User talk:Sj/6

Active discussions

2004 | 2005 |2006 | 2007-2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 -


IdentificationEdit

Sorry that you didn't identify with the Foundation in time to qualify for the steward elections. It was good to see you stand forward; there is a need for new involvement, even from people who have not historically done a lot of cross-wiki work. Considering your English and French connections, I hope you will consider doing other Meta-work as well, including small-wiki support and cross-language collaborations. Regards, SJ · talk | translate 00:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Silly me. I didn't read the instructions carefully enough. I thought that similar to ArbCom, that I had to identify to Foundation before being appointed rather than before the election. I assumed I would be asked at the appropriate time. I thought of identifying, but then I thought that might be presumptuous of me, because the election hadn't started. Quite right that I should be disqualified - somebody who doesn't read instructions carefully shouldn't be a steward! SilkTork 10:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

...

Wikimania 2005 LinksEdit

Someone recently recreated a page at Wikibooks regarding Wikimania 2005 content that was transwikied here, to Meta. Maybe the content was then moved to the Wikimania wiki. It was noted that the links at http://wikimania2005.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme still point to Wikibooks for the content. I was wondering if you'd be able to fix the links or failing that, whether you'd be able to create me an account on that wiki to do so myself. – Adrignola talk 13:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


How can I combine accountsEdit

Hello Sj.

I have a global account "vaqo" and "vago-az". But basically I'm working in AzViki (account "vago") and this is not a global account. How can I combine accounts or how I can make an account vago global? Best regards, -Vago-az 08:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Vago, since you already have the azViki account user:vago, I believe you can simply look in the user-preferences when logged into that account, and choose to make the account global. If you need to usurg someone else's inactive account (though I do not see one with that name), you can make that request here: Steward_requests/SUL_requests. Regards, SJ · talk | translate
Thanks for the advice. Regards,--Vago-az 09:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


ThanksEdit

Should we unlock then? --Jyothis 03:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed --Jyothis 03:49, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

response to your queryEdit

Hi Sj. I've left a brief response on my questions page to your query. Regards, SWATJester Son of the Defender 05:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I responded there as well. SJ · talk | translate 09:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Sj, just as a friendly heads up-- since you had indicated "and for now am neutral", if you were considering moving (or confirming) your vote as implied by the "for now" part, the elections are drawing to a close tomorrow. Regards, SWATJester Son of the Defender 08:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. My overall thoughts did not change -- I think you will make a great steward with a bit more experience with other wiki cultures. en:wp is a model for many, but there are some significant ways in which its culture differs from that of other projects (particularly in terms of how fast things should be done, and how notice should be given). SJ · talk | translate 11:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Hi Sj, I am not an experienced user to become a steward, i will not be elected as stewards, at the time of nomination knowingly i applied for that. My intention is only to participate and see the election process closely. The users(voters) who opposed me, have given very good judgment, i respect them all. The Supporters have chosen me as their candidate and some were neutral I am very much thankful to them for their participation. Sir, I really thankful to you for your contributions( as user and steward). You have given a very good suggestion, I accept your suggestion. Regards --Bhawani 13:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

interwiki problemEdit

Hello,

I left a question at Talk:Pywikipediabot/interwiki.py#possible problem. Can you help me?79.181.124.235 12:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm not sure what the problem is -- the other editors of that page are more likely to be able to help. SJ · talk | translate 06:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

HiEdit

He provided a mail from Wikimedia Spain which had a footer who said that every providing to third person is forbidden, or something like that (you can see the whole mail in os revisions on his user page). The conten of the mail was posted in all his posts. I asked DerHexer to take a look, and he talked with other stews (I think) and drini oversighted it. Yesterday he tryed the same, and Dferg has made a oversight like drini has done a day before. --WizardOfOz talk 08:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

NP :) --WizardOfOz talk 09:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Capsot's messageEdit

I left this message to two administrators before being blocked again... Thankss and sorry! Dear Administrator and/or Steward,

My username is Capsot, and I think everyone here knows me... I apologize for using a new account but you all seem impervious to my case and I beg you to judge my case soon (because I cannot work on any projects and mainly on the Occitan Wiktionary) and determine truly what I am guilty of, initiate an investigation and determine if I am really guilty or if, in my opinion, some administrators acted too rashly and abused their administrative rights in ways that could be seen as totalitarian. It all seems as if there was some kind of scheme in which the only goal is to keep me from editing and voicing my opinions or concerns aloud; and I hope you will act consequently with justice and equity. It is not good for me and it may damage your credibility on the long run.

I wish I could have used other ways to reply but well in spite of the following message that seems to leave a last chance to speak your mind: "Blocked users can edit their own user talk page, unless specifically disallowed from doing so"; it seems that Magistral Mathematicae, who seem to believe I am Catalan, resorted to the more violent option, leaving me no other way to express my opinion than to create new accounts endlessly (I have serious concerns about freedom of speech here and it seems that I am not the only one, I have seen some other reverts... I hope you will prove me/us it exists)

I am really troubled by what happens here because even though I can take the blame of all of my actions if you can prove my infringements, I do not understand the current situation that blocks all my edits in each and every one of the Wikipedia projects. I stand here to be judged, some day I hope, by a Committee of Administrators or any Boards that make decisions here because I do not think this process has been done until this moment, and that my account has been blocked for many days now mainly, in my opinion, on false grounds.

  • It seems that the main accusation that led to the block of all my accounts is: sockpuppet accounts [[1]].

However if I am not wrong (I have read what the Wikipedias say, but I guess you are experts and know much more than I do what the thing means) the general principle of sockpuppetry is to desguise or hide the true identity of the user (mainly in order to deceive or vandalize), and I have never done such a thing.

Either my accounts (Capsot's ghost and Brave Capsot's Heart had the name Capsot clearly visible on them (that is why I was blocked again so easily, had I used malice you would not have found me so easily...) or in the case of Wikiporros (in the Catalan Viquipèdia) or Wikipuerros (in the Spanish Wikipedia) I clearly said they were "vegetablegängers" accounts of User Capsot, but probably the allusion to "doppelgänger accounts" was too misleading to be understood...

I think, but I can be wrong, that there is no real problem in having multiple accounts as long as you state who they belong to and I did, especially in the "doppelgänger" ones but then it would be another accusation, not sockpuppetry: I admit it I am guilty of creating multiple accounts after I was blocked

So what can be the other charges I am responsible for? Please tell me, I am eager to know so I can defend myself and respond to the accusation(s)/prosecution(s), an option nobody had given to, nor seem willing to be giving, me until now. I would also greatly appreciate that you stated publicly and clearly in some page of your Arbitration Committee, if there are any, what are the other charges against me so I can respond to my prosecutors. Let it be known which users have left complaints so I can try to provide answers.

  • I am also afraid that most, if not all (at first until Samuel Klein's message), of the messages I have sent were erased without even checking what they contained, and many users (Austin Hair and Samuel Klein) restored what you had erased. Samuel Klein also emitted a concern, not understanding clearly why I am blocked for (he thinks I am just blocked in Meta, I do not think he know you have blocked me on a general level).

I am confident that many of you act decently and honestly so I have faith that a proper attention and unbiased justice will be applied to my case. Thank you in advance. Sincerely,

Claudi Balaguer/Capsot

Ps: In the case you open the discussion I promise not to open any other accounts before the conclusion of it all. Thank you!

Re:Edit

What lead a lock is that he started sockpuppeting to disrupt on several wikis: meta, eswiki and cawiki at once. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Here on eswiki: [2]
Here on cawiki: [3]

and several others I don't have the diffs at hand.

Now the excuse is "I didn't do it on my main account, and I always acknowledge those accounts were mine, therefore that's not sockpuppeting". But that doesn't fly.

Several people talked to me my by private asking for me tu unblock, I quote a small excerpt (bold is my own):

Since then we had several email conversations. He seems to regret what he had done and he is certainly more calm now. He expected to be blocked and he doesn't ask to be unblocked, at least for now. He would like, however, to request one thing from you, the administrator who blocked his accounts. He has no problem with his actions being called "libel", "vandalism" and "disruption" - he admits on all these accounts, but he is unhappy with the definition of his other accounts as "sockpuppets", because in his understanding a "sockpuppets" is a stealth account which doesn't admit its relation to another one. He didn't hide the relation between his different accounts, so he finds the "sockpuppet" label incorrect and needlessly hurting.

And that he indeed knew what he was going to do was a no-no is clear from [4] and even though he says he's not part of Amical, he accepts in [5] that he's doing it all because "Board didn't anser Amical's demand".

Now, you can't get away with disrupting sockpuppets just by openly acknowledging you're going to use alternate accounts to cause problems. Therefore I locked the account as we do with all other disrupting sockmasters. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

P.S. he seems to be sweet talking to you, as he's spamming on other pages: [6]. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
By the way, to all who approached me and asked if the account could be unlocked, I said yes, but he needs to commit stopping this, apologize and commit not to create new disruptive sockpuppets. But so far there has not been any acknowledging of that. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

As far as I remember, a lock won't prevent you editing your meta talk page in order to talk about your unblocking. And I never denied him the right to edit his own talk page. But feel free to unlock the account if you think it's the best on the project's interests. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll unlock it then. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

RFD noticeEdit

Hello. This is to inform you that one or more files uploaded you are currently being discussed at Meta:Requests for deletion#Fair use images. Regards, Jafeluv 08:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikpedia logo change in Kazakh WikipediaEdit

Dear Samuel, Thanks a lot for your help in Kazakh Wikipedia. I have changed the first page of KK WP. However, we have some difficulties in changing the Wikipedia logo on left corner.

Here is a story. Since beginning of XX century Kazakh alphabet has been changed three times - Arabic, Latin and Cyrillic. Currently we use Cyrillic, but discussing probability of switching to Latin script again. That shiftings from one orthography to another took place during Soviet regime. That is why Kazakhs from different part of the world use different type of alphabet. In China it is arabic, in Turkey it is Latin, in Russia - Cyrillic and so on. But 90% of Kazakhs live in Kazakhstan and they officially use Cyrillic alphabet and spelling rules adopted to Cyrillic script.

Now there are big discussion about spelling of the name of KK WP. The person who launched KK WP for first time was Kazakh from China, and he named it "Укипидия" which phonetically close to "Ukipidiya" and grammatically out of the common rules. Many people here advocate for changing it according to the rules of official Kazakh orthography. In order to present authoritative opinion we addressed this question to linguists from Institute of Kazakh Language. They explained that we should change spelling of the name to "Википедиа" which would be more accurate from grammatical point of view and phonetically will be closer to "Wikipedia".

So we tried to change it on the first page of KK WP. But it looks like that admin has no access to that part. Would it be possible to contact to someone who can help us to sort it out.

Thank you in advance. User: Ashina

Certainly -- this is something handled at Requests for logos. SJ talk | translate   03:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Please also note that there are some projects which use multiple scripts, where there is a natural way to change from one to the other when reading. You may be able to set up something like this. zh.wp offers an example of this. SJ talk | translate  

WikiUsabilityEdit

Hi Samuel, I just wanted to update you on the wikiusability idea, I'm in the process of getting a video made to put up on kickstarter.com, a website that supports unique projects and sets up users that want to contribute to funding these projects. I wanted to maybe get some feedback, I got friends helping with couple things, and wanted to see if maybe you had some ideas or comments about the project. I will be writing more of it out, and I can send more info your way if you want. Let me know, thnx, Attila.

That sounds good Attila, thank you for letting me know. I would definitely like to read more about this: you could create a page about it here (say "wikiusability") for input from other wiki-enthusiasts.
Ok sure, I'll update the page soon, and thnx for the interest :)

BTW my email is ati10mutu@hotmail.com, I'm not too familiar with this website, and am not sure how I would receive messages. Thnx again

Whoops -- #usabilityFail ! A fine example of the genre. [sorry...] SJ talk | translate   07:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
not sure what that is?

RespondedEdit

here. :-) Sorry for the delay, I didn't see that one. Philippe (WMF) 03:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Incidentally (i'm interrupting), the page you linked to above (at wikibooks:en:Index:Miss_Mapp.djvu wikisource:en:Index:Miss_Mapp.djvu) didn't work. I'm intrigued. Can you point me toward a correct link? Philippe (WMF) 03:27, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Fixed, thank you. Somehow my mind switched wikisource and wikibooks while adding the link. Man, it's really about time to fix our interwiki linking shorthand and tools -- still no redlink/bluelink generator across projects! SJ talk | translate   03:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

{{yes}}Edit

See this edit. Please reply here to say that this is OK, as to avoid any further controversy. — Waterfox ~talk~ 16:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That's just fine - thanks Waterfox. In general it's fine to edit my comments and userpages, as long as it is in good faith and doesn't alter what I meant to say. SJ talk | translate   16:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


About checkusers and the legal situation.Edit

See User_talk:Dferg#Request. Dferg has also resigned the checkuser tool, citing Barras' situation. I think this situation could be easily cleared up by clarifying checkuser policy, probably allowing disclosure of impeaching information to the user impeached, if the user consents to the public release of the information, which clearly, by policy, is allowed. This would not be allowed for "weak" identifications, only for ID so strong that, if the identification with a user is an error, impersonation or illegal device access, amounting to the same thing, was involved, providing the impeached user with a means to pursue other remedies. My opinion is that a user who suffers what Abigor suffered could legally demand such information be provided, but there should be no need for that. It should just be provided to him, justice and equity require that. He's permitted public disclosure, which would, then, be transparent.

I see the problem here, with Barras and Dferg, as being legal ignorance. There is some legal risk involved in the usage of the checkuser tool, but if a checkuser follows clear guidelines that protect from legal consequences, there is no real problem.

The paradox here is that by not disclosing the information, but by having made a public announcement providing personal conclusions from the evidence, it's not impossible that Dferg did create legal liability for himself, which could have been eliminated by prompt provision of the data. In that case, his personal conclusions would be moot, he would simply become a clerk reporting what is in the record, following procedure for such disclosure. I notice that Dferg went back and modified the report, obviously being aware of the problem. --Abd 16:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

WikinewsEdit

Hello (sorry if the odd word is misplaced, I do not speak English very well) I write on behalf of Wikinews in Spanish where we passed a few months ago "Reporters Accreditation Policy" However, the email is in this wiki was closed and redirected to us not for this application. I spoke with recommended that I Dferg who sent this message to you is the hicieras reach the team to review and approve or deny the policy.

I wonder if you have any mail that can send the policy in English and Spanish. Greetings from Costa Rica --MadriCR 22:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Creí que no hablabas español :P Escribo en nombre de Wikinoticias en español hace unos meses aprobamos la "Política de Acreditación de Reporteros" Sin embargo, el correo electrónico que nos dieron para enviar la política se cerró y nos redirigieron a otro en el que nos respondieron diciendo que ese correo no correspondía a ese pedido, Hablé con Dferg, quién me recomendó que hablara contigo para saber si puedes enviar el mensaje al resto de responsables para que aprueben o rechacen la política.
Me pregunto si tienen cualquier correo electrónico al que puede enviar la política en Inglés y Español. Saludos desde Costa Rica --MadriCR 01:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Per Wikinews accreditation policy board approval seems to be required, as those people are going to use the "Wikinews" trademark. The address board wikimedia.org is closed and bounces all emails sent to it. And that's why I've redirected MadriCR here. See relevant thread here. Regards, -- Dferg ☎ talk 10:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
As per your suggestion I posted here - eswikinews editors are still waiting for the Board to say OK or not. I've got questions yesterday. Best regards, -- Marco Aurelio 18:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

HiEdit

If you ever have a moment, I would like to chat with you about a few things. You know many ways to get in contact with me. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Please read and see that Millosh is acting very inappropriately and abusing the Language Committee process. He allowed for no time for discussion and his closing rational shows 100% ignorance of the whole matter. We did not accept Montenegran as its own Wiki and it was more of a language that Scots is. Furthermore, the ISO codes are not put together by a linguist organization and even include Cockney, which is not its own language. There is a lot of scholarship that verifies that Scots is a dialect, and even 64% of Scots people refuse to accept it as a language. It is not legal, not official, and not recognized but only speculated as a language. For Millosh to close the discussion on its first day and allow for the nominator to be described as a troll and dismissed, a nominator with a really strong track record at the WMF, is inappropriate. As a Board Member, you and other Board Members have the authority to remove Millosh for abuse of process and showing their inability to actually deal with the matter appropriately, or to add additional people who will ensure that Millosh does not act in this way in the future. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Millosh's response looks reasonable to me, and he responded to your harangue - something frowned upon on this wiki - with patience and an invitation to work with him on other projects. SJ talk | translate   03:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


Closing projects policyEdit

Hi SJ. I am afraid I have been making a pest of myself over at Talk:Closing projects policy, where you previously commented a couple times. If you think my concerns about the Board's role in this are much ado about nothing, just let me know and I will desist. Thanks. ~ Ningauble 20:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for staying on top of that process. Your recent updates look like improvements. SJ talk | translate   20:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiversityEdit

Recently , I was reading over a custodian process at Wikiversity, http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/Abd_%28full_custodian%29&action=history

Now, I'm not a regular contributor at Wikiversity and thus might not understand the policy that project applies (I'm more used to policy at Wikipedia), However The points raised by SB_Johnny and Ottava Rima make for concerned reading.

Perhaps being a more experienced person in the way things work , and having greater expertise in such matters, you would be able to explain why Ottava and SB_Johnny felt they had to voice some of the concerns about Abd in the manner they did?

I will note that Abd has attempted to respond to some of the points raised by SB_Johnny here : (http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/Abd_%28full_custodian%29/Response_to_comments_of_SB_Johnny) which was located on a sub page linked from a 'collapsed' discussion.

I could of course be misreading what Abd, Ottava and SB_Johnny are intending, but in my reading there seems to be a degree of animosity between these individuals, something which does not bode well for the sort of stable administration a project like Wikiversity needs.

I'm also not sure about Abd's ideas for an 'Assembly' , given that like other projects, Wikiversity already has a number of talk pages and noticeboards. How would this assembly not be just another noticeboard?

Perhaps as an experienced contributor across many WMF projects, you could look over the contributors concerned views and comments on this matter, with a view to forming a more objective viewpoint that isn't as emotionaly charged as the Custodian discussion on Wikiversity seems to have become.

ShakespeareFan00 19:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia VenezuelaEdit

Hello,

I am writing to ask you a question regarding the status of our still pending request of Wikimedia Venezuela to become a local Wikimedia Chapter. We have started gathering people and ideas since October 2010, organised a series of lectures for Wikipedia TEN. Our proposed bylaws have been reviewed by members of the ChapCom as early as May 2011. We were informed that in June-July 2011, our proposal was scheduled to be submitted to voting and, as of October 2, 2011, we are yet to receive a notification, either approval, rejection, suggestions...we have received only silence. What is going on? What has delayed the ChapCom to close the voting on our case? Working groups in other countries have submitted their proposals/requests to form a local WikimediaChapter more or less at the same time that we did, and they have been approved already. Why not Wikimedia Venezuela? What is wrong with us? If we were told what is wrong with us, we could work it out and fix whatever is needed...but with no input, we are left sitting in the waiting room for months..

Could you please tell us what is delaying our approval? What do we have to do?

Our people (37) is anxious and wondering what is going on. We were more people, but we feel dissapointed and discouraged, and this doesn't help us at all. Could you please give us an update?

Many, many thanks in advance from Venezuela.

--Jewbask 01:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for answering! If I remember well, DamianFinol, who is also a member of Wikimedia Venezuela, clarified these questions with Effeietsanders last June. My mistake: not to have these clarifications posted on the Talk page. I'll post them right away. Sorry about that! --Jewbask 01:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. It is important to have these notes clarified on the wiki (and any changes made in the bylaws linked here) since we try to be transparent about the review process. Warm regards, SJ talk | translate   03:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Global blocks/ban (un)mergeEdit

Hey Sj, per my email to you awhile back, I am shortly going to unmerge the bans material from Global blocks and locks into a separate draft because it is referred to specifically in the new Terms of use draft, and because I've expanded it. Let me know if you have any thoughts about page organization etc. going forward, I'm all ears. :) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The expansion looks good - separate articles is an improvement. The headers of each should link to the other clearly. SJ talk | translate   12:46, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


Is it allowed in Wikipedia?Edit

To keep in the pages of wiki Administrator's personnel thesis? at http://sd.wikipedia.org ? Other problem is We call Computer as same in English, but admin forcibly used his word Ganpukar of Computer. I have proof that thousands of published books called it Computer not Ganpukar. If some one oppose him he started abusive language. That is the reason sd.wikipedia.org never got attraction to Sindhi community. Plz check record there. Other things are he locked CSS due to that on the same site there are lot of font styles appeared there. He is not able to set commonCSS or Monocss. We are in trouble to work in our local Sindhi language. I don't know where to say for this problem. Record history says all the situation there. I appeal plz warn him to follow en.wikipedia.org rules, other wise he will continue use his personnel details and personnel promoted articles there. Dear I am sorry If u r not right person to say all about this, Plz suggest me where I can raise this issue. My sd.wikipedia.org ID is same. His thesis is not a violetion? http://sd.wikipedia.org/wiki/ماحولياتي_انتظام_ڪاڻ_اُپُگِرَهِي_عَڪس_ضماءُ_۽_درجه_بنديءَ_جي_طريقن_جو_اَڀياس Alixafar 01:11, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

This has been replied to on Alixafar's talk page. SJ talk | translate  
Return to the user page of "Sj/6".