User talk:Jusjih

• /Archives to 2009
• /Archives to 2013

steward right

I'm sorry I had removed your steward bit due to Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2014, i'm unhappy with the unfortunate result, and hope you don't take it personally. I really wish to see you among us again in the future. Matanya (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Superprotect status

Dear Jusjih, since you are an administrator on a wiki from which no user participated in this discussion, I'd like to make sure you are aware of some recent events which may alter what the Wikimedia Foundation lets you do on your wiki: Superprotect.

• Request for comment: Requests for comment/Superprotect rights
• An open letter about its implementation: Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer

Peteforsyth 09:25, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Would You Consider Supporting My Ban Appeal?

Hi Justjih. I'm banned from Wikipedia English, and hoping to strike up enough of a community discussion to overturn it. Would you consider participating in that discussion? I made a space for it at my Meta talkpage, here: [1] Colton Cosmic (talk) 17:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC) PS: I picked your name at random from the list of administrators, checking only to make sure you've been recently active.

Notice of removal of adminship

Hello,

I regret to inform you that, in accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and as a result of your inactivity, administrator rights have been removed from your account. Please see Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2014 for details. Kind regards, Barras talk 14:13, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm really sad about you losing those rights now. It's clearly a case where our policy needs to be changed since you've several actions as admin! Sorry about that! :-( -Barras talk 14:13, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Heh

Good to know you started to learn Korean! Keep up your good work! — revi^{^} 06:19, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I just found Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese, but not Korean administrators here. Though no match to native Koreans, I am still a Korean speaker in wider sense.--Jusjih (talk) 06:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, When I visited here first time, I was surprised that there was no admin who can speak Korean (even no ko-1), and I thought someday I want to be the first ko-N meta admin. :p If you can help small wikis in Korean (esp, kowikiversity and kowiktionary has no admin!) it would be really great. — revi^{^} 06:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

If you are ready and willing, I would like to nominate you to become an administrator here. To help small Korean wikis with no administrator, I better be a global administrator (unlikely) or even a steward again (possibly next time). Further more, I welcome you writing me in Korean from now on, then I will practice more, including looking for hanja-eo (한자어). :-) --Jusjih (talk) 21:50, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

한국어 위키백과 관리자가 된 지 얼마 안 돼서 지금은 힘들고 연말에 다시 추천해 주면 좋을 것 같아요. — revi^☏ 22:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I am nominating you now. After we succeed, we will be proudly listed at commons:Commons:List of administrators by adminship status in other Wikimedia projects under "Administrator in Meta".--Jusjih (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

Deutsch | English | español | français | italiano | 한국어 | Nederlands | português | Türkçe | русский | العربية | Tiếng Việt | edit

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades... (our budget is smaller than Commons)

Jusjih, congratulations! You now have the rights of an administrator on Meta. Please take a moment to read the Meta:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat, and Meta:Requests for deletion, but also Talk:Spam blacklist and Talk:Interwiki map), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings, or modifications of protected pages. The majority of the actions of administrators can be reversed by the other admins, except for history merges which must thus be treated with particular care.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikimedia-admin @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Commons:Guide to adminship to be useful reading although it doesn't always completely apply here at Meta.

Please also check or add your entry to Meta:Administrators#List of administrators and the Template:List of administrators.

Congrats! I'm happy that I could give you back the mop! -Barras talk 11:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Congrats, Jusjih! — revi^☏ 11:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Almost welcoming you in adminship soon.--Jusjih (talk) 00:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to the CentralNotice-admins list

Hi! This bulk email is to let you know about a mailing list used to communicate bug reports and new features in CentralNotice, and to facilitate conversations between the admins. This message is being sent to you because you have the privileges to use the CentralNotice admin interface.

If you use CentralNotice to post or modify notices, please consider joining the list by visiting this page and subscribing yourself:

   https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/centralnotice-admins
   

Thanks,

Adam Wight (talk)

00:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Fundraising Tech,

Wikimedia Foundation

File:Annual report chaptersmeeting 2009.pdf

Hi, the file in the subject is an official document of Wikimedia CH and it's a report. The document should not be candidate for Wikimedia Commons because it concerns content of Meta (chapters reports). The origin is the Chapter itself. It's the second time I receive an information of cancellation of Chapters reports... regards. --Ilario (talk) 11:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons Project scope states that if file is used on any wikimedia project, it's inside their project scope. And, meta is not a media repository. — Revi 19:28, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I would like to move it to Wikimedia Commons, but the tool does not always work.--Jusjih (talk) 07:25, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Jusjih: Have you tried w:WP:FTCG? I haven't tried that either, but I think it will work. — Revi 12:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

That looks too complex for me. As I am much more busy at b:Annotated Republic of China Laws and b:zh:中華民國法律註解, I am less inclined to move files to Commons now. By the way, should I say "대한민국 법률 주해" or "대한민국의 법 주해" in Korean for "Annotated Republic of Korea Laws"? After I clean up Taiwanese laws at Wikibooks, I may want to start a similar project for South Korean laws in English and Chinese Wikibooks.--Jusjih (talk) 06:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Both are correct, but I think mixing first and second one (대한민국의 법률 주해) makes more sense. — Revi 10:23, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Steward elections

Hi Jusjih. The steward elections have begun... perhaps you might wish consider to apply again? :) With regards, Trijnstel_talk 16:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jusjih, I noticed you are rather inactive as a commons Bureaucrat, yet you apply for a steward position here. You might want to evaluate if you have time for both, or would like to give up a few hats before this election starts. Cheers. --Dschwen (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I have thought whether to quit some bureaucrat flags. I became a Commons bureaucrat only after accepting other user's nomination. I better announce my resignation at Bureaucrats-commons and Commons-l first. I have also considered quitting bureaucrat flags on some Chinese wikis, but only if all other bureaucrats also quit.--Jusjih (talk) 02:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Steward elections

Your steward wrote in the nomination page you're the steward in 2006. When I look at the archives in 2007 writes. I fix them in 2007. Get the news. Good wikis. --Uğurkent^talk 14:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Better if someone could fix Stewards#Chart to either position "April 2004", "May 2005", etc more appropriately, or change to "From April 2004", "From May 2005", etc. Current layout is somewhat confusing. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 22:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

signature

hi there, you forgot one here :) Pundit (talk) 07:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. As we already have reminders of forgetting edit summaries, hopefully we will get reminders of forgetting signatures in appropriate namespaces.--Jusjih (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

37.144.145.16

Will you look, please, at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/37.144.145.16 That seems to be a destructive bot. What do you think about it? Domitori (talk) 04:11, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Mass requests to delete do not automatically make the IP a destructive bot nor allow me to block it, so please just reply at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/2015/02/16. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 04:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Jusjih, for the advice. Could you give also an advice with respect to similar case at the Russian version of wikisource?

It seems to me, user Lozman runs a bot, that removed texts by

https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Леонард_Борисович_Терновский
https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Софья_Васильевна_Каллистратова
https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Александр_Павлович_Тимофеевский

The texts are moved to some strange site http://wikilivres.ru There, the user with the same nick Lozman removes them with pretext of violation of the copyright (the licenses from Wikisource are not transferred to that site). You may look for the example at

https://ru.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Леонард_Борисович_Терновский&oldid=96651

Sincerely, Domitori (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC).

Perhaps the United States non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term is why the Russian texts are moved from the American site to the Russian site. I understand no Russian, so I cannot help on this.--Jusjih (talk) 01:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hello Jusjih,

On behalf of the stewards' election committee, congratulations on your election as a steward! Your permissions have now been set and you are able to start working.

You have been added to the list of stewards and the stewards' chart. Please take a moment to check that your details are accurate and update them if necessary.

You have been given access to the mailing lists related to your steward duties, which include: checkuser-l, the private mailing list for Wikimedia checkusers, stewards-l, the private list for stewards. In addition, you have been or will be given access to the related private wikis, one for checkusers and the other solely for stewards, details of which will be provided.

If you use IRC, you will be given access to several channels, including #wikimedia-checkuser^connect and #wikimedia-privacy^connect. Please also idle in #wikimedia-stewards^connect when you are available for duty.

Best of luck with your new tools; I am sure you will do a fantastic job. Please remember that your fellow stewards are always available if you need a second opinion, either via the mailing list or on IRC.

Useful links:

• Stewards policy
• Steward handbook
• Steward requests

On behalf of the election committee,

Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 21:29, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

---

I congratulate you! I wish you success in your work! Best regards, --►Cekli829 13:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

a request

Einsbor sir please provide me the right of account creator. I have requested on Steward requests/Permissions.-बेनुपराज पौडेल (talk) 09:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Updated scripts

Hi Jusjih. I edited your monobook.js to update you to the latest version of StewardScript, which is compatible with the latest MediaWiki changes and resides on the Wikimedia Tool Labs for easier updates. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 23:57, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, though I am unfamiliar with the scripts.--Jusjih (talk) 00:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

ast.wikipedia bureaucrat

Dear Jusjih, I do apologize for my inactivity during so many time, but for really serious personal~/familial affairs I couldn't attend properly my duties of bureaucrat. Of course I know this status means responsibility; I didn't want to be bureaucrat for hanging medals, but only for making ast.wikipedia working better. So I really beg you my pardon for all inconvenients caused because of me. Personally, I'd like to maintain the bureaucrat flag in asturian project, but if you consider I don't deserve it, please don't hesitate in unmark it. From my side, I'll try to collaborate all it is in my hands from now on. If I see I can't fulfill the task, I'll be the first in saying to you. Yours truly --Esbardu (talk) 18:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

wo.wikipedia bureaucrat

Dear Jusjih,

thanks for your e-mail, I endorsed the bureaucrat responsability on wo.wikipedia in 2011, mainly for 3 reasons :

- I understand a bit the wolof language (i was able to edit articles and communicate with the 3-4 users present on wolof wikipedia)

- They were no bureaucrat at that time, someone was needed to organize the communauty.

- They were noone to do the link between wo.wikipedia and meta, when we needed a steward for doing a job (e.g. rename a user name, give bot flag),

it was taking a long time.

I agree that bureaucrat is a responsability, not a title, and i never claimed so. I just got a new job and a child, giving me few free time. Just i do not see any reason to reconsider the present situation, it is wo.wikipedia and not en.wikipedia : they are few users and few activity on it, so few to do. I did the main job 4 years ago. At least one bureaucrat is needed on this wiki to keep an eye time to time on that wiki (that's what i do). And to keep a bureaucrat (even sleepy) does not bother anyone.

Note that there is no activity at that time (i.e. edit of articles) so i do not see what to do for the moment. And it is most of the time like this. Note further that to edit wolof articles is not easy as very few people contribute. I advised you to try (i could manage to edit with time but you need to learn a bit the language). Most of people complete their user page in english saying that they are sysop elsewhere, and that's it. No contribution so far on the articles content. Best regards. Guérin Nicolas ^(messages) 10:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. The general confidentiality agreement is now ready, and the OTRS agreement will be ready after 22 September 2015. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 22 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 23:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Reminder: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015, you will lose your access to nonpublic information.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 08:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

Requests for comment/Removal of bureaucrats in small wikis

Why this till pending for closing. Jayantanth (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@Jayantanth: FWIW, Meta-Wiki does not all snowball closure.

However, as this RFC is unlikely to have at least one support (your only "support" seems nonsense), I also prefer this user himself close this RFC. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:22, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Reminder: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015, you will lose your access to nonpublic information.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 20:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

URGENT: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015, you will lose your access to nonpublic information.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 22:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

URGENT: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015, you will lose your access to nonpublic information.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 17:28, 9 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your language • Get help

URGENT: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 15 December

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

I wanted to follow-up on an message I sent you in September regarding the need for you to sign a confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) in order to maintain your access from Wikimedia to nonpublic information.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are transitioning to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that anyone with access to nonpublic information sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain their access. You are receiving this message because you have access to nonpublic information and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015, you will lose your access to nonpublic information.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnumwikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 15 December 2015 (OTRS users have until 31 December 2015) to retain your access to nonpublic information. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

If you wish to stop receiving these notices, you may remove yourself from this list. Please note that doing so will not prevent you from losing related user rights after the 15 December 2015 deadline.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery, 18:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your language • Help

Apologies

I missed the nuance of the date for your resignation. Apologies for that. As I had also missed the global group removal, I will leave that in place until your allotted time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

"Remove for unclear language skill"

Please be clear why this is a reason for removal, since in its current form, it doesn't help me nor does it mean anything more than an empty "remove". Savh^ñ 13:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

And please be mature enough to evaluate that an oppose vote on your proposals is not a convincing reason to ask for removal - specially considering only one person supported your proposals. Maybe the problem is not the people opposing the proposals, but the proposals itself. Savh^ñ 22:45, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Missing language skill means incomplete statement. Too few bureaucrats in a wiki means local dictatorship that I have seen as former bureaucrat in Chinese Wikisource, Wikiquote, and Wiktionary.--Jusjih (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jusjih: I suggest you to self close your RFC as "no consensus" please?! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:14, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I personally found these opposes to be the worst I've seen in years. It was even more disappointing to see them coming from a former steward. --Rschen7754 17:53, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: I disagree as you are not a steward or bureaucrat anywhere. I have even received even worse or irrelevant comments when I was a steward. When busy in real life, mind your own business.--Jusjih (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

This is amazing. Savh^ñ 11:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Stewards/Confirm/2016/Vituzzu

Hi, there was an error which didn't sign your comment at Stewards/Confirm/2016/Vituzzu. You should add it again. Thanks Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. There should have been better space to avoid misleading.--Jusjih (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Global user page migration

Hello Jusjih. I deleted your local user pages on most wikis as you requested via Synchbot, and your global user page is already active. You can see the deletion log on your archive page. :) —Pathoschild 18:45, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

permisi

Pak tempat diskusine teng pundi pak nggo njaluk tulung nanya.

Announcing a new mailing list for Meta-Wiki administrators

Hello!

As a regular administrator on Meta-Wiki, you're allowed to subscribe to the recently created metawiki-admins mailing list. This is a closed mailing list for announcements, asking for help and discussion between Meta-Wiki administrators. If you wish to subscribe, please fill the form at this page and then contact Savh or MarcoAurelio via Special:EmailUser using your administrator account so they can verify the authenticity of your request and address. You'll find more information on the mailing list description page. Should you have any doubts or questions, feel free to contact any of us. We hope that this tool is useful for all.

Best regards,
-- MarcoAurelio and Savh 12:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Mailing list administrators for metawiki-admins mailing list.

Message sent to members of Meta:Administrators/Mass-message list. Please see there to subscribe or unsubscribe from further mass messages directed to the whole group of administrators.

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2018. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before July 31, 2024. Kind regards, Matiia (talk) 02:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Requests for new languages/Wikisource Literary Chinese

I really, really need your help on this, both because of your language skills and because you're a sysop on s:zh:. Let's have a brief talk here first, before you possibly jump in over there.

There are substantial and lengthy discussions, both at the link above and at oldwikisource:Category talk:Literary Chinese. From my perspective—and I'm not an expert on East Asian language history—I can see arguments both ways:

• On one side, lzh is an ancestor of modern Chinese. So lzh content ought to be contained in Chinese Wikisource—and much is, as I understand it.
• On the other side, lzh was the literary lingua franca of the entire region, and to some extent was even a literary ancestor of other languages in the region, including inter alia Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese ... To that extent, the analogy in Europe would be more to Latin than to something like Old French. And in that case perhaps there should be an independent lzh Wikisource.

My current thinking on this subject runs along these lines:

The very best solution would be one where the content continues to live in Chinese Wikisource, but where document descriptions (and perhaps even talk pages) can exist in multiple appropriate languages, particularly on pages of documents of high interest to people outside of China.

My first question, then is: Would the Chinese Wikisource community be amenable to that? (and: Is that politically possible?)

• If the answer is "yes", then I would ask the Chinese Wikisource community, in conjunction with other interested parties, to set up some guidelines for this. And then I can close this request as "rejected", with direction that all the content in Literary Chinese should be moved to Chinese Wikisource.
• If the answer is "no"...

I am inclined to set up a situation where documents potentially live in parallel (are duplicated) on both zhwikisource and on an lzh Wikisource (currently housed at oldwikisource).

I think I would almost have to do that. There is a legitimate interest from people outside China in much of the content, and not all of those people are fluent in modern Chinese (of any sort). (I'm not counting people like me, of course; I mean people who are fluent speakers of Japanese, Korean, etc.) Yet I don't think that somehow splitting up the content on zhwikisource would be a good idea, as I don't think anyone can judge that certain content would be of "no" interest to the zhwikisource community, either.

I'd really like to figure out what to do here. Your help would be most welcome and appreciated. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I have presented a compromise at Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Literary_Chinese#Discussion. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 05:04, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

New update: Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Literary_Chinese#Proposed_rules_for_LZH_in_Multilingual_Wikisource, under this rule, the zh.wikisource and lzh test on mul.wikisource should co-exist each other. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:31, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion

Please, delete my userpage on en.wiktionary [2]. Kubura (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2019. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 11, 2019. Kind regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2020. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 09, 2020. Kind regards, MF-W 22:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Steward_requests/Checkuser#[email protected]

Hello, this SRCU request needs your input to continue, please consider adding comments on it within the following one month, thx. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I will say as soon as possible, as this needs further input urgently, certainly not the 1 month @Liuxinyu970226 said. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:39, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021: Invitation

The 2021 Community Wishlist Survey is now open! This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 30 November, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 8 December and 21 December.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals!

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021

We invite all registered users to vote on the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. You can vote from now until 21 December for as many different wishes as you want.

In the Survey, wishes for new and improved tools for experienced editors are collected. After the voting, we will do our best to grant your wishes. We will start with the most popular ones.

We, the Community Tech, are one of the Wikimedia Foundation teams. We create and improve editing and wiki moderation tools. What we work on is decided based on results of the Community Wishlist Survey. Once a year, you can submit wishes. After two weeks, you can vote on the ones that you're most interested in. Next, we choose wishes from the survey to work on. Some of the wishes may be granted by volunteer developers or other teams.

We are waiting for your votes. Thank you!

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2021. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 10, 2021. Kind regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:47, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

您是否依然反对“文言文维基文库”？

我最近注意到本站出现这样的评论请求：Requests for comment/Start allowing ancient languages，由于这个评论请求似乎要求一股脑的重新允许古代、消亡或历史语言建站，我担心如果这会获得通过，且语言提案方针因此获得修订的话，您的反对将因此苍白无力，且中文维基文库将不得不面临告别文言文内容的窘境。--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

当然强烈反对。谢谢提醒。意见请求已署名反对。--Jusjih (talk) 01:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 2021

Gifnk dlm 2020 (chat) wishes you a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Hopefully this greeting has made your day a little better. Spread WikiLove by wishing another user Merry Christmas! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Much love! -Gifnk dlm 2020 Merry Christmas 🎄(talk) 12:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because it appears that you've have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2022. If you'd like to keep your permissions, please sign on that page before April 11, 2022. Kind regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:52, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat

I have raised a thread concerning some of your recent comments at the above page. --Rschen7754 05:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship

Hello Jusjih. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2022. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2022. Kind regards, MF-W 11:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Steward election questions

I've collapsed your first question on the steward elections page. Jusjih, we've been through this before. Please stop this, there is no point whatsoever in continuing this campaign of yours. Continuing to disparage "the person you are presently engaged in a dispute with...does not reflect well on you as a Meta-Wiki administrator." That is a quote from me, from September 2021, about your dispute with this same person. You have pushed this through multiple questionable RfCs, requests on various noticeboards, and now for some reason in steward election questions. There is a very good case for long-term hounding/harassment, and if this continues, administrative action may be necessary. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 17:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Wait. Do you want the case to be handled locally first.?--Jusjih (talk) 18:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

ElectCom has collectively decided to remove the question. If there is already an extensive history involving this dispute (as mentioned by Vermont) then the complaint has all ready been handled. If the outcome was not what you wanted, that doesn't mean it hasn't been handled. I suggest you drop this issue immediately and not bring it back up... otherwise a Boomerang may come your way. Consider this your absolute final warning. Operator873 ^connect 20:34, 21 January 2023 (UTC)