Stewards' noticeboard

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

←Stewards

Stewards' noticeboard

Archives→

Shortcut:
SN

Welcome to the stewards' noticeboard. This message board is for discussing issues on Wikimedia projects that are related to steward work. Please post your messages at the bottom of the page and do not forget to sign it. Thank you.

This is not the place for stewards requests. To make a new request, see steward requests and requests and proposals .
For illustration of steward policies and use, see the steward handbook .
See also: Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard.
This page is automatically archived by SpBot. Threads older than 30 days will be moved to the archive.

Temporary opt-in for ukwiki to global sysops setEdit

Hi,

As you probably already now, Russia invaded Ukraine five days ago. Unfortunately this resulted in a significant decrease in activity of Ukrainian Wikipedia administrators: some of them are now taking part in the war, some are volunteering for medical or civil defence, while others have a significantly disrupted Internet connection (editing Wikipedia from a bomb shelter is problematic). Also unfortunately, this resulted in an increase in activity of vandals, notably pro-Russian trolls.

As a result, Ukrainian Wikipedia community requests to temporarily allow global sysops to act on Ukrainian Wikipedia. You can find the community consensus here: uk:Вікіпедія:Кнайпа (адміністрування)#Глобальні адміністратори. This is valid for the duration of martial law in Ukraine (i.e. 1 month at the moment).

We kindly ask global sysops to do only non-controversial actions, such as reverting obvious vandalism and blocking vandals, but not engaging in content disputes (nor speedy deletion of non-vandalism, for example). The main motivation is the need to revert vandalism during European night: many of our administrators have to spend nights in bomb shelters, giving space to various Russian vandals.

Thanks in advance for your help — NickK (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: This is incredibly sad to hear 😣 I have removed ukwiki from the Opted-out of global sysop wikis wikiset. Please let us know if there is anything else we can do to help you and your community. Slava Ukraini! -- TNT (talk • she/her) 22:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

temporarily removed ukwiki at MediaWiki:HideButtonsFromNonGsProjects.js. Please ping me or any IA when gs opt-in has been disabled. Thanks and stay safe. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Minorax: Can the script be tweaked so that IA won't have to edit it manually whenever there is a change in wikiset#7? See gswiki.js by Martin. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Possible solution. @Martin Urbanec: any objections? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Minorax Sorry, for some reason, I didn't see this ping. No objection from me

. Martin Urbanec (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: Courtesy ping that one month has passed—can I assume that the ukwiki community still wants this in place? ~TNT (talk • she/her) 10:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@TheresNoTime: Yes, this should remain valid for the duration of martial law in Ukraine (until 25 April so far, possibly extended). The activity somewhat recovered but is not close to pre-war levels yet — NickK (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: Forgot to reply, sorry—that's fine :) ~TNT (talk • she/her) 19:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Global ban for NivelesEdit

Hello! I started this RfC to globally ban Niveles and his socks in early February. The global bans policy states that a Discussion should be open for at least two weeks, but no more than one month, however this one is open for almost three months by now, so it should probably be closed sooner rather than later. ~Styyx^{Talk? ^-^} 14:55, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for making note of this. I’ll take a look later today if no one has gotten to it by then. Best regards, Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 15:14, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

@Vermont: --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

There seems to be an issue over whether the accounts listed actually are the same person, which I have not been able to confirm. And participation is quite limited, I am not comfortable closing it at this time. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 12:24, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

His arguments are not correct @Vermont the SPI case confirms that. Kadı Message 06:18, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I tend to agree with @Vermont. 19 comments doesn't look to me like a "broad and clear consensus", as the policy mandates, to implement a global ban. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I updated enwiki's entry of AAR/LEdit

FYI, see Special:Diff/23210318, am I inputed something wrong? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Please remove User:Metaverse from Global renamer group and revert #91629 renameEdit

Dear Stewards, User Metaverse (previously DutchTina) vanished Metaverse account without their permission (see [1]), and later on the same day to grab that username they made a request to rename DutchTina to Metaverse (see #91629). In their request, they haven't provided any info that they vanished the same account a few hours ago.

Now upon asked by Steward BRPever about the vanishing they were not able to provide a VRT ticket, which actually does not exist as being a renamer and having access to rename queue myself, there was no such request on 29th April or even earlier in last month.

So as per the Global renamer policy page I beleive this is a serious misuse of the right and thus I am requesting their right to be revoked. I am also requesting the reversing of rename #91629 as such. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@1997kB I want to quickly acknowledge this message – thanks for raising it to our attention. We're having a look. Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

It's especially ironic that (unless I've missed something), the account "Metaverse" could have been properly usurped at w:WP:CHUU after waiting a week rather than inventing a fake excuse. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 15:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Exactly! Since they are sysop, anyone could have accepted such request despite it being similar to sulutil:METAVERSE with 196 edits. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad to see this being brought up and called out. This was absolutely an inappropriate rename and vanishing and rights should be stripped from DutchTina whether it was intentional or not because its shows a wild ignorance of policy or total incompetence with the tool. Praxidicae (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Note Phab account was also renamed ref phab:T307267 RhinosF1 (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Another note: There are multiple redirects from DutchTom's userspaces (previous username of DutchTina) which are about to be, or have already been, re-redirected to Metaverse thanks to redirect fixing bots. They should be checked before re-renaming so as not to confuse the bots. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear colleagues @1997kB, Pppery, Praxidicae, NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh, RhinosF1, and Martin Urbanec:, since I'm the responsible for accept this request, I ask apologies for not check properly that occurred an usurpation on Metaverse account (however, the log of this rename doesn't appeared on queue). I'll gonna revert my changes if all you agree with this sanction against DutchTina. --Eta Carinae (talk) 13:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Eta Carinae, don't worry about this too much :). If the usurpation did not happen, the request wouldn't be approved either.

Ad a revert, personally, I'd prefer leaving it to a steward – it's probably best done together with reversing the vanishing itself (and declaring it as inappropriate), and reversals of RTV requests are usually done by the stewards. Thanks for the offer though. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@Eta Carinae: Just out of curiosity, was it written "name too similar to Renamed user 75654256"? With "XXX (usurped)" it appears and I always thought that it appeared because of the previous renaming and not because it was really similar! Btw don't worry, it can happen and imho it's definitely not your fault since no one could expect such a thing (they asked to be renamed twice and never mentioned the vanish). I confirm that I can't find any ticket in renamers queue concerning User:Metaverse. It would be important to have their answer on this. Btw imho is also worrying that, just after the vanish, they started to process all requests in any languages. I hope there is an explanation for this behavior! Superpes15 (talk) 08:45, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Superpes15, no, it doesn't appeared that Metaverse was renamed before. The only conflict with antispoof was with the METAVERSE account (the reason why I rejected the request at the first time), and now, I know why this happen. Eta Carinae (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh that's clear! Thanks for the information :) Superpes15 (talk) 13:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

If no objection will be arisen I'll soon revoke "current" Metaverse's renamer right. I'll be open to let them choose another name instead of DutchTina, but Metaverse owner must be restored. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

For cleanliness of the logs, it might be preferable to first rename back to DutchTina regardless, before renaming to anything else. Just a thought. Effeietsanders (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment, @AmandaNP: already removed Metaverse from global renamers. --Eta Carinae (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't a RFC be filled as per Global renamers#Removal of access? -- CptViraj (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely: Requests for comment/Revoke A's global renamer permission. --Novak Watchmen (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I apologize for not getting it going sooner, but I have started it now Requests for comment/Revoking Metaverse's global rename permission. -- Amanda (she/her) 14:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Renamed global-deleter global groupEdit

Hi, posting here for transparency. I have renamed (diff) the global-deleter (permissions, users) global group from Pathoschild's global group to Global deleters in keeping with the name described at Global deleters. This change was made in MediaWiki:Group-global-deleter and only affects the localised name, not the global group name. ~TNT (talk • she/her) 13:21, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

phab:T279828 might be worth doing. --Zabe (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Zabe: Yup, makes sense, looking at the patch now 🙂 ~TNT (talk • she/her) 20:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Global lock for User:Modern primatEdit

Hi dear Stewards. Modern primat is a Turkish Wikipedia user. He was banned lots of times by various administrators. Now, he banned indefinitely by a sysop named Vincent Vega. Yesterday, he put this link to his talk page in order to harass and troll users. I am an admin in Turkish Wikivoyage, in this project also he warned by administrators. In conclusion, this user needs a global lock. Kind regards,--Kadı Message 11:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kadı: Hi, please make your request at SRG. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 11:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh, Done. Kadı Message 12:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Major rollback neededEdit

Hello. I noticed there were vandalism happening in the mswiki on lots of pages. The culprit was a multiple ip address (I believe he/she is the same person). The person has removed or replace content of the page and added "Muhammad Alif Adha Bin Samad" in the page. I was unable to revert all, one by one manually because they were a lot. Is there any solutions for the issues? Please ping me for any replies. Thank you. CyberTroopers (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@CyberTroopers: Try using User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal; it can help reverting multiple edits at once. Other than that, things seem under control. I reverted some edits by 203.116.120.49, EN-Jungwon took care of the rest. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 04:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Special:CentralAuth/Mmoore11Edit

Hello. Can you merge local account with global account please? Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 11:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey @AlPaD, stewards don't have that capability (at least not today). Those kind of things need to be handled at the sysadmin level. Note this account is four years old and has exactly zero edits. It is highly unlikely it is actually used by someone, so it is probably easiest to leave it broken. Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

The global account can be deleted. Ruslik (talk) 20:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec: Yes, I mentioned it to correct the technical problem. @Ruslik0: Some time ago I requested the deletion of some completely empty accounts and my proposal moved on the phabricator. AlPaD (talk) 05:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

But Mmoore11 isn't empty account, just for some reason the local account isn't connected to the global account. AlPaD (talk) 07:19, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Abuse Filter Helper Group Enhance.Edit

I suggest here with to add the rights deletedhistory & deletedtext.

These rights will make the job easier for two things. To identify LTAs and Crosswiki vandals, it is often necessary see deleted posts. The right "abusefilter-log-private" makes this much easier, but this assumes that the edits were previously captured by a filter.

Also, this would make it easier to write global filters. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 08:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose This group was created to let people view private filters and associated log entries. As far as I know, it was not created as a generic group for antivandal purposes (something like eliminator, but globally). I think it would be wrong to shift the group's purpose by adding new kinds of rights. Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec The group is used to review entries and identify spambots and vandals. This is effective and the right is passive, so no local community should oppose it. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 11:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Maybe create a new group rather than change existed group? SCP-2000 12:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Sounds nice; would we name it "global eliminator", "global half-sysop" or "global sysop-in-training"? According to eliminators (Q10862160) et. al., the definition of eliminators varies by projects some can move files, some can't; some can protect pages, some can't; some can edit pages protected at sysop level, some can't; some can block users, some can't. If anyone were about to open a RfC, I'd like to have a ping. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I personally disagree "global eliminator". But I suggest to create a group like "Global file deletion review", which can view deleted content and the detail of hidden Abusefilter. SCP-2000 12:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I am against new groups doing basically the same thing.

We should improve what already exists and not introduce anything new. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 14:44, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding new rights also means introducing new scope. AFH is for viewing private abuse filters and their log entries, not deleted things. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 14:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I think this might run afoul of the WMF, see Limits to configuration changes. --Rs chen 7754 20:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

GFDR, if approved, will be the first non-admin user group that allows its users to view deleted content, albeit a very small and specific part. On the other hand, RfGP is a RfA-comparable process. That being said, I don't think that limit by WMF Legal applies here. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 20:45, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

I honestly don't see the need here. I think we should go through local process if we need a deletion review. Local admins are elected for the job, and stepping on their toes doesn't really sound like a good idea. BRP^ever 22:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Martin here (while agreeing with the OP in that a new usergroup is unnecessary). AFH is not designed as an anti-vandalism tool - would suggest someone in that case to go for global sysop. If we were to add the requested rights, some may start asking for cross-wiki experience and whatnot, which isn't what the group is meant for. OP is a global sysop, which makes me think that the request is meant to assist anti-vandalism efforts on non-GS wikis. In which case, I'd rather support making global sysop truly global or drastically trimming the list of wikis in the opt-out set. Leaderboard (talk) 20:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

@Leaderboard@BRPever To clarify, I am not concerned with an audit of deletions. The right is to be used only passive to see the content for the above reasons. @Rschen7754 It is clear for me that the WMF has to be asked. But I think it is very likely that the WMF will agree, due to the fact that only a few and trusted users get this permission anyway. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 15:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@WikiBayer: I understand your rationale as someone with AFH. One issue I can foresee is if this right is granted, users may start mixing this up with a right that requires crosswiki experience (which is not true). This alone would deter me, as I've seen how "cross-wiki" obstinate this community can get at times. Leaderboard (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2022 (UTC)