User talk:DerHexer/archive02

Archives of this user talk page: archive 1 (2007-2012).

Meta OS

Hey there! I think you should ask for your meta OS bit back on M:RFH. As you recently saw, we needed some and well... you were around. Nu los und frag schon! ;-) -Barras talk 11:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

As meta OS I would like to second barras suggestion here, given the time that you are avaible on irc, you are the best candidate for this role Mardetanha ^talk 14:00, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thirded. Courcelles 16:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

+1 although I'm not a member of your cabal ;-). The Helpful One 16:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

 Support Because DerHexer asked me to reply. Hehe, no I'm kidding. I support Barras' suggestion. Trijnstel_talk 21:20, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

+1. We don't have many active oversighters, so a few more should improve our service and response time. —Pathoschild 00:50, 01 April 2012 (UTC)

May I also request that you archive this talk page please? :) The Helpful One 00:51, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Herbythyme

We spoke on IRC about this [1]. Please talk some sense into Herbythyme and get him to stop acting so blatantly abusive. It is extremely embarrassing and if admin are so willing to disregard clear conflict of interest and abuse ops to attack people they do not like, they really shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the project. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Spam blacklist

Hi DerHexer. I just did this edit as I assumed you forgot the logging. :) Kind regards, Trijnstel_talk 17:51, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Hoo man already pinged me. ;) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 18:29, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Suspicious of an inadequate block

Dear DerHexer,

I am a regular contributor of the Spanish version of Wikiversity (my user page in Spanish). I find that the ip from which I am currently connected (201.144.87.45) has been blocked due to supposed cross-wiki spam. I do not doubt that this kind of activity could have been enacted from the ip, since companies use nat after nat, and so possible spammer can get blocked with legitimate users. Sadly I find these while teaching the coursewors of es:wikiversity:Proyect Yoreme, and our class was spoiled (students are supposed to keep a workbook within ther user page). I was wondering what could I do to avoid this in the future? Thanks in advance for your attention to this e-mail. Sincerely, El erno (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunatelly, you would have to find a steward to unblock this IP, for example in the IRC #wikimedia-stewards . For your own account an IP block exempt could be enabled but that wouldn't work for the whole class. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I will take this into account, and join the Stewards' IRC. I guess that they might have handier and more immediate responses for such situations. Cheers,

El erno (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Request

Dear DerHexer,

I hereby would like to return the sysop flag the German Wikipedia community has granted me. I would appreciate it if you to remove it from my account.

Thanks & best regards,--Toter Alter Mann (talk) 09:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Das ist eine freiwillige Rückgabe, wo du dir danach die Rechte vom Bürokraten zurückholtest, ja? Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Nein, das ist eine endgültige Rückgabe, wie ich sie im Rahmen meiner Erstwahl in Aussicht gestellt habe (genauer gesagt: Mein Mandat läuft nur für ein Jahr und würde deshalb eine Wiederwahl spätestens morgen erfordern).--Toter Alter Mann (talk) 15:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Dann mach doch lieber die Wiederwahl. :-/ --Geitost ^diskusjon 12:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Diese Möglichkeit hat er auch jetzt noch, nachdem die Rechte entzogen wurden. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 09:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you help the Akan Wikipedia?

my name is --Nkansahrexford (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC). I live in Ghana and a native speaker of Akan.

A group of Ghanaians (myself inclusive) are really ready now to expand the Akan Wikipedia nicely. We'll like to do that as a project too.

But I cannot make edits to the mainpage and I do not know any Ghanaian who can do that simply because we are not admins or stewards.

I therefore, wanted to contact you and see how best you can help us. Even if none of us qualifies to be an admin or a steward now, we hoping you take the translations from us and input them there for us. I think after putting the mainpage in real shape, we can go ahead to create more articles to fill the wiki.

Kasahorow.com has a developed system we use in translating English to Akan of which we plan employing to help us in the process.

Please talk back soon.

--Nkansahrexford (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nkansahrexford, and sorry for my belated response: I came back from holidays today. Of course, I would help you with improving akwiki's main page. But imho it would be better for you to request temporary sysop rights on Steward requests/Permissions#Administrator access and do that on your own. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 09:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, I think I now have access to the landing page of the akan wikipedia. I want to do the exact duplicate of en.wikipedia.org landing page. However, I realized there are much technical stuffs behind what renders on the landing page. For that, i really need help. I currently wish to use the same format as the En Wikipedia homepage.

Please help me work on that. And for the temp sysop rights, I think I will go for it when the need really comes.

Thank you. Happy vacation comeback.

--Nkansahrexford (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

WP laufen die Autoren davon..

..steht groß auf der 1. Seite der Tageszeitung. Auch ich überlege mir, mich (diesmal vielleicht endgültig) von WP zu verabschieden. Dabei hatte ich lange Zeit sehr viel Spass an aktiver Autorenarbeit. Die Gründe, die im dpa-Artikel genannt werden, verfehlen jedoch den Kern der Sache. Die Probleme der Autoren in de.WP treten erst zu Tage, wenn man längere Zeit Artikel schreibt bzw. ergänzt und so seine Erfahrungen sammelt.

1. Übel: Man setzt sich stundenlang hin, recherchiert und formuliert und schreibt nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen. Dann kommt ein "Fachautor", der selbst wenig schreibt, dafür aber serienweise mit Begründungen wie "keine Verbesserung" revertiert. Kein Versuch, mit dem Autor die Textänderung zu diskutieren. Auch keine Detailverbesserung, sondern vollständiges Revertieren. Leider nur zu oft klafft gerade bei den eifrigsten Revertierern (es gibt wenige, diese sind aber sehr aktiv) die Eigenbeurteilung und Fremdbeurteilung ihres Wissens merklich auseinander. Ich habe den Eindruck, dass manche Kandidaten überhaupt keine nenneswerten Textbeiträge produzieren, sondern nur eifersüchtig "ihre" perfekten Artikel kontrollieren, damit niemand irgend etwas daran ändern oder vervollständigen kann.

Vorschlag a: Die Reverts jedes Autors werden gezählt werden. Ab einer Obergrenze von fünf undiskutierten Reverts pro Monat gibt es eine automatische Zeitsperre (auch einen Monat oder nur eine Woche?). Bei sehr produktiven Autoren kann diese Frist verkürzt werden. Wenn ich mich recht erinnere, habe ich bisher insgesamt maximal 10 Beiträge revertiert und den Grund dafür jedesmal auf der entsprechenden Diskussionsseite angegeben.

Vorschlag b: Die produzierten kByte werden summiert, wenn sie eine gewisse Mindestgrenze von beispielsweise 500 Byte überschreiten. Ein guter Autor produziert wenige, lange Beiträge, die WP füllen. Wer dagegen hunderte Kurzbeiträge mit jeweils nur fünf Byte beisteuert, ist durchaus eifrig, aber kein Autor. Auf der Seite Spezial:Einstellungen wird neben der (wenig interessanten) Anzahl der Bearbeitungen die "Gesamtmasse" der produzierten kByte angegeben.

Vorschlag c: Ich erinnere an das Zitat von Albert Einstein: "Die Herrschaft der Dummen ist unüberwindlich, weil es so viele sind, und ihre Stimmen zählen genau wie unsere." Es muss eine Gewichtsfunktion eingeführt werden, die den Argumenten produktiver Autoren mehr Gewicht gibt als denjenigen, deren Mitwirken sich auf Kurzbeiträge wie "typo" und "Revert" beschränkt. Nicht die Anzahl der WP-Aktionen darf ausschlaggebend sein, sondern die konstruktive Artikelarbeit, gemessen in kByte. Jeder Admin hat bei edit-war zu berücksichtigen, welche Kontrahenten produktive Autoren (mit vielen kByte) sind und welche sich vorzugsweise mit Kleinkram wie typo beschäftigen. Auf diese Weise wird die Arbeit aktiver Autoren nicht achtungslos in den Müll gekippt.

2. Übel: Einige besonders aktive "Löscher" und "Revertierer" genießen offenbar Rückendeckung und Wohlwollen gewisser Admins. Es existieren vermutlich Seilschaften, die schwer zu durchschauen und noch schwerer nachzuweisen sind. Erst nach sehr zahlreichen Edits erkennt man ein immer wiederkehrendes Strickmuster. Wie und wo soll man dieses Problem ansprechen? Ich habe einigen Admins das Problem geschildert und nie Antwort erhalten. Keiner will sich Ärger mit Kollegen einhandeln, Autoren sind eben nur "Fußvolk", mit dem man sich nicht abgibt. Es lebe die Hierarchie! Als mir vor Monaten der Kragen platzte ist und ich konkrete Namen und Bündnisse nannte, erntete ich ohne Rücksprache eine Woche Zeitsperre. Da reagieren manche Admins extrem schnell! Allerdings auch hier ohne Rückfrage, so als ob es weder email noch Benutzer_Diskussion:Herbertweidner gäbe. Ist ja auch angenehm, wenn man unbequeme Mahner anonym von oben herab abschalten kann.

Vorschlag: Es wird ein "Kummerkasten" geschaffen, in dem Probleme und Anregungen ersthaft diskutiert und Beschlüsse schlussendlich auch durchgesetzt werden. Das erfordert einen Ansprechpartner, der ernsthaft antwortet und Autoren nicht wie "dumme Jungs" einfach stehen lässt. Um ein Überquellen dieses Kummerkastens zu vermeiden, kann ein Kriterium vorgeschaltet werden: Nur solche Eingaben werden akzeptiert, die von mindestens drei produktiven Autoren (Definition siehe oben) unterstützt werden. Notwendig ist die Sicherheit, dass ein Ergebnis herbeigeführt und realisiert wird, falls man vermeiden will, dass sich engagierte Autoren vollends demotiviert abwenden. Eine Spielwiese wie Wikipedia:Adminwiederwahl/He3nry ist ja offensichtlich Augenwischerei. Was darf sich dieser "Halbgott" noch alles leisten, bis ihm irgend etwas dämmert? Eine Schande für WP.

Wenn die Verantwortlichen in den oberen Etagen von WP sich weiterhin taub stellen und nicht umgehend bei den noch aktiven Autoren recherchieren, was denen die Lust am Schreiben verdirbt, wird deren Anzahl weiter rapide schrumpfen. Autoren, die sich bereits resigniert zurückgezogen haben, kann man nicht mehr fragen.

Mal sehen, ob auch dieser Beitrag auch im Desinteresse versickert. Ob sich ein Koloss wie WP bewegen kann? --92.193.22.92 22:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC) (in de.WP: --Herbertweidner (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC))

Zu Vorschlag 1a: Schaue Dir mal ausserhalb der Schulferien vormittags die "Letzten Änderungen" an. Da kommst Du locker auf 10 Reverts von Unsinns-Einträgen der Art "Detlev ist doof" - innerhalb 1 Stunde! Willst Du diese Reverts auch mitzählen? --Tsor (talk) 07:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

@Tsor: dann schau dir mal die de:Diskussion:Dauerstrichradar an, eine Aufzählung von extremen Beispielen von sinnlosen Reverts (bis hin zum Editwar), die nach dem Motto vorgenommen wurden: "Der Hauptautor ist doof" --Charly Whisky (talk) 12:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Es gibt eine klare Unterscheidungsmöglichkeit: a) Wenn sich ein Autor, der einige kByte Texte produziert, über einen Revert eines Erbsenzählers oder Platzhirschen beschwert, wird dieser gezählt. b) Ein dummer Junge, der doofe Bemerkungen reinsetzt, wird sich wohl kaum beschweren, wenn diese wieder rausfliegt. Solche Reverts zählen dann auch nicht, sondern sind notwendig. --Herbertweidner (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Die Beschreibung / die Situation kommt mir irgendwie bekannt vor. Ob die Vorschläge so 1:1 umsetzbar sind ist eine andere Frage. Auch hätte sich IP 92.193.22.92 etwas mit Emotionen zurückhalten könne. Da ich die Situation aber kenne, kann man auch mal ein Auge zudrücken. mfg Markus R Schmidt (talk) 15:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ich unterschreibe das. Egal, wie man es formulieren möchte, solche Probleme existieren und die Verursacher profitieren davon, dass der Durchschnitts-Mitautor von ganz anderen Motiven beseelt ist als sich um Machtgefüge, Adminwahlen, Wiederwahlen, Ränkeleien und Ähnliches zu kümmern. Dass der bürokratische Teil der Autorenschaft sich praktisch selber wählen kann, weil der Rest der Mitautoren gar keine Lust und Interesse an solchen Themen hat bringt dann Probleme auf den Teller, wie oben beschrieben. He3nry ist da nur ein kleines Rädchen, welches ich natürlich trotzdem gerne blockieren helfe.

Ansonsten - ändern läßt sich an der Motivation der Durchschnitts-Autoren wohl wenig, also auch nichts an den Vorausetzungen, von denen Gruppierungen wie die, die uns aufgefallen sind, profitieren.

Ich rege mich also nicht weiter über die Zustände auf, versuche weiter Spass in der WP zu haben und wenn von mir neues Mißverhalten von denen, die mir schon aufgefallen sind, beobachtet wird, versuche ich möglichst effektiv und mit geringstem emotionalen Kraftaufwand dagegen einzuschreiten.

Dazu gehört natürlich auch die Pflege der Wiederwahlseiten von Admins wie He3nry,Howwi und Consorten. --2.209.8.52 19:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, beim Anmelden im Meta lese ich hier (What is Meta not): Meta is not a forum for continued attacks against other users. Do not report on other users' past misdeeds here. Remember that edit histories reflect all users' behavior impartially— including your own.

Das gilt dann ja generell für alle "User", auch diejenigen, die oben beschrieben sind. Also gut, ich kann mich gleich wieder abmelden, der Beitrag eins Drüber mit der IP-Signatur war von mir. Wie soll man Mißstände bekämpfen, wenn man diese und die Namen dazu hier nicht nennen darf? Als "continued attacks against other users" würde das sofort ausgeschlachtet werden. Schön. Haben wir noch andere Möglichkeiten? --Carl (talk) 05:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Genau das ist das Kernproblem: Nennt man keine Namen, sind das unbelegte Vorwürfe, denen so nicht nachgegangen werden kann. Nennt man aber Namen, gilt das als persönlicher Angriff und man wird gesperrt. Dieses "die Schotten dicht machen" ist ein typisches Hierarchieproblem: Sollen die da unten doch sehen, wie sie klarkommen. Das bringt uns aber vom Thema ab! Mein Verbesserungsanliegen geht nicht gegen konkrete Personen, sondern der Aufwertung von aktiven Autoren gegenüber Erbsenzählern, die wenig können außer revertieren. Da wünsche ich eine Entscheidung, wessen Stimme mehr Gewicht hat. Es muss eine Gewichtungsfunktion her, damit nicht Schwätzer und Möchtegerne die gleiche Rangstufe haben wie aktive Autoren. --Herbertweidner (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Ich habe schon eine Menge unsinniger Reverts gesehen, die häufig per Huggle gemacht wurden, und das kann ärgerlich sein. Andererseits, s.o. Tsor, kenne ich auch die Statistiken über die Vandalenedits pro Stunde. Das zu lösen ist ein Problem. Vielleicht könnte man in die Richtung gehen, dass die Verwendung von Huggletool etwas anders gehandhabt wird. -jkb- 08:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Wie ich oben schrieb, werden Reverts erst dann gezählt, wenn Klage durch den Autor auf einer Seite wie WP:Revertmeldung (analog zu WP:VM) erhoben wird. Kleinkram, den dumme Jungs verursachen, wird wie bisher erledigt. Auf WP:RM sollen nur die Gewohnheitsrevertierer und Platzhirschen getroffen werden, die ohne vorhergehende Diskussion mit einfältigen "Begründungen" wie "keine Verbesserung" ganze kByte mühevoller Arbeit löschen. Immer wieder und ohne jeden Ansatz, mal selbst konstruktiv mitzuarbeiten. Wenn ich mal einen Namen nennen darf: Benutzer:Bob Frost hat hier (http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wellenwiderstand&diff=99388397&oldid=99384053) 4667 Bytes ohne Diskussion gelöscht, die einige Fachautoren in den Wochen vorher in mühevoller Kleinarbeit ergänzt haben. Offenbar ist er aus dem Urlaub zurückgekehrt und hat sich geärgert, dass jemand "seinen" Artikel geändert hat. Genau so jemand gehört nicht in die Gemeinschaft, man hätte ihm für dieses Musterbeispiel an gutem Willen eine längere Denkpausen gönnen sollen.

Wäre das Problem mit den "Kleinvandalen" nicht deutlich geringer, wenn nur angemeldete Benutzer ändern dürfen? Offenbar ist WP in dieser Richtung zuuuu tolerant. Jemand, der ernsthaft mitarbeiten will, hat wohl kein Problem damit, sich anzumelden. --Herbertweidner (talk) 10:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Einmal das, und mein Vorschlag, die Wikiquette etwas verbindlicher festzulegen, wäre auch ein positiver Schritt. Wer die Wikiquette nicht einhält - darum geht es ja bei den oben beschriebenen Kahlschlägen durch "Hier komme ich Autoren" mit ihren willkürlichen Aktionen, kann z.Z. nicht verbindlich dafür zur Rechenschaft gezogen werden.

Wikiquette - "Empfohlenes Verhalten", empfohlen, nicht vorgeschrieben.

Problematisch ist das fehlende Interesse beim Gros der Autorenschaft für Veränderungen in der WP. Wenige von der breiten neutralen Autorenschaft würden überhaupt an Veränderungsversuchen teilnehmen. Das dies so ist, kann man sehr leicht an den Teilnahmen bei Adminwahlen ablesen. Mehr als die Hälfte der Wähler dort sind selber Admins, Bekannte, Befreundete oder gar "Seilschafter" aus dem direkten Umfeld derselben. Es tauchen bei jeder Wahl mehrheitlich immer die gleichen Namen auf, bei bestenfalls 300 Wählern im Schnitt und bei vielleicht 7000 aktiven WP-Autoren ist das ein deutlicher Hinweis. Vom "Volk gewählt" kann man sich also komplett abschminken. Die Erfolgaussichten für ein Aufbrechen der etablierten Strukturen und eine Abschaffung hierarchischer Regelwerke hängt von einer sehr viel größeren Beteiligung der allgemeinen Autorenschaft ab. --Carl (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Genaugenommen dürfte das Revertieren, Verändern und Löschen von größeren Inhalten mit längerem Bestand nicht durch die umgehbar lasch empfohlenen Verhaltensregeln der Wikiquette geregelt werden. Respekt vor den Vorautoren und der Versuch, vor derart eingreifenden Edits auf der Disk einen Konsenz zu geplanten Veränderungen zu erreichen, kann verbindliche Vorschrift für alle werden. --Carl (talk) 06:28, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

about your title blacklist edit from June

DerHexer, you made an edit to the title blacklist here about 6 weeks ago with the edit summary "tempfix". [2] I am not sure what you were looking to fix or what you deem temporary. Maybe you forgot? Your edit has allowed accounts such as en:User:Wikipedia sux balls to be self-created. That no-project-names line has been in the blacklist, from what i can find, since the username blacklist was created in early 2008 and was later merged into the title blacklist. If your temp issue is resolved maybe you could re-activate that line on the title blacklist. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 11:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note! I seem to have forgotten that. :-S That's indefensible. It's activated again. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Sperrung 50.116.1.33

Hallo,

ich verwalte das Netz hinter der IP 50.116.1.33. Diese wurde (meines Erachtens grundlos) gesperrt. Dort gibt es keinen Open Proxy. Ist es moeglich die IP wieder zu entsperren? Danke im vorraus.

Die Sperre wurde von JD aufgehoben. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 18:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 23:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

My request

Hello! Please check my request for admin's flag on pa.wikibooks on "stewards requests/permissions"and help it coming to an end soon. If the stewads are waiting as usual for any response from the community there, I wanna tell you that I made the request more than a month ago but no response bcz there is no community but the wiki is full of vandalism, nonsense (no useful contents) etc. so I need the flag. Please check. Thank you. --Itar buttar (talk) 12:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, the only response is an oppose. Otherwise we would just give temp sysop access. But without any supportive vote that's gonna be difficult. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Bitte um Hilfe

Hallo DerHexer, ich beteilige mich eigentlich nur selten an Diskussionen in Artikeln, aber wenn es der Fall ist, dann möchte ich mich nicht von einem User, nur weil ihm scheinbar meine Meinung oder die darin enthaltene Information nicht paßt, ausschließen lassen. Ich verstehe meinen Beitrag in jeder Hinsicht als konstruktiv und sehe daher nicht ein warum ich ohne triftigen Grund durch wiederholtes Revertieren meines Eintrags, trotz meiner höflichen Aufforderung solche Eingriffe zu unterlassen, de facto ausgeschlossen werde. Vielleicht liegt es in Deiner Macht dies hinkünftig zu unterbinden. Artikel: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Bruce_Lee Ich bin PeterPaan. --62.47.130.248 11:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, DerHexer. Could you please delete this edit ? Takabeg (talk) 13:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

And why, please? —DerHexer (Talk) 19:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The link given in the message includes private correspondence (facebook). I think this kind of link and message should be deleted by "oversight" per en:Wikipedia:Privacy#What to do. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 09:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

tr:User:BetelgeuSeginus was blocked by tr:User:Elmacenderesi in Turkish Wikipedia on 16 November 2012 by reason of personal information disclosures (whether or not the information is accurate). Because the complaint to tr:User:BetelgeuSeginus was tr:User:Khutuck, I asked him. However he didn't reply on this issue. Yesterday User:Berkecelik posted a message including private corresponence between two users (I mentioned above). I came to understand (possibly misunderstood) that tr:User:BetelgeuSeginus had been blocked because of his publishing this private correspondence in Turkish Wikipedia. I think (from contents of this correspondence) that tr:User:BetelgeuSeginus was a whistleblower (I don't know whether there is an application like Whistleblower Protection Act in Wikimedia.) and wanted to make accusation a Turkish administrator with his intentional abusing policies and spirits of Wikimedia projects by showing this evidence. So I replied to User:Berkecelik that users must not publish such private correspondent (even according to the article 132 of the Turkish Penal Code, such action is considered guilty.), and I recommended BetelgeuSeginusto not to publish it but to post e-mail to responsible person (e.g. Jimbo Wales etc.) by himself. Takabeg (talk) 10:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. —DerHexer (Talk) 11:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Takabeg (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, DerHexer. Could you please delete first picture. The uploader of this file want to delete this file but ı gave the photo because he want it.The user takabeg said I must send this messageBetelgeuSeginus (talk) 19:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I confirm it. Berkecelik (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with this text? I cannot understand it. If necessary, please provide a translation per wikimail. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. —DerHexer (Talk) 11:52, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Berkecelik (talk) 18:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Bitte um Hilfe

Hallo Hexer, darf ich dich auf Folgendes aufmerksam machen, und könntest du helfen? Danke.

[3]

[4]

Michael Kühntopf

Das habe ich erledigt. —DerHexer (Talk) 00:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Question

Greetings Steward.

User:Snowolf said that you're the one to see with regards to questions about restrictions for voting in Steward Elections. [5] Long story short I wanted to find out the reasons for the rule that there must have been 600 edits before November 2012. Can you shed any light on my question please? Thank you. MIVP - (Can I Help?) - (HeadQuarters) 14:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't know when and why this number was implemented. But as far as I remember, Pathoschild can elaborate on this. Sorry for sending you round. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:15, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Adminship on Commons

Hi DerHexer, could you please remove my adminship on the Commons (only there). This site has become the realm of a very active bunch of vandalizing idiots in the last couple of months, leaving a track of destruction in my and other uploads, and I don't want to be identified with most of them anymore. Thanks in advance. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 08:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your work on Commons! :-) —DerHexer (Talk) 23:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

SUL-Vervollständigung

Hallo, Hexer, als Frage: Kannst Du vermitteln, veranlassen oder durchführen, das mein SUL-Konto, das in der finnischen und der slowakischen WP durch, soweit ich das sehe, bisher ungenutzte Accounts blockiert ist, vervollständigt werden kann. Eventuell soll dies durch Umbenennung der bisherigen Accounts, per Steward oder Bürokrat, möglich sein. Obwohl sich meine finnischen als auch die slowakischen Sprechkenntnisse ungefähr im Hauptsiedlungsgebiet der Zwerge von Überwald herumtreiben, ist vielleicht der eine oder andere sinnvolle Edit möglich, aber eine Umbenennungsanfrage aus diesen Gründen wenig sinnvoll. Beste Grüße -- Sozi (talk) 20:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Die Bürokraten verstehen üblicherweise auch Englisch. Ein Bestätigungsedit auf dewiki oder metawiki, dass du die dortigen Konten übernehmen willst, sollte als Beleg genügen. Dann einfach per IP oder Alternativkonto auf dieser und dieser Benutzerdiskussionsseite den Bürokraten um Usurpation bitten. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:16, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Importrechte

Warum? --32X (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Weil de:Wikipedia:Importwünsche/Importupload besagt: „Importeure können nach Anfrage auf der hiesigen Diskussionsseite nur Administratoren werden und verlieren auch diese Rechte, wenn sie ihre Adminrechte abgeben.“ Sorry. —DerHexer (Talk) 23:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

#wikimedia-privacy / #wikimedia-checkuser access request

Hi. I've been appointed to the enwiki Audit Subcommittee. I understand I'm supposed to request access to the #wikimedia-privacy and #wikimedia-checkuser IRC channels, and that you're one of the people who can help me with this. Could you, please? Thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Both done. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 09:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Mark for translation?

Hello DerHexer, I posted new question answers. Thank you for your support for this process. –SJ talk  14:36, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment

Hi DerHexer, please could you comment at Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013#Translating Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/2013/Questions and its subpages? I know translation as much as possible is beneficial, but I'd rather not overwhelm translators so would appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Thehelpfulone 22:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

WMDE currently translates all Q&As into German and asked me to add the templates which I did. But I asked them to elaborate on this. As far as I know, this is supported by the ElectCom who denied a translation on dewiki. But I can understand your reasoning there. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I have added a comment here. (And: It is not about the EC "denying" the translation on dewiki. They just really encouraged us to post it on Meta, which I also find is the better place – especially since with only posting it on dewp, we would not really be able to reach out the the other DE wikimedia projects.) --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 16:45, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Geblockte IPs 109.163.229.0/24

Hallo Hexer, die komplette IP-Range 109.163.229.0/24 ist wegen Spam gesperrt. Diese Range hat verschiedene Besitzer, siehe RIPE. Ich möchte dich bitten die IPs 109.163.229.240-255 von der Sperre auszunehmen. Sie gehören zu Freifunk-Franken.de, d.h. wenn man sich über einen Freifunk-Knoten einloggt, erhält man nach außen eine dieser IPs (bis jetzt nur .254 aber das kann sich noch ändern). Auch läuft darüber kein offener Proxy. de:user:Alex42 Alex42 (talk) 11:34, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Habe das nun geändert. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:54, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Dankeschön. Alex42 (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

What do you think?

About this? - 2001:558:1400:10:71F1:7547:9E08:43B5 17:44, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Afaics, this has been done. Unfortunately, I haven't had nor have time to look closer into that. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Manuelle Bestätigung

Lieber Martin! Kannst du mich bitte gemäß dieser Angaben manuell bestätigen? Ich würde gerne an den persönlichen Bekanntschaften teilnehmen und muss dazu mindestens automatisch bestätigter Benutzer sein. Vielen Dank. --Balderych (talk) 08:42, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Die drei, vier Tage möchtest du nicht warten? Dann kann das mit den persönlichen Bekanntschaften gleich losgehen. :-) Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Nein, solange wollte ich eigentlich nicht warten. Jetzt ist die Hälfte aber auch schon fast vorüber, insofern hat sich die Anfrage wohl erledigt. Trotzdem danke, dass du es dir angesehen hast. --Balderych (talk) 12:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Müssten andere Benutzer ja auch warten. ;-) Das Recht ist auch eigentlich dafür da, das irrtümliche Entfernen des Status bspw. aufgrund von Missbrauchsfiltern zu revidieren. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Abusive reasons for block on Romanian Wikipedia by administrators

If you translate the Village pump of the Romanian Wikipedia you realize that the language used is abusive therefore there are making fun in a rude way about the fact that I graduated the school of engineers, they pretend that I have different gender identities, the use two double sens arguments either "I am a child" or "I am too smart to be a child". There is only one fair comment about me that I have done a lot of good work on reverting vandalism.And maybe this is the reason why some people are so upset with me that not only that they dedicated to have a rude attitude about with an abusive vocabulary but also to block me.I think that you have to check through the proper translation of the discussions that are going on the Reclamation page and also the Village Pump.Receptie123 (talk) 14:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Global AbuseFilter with no discussion

Hi. Please, have a discussion before letting all steward have access to this powerful tool. Has the issue with filtering by wiki been resolved? (See GAF) PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Its developer, Hoo man, asked us to test his tool. We found some bugs which he fixes now. At the beginning and during these tests, we will only log data. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Editor @ ar.wiki

Hello. I would like to inform you that I have granted you editor flag at the Arabic Wikipedia, all your edits there will be automatically marked as patrolled. Best regards.--Avocato (talk) 05:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! —DerHexer (Talk) 22:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Benutzerkonten zusammenfügen/ Benutzernamen ändern

Hallo,

ich bin seit einigen Jahren als Huhu auf 341 verschiedenen Projekten, jedoch auf Commons als Huhu Uet aktiv. Bis vor einiger Zeit konnte ich als Huhu auf der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia unter diesen Namen arbeiten und zeitgleich als Huhu Uet auf Commoms. Nun ist es aber so, das wenn ich mich als Huhu anmelde werde ich als Huhu Uet auf Commons abgemeldet und andersrum ist es auch so, was ich sehr nervig finde. Ist es möglich meinen Namen zu ändern und alle Benutzerbeiträge (Artikel) und die Zahl der Bearbeitungen als Huhu (in allen Wikis: 10.808) und als Huhu Uet (in allen Wikis: 16.704) zusammenlegen? Meines wissens können das nur Stawards. Als neuer Benutzername der auch aussagekräfiger ist als Huhu oder Huhu Uet könnte ich mir gut Lucas Uetersen oder Frank Heinzson vorstellen.

Gruß—Huhu 14:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

PS:Eine Nachrich kannst du mit bitte auf Commons hinterlassen.

72.14.176.0/20

Your block of 72.14.176.0/20 is due to expire soon. I just checked it, and it's still an open proxy, which is accessed through www.guardster.com/free/.

Please extend the block. I'd do it on en-Wiki but I don't have admin rights on Meta. Amatulic (talk) 13:59, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

My block

You have blocked me for a relatively short time. But still, I don´t agree that I would have committed any abuse or even long-term abuse. You have not given any reason in detail. So I have requested to be unblocked as soon as possible. I am a long-term contributing registered user, but maybe I have once forgotten to log in while editing. --91.34.28.9 10:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Paulis

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions#Bureaucrat_access --FrobenChristoph (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Global message delivery/Access list

Hi. Da Fussi hier. Langsam habe ich mich durchgewurschtelt. Bin dabei eine Möglichkeit zu suchen, auf allen Lounges der Wikivoyage-Sprachversionen eine Nachricht zu hinterlassen. Die Artikelliste habe ich angelegt. Wie komme ich nun aber auf die Access list? Habe hier keine Seite gefunden, auf der ich mich bewerben kann. Weist du da Rat? Grüße vom Fussi. -- DerFussi 19:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Participation Support Program survey

Hello, the Wikimedia Foundation would like your feedback on the Participation Support Program! We have created a brief survey to help us better understand your experience participating in the program and how we can improve for the future. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you submitted or commented on Participation Support requests in the past.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback! And we hope to see you in the Participation Support Program again soon.

Happy editing,

Siko and Haitham, Grantmaking, Wikimedia Foundation.

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 21:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Esino Lario/Scholarships

;) --Nemo 14:18, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Votes

Hi. Please note that voting has not yet begun, and will not until 8 February 2014, 18:00 (UTC). You are Member Election Committee :) Sincerely, --►Cekli829 15:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

As you've seen, I stroke my statement. And as you continue wasting voters' time each and every year, I'll propose a change for the next year's steward election prerequisites that users cannot apply more than three times at all and each year consecutively. Stop kidding us or trolling steward elections, thank you. And please add to your statement that it's the fifth time that you're applying for stewardship, otherwise I'll add a link to User:Cekli829/Stewards/Elections 201X/Statements/Cekli829. —DerHexer (Talk) 16:00, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

This is already the fourth time of my candidacy. Actually to be a candidatefor the previous 4 elections was a great experience for me. More: [6]. This is not a joke, in fact. Doubtless if wikisociety will support me, I am ready to assume the responsibility. --►Cekli829 16:13, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

This is actually the fifth, FYI. 1: 2011, 2: 2011-2, 3: 2012, 4: 2013, 5: 2014. I'm more interested to know how you have addressed concerns from your past candidacies, so I would appreciate an answer to that question (don't need to answer here). Or by "already the fourth time of my[...]" do you mean you already have four times? "previous 4 elections" That is correct. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

OK ;) All right! Thanks! --►Cekli829 23:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Mein deutsches Benutzerkonto

Hallo Der Hexer, kannst du mich bitte auf der deutschen Wikipedia freigeben. Grund ist folgender: Ich mochte eine Anfrage beim Schiedsgericht stellen. Kannst du bitte zusätzlich die globale Benutzersperre aufheben. Danke und Grüße --Holzliebhaber meta (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

quetsch dazwischen sicherheitshalber: grüner Kasten. Sorry fürs Einmischen. -jkb- 00:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Da die Wartezeit bereits mehr als zwei Wochen andauernd, weiter zu Steward requests/Global und werde dort eine Diskussion aufschlagen. Grüße --Holzliebhaber meta (talk) 18:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, da war ich eine Woche in Straßburg und bin seit der Wiederkehr krank. Aber SRG ist wohl eh der bessere Ort. —DerHexer (Talk) 18:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

DHr, it is at SRG though it is not anything that I wish to overrule, having no idea whether it is xwiki issue or not, or even if there are local blocks in place. I have suggested to the user that they can email deWP AC.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:53, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics

Idea Lab

Idea Lab

Hello, DerHexer! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

Upcoming events focus on turning ideas into Individual Engagement Grant proposals before the March 31 deadline. Need help or have questions about IEG? Join us at a Hangout:

• Thursday, 13 March 2014, 1600 UTC
• Wednesday, 19 March 2014, 1700 UTC
• Saturday, 29 March 2014, 1700 UTC

Hope to see you there!

This message was delivered automatically to IEG and IdeaLab participants. To unsubscribe from any future IEG reminders, remove your name from this list

Request for feedback on my GSoC'14 proposal

Hi DerHexer,

I am planning to work on the project titled "Tools for mass migration of legacy translated wiki content" this summer under Google Summer of Code. I have drafted a proposal for the same over the past few weeks. This project is going to help the translation adminstrators like you in a great way, as it would completely automate the tedious manual task of preparing a page for translation and then importing the translations into the Translate extension. You can check the proposal page for detailed information on how I plan to accomplish this.

As you would be an end user of this tool, it would be great if you could go through the proposal and provide feedback/suggestions. Your feedback would definitely help me improve the proposal as well help in creating an even better tool. You can do the same on the discussion page of the proposal or reply here, whichever is convenient for you. I look forward to hearing from you! Thank you!

P.S: I need to submit the proposal to Google by March 19, 2014.

BPositive (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Grants:IdeaLab/A place to work together

My dear ex WMDE board member, did you file in bugzilla all possible improvements to Lockdown? --Nemo 09:08, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

? Ping me on IRC. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 16:27, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Avoided

Die globale Sperrung hast du schon vorgenommen, kannst du die Accounts auch noch verstecken. Wir haben es nicht nötig, diesen User noch länger zu sehen. Und übrigens noch eine Frage: Ist eine Anzeige in diesem Fall Sinn? Wegen Projektstörung und Beleidigungen anderer Personen. Sowas gehört gelöscht.

Hier noch einmal der Link:

de:Wikipedia:Checkuser/Anfragen/Avoided

--Olmoj (talk) 16:55, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Die rechtliche Frage wurde hier schon diskutiert. Ein Verstecken sehe ich eher nicht durch die Oversight-Policy gedeckt, da keine realen Personen betroffen sind. Einzelfälle habe ich in der Vergangenheit versteckt. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:09, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, zuspät gesehen. Warum sperrt du nicht die IPs global? Habe bereits auf Steward requests/Global gemeldet und dann das erst gelesen. Kannst du bitte seine IPs und sein Hauptaccount längerfristig sperren? Grüße --Olmoj (talk) 19:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Ich kann nicht ganze Ranges, schon gar nicht die mobilen, sperren, da sie von dutzenden bis hunderten Unbeteiligten Wikipedianern genutzt werden. Über eine globale Sperre könnte man reden, wenn er sich in den anderen Projekte zurückhält, sollte das aber nicht notwendig sein. Enwiki ist schon lange der Fall bekannt, die dortigen CUler haben es nicht als notwendig erachtet, größere Maßnahmen einzuleiten. Da werd ich ihnen nicht dazwischenfunken. ;-) Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 21:34, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Unintended transclusion?

Hi, you might want to fix this comment. I guess you unintentionally transcluded a page. whym (talk) 13:59, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! Whyever it's not the same system as with files. ;-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Import Script

Servus, kennst du ein Script mit dem man mehrere Artikel gleichzeitig aus einer anderen Wikipedia importieren kann? Beispielsweise aus einer Kategorie. Gruß --Joe Watzmo (talk) 07:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Ja, Joe, das geht sehr einfach mit XML-Export und -Import. Nenn mir einfach eine Kategorie im Ausgangswiki und das Zielwiki und ob ich ggf. noch „User:Joe Watzmo/“ vor alle Seiten schreiben soll, damit das nicht gleich in den Namensraum 0 (Artikel, Einträge usw.), sondern in den Benutzernamensraum kommt. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 08:27, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Prima, dann bitte den Inhalt der de:Kategorie:County in Texas aus de.wp nach bar:user:Joe Watzmo/.

Könnte ich so einen XML-Export und -Import in Zukunft auch über meinen Bot (Joebotnik) machen?

--Joe Watzmo (talk) 06:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Das sind 255 Artikel. Die werden alle auf einmal übersetzt? Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:07, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ja, so stelle ich mir das vor. Ich habe mir bewusst eine größere Kategorie rausgesucht, mit vielen gleichförmigen Artikeln (weil du angedeutet hast, dass das einfach geht). Natürlich würde ich das mit Hilfe von Joebotnik machen und dann manuell nachbearbeiten (und nur in abgespeckter Version; nicht in der Artikelänge, in der sie auf de.wp vertreten sind). Wenn du das machst, hätten wir zumindest die Versionsgeschichte von de.wp erthalten und würden sehr viel Zeit sparen). Außerdem gibts für rein botgenerierte Artikel auf bar.wp zur Zeit keinen Konsens (es gibt da, im Unterschied zu vielen anderen Wikipedien, keinen einzigen davon). Ich wäre dir dankbar, wenn du mir das ermöglichst. Ich rechne damit, dass ich mir auf diese Weise mindestens 90% der Arbeitszeit ersparen würde (um die Kategorie rein manuell zu übersetzen, brauche ich dazu, bei meinem aktuellen Zeitbudget mindestens ein halbes Jahr! mit Bothilfe vielleicht 14 Tage). PS: auf bar.wp ist noch nicht einmal die Einzelimport-Funktion aktiviert. (Das werden wir natürlich auf bugzilla beantragen.) Gruß --Joe Watzmo (talk) 06:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Bin am Importieren, gibt nur gerade einen merkwürdigen Importfehler, den ich erst klären lassen muss. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Jedenfalls schon mal herzlichen Dank, dass du das in Angriff genommen hast. Ich hoffe, dass sich der Fehler klären lässt. Gruß --Joe Watzmo (talk) 17:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@Joe Watzmo:, endlich fertig. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Servus! Ja, klasse, ich danke dir. Ich werde jetzt nachträglich noch rot, weil ich gleich so eine große Kategorie importiert haben wollte.

Nur zu meinem besseren Verständnis: Ist das immer so aufwändig oder hat irgendetwas nicht funktioniert?

Gibts eine Möglichkeit mit einem Bot einzeln zu importieren oder geht das nur über die MediaWiki-Funktion?

Gruß, --Joe Watzmo (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Naja, war ja die letzte Woche auch nicht da und mache so etwas eh nebenbei. War ein wenig überraschend, dass er nicht so viele Neuimporte auf einmal verarbeiten wollte. Weiß nicht, ob das andernorts einfacher funktioniert. Per API müsste man da einiges machen können, frag mal am besten de:User:Doc Taxon dazu, der sich da schon mal eingearbeitet hat. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Vandalen/PA-Konten

Hallo DerHexer, wäre es möglich die beiden neuen Konten c:User:Neoňazi Dosken und c:User:Sȇȇwolf ist ARṦCH! global zu sperren und/oder die Kontonamen sogar völlig verschwinden zu lassen? Auf Commons habe ich beide indef'd. --Túrelio (talk) 13:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Durch die Oversightpolicy ist das nicht wirklich gedeckt. Gesperrt habe ich sie aber global. Ansonsten bitte missbräuchliche Benutzer bitte lieber per E-Mail an mich schicken, sonst müssten ja auch noch die Versionen hier versteckt werden. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 07:24, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

O.k. Danke. --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Sperrprüfung

Hallo,

ich bin auch bei meinem neuen Benutzeraccount FOkt bei der deutschen Wikipedia gesperrt worden, obwohl ich ihn nur verwendete, um bei meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Miscellaneous eine Sperrprüfung anzustoßen und bei der dt. Wikipedia eine "Hallo-Begrüßung" auf der Benutzerseite anzulegen. Die Sperrung erfolgt ohne nachvollziehbaren Grund, ich habe unter FMrz, FSept weder Vandalismus noch sonst irgendetwas unseriöses getan. Im Gegenteil, anders herum wird ein Schuh daraus (Verstoß der "anderen" Seite gegen elementare Diskussionsregeln). Auch den Vorwurf der Sockenpuppe weise ich zurück. Es ist erlaubt, mehrere Accounts zu haben, was nicht geht, ist damit Unterstützung zu suggerieren. Ich hatte den Account FMrz bereits im März 2014 angelegt und so viele Edits, dass der Account den Status eines passiven Sichers bekam. Das ist einerseits schön, aber bei bestimmten Themen wäre es doch günstig, wenn noch von jemandem nachgesichtet werden würde. Offiziell muss bei der Sichtung zwar nur auf offensichtlichen Vandalismus geachtet werden, aber es ist oft auch eine gewisse inhaltliche Kontrolle dabei und das finde ich bei wichtigen Änderungen angebracht. Der Leser von Wikipedia weiß, dass ungesichtete Änderungen nur "halbgar" sind und bekommt diese auch zunächst nicht angezeigt. Deshalb legte ich im September den Account FSept an. Und bei einer von mir als evtl. kritisch eingestuften Änderung eines Artikels habe ich dann vor einer Woche statt FMrz mit automatischer Sichtung eben FSept verwendet. Daraufhin gab es einiges Hin-und Her und eine nicht hinnehmbare Diskussionsweise auf der "anderen" Seite. Jedoch von meiner Seite keinen Edit-War. Aber es war dann mein Account (FSept) der geblockt wurde. Der betreffende Admin muss sich da sehr wenig Zeit genommen haben.
Das bekam ich aber gar nicht mit, unter anderem deswegen, weil ich davon selbst genervt war und keine Zeit mehr damit verplempern wollte und den Account FSept daher für mich unbenutzbar machte (langes zufälliges Passwort gegeben und Wegwerfen desselben). Ein kleines bisschen rechthaberisch bin ich schon, und habe deshalb gestern eine kleine Veränderung an dem bewussten Artikel gemacht (dann mit dem FMrz-Account, FSept ging ja wegen des fehlenden Passworts nicht mehr), die in gewissen Zusammenhang zum vorherigen steht, aber logisch unangreifbar ist (d.h. eine Überschrift, die eine Vermutung im Text als Fakt widergibt, korrigiert) und bis jetzt - einen Tag danach - auch nicht geändert worden ist und die aktuelle Version des Artikels darstellt. Soviel auch zum Thema "enzyklopädische Mitarbeit" auf der Sperrerseite.
Ich möchte also eine Sperrprüfung beantragen für FMrz, FSept (obwohl der Account ja de facto stillgelegt ist) und FOkt. --FOkt (talk) 10:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hab's an den sperrenden Admin weitergegeben. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Botschaft

Es schien ein ganz normaler Tag für die Admins und auch Benutzer, doch die Umstände in der Wikipedia formten mich zum Zerstörer. Eine Explosionen von lange aufgestauten Gefühlen und seelischen Belastungen führten dazu, dass ich wahllos vandaliere. Ich betrete die Wikipedia. Bin ausgerüstet mit Maus und Tastatur und schlage zu. Der Teufel auf meinen Schultern gibt applaus. Ihr könnt machen was ihr wollt, aber ich bin lange noch nicht raus! Ich bin wie die Mäuse und Kakerlaken und nutze jedes Loch. gruß,--621schicksal621 (talk) 16:22, 27 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

OTRS-Ticket

Hallo Martin. Besteht die Möglichkeit, dass ich das OTRS-Ticket zu diesem Bild einsehe? Da ich das angeleiert hatte, bin ich für zukünftige Fälle einfach interessiert, zu sehen, wie der Urheber die Vorgaben umgesetzt hat. Danke und Gruß --Lienhard Schulz (talk) 15:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Erledigt. —DerHexer (Talk) 17:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

URL löschen?

Hallo DerHexer,

Du hast mir hier auf meinen Request geantwortet. Danke fürs Ändern der Usernames. Was aber eigentlich mein Problem ist: Auf der alemannischen Wiki gibt es die URL .../Benutzer:Magnus_Gienal noch, d.h. sie wird auf Google gefunden und dann auf die neue Benuzerseite .../Benutzer:Huhn32 weitergeleitet. Bei der deutschen Wiki wurde die Umbennung auch schon vorgenommen, dort ist aber die URL zur alten Benutzerseite verschwunden. Dies sollte doch auch für die alemannische Wiki möglich sein, oder? Danke. Gruss, --Huhn32 (talk) 22:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Huch, hab das vor ein paar Tagen schon korrigiert, aber hier gar nicht geantwortet. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Danke vielmals! Eine Unterseite ging noch vergessen: http://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Magnus_Gienal/FCVaduz Die wird noch gefunden, wenn man bei Google meinen vorhergehenden Benutzernamen eingibt. Kannst du das auch noch löschen? Dann wäre es perfekt! Danke und Gruss, --Huhn32 (talk) 20:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Das sollte sich aber bald ändern, da sie gelöscht ist. Bei der nächsten Durchsuchung von Google wird sie dann verschwinden. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 21:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

You got new messages at SRUC.

Not too sure what's going on at the moment. I have agreed to the Username change though. Lor^Chat 07:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Find my response over there. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Global sysop rights

Hello DerHexer! Could you answer an question? Well, I went GS between December 2012 to December 2013 and resigned because I do not had more time. If I want to have the rights back, I must open a new request at SRGP? I searched discussion about this question, but I not found. Thanks in advance. Érico Wouters ^msg 13:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

After a short discussion between stewards, we would recommend a new request. But I'm confident that you'll succeed. :) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 16:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks DerHexer! :) Érico Wouters ^msg 18:06, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Konto-Löschung

Hallo DerHexer, könntest du bitte die WMF-weite Sperre bzw. besser komplette Löschung des Kontos c:User:Mark D, der Nażi veranlassen. Das ist ein vandalism-only account mit 1 Edit, der offenkundig einzig angelegt wurde, um Seewolf anzugreifen[7]. Das Argument für die Löschung wäre, dass die Existenz eines Kontos mit einem solchen Namen dem Image der WMF (-Projekte) kaum zuträglich sein dürfte. --Túrelio (talk) 07:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Ist Mark D ein bekannter Benutzer? Ansonsten dürfte es recht schwierig sein, eine Kontenversteckung mit der Oversightpolicy zu begründen. Ansonsten hab ich die beiden Konten global gesperrt. Das ist übrigens Avoided mit der Range 84.151.128.0/18. Die kann man sicherlich auch auf commonswiki sperren. Global gibt es seit Oktober eh nur Anmeldungen von Avoided selbst, da wäre sogar eine globale Sperre begründbar. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Danke. Nein, er hatte nur 1 Edit gemacht (Wegwerf-Konto). Ich hatte ihn auf Commons sofort gesperrt als ich den Edit entdeckt habe. Ich verstecke den Namen einfach lokal in der History von Sewwolfs Disku. --Túrelio (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Äh, ich hatte dich wohl falsch verstanden. Ein Konto c:User:Mark_D gibt es nicht. Warum der den obigen Namen gewählt hat, weiß ich nicht. Aber Seewolf wird bekanntlich schon seit langem immer wieder angegriffen. --Túrelio (talk) 14:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Ok, dann seh ich aber nicht wirklich die Persönlichkeitsrechte von jemandem verletzt, was eine Oversightaktion gemäß der genannten Policy rechtfertigen könnte. Sonst wird ja keine Person direkt genannt. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC) P.S.: Lokales Verstecken durch Admins ist okay.

help pls

Hi; I am a student in Başkent University. ip 212.156.67.30 is used by Başkent Üniversitesi in Turkey. But it was blocked in Turkish wikipedia for unlimited time. block begins: 23:15, 6 Feb. 2011. Since that time whole university can not make any edits in Turkish wikipedia. We university students want to edit turkish wikipedia. Local adminstrators say they are very angry with an old time user and they dont unblock th i.p. and they punish a whole university. It has been a long time and probably the person that makes them angry is graduate by now. Thank you for help.

I left the blocking administrator a message on his talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Danke. I will let you know if it is done or not.

Hello, the blocking admistrator is not active. Can u contact an active one please. Thank you.

tr:Vikipedi:Hizmetliler

Khutuck has solved the problem. Thanks to him or her.

Usurped

I noticed that you have changed some user names to (usurped), which I belive is to make it clear for everyone that the account was usurped.

During 2006, someone usurped my user name, using a capitol I in the end, and managing that the name Dan KoehI (please see centralAuth) which visually looks exactly like my username. Obvioulsy created to give me bad credit, it was used on the Swedish Wiki, and Wikispecies, where i was active in 2006. The user name was blocked july 2006 on on Wikispecies, and blocked on the Swedish Wiki in August same year, due to vandalism. I blocked the account for ever som days ago, but still feels uncomfortable, that someone may acually believe that I was blocked, since its so difficault to see the difference of l and captil I on a user name. My question is if you could change this to something similair, like Dan KoehI (usurped) so it gets more visaully clear that it was a vandal who tried to make people belive it was me that vanadlized? Btw would it be possible to get info on the IP for that account? I believe it must have been someone from the Swedish wikipedia community. Regards, Dan Koehl (talk) 12:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if I addressed the wrong person with this issue. A small comment as answer would be nice. Dan Koehl (talk) 00:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies for the missing answer. It's on my to-do list but I don't wanna bother my steward fellow who's more into technical stuff too much at once. ;-) Your question is not forgotten, I will notify you once this is done. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:42, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I hoped so, thanks a lot, really appreciated! Dan Koehl (talk) 00:46, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dan Koehl: I've renamed both accounts to ImpersonatorABC123. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:37, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Dan Koehl (talk) 00:45, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy new years 2015

Happy new year to you dear "DerHexer"--Grind24 (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! :-) A happy new year for you too. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

For reading my mind. I'd been meaning to ask for someone to fix this for a long time, here and on about five other projects, and -- lo -- it's done! Really appreciate it. Happy new year, and I'm glad to see you are still around. All the best - Antandrus (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Antandrus! :-) As you have might seen, I check the SUL status of all enwiki users with more than 20'000 edits (as I did before with all dewiki accounts with more than 5'000 edits, almost the same amount of accounts: about 3'500), usurp usurpable local accounts, and notify users without global accounts or SUL conflicts. I think that will decrease the workload when SUL finalization is proceeding. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:21, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

SUL finalisation problem with my account

Hi DerHexer,

I have noticed that you have made a renaming of an account in Dutch Wikipedia for my account NickK. There is, however, a problem: I was not aware this and I noticed this only by opening a link to some random page in Dutch Wikipedia, effectively creating a second account there. This means you made a complicated situation with my accounts even more complicated :)

The situation is approximately as follows

• I am an owner of a global account sulutil:NickK
• In wikis were I have no global account I use a username Nick UA (sulutil:Nick UA). It has no global account and I do not want to have one on this name
• As I did not create a global account Nick UA, in several wikis (afwiki, slwiki and vowiki) this name was used by a vandal (I use name NickK in all these wikis)
• In several wikis (dewiki, enwiki, frwiki, rowiki) the username NickK belongs to a German user de:Benutzer:NickK who unfortunately does not want to change his name voluntarily (and does not find SUL finalisation process clear enough)
• In nlwiki, dewikibooks and enwikibooks this username is most likely used by the same user (could not confirm but it is very likely)
• In frwiki his account fr:Utilisateur:NickK was usurped to fr:Utilisateur:NickK-de, and my account fr:Utilisateur:Nick UA was renamed to fr:Utilisateur:NickK per local policy
• Now you usurped the account NickK in nlwiki, which means that now I have two accounts there: nl:User:NickK (empty but connected with my SUL) and nl:User:Nick UA (with contributions and my personal preferences but unattached).

Thus I would like you to do the following:

• Please swap nl:User:NickK and nl:User:Nick UA, so that current nl:User:NickK (empty but unified with SUL) becomes nl:User:Nick UA (empty and unattached) and current nl:User:Nick UA (with contributions but unattached) becomes nl:User:NickK (with contributions and unified with SUL). Please do not create a global account sulutil:Nick UA to avoid further mess
• Please try to contact de:Benutzer:NickK and explain him the situation. At the moment looks like he already has three different usernames: fr:Utilisateur:NickK-de in frwiki and some random username in nlwiki, and in addition he will have all his accounts renamed during SUL finalisation.
• If this is done, please rename all my accounts in dewiki, enwiki, rowiki, dewikibooks and enwikibooks from sulutil:Nick UA to sulutil:NickK

Hope this is clear enough, if not, I will be happy to provide further details and/or confirmations. Thanks — NickK (talk) 00:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nick! I'm aware of your problems with the dewiki account. I hope to mediate there soon. In approx. late January 2015, stewards will get access to an account merge tool which will allow us to merge two or more global accounts. I think that this is the best solution for both your accounts. In order to merge two global accounts, both have to be completed global accounts. But for now, afaics, you can use both accounts in any way you want. Any further ideas? Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I would split the problem into two:

• There was an old problem that I had a username sulutil:NickK in most projects, but had to use sulutil:Nick UA in some other. I was quite comfortable with this, and I got used to getting no response from a German user for some two years :) However, I used only one account per wiki, either NickK, or, if not available, Nick UA, and I never used two accounts per wiki.
• Now you renamed an account NickK in nlwiki, and I accidently created a second account there (in addition to nl:User:Nick UA I used for some 5 years). I am not comfortable with having two accounts in nlwiki, as in order to edit anything there now I have to log out of my global account NickK, log in to my local Nick UA account there and log in again to my global account to edit elsewhere, which is something I always wanted to avoid. Are you able to swap locally nl:User:NickK and nl:User:Nick UA (for example, by renaming nl:User:NickK to some temporary username, nl:User:Nick UA to nl:User:NickK and that temporary username to nl:User:Nick UA)? If this is not possible, can you just locally rename nl:User:NickK to something random and rename nl:User:Nick UA to nl:User:NickK?

Please also tell me if you have made any usurpations of NickK in other wikis (I do not see logs on Meta and obviously I do not want to check local logs, as it will automatically create a new NickK account in these wikis for me). Thanks! — NickK (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@NickK: I flipped both accounts. Afaics, I've just usurped rowiki too. Shall I change accounts there as well? … Anyway, please get your global accounts merged when it's possible and doable. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I have not created a second account on rowiki yet, so please rename Nick_UA to NickK in rowiki as well — NickK (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@NickK: Done, please don't forget to merge your two new local accounts with your global account on Special:MergeAccount. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:24, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for renaming, I have already merged them. I also recall having a conflict on enwikibooks that is not there anymore. If you have made an usurpation there as well, could you please rename Nick_UA to NickK there either? This will leave me with just three problematic wikis (dewiki and enwiki where I have accounts as Nick UA and NickK is in use, and dewikibooks where NickK is in use and I have no account at all) — NickK (talk) 01:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@NickK: You were right, I've usurped that account too. I flipped them now, please merge again. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Done, thanks. (Was flipping really necessary in this case provided I had no local account NickK? This just created me a new account Nick_UA, which is not a problem but I just wonder whether this was really needed) — NickK (talk) 01:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Better there and you merge it than creating a new global account NickK (temporary) once all accounts become global ones. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I see (probably you meant that I would have to create a global account Nick_UA and not NickK_(temporary), as there are hopefully no local accounts NickK_(temporary) ). By the way, it does not look like you could randomly pick my account in enwikibooks, so are you following some list for resolving SUL conflicts? If yes, is there any way to access this list? I might be interested in getting in touch with active Ukrainian Wikipedians (say, 100+ edits) having SUL conflicts — NickK (talk) 02:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

There are no NickK_(temporary) accounts anymore. As all (local) accounts will become global accounts, it would have become a global account somehow. The same applies to Nick UA. But we currently don't know how local accounts will be automatically merged, probably just when they have the same email address set and confirmed. … I first checked all accounts on dewiki with more than 10'000 edits, then 5'000 edits (thinking about 2'000), afterwards I went to enwiki and checked all accounts with more than 50'000, then 30'000, and finally 20'000 edits (thinking about going down to 15'000 or even 10'000). Currently, I'm checking all global accounts besides these two wikis, at first with more than 100'000 and then 80'000, now I'm doing the ones with more than 60'000 (thinking about going down to at least 50'000). Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 09:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Is it possible to get such list for ukwiki (at least 1000+ edits)? I have already contacted some users back in 2013 (although I had no list), so I might be interested in getting such list now for letting them know about this change — NickK (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@NickK: You mean an updated list of uk:Вікіпедія:Найактивніші? How outdated is this? I've used similar lists on dewiki and enwiki (check the interwiki links), for the global list I asked Hoo man for help to make a database query. I converted them with regexp so that each account was linked to m:Special:CentralAuth (if you want me to do that for the ukwiki list, I can easily do that for you, but I won't have enough time to check all of them). And then I've checked all of them manually … cleaning up usurpable accounts, dropping some standard note I created for notifying users with non-global accounts. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I meant more like an explicit list of users without SUL accounts — is it possible to get anything like this? I have contacted most of users from uk:Вікіпедія:Найактивніші back in 2013, but it took a lot of time to check whether a given user has a SUL conflict, so I wonder if there is anything more efficient. If you just check lists of most active users one by one manually whether they have a SUL or not, I can just say that this is a really good work — NickK (talk) 22:25, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

(Just in case, uk:Користувач:RLutsBot/Редагування is the most up-to-date version for ukwiki, but checking some 2800+ users is really a hard work, so thanks again for your efforts) — NickK (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage

Hi, to create a page (wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage) for local wikipedia, what to do? (probably need to write a letter into Bugzilla?)--6AND5 (talk) 15:06, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, no idea. But you may raise your question on en:Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:09, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

@6AND5: create the page and protect it. Create user instruction on the page itself, if people land there and the talk page, where people would apply for rights. Put the page on your watch list. The app will do the rest of checcking that 1) the page exists, 2) that the user is on the list, so approved to use the app. Obviously for a protected page the admins will need to write to the page (if you want lower approval rights, don't protect). My question would be "do you really need it?" You should always justify that from an evidence base, rather than playing with a configuration option.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:45, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@Billinghurst:, thank you. We already have this page, and everything is OK.--6AND5 (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Requesting usurps

Hello, how are you? I need your help. I request usurps here, what should I do? Thank you for your attention. Anbu (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can see, your request was fulfilled successfully. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:52, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't think posting English messages on Jawiki helps

If they haven't unified it by now then they probably never make edits outside the Japanese WP, and chances are, an English message will not make any sense to many of those users. If you had let us translators know (or maybe I had missed it) that you were going to mass-post messages, you wouldn't have bewildered many users. I've translated the message below so use this instead.

== グローバル・アカウントに関するお知らせ ==

{{subst:PAGENAME}}さん、こんにちは。ウィキメディア財団のアカウントの統一ログインに関する作業を担当しているスチュワードです。（統一ログインへの完全移行のお知らせをお読みください。）[[Special:CentralAuth/{{subst:PAGENAME}}|あなたのアカウントを拝見]]した結果、グローバルアカウントをお持ちでないことに気づきました。利用者名が衝突した場合あなたの利用者名は改名されます。利用者名を確保するために、特別:アカウント統合にアクセスし、パスワードを入力してアカウントの統一を実行されることをおすすめします。ご質問がある場合は、お気軽に会話ページまでお越しください。ご対応よろしくお願いします。~~~~

Cheers. 朝彦 (Asahiko) (talk) 01:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi 朝彦 (Asahiko)! I was doing these notifications on my very own regard knowing that a couple of users across wiki will not understand me. Therefore, I appreciate translation support but expect that from the Wikimedia Foundation too when they notify users on their own. I will consider to add your translation as soon as possible. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 02:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I see. Good to know that that's not the only message they'll get, because I was thinking that's kinda harsh if they weren't notified in their own language. I would be keeping an eye out for translations on this matter. Thanks for your effort on this! 朝彦 (Asahiko) (talk) 02:14, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

A little additional remark. User:Penn Station has kindly been taking up the job of explaining the confused users on what the message is all about, and notifying the community at our ja:WP:NEWS and ja:WP:VP. So we'll probably have more people signing up so that's good; but again, I see that you are a polyglot, but on the other hand many of our good trusted contributors have said that they are not comfortable outside their mother tongue or that they prefer to remain in a monolingual environment. That does not make them any less of a contributor, and I would expect a steward to have this sense that language barriers can be felt by some as more than just an impedance in communication, but may even evoke xenoglossophobia. Again, I really do appreciate your effort to make everything run smoothly, but we translators are here for a reason, so please feel free to ask any of us. --朝彦 (Asahiko) (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I've thanked Penn Station for his support. Nonetheless, there are possibly only few volunteers who do know more about SUL finalization which is why I offered my private help, knowing that some people would either not understand or do not care. But I can do this only in few languages, and in only two of them fluently of which one is an internationally used one and hence also in all Wikimedia projects. And I still do think that translations into hundreds of languages for private messages are not appropriate when more general, widespread messages will be provided soon. Meanwhile, as you can see on my Spanish user talk page, I also help users who respond in their mother tongue. That's completely appropriate and mostly doable for me. Honestely, I never heard before that offering help evokes disgust, that would be harsh instead and not the helping hand itself. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, I did not know that an "official" message will be on its way, so I sincerely beg your pardon on my initial reaction. But it is very true that people can feel intimidated when a large block of alphabet text that they can't decipher comes up without warning. Take a look at any Japanese Q&A website and you can easily find many posts along the lines of "I got a strange e-mail and it's all written in English, and I can't read it and I'm so scared, what should I do???" and it turns out to be "MAILER-DAEMON: Unknown user" (not kidding). Most likely the barrier of foreign language is much lower among Indo-European languages, so I'm not surprised that you're surprised. It could be a Japan-specific thing, but I would appreciate it if you could keep it in mind. --朝彦 (Asahiko) (talk) 01:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I see. Maybe I'm not so scared of different scripts due to my Greek studies and my daily work as a steward. Apologies if I confused or even scared people, as I said that was never my intention. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 01:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Re: xcontribs

I have now included logs, just for you: [8]. The comparison doesn't really change. :P [9] Of course log counts come with their own set of issues, in particular the fact that there is a bias towards certain wikis with higher logging (like interwiki userrights changes on Meta-Wiki, autopatrolled on wikis with patrolled edits). --Nemo 12:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

504 Gateway Time-out :p —DerHexer (Talk) 22:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Works for me, loaded in 32 seconds. --Nemo 09:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

en.wiki rename requests

Nice, I like this on-wiki process[10] much more than special pages. :) Well done DerHexer & Legoktm. Do the log entries without a link to the request come from en.wiki? If so maybe the template could automatically link the rename special page with a prefilled reason. Let me know if I can help. --Nemo 09:14, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: No, they are coming from Special:GlobalRenameQueue/open. Unfortunately, we cannot provide a direct link to a public request there. Is Special:GlobalRenameQueue/request/123/view publicly available? Then we could link to this page (I can write a temp-JavaScript). Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ugh, as I feared the special page behaves worse. :( That page is not accessible, perhaps the rename request itself should be logged and then the log entry could be linked. --Nemo 11:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Unified login in other languages

As per Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat#Unified_login_in_other_languages, I have difficulties in logging in to some Wikipedias as the username blacklist has to be overridden. As can be seen, the problem has (temporarily) been solved on the French Wikipedia but nothing has been done on the German Wikipedia and it was suggested that you may help. Thank you. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

The Average Wikipedian, apologies for my late response. Can you please send me a wikimail so that I can get your mailaddress? Once I have that, I can override the antispoof conflicts. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:45, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Reverting cleanup of invalid user pages

Hello DerHexer. I noticed you reverted pages tagged for deletion as part of User:Pathoschild/2015 invalid user pages. Was there a reason to keep the invalid user pages? —Pathoschild 00:05, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for making trouble. At first, I saw no deletion reason which is why I reverted these edits. A further link to your subpage may have reduced my confusion. With SUL finalization, most deletions will become obsolete as these users will get the global accounts (and hence also the metawiki account). Finally, I think it's much more useful to raise attention to this list instead of adding templates separately. A script may delete them alltogether. Still no reason to revert your edits, sorry for that. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:08, 13 March 2015 (UTC) P. S.: Btw., instead of deleting notes to the wrong user, I'd prefer to move them to the correct user talk pages (Brto 'd Sra to Bèrto 'd Sèra, Danny B to Danny B., etc.).

No problem. I'll list them for deletion at Meta:Requests for deletion later instead. :) —Pathoschild 00:19, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

For the right of Account Creators

Hello DerHexer sir, I am an active user in newiki. The Bureaucrat on newiki told me that you can grant me the right of account creator. so, as per the decission of community I request you yo click here and go to the page on newiki where newiki community has supported me and provide the right of Account Creator.Thank tou.-बेनुपराज पौडेल (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Strange SUL finalisation case

Hi DerHexer,

I looked for users who will be renamed in ukwiki and I have noticed a very strange case — Special:CentralAuth/Trent98. The user has accounts in ru and uk wikis as Trent98 (he was renamed from another name), but some enwiki user with 0 edits has a SUL account with the same name. I tried to inform these "problematic" users but I am confused here as I have no idea what can be done in this situation — could you please suggest what can be done here or, if you don't know, where should this user ask for assistance? Thanks — NickK (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Strange indeed. As this global account had no local accounts attached, I deleted it. The ukwiki user can now create a new global account by submitting their username on uk:Special:MergeAccount. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:27, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

SUL Hilfe?

Hallo, hab grade auf Commons was gesehen und hoff dass du dich drum kümmern kannst. Es geht um [11]. Der Account auf Commons gehört zum gleichen User wie in dewiki, aber der (offline bei Baumfreunden überregional bekannte) Inhaber ist leider vor 10 Jahren verstorben, siehe Infos/Links auf den Benutzerseiten und den unteren Beitrag auf [12]. Bei Umbenennung eines der beiden Accounts würde die Zusammengehörigkeit verloren gehen, auch bei den von ihm beigetragenenen Fotos. Lässt sich das vielleicht verhindern? Holger1959 (talk) 01:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

@Holger1959: Vielen Dank für deine Nachricht! Da er leider nicht mehr selbst die Konten zusammenführen können und die Stewards trotz Bitte kein derartiges Tool erhalten haben, kann dies leider zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt gemacht werde. Sobald das Konto aber umbenannt ist und wir Stewards ein Programm zum Zusammenlegen mehrerer globaler Benutzerkonten erhalten haben, kann ich gern diese beiden Konten unter dem ursprünglichen Namen zusammenführen. Der erste Punkt wird bekanntlich Mitte April erledigt sein, das Programm ist zwar schon geschrieben, aber leider so fehleranfällig, dass eine Behebung dieser noch ca. sechs Wochen benötigen wird. Da ich viele solcher Anfragen bekommen habe, wäre es gut, wenn du dich dann wieder bei mir melden könntest. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:53, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

danke! werd mich dann wieder melden. ich versuch auch Mal alle seine Bilder zu beobachten, dann krieg ich Änderungen mit. Kann man nicht vielleicht auhc irgendwo eine Liste solcher Konten anlegen wenns so viele sind?

Ein Problem was ich außerdem kommen seh ist dass diese vielen Umbenennungen Urheberangaben auf Commons verloren gehen oder falsch werden. Problem besteht speziell bei den ganzen übertragenen Bildern aus den Wikipedias, wo der Urheber nicht in der Commons-Logzeile steht, sondern nur in der Information-Vorlage mit Link wie [[:de:User:Name|Name]] (@Erik Moeller (WMF): habt ihr das bei der Foundation schon im Blick? wär vielleicht sinnvoll dafür frühzeitig sowas wie File metadata cleanup drive aufzusetzen und das zu koordinieren, oder?) Holger1959 (talk) 19:48, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Single-edit or vandalism-only global accounts

[13] was later removed, can it be deleted according to de.wiki rules? Then, if Special:CentralAuth/Sakretsu could be deleted as empty, the other user could register the global account. --Nemo 06:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: The global account is deleted. Please guide them to it:Special:MergeAccount. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, looks all good now. --Nemo 11:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Updated scripts

Hi DerHexer. 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. I also updated various deprecated functions and made your scripts HTTPS-compatible. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 23:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome! I just did vector.js too, for the same reasons. —Pathoschild 02:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Beleidigung durch Admin

Hallo, ich bin von einem Admin in der dt. wikipedia der Quellenfälschung und der Raubkopie bezichtigt worden. Und zwar sowohl auf meiner Diskussionsseite als auch im Kommentar in der Artikel-Zusammenfassungszeile. Da dies kein gewöhnlicher Nutzer war, sondern ein Administrator, ist es nicht eine (fehlerhafte) Meinungsäußerung, sondern eine Beleidigung durch falsche Bezichtigung. Ich erwarte, dass dies von diesem Admin korrigiert wird. An welches Forum kann ich mich wenden, wenn der Admin dies nicht tut? --Jonitake (talk) 18:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Die Diskussionsseite ist schon der richtige Weg. Ansonsten kann noch die Dritte Meinung hilfreich sein. Sonst gibt es eigentlich nicht viele Möglichkeitne, sich über einen Admin zu beschweren. In dieser Funktion hat Koenraad die Bearbeitung ja aber auch nicht zurückgesetzt. Ich würde hier zwischen Bearbeitung und Funktion trennen. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:42, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

requesting for bot approval

Hello DerHexer sir, can you confirm some of bot request? I asked with other but they are inactive right now.-Mr wikilover (talk) 10:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

The request was approved. —DerHexer (Talk) 22:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

SUL mention

FYI [14] --Nemo 07:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the link! :-) —DerHexer (Talk) 09:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Curious

Why did this request get rejected? –xeno 22:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I took non-unique as a reference to the SUL finalization. If I misinterpreted this request, please go ahead and rename this account! :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! It's been done. FYI we are now pointing users from enwiki to the queue so there should be some increase in traffic there. Best regards, –xeno 15:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I read that somewhere. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:32, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

email

INeverCry 22:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Global rename

Hi DerHexer, sorry for that. Next time I will pay attention with a large number of contribs. I'll ask to hoo man or Legoktm. --Euphydryas (msg) 22:19, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your quick response! :-) This can result in serious, temporary issues for the servers and can even break user contributions for longer. We should be definitely careful with these. —DerHexer (Talk) 22:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Please help us, You may not of course, but if you dont help, whole viki of a country will be forever opressed, by scoundrels.

(I dont know how can I reach you. I sent the same mail to you, four people in charge. Which way do you most often prefer to communicate? Well, seems you like classical languages and photography, maybe you are the right one) Just examine the issue, I trust you will decide rightly. I am not sure, RFC is useful to explain the real situtation. Because, there is a probability that the people which mistread, will be judgers again, for the same issue. I think you may the one who can help, if you like of course. Anyway if you dont make something, viki of a country of 70 million people, will never be developed.

Pages in Turkish viki are considered as a space of power struggle and of political propaganda, by the members who must be responsible for protecting our wiki ideals.

The issue is general, which is valid for all Turkish members with some authorization, to erase, to edit or to ban. So, you should revise their personal situations as a whole. The authorized active members in Turkish viki are few in number, and they aim to maintain this situation, so, to stay as an elite ruling Turkish viki.

The charged users of Turkish viki, who gained eligibility over other users and content, systematically apply cencorship, opression and harrassment over the regular users and contributed contents from regular users. They systemically impede corrections and editing approaches, especially for protecting articles which they constructed for propaganda purposes. However, obstraction and cencorship are general rules, to protect their power-positions, to protect their biased policy and to conceal their unfaithfulness against wiki criterias. Also, they systematically hinder the opening of new pages. So, there is a serious barrier, against newcomers for collecting points and gaining access for eligibilities.

The opression is unbearable especially in case of the pages about the ciritical-Islamist philosophers and writers. However, in general, this negative attribute is against all Turkish academicians and university members. Turkish viki seems declared a war against Turkish universities and scientists.

The abuse of authority and abuse of delegation rights, among Turkish users-in-charge or gate-keepers, are hard to be explained. However, international stewarts and wiki bureaucrats can assess the situtation very clearly, if they examine two recent examples which I give below.

First, the case about Prof.Dr Celalettin Vatandas. Vatandas is a sociologist and the writer of twelve books about the early-history of Islam, the historical problems of Muslim communities, post-colonial studies, and problems caused by modernity processes in eastern nations.Also, he has books about multi-culturalism and late-modernity problems in all nations of the world. All of the books are still in circulation and publication reports say, these are good sellers in their own category. His massive study about the world-cognition of Turkish youth ( The youth in Turkey) gives way to national-wide argumentations in Turkey. His books are in Turkish, but he has also articles in English. Moreover, he is the first council in very credible official foundation of Republic in Turkey, Ataturk Highest Institution of Culture,Language and History, called AYK in abbreviation. He is the vice-president of Gumushane University and the dean of the faculty of Communication Sciences there.

I wrote an article about him including all points above,(the ones proper for viki), gave bibliography and sources in proper format, even I added links of internet news from credible sites about his populer studies. But the members of abusement, our viki "elites", erased the page, with the code of M6. They said, the professor is not worth of being in wikipedia. I tried to tell the truth in discussion page, also I sent messages to all the active users in charge. But instead of concerning the article in a proper way, they voted for it quickly in their narrow community, and erased it without reading or considering my last corrections. Everything was happened in period less than 36 hours. Not five days. Now, they erased even my polite objections to defense the value of the article. This is basically, the clearing of the proofs about their guilty-crime against wiki criterias.

Second case is the Şafak Yayla. Yayal was a member of DHKP-C, an absolutely terrorist organization, which is in terror list of US, UK, EU and Turkey. Yayla was an "armed" activist, and the murderer of the public prosecuter who was first hostaged by Yayla, with armed thread. Criminal reports said that the primer cause killed the prosecuter were the bullets from the pistol of Yayla and his partner in the action.

Can you think that such an activist, who was a member of a terrorist organization, was a terrorist? If not, who can be called as terrorist on earth? Do you say Baghdadi was not terrorist but president of his self-declared state? But our Turkish elite members doesnt allow to call Yayla as terrorist. In fact, I didnt attempt to call him terrorist, bu only objected to call him, as "proleteriat revolutuanist" and "activist". In case of it, I edited the article with saying that, DHKP-C is an internationally and officially recognized terrorist organization and Yayla was the member of it, still without calling him directly as terrorist. Within my statements, I gave a link to DHKP-C vikipedia article, which declares the organization's official terrorist situation -an old article, wrote before these self-evident elites-. However, they erased my corrections. And clearly I explained the reasons and benefits of my attempt, both in community dashboard of the case and in explanations of my writings.

Still the article, nor erased neither corrected. They struggled to keep it in the way they made. They erased all the points I collected from my contributions. And they attacked, with the accusation of not abiding the wiki rules. However, clearly I abide the rules, but they dont. The ones who are expected to protect, abuses and violating wiki criterias, to gain power, and to use this power.

Please make a judgement, and save us from these people. Okurogluselo (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not qualified for handling this issue as I'm mostly involved in technical stuff and cannot read Turkish either. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Your lock of User:Derenek

Global account log.

This user is not blocked anywhere, and has been editing since 2013. His editing may be contrary to policy on wikis that prohibit original research, but original research is allowed on en.Wikiversity, and his ability to explore his research there may inhibit his violations of policy elsewhere. Please lift the lock and only reinstate it if he is blocked on at least two wikis, which should be about the minimum except for blatant spamming and vandalism. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 14:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I would have if they had used a fresh account without crosswiki OR and spamming but as you wish. Upon your responsibility. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:21, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I will let you know if I see cross-wiki abuse from this account. --Abd (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:40, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

großes Problem mit https

Hallo Hexer,

mit dem neuerlichen Zwang zu https-Verbindungen habe ich nun ein großes Problem: Wegen de:Poodle und ähnlicher Bugs habe ich bei meinem Firefox SSL 3.0 ausgeschaltet und lasse nur noch TSL x.x zu. Nun kommt es schon nach wenigen edits zu der Situation, dass die wmf-server die TSL-Verbindung nicht bedienen können und es zu einem fallback auf eine SSL-Verbindung kommt. Diese wird wie gesagt von meinem browser abgelehnt, ich bekomme aber ab diesem Zeitpunkt überhaupt keine TSL-Verbindung mehr angeboten!

Was soll der Unsinn, einerseits angeblich "aus Sicherheitsgründen" die http-Verbindungen vollständig zu kappen, dann aber die unsichere SSL-Verbindungen als fallback in den servern zu lassen?!? Kannst Du mir bitte helfen? Ich bin de facto ausgeschlossen (und das ausgerechnet in dem Moment, in dem ich einen recht großen edit speichern wollte :-( Gruß a×p_de^Hello! 12:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Mehr als dort kann auch ich leider nicht empfehlen. Kann noch meinen Stewardkollegen Hoo man fragen, ob der was weiß. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:59, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Klingt nach einem Problem auf deiner Seite: Die Wikimedia Server unterstützen kein SSL 3 mehr, deshalb sollte so etwas nie negotiated werden. Hast du eventuell https "brechende" Proxies zwischen dir und Wikimedia, oder etwas derartiges? - Hoo man (talk) 21:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Hoo man: Nein, mein proxy filtert nur port 80. Und wie Du siehst, kann ich durchaus https-Verbindungen zu wmf-servern aufbauen! Nach ein paar edits werden dann als erstes keine Bilder mehr angezeigt, kurze Zeit später bekomme ich dann die Meldung, es könne keine sichere Verbindung aufgebaut werden da ich "security.enable_ssl3" auf false gesetzt habe. Ab diesem Zeitpunkt verweigert der server "de.wikipedia.org" alle weiteren Verbindungsversuche. Seltsamerweise kann ich gleichzeitig meta.wikimedia.org, commons.wikimedia.org oder en.wikipedia.org weiterhin erreichen. Ob dauerhaft habe ich allerdings noch nicht ausprobiert (sprich ob bei entsprechend intensiver Nutzung dann früher oder später nicht auch das gleiche Problem auftritt).

P.S. Ich habe inzwischen festgestellt, dass "de.wikipedia.org" auf zumindest zwei verschiedene IPs aufgelöst wird (siehe dort)! Gruß a×p_de^Hello! 19:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Gewaltdarstellung

Hallo DerHexer, ich wäre Dir dankbar, wenn Du Dich an der Grundsatzdiskussion zur Thematik der Gewaltdarstellung im Kontext mit dem Jugendmedienschutz beteiligen könntest unter Diskussion: Enthauptung #Gewaltdarstellung sowie den exemplarischen Löschdiskussionen auf Wikimedia unter [15], [16] und [17]! Die Wiki-Projekte scheinen mir hier zu einem rechtsfreien Raum zu verkommen, in dem die Editoren nach eigenem Gutdünken schalten und walten können, wie sie wollen! Dies ist nicht hinnehmbar!

-- Uwe Martens (talk) 17:29, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Ich bitte Dich zu gegebenem Anlaß, mein Benutzerkonto auf globaler Ebene zu löschen, insbesondere meine Benutzerseite auf Wikipedia! Als letztes habe ich zu Deiner Info diese Rundfrage gestartet: Wikipedia: Umfragen-Gewaltdarstellung, was mir allerdings von der WP-Gemeinschaft geschlossen mit gröbstem Undank beantwortet wurde (Intrigenspielchen, Verarschen, Beleidigungen und zur Krönung des ganzen anschließende Sperrung!). Da die WP Gemeinschaft an der Jugendrechtsverletzung festhält, muß ich schon aus Gründen der Mithaftbarkeit aus Wikipedia aussteigen! Vielen Dank für Deine Bemühungen!

-- Uwe Martens (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

for giving your perspective, and for your kind words about our work at the meeting today. Happy and safe travels, Patrick Earley (WMF) (talk) 02:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you too! Hope to see you again in October in the WMF office. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Dear DerHexer, please look this. --Vadgt (talk) 12:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

My fellow steward Ajraddatz granted you temporary admin rights for three months. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

How can we improve Wikimedia grants to support you better?

Hi! The Wikimedia Foundation would like your input on how we can reimagine Wikimedia Foundation grants to better support people and ideas in your Wikimedia project.

After reading the Reimagining WMF grants idea, we ask you to complete this survey to help us improve the idea and learn more about your experience. When you complete the survey, you can enter to win one of five Wikimedia globe sweatshirts!

In addition to taking the the survey, you are welcome to participate in these ways:

• Respond to questions on the discussion page of the idea.
• Join a small group conversation.
• Learn more about this consultation.

This survey is in English, but feedback on the discussion page is welcome in any language.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Last call for WMF grants feedback!

Hi, this is a reminder that the consultation about Reimagining WMF grants is closing on 8 September (0:00 UTC). We encourage you to complete the survey now, if you haven't yet done so, so that we can include your ideas.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Updates to CentralNotice

Hi! I see you've been working on the wlm 2015-de CentralNotice campaign. I just wanted to check that you'd seen the documentation about recent changes to CentralNotice. (This is the first campaign that I've seen enabled since the update. I thought I wouldn't activate support for legacy display stats automatically, if it's not necessary.) Please LMK if you have any questions! Thanks much! AGreen (WMF) (talk) 21:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

German Wikipedia and a conjecture about FlaggedRevs

Hello,

I reached your user page after looking for experienced de.wikipedia contributors that also are active anglophone sites. I am looking for a little help to deal with a conjecture that is intriguing me: that review systems such as FlaggedRevs might encourage contributions, rather than being an obstacle to them. The hypothesis is fleshed out a little more fully in this Wikibooks discussion. Given that the German Wikipedia is the largest project making extensive use of FlaggedRevs, I believe it would be a good place to look for evidence for or against the conjecture. That being so:

• It would be very interesting to hear your opinion about it.
• I would like to bring this discussion to de.wikipedia, but as I don't speak German I am having trouble to find my way there. Is there some sort of Village Pump in which it would be appropriate for me start a topic in English? And if not, could you help me by starting such a topic in German on my behalf (a two-line summary like the one I wrote here with a link to the Wikibooks discussion would be enough)?
• Are you aware of any studies carried out by Wikimedia or wikimedians about how FlaggedRevs affects the amount of contributions?

Thank you for reading this, and cheers, Duplode (talk) 04:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

@Duplode: The latter first: I could ask WMDE what happened with mw:WMDE contract offers/Evaluate the impact of using flagged revisions. See further this. Additionally, I can help with translations but I'm not sure either where to post that, either the talk page of our Signpost (“Kurier”) or the tech discussion board. On either place you can discuss in English, a short introduction German would be nice though (at least in the Kurier). I'm not a big fan of flagged revisions as this contradicts the wiki principle in my opinion, increases the workload, and leads to other mistakes while I do believe in the common sense of human beings to identify obvious vandalism what the tool was designed for (which additionally gives Wikipedia the image of an encyclopedia that anyone can edit and where mistakes can be easily reverted). Nevertheless, the introduction of flagged revisions to the German Wikipedia was confirmed twice in polls by a majority 1, 2, probably most people where already used to it and didn't want to change that running system. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to the "Edit trends" blog post. It is a nice conversation starter, although as someone points in the comments there it would be useful to have the amount of bot edits as well.

A translation of my initial message would be very helpful, enough to get things going (I could post it myself then). I don't think anything other than the short introduction in German is necessary, as long as there is a link to the en.wikibooks discussion. So here is the message:

(Title: Can flagged revisions encourage contributions?)

Hello,

I am looking for opinions and evidence, for or against, the following counterintuitive conjecture: Review systems, such as flagged revisions, can encourage contributions by making newcomers more confident that their edits won't break something, anger someone or end up ignored. This discussion begun at en.wikibooks (see this topic there for extra context). I brought it here because the German Wikipedia is the largest project making extensive use of flagged revisions, which makes the perspective of this community highly relevant.

P.S.: Since I am unable to write in German, this message was kindly translated by DerHexer. In any case, feel free to continue the discussion in German, the language of this project.

(Titel: Können gesichtete Versionen zu mehr Beiträgen anregen?)

Hallo!

Ich bin auf der Suche nach Meinungen und Untersuchungen, die für oder gegen die folgende kontraintuitive Vermutung sprechen: „Beurteilungssysteme wie die gesichteten Versionen können zu mehr Beiträgen anregen, weil sie neue Mitarbeitende mehr darin bestärken, dass ihre Bearbeitungen nicht irgendetwas kaputt machen können, jemanden verärgern könnten oder gar ignoriert würden.“ Die Diskussion dazu begann auf en.wikibooks (siehe diesen Abschnitt dort für weitere Informationen). Ich wende mich an die deutschsprachige Wikipedia, da sie das größte Projekt ist, das am intensivsten das System der gesichteten Versionen verwendet, und uns die Erfahrungen dieser Gemeinschaft für uns daher sehr wichtig sind.

P.S.: Da ich kein Deutsch schreiben kann, wurde diese Nachricht freundlicherweise von DerHexer übersetzt. Bitte schreibt ruhig in der Sprache dieses Projektes weiter.

As for where to post it, is this the Kurier talk page you mention? Between your two suggestions, I believe it is the most appropriate one. I am primarily looking at this issue from the community-building perspective rather than the technical one, and so a general discussion page would be a better fit.

The concerns with flagged revisions that you mention are legitimate, and I share them to some extent. Still, experiences elsewhere make me feel there is something to the idea that knowing that edits will be reviewed by another human can be psychologically reassuring to new contributors. I also suspect that effect gets stronger as the content being edited becomes more structured.

Cheers, Duplode (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

@Duplode: Will see when I have time for translation. Meanwhile you can have a look at wm2010:Submissions/Flagged revisions study results, the interim result of the study mentioned above. Unfortunately, it was never finished and therefore never published. But maybe the slides can bring you some insights. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 08:55, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

It is indeed a pity the study was interrupted just before it would get really interesting, with the account creation stats and the comparison with other projects. As for the translation: sure, whenever you are can. Thank you, Duplode (talk) 03:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

@Duplode: Translated, don't hesitate to post both, English and German version. You can also add a link to our discussion here so that people don't have to search for studies that were already mentioned. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 09:55, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Message posted. Once more, thank you! Duplode (talk) 18:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

From meta [18]

Global lock for socks of 89.249.207.229

Hi. I am user:Hayk.arabaget. I am not able to edit in Wikipedia from Yerevan State University, as the I.P address is blocked by User:DerHexer, from 12.05.2015. Please do something--Hayk.arabaget (talk) 11:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I understand, maybe there were several people, who did vandalism, but there are more than 10000 students in YSU, who can not edit from here forever. I ask you to re-block the IP address, if it is possible--Hayk.arabaget (talk) 11:44, 11 September 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

Global Rename

Hi, will you look at my request. Target user's edit count is zero and is not responding to Usurpation request, but still i have to wait for a month. Can you please do it now ? Hitch Hicking Across Sahara (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 31 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 OTRS volunteers sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have been identified as an OTRS volunteer and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access. OTRS volunteers have a specific agreement available, if you have recently signed the general confidentiality agreement for another role (such as CheckUser or Oversight), you do not need to sign the general agreement again, but you will still need to sign the OTRS agreement.

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 31 December 2015 to retain your OTRS access. 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 21:20, 28 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

Merging usernames CFynn and Cfynn -> CFynn

Thanks for your response to my query under the topic Two different usernames on 21 September 2015 at Talk:Single User Login finalisation announcement. I'm still not sure how I can proceed with your suggestion (If I get this right it means renaming CFynn@commonswiki to a temporary name "CFynn (usurped)"; and renaming Cfynn@enwiki to e.g. "Cfynn (usurped)"; then combining Cfynn@commonswiki and CFynn@enwiki) - what is the way forward to get this done? - or can someone, such as yourself, do it for me? I don't care about losing track of the relatively few edits I've made with the wrong login on each account - but I do want to reduce the number of login changes/switches when working with both enwiki and commons. Many thanks for your assistance as this has been frustrating me for a long time now. Cfynn (talk) / 15:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC) CFynn (talk) 15:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@CFynn: Please go to en:Special:MergeAccount, submit your Cfynn@commonswiki password, and merge your both accounts. Afterwards, you don't need to change login anymore. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:11, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - whatever you did behind the scenes worked! Cheers. CFynn (talk) 12:39, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikimania/Scholarships/2016

I'm surveying the information available to see what budgets we can count on. --Nemo 16:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Nemo, thanks for the note. Please ask Nicole about the German program and put me in CC please. :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:40, 9 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

E. Bieber OTRS THE ESTATE OF EMIL BIEBER / Klaus Niermann

Guten Tag, es gibt ein paar Fotografien, die Bildstempel oder Aufdrucke „E.Bieber“ haben. Hinter E.Bieber verbirgt sich ein Atelier, das von Emilie Bieber 1852 in Hamburg gegründet, von ihrem Neffen Leonard Berlin-Bieber 1872 übernommen und weitergeführt wurde, zusätzlich machte er noch ein Atelier in Berlin auf. Später schloss er das Berliner Atelier und übergab seinem Sohn Emil Bieber das Hamburger Atelier. Der Hamburger Fotograf Klaus Niermann hat sich nun vor einigen Jahren die Rechte an den Fotografien von Emil Bieber (†1962) -vermutlich dessen Sohn- abtreten lassen, was mit Sicherheit auch mit wirtschaftlichen Interessen zu tun hat. Die Schwierigkeit besteht darin, zu erkennen, welche Fotos von Emil Bieber stammen, da alle Inhaber mit derselben Signatur „E.Bieber“ arbeiteten. Und gerade Leonard Berlin-Bieber hat in seinem Berliner Atelier um die Jahrhundertwende zahlreiche „Namensträger“ vor der Linse gehabt (die sich natürlich heute vermarkten lassen/ließen). Ansonsten handelte es sich sowieso um ein fleissiges und bekanntes Atelier. Eine zweite Schwierigkeit besteht darin, dass Herr Emil Bieber 1958 die Negative seiner Bilder (35.000 Platten) verschenkt hat, also auf seine Rechte verzichtet hat! Dazu sind die Quellen auf de:wikipedia/Emil Bieber zu finden. Welche Rechte hat Herr Niermann eigentlich? Für eine gelegentliche Antwort dankt --Sorgenlos (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Mir ist nicht ganz klar, wieso du hier fragst und nicht bspw. auf dewiki oder per Wikimail, aber gut. ;-) Durch das Verschenken (wahrscheinlich nicht einmal das notariell beglaubigte), gehen nicht zusammen mit den Besitzrechten auch die Urheberrechte an die Person. Dies muss separat vertraglich festgelegt werden. Sollte dies bei den Fotografien der Fall gewesen sein, dürfte es schwierig sein, sofern aus dem Stil oder der Unterschrift selbst nicht herausgelesen werden kann, ob es Emilie oder Emil Bieber erstellt hat, dies für die Wikimedia-Projekte zu nutzen. … Lustigerweise war ich an der Erstellung des Artikels Emilie Bieber beteiligt (1, 2). Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 00:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

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

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, 02:31, 12 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your language • 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, 06:43, 13 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your language • Help

FINAL NOTICE: Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by TOMORROW

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

I wanted send one final 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, 05:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your language • Help

please unprotect user:Gangleri

Hii DerHexer! Before adding special:Renameuser to MediaWiki I used the nickname Gangleri. Later long time before the implementation of global (unified) accounts some WMF language projects renamed my account to לערי ריינהארט while some others as w:nl: rejected the renaming request because of their policy to use extended ASCII / Latin only. So at a great part of the WMF accounts I still used the old nickname while at others I used the nickname with the Hebrew letters and with the space. Since some time I use both accounts for testing different browsers, setup configurations, gadgets, BiDi issues related to nicknames etc..
In order to create a page for the global (unified) account Gangleri I kindly ask you to unprotect that page; the account should not be blocked because I am able to write now. Some other WMF projects may have protected the user and or the talk page as well. Thanks you for your efforts in advance! Best regards Reinhardt aka Gangleri (talk) aka לערי ריינהארט. 08:23, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Die Seite müsste offen sein. Wird dir ein Fehler angezeigt, wieso du sie nicht anlegen kannst? Ich kann sie derzeit bearbeiten. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 17:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

לערי ריינהארט: Ping. —DerHexer (Talk) 17:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Danke! Meines Wissens war diese Seite (eventuell verwechsle ich die mit anderen Projekten wie wikt:is:user:Gangleri etc. - auch diese Seite ist nicht schreibgeschützt) gesperrt bzw. der account geblockt. Gruß Gangleri (talk) 23:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and happy new year

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Merry Christmas and happy new year. (:

--Pine^✉

Thanks a lot. Same for you! :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikimedia projects. Merry Christmas and happy new year. Cheers  :-) -Grind24 (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, same for you! :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:07, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, have you received e-mail I sent you couple of days ago? What is the outlook of you handling that request? tufor (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I surely got it. But during Christmas I couldn't look for my script. And I fear that I will not be able to find it. Let's see how else I can solve this. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:19, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Translation

Hi DerHexer: I have just created Basque Wikimedians User Group (stub) and I would like that could be translated in other languages, specially in basque. I've tried doing as others insering <langage/> code but it doesn't work. I'd be very pleased if you could help me with this. Thank you! -Xabier Cañas (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

You can do that on this page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!!-Xabier Cañas (talk) 11:57, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Request for input on Wikipedia video project

• 
• 
• 

Hello, I have completed an outline of the material that may be covered in the modules on this page.

Please note that not everyone will view every section. For example, some people may want to view only the modules that apply to Wikipedia, and others may be interested in the modules that apply to Commons.

Also, different language Wikipedias sometimes work differently. I am referring to English Wikipedia in the outline. One of the goals of the video series is to make the videos in a way that is easy to translate to other languages. One possible option is that for references to English Wikipedia which have no similarities on a Wikipedia of a different language, the portion of the video that is unnecessary can be removed from the translated version of the video. Also, members of different language communities may produce additional materials which they may add to the videos for their language, or the community members may replace portions of the English-language video with different information that is more applicable to Wikipedia in a different language.

I would appreciate your comments on the grant talk page, preferably by 11 January. Thank you! --Pine^✉ 09:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Inspire Campaign on content curation & review

I've recently launched an Inspire Campaign to encourage new ideas focusing on content review and curation in Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia volunteers collaboratively manage vast repositories of knowledge, and we’re looking for your ideas about how to manage that knowledge to make it more meaningful and accessible. We invite you to participate and submit ideas, so please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 28th.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is welcome - your skills and experience can help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign to improve review and curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and accessible! I JethroBT (WMF) 05:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery.

Confirmation discussions

Dear DerHexer,

As you probably know, the confirmation discussions for Stewards have been closed. In order to determine the outcome of these discussions, you are invited to comment on Talk:Stewards/Confirm/2016 before scheduled closure of the confirmation section "one week after the appointment of the newly elected stewards" (Sunday 6th of March, 17:22 UTC), though the closing time might be extended at the ElectCom's discretion for an extra week if it is believed "further input is required before concluding". All stewards are welcome to comment, including those newly elected.

For those who ran for confirmation, consider revising comments regarding you, and replying to those where appropriate. Savh^ñ 08:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Abusive user names

Hi and thanks for the swift action. For another time, what would the correct procedure be for reportng such types of abuse? regards Knud Winckelmann (talk) 11:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

You know what? I'm an idiot. It clearly stated on the page. Sorry about that. Lesson learned. Regards Knud Winckelmann (talk) 11:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's not tragic! Thanks for reporting. :-) Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)