User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 10

Active discussions

<older newer>

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


I would like to congratulate you on your election as a Steward! You played a blinder, Mike, and I am very proud to have been a support on your nomination. Do us proud, Mike! Iceflow 01:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Ditto, though I did not vote for or against you, I do thank you, for your vote, for or against my own nomination, and your constructive comments. Apteva 15:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Scientific images

ping. And if you can help to corrected we would be glad.--Juan de Vojníkov 19:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

jbo.wp main page

Hi, Mike. I saw you recently reverted vandalism to the Lojban Wikipedia main page. Wouldn't it be wise to protect it against anonymous edits? Could you do that please? Cheers, :) Malafaya 19:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

  Done by Spacebirdy already. Pages awaiting for speedy deletion already deleted by me. Best regards to all of you. —Dferg (meta-w:es.) 19:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Blacklist update

Hi. I think you just blacklisted Google. --Dynaflow babble 01:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, seth already got it  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm still getting spam-filter blocked on both and meta when trying to save anything involving the address google dot com. How long do filter reversions take to percolate through the system? --Dynaflow babble 02:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
~10-15 minutes.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay, there it goes. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 02:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello - I noticed that the editor w:User:Infinitysnake has reverted your removal of this link, and has added more instances of this link. There's very likely a conflict of interest given the whois information for this domain: Administrative Contact: Emick, Jennifer 4121 Wakefield Loop Fremont, CA 95112 US +1.510 713 1600

I've warned the editor, and am going back to remove the changes i can find, but i'd be interested in hearing what else can be done. Thanks. Quaeler 11:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I don't have time to look right now, but I've reopened the report with a pointer to your note.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I can confirm that infinitysnake is the same infinity snake as the user on enwiki. I got an email from that address through the special:email user function. So... == en:User:Infinitysnake. —— nixeagle 21:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, so that sounds bad. Feel free to take action as required, as I haven't got any time presently.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:32, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I've really poisoned the well with my previous actions related to this; i believe it would seem really poor were i to take further action concerning this.. :- / Quaeler 11:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


I am really happy to see you as steward even more than my stewardship , i do believe that you were best candidate this year , so i want to give you my most sincere congratulations --Mardetanha talk 22:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I think we have some excellent additions to the steward team, and I look forward to working with all of them. Of course, I do think you are among the cream of the crop, and I hope to collaborate with you on several projects (WM:SPAM and User:Mike.lifeguard/Screencasts being only the first two coming to mind :D )  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
\o/ congrats mike Abigor talk 23:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on your election as a Steward! - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 01:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

¡Felicidades! wich means congratulations in Spanish. I'm really happy to see you as a Wikimedia Steward :D . Best regards. —Dferg 12:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

"Useful" maps

Hey there Mike. It'd be my suggestion that you nominate these pages for deletion outright; I agree that they seem without relevance to Meta nowadays. Probably best to do it at a more visible forum. Best, —Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm planning to fill that category then do a bunch of nominations together. Feel free to preempt me if you like  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 08:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh, no, not at all. I'll leave you to your designs; thanks for clarifying. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Tidying developers' user rights, redux

Congrats on your promotion! Can I now take the opportunity to poke you on this? As best I can determine, the rights break down as follows: I'm not even sure if some of the fishbowl wikis at the bottom are accessible through the CentralAuth network, but they might as well be left anyway. Are you interested in spending an hour or so cleaning these out? Happymelon 12:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


Looks to me like some of these need to be double-checked:

  • All the enwiki ones
  • All the meta ones

Which I'll do now...  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

As well, some of these are old... All developer rights have already been removed. I imagine this is simply due to replag.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Probably; the s3 cluster was only synced this morning, so many of these data will be from before 5 January when the s3 replication was halted. Shall I recheck the data?
With regards the meta and enwiki rights: I believe the local "steward" group is deprecated even for stewards, although there seems to be some lack of clarity here: I note that your promotion has involved you being given both the global and local "steward" flags; I'm not sure what's going on there. Checking the relevant processes on, Kate is the only other dev to have passed a 'normal' RfA (w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kate); none of the devs have passed an RfB or AFAIK been confirmed as CU/OS by the Arbitration Committee. On meta, Tim and Brion's flags have both been removed; see Meta:Administrators/confirm/Archives/2009-01 and Meta:Administrators/confirm/bureaucrat chat/January 2009#Brion VIBBER, leaving them only the local steward group. Happymelon 22:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
That's because they are inactive in terms of admin work on Meta-wiki. Tim and Brion gained sysop rights through other means prior to their involvement as developers. Their removal should only come about if enwiki creates a desysopping policy, and they fail to meet it. Majorly talk 22:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Tim and Kate, yes, I can't find any evidence that Brion ever gained +sysop in the 'normal' way. Happymelon 23:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Where's your evidence against? Majorly talk 23:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
  1. I'm not removing their enwiki permissions anyways, so who cares?
  2. Please discuss this on Wikimedia Forum so I don't get a new orange bar every ten seconds.

Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:44, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

#wikimedia-admin thoughts

Hi Mike,

What's the makeup of the #wm-admin channel? I'm trying to figure out how to improve local wiki expertise on smaller wikis in a way that gives us as a meta-community at least one active editor (active in policy as well as daily editing) on every wiki who is in touch with at least one active Meta editor/reader. This doesn't involve any admin flags or tools, but it seems like a reasonable thing to strive for. And smw admins -- or at least people who are fluent in the wiki's language and know something about mediawiki if not wiki patterns -- are one sensible place to start.

-- sj | help translate |+ 05:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

It's mainly admins who are involved with cross-wiki/small wiki work, though recently single-wiki admins from enwiki have been joining (don't know why - it must be awfully boring for them). The channel is expressly intended to be a resource for new/temp admins, esp on small wikis to get help when needed (the other main purpose being coordination of countervandalism etc). So, that channel might be a good place to start if you want to get the ball rolling.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:04, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Flood flag

Hi; great job fighting the good fight. You're doing so well that you're flooding RC ;) Would you consider using the flood flag...? —Anonymous DissidentTalk 02:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, forgot that. I'll try to remember next time.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


You should add a whitelist to the bot. J.delanoygabsadds 07:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Did I miss something?

I thought stewards were not supposed to take CU rights where the community had elected CUs (here)? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it was something of an emergency (~2h-long grawp attack). I also ran checks on cawiki and huwiki, both of which have CUs. I nearly did on eswiki, but Drini was around to do it for me. Incidentally, I was thinking of asking for CU rights - I'd appreciate your opinion on that.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Not really sure about that - all current incumbents are stewards already. Equally that may change. --Herby talk thyme 18:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm sure you can guess my views on that conversation! It feels very strange to be marking your edits patrolled - would be nice to have that stop again (& all that comes with it)  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Wikispecies - Use of venacular names

Per what you said, RTG was forum-shopping. Before he initiated this RfC at meta, he attempted to gain consensus for change in our village pump. The majority of the community (6 in support, 2 in oppose) agreed that the system does not need fixing. So RTG didn't get what he wished to see, and decided to try use editors from outside Wikispecies to intervene an internal matter. I sincerely ask you to close and declare it as no consensus because even if it achieves consensus at meta, Wikispecies community have voiced their views already and won't adopt the changes that RTG suggested. OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was my point in "asking" - though I'd prefer someone else close it since I raised the issue. If nobody does soon, I'll close it since Meta is not for forum shopping.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
  Closed, please see if I missed something, as this is the first time I close an RfC. Thanks. —Dferg (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you folks. OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Mike.lifeguard/Archive 10".