Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat

Please find answered requests in the archives (this month).

@AramilFeraxa set MediaWiki:Ipb-default-expiry-temporary-account to 3 months in August 2025. Apparently, the decision was made based on plwiki's practice (which itself was based on a WMF employee's advice) and some stewards' preference at the time.

I would like to argue that TAs should be blocked indefinitely by default, per enwiki's practice. The primary reason is so that the block reason banner would remain even after the expiration of the account. Making blocks more visible would help with future inspections.

Should TAs be blocked for 3 months or indefinitely by default?

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:28, 25 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

I think 3 months as a default is a good thing. You can select indefinite in the block menu fairly easily if that's what you actually intend to issue a block for, and I might argue that not everything necessarily needs an indefinite block. I'll grant, there are times and places where an indefinite block is warranted, though I'd argue that a week-long block suffices in many circumstances of simple vandalism and messing around, or even just tossing them out for the duration of the temp account. EggRoll97 (talk) 02:36, 26 June 2026 (UTC) Reply

3 months seems fine, at that point the account is disabled anyway. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I'd prefer indefinitely by default - if a TA does something that we would indef a registered user over then in the name of consistency we should indef the TA. * Pppery * _{in solidarity} 14:41, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Since IP data is removed after 90 days, there is no reason to block for longer than that. IMO, it has no real purpose to have the block remaining. However, I've no strong feelings about it. -Barras talk 15:03, 2 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I think what Pppery suggests could be useful for historical purpose. For example, a temporary account that had a certain pattern can be associated with an LTA that used a blocked temporary account, and seeing that there is an active infinite block makes this search more immediate. Obviously nothing changes in the effectiveness of the block! Superpes15 (talk) 02:26, 3 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Which future inspections are you referring in this case, NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh? Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 21:36, 9 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Let's say you were checking an expired TA's edits on some small wiki without a community. Those edits weren't obviously disruptive, so you went on to check its CentralAuth. You saw that it had no edits on another wiki but was indefinitely blocked there by an admin for being a LTA and for triggering the filters with similar disruptive-yet-innocuous-looking edits. If that block had already expired, you would never have found the block entry and the filter hits. You would wrongly assume good faith and leave those edits there for all eternity, misleading future readers.

This is a real situation I have been in. Blocks do more than just preventing an account from performing actions. They carry information that might turn out to be extremely useful.

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:46, 9 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Okay, so I usually do this (blocking TAs indefinitely) for LTAs. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 00:24, 10 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

How is this any different for IPs? Leaderboard (talk) 16:16, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

@Leaderboard: Sorry, but I don't quite understand the question. IPs shouldn't be blocked indefinitely because they can be reassigned, and that's that. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:37, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Correct, but a similar argument can be applied for TAs. It is indeed true that they aren't reassigned, but I am not sure that it'll serve any useful purpose. I don't mind either way though. Leaderboard (talk) 07:11, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

This discussion has lasted long enough. Could an uninvolved admin please close it? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:45, 24 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Hi, would it be possible to do a MassMessage for this RfC to Distribution list/Global message delivery? The RfC has received some criticism for most participants being from the Global North, so this'd be to invite a wider range of perspectives (especially relevant since this mostly affects small wikis). Below is what I had in mind for the message, feel free to copyedit or make changes.

<bdilang="en"dir="ltr"class="mw-content-ltr">
== Request for comment (the future of Abstract Wikipedia) ==
{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:CONTENTLANG}}|en||Apologies if this has not yet been translated into your wiki's language. {{int:Please-translate}}}}
You are invited to voice your opinions in a [[Requests for comment/The future of Abstract Wikipedia|request for comment about the future of Abstract Wikipedia]]. Thank you ~~~~~ {{Int:Feedback-thanks-title}}
</bdi>

Thanks, Kowal2701 (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Sending... – DreamRimmer ■しかく 12:19, 24 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Done – DreamRimmer ■しかく 12:25, 24 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

Reason for request: I am organizing an event in the fan club.

Criteria met: No active blocks

• Global edits: 16,775
• Additional Criteria: Fan club project manager

Additional information: To make my project coordination easier Chinemeremprince (talk) 21:26, 31 July 2026 (UTC) Reply

I am an autopatrolled user on the Vietnamese Wikipedia, and I would like to request the autopatrolled right on Meta-Wiki. In cases involving vandalism or spambots that require urgent action when no local administrator is available on the Vietnamese Wikipedia, I would like to use Twinkle Global to report them to m:GSR. Làm Việc Thiện (talk) 12:45, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Not done Autopatroller status is granted sua sponte , and the request before that led up to this request on SRP doesn't inspire all that much confidence. Autopatroller (or the lack of it) also has zero ability to impact you from requesting urgent action on GSR. //shb (t • c) 12:56, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

@shb Over at SRP, I was advised to submit my request here, This is not the correct place to request this user right, as RFH is the correct place for that. However, you said that it "doesn't inspire all that much confidence." Without the autopatrolled right, I cannot use Twinkle Global on Meta-Wiki.Làm Việc Thiện (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

I'd very much expect an autopatrolled user to know that SRP is not the place to request Meta-Wiki permissions. //shb (t • c) 13:41, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

矫正俱乐部是岩手第一协会 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long-term abuse. ja:LTA:NRE XReport --20041027 tatsu(talk) 14:31, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Done. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 14:32, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

The final necessary step (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism XReport --☠︎Quinlan83☠︎ ^{(You talkin' to me?)} 17:09, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Blocked by Jianhui67.🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 17:28, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Wolf Cola 2 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long-term abuse XReport --☠︎Quinlan83☠︎ ^{(You talkin' to me?)} 17:23, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Blocked.🪶-TΛNBIRUZZΛMΛN (💬) 17:28, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

~2026-42657-79 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long-term abuse XReport --☠︎Quinlan83☠︎ ^{(You talkin' to me?)} 19:48, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Blocked NDG (talk) 19:50, 1 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Please block this IP range https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:IPContributions/2001:F40:907:0:0:0:0:0/32 --WikiBayer 👤💬 04:43, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Not done Resolved in a different manner. EggRoll97 (talk) 05:10, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

That's an extremely broad range. What's the justification for blocking the entire /32? It could cause massive collateral damage. – DreamRimmer ■しかく 05:17, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

@DreamRimmer

@EggRoll97 The IP is used across wikis with temporary accounts here, "anonym only" would be helpful to block only edits by temporary accounts, not users who are logged in or create account. WikiBayer 👤💬 06:27, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Kver1234 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Vandalism XReport --☠︎Quinlan83☠︎ ^{(You talkin' to me?)} 08:19, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Already locked by 1234qwer1234qwer4. Jianhui67 ^{talk ★contribs} 09:55, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Astra and Andrew, again (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long-term abuse XReport --Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:26, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

Locked by epic steward EPIC. Jianhui67 ^{talk ★contribs} 15:55, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

~2026-42849-33 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • GUC • CA) — Reasons: Long-term abuse XReport --Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:29, 2 August 2026 (UTC) Reply

• Meta-Wiki requests
• Noticeboards