Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2022-06

lmo.wiki opt in into global sysops set

I opened a discussion to re-add lmo.wiki back into Special:WikiSets/7. 1 month has elapsed without any objection. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:24, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Removal of advanced rights

Hello, I have made the RFC above that would affect how some requests at SRP are processed, specifically the removal of bureaucrat/CU/OS etc. when a user is desysopped. --Rschen7754 22:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Stopping archiving completed SRG requests

This isn't a RfC (and I'm not sure we'd need one anyway..), but just a quick question for a simple matter — what are people's thoughts on no longer archiving completed SRG requests? It serves very little purpose, as the block/lock reason is recorded in the block/lock log, and a number of stewards already link to the report diff in the additional reason too.

For clarity, by "completed" I mean requests which have resulted in a global block/lock.

We would continue to archive denied requests, and should probably delay the removal of completed requests by a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 30 minutes?) to allow review — TNT (talk • she/her) 07:53, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh just to also note: this would mean we can clear down SRG a bit quicker, and hopefully not hit the template limit as often — TNT (talk • she/her) 07:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I like the idea of no longer archiving otherwise successfully processed request. My opinion is really just rooted in the rule: Stop and ask yourself why type of mind set. Operator873 ^connect 08:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Personal take is: if majority of stewards used the permalink every time they fulfill SRG request I have no problem with it. (and 30 minutes are too short, few hours at a minimum.) — regards, Revi 08:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

On one hand, I am not sure keeping archives of (mostly) locked spambots/LTAs is useful (e.g. WP:AIV ain't archived at all AFAIK). On the other hand, I think I remember a discussion not long ago disfavouring not archiving that page. I do not use the permalink when dealing with SRG lock requests though. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• I still find the archives useful. Usually when I am looking for (b)locks that was carried out by someone else. I still think keeping them is a good idea.--BRP ^ever 10:08, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

  +1 to @BRPever. If we can get a permalink to the lock reason, I think it could work fine. But just removing completed requests ATM would make it very hard for me to see whether there is a SRG req prompting the lock, and what does it say. Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:47, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

• Non-steward comment, but as a reporter, I do use archive search from time to time to find older requests to refer to, so I see a use in them. Note that they are already noindexed currently. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
• non-steward comment. There are a whole lot of trivial spambot lock requests being made that do not require blocking if they are locally blocked. At this point of time, spambots do NOT typically go xwiki, and if they are locally blocked they are managed. If we need an investigation then they could be poked at SRCU. I would say that spambot requests do not need to be archived and could be actioned and jettisoned, and we could retain locks that are more informative. To do that we could differentiate the DONE statements, and have one for archiving and one for quick removal IF it was determined that locks of spambots are required as a continuation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Temporary opt-in for ukwiki to global sysops set

Hi,

As you probably already now, Russia invaded Ukraine five days ago. Unfortunately this resulted in a significant decrease in activity of Ukrainian Wikipedia administrators: some of them are now taking part in the war, some are volunteering for medical or civil defence, while others have a significantly disrupted Internet connection (editing Wikipedia from a bomb shelter is problematic). Also unfortunately, this resulted in an increase in activity of vandals, notably pro-Russian trolls.

As a result, Ukrainian Wikipedia community requests to temporarily allow global sysops to act on Ukrainian Wikipedia. You can find the community consensus here: uk:Вікіпедія:Кнайпа (адміністрування)#Глобальні адміністратори. This is valid for the duration of martial law in Ukraine (i.e. 1 month at the moment).

We kindly ask global sysops to do only non-controversial actions, such as reverting obvious vandalism and blocking vandals, but not engaging in content disputes (nor speedy deletion of non-vandalism, for example). The main motivation is the need to revert vandalism during European night: many of our administrators have to spend nights in bomb shelters, giving space to various Russian vandals.

Thanks in advance for your help — NickK (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: This is incredibly sad to hear 😣 I have removed ukwiki from the Opted-out of global sysop wikis wikiset. Please let us know if there is anything else we can do to help you and your community. Slava Ukraini! -- TNT (talk • she/her) 22:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

temporarily removed ukwiki at MediaWiki:HideButtonsFromNonGsProjects.js. Please ping me or any IA when gs opt-in has been disabled. Thanks and stay safe. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Minorax: Can the script be tweaked so that IA won't have to edit it manually whenever there is a change in wikiset#7? See gswiki.js by Martin. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Possible solution. @Martin Urbanec: any objections? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 10:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@Minorax Sorry, for some reason, I didn't see this ping. No objection from me . Martin Urbanec (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, how long does that request take? Maybe that should at least be cached if done. Scripts like markAdmins are updated manually too. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4: It depends, but normally less than one second. Try querying yourself at ApiSandbox. According to my browser console, $.getJSON() took 346 miliseconds, while that of mw.Api() was 369. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: Courtesy ping that one month has passed—can I assume that the ukwiki community still wants this in place? ~TNT (talk • she/her) 10:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@TheresNoTime: Yes, this should remain valid for the duration of martial law in Ukraine (until 25 April so far, possibly extended). The activity somewhat recovered but is not close to pre-war levels yet — NickK (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

@NickK: Forgot to reply, sorry—that's fine :) ~TNT (talk • she/her) 19:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

NickK, 3 months passed since last check-in; I assume this is still in place (given the circumstances) but can you confirm? Thanks! — regards, Revi 10:51, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@-revi: Interesting question. We have a rebound in activity, we have appointed temporary admins so the need is not that urgent. However, the community approval still stands (it is valid until the end of martial law in Ukraine), and we still face some lack of activity, particularly during EEST night. I assume that we continue but I will open a new community discussion on it — NickK (talk) 15:33, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I think I speak for the steward team et al that we're happy to keep this in place for as long as the uk.wiki community feels it is appropriate :-) — TNT (talk • she/her) 11:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

@-revi and TheresNoTime: I asked on uk:Вікіпедія:Кнайпа (адміністрування)#Глобальні адміністратори - 2, and there is a consensus to keep the opt-in provision. Thanks for your help! — NickK (talk) 19:25, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Ack, thanks for letting us know! With best wishes, Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)