Steward requests/Miscellaneous/2019-03

Manual requests

Steward move request — MWException error on Thai Wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hello! On the Thai Wikipedia, the page "เจ้ากรรมนายเวร (ละครโทรทัศน์)" needs to be moved to "เจ้ากรรมนายเวร" (removing the parenthesized text). But none of the local editors, including the admins, is able to perform the action due to the error "MWException". So, would any Steward please move the page "เจ้ากรรมนายเวร (ละครโทรทัศน์)" to "เจ้ากรรมนายเวร". Thank you very much. 🙏 --Miwako Sato (talk) 17:46, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Miwako Sato: Did you (or any other user) try to delete the page เจ้ากรรมนายเวร to make the other one be redirected to that title? Esteban16 (talk) 02:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
@Esteban16: Yes, and administrators @Sry85: and @Lerdsuwa: have also tried to do so but were unsuccessful because of the same error (MWException). Now, I can't even put the word "เจ้ากรรมนายเวร" in a topic title on the Thai Wikipedia for an unknown reason (probably this error also). --Miwako Sato (talk) 05:16, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, actually, if you can't delete it because it has too many revisions, you see an error message you can't delete it because it has too many revisions, not the MWException. I guess I will fail as well (because we are no different with you w/r/t deleting a page) but let me try it. — regards, Revi 13:49, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
As expected, failed. Reported at phab:T217136. — regards, Revi 13:53, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Pretty sure Steward also has bigdelete in their account, it didn't work?.--AldNonymousBicara? 13:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
If bigdelete is the cause, it now do the actual deletion in the background and just let me know that "MediaWiki has put your pages to the queue to fire a machine-gun", not an MWException. So no, this is not related to the Bigdelete. — regards, Revi 14:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Miwako Sato, can you see phab:T217136 (specifically the last comment by @Daimona)? Thanks! — regards, Revi 09:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for my late reply. I have requested the local admins to look into "AbuseFilter 25" per the discussion at phab:T217136. Further developments will be reported here. Thank you very much. --Miwako Sato (talk) 15:19, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Kudos to Administrator @Horus: who has dealt with the issue immediately after I made a notice at the local admins' board. The filter has been turned off for now, and the page has been moved successfully. Yet, the reason why the filter causes problems is still not known. Should we now close this topic? --Miwako Sato (talk) 15:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Done by locals. The technical issues will be investigated by the devs. — regards, Revi 18:18, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
@Miwako Sato: You may wish to ask for the filter to be set to "action = 'edit'", as at the moment it is still applying to any action, and I am guessing that a move and a warn are not interacting well.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:29, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
@Horus:  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:30, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
It says unrecognized token at “edit”. Don’t know why. Horus (talk) 04:52, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
@Horus: If I copy your th:AF/25 here, prepend with action = 'edit' & it validates fine for me. I am using straight apostrophes/single quotes, and have the boolean operator.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:50, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
  Done First I added at the end of the code, but it can be added in the front of it. --Horus (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Status:    Not done


  • Could somebody please protect the page (or block the IP), another IP is always asking the deletion of my talkpage for no reasons. Thank you 08:16, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It seems they have stopped for now. And you should notify about this to local administrators. If there is no response then you may come back. Esteban16 (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for stop spam edits in vepwiki

Status:    Done

Please pay attention to the article vep:Uz' alasaksonijan orfografii. The user returned spam edits three times. He does not know Vepsian language and Low German language, but the user knows how to do trolling. I ask to ban the user in vepwiki. -- Koiravva (talk) 19:54, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

deleted. user's blocked until 10 May. einsbor talk 20:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

OAuth approval request for SQID

Status:    Done

Preparing to transition SQID from using WiDaR to a dedicated OAuth consumer. Let me know if there are any questions. --Akorenchkin (talk) 00:47, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Done. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 05:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

OAuth approval request for Le Dico des Ados

Status:    Done

Had to make a new version because I couldn't make OAuth work. Thank you ! --DSwissK (talk) 21:03, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Cross-wiki vandal CrystIeMann5568

Status:    Done

CrystIeMann5568 [stalktoy] – [cross-wiki edits] --bdijkstra (talk) 12:52, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bdijkstra: Locked by User:Jon Kolbert, and all their edits have been reverted. For future reference, SRG is the proper venue for global lock/block requests. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:45, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
I assumed that I was on the right page because the header spoke of "reporting cross-wiki vandalism". Perhaps a clarification and/or a link to SRG would be in order. --bdijkstra (talk) 14:57, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

European Parliament landing page down in Germany

Status:    Not done

There are multiple reports [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] of being down in Germany (and probably elsewhere too) for most users. We need an emergency switch to another URL with equivalent content. --Nemo 08:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Possible alternative URL: de cs da (same content already vetted by WMF legal, in PDF instead of HTML; links work) for MediaWiki:Centralnotice-template-EU Blackout 2019 de and friends. Or [8] (subject to same problems).
WMCZ reports is also down. --Nemo 09:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Question, why is it a request for Stewards? — regards, Revi 10:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
We have the same problem now with the Italian blackout. The Catalan Wikipedia links . The European Parliament webmaster office confirmed the problem.
I placed the request here because it's an emergency request and I'm not sure how many centralnotice admins still follow WM:RFH, but feel free to move it. (Nemo logged out) 11:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Pledge2019 seems to be a bit too "partisan". --Vituzzu (talk) 11:33, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of geographic articles on zawiki

Status:    Not done

On the Zhuang Wikipedia community portal, there is a request for deletion of 15 articles (and several other redirects to these articles) about Chinese geography that were created by a single user. The Zhuang Wikipedia has no local admins and no community members have disputed the deletion request. However, as I replied on the aforementioned discussion page, I am uncomfortable deleting these pages for two reasons: (1) it's not clear to me what the reason for deletion is, (2) there are corresponding articles on the Yue Wikipedia created by the same user which are being discussed in an ongoing deletion discussion. I'm listing the request on SRM so other global sysops/stewards, or Chinese speakers, can take a look. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:46, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up here. I would like to point out that the pages in question are neither "geographic articles" nor perhaps "disambiguation pages". Please refer to local discussions for more details.--Roy17 (talk) 01:57, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Those articles is ambiguously close to being geographic articles, such as communal places, emerging village and such. This also often happen in other small wikis, with user usually want to promote their villages or/as tourist spot. Depend on local communities decision these articles can be deleted or keep with criteria such as notability. But IMO this is not where GS/S should interfere since this should be left to local communities to decide if they want to keep it or not.--AldNonymousBicara? 07:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Based on cohaf report from yuewp, yuewp communities decide to keep these pages, I am inclined to reject these deletion request, how about you PiRSquared17 ?--AldNonymousBicara? 12:14, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Make it clearer, the articles are on AFD at zh-yue. I didn't know what happened to the discussion, can Deryck Chan help. Thanks much--Cohaf (talk) 12:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I'll just follow what will be decided here zh-yue:Wikipedia:刪文討論#揦.--AldNonymousBicara? 12:30, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
It looks like the discussion on yuewiki hasn't closed yet, but I don't speak Chinese. PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: I think the discussion on yue.wp is trending towards keeping those pages. This is an editorial policy issue at heart: should we allow place-name listings of places with the same name, where the same Wikipedia otherwise doesn't have any further information about those places? Given that this request concerns the za.wp and the editor who raised the request doesn't speak Cuengh and isn't otherwise involved in za.wp, I would hesitate to delete the za.wp articles unless a Cuengh-fluent editor chimes in and agrees with the deletion. Deryck C. 12:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Largely agreed with Deryc on this. I think it'll be prudent to close this as no action default to keep with no prejudice to renominate for deletion (and then requested here) when there are Cuengh-fluent editors asking for it.--Cohaf (talk) 13:11, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Not done, can't be action'd by GS since its, 1) not clear vandalism, 2) following other community suggestion it's actually okay to have such articles, 3) no local community agreement to delete this. With this I will close this request with not done, request can be re-requested again in the future if there's a community consensus to delete them.--AldNonymousBicara? 13:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
My two cents:
  1. The spammer has been canvassing User:Deryck Chan, the yuewp admin involved, for some time now. Yuewp process is crooked. (I will lodge my complaint on this matter in near future.)
  2. If other community standards can be followed, then why not try with some larger ones like enwp, dewp, frwp...? Which of these would approve of a disambiguation page that does not disambiguate? Perhaps Deryck Chan could as well provide some insight since he is an admin on enwp too!
  3. Of course there is no local agreement. It is a small wiki where there is virtually no community. I expected SWMT to be invovled, but User:PiRSquared17 might have brought this up too soon.
  4. When a user creates something useless, it could be a genuine mistake, but massively creating junk is certainly not.--Roy17 (talk) 17:02, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry Roy17, but I feel it's really not a place for GS to step in. We only help to delete, not to make an editorial claim for deletion nor judge it (with exception of obvious vandalism and spam), I only use zh-yue community for reference, if in the future there's a consensus from zawiki communities to delete it, we will gladly help. Of course, if PiRSquared17 have another plan in mind and decide to delete it, I have no objection. Thank you.--AldNonymousBicara? 17:13, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Aldnonymous: Yes I am aware of how to get real work done with some help from meta, so I limited my discussion to zawp even after PiRSquared17 had brought this up here (in my view prematurely). But since you chose to close this shortly after seeing some "reference" from yuewp, which itself is another small wiki, I repeated here what I had written on zawp anyway. If spam can only be deleted by local consensus, then I feel sorry for the za community that may never really exist.--Roy17 (talk) 17:34, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Judging editorial content and stepping in to decide local disputes is not within the scope of global sysops/stewards, and thus no action can be taken here. Vermont (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Roy17: I largely agree with the recent comments from Aldnonymous, Vermont, and Cohaf.
  • As I mentioned in my original response on the zawiki community portal, and has been reiterated several times here by others, global sysops and stewards should only delete pages when it is uncontroversial, i.e. for obvious maintenance reasons (e.g. spam, vandalism, cleanup) or where a clear local consensus exists. We aren't here to make editorial judgements. This is emphasized within the first two sentences of the global sysops policy, and the stewards policy says something fairly similar.
  • I only ever mentioned the yuewiki discussion as a point of reference. Clearly, yuewiki's decision to delete or keep the articles is not in any way binding on zawiki. So why bring up the yuewiki discussion at all? Well, at the time it seemed like some useful information and context could be gleaned from the discussion. The fact that the yuewiki discussion is trending towards keeping the articles does at least seem to suggest that deleting the pages would not be an uncontroversial act of routine maintenance (and so, as mentioned above, would not be within the GS scope). But even if the yuewiki discussion hadn't existed at all, the request could have been rejected for the same reasons.
  • Related to the above: If you believe there's something "crooked" happening on yuewiki, that's a valid topic for an RFC, and I would encourage you to write one. Nonetheless, as you acknowledged in your comment on the zawiki community portal, that issue is irrelevant to this discussion about articles on zawiki.
  • Sorry if I brought the request here "prematurely". I randomly stumbled upon the zawiki discussion, was unsure about the rationale for deletion, and figured I should post it here so other global sysops could take a look. If I hadn't posted it here, I'm reasonably sure nobody else would have seen the request.
  • At the end of your last comment, you do raise an interesting general question. While I wouldn't call these pages "spam" per se, perhaps you could call them "borderline acceptable" pages: pages that barely exceed the minimum standards for inclusion. If you go to a small wiki without a local community and create a bunch of borderline acceptable articles, they won't be deleted by global sysops and so will remain indefinitely, until a local community starts to develop and they make a decision about whether to keep or delete the articles. Is this a problem? Maybe not, because even though they may not be excellent articles, they are at least tolerable. As the community develops, they may also serve as barebones stubs to be expanded (in the case of disambiguation pages, they may serve as lists of articles to create). I'm pretty sure other situations like this have come up in the past. Anyone else have any thoughts on this general issue? PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@PiRSquared17: I have been aware of how to deal with these useless pages since the beginning, so I started a local discussion and waited. You brought this here when there was no local consensus to just "let other global sysops look at it". This could be achieved by posting on talk/user talk pages. What is the outcome of "other GS's looking"? It turns out people would simply put it off for "no local consensus" and not pay attention to details:
  1. All editors involved so far, including the spammer, have no knowledge in the Zhuang language (ISO code za). Does the spammer mention anywhere that he is fluent in that language?
  2. I would call this whole thing a joke then, that someone goes to a foreign wiki and writes gibberish by translating word by word, yet there is no way to remove them other than waiting for the non-existent community to form. And that community has to reach five to ten native speakers, since that perpetrator would almost certainly oppose deletion and probably bring along associates.
  3. (A bit more info on the spammer's linguistic ability: here he claims he "learnt Japanese (學過日文)" and "is learning Zhuang (學緊壯文)" among many more other languages. Pretty impressive huh? Yet he would use racial slurs "蘿蔔頭" and personal attacks when told to not use machine translation on Japanese wiki.)
  4. They do not qualify inclusion. They are not articles. There is nothing encyclopaedic about them. They were created as disambiguation pages, even though the spammer does not know mediawiki treats DAB separately from others so a DAB template or at least the magic word is necessary.
  5. DAB full of red links to serve as springboards of new articles? How long should we wait until that purpose fails too? One year? Five years? Ten? Until the local community forms? Until the perpetrator becomes inactive? It will not make any difference to wait for a year or ten. Is anyone gonna find these orphaned pages, if @PiRSquared17: you think that "nobody else" could even "have seen" a section on its only Wikipedia page for discussion?--Roy17 (talk) 22:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Roy17: The comment is that we don't have enough information to be able to make an outside determination (and we are cautious about imposing less clueful knowledge from outside), so the determination belongs on the wiki. The process for this would be for a local administrator (present or future) to determine community consensus and act. If you think that there is a need for a local administrator who can more fully assess this issue, then propose an administrator at the wiki through the process explained at SRP#Administrator access.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I am "requesting adminship to handle one time vandalism incidents or clearing a deletion backlog", but I am not the one who started this meta discussion though. I could prove three things: (1) the spammer does not speak fluent Zhuang; (2) the pages in question were created in a way analogous to translating word for word; (3) they do not serve any realistic purpose. I know only by this careful analysis can I expose them and hopefully alert people like SWMT. Native speakers aka the local community do not exist: a registered user with as few as 22 edits is ranked within top 20 contributors. Two most recently active (last edit being less than 1000 days ago) contributors do not speak Zhuang. One of them is the accused spammer.
Perhaps I should ask another question instead. What procedures do we follow to get rid of poor machine translation on an inactive foreign wiki? If the answer is to wait for that community to come into existence first, then you may close this entire discussion and please put up a disclaimer on top warning future editors not to waste time on this kind of problems.--Roy17 (talk) 10:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Persistent freeloading

Status:    Done

en:User:Tim198 is not doing any harm but for tidiness it ought to be deleted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:35, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Tidiness? Is that now a criteria at enWP? I love these tasks of little value.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:54, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I am a tiny bit confused about this indef block of a seemingly active user ([9]) without even waiting for a day after placing a warning related to user page edits, but obviously this is local enwiki business. However, if enwiki criteria demand this user page to be deleted I believe it should be done. --Vogone (talk) 14:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  Done Ruslik (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit request for login wiki

Status:    Done

Hi. The main page of the login wiki ( has a link to in the first line ("Welcome to the Wikimedia log-in wiki"). However, that page has been relocated to Can the link please be changed? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 17:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Some page create to the sock of Allthingsgo in global

Status:    Locally handled
  1. Talk:Remarks on collecting address when organizing event
  2. User talk:NumCinq
  3. User talk:Advo7

There have some evidence (See above) can prove Allthingsgo use the sock to do the Vandalism of sock,but these page had been deleted,I need to see their content and record in the LTA page for Allthingsgo only,thanks. --MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

This would be better answered at Meta:RFH. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 11:02, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I think there will quickly.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
OP posted at RFH. Can be considered locally handled as it had nothing GS / Stewards need to intervene in. --Cohaf (talk) 11:27, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Add below,
  1. en:User:Advogato4
  2. commons:User_talk:S465499642
  3. commons:File_talk:Lo-YunShui.png
  4. commons:User:Advogato2
  5. commons:Category_talk:Zhu_Ming_(thinker)
  6. wikidata:User:Advogato2
  7. en:User_talk:Purpleheena
  8. en:User_talk:CometQ
  9. en:User_talk:CometQ/BTS
  10. en:User_talk:-忍者-
  11. it:Discussioni_utente:CometQ
  12. en:User:0格格不入
  13. en:User_talk:0格格不入
  14. en:User_talk:0格格不入/綠騎士_(作家)
  15. en:User:NumCinq
  16. commons:User:Lzhwp
  17. commons:Category_talk:User_和平奮鬥救地球
  18. wikibooks:User_talk:Lzhwp
  19. incubator:User_talk:Lzhwp
  20. ja:利用者‐会話:Lzhwp
  21. wikidata:User_talk:Lzhwp
  22. en:User_talk:ET4Eva
  23. en:User_talk:Advo2
  24. ja:利用者‐会話:Advo7

There have some evidence (See above) can prove Allthingsgo use the sock to do the Vandalism of sock,but these page had been deleted.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Copying globally locked template to all WMF wikis

Status:    Done

I've improved the message users get when they try to log on a globally locked. See the examples below:

  - This is the default error message.
  - This is the improved error message which I've created for Wikibooks.

I think this message is significantly better than the old one. Can we have this rolled out across all wikis? [You can test this with the account posted in the Wikibooks screenshot. I see no problem with doing this since the account is locked] --Leaderboard (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

You can have that message locally if you so choose. Otherwise the locked message that you are viewing is maintained through the mw:extension:WikimediaMessages set and that is deployed over the top of mediawiki default messaging, and then the translations are then managed at It is not something managed locally, or by stewards.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks, wasn't aware of the presence of that extension. So what should be done if a message modification needs to be made Wikimedia-wide? Leaderboard (talk) 14:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
By filing a ticket on phabricator:. Of course you can try to submit a change to the extension directy, but that requires you to know how to use gerrit:. --Vogone (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
From any extension page there is a "report a bug" link, and that lodges something in the right place in phabricator. What can be done here is you can use the template {{tracked}} to link to the ticket, and something that sits beside the {{status}} marker. [I will note that lodging a ticket doesn't guarantee action, it simply starts the conversation.]  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:47, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
T216347 was fixed and the message amended. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:47, 1 March 2019 (UTC)