenland as "шега" (joke). The article didn't say that Danish PM used "joke" or "шега" in quotes; I think the paraphrase was POV, wasn't it?

George Ho (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Almost forgot: the revisions from oldid 23418 to oldid 24555 should be deleted or suppressed from public view because, as noted earlier, there is the comparison table comparing one bg.wn with a BBC article. George Ho (talk) 06:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm, wouldn't it be sufficient to just delete/blank the table? I'd really prefer to have the history of the village pump readily available if the closing of this project is ever discussed again. I don't think anyone is going to sue WMF (well, at least not anyone reasonable enough) for content that is available only from the edit history and then clearly without an intent to infringe the copyright (in fact, exactly with the intent to stop infringing the copyright).
— Luchesar • T/C 07:00, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Other bg.wn content (undetermined)Edit

Status:    In progress

Other articles mentioned at #Possible copyvio content at bg.wikinews I'm certain are likely copyvios. The ones below I'm very unsure about, so I figure that further evaluation is needed. If any one of them is copyvio, it should be deleted. One of previous requests was rejected because, at the time, bg language wasn't understood. I wonder whether the lack of understanding the language would impact this request.

Copied from one of my user subpages:

List of Григор Гачев's (Grigor Gachev's) remaining created articles:

Other articles seen at list of bg.WN articles

--George Ho (talk) 01:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

More articles seen in another revision:

George Ho (talk) 01:53, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

More articles taken from another revision:

  • n:bg:Рекордни пожари в Амазония — (detector) Most of one paragraph's content looks similar to some portions of either nova.bg article or the clubz.bg one. Some other areas of the bg.wn article look similar to portions of the news.bg article. Just one paragraph of the detailed bg.wn article wouldn't reach to the level of huge copyvio, but it needs rewrite. I couldn't determine whether the rest of the article infringes other sources.
    In my view this content is OK (no copyvio) --Ket (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2019 (UTC) Copied from this revision. --George Ho (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
  • n:bg:Иран задържа британски танкер (created 21 July) — the detector partially matched one paragraph and another sentence with partial content of the news.bg article (published 20 July). However, I'm not confident that just one paragraph would make the case big enough to be copyvio, but I could be wrong.
    IMHO this isn't indeed problematic in terms of copyright. That being said, I also see the typical Stanqo's style of presenting such events in a biased way—the article covers almost exclusively the Iranian POV. — Luchesar • T/C 14:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
  • n:bg:Почина Фидел Кастро (created 27 Nov 2016) — I can't tell whether the any of the first three paragraphs of the article were taken from the BBC article (pub. 26 Nov). However, the expression looks to brief to tell. The second paragraph erroneously claimed that Fidel Castro died at 19:00 unspecified time zone (02:00 EET / 00:00 UTC). However, according to BBC article, Fidel's brother Raul verified that Fidel's time of death was 22:29 local time (03:29 GMT/UTC). I don't know where the last paragraph originated. However, more importantly, would ru.wn accept the article containing such error about Fidel's time of death? Should it be transferred there?
  • n:bg:Цунами по крайбрежието на Япония: огромни разрушения — (detector) — looks to be translated from article by VOA Russian (old revision). VOA content has been released into public domain right away. If that's okay, then I guess my copyvio concerns would be invalid. However, VOA's content has been questioned, and VOA is deemed by some as "propaganda". If the bg.wn article didn't translate from VOA Russian, then where else?
    I agree that there is text translated from Russian based on mistakes in the text like "нефтепрерабатващия" and "източното крайбережие на Японии" - it should be "нефтопреработвателния" and "източното крайбрежие на Япония" respectively --Ket (talk) 11:49, 2 October 2019 (UTC) Copied from this revision. --George Ho (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

George Ho (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

License compatibility of one bg.wn articleEdit

Status:    In progress

The article n:bg:Научен пробив: земни скали от най-древната епоха могат да се намерят на Луната! was copied from cosmos.1.bg article, which is licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.5, though somehow the link directs to the CC-BY 2.5 license. As of now, the link to the original source is down, but I hope it works again later as it did hours ago. Just in case, here's the archive link from Wayback Machine. The CC-BY-SA wouldn't be one-way compatible with CC-BY, especially per n:en:Wikinews:Copyright. If importing the CC-BY-SA into Wikinews is not legitimate, then the bg.wn copy should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 06:36, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

First of all, IANAL. But bgwn is not unique in having content with different license than the default CC BY-SA 2.5. For instance there is such content on ruwn and having that in mind we had such content created on ukwn too (I am a part of the latter community thus "we"). In my opinion it should be fine as long as the license is explicitly mentioned. That is done by explicit "additional terms may apply" in the footer and a license template in the article. That being said, again, IANAL. --Base (talk) 19:58, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
@Base, George Ho, and Iliev: IANAL either. But if what you say is true, then all we need to do is to change the license template at the bottom of that page to reflect CC-BY-SA 2.5. (Original is back up here, and I can confirm it says CC-BY-SA 2.5, but that the link points to CC-BY 2.5 [BG].) Iliev, please confirm what I am copy-pasting from Creative Commons's website:
StevenJ81 (talk) 13:51, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
StevenJ81, probably „Криейтив Комънс – Признание-Споделяне на споделеното 2.5 България“ to be more precise—but I'm concerned exactly about this confusion between the text and the link. There are two CC BY-SA 2.5 licenses relevant to Bulgaria: an unported and a localized one. The link in cosmos.1.bg is to the localized license (but, indeed, to CC BY 2.5 BG, not to BY-SA as expected), while the text of the link itself seems to refer to the unported “CC BY-SA 2.5” (otherwise it should've been “CC BY-SA 2.5 BG”). So, if we decide that the text has precedence over the link (it makes sense to me, though, yeah, IANAL as well), we should probably change the template this way:
— Luchesar • T/C 14:15, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Other bg.wn articles not having copyvio issuesEdit

Status:    Done

The article n:bg:Коментари:Почина архитектът Сезар Пели has just one line, lacking value in any way, especially quality-wise. I think it should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 04:57, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Same with n:bg:Раул Кастро (created Dec 2016), which looks like some stub Bulgarian encyclopedic article about Raul Castro. It doesn't tell news or explain something that is newsworthy.

n:bg:Празници appears to be a Bulgarian definition of wikt:en:holiday, so it should belong, i.e. be transferred, to Bulgarian Wiktionary. Doesn't look newsworthy, especially for ru.wn.

I don't know whether some article about an open letter to a local government (n:bg:Варненски НПО разпространиха отворено писмо до институциите) is up to journalistic standards, and I don't know whether ru.wn would accept it. George Ho (talk) 18:18, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Closing discussion on ro.wpEdit

Status:    In progress

Since we have no bureaucrats, I would like to request the help of a steward who is willing to read through 2 discussions @ ro.wp and decide if consensus has been reached in either of them:

Please comment directly in the respective sections, so the community can see the conclusion.Thank you! --Strainu (talk) 21:11, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

  Not done, Strainu, closing local discussions is not what stewards are for, sorry. Stewards act upon local community consensus, not define what that consensus is. While you do not have local bureaucrats you can find an uninvolved administrator or even a trusted non-administrator from the local community to do the job. --Base (talk) 22:52, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, local closure is not going to happen. Such important decisions will be contested if done by a sysop. I understand that this is not what stewards are normally for, but I was hoping that one of you could act as a trusted, independent party that could play the role of a bureaucrat.--Strainu (talk) 23:01, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I see this as a request for an opinion from stewards on whether a consensus has been reached, and the community is asking a steward to put on that independent 'crat hat. Seems that an opinion from an outside, considered party can add value. If it is guiding to a community, rather than determinative, that sounds reasonable to me. @Strainu: Might be worthwhile having this request seconded by another admin or any existing 'crat at roWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Harassment : Global request for protection of talk pagesEdit

Status:    In progress

Hello, I've posted several requests for global lock because an idiot keeps harassing me across many wikis--along with a few other sysop / RC patrollers but it seems I'm the main target. Last night, it happened again : https://fr.wikibooks.org/wiki/Sp%C3%A9cial:Contributions/Kinndgpou. A few days ago I received about 30 messages from the same dude, across wikis I had never visited. This has to stop. I would like to request my talk pages to be protected on creation on all wikis (autopatrolled), except on the French-speaking and English-speaking projects, please. And even with only the two languages, I don't use the English-speaking Wikibooks, Wikivoyage, wikispecies. This is getting old ! :) Kind regards, --Bédévore (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

On all wikis where there are active administrators you need to ask them. Ruslik (talk) 13:24, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: And on the other of hundreds of projects - this seems like a huge time-sink to manage? — xaosflux Talk 14:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
@Bédévore: We can probably write an abusefilter to assist, though it would only be for small/medium wikis. I would want to see some of the deleted posts, though need to find a wiki where a global sysop can view (frWB is not one). Can you point me to somewhere else for a look-see?  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello @Xaosflux and Billinghurst: thanks for your answers. Here is the kind of stuff they send me : https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_discusi%C3%B3n:B%C3%A9d%C3%A9vore - https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:B%C3%A9d%C3%A9vore&action=history - https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:B%C3%A9d%C3%A9vore&action=edit&redlink=1 - https://tools.wmflabs.org/guc/?by=date&user=Miredboner. Edit : see also User:Bédévore/Harassment Kind regards, -Bédévore (talk) 08:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
@Bédévore: I have re-created global-181 that will work on global abuse wikis, to function on your root ns:2 and ns:3 pages, and if I did it right I have excluded your frWP user talk page. Noting that global abuse filters apply to small, medium and wmgUseGlobalAbuseFilters additional, incl. frWP, though will not help on the majority of the big wikis. I am going to leave it in watch for a while looking for false positives before escalating its actions. Let us see how it progresses.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you @Billinghurst: ! :) We'll see how it works. I will also feed Bédévore/harassment to help with the detection and history of the vandal. Kind regards, -Bédévore (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Oh, and looking at the guc contributions on user above, basically none of them were on global sysop wikis, so we aren't going to be much help.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:45, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

SpambotEdit

Status:    Done

Please block and delete wikt:ts:User:KelliU59863. Thanks. --Sgd. Hasley 12:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Praxidicae --DannyS712 (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

w:jbo:djordjysEdit

Status:    Done

Please delete it. Thanks. --Sgd. Hasley 10:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

done --WikiBayer 👤💬 11:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

w:szl:Special:Contributions/104.250.108.86Edit

Status:    Done

Bot creating same article with different names. -- CptViraj (📧) 17:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

  Done by Vermont. -- CptViraj (📧) 17:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

See alsoEdit