User talk:MF-Warburg

• Archive 2007-2011 (diff, oldid)
• Archive 2012 (diff, oldid)
• Archive January-June 2013 (diff, oldid)
• Archive July-December 2013 (diff, oldid)
• Archive 2014 (diff, oldid)
• Archive 2015-2016 (diff, oldid)

Dates

Great that you solved that! Something similar should probably be applied to {{Steward election status}}, though I don't really get why we don't create a new template every year or we should edit {{Sr-new statement}} so it includes the parameters - currently the statement pages don't have the required parameters filled in and show "These steward elections are finished. No further votes will be accepted.". Savh^ñ 10:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, we can do whatever option works. Another one would be to change the preload for the creation of the statement and vote pages. I have no particular solution for this. --MF-W 10:36, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

In re. User_talk:MF-Warburg/Archive6#Dellieplagiat

Hello again. If you have problems with logging to labs, etc. and I can be of any help, feel free to ping me when I'm around. Bryan could in theory also help as well. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 10:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, let's try it the next time we are both on IRC. --MF-W 01:50, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Language committee/Status/wp/inh

Dear, MF-Warburg! March 9 You have removed the page Language committee/Status/wp/inh. Tell me please what was it for? And how do I create this page again? It refers to the Wikipedia project in the Ingush language, which is now actively developing and which we are trying to open. Sincerely, Adam-Yourist (talk) 08:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello. Status pages were previously used to keep track of the activity of Requests for new languages. They are not necessary anymore, as their information is now incorporated into the template at the top of each request. That's why I am deleting them and why their recreation is blocked. --MF-W 14:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Miniaturenwettbewerb

Sei gegrüßt MF-Warburg, ich habe zum Ende März den Versuch unternommen, beim Miniaturenwettbewerb einen Text zu plazieren. Dies ist mir aus Gründen, die auf Formalien von Wikipedia fußen, nicht gelungen. Meine Erfahrungen als Author in Wikipedia sind gerade so jung wie mein Versuch. Ich halte meinen Text weiterhin für einen, der die Anforderungen des Miniaturenwettbewerbs erfüllt, nämlich: 'neu geschriebene Miniaturen (Obergrenze max. 15.000 Byte) zu allen Themen' für die 'Kandidatur zum lesenswerten oder exzellenten Artikel'. Eventuell sehen ja Sie eine Möglichkeit, meinen Text irgendwo im Wikipedia-Universum unterzubringen !? Mit freundlichen Grüßen Geilich --Geilich (talk) 12:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Geilich, woran scheiterte denn der Versuch? --MF-W 13:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Disappointed

My dear brother MFW, I am disappointed by the one sided decision taken by your goodself. As you know that I have tirelessly worked with Wikimedia Foundation as test admin, translator and contributor in khowar wikipedia free of cost, I have yet claimed any single penny from WMF. I have tralslated more than 1000 system most used msgs into khowar language which are necessary for creation of Khowar wikipedia, Your goodself on the basis of one IP marked my and other contributors name as socks, Brother is this a fari decision? This is discrimination, this is violation of human rights. More than 04 active users are also tirelessly contribution without break, we have already completed all the requirements for creation of new wiki, Being a test admin i am authorised to edit all the articles but I have been wrongly linked with other contributers as sock, I am one of the Language Volunteer who are helping WMF free of cost by localizing the contents into pakistani languages. I am very very disappointed sir, please guide me that what is the next step, this is my personal email rachitrali@yahoo.com --Rehmat Aziz Chitrali 03:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Your next step is to account for the additional socking that I have listed here.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 18:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Revert back to incubator

@MF-Warburg @Barean Hunter please check this project also [1]by check user, stward or clerk that there is no activity since long and revert back to incubator as there is no activity and no active 3 users are availble [2]Thank --Rehmat Aziz Chitrali 06:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

SOS

Bonjour et permettez-moi de me présenter : je suis Claude Piard, jadis contributeur sous le pseudo de Claude PIARD aujourd’hui quasi-banni dans des conditions pour le moins contestables. Et vous êtes mon ultime recours pour dénoncer des dérives nuisibles in fine à la réputation de Wikepdia. J'ai en effet déjà tenté d'alerter le CAR qui s'est déclaré incompétent puis fais appel récemment aux bureaucrates où mes messages sur leur PdD, revertés dans les délais les plus brefs par Habertrix, n'entrent même plus suite à une prise de contrôle que n'approuverait probablement pas la CNIL. Mais ce genre de manœuvre risquée est bien révélateur en soi de l'urgence qu'il y a pour certain(e)s de "cacher les poussières sous le tapis".

Excusez-moi donc de vous ramener loin en arrière. En novembre 2013 Litlok est intervenu sur la PaS pour TI d’un article consacré à l’ « Attitude des juifs sous le régime nazi » pour suggérer son transfert dans la catégorie Recherche en histoire de Wikiversité, ce que j’ai fait le 6 janvier 2014 non sans provoquer de réactions de Lgd/Alginatus, longtemps sous simple IP.

Deux ans plus tard, en octobre 2016 la fausse manoeuvre d’un collègue et ami qui a rapatrié par erreur les travaux résultant de l'évolution de cet article sur Wikiversité a été prétexte au procès le plus rapide de l’histoire wikipédienne. Un RA pour « désorganisation de l’encyclopédie » initié par Heddryin à mon encontre déposé le 22 octobre à 12 heures 46 a abouti à mon blocage indéfini le 24 octobre à 18 heures 41, sanction prononcée par Lomita – après une large consultation certes – aux motifs allégués de « WP-POINT, meatpuppetry et contournement de décision communautaire », la décision étant appliquée par Starus. Le RA initial a été clos dès le 23 par la même Lomita à 9 heures 33 – soit 15 heures après son ouverture – pour « conflit d’édition » trois minutes exactement après le dépôt de mon argumentaire, la discussion se poursuivant ensuite uniquement sur le BA entre administrateurs où celui-ci est ignoré.

Mes tentatives d’appel au RA puis au CaR sont rapidement éludés avec pour seul effet le blocage de mon IP (2A01:E35:2E8F:19D0:E574:9CCA:1C5C:7825) et l’effacement de ma page présentation ainsi que sa PdD probablement trop compromettantes pour mes détracteurs. Depuis d’épisodiques tentatives de modestes interventions lors d’éphémères déblocages de mon IP se traduisent par son reblocage immédiat par Lomita au seul prétexte du test du canard, empêchant ainsi toute remise en cause de sa décision. Et actuellement ma détermination à faire rétablir l’exactitude des faits me vaut en RA une proposition de bannissement de la part d’Heggesipe. L’IP flottante de mon téléphone me permet néanmoins de porter à votre connaissance cette situation sur laquelle je reste prêt à fournir tous les renseignements complémentaires utiles. A cette fin, et faute d'autres moyens, mon adresse e-mail était accessible via mon ancienne page Claude PIARD. Celle-ci est certes effacée et je suppose que vous avez les outils nécessaires pour la ré-ouvrir. Néanmoins je me permets de vous la confirmer : crjpiard@free.fr

Merci d’avoir pris le temps de me lire et bonne semaine. Envoyé depuis une adresse flottante, faute de pouvoir le faire plus régulièrement.--37.166.90.99 16:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Je découvre que ma connexion n'est pas bloquée sur Meta-Wiki et vous confirme donc totalement ce qui précède.--Claude PIARD (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Cette version archivée avant effacement de ma page de discussion confirme et explicite ce qui précède. Elle démontre également que j’ai épuisé tous les recours avant de vous solliciter. Sans résultats autre que provoquer une demande de bannissement. Indifférence générale ? Complot ? Quoiqu’il en soit le remplacement du respect des principes fondateurs et des recommandations écrites par le concept de « décision communautaire » ( i.e. « au soviet ») a de quoi inquiéter pour l’avenir de Wikipédia francophone--Claude PIARD (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC).

Close RftAs

Hi, I would like to know if it is possible to close this request to be a translation administrator, 8 days have passed and there have been no objections. There is also a request from another user but I think it still needs more discussion. Thanks and regards. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 01:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Already Done. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 01:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

pawikisource

I noticed that you imported few pages from sourceswiki to pawikisource. Unfortunately, some books are incomplete (missing Index or Page namespace pages), likely because they were not directly assigned to the language category.

Here is the list of pages that still need to be imported. Could you finish the import, please? Or whom/where can I ask for such action?

I think having these books in both pawikisource and sourceswiki may be misleading for users. Ankry (talk) 12:32, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

You are right, I only imported the pages that were in the category. I will import the pages you listed. Thanks. --MF-W 13:26, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Ankry: Done now. --MF-W 19:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Request Wikinews

Hi MF-W, as you can see here, the Dutch Wikinews community has published a request to launch. Unfortunately, none of the LangCom members has responds in a period of more than 30 days. We would like to know the decision (or at least some information) of the LangCom. Can you take a look at this? Can we do something more? Kind regards, --Livenws (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC) ps: I also have made contact with other langcom members who speak my own language (Dutch) buth they can not give me more information about the approval.

"Done" at Steward requests/Miscellaneous for Janevistan?

Hi MF-Warburg, you placed "Done" at Steward requests/Miscellaneous [3], but Janevistan was not deleted yet. Do you plan to delete Janevistan [4]?178.223.36.104 21:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

No. --MF-W 09:58, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, but if no one intent to delete Janevistan, you should label that "Not Done". Right?178.222.118.171 12:01, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

No. --MF-W 20:09, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

How can you say "Done" if nothing has been Done! That contradicts logic. You didn't make any changes anywhere. Nothing was done. How can you say go and request deletion yourself, when you know that page was and is admin. locked. As a Steward you should act in an impartial way. And, by the way, did Igor Janev offended you or anybody here? What is the reason of your behavior?178.223.25.122 23:00, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Email

Hello, hope you in good health, I sent an email to you about Language committee before 1 week almost. --Alaa :)..! 23:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Answered. --MF-W 14:55, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Emails to Stewards OTRS

I sent emails to Stewards OTRS queue. I was told that it is largely backlogged, and a response may be unknown. What else do you know about the Stewards OTRS service? --George Ho (talk) 05:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, I know the content of some tickets. But I am not sure whether I understood your question correctly. --MF-W 09:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll rephrase: May you estimate when a steward answers my emails? --George Ho (talk) 15:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I dug it out and answered. --MF-W 15:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Have you answered them all or just one? --George Ho (talk) 16:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

The tickets I saw were all about one topic. My answer is to all of them. But feel free to reply by mail. --MF-W 16:40, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Sent you email directly. --George Ho (talk) 16:46, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

And another email to OTRS queue. --George Ho (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Another email

Hello again. I sent you another email. --George Ho (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

Continuing what we spoke about earlier, could you perhaps translate at least some of the mw:Universal Language Selector/Compact Language Links page into German?

Thanks a lot! --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:38, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

withdrawal of the negotiation page

Is this precisely forbidden by the rules in all Wikipedia? Why? I was not fairly blocked. I now want to completely delete the discussion page. This question is blocked by ukrviki administrators? --Jphwra (talk) 20:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I also ask to be able to lock my account forever. I very much ask him to block it to any Wikipedia I will not post anything. --Jphwra (talk) 07:11, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, what are you talking about? --MF-W 16:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, he's talking about this: Wikimedia Forum#Why can not I remove a discussion page at the user's request?. We've started a discussion on ukwiki, so if you have any thoughts regarding whether we should remove user talk pages on users' requests or not, we'd be glad to hear your opinion here--Piramidion 17:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Help design a new feature to stop harassing emails

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team plans to start develop of a new feature to allow users to restrict emails from new accounts. This feature will allow an individual user to stop harassing emails from coming through the Special:EmailUser system from abusive sockpuppeting accounts.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you have experience dealing with abusive sockpuppeting accounts and you work across many wikis. We think that your insights will help us build a better feature.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

It is important to hear from a broad range of people who are interested in the design of the tool, so we hope you join the discussion and let us know how it would work best for you.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

NL gelöscht?

Da User_talk:Stemoc#Community_health_initiative.2FCommunity_health_initiative_Newsletter tut sich nichts. Ich wüsste aber gerne, was aus dem NL geworden ist. Das Projekt hat auf dem dewiki bisher keinerlei wiederhall gefunden, praktisch tot. --Manorainjan (talk) 14:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Der Inhalt der Seite war:

==Sign up for the Community health initiative Newsletter==
{{noise2|<center>Add your name below to have the Community health initiative Newsletter delivered to your talk page.</center><br/><center> </center>}}
# 
#

Hilft das weiter? --MF-W 16:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Meta:Requests for bureaucratship/Billinghurst

Hi. I am not sure if you have seen the ping there, but there is an active RfB going on for almost a week, and basically because we only have 2 bureaucrats considering the current process it is up to you whether it moves forward, so everybody is waiting for your response. You seem to be back now, so I would appreciate you taking some time to deal with that. Thanks. --Base (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there MF-W. I was comming to say the same as Base did. Apologies for the incovenience but we need you to decide if you want to endorse it or oppose/abstain it because in the later case a regular vote should ensue. If you could please address this at your earliest it'd be good. With best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

(apparently my email from a couple of days ago didn't arrived or has been sent to your spam folder; curious to know why as I don't really use the email so tagging it as 'spam' is kind of fun)

Hello. What a weird situation with my spam filter! I will comment on the page. However please note that the request will be unsuccessful after my comment, as Meta:Requests_for_adminship#Bureaucratship and Meta:Bureaucrats make clear that a request needs to be endorsed by 2 bureaucrats to be able to be considered at all. --MF-W 16:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello again. Thank you for commenting there and unlocking the process. I have closed the request as unsuccessful given that there can't be two bureaucrat endorsements now and concerns have been raised. The validity of those cannot be evaluated by an uninvolved bureaucrat either since we both have commented. This unlocks phase two, where the candidate can open a new RfB which will be governed by the rules of RfA. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Allow users to restrict which user groups can send them direct emails/Usurps

Hi MF-Warburg, Thank you for joining the discussion about the new feature to allow users to restrict which user groups can send them direct emails. After you pointed out the situation of emailing people with 0 edits for usurps, we are planning to allow users in the groups bureaucrat, steward, wmf-supportsafety, and global-renamer to still have the ability to send email to these users. Does this address your concerns? And are there any other situations that you know about that would require the ability to contact someone on a wiki where they have made 0 edits? SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi MF-Warburg, In addition to allowing users in the groups bureaucrat, steward, wmf-supportsafety, and global-renamer to still have the ability send emails to accounts with 0 edits, we are considering allowing 0 edit accounts to receive emails from the home wiki where the account was created. These additions address all of the cases that we have encountered related to Education programs and off wiki editing event follow up. Please let us know if you know of other situations that we need to address. Again, thanks for your feedback. SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, this addresses my concerns, and I can't think of any other situation except the ones you described. I added some technical note on the page. --MF-W 10:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Three deletion proposals under LangCom review?

Hello again. I see that you changed the status to under review by LangCom. However, I still see three deletion proposals as "open for discussion". May you or I please change the proposal statuses? Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

request

urwiki users are urwiki users, not urwiktionary users, as you say

Sir, there is no active user on urwiktionary except me and shuaib. :( --Bukhari (Talk!) 18:08, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Precisely. In such a case, there is no need for appointing bureaucrats. It's required that there is a certain community size for that. --MF-W 15:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikibooks Fijian

I think this should be deleted as well as Requests for new languages/Wikibooks Old English. --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 14:03, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Thanks. --MF-W 14:39, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Email

Hi! I have send you an email. Could you please take a look at it? Trijnstel_talk 11:37, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Stewards policy: Don't override consensus

I post this message on two talkpages, since You and Vituzzu put wrongly "not done" on the Steward requests/Permissions page, and since it is not expected that You read someone else's talkpage.
[5] User Denny used the tools after he was desysopped by the consensus of the community.
[6] [7] E.coli and Saxum were not on the list since they did not have such long period of inactivity like Denny, Joy and Dalibor Bosits.
[8] Those "recent actions" is just the gaming of the system. Two years of inactivity, then few edits and then again disappearance. The project needs the power users that maintain the project, not the ones that have the tools solely for having them.
Besides the inactivity, the other topics were also touched in the discussion when arguing why Denny, Joy and Dalibor Bosits should not have the tools.
The voting was prolonged, although every voting on hr.wiki since the beginning of the project (15 years) lasts seven days, and that concerned user had to know that.
The consensus is after a month even stronger than before. 10:1; even the voter "against" was "pro desysopping" - the reasons for "against" was solely beacuse of technical reasons - in that sense, 11:0. That is called the consensus.
Denny and Joy have never been chosen by the voting of the community.
This matter is not closed [9][10][11]. Community discussed, voted, enough time was given, including the extratime. The community clearly expressed its opinion.
Therefore I call the rule: Stewards_policy#Don't_override_consensus: "Stewards should not override consensus, such as whether or not a user should be given a particular user right...Stewards should always be neutral. They can vote in elections, but when executing the result of the election the steward has to act according to the result, even if they disagree with the outcome."
Sincerely, Kubura (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I only added the "not done" status to the requests in order to have them archived. Vito rejected the 3 requests which belong together, but only marked the first as not done. I have not made a decision about this. --MF-W 01:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, those three were just in the same group, but there was not the reason to put them alltogether "not done" (solely Denny made several edits - but after the discussion, the other two were not at all). Kubura (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Ask

Hi! Tell, and the absence of objections — consensus? Does it work in technical matters, for example, when it is necessary to create a flag of a patrolling or rolling back? --OlegCinema (talk) 12:52, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

In principle yes. There is a difference between "everyone is in favour" and "nobody says anything" though, that might be relevant if you e.g. propose to create a patroller or rollbacker group - in particular because if nobody supports such a group, there also seems to be nobody to whom such a group might be given. --MF-W 13:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I plan to start developing the project and without such flags as" patrolling " nothing will come out. You will need to check the created articles. Such people there is. I will involve many of the other dictionaries. --OlegCinema (talk) 13:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I. e. I will invite everyone to the project --OlegCinema (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Global rename

Hi Warburg,

Thanks for looking into this. Since the ping is not working and I'm unsure weather you are watching that page, I decided to follow up with you here. How about JTF, XTC ,GTC, FTC, KQT, STC, FTC, DTC, WTC, CTC, JTC, HTC, OTC? I'm OK with any of these three letter words. Thank you.Wikicology (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Guianan Wikipedia

Hi, can you tell me why the Guianan Wikipedia project is not yet approved, please ?! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Decker def

I have been referring to Decker (e.g., in talk page discussions) as a "globally banned user". I just realized that I don't actually know what his official status is. I guess he's not that because he's not listed at List of globally banned users. (I don't recognize any of those names as being him, anyway.) I know he has been prevented from editing under many different accounts and IP addresses. So what does that make him? - dcljr (talk) 18:31, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

He is a long-term abuser that regularly gets blocked. He is not banned since that is more for users who also do productive things but cause some problems. Decker on the other hand just gets blocked/reverted on sight since he does nothing productive at all. --MF-W 12:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Local admin is editing pswikivoyage before importing has started

Can you please weigh in at voy:ps:User talk:Bloch khan#Please wait for importing to be finished? Since you are the one doing the importing, you presumably know better than I whether this admin is wasting his time or not. - dcljr (talk) 02:05, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. --MF-W

About your revert

Hello, my edit to your user page here on meta came from the fact that marking "I am admired here" on many other sites can be confusing. She questioned me when I saw her on another wiki. But you don't seem to like what I did, maybe the following meta mention is enough for you. As you wish. Just put a comment in your revert in the future please. Sincerely --Framawiki (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

"here on Meta" does not seem to be very confusing to me on a page whose footer says "What you see on this page was copied from [$2 $2].". Also, who is this she? --MF-W 22:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Sysop rights on Arabic wikipedia

I am writing to you because I lost my sysop rights on Arabic wikipedia today. It's abuse from another sysop who is making rules as he wants. First he made the control period between 07.01.2018 to 07.07.2018 and then suddenly changed it to 19.01.2018 to 19.07.2018 (just to show that I did less than the required number of sysop edits, because I did't edit from the 16th of July to 29th of July, because of my work as a doctor --> the rule says that a sysop must do 30 sysop edits every 6 months). It is an abuse of power here to change the rules as one wants. Dear Sir, I beg you to give me my sysop rights back. Thank you very much. Why does this Sysop asked only for deleting my Sysop rights? There are other Sysops who edited much less than the requested edits and still are Sysops. The rule applies for all. This is pure abuse from that Sysop. Thank you very much for understanding me and give me my Sysop rights back (Recht herzlichen Dank).--DrFO.Tn (talk) 22:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

The removal of sysop right is correct, and there's a discussion in arwiki about this user reaction --Alaa :)..! 06:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Comment @DrFO.Tn: That's incorrect. I did not make policies as I want. I just applied the policy approved by the community. The policy says that a sysop must do 30 sysop edits within 6 months not EVERY as you said. Also, I did not just request to remove your sysop rights. In 2018, I submitted almost 4 requests to remove the sysop rights of approximately 4 administrators and you can see the requests. I am only applying the policy. Thanks.--Faisal ^talk 12:33, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Import Beta to zh wikiversity

Hello I am a beta custodianship. I want to assist with the import work. Can I grant my custodianship and import permissions? --安可 ‧對話（中文維基百科用戶） 23:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Already being dealt with. --MF-W 10:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Guianan Wikipedia

Hi, could you check the project of the Guianan Wikipedia please, because I sent a message to some administrators and none answer, yet we did all that they asked us, they we have recently asked to fill as many pages as possible, what we did, we filled 80% of the pages of the project and now, after one year of work on this project, we would like to know if it will finally be approved ! ! ! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 14:39, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I just looked through a random selection of articles in Wp/gcr. Are there any that have more than one paragraph? --MF-W 23:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, there are some who have more than one paragraph, but if the majority have only one paragraph, why do you think that more is needed, if yes how many? And if not after that, you don't know if there is a lack of other things to do, because I have the impression that they don't tell me all what to do and after it makes me come back each time ask them what to do and it's a bit embarrassing...! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, why don't you answer too, you think I'm harassing you, I'm sorry that wasn't the case, I'm sending a lot of message because this project is really important for me, you know, I'm going through a quite difficult period in my life. When I started this project, it was at the base for my region (French Guiana), for my language (Guianan Creole) which starts to disappear a little, but with time I really attached to this project to such I was there on practically every week and every month the administrators said that they would soon approve it and they still did nothing. This project to develop a huge stress in me, so please, activate it finally, especially that I need a victory, a success, in this difficult period of my life, Please Create the Guianan Wikipedia !

If I'm not completely filled in the pages, it's only for the project, I PROMISE you to Fill them, well relaxed, calmly, without stress once the Wikipedia created, but this project makes me completely nervous, activate this project PLEASE, for heaven's sake, please ! LeGuyanaisPure (talk) 13:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to reply. I have given an answer in the section with the same topic on Steven's talk page. --MF-W 23:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Steward requests/Miscellaneous

Hi MF-W, I've seen that you're a steward and you're currently active. Would you mind taking care of a request I've opened last month in Miscellaneous but nobody has solved yet, please? Gheorghiosan (talk) 08:31, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Archiving and lost request

Hi, I fear that when you performed this archiving, my request for sysop rights went lost in the garbage. It wasn't a global flag, so possibly it isn't monitored elsewhere. Can you double check please? --Ruthven (msg) 08:07, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, no, it's here! Just got forgot by stewards. :D Cheers! --Ruthven (msg) 08:09, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Oops! I restored it to SRP. --MF-W 14:34, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Chi-chewa Wiki Import pages

Hi i was given rights to be admin on the Chi-Chewa wiki now i want to import some templates here but am geting this message No wikis from which to import have been defined and direct history uploads are disabled. somone told me that you help me with this i wanted to know what i need to do. Thank you. --Chabota (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Please get community consensus for the adding of the desired import sources and then make a request for them to be added on phabricator:. --MF-W 14:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. --Chabota (talk) 06:06, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Emergency in KaWiki

Dear steward,
Please read my explanation thoroughly. It is about an inexorable situation in the Georgian Wikipedia, the long-established. Every attempt to solve the problem locally fails again and again. So, please, do not be indifferent.
The requests are extraordinary, so I do not write on a general page, but personally.
Best regards, Deu. 18:04, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikimedia Tool Developers Group/Report 2018

Deqr MF-Warburg

I hope you are doing well, I create a draft report for the user group, can you enrich the report thank you Mounir Touzri (talk) 15:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Verlängerung für Adminrechte

Guten Morgen MF-Warburg,

ich weiß nicht, ob Sie gelesen haben, inzwischen habe ich meine Beantragung für Adminrechte in unsere WP neu erstellt. Ich habe auch Unterstützungen bekommen (siehe Requests for adminship). Könnten Sie mir zumindest Bescheid geben, wie lange ich noch warten muss. Mir wurde geschrieben, dass man eine Woche warten muss, wenn ich für die Adminrechte neu beantragen.

Beste Grüße Munkhzaya.E (talk) 05:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Ist jetzt verlängert. 7 Tage Wartezeit nach Eröffnung des Antrags sind erforderlich. Viele Grüße --MF-W 17:45, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Danke schön. Beste Grüße Munkhzaya.E (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Montenegrin 5

What do you think about @Prz rulez:'s comment? This looks like contesting the rules of langcom and is it appropriate to you? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:39, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, anyone can contest what Langcom says. It's not like Langcom is speaking infallibly all the time. --MF-W 18:41, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Hindi Wikisource

Hi,

Any chance for creation of this project soon? We observe in sourceswiki enormous activity of Hindi contributors, especially in last year.

And I am personally, a bit worrying that sourceswiki might become de facto Hindi Wikisource if not separated.

I think, some input from the Language Comitee what prevented establishing this wiki so far would be welcome. Ankry (talk) 12:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Could you please consider to reply this?Jayantanth (talk) 20:53, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

This topic is being discussed in Langcom. --MF-W 19:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Stewards/Confirm/2017, Stewards/Confirm/2018

Just so you know as you appear to lack comprehension of the English language, these [12][13] were done to provide a proper notice, as "Please note that voting has not yet begun, and will not until 08 February 2017, 14:00 (UTC)/08 February 2018, 14:00 (UTC)" seems to be outdated and incorrect. It was also to match the template of the previous years. Flooded with them hundreds 13:54, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, I had looked wrong and thought you edited the other template. But how strange that the template doesn't work properly with the past dates as a parameter. --MF-W 10:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Lzh-Wikisource

The idea of having a lzh Wikipedia is probably not bad. In fact, it's good. However mister, I would like to remind you that Zh wikisource is already functioning as a de facto Lzh wikisource. It has been functioning like this for a long time. A bulk of the contents of the Chinese wikisource is of Literary Chinese instead of Mandarin. Plus, the user who requested this is not a member of the Chinese wikisource community. He or She has very little experience on editing Chinese wikisource and all. The thing is: Even if a literary Chinese wikisource is set up, they will probably have to copy thousands and thousands of pages from Chinese wikisource just to create an identical page. I would deem such a situation unneccesary and time-consuming. ----Kubelreiter (talk) 12:58, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Current vote

Current vote in the mail group theoretically ends at about 16:00 UTC today. There is enough support to pass the proposal even if you continue to oppose, but I wanted to make sure this wasn't a case of your not seeing the original vote announcement. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

ygm

Hi MF-Warburg, you've got mail. If replying, please ping me so I know to check (or send via wikimail). Thanks! — xaosflux ^Talk 23:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Xaosflux --MF-W 08:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Bot inactivity notice

Hello MF-Warburg,

The Meta-Wiki community has approved a new bot inactivity policy which states that bots that are inactive for a continued period of 14 months should be subject to review. A bot you operate, Kimberley-nia Bot (talk · contribs) meets the inactivity criteria. In accordance with the bot inactivity policy, if you wish to retain the bot flag for the named account, please answer to this message no later than 6 April 2019 on Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. After that date if the bureaucrats have not received any reply, the bot flag for the named account will be removed.

To reflag a bot, please create a new request at Meta:Requests for bot status.

Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

LPP/de, LPP/fr, LPP/ms, LPP/nl and LPP/ru need update

As changes applied for 12 days. --125.36.185.11 02:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you want me to do? --MF-W 10:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure s/he wants you to do some translation. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Too bad I don't speak ms, nl or ru. --MF-W 09:56, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Sana'ani Arabic

Regarding this Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Sanaani, Hi, I am from Yemen. Sana'ani Arabic is a dialect of Arabic that it's words are 99% are Arabic. There is almost no differences between the words in standard Arabic and in Sana'ani Arabic. The differences are phonics. If you know Yemenite Hebrew there are similar phonic features in Sana'ani dialect to Yemenite Hebrew that is used by Jews from Sana'a or north Yemen. For example the letter ج (Jim) is pronounced differently. You can see the rest of my argument in that link. I will propose another language which is Mahri language that is spoken by most of Omanis and a lot of Yemenis in Mahra region. It is completely a different language. There is also Socqtri language which is also a completely different language. The Sana'ani proposal was passed without discussion could you fix that?. Thank you so much..--SharabSalam (talk) 01:15, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I see the issue will be proposed to Langcom. It will then surely be solved in a very good way. --MF-W 09:56, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Ich bitte um Ihre Hilfe

cfr. task T227521. Danke! ;-) —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Language splits

We've been discussing this since forever it seems: mailarchive:wikimedia-l/2005-March/062512.html. :-) Nemo 15:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh dear. I hope it will eventually get solved before the end of time :P --MF-W 19:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Journal hosting sister project proposal

Hello, I'm leaving a note on the talkpages of those on the old SPCom list to ensure that you have seen this proposal discussion for a journal hosting sister project. I realise that the process these days is slightly different, but I'm keen to make sure that we get as broad feedback as possible, so please consider to adding a note to comment/support/oppose. We hope to submit a cover letter to the WMF trustees in the coming month. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 03:46, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Main Page thanks

I'm pretty sure all those thanks were accidents. I suspect that it's pretty typical for users who don't know exactly what they're doing to click the thank buttons on history pages of main pages. (I've gotten quite a few for edits to the English Wiktionary main page.) --Yair rand (talk) 21:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

However they all are for edits of the same day, from accounts with almost always 0 edits, which is why I find it very curious. --MF-W 21:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

15 of the 16 edits you've made that are still on the first page of history are from that same day. New users who don't know how the site works usually have 0 edits, and logged-out users don't have a thank button. --Yair rand (talk) 22:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok. But most of these accounts only ever visited Meta, as evidenced by Special:CentralAuth. Who creates an account on Meta and then only looks at the main page history? --MF-W 23:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Importing of hiwikisource

Please see my comment at phab:T218155#5548823. - dcljr (talk) 00:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Taken care of by Jon Harald Søby. - dcljr (talk) 03:14, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism on Polish Wikinews

Hello,

Since there have been no active administrators on Polish Wikinews since a few days, may I ask you to delete an article which has no useful and relevant content and seems to be a vandalism? The article has following URL: [14].

Best regards

Szczecinolog (talk) 08:15, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I see someone else already did it. Best regards --MF-W 15:04, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Template_talk: SWMT-Members

Hey MF-Warburg, As you were previously involved in discussions on Template_talk: SWMT-Members, your input will be really helpful on a recent discussion about making single list of users instead experienced and new. Thank you! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Unaddressed persistent vandalism in Wikimedia Incubator

Hi MF-Warburg,

There is a vandal in Wikimedia Incubator who keeps spamming the administrators' noticeboard with unintelligible false accusations against other users (see diff links [15], [16], [17]). The pattern behind the vandalism matches one of the LTAs who has a vendetta against certain users and keeps jumping IP addresses. Attempts to revert the vandalism have been met with further vandalism, and when I messaged StevenJ81, one of Incubator's admins, about it, I got no response, and the LTA started spamming StevenJ81's talk page as well (example diffs [18], [19]). Since you are listed as an admin on Incubator, can the affected pages be protected to prevent further vandalism?

Thanks, DraconicDark (talk) 00:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, as you will have seen, I have protected at least Steven's talk page, as he is currently inactive. Thanks for helping to get rid of the vandalism. --MF-W 23:08, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Unfortunately, the vandalism at Incubator's administrators' noticeboard hasn't stopped. The LTA keeps adding defamatory attacks to the page, so semi-protection of the administrators' noticeboard may be needed. DraconicDark (talk) 00:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

I am, of course, aware of this. However, I don't think it will help to protect I:AN. It only makes it more difficult for users to make requests to admins, which the vandal will merely move to attack a different page. --MF-W 14:25, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Semi-protecting the page would make it so only autoconfirmed users could edit the page, which wouldn't make it that much more difficult to make requests, given most Incubator users are autoconfirmed. If you think that's not the right thing to do, is there another way to prevent the constant vandalism? One possible remedy I can think of is modifying the abuse filter to detect this specific brand of vandalism, given that there is an obvious pattern to the attacks (incomprehensible rant about supposed privacy violations that accuses specific users, followed by a ton of broken links). I ask because this vandal is extremely persistent, keeps attacking and harassing those who try to remove his vandalism, and may even have taken out StevenJ81's email (see link for details). This particular vandal has already been banned by the Foundation, so besides protection and possibly modifying the abuse filter, I can't think of anything else that could be done. If you have any ideas, that would be greatly appreciated. DraconicDark (talk) 22:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

I am aware of how semiprotecting works. But the reasons I stated already do still apply. And yes, abuse filters exist. --MF-W 15:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Thanks for your input. The vandalism still hasn't stopped, so if protection isn't a good idea, the abuse filter needs to be looked into as a possible countermeasure. Do you know anyone who could modify the abuse filter? If this vandalism is simply allowed to continue, it could have the effect of scaring away users who actually want to make legitimate requests to admins. DraconicDark (talk) 01:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Just asking, will any good be for incubator to be a GS wiki. Just wondering, thanks.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure it would be necessary. SWMT/global people are already helping with reverting, while any necessary blocks against this guy should be global blocks and locks, as he is truly active cross-wiki unfortunately. --MF-W 00:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I shall continue my reverts there. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 16:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I should have been more specific. I did put abusefilters into place. They are hidden from public view to prevent the vandal from getting around them. But he still manages to do it, so I try to adjust the filters from time to time to catch more of this nonsense. I also now archived all requests from I:AN, as they were all done, to make reverting easier if he continues to hit there. --MF-W 00:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

RFA

Hi. At the time the RFA was supposed to end. There was sufficient support? Rehman 13:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sent you an email, as you haven't edited for the past day (and also for a week before closing the RFA). Rehman 07:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I realize this is unfortunate for you, but we always take into account everything that was commented at the time of the closing, not only within one week precisely. Requests can be left open longer, see Meta:Administrators: "with at least one week allocated for the community to express opinions". --MF-W 11:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, MF-Warburg. I still disagree with the outcome. There were 6s and 4o, of which 3o are after the RFA expired.

• Even if you consider all votes, it is still majority.
• All of the oppose reasons are not valid; edit count is not objective. Meta is not an encyclopedia, or a parallel project like Wikidata/Commons. Excluding special Wikimedia activity (like usergroups, which I work on), or project specific work, there is mostly no other legitimate way of "growing" the edit count other than fixing typos or reverting vandalism. It doesn't make sense to block trusted volunteers from access to useful tools such as the admin flag, only because of the Meta edit count. I could have easily made dozens or hundreds of smaller edits fixing typos or adjusting things, just to rack up the edit counter, but that is not what Meta is for, or how it should function.
• I am already very active on other projects, and already an admin on other large projects. I have already been identified by WMF, so trust or misuse is not a concern.
• Requests on RFAs are left open when clear issues are only being revealed. And the crats usually clearly mention the extension. In this case, it was clearly left open because no crat was around.

As the closing crat, I would like you to reconsider this please. Thanks. Rehman 12:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not reconsidering it. About point 1, you need at least 75% support in a RFA on Meta. About point 2, the policy even says "this is a subjective, not objective, measure". About point 3, nobody brought that up as an oppose point in the request. About point 4, there is no obligation to close RFAs at the exact second, and previous practice has always been to take all comments into account. --MF-W 21:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Siberian

You forgot to delete the request from Requests for new languages. --2001:B07:6442:8903:E011:C9E4:72C8:9D85 13:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

about RfC

I said this RfC. I came from Hasley's talk page. I will not object if I delete it for a reasonable reason, but at least I object to it because it is against the reason such as "Vandalism" and the fact that it is LTA that Mr. Hasley mentioned. .. If I wasn't allowed to speak by IP, I didn't comment. I could not express my opinion because it was protected, so I just wrote it in a talk page. And I think it's unfair to have Hasley commenting in favor of removing the opposite comment that isn't even an LTA.--49.98.84.90 04:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm from jawp user Twitter. I don't know in other languages, but there are recent posts by jawp in the comment requesting notes of IP users who are not vandalism or LTA.[20][21] I want to request the withdrawal of Talk:Requests for comment/Reforming the RFC process's deletion.--49.98.84.90 04:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)--49.98.84.90 04:46, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikisource Ligurian (vertraulich)

Hallo MF, vielleicht können wir uns auf Deutsch besser verstehen (schließlich spreche ich besser Deutsch als Genuesisch!).

Ich entschuldige mich in erster Linie für die Verlängerung der ganzen Prozedur in Bezug auf die Einrichtung von der Ligurischen Wikisource. Meine ersten Bedenken sind jetzt vom Tisch, weil das Problem der Schnittstelle scheint, gelöst zu sein. Dabei war die erfreuliche Nachricht, dass einer unserer besten Übersetzer für Genuesisch, nämlich Giromìn Cangiaxo, endlich mal auftauchte und bestätigte, dass er die Schnittstelle quasi unter Kontrolle hatte (eine hervorragende Leistung!).

Nun ist alles in Ordnung mit Ausnahme der Wikisource-specific namespace names: in dieser Hinsicht habe ich mich sehr bemüht, die sprachlichen Wünsche von Giromìn und G.Musso zur Geltung zu bringen bzw. sie offiziell zu machen. Ich erkenne an, dass die beiden Genuesisch besser können als ich, weil ich aus einem benachbarten Gebiet stamme (Val Borbera), wo die ligurische Sprache leicht anders ist als in Genua. In der Diskussionsseite habe ich gestern Abend das definitive Schema gepostet, wo ihre Präferenzen klar aufgelistet sind. Bitte gib ein endgültiges grünes Licht zu den o.g. Schlüsselwörtern in ihrer neuesten Fassung am Ende der Diskussionsseite.

Vielen Dank für deine Unterstützung und dein Verständnis in dieser Angelegenheit.

--Luensu1959 (talk) 07:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Danke, ich antworte noch per Mail. --MF-W 01:18, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:Infobox software?

Hi MF-Warburg, would you please give me more details as to why you deleted the template I created? I need it to describe a tool on Meta. Thanks! Macruzbar (talk) 18:25, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, infoboxes are for Wikipedia articles and such. I don't see what tools would be described on Meta that need such a template. --MF-W 18:44, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

New Member of Wikimedia Tool Developers Group

Hi MF-Warburg , am a new member of Wikimedia Tool Developers Group. i would like to know if there are other media(such as whatsapp group,telegram group etc ) apart from the ones mention on the page, which members uses to communicate with each other and also ways/things i should be doing in order to be more active in the group. Thanks --Dolphyb (talk) 08:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I'm afraid I am not aware of any activites, but that might also just be because I am not really active in that area anymore. Best regards --MF-W 11:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time out to reply MF-Warburg, but i would appreciate if you could point me to the right person, who you know that might still be active in the group. Atleast you have long stayed in the group to know some persons who might still be active. Thank --Dolphyb (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Policy

Hi! I've so far remained uninvolved with the the above page’s corresponding RfC; mind if I help draft the results? Best, Vermont (talk) 12:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't mind at all! Feel free to. As a Meta sysop, I suppose you are also completely legitimised to close the whole thing, if you want to. --MF-W 12:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I've added to the draft page, closed the RFC, and removed the draft notice. What templates and categories should be added to the page? I haven't been in a position of initiating new policy pages before. Best, Vermont (talk) 00:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I have added the customary header templates (one of which also gives Category:Global policies. I'm not aware of any other categories that would be necessary). I've also made the page ready to be translated. --MF-W 08:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Best, Vermont (talk) 12:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

discussion pages

Hi! Sorry to bother you again, but the ligurian wikisource admin seems to have disappeared. Would it be possible to also move the discussion pages of it:s:Index:Italien112.pdf and it:s:Index:Ra Gerusalemme deliverâ.pdf from the italian to the ligurian wikisource? As an example this is one and this is another. I used them to flag the errata while trying to leave the transcription as diplomatic as possible. If you have a special tool to do it speedily and it's not to much work, of course. Thanks very much again! G.Musso (talk) 17:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

as a matter of fact this is a list of discussion pages that went missing during the move from the multilingual to the ligurian Wikisource

1. Discuscion pagina:Comici.schiavi.djvu/60‏‎ (2 inganci)
2. Discuscion pagina:Fioretti 1465.djvu/‏‎ (2 inganci)
3. Discuscion pagina:G. Peragallo - Poesie - 1870.djvu/75‏‎ (2 inganci)
4. Discuscion pagina:G. Peragallo - Poesie - 1870.djvu/78‏‎ (2 inganci)
5. Discuscion pagina:GSLL 06.pdf/171‏‎ (2 inganci)
6. Discuscion pagina:GSLL 06.pdf/173‏‎ (2 inganci)
7. Discuscion pagina:GSLL 06.pdf/174‏‎ (2 inganci)
8. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/10‏‎ (2 inganci)
9. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/12‏‎ (2 inganci)
10. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/13‏‎ (2 inganci)
11. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/14‏‎ (2 inganci)
12. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/15‏‎ (2 inganci)
13. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/16‏‎ (2 inganci)
14. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/17‏‎ (2 inganci)
15. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/18‏‎ (2 inganci)
16. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/19‏‎ (2 inganci)
17. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/2‏‎ (2 inganci)
18. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/22‏‎ (2 inganci)
19. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/23‏‎ (2 inganci)
20. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/24‏‎ (2 inganci)
21. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/25‏‎ (2 inganci)
22. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/27‏‎ (2 inganci)
23. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/28‏‎ (2 inganci)
24. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/29‏‎ (2 inganci)
25. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/3‏‎ (2 inganci)
26. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/4‏‎ (2 inganci)
27. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/5‏‎ (2 inganci)
28. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/6‏‎ (2 inganci)
29. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/7‏‎ (2 inganci)
30. Discuscion pagina:Ra.canson.de.l'aze.1665.djvu/8‏‎ (2 inganci)
31. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/110‏‎ (2 inganci)
32. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/112‏‎ (2 inganci)
33. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/117‏‎ (2 inganci)
34. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/169‏‎ (2 inganci)
35. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/172‏‎ (2 inganci)
36. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/173‏‎ (2 inganci)
37. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/175‏‎ (2 inganci)
38. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/176‏‎ (2 inganci)
39. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/178‏‎ (2 inganci)
40. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/180‏‎ (2 inganci)
41. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/181‏‎ (2 inganci)
42. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/195‏‎ (2 inganci)
43. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/196‏‎ (2 inganci)
44. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/198‏‎ (2 inganci)
45. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/199‏‎ (2 inganci)
46. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/200‏‎ (2 inganci)
47. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/202‏‎ (2 inganci)
48. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/203‏‎ (2 inganci)
49. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/204‏‎ (2 inganci)
50. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/205‏‎ (2 inganci)
51. Discuscion pagina:Ricci177.djvu/57‏‎ (2 inganci)

and these are missing too

1. Pagina:Malinverni C. Bolle de savon 1921.pdf/111‏‎ (2 inganci)
2. Pagina:Malinverni C. Bolle de savon 1921.pdf/119‏‎ (2 inganci)
3. Pagina:Malinverni C. Bolle de savon 1921.pdf/161‏‎ (2 inganci)
4. Pagina:Pinocchiu2019.djvu/235‏‎ (2 inganci)
5. Pagina:Pinocchiu2019.djvu/25‏‎ (2 inganci)
6. Pagina:Pinocchiu2019.djvu/42‏‎ (2 inganci)

Sorry I didn't realize it before. I hope there is a way to retrieve them thanks G.Musso (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi G.Musso! I can do this in the next few days. --MF-W 00:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

great! thanks! G.Musso (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

For the record, it was done by Sotiale. --MF-W 12:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Administators removal archive

Hello MF. I hope you are good. In this archive, the record of October 2018 isn't written correctly. In this activity evaluation, the rights of 2 admins were removed. Can you/we correct the missed information in the archive? As bureaucrats usually edit these archives, I don't want to edit without permission. Thanks. --Uncitoyen^talk 19:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I fixed it now, but feel free to edit the page yourself, it's not protected or anything. --MF-W 00:08, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I was hesitant to fix it. Thanks. --Uncitoyen^talk 09:03, 24 September 2020 (UTC)