Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2022-05

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in May 2022, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Renamed global-deleter global group

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 was archived on a request by: --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Global lock for User:Modern primat

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 was archived on a request by: --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Major rollback needed

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 was archived on a request by: --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Abuse Filter Helper Group Enhance.

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)

Oppose this, if such a new group is needed it should be established on its own. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Oppose as scope creep. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 14:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
OK, per @Martin Urbanec and @Xaosflux I have created Requests for comment/New Group for view deleted content
This section was archived on a request by: 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 18:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Vandal on translatewiki net

Hi dear stewards, as I am not competent in translate wiki, I don't know clearly where I need to inform this: anyway, this user vandalized translations. Turkish Sysops Pinging @Vikipolimer, ToprakM tried to revert them but the vandalized version exists now. So what can we do about this incident? Regards,--Kadı Message 20:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I might be misunderstanding but that's not a WMF wiki? Praxidicae (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Kadı, translatewiki.net is not a Wikimedia wiki -- it runs separately from all Wikimedia projects. This needs Translatewiki.net admins/other functionaries (list). I can't find where their admin's noticeboard or a similar page exists -- translatewiki:Support is the only possibly-related page I can find. Hope this helps! Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Martin Urbanec! Thanks for the clarification. I looked at the list and saw @MarcoAurelio. Maybe this steward and translatewiki admin could solve this incident. Kind regards, Kadı Message 20:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Special:CentralAuth/Mmoore11

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)

@Ruslik0: Although the account isn't completely empty, I agree that it can be deleted. AlPaD (talk) 19:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't this just need a Special:CreateLocalAccount on mediawikiwiki now? — xaosflux ^Talk 13:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Thanks! So if the user ever returns (I don't think) (s)he will be able to merge the account. AlPaD (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

ipinfo permission for GS

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T309318

Recently IPInfo extension was deployed on all WMF sites. As GS is treated as admin on small wikis, they should be granted ipinfo-view-full and ipinfo-view-log permission. Stang 14:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Stang: Looking at T307164 and T296499, I'm not too sure and this might need further input — TNT (talk • she/her) 14:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@TheresNoTime m:Special:Permalink/23099554#What_about_global_rights_holder 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 18:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for filing the task @TheresNoTime. It's all a bit messy. While this commit enabled log access to sysops, it looks like this might be an oversight. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Fully agree. Do the same applies to GRs as per the discussion Bayer linked above? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 00:36, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

ipinfo-view-log is not needed 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 09:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Agreed — I've set T309318 as stalled pending AHT input. As such, this request likely won't be progressed until we get clarification (just FYI Stang) — TNT (talk • she/her) 10:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

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

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)

Nothing to worried about those, bots will re-update them after the rename. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Won't DutchTina be re-renamed without leaving redirects? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe the redirects will be overwritten, so the end result will be DutchTom -> MetaVerse -> DutchTina where bot will fix DutchTom to point to DutchTina? If really needed we can probably run some limited test by creating some new accounts. — regards, Revi 16:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Good news is that I can only find one broken redirect in Metaverse's userspace, which should be moved back to its original place. Bad news: All redirects in DutchTom's userspace, except for .js/.css ones, are now broken. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 16:51, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Bot does not fix them immediately; DoubleRedirect list is cached and updated periodically, and as such it needs some time to catch up. — regards, Revi 16:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

They will not be listed at DoubleRedirects, but BrokenRedirects. For example, see af:User talk:DutchTom. Normally bots will tag it for deletion. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:20, 26 June 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)

@Vituzzu: Considering the consensus here and in the ongoing RfC that the rename was innapropriate, I think both renames (the usurpation and the rename) shall be undone. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:29, 27 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)

I have closed the RfC. The removal is supported/endorsed. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but shouldn't the rename be reversed, per what discussed above and required by many in the RFC? --PercyMM 13:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Support Yes, I think it became clear that this name change needs to be reverted. Ciell (talk) 07:16, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Can a steward act on this? Thanks. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 16:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Done Sorry it took so long & thanks for the reminder. Done, both renames should now be reversed. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)