User talk:EPIC

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

My account user blocked because of Template:Checkuserblock-account I had no another account on Wikipedia I'm Farsi wiki editor and My user globally locked and blocked with no previous notice. I explained a lot everywhere and now I would mention that I have a brother and he was fan of Farsad (rapper) and sometimes he vote in AFD and make some edition in Farsi Wikipedia and we mostly use same PC. And explained to that moderator who blocked me but he didn't pay attention! And other 2 account only made for submit massage in order to get help to other moderator; I didn't any mistake anytime and if I did unwanted I apologize. And I submitted ticket bud they answer me wrong! Please help me if you can, thanks 5.115.138.165 22:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@EPIC my last ticket number is #2024121610009662 but More than 6 Days left and no one answered yet 2A02:4540:AC:6A4:1:0:37AF:19C3 05:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Lock appeals submitted to us can generally take some time. You were locked for cross-wiki abuse/sockpuppetry. EPIC (talk) 07:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@EPIC What should I do to get unlocked sir? I apologize for all the things that happened and I guarantee to never happen again! I only opened 2 other accounts right after my main account banned, for put massage in order to get help so it seems it's out of rules and I didn't know that. By the way I apologize 2A02:.&checktime(4540,23,66,':')D5:1:0:8063:1FE5 08:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hi EPIC, Sorry to bother you but regarding this, Would you say using two accounts is fine providing no policies are being broken ? or should there be a reason as to why the second account needs to be used/exists?,

The user isn't circumventing any blocks and they're not disrupting anything but I've always thought there had to be a reason for a second account otherwise it would need to be blocked ? Am I wrong on this?, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010 ^Talk 13:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hello, it depends from case to case, though generally having multiple accounts isn't wrong in itself as long as they aren't being abused. EPIC (talk) 13:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Ah okay I didn't know that - I thought there had to be an actual reason for a second account, I didn't think you could just create one and then edit from both accounts (ignoring shared pcs, awb, etc etc),

As the user created 10 alts on Enwiki 7 months ago I therefore thought this new account was a major red flag and that history shouldn't be repeating itself but I guess I'm wrong on this, I don't understand why it's okay and I don't understand why nothing is being done about it at Simple Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Sock_block_request but I guess it all comes down to them not actually doing anything wrong so it's fine, I don't think it is "fine" but I'm obviously in the minority on that,

Anyway thank you for replying and thank you for helping me better understand why, Felt like I've been going around in circles for the past 2/3 days, Your help is very much appreciated so thank you again, Have a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy and Healthy New Year, Warm Regards, –Davey2010 ^Talk 15:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Yes, generally there still has to be a good reason to create more than one account, but 10 is quite over the general limit. EPIC (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

But this is my point EPIC - no good reason has been provided from this user, That being said we're not at 10 accounts yet (as far as I know) so maybe I'm caring too early I don't know, I just don't see why they need to be editing from two accounts when SOCKLEGIT doesn't apply to them, Anyway I've closed that thread as you've said having two is okay and no one seems to want to do anything at Simple - I guess it's a problem if they were being deceptive, commenting twice on things etc etc, Thanks again for your help it's much appreciated, Take care my friend, Warm Regards, –Davey2010 ^Talk 15:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Dear Administrators,

I am reaching out to request a review of a block placed on my IP address. I believe that this block was either a mistake or a result of a false positive. I have not engaged in any disruptive activity, and I would greatly appreciate it if you could look into the matter and consider lifting the block.

Thank you for your assistance!

Best regards, AuthorChiman (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@AuthorChiman: I assume you are affected by a global hardblock. Could you write to stewards@wikimedia.org and provide more information? EPIC (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Okay Thank You! AuthorChiman (talk) 17:49, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hi EPIC, hope you are doing well. I think my rights were removed by mistake. Because the claim is against the local rules. The reason is that I am inactive. But this is not right. I am the 9th most active sysop among 15 sysops in the last 6 months and the 11th in the last year. According to our local rules, the minimum requirement is 25 sysop actions in the last 6 months. However, I have made 149 sysop actions in the last 6 months and 476 sysop actions in the last year. The interesting thing is that the sysop who made the claim has made fewer sysop actions on our local wiki than me in the last six months :) I am leaving here the statistics of sysop actions on the local wiki in the last 6 months and the last 1 year. Please review and return my rights, I still have the desire to be active. If necessary, I will give up the rights myself. I would also like to inform you that there is no vote or any decision other than the claim of inactivity.

Hope you wonderful holiday, sincerely --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 17:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Eldarado: I removed the rights on request of another local bureaucrat per the inactivity policy. As far as I could read, the policy also requires 500 edits in six months, and 25 of them needs to be related to moving pages, creating templates/categories and uploading files, and if I understood correctly, it was that part which wasn't met, which is why the flags were removed (the policy mentioned that the removal will be an automatic removal without a vote if there has already been a vote in the past). With that being said I might have misunderstood. @Turkmen: Could you please clarify the removal request? If it was an incorrect removal then I could restore the rights. EPIC (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Thanks EPIC for the reply. Our rule says that if a vote has been held on reason of the inactivity of a sysop and it hasn't been approved, then after 6 months of inactivity, you can get the status without a vote. However, there was no vote on my inactivity. (last vote wasn't for inactivity) If the reason is my inactivity, a vote should be started on it first and my opinion should be asked. In addition, I am not inactive and I have 500+ edits in the last six months. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 18:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hello, there is no misunderstanding. In February 2024, a request was made by the user to remove the rights due to inactivity and other reasons, and a vote was held here. The user avoided getting his rights with only 1 vote. However, there was no change in the user's activity after that process. And the vast majority of deletions there are mass deletions via twinkle. For which the user was warned by another admin. And many of the pages were later restored by that admin. Excluding these wrong deletions, the user's contributions in 2024 are: 15 (8 blocks, 1 block change, 1 unblock, 1 protect, 3 page restore (same page) and 1 patrol). Regards, Turkmen ^talk 18:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Turkmen: Was the vote related to inactivity? The policy seems to mention that the voting should be related to the user's inactivity (i.e it can't be just any regular de-sysop voting). EPIC (talk) 18:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Of course that voting wasn't related inactivity. First started voting for all sysop then some of then accepted. 100% election wasn't related my inactivity. I'll send the links here when I get my laptop at night. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 19:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@EPIC, Yes, one of the main reasons was inactivity. The user who started the request clearly stated his opinion here. For example, it is enough to look at these comments (1, 2 , 3, etc.) during voting. As the user said above, although he previously said he would voluntarily give up on user groups, unfortunately he does not. He also avoids starting a discussion in the local. Turkmen ^talk 19:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

This is the voting in February. You can see all sysops on the voting :) it means all sysops are inactive? @Turkmen:, if you have a problem with me, don't do this type of things, because you are harming our Wikipedia with such actions. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 19:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Eldarado, In the voting there, 1 admin's rights were removed for inactivity, 1 admin's rights were removed for abuse (then blocked indefinitely). Only 2 admin rights were not received. One of them is now actively countributing. And you have been removed for continuing to be inactive. Please don't mislead the discussion. If you have objection, you can open a discussion in the local. If you're right, the community will support you anyway. Turkmen ^talk 19:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Turkmen:, First of all, the correctness of the decision must be confirmed after that you can also open a discussion for me. You did not answer the question addressed to you in here. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 19:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

What question? Turkmen ^talk 19:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Turkmen, You just mentioned the comments of the users. You couldn't show us the reason of the voting. All sysops were on the voting and you are telling us the reason was inactivity. Sorry, but you are no adequate and I can't continue to discuss with you. I'm just waiting for the Steward decision. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 19:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

After some further looking at the voting in question, I do agree on the impression that the vote might have been part of a general confirmation which involved all sysops. As such, I have restored the flags at the moment, at least pending clarification. Considering the controversy/uncertainties here, could you open a local discussion, or alternatively have the other two local bureaucrats give their comment on whether they think the removal is in line with policy? EPIC (talk) 20:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Unfortunately, I think this was the wrong decision. There is no concept of "general voting" on the Azerbaijani Wikipedia. I will start a general community discussion tomorrow. Thanks for your attention! Turkmen ^talk 20:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

The confirmations involved all sysops at that time as far as I can see (regardless of whether they were inactive or not), thus why I get the impression that it was just a general admin confirmation, even though I notice that inactivity was part of the background to why it was opened. Since this case seems rather complicated, I restored the rights, though as mentioned, the other two local bureaucrats are also free to give their opinion on whether they think the policy is met here. @Eldarado: FYI as well. EPIC (talk) 20:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@EPIC good day.

I have also taken a deep look at discussions and current azwiki rules.

Eldarado's (and others, including me) admin status was put into discussion in February, to get general opinion of the wikipedians. Following that, Eldarado's status was nominated for voting. The arguments were his position and activity. He stood as admin by 1 vote.

The local policy says that a sysop may get their flags revoked if they have't improved their activity from the previous voting for inactivity. Turkmen's removal of Eldarado's rights is understandable as the discussion (17 February – 3 March voting of his) featured arguments of this kind. Toghrul R (talk) 21:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Got it EPIC, I already asked for two bureaucrats' opinion. --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 20:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

EPIC, both bureaucrats mentioned their opinion and both are said votings are not releated inactivity. Yes Toghrul "The local policy says that a sysop may get their flags revoked if they have't improved their activity from the previous voting for inactivity" and where is my voting for inactivity? Could you please show us? Thank you --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 23:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

I understand both sides here, but since both of the other two bureaucrats seem to be unsure as well, and technically the inactivity policy isn't met here, I would say to refer this to the local community. Open a local discussion, and return with a new SRP request if there is consensus to remove. EPIC (talk) 23:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

EPIC, I understand you, there is a language barrier. You can assign Turkish or Azerbaijani languages known steward here for read our local discussion and mention their opinion. In addition, according to the rules, I am not inactive. Above I have posted statistics for the last six months and the last year. From there you can see that there are 6-7 more sysops with less activity than me. Why is my inactivity being discussed. In your opinion, is this fair? --eldarado (talk | contributions | meta page) 00:43, 24 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Turkmen and @Toghrul R are right. The main reason why @Eldarado's status was brought up for discussion (passed the initial stage) was his passivity. It has not been active at all in the last 1 year. Bot edits and similar activities are not considered activity. Samral (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hi, User:EPIC. I hope you're doing well. I wanted to wish you a merry Christmas, because you helped in the Gagauz Wikipedia. I also wish you the best for 2025. I hope you live a happy life and enjoy your time in Commons. I hope I see you next time. Bye. OperationSakura6144 (talk) 11:51, 25 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hi Sir @EPIC

I submitted ticket to he steward but I didn't get answer, may I have last chance to get back my account ? I apologize for all things that happened, thanks. 2A02:4540:A6:.&checktime(9607,1,0,':'):5260:9A22 17:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

Hello, EPIC: Yes, I understand. Horcus is basically my partner. I encouraged him to participate in Wikipedia, and, well, he ended up voting for me and for other users. I apologize for not mentioning earlier that we share the same IP address; I did clarify it later. On my local Wikipedia, as far as I know and as an experienced user, this is not prohibited unless it’s a sockpuppet directly linked to me. That said, if necessary, as a consequence of this issue—which also caused problems for another user’s request—you may revoke my application for global renamer. Additionally, the account was not created with the purpose of securing votes for myself or others—I essentially don’t know any of the other users. Moreover, the user is actively participating in the Spanish Wikipedia. That said, I once again apologize for the inconvenience. If necessary, you may revoke my application due to this issue, and if required, impose a sanction for both of us within Meta. Best regards. —Aopou {discusión} 00:16, 29 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

@Aopou: Excuse my somewhat late response. I'll also tone down some of the stuff I wrote on your talk page. Yes, sharing the same IP address is fine indeed and no sanctions will be imposed, nor will your discussion be closed. In this case, the votes were striked since it seemed that one of the reasons why the account was created was either as a sockpuppet or to gain support in your request (but per your explanation I think the first one isn't likely). In cases like this, it is indeed therefore useful to disclose any additional accounts or users you share an IP with. With that being said, as mentioned, we will assume good faith here and there is really no need to scold or punish anyone for it, since it seems that the account was simply created in good faith. EPIC (talk) 08:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC) Reply

i had just finished extensively editing a wikipedia page when i got hit with this notice of ip blockage completely unprompted. i have no idea why this address range is blocked considering i've been using it to edit for over a year now and is my local address. you can understand why i would be upset, especially since i have no knowledge or warning of having broken any rules. please review and explain what kind of long-term abuse caused this judgement to be made.

106.154.148.0/22

yours, Plifal (talk) 10:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

I tried modifying the block slightly. Could you try again now? EPIC (talk) 21:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Thank you very much for your services to the Wikimedia projects! We would be happy to see you as a steward this year too. All best wishes, Sincerely, Gadir (talk) 05:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hi EPIC. If you have a moment, would you please take a look at ticket:2025010410002852? Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 21:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

@Xaosflux: Thank you, done and responded there. EPIC (talk) 22:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hello EPIC: I would like to ask you about a matter to see if you can assist me. On the Spanish Wikipedia, there is a user who creates articles in very poor conditions, essentially without references or proper attribution of copyright, among other issues. I reported this on the noticeboard, and the user was blocked. However, after conducting a deeper investigation, I discovered that the user is engaging in cross-wiki spam, posting the same poorly formatted articles across different projects. So far, they have been sanctioned on two Wikipedias and are about to receive a third block on the English Wikipedia. My question is: is it possible to report this cross-wiki spam behavior to request a global block? I am certain they will continue to be sanctioned on more wikis for the same actions, as they disregard all warnings. The user in question is Theguyfromermesinde. Sincerely, —Aopou {discusión} 21:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

@Aopou: I looked into it just now. It seems that the only current local blocks are temporary, has there been any past local blocks or past issues? EPIC (talk) 22:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

No, this is the first time I’ve noticed their activity. In my view, they could be an evader of sanctions or something similar, although I can’t confirm it without concrete evidence. The account is relatively new, less than a month old, and has been focused on performing cross-wiki edits. So far, it has only been posting the same articles and evading warnings across different Wikipedias. For this reason, I thought it would be appropriate to report them for cross-wiki spam due to their unusual behavior. I based this on a similar case that occurred on the Spanish Wikipedia. An account (Futurolog21) engaged in the same behavior and was ultimately globally blocked for it. —Aopou {discusión} 22:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

After looking into it I've globally blocked the account for a week. The blocks are quite recent and only temporary, thus why I'm beginning with a shorter global block at first. If the behavior in question happens to continue after this block, we can consider further actions. EPIC (talk) 23:16, 14 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Perfect, thank you very much. In any case, I will continue to follow up in case new information comes up or if I find that they were expelled from somewhere, as, in my opinion, there is no justification. However, I can't keep making claims without proof. Apart from that, thanks again, and I also appreciate the autopatrolled. —Aopou {discusión} 23:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hello admin, the puppet case on my main wiki has not been resolved for about a month. The moderators said they could not be active. I opened an moderator request for myself. Could you please moderate me? Thank you. Steward requests/Checkuser Dervişli (talk) 11:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hello! Thank you for your hard work on Meta-Wiki. Best regards, Julius 12345 (talk) 18:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Thank you! EPIC (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hello I applied and it still hasn't been reviewe. Saygılar. [1] Çınarcan (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hi EPIC, did you receive my email, or did it end up in your spam folder? Regards Wüstenspringmaus _talk 05:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

I'll look into it in a while. EPIC (talk) 07:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

I was wondering how I would appeal my block on commons. Do I just submit a utrs appeal? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

The block reason says that you will need to appeal from Helloidonthaveaname. So assumably the appeal should come that way. EPIC (talk) 10:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

But I can't access the account Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 22:19, 19 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

What do I do now? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:40, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

You will either have to appeal through email then, or another way. Either way the stewards cannot assist in local block issues. EPIC (talk) 08:45, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

@Elcobbola Is this possible? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Pinging @Taivo also Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Elcobbola last edit was in october, I think I would try to get on Helloidonthaveaname first. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Sockpuppets are not unblocked, no way. You must log in and request unblock under Helloidonthaveaname account. And bytheway, when blocking, I do not check blocks in other projects, I do not care about that. I did not know, that you are blocked in enwiki. Taivo (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

@Taivo If I requests from Helloidonthaveaname can you unblock me on this account instead. I was unblocked on en on this account. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

@Taivo When i logged on to Helloidonthaveaname, my ip was autoblocked, can you remove the ip block so that I could edit my talk page? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Autoblock #489812 --Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hej EPIC,

Jag heter Alexander och jag var tidigare användaren bakom kontot Lovertruck. Jag har märkt att mitt konto blev globalt låst den 11 april 2024 på grund av "cross-wiki abuse." Jag vill be om ursäkt om mina tidigare redigeringar har orsakat problem.

Jag vill förklara att många av de redigeringar som ledde till detta lås gjordes redan 2022, när jag var ganska ung och inte fullt förstod hur viktigt det är att följa Wikipedias riktlinjer. Sedan dess har jag lärt mig mycket och förstår nu varför reglerna kring seriöst bidragande är så viktiga.

Mitt mål är att bidra positivt till Wikimedia-projekten framöver, och jag hoppas kunna få en andra chans. Skulle det vara möjligt att få mer information om exakt vad som ledde till låsningen? Och finns det någon möjlighet att få mitt konto upplåst, eller kan jag skapa ett nytt konto för att börja om på ett bättre sätt?

Tack för att du tar dig tid att läsa detta. Jag ser fram emot ditt svar.

Med vänliga hälsningar,

Alexander (Lovertruck) 217.21.224.200 12:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

The reason for the lock is stated in the lock summary. As for how to appeal your lock, as I already explained to you on IRC, please send in an appeal to stewards-appeals@wikimedia.org. However, I would suggest waiting some time with doing so, as you were evading your lock as recently as this month.

Anledningen till varför ditt konto låstes står i motiveringen till låset. För att överklaga låset kan du, som jag redan förklarade för dig på IRC, skicka en överklagan till stewards-appeals@wikimedia.org. Däremot skulle jag vänta med en överklagan om jag var du, eftersom du kringgick ditt lås så sent som denna månad vilket kan ha en negativ påverkan på din överklagan. EPIC (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Why the block message related to this block:

Ankry (talk) 17:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

I understand the confusion. Short explanation, plwiki has no account creation request system, thus why editors are being pointed to ACC. If you have an account created that way, you can then use it to edit the Polish Wikipedia since the block only affects logged out users. The block doesn't seem to have caused too much collateral yet, but if it does get too high, plwiki administrators can decide to exempt that block locally on plwiki. EPIC (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
If you have an account created that way, you can then use it to edit the Polish Wikipedia since the block only affects logged out users. This is not true. ACC creates accounts on the English Wikipedia. If a user attempts to use such an account on the Polish Wikipedia from the blocked range, they will not be able to since account creation is blocked (local account cannot be created). Speaking as one of the ACC tool admins, you should not be referring users to ACC in global block messages. — JJMC89 (T ·C) 07:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
The global block should only prevent auto-account creation as long as it is a hardblock. If it's a global softblock, it should not be preventing autocreation of an account. An alternative could otherwise be to instead redirect users of that IP range to stewards for assistance, as has been done in the past for similar blocks. EPIC (talk) 07:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
When a block is blocking account creation, it applies to all types of account creation, including autocreation. Before we could set the account creation option for global blocks (i.e., all gblocks blocked account creation) they did not block autocreation. — JJMC89 (T ·C) 07:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
I've changed the block summary to redirect users to the stewards instead. The decision on whether plwiki wants the block locally exempted I'll leave to the local administrators. EPIC (talk) 07:56, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Please help
[edit ]
Latest comment: 4 days ago 1 comment1 person in discussion
I was publicly bullied. A so-called senior editor used hate speech against me but also gave me death threatsUser:Davey2010 Mentioned/ threatened me publicly May I suggest playing on a motorway as a new hobby ?, Be careful though you wouldn't want to wake up dead in the morning :)[2]. And I have to email it to simple-admins-l@lists.wikimedia.org?? seriously??
Also, I raised this issue on simple wiki AN but the response I got can be seen here: [3]
And the admin name grif is trying to cover it. Please do something. This is not a good thing to do. Also when I try to report AIV. I can't because of the abuse filter. This is so sad. Qylt (talk) 02:01, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

Wikinews RfC
[edit ]
Latest comment: 3 days ago 4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi! I'm very happy you could have a look at the RfC and make a fast closure. So thank you very much for that. I had/have a question more at Special:Diff/28158070. The bot put it to the archive :-) But in short it is: Should I set an exception for de and ru so they keep CC-BY-2.5 or should I let them keep the standard license (which will soon be CC-BY-4.0). MGA73 (talk) 06:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

Sorry if I made it somewhat unclear. Since there have been objections to BY-4.0 locally, I would suggest to wait with any license change for them, at least at this time. For the others there seems to have been no issues with a change to BY-4.0, and I think the change could be proceeded with for them. EPIC (talk) 06:50, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Perfect! Then I will request that an exception is being set for ru and de so that they will keep CC-BY-2.5 untill they ask for another license. --MGA73 (talk) 08:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Seems that pissed off an admin at German Wikinews so now I'm blocked there. Life is not easy :-) --MGA73 (talk) 06:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Hello
[edit ]
Latest comment: 4 days ago 3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, I have withdrawn my candidacy for the management. Can you close the candidacy as withdrawn? Thank you, have a nice day. Dervişli (talk) 08:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

 Done EPIC (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Thanks Dervişli (talk) 08:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Please
[edit ]
Latest comment: 4 days ago 1 comment1 person in discussion
Please lock my account Dervişli (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

FYI
[edit ]
Latest comment: 2 days ago 2 comments2 people in discussion
Doubt this is the target, but if so you can get more data now. See VRT. — xaosflux Talk  13:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

Nope, probably not the target. Left a note there. EPIC (talk) 13:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
Email
[edit ]
Latest comment: 1 day ago 2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello @EPIC I sent a global unblocking email to stewards@wikimedia.org. Since you are the one who locked my global account, I think it would be more appropriate for you to take care of it. 31.223.48.207 16:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

I forgot to add the ticket number, I added it now, I would be very happy if you check it. @EPIC Your ticket number is #2025012510004061 31.223.48.207 18:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 
RfTA
[edit ]
Latest comment: 1 hour ago 2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello. I just wanted to say that reminding me of the bans from a few months ago from the wiki farm, unrelated to my translator's rights (which were not even taken away from me because my work was honest), is unfair. It's very strange that in RfTA, where it's only about extended translation permissions, no one commented on my translation skills, but mostly on my history (although neither on Meta nor in other projects did I have any problems like those on plwiki). I leave you with this. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

Thanks for the clarification. I don't doubt your abilities, but considering the circumstances I just think it might have been too soon. I wouldn't mind potentially supporting a future request, with that being said. EPIC (talk) 09:21, 27 January 2025 (UTC) Reply 

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EPIC&oldid=28180132"