Steward requests/Miscellaneous/2021-11
Manual requests
Requested protection
Please, protect tn:Basweu. 217.117.125.83 10:02, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Deletion request at en.wiktionary
I need a Steward to delete the high-revision page wikt:Wiktionary:Wanted entries. It has failed Requests for Deletion and all of its content has been exported to the appropriate pages. Please give "Deleted per RFD..." as the reason. Ultimateria (talk) 17:42, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Copied Greek articles on pntwiki
Can someone check out the latest articles created by an IP editor on the Pontic Greek Wikipedia? Looks like they've been copy-pasted from the Greek Wikipedia (thus, copyvios in the wrong language). The wiki has no local admins. - dcljr (talk) 02:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- deleted — billinghurst sDrewth 23:22, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Delete a page on scnwiktionary
The page wikt:scn:tempate:mzb is an error, could somebody please delete it? There aren't local active sysops.--XANA000 (talk) 22:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
eo.wiktionary
Dear Stewards! Please note for Requests for comment/I need to solve the problem that I consider important in the eo.wiktionary.org project.
In addition to the topic raised in the request, a blocking war between eo.wiktionary local admins has now begun. Kaganer (talk) 23:53, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- Both admins have blocked themselves and there are no other admins. Before self-unblock was removed from admins this would have resulted in a wheel war and there would have been grounds for an emergency desysop from stewards. Now ?? This is a bit of an unprecedented situation. --Rs chen 7754 03:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- IMHO, there is more wide problem in this project. Kaganer (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed there is, but I'm trying to simplify this to something a steward can do something about quickly. --Rs chen 7754 19:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Since both are blocked this is not an emergency. Ruslik (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Comment@Ruslik0: I have made a comment on that I believe that we should remove all admin rights and blocks. The precedent for this is early hi and pa communities and zhCU. Resolution without taking sides for a toxic culture. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Actually it is not the first time when they block each other other. The last time they eventually unblocked each other. Ruslik (talk) 20:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- how can it be that a blocked admin can block someone? WikiBayer 👤💬 12:26, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @WikiBayer A blocked admin cannot block anyone, except the admin who blocked them. That's a prevention against an admin blocking everyone else to earn some more time to make further damage. AFAICS, Pablo Escobar first blocked Taylor 49 and then (while still blocked), Taylor 49 blocked Pablo Escobar. Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- how can it be that a blocked admin can block someone? WikiBayer 👤💬 12:26, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Actually it is not the first time when they block each other other. The last time they eventually unblocked each other. Ruslik (talk) 20:58, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Comment@Ruslik0: I have made a comment on that I believe that we should remove all admin rights and blocks. The precedent for this is early hi and pa communities and zhCU. Resolution without taking sides for a toxic culture. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Since both are blocked this is not an emergency. Ruslik (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed there is, but I'm trying to simplify this to something a steward can do something about quickly. --Rs chen 7754 19:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- IMHO, there is more wide problem in this project. Kaganer (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Comment Comment This is currently under discussion in steward's mailing list. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Per our internal discussion, I've desysopped and unblocked both users. Hope they can resolve their differences in a collected way now. Best, —Thanks for the fish! talk•contribs 13:56, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Case "Vami"
@Billinghurst: User "Vami" also has a bot, operating through the main account, and performing . Vami created a useless dupe of an existing language-independent template, defined a privileged role for Russian for it, and switched all Russian pages to it by bot. There are 345 languages in the central table (created by me). As a (former) sysop I am responsible not only for removing piracy, but also for a sustainable development of the wiki. Turning one language-independent template into 345 separate templates doing same work is bad for maintainability and sustainability. Thus I (politely) opposed the idea, and got the full loathing in return.
Upon arrival at eo wiktionary, user "Vami" had less than 200 global edits. Few days later I noticed that Vami performs advanced template edits, and soon it turned out that "Vami" even has a bot! Most likely "Vami" is a new account for an old LTA blocked somewhere for a very long time.
The Esperanto wiktionary is in bad condition (but less bad that 2017 when I emerged), and full of piracy (but I succeeded to delete a part of it before I got banned as a result of Vami's pressuring). WMF TOS prohibits piracy thus I consider it as a duty of a sysop to delete pirated content: Requests for comment/Resolve massive copyright infringement on Wiktionary in Esperanto.
Since eo wiktionary now officially has no sysops, the stewards and global sysops are reponsible for cases of severe misbehaviour. User "Vami" has been harassing, hounding and offending me for several weeks. Please take suitable action. Evidence of toxicity:
- "Any tolerance has a limit" "Particularly for idiots" ...
- "You have to attend a school" "stupidity" ...
- "Template:...nazi..."
- nazi introduced a language code "NAZI" here and on several more categories
- "you are stupid" ...
All this certainly would have given a long block on en wiktionary.
The toxic user Vami did not see the condition of the wiki back in 2017, and I do not want to be accused and hated for faults that I have not caused, actually on the contrary, for faults that I have repaired partially only during past 4 years in my spare time. And I do not want to be accused and hated for removing piracy because this is a duty of sysops, and fault of those who had inserted it. Pirated content has no right to exist.
Harassment and hounding is prohibited by both TOS and UCOC. Please resolve the case "Vami" now. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Vami and Taylor 49: if anyone is operating a bot process, or something equivalent through their account, and where there should be a consensus for actions/edits, then would those users please put those operations aside until the community can work out an agreed process.
I would also hope that the eoWikt community as a whole could look at Meta:civility and look that as a means to get the wiki back on track. It seems that the words spoken have caused hurt on both sides and hardened the resolve to actual listening and cooperation. Strident behaviour won't resolve this situation. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:24, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Pages related to international actors and actresses
Could someone review the contributions of user Xezbeth on both English Wikipedia as in Wikidata? It continues to reverse the number of pages related to international actors and actresses, as well as non-British and Canadian or Irish nationals who were born in such a country that I have corrected so far, I accidentally realized that when separating two more well-known terms from Wikipedia called "actor" and "voice actor" it was because one of them covered all works such as film, theater, television and voice actors (I mean archived discussions like this one), but apparently she preferred to ignore the relative rules here on this site regarding the short description where it included the biographical data of a person who who are born and die (I mean this one too), that kind of disruptive behavior towards IPs of different rank is unacceptable towards those who tried to fight without anyone having committed that vandalism, as well as related pages Japanese voice actors which all also did so much live action outside anime and foreign productions, including American series and movies. 152.0.138.50 04:18, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Stewards and global sysops have no authority to review edits at either of those wikis, please talk to those respective communities. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Request for deletion of w:zh:愛·回家之開心速遞角色列表
The page was nominated for deletion under local XfD process on 27 October 2021, see w:zh:Wikipedia:頁面存廢討論/記錄/2021/10/27#愛·回家之開心速遞角色列表. The discussion was concluded as "delete" by local sysop/b'crat AT, but the actual deletion requires bigdelete user right as it contains 9,881 revisions. Thanks in advance. --無聊龍 (talk) 15:40, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
EoWiktionary requests
removal of the content of the pages at eo.wiktinary
As rightly noted by billinghurst - "edit wars take place". I would not like to participate in these wars.
The complete removal of the content of the pages (13 nov. 2021):
| Extended content |
|---|
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=viza%C4%9Do&type=revision&diff=1017870&oldid=1017083
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=abio&diff=prev&oldid=1017115
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=barono&diff=prev&oldid=1016929
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=kuko&diff=prev&oldid=1016848
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=aran%C4%9Do&diff=prev&oldid=1016809 Please note that despite the fact that account of Taylor 49 was blocked in this time, the removal of content was performed from account of Teylorbot - the bot under control of Taylor 49. |
Please rate this deletations and undo it from name of administration if it is possible. The deletations in the project eo.wictionary is problem discribed in this RfC Thanks, Va (🖋️) 09:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
removal of the content of the templates at eo.wiktinary
As rightly noted by billinghurst - "edit wars take place". I would not like to participate in these wars.
The complete removal of the content of the templates (16 nov. 2021):
| Extended content |
|---|
Please note that account Taylor 49 was unblocked 16:46, 15 nov. 2021 https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Speciala%C4%B5o:Protokolo&logid=108331 |
Please rate this deletations and undo it from name of administration if it is possible. The deletations in the project eo.wictionary is problem discribed in this RfC Thanks, Va (🖋️) 09:43, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
massive substitution of the content of private/personal messages at eo.wiktinary
As rightly noted by billinghurst - "edit wars take place". I would not like to participate in these wars.
Мassive substitution of the content of my private/personal messages on the pages of user's discussions.
Please note that despite the fact that account of Taylor 49 was blocked in this time, the massive substitution of the content of my private messages was performed from account of Teylorbot - the bot under control of Taylor 49
Please restore my personal messages from name of administration. Thanks, Va (🖋️) 09:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Vami: We are not here for to avoid reasonably and politely raising matters of concern on the wiki. All dispute discussions should take place on the wiki. I can say that for a bot to put in speedy deletion requests and for there not to be local discussions for existing pages seems unusual to me, and I have asked for the bot operator to review that work and to start DR conversations. With regard to substituting welcome templates, I would be guided by the wording on the template, and the practice on the community; so communities require it, some do not wish for it, and some don't matter. I think that asking for these to be reverted solely for the reason of reverting is not a reasonable request unless something is clearly broken. That seems to me to be the wrong area to make a fight on principle. I ask that the conversations that need to be undertaken by your community are returned there. [Not having edit wars does not mean stop having discussions locally and reaching consensus.] Stewards or GS can review those discussions once they have reached a consensus. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Billinghurst (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- According to the decision, the eo.wiktionary project no longer has its own administration and is being managed by Meta. This automatically means that you have to solve a huge number of problems that arose from poor previous administration.
- Please be patient with this.
-
- If some problems turn out to be so complex that they cannot now be solved even with the help of your automation tools, then you could help even with advice or a link to the documentation or an example of solving a similar use case from your experience.
-
- By Welcome Message. Any first message on a discussion page can be considered a Welcome message. Which is not entirely true. And the use of templates is not a criterion, because we use at least ~~~~ anyway. And technically this is also a template. Therefore, it makes sense to consider a Welcome message only an automatically generated message (by system or by bot), to which there is no point in responding due to the absence of the person who started the discussion and is ready to respond.
- In my case, it is about my personal messages. And the content of the text under which I put my signature has been changed.
-
- If there is no technical possibility to restore it, I understand that. These are just 63 revisions made by the bot - what a bot can do in an hour, I can manually fix it in just a day. RfC is still not complete with a definite decision: were the previous deletions legitimate; who should be responsible for violation of the technical regulations for removal; is it even possible to restore everything (or at least something) that has been deleted in a reasonable time and amount of work. And without these decisions, new deletions occur...
- Va (🖋️) 17:11, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- sorry, I seem to have forgotten ping ... @Billinghurst: Va (🖋️) 19:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Vami: You misunderstand the roles of administrators, let alone global syops. All WMF communities work on the basis of local consensus where matters are discussed, and administrators or bureaucrats implement the consensus of the community. All conversations about the wikis are meant to take place on the wiki, and where there is a consensus to act and rights usage is involved then it is undertaken by an admin; in the cases of small wiki and in this situation, then a message is posted here and GS will undertake that action. It should not be about administrators or GSes being judges. P.S. Please don't tell me what my role should be, uncool. It is not up to metawiki to solve your problems, it is about the combatants putting aside their egos and looking to work together to build a better wiki. GSes are impartial and are here to assist. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Billinghurst: I understand that this page is not a forum for discussion. But IMHO, the situation is hopeless. Therefore, according to the first part, i understand all your answers as: my request is not considered as technical contains anything that could be "GS will undertake that action". Ok, i am undoing the deletions by myself and starting discussions on these issues: vizaĝo, abio, barono, kuko, aranĝo We will consider this part completed.Similarly for the second part of the request. Deletions canceled by myself and discussions started: ru-alfabeto-minuskla, ru-alfabeto-majuskla, ru-alfabeto-miksita Let's consider this part completed too.For the third part. You have blocked the robot for a period of one month and asked the owner of the robot to resolve the issue of replacing the content of my personal messages. However, you 'did not specify the period for which my personal messages should be restored. Please clarify how long we will need to wait before we can consider the issue to be resolved or to admit that the owner of the robot is not going to restore the incorrect changes made.A small technical question. I agree that "All conversations about the wikis are meant to take place on the wiki". But what if, while i am trying to discuss something, the destruction of the content without discussion occurs at the same time. Or if, at all, something i write in public comment can be changed by an outside editor? Unfortunately, the case of mass spoofing of my messages described by me is not the only one. Previously, there were such precedents.Thanks, Va (🖋️) 08:34, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Vami: You misunderstand the roles of administrators, let alone global syops. All WMF communities work on the basis of local consensus where matters are discussed, and administrators or bureaucrats implement the consensus of the community. All conversations about the wikis are meant to take place on the wiki, and where there is a consensus to act and rights usage is involved then it is undertaken by an admin; in the cases of small wiki and in this situation, then a message is posted here and GS will undertake that action. It should not be about administrators or GSes being judges. P.S. Please don't tell me what my role should be, uncool. It is not up to metawiki to solve your problems, it is about the combatants putting aside their egos and looking to work together to build a better wiki. GSes are impartial and are here to assist. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- There is no spoofing, and please stop deliberately using wrong pronouns about me everywhere. Taylor 49 (talk) 11:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Taylor 49: I have already answered you on this question several times - here and here. You answered me with the phrase "f**k off" in this edition (@Tks4Fish: this interesting answer is posted on your personal discussion page, but you might not have noticed...)I apologize to everyone - I didn't plan on doing a discussion club here. Va (🖋️) 12:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- There is no spoofing, and please stop deliberately using wrong pronouns about me everywhere. Taylor 49 (talk) 11:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Signatures in Newusermessage on hiwikiqote
Hello, This is to bring into notice that Hindi Wikiquote has automatic welcome extension installed and every newcomer is welcomed automatically. However, I recently noticed that the signatures used for such welcome falsely pose as if the newcomer is being welcomed by the then Admins and not by machine (bot). The then admins inserted their own signatures in q:hi:मीडियाविकि:Newusermessage-signatures and at present both the users are inactive (one account has been even renamed and now actually nobody is registered by that name, i.e YmKavishwar). I request here to take appropriate action. The local community is being notified on VP. --SM7 --talk-- 07:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- I have deleted the page since there are no active admins. Not sure if there is any further action we can take here.-BRP ever 07:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- @BRPever: Thank you very much for such a quick action. I, too, believe deleting this page is enough. Now, such welcome messages will be posted with the signature of hi:सदस्य:New user message. I have created this user page with the info that it is a bot, not a real user (just like we have on hiwikipedia). I further request you to kindly fully protect this user page and its talk page so that future editing on these pages, either accidental or malintended, can be prevented. Then this request can be closed as done. Thanks again.--SM7 --talk-- 13:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Done, thanks --BRP ever 20:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Delete a page with large edit history
I'm a sysop on jawp. Could you please delete wikipedia:ja:Wikipedia:貝塚/サンドボックス/20211124_2, an old sandbox page, which has over 5,000 revisions from 31st December 2019 to 24th November 2021? I would take care not to cause you trouble again. The sandbox page in progress has been restored as w:ja:Wikipedia:サンドボックス. Best regards.--Kurihaya (talk) 06:31, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Done @Kurihaya: That page is deleted now. Thank you for your patience. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Please help to edit "MediaWiki:Sitenotice"
Please help to edit MediaWiki:Sitenotice adding a link to section "Vikivortaro:Diskutejo#Malobservado de kopirajto, propono pri nova tiurilata regularo" with visible text "partoprenu en grava diskuto pri kopirajto" above the 2 links already present. Taylor 49 (talk) 13:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Taylor 49 Why should that be done? Was this discussed anywhere? Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
More helpful would be to link to m:Requests_for_comment/I_need_to_solve_the_problem_that_I_consider_important_in_the_eo.wiktionary.org_project, which has been running for a month now. It is the decision on this RFC that will matter, not the local discussion. Va (🖋️) 18:21, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- Please note this page is not for discussing what should be done. Such discussion needs to be handled locally (and the result reported back here, where it will be actioned by a steward or a global sysop). Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- Obviously, discussions should take place locally. But it is important that the opinions and decisions expressed in the RFC are known. It is the conclusions of the highest level of administration that matter. Va (🖋️) 18:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- > Why should that be done? Was this discussed anywhere?
- It is a link to exactly the local discussion that you are requesting. I do not think it is sane to discuss the question whether a discussion should be linked.
- @Vami: instead of "I_need_to_solve_the_problem_that_I_consider_important_in_the_eo.wiktionary.org_project" one could link Requests_for_comment/Resolve massive copyright infringement on Wiktionary in Esperanto which is about content, not about personal attacks. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- And now this one. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- An interesting idea is to suggest deleting the entire project to hide your own vandalism, your own insults against other participants and conflicts with other participants. And interfere with the investigation of this activity.
Yes, it must be announced via eo:wikt:MediaWiki:Sitenotice Va (🖋️) 11:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- An interesting idea is to suggest deleting the entire project to hide your own vandalism, your own insults against other participants and conflicts with other participants. And interfere with the investigation of this activity.
- And now this one. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Obviously, discussions should take place locally. But it is important that the opinions and decisions expressed in the RFC are known. It is the conclusions of the highest level of administration that matter. Va (🖋️) 18:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Not done Please read what's at the top of this page. This place is where you can make obvious requests that need no consensus (eg. obvious technical fixes that only Stewards and GS can assist with and is within their scope). Or requests where you have already obtained local consensus. Since this is neither obvious nor is there any local consensus, I am closing this as not done.-BRP ever 22:40, 25 November 2021 (UTC)