Jump to content

Steward requests/Miscellaneous/2022-02

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Manual requests

Blocked on en.wikipedia, please help.

Status:    Not done

Hello. This is important. Everybody reverted my edits on the English Wikipedia. This wasn't considered spamming and I was just doing constructive edits! This is a serious problem. Would you like to help me, please? --ExpositionLaner2835 (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

You are blocked as a sockpuppet of Giratto with CheckUser evidence. Please follow guidance w:WP:AAB to appeal this block. Stang 17:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Not done. This is an issue for Wikipedia in English, not a global issue. -- Tegel (Talk) 17:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Change the default font used while downloading as pdf

Status:    Not done

Please change the font from "FreeSerif" to "Noto Serif Devnagari" on all wikisource sites using devnagari script. For e.g. hindi, marathi, nepali, etc. I tried to conact admins of respective languages, but they were not convinced.

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T285590

Shantanuo (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Not done If their admins not convinced, we cannot do anything either. Ruslik (talk) 21:00, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Interface Administrator permission not available

Status:    Not done

On my Fandom Wiki, there is now way to add a certain part of WikiMedia:Common.js, as I don't have Interface Administrator. Yet, when I check the permissions, my wiki doesn't even have it. So, I was wondering if that could be dealt with? --163.182.224.150 15:06, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Mark as Not done as off-topic. --SCP-2000 16:10, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Deleting page on Urdu Wikibooks

Status:    Done

Hey Stewards, I received an email on ur-info VRT queue, asking a specific page to be deleted on Urdu Wikibooks. I searched for active admins over that Wiki but failed to get any. This is the page and I received the email from the author. Thanks. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Am I supposed to share anything else? Regards, ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 13:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
The article creator has likely misunderstood Urdu Wikibooks as Urdu Wikipedia. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello @AafiOnMobile, the ticket number would be great to have, for posterity. Thanks, Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:29, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Martin Urbanec It is: Ticket#2022021010006117. Regards, ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 15:41, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks AafiOnMobile. Deleted and left a comment in VRTS. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the prompt action. I closed the ticket and left them a response in Urdu. ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:36, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Rules between wikis

Status:    Not done

While it makes complete sense that the manual of style varies greatly between different wikis (after all, different languages have different writing conventions), it is somewhat concerning, to put it mildly, that certain rules that are widely accepted on many don't exist on some/only have essay status. For example, while the no-attack-pages rule is well accepted on many wikis, but is only an essay (Russian and Ukrainian wikis) or completely non-existant (ex, Croatian wiki) for other wikis. The lack of a policy making attack pages grounds for speedy deletion turns out to be QUITE a problem when such wikis have populations of nationalist editors who dominate votes in any deletion nominations and hold adminship positions dictating that even ultra-nationalist sources are permissible and banning all reference to sources that don't fit such worldview. It's not exactly a secret that some wikis, especially Ukrainian, Croatian, and the Baltic languages have a Nazi problem (there have been many attempts to address this discussed here on metawiki before, but it's been difficult to acheive better results since to it's hard to get a consensus of votes to reign in Nazi apologetics in a wiki filled with Nazis). There are simply just too many examples of such phenomenon to list out, but anyone can use an online translator to see. As for Russian Wikipedia - as I have personally seen, the wiki is EXTREMELY hostile to some peoples, for example, Crimean Tatars. Right now novoross.info, a site with openly white supremacist editors and very hostile to Crimean Tatars, is permitted to be cited; "historian" Oleg Romanko is considered a reliable source and frequently cited despite some of his VERY sketchy statements and debunked claims; however, works by Valery Vozgrin cannot be cited under any circumstances; and articles about Crimean Tatar people who meet notability requirements and contain numerous sources are disproportionately targeted for deletion (likely in full knowing that deletion is unlikely, being for the sole purpose of detering writing such articles/frustrating/"punishing" their authors), sometimes even repeatedly, even though there are many biography about non-Crimeans containing zero sources that are turned a blind eye to). In consideration of those facts, I strongly suggest that the current no-attack-page essays on wikis where they are not rules be turned into rules WITHOUT discussion, and wikis lacking such rules adopt them.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 00:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

User talk:-revi/FAQ#desysop - we are not an arbitrator. Closing. — regards, Revi 10:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Bashkir Wikipedia

Status:    Not done

Good evening. On January 16, 2022, I was blocked from the Bashkir Wikipedia for a week, allegedly for making edits. Although, there was no discussion on this issue, I was blocked even with restricted access to discussions. On January 16, I renamed the article Siberia Tatar language from Sybyr tele to Seber Tatar tele and Sybyrzar to Seber Tatarlary, referring to the Bashkir Encyclopedia. Since Sybyr Tele is an original study, and there are no sources for it. The administrator of the Bashkir Wikipedia, ZUFAr, asked me about these edits, to which I explained to him that the title of the article was brought according to authoritative sources, and also asked me to correct the name of Seber Tatarlary to Seber Tatarzary, as I made a mistake. There was no reaction to this. And without any discussion, he deleted my contribution, explaining that there was no such text in the source, I returned the text, specifying the source again, but the administrator began to reject without explanation, to which I indicated a quote from an authoritative source on his discussion page. And he calmed down. Then another participant started adding text to the article referring to the VKontakte social network and an interview with a resident of the village. On the discussion page, I explained to her that social networks and texts from it cannot be authoritative and deleted the unauthorized text. I also explained to her that the interview of a resident could not be authoritative, and pointed out specific errors and original research in the source she added. There was also no realisation. And in the evening, the second administrator of Ryanag, who is indefinitely blocked in the Russian Wikipedia for numerous violations of the rules and bypasses the blocking anonymously still violates the rules, just blocked me from the first time for a week, for a certain war of edits and imposed a topic ban on cancellations and changes of articles. At the same time, all the text I added was left, the names of the articles were also left according to the source that I gave. And the administrator of ZUFAr deleted this source, although he left the text from it. At the same time, those who added the original text and deleted authoritative sources along with the text, including one of the administrators, did not receive any warnings. And the second administrator, violating the rules himself, blocked me and imposed a topic ban.--Ilnur efende (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

User talk:-revi/FAQ#desysop - Stewards are not an arbitrator, we do not get involved in local disputes. Closing. — regards, Revi 11:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Request for mass deletion of Fair Use images

Status:    Not done

Can someone please delete just over a hundred unused FU files on cy-wikipedia please? Many thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 15:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000: Hello, cywiki has 15 sysops (including you) able to do this. I'm not understanding the reason for this request, since stewards perform actions only when there is no local users able to do something. stanglavine msg 15:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
I've been through 'Special pages': we can mass delete an user's files, but there's no mass deletion of files in the above category, unless the tool has been translated wrongly. Can you give me the link please? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000: there is no such special software function. Some user scripts have batch-delete helper functions, such as Twinkle - but you would need to localize it for your project first. — xaosflux Talk 12:41, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000: I use this script for mass delete, but you'll need install it yourself. As xaosflux said, there is no native MediaWiki function for this, just gadgets and scripts. stanglavine msg 12:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi both, and thanks for your time on this! If you have time to delete, I'd be very grateful, otherwise it's gonna take me yonks to get my head round this! Thanks! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
It's not a matter of time: It's a matter of rule. We do not enter an wiki where there are active admins. Even more so when the wiki is not an GS wiki. Period. — regards, Revi 23:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000: I have installed the enWS's gadget script into your global.js file special:mypage/global.js. You will now have a w:cy:Special:Massdelete page where you can load a page list and delete, this will also work for any WMF wiki where you are an admin. Feel free to comment out the line 2 when you have finished with the script. Noting that you will need to use your own delete reason, it is populated with enWS's in the dropdown  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Whow! That's great! Thank you billinghurst! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 11:54, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Outside the Stewards job description (tm). Closing. — regards, Revi 11:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Add it.wikiversity in global-bot wikis

Status:    Done

As per new local policy, just approved, please add it.wikiversity in the opted-in wikis for global bots. Regards. --Superpes15 (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

  Done --Wim b 18:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

deletion request on zh.wikipedia

Status:    Done

discussion: zh:Wikipedia:頁面存廢討論/記錄/2022/02/09#2019冠狀病毒病香港疫情病例_(2020年)

This page (zh:2019冠狀病毒病香港疫情病例_(2020年) has over 5000 editions and local sysop can't delete it. Need steward for help. --GY Fan★ 09:44, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. — regards, Revi 19:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Hide a title on main page of nl.wikibooks

Status:    Done

On nl.wikibooks the word "Hoofdpagina" ("Main page") shows up on the main page (https://nl.wikibooks.org/). It used to be hidden by a line in https://nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Common.css#L-187 : 

.action-view.page-firstHeading .firstHeading { display: none; }

, but that doesn't work anymore in the new version of MediaWiki (8 feb 2022). I request this line to be changed to: 

body.page-Hoofdpagina h1#firstHeading {display: none;}

NB.: The code is checked in https://nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Gebruiker:Erik_Baas/common.css#L-95 . - Erik Baas (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. It only works for logged-in users. - Erik Baas (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
@Erik Baas This is a cache problem "&action=purge".
A steward should remove the obsolete code, even if it is now resolved elsewhere. I can't do it myself, since nl.wikibooks is not a GS wiki. 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 21:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

All done--Sakretsu (炸裂) 23:39, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Блокировка

Status:    Not done

Добрый день. В русском викисловаре меня заблокировали - блокировка произведена администратором Lingüista.

Указана следующая причина: сокпаппет Блинов Рюрик Петрович. Начало блокировки: 15:41, 19 февраля 2022/ Окончание блокировки: бессрочно. Цель блокировки: Relaxing50. Идентификатор блокировки — 19600.

НО!!! Я не Блинов Рюрик Петрович.

Пожалуйста помогите!

Relaxing50 (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

User_talk:-revi/FAQ#desysop--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 07:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Что тогда делать? Он заблокировал меня так, что я не могу править страницы обсуждения ни свою, ни его. Также я не могу делать это с другой своей учетной записи (fullstopru) и даже выйдя из профилей и меняя IP (у меня мобильный интернет, то есть "серый" IP, но прокси я не использую - браузер Edge). Relaxing50 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

150 spam ?

Status:    Done

All 150 contributions/articles on Studio 54 Network (here in "simple english" for example) appear to be spam ? --Arroser (talk) 12:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

@Arroser: Simple Wikipedia has local sysops, GS or Stewards can't help you. simple:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 19:27, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
@WikiBayer: : Simple english was only an example, to have links on the article, on the others WP. The real problem is not only this language, but the 150 articles i think. --Arroser (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Could you please link articles that are at global sysop-enabled wikis then? THanks! Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
OK Wikidata d:Q39841 Article created by Luigi Salvatore Vadacchino. Article are in ak:Radio_Studio_54_Network bm:Radio_Studio_54_Network ca:Radio_Studio_54_Network and more.𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 19:37, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
I think we should delete these pages. The content is 1 line + Links. This is not Useful for the projects. Please more opinions. --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 19:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
@WikiBayer I agree Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
.:@WikiBayer I agree as well. EstrellaSuecia (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

If we are talking Radio Studio 54 Network (Q39841) then really shouldn't they be raised with the individual wikis. It is not up to this place to determine the notability nor whether pages that have been considered a reasonable addition for 8+ years after they were created. That has not been our role previously, and without some broader discussion through an RFC I don't think that we should act. Different from asking stewards or GS to act as administrators at these wikis where a legitimate conversation has taken place.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

billinghurst the problem i'm seeing is that this is a massive crosswiki borderline hoax :/ Praxidicae (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@Praxidicae: The item is visible at so many major wikis so who are we at this wiki to make that determination with the scope that we have been granted by the communities in our rights allocation. The processes for deletion of out of scope material is set to belong to local wikis. If the major wikis went about their investigations and came to their determinations, then these determinations flowed out to the wikis, then we have the scope to act. Tell/show me where it is in scope for this forum to be the instigator for such actions. Yes, it means more work, yes it is a PITA, but once we start that slippery slope of granting ourselves the power, then … No thanks, let us act within scope.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't advocating for doing anything, it was just a comment in general. Praxidicae (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@billinghurst Quote "The item is visible at so many major wikis ... The processes for deletion of out of scope material"
I don't see that as "Out of Scope". One line and the web links is not useful content. Pages with useful content should not be deleted by GS, but pages like in the akWP can, in my opinion, be deleted using Reason "Crosswiki Spam/no useful content". --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 13:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
I am making zero judgment on the articles. I am talking about the community specified roles of global sysops and stewards.

Out of scope for global sysops and stewards to speedy delete 8 year old articles. Out of scope for Steward requests/Miscellaneous to determine local wikis deletion processes. If you were doing works added today, maybe. Works added in 2012 should go through due process at the wikis. These wikis, they own their issues, we don't. Don't start making this role to be more than we have been elected to do.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:09, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Marking as done to close. Handled locally, no further actions possible or needed on the global side. Vermont (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Help with a long-term spammer requested

Status:    Done

In recent weeks, :slwiki has been a target of a relentless spam campaign involving more or less convoluted links to some junk book ("Threelogy") and to what appears to be a collection of files mentioning Katyn massacre. Judging by spam blacklists and other mentions on Meta, it's a cross-wiki issue. The spammer(s) use(s) different IPs each time and different ways to link (old diffs from various wikis, archive.is pages etc.), sometimes edit-warring with admins who revert, and it's been impossible to permanently block this activity. This has been going on for months, but now it's ramped up a few notches. Just earlier, the attempts got so persistent that :slwiki's abuse filter got throttled! Can someone help? — Yerpo Eh? 13:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Yerpo: I'm not a global sysop, but I am extremely familiar with this spammer. The person behind the spam is a cross-wiki vandal, sockpuppetteer and harasser who has been permanently banned by the Wikimedia Foundation from editing any Wikimedia site. More information can be found at w:en:WP:LTA/GRP. As the edits of this person are subject to revert at sight, and as the edits are inherently disruptive, I believe that global sysops may help you block and delete nonsense created by this prolific vandal. I believe you can make requests to GSs here to deal with the vandal's disruption through protection of pages, deletion of added vandalism and blocking of IPs, especially as the vandal abuses open proxies to revert-war with vandal fighters till protection is applied. JavaHurricane 02:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
@JavaHurricane: I had a feeling that the issue was this big, yes, but I couldn't find any discussions here, so thank you for pointing it out to me. Actually, :slwiki has plenty of admins and deleting/reverting this trash and blocking is not technically a problem, but it's rather draining, so I was hoping for some advice on how to prevent it, or possibly some more efficient global filter/block. Reading the rest, I have a hunch that it isn't technically feasible, though, so if anybody from the small wiki monitoring team or any other global sysop would keep an eye on :slwiki to help reverting at least, we'd be grateful (even if we're not so small). The person's current obsessions are boxing and Katyn massacre/Stalin. — Yerpo Eh? 05:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Also read w:pl:WP:CHICAGO (use Google Translate if you don't know Polish). He's been going on like this on a lot of WMF sites, in particular simple.wikipedia. He's gone on with the Katyn massacre on the English Wikivoyage, but we put in a filter that prevents the word "katyn" to be typed. SHB2000 (talk | contibs) 11:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
This page is generally not for full-fledged discussions. The header suggests "Formal or controversial requests can be filed at Steward requests/Miscellaneous", so I'll be moving this there. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
@Yerpo: I have introduced w:sl:special:abusefilter/5 simple and targeted and left it in detect only—it will only be a start recipe. Feel welcome to turn it on for disallow when you feel comfortable that there are low false p+ves. The issue is going to be that when they are stopped, that they are just likely to adjust their behaviour to something a little different. About the only way that I have managed to truly scare them away is to set these filters to block, which here at meta I set to 2hr blocks, so it places an immediate inhibitor, and they don't get to probe the filter to work their way around it. Adding blocking to AF requires a consensus of your community to activate that component of AF and to have it activated via a phabricator site request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:49, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Marking as done, appears to be resolved. Vermont (talk) 02:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Please rate and restore.

Status:    Not done

Full content deletion was performed by the user Taylor_49(02:38, 13 nov. 2021)

https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=kuko&type=revision&diff=1016848&oldid=1016830
A request has been made about this and similar deletions. (12:43, 16 nov. 2021)
Steward requests/Miscellaneous/2021-11#EoWiktionary requests
There were no technical actions on the part of the administration, in connection with these I canceled this deletion
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=kuko&type=revision&diff=1018010&oldid=1016848
and at the same time began a discussion on this issue
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Diskuto%3Akuko&type=revision&diff=1018012&oldid=1016866
Thereafter, all content was re-deleted by the user Taylor_49 by editorial action (05:36, 20 nov. 2021)
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=kuko&type=revision&diff=1018387&oldid=1018011

  • Please rate the complete removal of the content again.

And also completely removed the content
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=envii&type=revision&diff=1018390&oldid=1011169
I ask you to restore the data, in connection with the fact that for reasons unknown to me, the system refuses me to perform the restore. This article does not belong to the PIV dictionary, since it is a complete copy from the PV dictionary, published earlier than the PIV and has no citation restrictions. These questions have already been discussed here
and here, on both RfCs a definite decision has not been made yet.

  • Please restore the content of page envii for the editors.

Va (🖋️) 09:29, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Vami is right that the 2 tiny main definitions of "envii" are already in PV (year 1930, presumably public domain by age), but the moderately long list with derivatives and their definitions is NOT in the PV, thus there is still evidence of copying of non-trivial quantity of text from PIV (editions 2002, 2005, 2020) and thus copyright infringement. Taylor 49 (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


Please take into consideration
Deletion of information by user Taylor 49
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=fondo&type=revision&diff=1018389&oldid=1017045
For my part, i canceled this action
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=fondo&diff=next&oldid=1018389
and at the same time i started a discussion
https://eo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Diskuto:fondo#202111200755_Vami
Instead of discussing and proving the legality of actions, the information was deleted again by user Taylor 49
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=fondo&diff=next&oldid=1018423
Va (🖋️) 19:02, 20 November 2021 (UTC)


Please take into consideration.2
Deletion of information by user Taylor 49
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=viza%C4%9Do&type=revision&diff=1017870&oldid=1017083
For my part, i canceled this action
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=viza%C4%9Do&diff=next&oldid=1017870
and at the same time i started a discussion
https://eo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Diskuto:vizaĝo#202111170457_Vami
Instead of discussing and proving the legality of actions, the information was deleted again by user Taylor 49
https://eo.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=viza%C4%9Do&diff=next&oldid=1018087
Va (🖋️) 19:25, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

The reason why I propose deletion is exactly same in both above cases: content is copied from copyrighted PIV as revealed in the "delete" template and reiterated in the local discussion. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
No final decision has been made for either RfC or RfC
Therefore, you acted arbitrarily, only on the basis of your opinion, the correctness of which has not been confirmed.
You ignored the discussion - you did not discuss, but deleted.
You force to restore your vandalism again in manual mode. Va (🖋️) 07:14, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Not done, closing lingering eowikt SRM requests. Vermont (talk) 02:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Case "Vami" (harassment and bot performing "problematic editing")

Status:    Not done

User "Vami" also has a bot, operating through the main account, and performing "problematic editing". 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:

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)

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)

Recovered section accidentally tagged as "Done" and subsequently removed without having done anything. Getting my bot banned whereas Vami's bot can continue is a strange outcome, based on a very superficial evaluation missing among other the fact the Vami has a bot at all. Please review the case. The fact that Vami is horribly rude should also be possible to address some way. Please let me know how if this is not the right place. Taylor 49 (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
There has been an unfortunate amount of incivility involved in this (from both users involved), to the point that the vast majority of content I'm reading while trying to catch up is completely unrelated to the actual dispute. Vermont (talk) 02:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Not done, closing lingering eowikt SRM requests. Vermont (talk) 02:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

eowikt: if rollback is not possible, then you need help at least in retrieving the lost information

Status:    Not done
  • Involved accounts eo:wikt:User:Taylorbot, eo:wikt:User:Taylor 49.
  • The bot operation log, user Log - these two actions are interlinked.
  • In the German section of the project, information on dialects has been destroyed. All articles where the template "Dialektaĵoj (germana)" was used are affected (the information has not been moved to another section of the article, not marked as a comment in order to exclude the display of information and to be able to process the information in the future).
  • Restore request closed with no result.
  • I am asking for help in extracting diffs containing information about the pages and the full text of the parts removed from it. In any text format. For contact - mail and Telegram

Va (🖋️) 06:48, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Not again?! Stewards are not SQL queries. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 07:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
de.wiktionary.org . Does not need any advanced rights. But please do not flood Esperanto wiktionary with non-Esperanto text (outside of examples) copied in industrial scale from "de.wiktionary.org" without attribution like Pablo did. But I have a better idea: you can move to "de.wiktionary.org" and stay there. I promise that I never will persecute you there. Taylor 49 (talk) 01:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
User:Taylor 49, You do not understand what is written here, you violate what is written here. The problem is not in the rights for action, but in the amount of destruction caused by your bot, this amount is such that I am not able to restore it all manually. Va (🖋️) 12:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
@User:Vami Please stop lying, spamming and trolling. There is no destruction. Taylor 49 (talk) 06:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, User:Taylor_49, but the protocols of your actions exist regardless of my opinion. The statement that the logging system is lying or trolling is meaningless.
Besides, I was not talking to you. Because my appeal to you was without result.
You are trying to unleash a discussion here. This place is not intended for discussion. Your goal is to get this request denied precisely because a discussion has started here. There is an example where you have successfully achieved this. Va (🖋️) 08:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Not done, as there is nothing to do here from the Stewards side. Vermont (talk) 02:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Import template used by twinkle from enwiki

Status:    Withdrawn

We recently imported a direct version of Twinkle gadget from enwiki to our local kswiki. However, we have not imported all templates used by two twinkle. I request you to kindly import templates from en:Category:Templates used by Twinkle to ks wikipedia kindly don't import the templates that are already present as most of them have been translated. I know this may be hectic, If this twinkle is discouraged for small wikis like kswiki, Then can you kindly install Global twinkles as a gadget. I will leave the change upto you as you are more experienced than me. Thankyou. --Iflaq (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

@Iflaq: If there is only one or two people going to use this, then it would be better for you to install it through your special:MyPage/global.js per the instructions at User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal. We can set it up as a global gadget if there are going to be plentiful users. Running the English version is not the best idea.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
FWIW There are a massive 848 templates at enWP in play with Twinkle and that is just crazy. Seems gross overkill, and setting a rod for your back, to coin a phrase.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Billinghurst, Thankyou for your advice. Can you please create Global twinkle as a Gadget for our wiki. Since the enwiki needs many templates which are not present and translated it seems odd to use it. I will be importing and localising them one by one till then we can ise global twinkle as a Gadget. Thankyou. Iflaq (talk) 03:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
TwinkleGlobal is a cross-wiki script. It doesn't require any local templates. And it doesn't follow any local administrative process. So it's better to install twinkle from enwiki then localize it. Xiplus (talk) 07:38, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
The key point is how many functions do you want to use? For example, if you don't need to tag articles with Cleanup Tempaltes, you don't need to import those templates. Xiplus (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
If i get it right Xiplus, You are suggesting to Import and translate Enwiki Twinkle not Global Twinkle ? If so it would be better if someone can import all templates from the enwiki and the we will translate them according to our needs. Though some of them may not be used currently but can be used in future. Thankyou. Iflaq (talk) 11:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
How is the AFD process on kswiki? I can't find any related pages. I think there is no such process on kswiki, so you should not import AFD-related templates. Xiplus (talk) 12:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your guidance Xiplus. So the question Iflaq which functions are you're wanting to have Twinkle using at your wiki? Maybe Xiplus can guide you on the required components for you wiki, as it seems that all the functionality of Twinkle is not required on a less complex wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

The function (component) list is here. Xiplus (talk) 15:14, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Sure Xiplus, Billinghurst got it. I have created a page that depicts our need ks:User:Iflaq/Research. Is there a way to import these templates faster than manually importing them one by one. Iflaq (talk) 05:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Iflaq, is there still action needed regarding this request, or is it okay to close? Vermont (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

OAuth permissions

OAuth approval request for MTCWeb-Dev

Status:    Done

Hi, could someone please disable this OAuth consumer? I'm no longer using it, thanks. -FASTILY 00:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Fastily: Done -- TNT (talk • she/her) 00:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Miscellaneous/2022-02&oldid=24907890"