Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive 2016

GET access right on beta

Hi, I have already an access on commons GWT but not on beta which impairs me to debug things. May I request one? Kelson (talk) 06:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I can do this, but « User account "Kelson" is not registered. » on Commons Beta. Can you register your account there? Jean-Fred (talk) 10:04, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Salut Jean-Fred. Sorry, I have indeed forgot that "detail". I have created it. Kelson (talk) 16:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thx, works fine. Kelson (talk) 20:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 08:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

A bot that will accept and perform find and replace and category copy commands

See Commons:Village pump/Proposals#A bot that will accept and perform find and replace and category copy commands. Thanks, ★ Poké⁹⁵ 00:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 08:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

GWToolset user rights for User:MartinPoulter

Hi, I am the Wikimedian In Residence at the Bodleian Libraries in the University of Oxford (see announcement and project page). The Bodleian is allowing me to freely share thousands of its digital media files on Commons, of which I am ready to upload the first batch of just over a thousand. In accordance with the GWToolset instructions, I have created a metadata mapping and run a test upload of this batch on Commons Beta. I'm now ready to do the proper upload. I've been a Commons contributor since 2009, and though most of the uploads to my account are from the Bodleian (about eight hundred of these so far), I have a longer history as a volunteer contributor. Thanks in advance for any help, MartinPoulter (talk) 21:33, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The files at beta currently cannot be opened due to some server error. Trying again later. --Krd 05:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@Krd: Thanks for your patience. It seems to be working again now. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

GWToolset granted, please do a few uploads at Commons and report when done. Thank you. --Krd 15:23, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 10:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Request to get translation administrator

Hi! I'd like to ask to add me to the translation administrator group, mainly to maintain Commons:Wikimedia Österreich (I'm a board member of WMAT). Of course I'm willing to help at other topics if necessary. --AleXXw 19:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done odder (talk) 11:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 10:00, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Request for translation administrator rights

Hello. In order to test T126330 phab:T126901 once deployed, I'd like to have access to the toolset. Thank you. —MarcoAurelio 12:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

@Marco: I am sorry, but I am having trouble understanding why you would require adding to the translationadmin user right to fulfil that task. Care to elaborate? :-) odder (talk) 09:17, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Did you mean phab:T126901? Likely you want to test if the extension works correctly when deployed. I don't see why it shouldn't work but we have enough TA's here on commons who can do a quick test. Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Odder. I entered the wrong task number in my application, and I thank Steinsplitter to notice it and add the correct task number here. Basically is for what Steinsplitter said: once deployed, I'd like to be able to test if the notification extension works correctly testing on myself without having to bother anyone. However if this is a problem, I'll of course happy to withdraw this. I also take this oportunity to say that the extension has been scheduled for tomorrow's morning (SF time) SWAT, so you should have it soon. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio 15:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

No, actually, I think it will be easier for everyone if you test it yourself as author of that configuration patch. Please run the test at your convenience and report back to this noticeboard so we can remove you from that user group after it's done (unless you actually plan on working on some translations). In other words, this is now  done. Thank you for your work on this, by the way, hugely appreciated. odder (talk) 16:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

@Odder: Looks like he tested it yet. I also can confirm that the extension works :-). --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Yup. The extension seems to be working. Regards, —MarcoAurelio 16:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help, @MarcoAurelio, I'm marking this as resolved. odder (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: odder (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Inactive bot run

The last run of de-flagging of inactive bot accounts was neatly done, so I would like to thank those involved for a sensible and sensitive process. Having simple and low-profile bureaucracy on Commons does help to keep a mellow culture, providing an example to contrast against how things work on other projects, where the bureaucracy gains a reputation for complexity and being heavy-handed with individuals.

A small suggestion, which would probably happen anyway in the light of a history of common sense, is that if inactive bot accounts suddenly become active and start to fill recent changes, I would hope that a 'crat would step in and restore the bot flag and then confirm the situation with the operator, rather than blocking the account and then expecting the operator to request it. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

The accounts affected by the de-flagging are inactive for more than two years, so I don't expect any of them to return suddenly and unexpected. Anyway, if one does, I'd support reflagging them through short channels if possible within the bot policy. If there are new tasks to started which per policy should be discussed within a bot request anyway, I'd say we should discuss first. Please note that there is currently no backlog on bot requests from crat's point of view, so I think we don't have any real issue. --Krd 18:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

+1. I have nothing to add :-). --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Riley Huntley (talk) 04:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Need assistance

This discussion is exceeding the civility limits. Jee 12:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Riley Huntley (talk) 04:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/The Photographer

Hi, I think this rfa, that is already ended but not yet closed, should stay open officially several more days as a block in another Wikipedia, discover by someone else a couple of hour before the end of the rfa makes me a bit uncomfortable. Regard, ... Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 07:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

And if my request is accepted then "Scheduled to end: 21:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)" at the head of the Rfa should be amended to understand that the votes and discussions are always open. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Have you asked @The Photographer: ? --Fæ (talk) 10:02, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

No but I have the hope, as a Rfa is a thing somewhat important, he added it at his watchlist. Then normally there is no need to ping him, as I quoted that in the Rfa too. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC) and if he also forget to add the Rfa to his watchlist then it will be maybe better for us to forgot too the Rfa...Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Technically you are asking for a new RFA, as the last one has finished. --Fæ (talk) 10:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I know what I asked and my request is quite clear, for my part to let this request still open as it was ended for less than a few hours make the balance with the discover of the block a couple of hours before the end. And it is fully within the powers of bureaucrat to let open a discussion that is not yet officially closed (not officialy finished), a Rfa is finished when closed by a bureaucrat. EOD for my part, Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:36, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

oh and this situation would not have happened if he did not "forgot" to tell something about the block. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

•  I withdraw my nomination I just noticed he must have 75% of support to be promoted, but he currently have not. Then this can be closed.Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

• Is this RFA ever going to close now? I can't see any deadline and the original passed 5 days ago. It's clearly not going to get 75%. -- Colin (talk) 09:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

  I usually extended controversial requests for a week. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

EugeneZelenko, perhaps it would have been helpful to update the "scheduled to close" text then, so people know it is really still open (as opposed to a nomination someone forgot to tag as closed). Some people may be put off voting. Anyway it has descended into a farce now. -- Colin (talk) 08:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree this should have been handled better, and I'd like to apologize to the candidate for the suboptimal procedure. Sadly we still appear to be lacking a sufficient number of active crats for cases where one or another feels involved and would have preferred to abstain from interfering. Anyway, I suggest to close this request per 21:06, 29 February 2016 (today evening), one week after original scheduled end, as it stands at that time. --Krd 12:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I've closed the RfA as unsuccessful. --AFBorchert (talk) 23:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: AFBorchert (talk) 23:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Translation administrators inactivity

Users listed below haven't performed any translate admin action within a full year. I am requesting removal of the translation admin flag per TA policy.

• Ilario (Log, right was granted 29 August 2014)
• Varnent (Log, right was granted 12 November 2013)
• Patrick87 (Log, right was granted 10 December 2013)
• Leitoxx (Log, right was granted 21 May 2014)
• Guillaume (WMF) (Log, right was self-granted 10 October 2014)

Nikerabbit is not included in the list above because he is the translate extension dev (not sure if it schould be removed or not).
Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:46, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the list. I've removed the translation adminship for all the accounts named in the list. I think it is best for a developer to keep this right even if it isn't used. This gives at least the opportunity to check its interface. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 08:27, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

GWToolset user right request for Mmason23

Mmason23, from w:Museum Victoria has been preparing a batch of several hundred files from the museum's Tangyes Lantern Slide Collection for upload to Commons. He's been working with myself and with Pigsonthewing.
Here's his upload log of most recent tests on Beta or a specific individual example.
The redlinks that show on beta (Institution:Museum Victoria, Category:Tangyes Lantern Slide Collection, and copyright template {{PD-scan|PD-Australia}}), are all prepared over here on Commons to connect properly when uploaded. Sincerely, Wittylama (talk) 23:34, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 07:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 07:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/HJ Mitchell (de-adminship)

Could an uninvolved crat close this? Jcb (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 11:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Translation administrator rights request

I hereby request Translation administrator rights. Primarily I will use the rights to manage translation projects related to the Eurovision Song Contest. I am working on translatable templates that are and will be used on 877 filepages related to the Eurovision Song Contest 2013, 1061 filepages related to the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 and hopefully filepages related to the Eurovision Song Contest 2016. I will also try to help with other Translation pages on Commons. -abbedabb^talk 21:11, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

On hold for 48 hours per policy. --Krd 06:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 19:26, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 19:26, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Request for Translation administrators right

Hi all, I hereby request translation administrators right. I translate English into Chinese, and I often do translate work here and meta. This right will help me marking page tranlate-able. I also know how to use Translate extension. Thanks in advance.--Stang 13:24, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

User has less than 800 edits on commons, imho moor onwiki experience needed. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:25, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I often mark copyvio, request for deletion and translate pages, so I think I am experienced enough.--Stang 10:00, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose Never seen him tagging pages for translation, fixing mistakes with the extension, low editcount. Not now. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:29, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

---

Ok，I want to  I withdraw my nomination.--Stang 10:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Request withdrawn. Riley Huntley (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Translation admin rights

I would like to have translation admin rights for Commons-related GLAM projects.

Susannaanas (talk) 10:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Susannaanas: Which pages you like to tag for translation? You want to help with the backlog? --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Right now I was thinking about Commons:Simple_media_reuse_guide. I don't object to helping out, but I have a dire situation with my time/resources now. When I can, I will. I also continue with the Wikimaps project, where we will need to make multilingual guidelines. I continually work with GLAMs, creating their pages and templates, which is where translations will be welcome, too. And categories for maps, where the information may be expressed in several languages. (Categories are also used for maps with several sheets). --Susannaanas (talk) 11:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Susannaanas: The tagging of Commons:Simple media reuse guide is very bad (html in translate tags, no usage of <tvar|> and Special:MyLanguage, do not add T:num by hand. ...) and must be fixed before marking. Can you do that, please? --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I'll check that out. The page is not originated by me and I want to do that in accordance. --Susannaanas (talk) 16:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I have now removed all hand-made translation-related tags. --Susannaanas (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hand made translation tags are fine if placed in a correct place, the T: are not fine. Did you read the documentation on mediawiki? Please do so :). --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes I did, and I repeat, I did not add any of those tags myself. I would like to be able start from scratch. I need to rehearse before mastering the process. For that I need permissions. --Susannaanas (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

 Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Closing after two days and assigning the bits. I see no objections here. --Dschwen (talk) 19:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 06:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Translation admin rights for jdx

I would like to be granted translation administrator rights. At present I need them for POTY related stuff. jdx ^Re: 20:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

@Jdx: What you like to do exactly with the tools? Please provide a example. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter: I would like to mark pages for translation in order not to wait for an admin's action. Pages like this one (it's "funny" – my changes are not related to translation but the page still needs to be marked), this or this (OK, this one you marked a few hours ago :-) ). Also I am quite sure that some POTY pages from previous years need to be marked for translation. jdx ^Re: 16:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

•  Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done--MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Clindberg

This seems to be an active request for adminship, but it says that the request is scheduled to end last year, and it seems that the request hasn't been listed officially, and it is unclear if the user accepts the nomination. I think that something should be done with the request, but I'm not sure what. It is not a good idea to have hidden requests for adminship which are open indefinitely. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd say it should be closed now as invalid as the user has not made reasonable effort to file a valid request. --Krd 16:31, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Carl didn't accept the nomination for a long time, so I think it is safe to close the request now. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 03:13, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

@Pokéfan95: This request was posted here to bring it to the attention to 'crats, in the future I'd leave it to them to comment if it is safe to close a request. Riley Huntley (talk) 03:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment modification.Riley Huntley (talk) 03:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 16:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Reguyla re-blocked

I am noting here for crats' information that I have just placed an indefinite block against User:Reguyla for postings made very shortly after his two-week block ended earlier today. See details here. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 21:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Josvebot 2

Could a crat review and approve (read: close) Commons:Bots/Requests/Josvebot 2? Seems to have reached a community consensus after time discussed. Josve05a (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Done, thank you for the reminder. odder (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 21:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jaya8022

Please speedy close Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jaya8022, cheers. ~riley (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

While we're at it, there is also Commons:Administrators/Requests/118 alex waiting to be cleaned up from March. ~riley (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done for both. odder (talk) 22:47, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: odder (talk) 22:47, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Bots/Requests/KasparBot

Can a 'crat please wrap this up? Thanks. :) ~riley (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

And now  Done, thanks. ~riley (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ★ Poké⁹⁵ 01:58, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

What are Bureaucrats and what are they good for?

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 12:22, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Resysop of User:Denniss

As Denniss was desysop-ed out of any Wikimedia Commons agreed process or policy by an WMF employee, there is nothing in policy to bar his account being resysoped as his original RFA remains a valid community consensus that has not been revoked by the community that appointed him. The WMF has the authority to ban accounts without any process for appeal, but it does not yet dictate the details of how Wikimedia Commons elects or unelects our administrators. Any WMF employee can start a de-sysop procedure against Denniss if they wish, but they chose not to bother with that.

More than the suggested 30-days of desysop has passed. Can a Bureaucrat please now take this action? --Fæ (talk) 14:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The WMF-desysop stated "If he wishes for his admin rights to be restored, a RfA can be opened once 30 days elapse, and the community may decide on the request at that time." In other words, WMF has mandated that a RFA before giving him back the bit - to ignore them on that point will just add to the drama not lessen it.

There is also the very real concern that Denniss should only be re-instated if he actually wants the bit. Given his recent treatment I can understand the "considering retirement" message on his user page, and if he has no future interest in doing admin work then re-sysoping adds no value, either to Commons or the Community-WMF relationship.

If Denniss does want to resume admin status I have no objection - but lets do it in the least dramatic way possible please..--Nilfanion (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

This does not make sense. To revoke the last RFA, there would need to be a desysop vote. If you want to run a desysop vote first, then do that. The WMF does not appoint admins and it does not control the local RFA process, for very sound legal reasons. --Fæ (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

No, its following the instructions from WMF at time of desysop and to disregard that is to ignore a WMF edict. A 'crat ignoring that could be seen as overruling WMF - something they would be foolish to do, especially if a fresh RFA will get same end result.

And really, leave it to Denniss to decide if he wants to be an admin. If he does, any discussion on that would take at least week - and would probably conclude RFA is best venue, so just start it at RFA. If he doesn't want to be an admin, why force him to suffer more grief? Please do not decide on his behalf.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Denniss is free to comment, and this thread is not a vote. The WMF literally does not make edicts on Wikimedia Commons policies agreed by consensus, and "the WMF" did not take action against Denniss, which is quite obvious by the fact of how quickly this was done. The WMF does not sanction, control or create community policies.

Bureaucrats were elected to show leadership to ensure Commons policies are applied, even when a WMF employee takes unilateral action that ignores policy and flouts community consensus. --Fæ (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I see no reason to reply further, odder closed the discussion about those issues above, and his closure gave some very sensible advice.

If Denniss indicates that he actually would like the bit back (as far as I can tell, he has not commented on-wiki at all), then a new positive discussion can be about if and how that should happen. Please just drop it.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Neutral The desysopping is of course out of process (and outside of WMF's scope), but I won't support yet until Denniss says that he wants to be an admin again and a RFA is done. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 23:55, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

At some point in the future I'd like to have my admin bit restored. Currently I'm not sure if I want to do anything for the WMF if it just needs one Troll to get kicked-out by some WMF people without being given a chance to explain the edits before any action is taken. Even in court you get a chance to do so but the WMF just swings the banhammer.--Denniss (talk) 06:59, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

It seems Denniss has learned nothing from his time on the "naughty step". Denniss violated numerous community agreed policies (edit warring, wheel warring, blocking while involved, enabling a banned user to evade their ban) plus restored text that contained a blackmail threat against another user on this site. The only reason he wasn't desysopped by the community is because the edits involved russavia, and at least one 'crat has fully shamed himself over his biased actions at the time. If Denniss views me as a Troll, and is unfriendly enough to state this here, then I encourage him to take his "considering retirement" all the way. You're only helping WMF by staying, and you wouldn't want that. The only trolling going on here is the pointless inflammatory request by Fae to defy WMF by restoring Denniss admin bit without an RFA, an action that would likely get any 'crat immediately banned by WMF -- and Fae fully knows this. The only 'crat action needed here is to close this thread. -- Colin (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

With Dennis' statement of not wanting to get resysopped I consider this request as resolved. --Krd 12:22, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 12:22, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Move admin rights to my other account

Hi there. I'd like to have my administrative rights from this account, moved to my other account, User:Missvain, which is now my primary account again. Thanks. Sarah (talk) 17:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Fine with me. Anybody else care to comment? If not I'll move the rights in a few hours. (I see the two user pages are already clearly linked, so there should not be a problem here) --Dschwen (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok for me. --Krd 05:49, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't see a problem. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:49, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks User:Dschwen and everyone else! Sarah (talk) 17:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 18:01, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 06:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Translation admin rights

Hi, Bureaucrat. I would like to be granted translation administrator rights. I would like to contribute for Wikimedia Commons. See also My SUL info. Thank you.--Charidri (talk) 05:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

On hold for 48 hours per policy. --Krd 08:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Charidri: Please be more specific as to what exactly you require translation admin rights for. Have you had any experience using this rights somewhere else? Have you had any experience using the Translation extension before? Are you familiar with the documentation for that extension? Thanks, odder (talk) 09:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Odder: re

Please be more specific as to what exactly you require translation admin rights for. >It is part of the my contribution for this site.

Have you had any experience using this rights somewhere else? 　>No. It need experience? Requirements??

Have you had any experience using the Translation extension before? >No. It need experience? Requirements??

Are you familiar with the documentation for that extension? >I’ll do my best.

I'm unnecessary translator???--Charidri (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose The reply to odder's question is imho not satisfactory. I never saw him tagging pages for translation, fixing ta syntax, etc. (needless to say: For translating pages the flag is not needed, just for marking pages for translation) --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Withdrawal. Can not contribute.--Charidri (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Withdrawn. --Krd 18:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Onam loves Wikimedia 2016

Onam loves Wikimedia is a Upcoming Photo Uploading Campaign by Malayalam Wikimedia Community. More Details find here Commons:Onam loves Wikimedia event 2016. Need Admin helps to set up a campaign page. more detailed project page in home wiki --Manoj Karingamadathil (Talk) 10:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Please request admin assistance at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Thank you. --Krd 16:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 16:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Project proposal: WikiSymbols

https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiSymbols

"Enabling visual communication"

The proposed WikiSymbols is about symbols/icons that can be understood by people from different cultures and different educational backgrounds as well as illiterate people. WikiSymbols enables (intercultural) communication without words. Contributors to the proposed WikiSymbols design symbols for all kinds of words and upload them with different tags so they can be found. Users worldwide can then download them and use them for websites, presentations, ... simply communication without words. The symbols could also be integrated into other wiki projects.

The contributors can choose whether their symbol/icon has a public domain licence or a creative common licence. The icon can driectly be downloaded in both cases. In the case of public domain, the creator of the icon/symbol has not to be credited. In the case of creative commons, the creator of the icon has to be credited.

Status Quo: There are already a couple of websites that aim to make icons more accessible. To name two successful/popular of them: The Noun Project (https://thenounproject.com/) and iconfinder.com

iconfinder.com recently has reached more than 1,000,000 icons. The most popular sites that sell icons have each 1-7 million unique visitors per month. Estimations are that there are tens of thousands if not hundred thousand contributors to these sites. They are marketplaces with high commission rates. For example, at The Noun Project (a company which started with donations from kickstarter) designers earn an average 0,03$ per sold icon. There are therefore many designers who would rather give them away for free than to sell them at these platforms.

There is already a lot of symbols/icons at Wikimedia Commons. (Maybe someone knows how many?) The symbols at Commons are not that easy to find though. To attract more designers who would contribute it is necessary to present the symbols/icons in a more prominent place. comment was added by GabrielVogel (talk) 09:21, 14 September 2016

As far as I understand, the Bureaucrats' noticeboard is not the right venue for such announcement or discussion. Please see COM:VP. --Krd 16:08, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 16:08, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

User:BotMultichillT

Please review this bot's edits and ensure everything is per community consensus. Related. Jee 16:22, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

• +1 [1] The BOT put the name of the photographer in a field made for the author of the depicted artwork in the photo (e.g. a sculpture or a painting). And replace the information template, suitable for photographs, by the artwork template, not very suitable for photographs, and even less mandatory. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Jkadavoor and Christian Ferrer: Is this still an actual problem? If yes, please point to previous discussions and list one or two example difflinks. Thank you. --Krd 16:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

If the lack of response from the operator can be considered as s/he stopped/agreed to stop using the bot that way, then its OK. Otherwise not OK. Jee 16:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

• @Krd: It's fine, insofar as the operator does not force people to accept the changes (in no way mandatory) made by the BOT. I've nothing against Multichill or against the BOT. And I don't doubt about his good faith, and I thanks him for his work and his involvment, however if he don't have the pedagogy needed to convince this very great contributor then he let the files as they currently are, because we are not there to annoy the best contributors. If there is a(n) (edit) war, then I clearly chose my camp, and, sorry again to be a little harsh, this is not personal, but you will deal with me guys. For me this is fine now and this can be closed. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

  I agree this can be closed here, not least because I personally don't think that crats have a special authority here. If the issue arises again, I'd suggest to address this via AN/U. --Krd 18:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 18:11, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Noratelimit right

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T144689
RESOLVED

Hi! As a steward, I just assigned account creator userrights to Dr. Bernd Gross per ticket:2016081510009464 (steward queue) as he needs the noratelimit right to inform WLE winners per wikimail. Unfortunately, local bureaucrats cannot assign this right yet which is very helpful for events when you need to create more than 6 accounts within 24 hours, or send out wikimails, etc. without giving bot flags. You might consider assigning these rights yourselves. For that reason, consensus is required and a phabricator ticket needs to be created. // CC Steinsplitter who helped in this particular case. Best, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to support that, if anybody else will take care of creating the phabricator ticket. --Krd 15:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm also happy to support this change, and just created the necessary ticket on Phabricator (and assigned it to myself). odder (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Just letting everyone know that I submitted a patch for this configuration change last night, just waiting for a few more voices supporting this request. odder (talk) 14:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

• Support I support adding this group membership to the commons 'crats. (And could pretty easily be convinced to extend it to sysops). — xaosflux ^Talk 02:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support that's easier and better --Ibrahim.ID ♒ 03:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support. Makes sense for bureaucrats to be able to do this, as is already the case on enwiki. WJBscribe (talk) 13:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support. as above. Yann (talk) 22:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support. Helpfull. Natuur12 (talk) 23:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support. Dan Koehl (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
• Support. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:17, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
• Support useful Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 15:18, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
• Support INeverCry (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

---

• The ticket has now been closed as resolved, and the change has been merged and deployed onto the site. Many thanks to everyone who supported this change above. odder (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: odder (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Bots and the upload by URL right

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T145010
RESOLVED

This is a minor point with respect to rights, but I'm raising it here for the record in case there are later issues. In the past week I have added the image reviewer right to Faebot and Noaabot, both long term bots that previously were running uploads from known safe URL sources. As these are bots under my control and I have the IR right, this seemed reasonable in the absence of a clear policy as far as I'm aware. This was a work-around to changes to how accounts can upload from a white-listed URL. I'm unsure if this is a bug, as up until now I had presumed that any account can upload from white-listed URLs; perhaps changes to what bot accounts can now do without additional rights is an unintended consequence of reacting to the poor use of mass upload tools. Happy to be advised if there are related phabricator tasks, it's easy to lose track.

If the way this works changes, I'd be happy to drop the IR right from the two bots that currently seem to need it to function. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I haven't heard anything related, and I'm unable to take care of this for the next four weeks at least. --Krd 13:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I see no harm in adding (upload_by_url) to bots (and all autopatrolled if there are no security issues). The right just allows to upload files from a white listed url (see also phab T140040) and to import files from flickr using Upload Wizard. The url2commons has no restrictions at all (as far i know). --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I support upload_by_url for bots. --Krd 13:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I think will be good idea to give this right separately, because not all bot deals with uploading. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: And what is the sens of giving it separately? It would be the same as giving suppressredirect or changetags separately. I fail to see how you cane abuse the right. I wan to note again, url2commons has mainly the same funtions with no restrictions at all (as far i know). --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:11, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't see a point to give this right to all bots. Right could be requested in bot request. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: Your opinion would make sense if you would restrict standard upload as well for bots, because bots could still use url2commons in bot mode or download the file to local machine and upload it. And as far i know, in bot requests the bot flag (with a lot of rights) is getting assigned and not just a specific permission (such as edit, move, edit semi protected, etc.). I see no sense in restricting a uncontroversial and helpful tool. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:18, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Bot request contain information about its purpose. I don't see why additional right could not be requested, if bot is clearly about uploads. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@EugeneZelenko: given that the simplest solution would be to grant the flag to all bots, and this was effectively the status quo in the past, could you give an example of how you think any currently approved bot might misuse the upload-by-url right? I agree that it's a question that may be raised during bot approval, but considering the low risk of misuse for established bots, adding useful features like re-uploading damaged files or handling updates from the source might be the sort of thing that may be wholly appropriate for a bot not specifically focused on batch upload, and avoid the bureaucratic burden of a re-request for approval. Either way, I'm pleased that we are considering a slightly better process. --Fæ (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

The potential damage is very limited, and that such a misuse is going to happen by an approved bot is unrealistic. No need for an additional separate rights process. --Krd 11:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Please note that I have now created a Phabricator task for this request. odder (talk) 20:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi all—the configuration patch is now ready and awaits the establishment of a proper community consensus. odder (talk) 14:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@Odder this looks a bit stuck, for community consensus are you expecting tokens in Phabricator or votes here? --Fæ (talk) 14:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Fæ: I was hoping for a few more comments in favour of this change on this page, but it appears there isn't much interest (which is quite understandable—configuration changes are inherently boring). My current stance on this change is that if no more comments opposing it are voiced until Sunday night, I will use my bureaucrat discretion and request that the patch I submitted to Gerrit be approved. odder (talk) 19:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I support the proposal. As stated above, granting this to all bots is the simplest solution, it is basically just restoring the status quo and does not appear particularly open to abuse. WJBscribe (talk) 13:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

---

• The ticket has now been closed as resolved, and the change has been merged and deployed onto the site. Many thanks to everyone who supported this change above. odder (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: odder (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Kanonkas

Kanonkas has not edited Commons since June of 2015. It seems that his adminship (and thus his status as a crat) should have long since been revoked under the policy about de-adminship of inactive administrators. I assume this was an oversight. Revent^talk 05:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Kanonkas seems to do the required ten log actions every half year to retain his status, for 6 years now. Although this is within policy, I´m not sure if this appropriate. --Krd 06:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Krd: I have no personal issue with him, at all, I just noticed that he was long inactive. I trust the other crats to decide... if anything, I think it would be a matter of security until he resumes activity. Revent^talk 06:11, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Just realized, I said 'other'... not that I don't trust you, lol, I mean the crats 'as a group'. Revent^talk

You suggest to block him until 4 Jan 2017 in order to let him do 10 or 12 ip talk page deletions then? --Krd 06:38, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Umm, no, said nothing about blocking him... I'd rather assume that when/if he becomes active again as 'an editor' (and it's clearly 'him') that there wouldn't be any real opposition to him regaining the right.. it just seems unwise (insecure) to leave highly advanced permissions on an account that has been inactive for over a year now. Revent^talk 06:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

He isn´t inactive, see Special:Log/Kanonkas --Krd 06:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Krd: My mistake. I was looking at his 'edit' history (which shows nothing for far longer)... please consider this withdrawn. Revent^talk 06:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry but the requirement for keeping adminship is and quote " An "inactive admin" is one who has made fewer than 5 admin actions on Commons in the past 6 months", Kanokas intentionally makes around 10ish edits every 6 months (seems to be blocking proxies which don't even edit on commons) since 31st May 2010 to keep both his admin and bureaucrat rights and IMO, that is cheating and abusing the system set in place. Its bad enough we have admins/crats who do not want to do real work on commons but to cheat the system just so that they can hold onto their rights is downright pathetic. He should lose both his rights even if he comments here to save his rights because this is really very very petty..Thats over 6 years of 'cheating' the system...well done.. edit: apparently doing the same thing on enwiki to keep his rights there..--Stemoc 07:15, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree this user doesn't seem "active" since the end of 2010 by any dictionary definition of "active". Same goes for en:wp. A couple of pages worth of actions/log entries doesn't cut it. While the threshold for automatic removal of tools might be justifiably high, I don't think the community would regard this user as fulfilling their role as admin and especially not as a 'crat. So I'd support a de-admin request, though possibly that would have to be discussed on a higher profile forum than BN. -- Colin (talk) 07:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I would also support a de-admin request or at least he should lose the crat status. Perhaps someone wants to open a discussion at com:AN/U? Natuur12 (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

I would support a de-admin or at least a de-crat. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

A crat is not a rank where you can brag but a privilege of an experienced and established user willing to help in crat-related tasks. I support for a de-crat, but neutral for now in a de-admin. ★ Poké⁹⁵ 14:02, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll create the page at AN/U shortly. -- Colin (talk) 15:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Colin: Couldn't this have waited for at least 24 hours so Kanonkas had been given time to respond beforehand?    FDMS  4    18:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

FDMS4, what makes you think Kanonkas would have seen this BN post? And what possibly could he do in 24 hours to make the community think he should retain the admin bit, never mind the 'crat bit. He hasn't really edited here for six years! I followed the procedure at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship though this case isn't explicitly handled, and Natuur12's suggestion. I've posted on his talk page and sent an email. -- Colin (talk) 18:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Right, he was only linked to in the header, not pinged. We give straightforward-inactive admins 30 days to react; I would simply prefer having received any kind of explanation from his side before commenting on the user rights removal.    FDMS  4    18:54, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

FDMS4 have a look at the AN/U. He wouldn't have seen a ping either, as he's not active. I suspect you haven't understood the scale of the inactivity. What kind of explanation is likely to change anyone's mind? "I've been locked up in a high tower for six years by an evil prince and only allowed internet access for five minutes every six months"? :-) The automatic de-adminship policy applies for users who have not edited sufficiently in the last six months" and for merely six months there's quite a strong likelihood this is due to a short-term change of circumstances in real life that may change again to permit more activity again. But six years? Anyway, the de-aminship hasn't started, only an AN/U discussion for consensus. -- Colin (talk) 19:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

And right, pings don't trigger eMail notifications by default. I guess there are possible explanations other than your sarcastic example; also, this is about making a decision (as a community) having heard both sides, not primarily about getting anyone's mind changed.    FDMS  4    19:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@FDMS4: Since the note that I did not actually 'ping' him seemed a bit like a criticism of me, I just want to make it clear... I did not say 'I request that you revoke his rights', and did not intend to explicitly request that... my mentioning this here was simply to bring this to the attention of the active crats (since it appeared that 'processing' him as an inactive admin had been overlooked) and prompt them to address the issue. I 'withdrew' that on the basis of Krd pointing out that he had in fact met the technical requirements... that did not mean that I don't think the community should consider the issue (I do) but that the 'procedural' point I raised was actually incorrect. Further discussion of this should, really, move to AN/U. Revent^talk 23:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

 Comment Please continue any further discussion at COM:ANU#User:Kanonkas not active Revent^talk 23:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Revent^talk 23:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

account for GLAMtoolset

Hi,

The University of Amsterdam Special Collections intends to donate a large digitised collection of old, out of copyright, artwork mainly of animals.

Original images by occasionally famous artists are cutouts etc. from eighteenth and nineteenth century illustrated biology books. Image data format: .tif(f), say 30+ MB each. We want to use the GLAMtoolset for this. I have tested it on the beta server. We have to do some work on the mapping because we want to use the biohist template, which isn't working in the beta environment.

Example file is at: https://commons.wikimedia.beta.wmflabs.org/w/index.php?title=File:Paradisaea_apoda_-_1700-1880_-_Print_-_Iconographia_Zoologica_-_Special_Collections_University_of_Amsterdam_-_UBA01_IZ15700107.tif

I am working at the University of Amsterdam Special Collections as Digital Curator and coordinating the upload of the images.

Thanks!

Erik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebastia1 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ebastia1: Please create your user page (User:Ebastia1) if possible. --Krd 14:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

User page created ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebastia1 (talk • contribs) 08:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

And please see Commons:Signatures. GLAMtoolset granted. --Krd 08:55, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 08:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Inappropriate behavior by bureaucrat User:Krd

Earlier today Krd blocked a long-time editor for removing a category from images using cat-a-lot: User talk:Tm#You have been blocked for a duration of 1 day. The category, Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard, has been earmarked to be emptied and then deleted. Krd blocked Tm simply for removing a category from images. He didn't try to warn Tm or tell him not to do the cat-a-lot removals, he instead just blocked him. Tm then mentioned me and my removals of the same category with VFC. Like Tm, I thought I was helping out. Krd states to Tm at his talk that if he knew I was doing it he would've blocked me too. No warning, no communication, just a block. I'm an admin, so in order to block me he would likely have had to emergency de-sysop me since I can unblock myself. This would've been done to prevent removal of a category from some images!

As with Tm, just a quick post on my talk saying don't do the removals would've been the right thing to do for Krd. If he had told Tm to stop or myself, we would've stopped. No block would've been needed. Krd's block of Tm was a bad block. Only today did Krd put up a notice at the CFD not to manually remove the category: [2]. A bureaucrat shouldn't just be blocking good-faith editors with no attempt at communication. This is not an example of Krd leading the community the way a crat should. I would ask that Krd be instructed to try warnings or simply telling people to stop before administering what can only be viewed as unnecessary and unfair blocks like the block of Tm. lNeverCry 21:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

What underpins this incident is how best to apply bot related policies and norms to primary accounts. All bot operators are aware that if their bot is flooding watchlists in an unexpected way, then any administrator is free to take action to first block the bot account, then discuss the incident with the operator.

Unfortunately in this case, Tm was not running their own bot, but relying on cat-a-lot to make very large scale changes, which then were executed rapidly, as cat-a-lot is not subject to the throttle limits we see for other bots. It is clear to everyone that Tm was acting in good faith, and the root cause is that cat-a-lot is not intelligent enough to auto-throttle itself based on the volume of changes to stay within our guidelines for bots.

A positive outcome from this regrettable incident, would be that cat-a-lot may need to be changed so that either users are clearly warned that they are responsible for keeping jobs below an agreed size (say, 10,000 changes in one job), or even better, that cat-a-lot itself is improved to monitor its own queue and throttle jobs that run over a given time limit or number of changes (slowing right down to say, 10 changes per minute, so 1,000,000 changes would then take 2 months to run but avoid flooding).

Krd would have seen that all of Tm's changes were attributed to cat-a-lot. On seeing that attribution, a good emergency step may have been to halt all cat-a-lot's current jobs (which would not block cat-a-lot for other users). I'm unsure how that would be done, perhaps we can ping one of the operators to see if an equivalent of the emergency shut-off button used by other bots may be possible? --Fæ (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

(ec) Oh, there's a corollary I'd better spell out. If there is an auto-throttle as suggested, then this would clearly encourage any user with 1,000,000+ changes to set up a bot task specifically to do it in a fraction of the time, rather than applying an off-the-shelf tool. Any change of several million edits, would benefit from being run as a project, even if only discussed on Commons:Bots/Work requests. We certainly all want large scale changes like this to be right first time. --Fæ (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Cat-a-lot is JavaScript and does not much more than to automate user actions - there is no difference between the user acting by himself and the user operating cat-a-lot. So blocking a cat-a-lot action will always mean to block the user. But I see no bureaucrat action involved here, I guess this is the wrong place to discuss the issue. --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 21:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure, however even in JavaScript it is possible to enable monitoring of the outcome. I agree it may be an odd way to achieve throttling, which is better at the server end, which again should be achievable with a bit of thought even if it gets applied to a user's primary account. I also agree that BN is not the place to bounce it around, this is more the domain of Phabricator tasks. --Fæ (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Reinhard Kraasch: A bureaucrat is the one who took this action, so I think this is a perfect place to bring it up, especially since crats are supposed to guide the community, not abuse its members like they're robots. Tm is a hard-working human being who's dedicated to Commons. Cat-a-lot doesn't disable notifications does it? Tm had to remove a small batch of files, refresh the page, and do it again. In that time, Krd could've left him a talkpage message to stop the removals. If that didn't stop him, then maybe a block might've been required. But why not try communication first? I was using VFC to remove files. I had to reload the page after only 1000 or so removals. This took a minute or so. Upon reload I would've seen any talkpage message and responded to it as Tm very likely would've. lNeverCry 22:01, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

As far as I see it, Tm has been asked by several others to leave the job to a bot. --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The example you diff is a discussion that doesn't end with anything close to a clear reason or agreement to stop. More than one user in that quick discussion just asks Tm to do it a little differently. No block is mentioned either, and Poco is an admin. My question is still why communication from a crat wasn't attempted, and why Tm was just blocked for doing something that was agreed upon at CFD. As I state above, Krd only added the note not to manually remove the cat today. Where is the respect and consideration for Tm? Is removing this cat an emergency? Krd states he would've blocked an admin (me) to stop the removals. How often have you seen a crat block an admin with no warning and no emergency (removing a category with cat-a-lot or VFC is perhaps an annoyance if it floods a watchlist, but not an emergency in any sense). I didn't have anyone tell me I flooded their watchlist, and I removed 250,000 files altogether. Tm may have seen me doing it and thought it was OK. This is some heavy-handed treatment at best. My question still stands: why not warn Tm and give him 15 minutes to stop before applying a block that was obviously upsetting? lNeverCry 22:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

INC, good point. I waffled too much before considering the visual interface. It can be automated, but I'm presuming that Tm was not using a work-around. --Fæ (talk) 22:12, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

And Tm indicates he did 1800 edits with cat-a-lot in a half hour. That tells me he was likely doing batches of 200 at a time. He would've seen a talk notice within a minute or two. No need for a block. He wasn't running any unapproved bot either, he was using a tool we all have available, so what part of blocking policy was used here? lNeverCry 22:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

My suggestion might be a bit conroversial but how about talking this over with Krd first before writing a melodramatic complaint? Natuur12 (talk) 22:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

You're involved in a separate dispute with me and Ellin, so a revenge comment/insult like this is completely inappropriate. As for talking it over with Krd, where is he? He's the one that mentioned blocking me at someone else's talk. lNeverCry 23:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

So much bad faith. I didn't insult you and believe me, taking revenge is not my style. Though your excessive usage of fallacy's is starting to annoy me but that's something different. Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid that's not an acceptable response. This really is not helpful behaviour. I concur with Natuur12 in this instance, discuss with Krd first and escalate the issue if the response you receive, after a sensible period of time, is not sufficient/appropriate. It's not conducive to good relations with other administrative personnel if you open the conversation demanding their head on a plate. Mellow used to be the buzzword for Commons, not English Wikipedia, could we get back to that mellowness. Nick (talk) 23:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Discuss it first like Krd did with Tm? I'm not up for hypocrisy today Nick. As for Natuur12, he has a separate dispute concerning me and Ellin Beltz, so his comment above is clear baiting and revenge. I'm not demanding anyone's head. Krd mentioned blocking me on someone else's talk, so why should I give him the respect he didn't give me? I only saw his comment because Tm had the consideration to link me for a mention notification. lNeverCry 23:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Tm had previously been warned about not using a bot to empty the category in question though, this was not an out of the blue block, but one which Tm must surely have considered was possible in light of the previous discussion. Hypocrisy is not a good word, and I'm not being hypocritical, I'm suggesting you take a mellow, friendly, collegial approach and reach out to Krd first, even if Krd hasn't treated Tm in the way you expect of them. They're here, being an editor and administrator because they value this project, they have the same goals and objectives we all share, there's no need to make bad assumptions about them, or to treat them shabbily, even if they've treated someone else shabbily, rise above it, and do the same with Ellin and Natuur12. Nick (talk) 23:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Nick: What bot? Tm used cat-a-lot. He did 1800 edits in a half-hour. That's really not much considering the speed of cat-a-lot. He wasn't warned. Poco was the only admin in the discussion and he gave no warning. He asked Tm not to do it, but no direct warning was ever given and no block was threatened. That was 10 days ago. I would also point out that this block was initiated by a post on AN by an SPA sock account [3]. Wanna guess who that is? I've got a decent idea. lNeverCry 01:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment I had recently brought a complaint against another bot operator who refused to postpone his actions until a consensus is achieved. The moment I raised the complaint, the user stopped such edits. But didn't engage in a constructive discussion. Similarly I asked McZusatz and Steinsplitter don't mix two types of edits in a single edit by the bot as it is difficult to review. Steinsplitter immediately accepted it; McZusatz refused. So my request to the crats is don't allow bot operator who have a non-willingness to listen the community to make mass-edits. Rudeness is not an acceptable behavior irrespective of how important they are here.

Edits by cat-a-lot and COM:VFC also flood the watchlist as the bot edits. The latter can be filtered out though. From the complaints by many users in different places, it is clear that people are not educated before starting these mass edits. Many people are watching their uploads and they can remove this category themselves without flooding the watchlist (or as a single flood) than random flooding every now and then. Jee 04:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Well it seems every bot wants to join in the fun and make pointless edits that only remove this category. Why is this desirable? Just ignore the category, and bots can remove it if they make other useful changes to a page. -- Colin (talk) 08:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

It was my first impression too when I saw that discussion. That category seems to do no harm or good. But the current mess (flooding our watchlist) is disturbing. Jee 09:22, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Anyway:

1. Krd has removed the block after 4 hours
2. Tm has been asked before not to use cat-a-lot
3. the category removal as such is a questionable undertaking
4. Krd has not been spoken with before opening this case
5. and after all: this was - if at all - not a bureaucrat's misbehavior (and by the way: bureaucrats are not "super-admins").

This section was archived on a request by: --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 10:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Translation administrators inactivity

Please remove TA permission from following accounts per Commons:Translation administrators/Policy (no TA action within one year):

• Denniss (self-granted more than a year ago, never used)
• Glavkos (granted 28 November 2015, never used)
• XenonX3
• WikiBronze

Excluded: Admins, WMF-Staff
--Steinsplitter (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 16:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 16:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Pokéfan95

Hi, can a crat please close my RfA as withdrawn? Thanks, ★ Poké⁹⁵ 12:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 13:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: ★ Poké⁹⁵ 13:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Translation admin request

Hi! I'm currently translating some pages here, and while doing it I find some mistakes in the source pages that I'd like to correct. People often forget to use the Special:MyLanguage and "tvar" tags, do some other mistakes in tagging and so on. Besides, the translation admins often forget to check the "do not mark this message as outdated" box, so that adding or removing a comma results in an outdated message and somewhat ruined translators' work (this I encountered somewhere today). I'd like to be able to fix all these while I'm translating stuff. Besides, after adding the tvar tags and other minor changes I usually also update the translations, at least those with the largest percentage of translated content.

I'm a sysop on ukwiki and a translation administrator on meta-wiki (you can check my translation log there). I should also note that I work as a WikiOgre, which means that I might be inactive here for most of the time, but if I get some kind of motivation, I'll come and do a large amount of edits.--Piramidion (talk) 00:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done --Krd 10:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

 Thank you.--Piramidion (talk) 10:58, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 10:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Translation admin inactivity

Kelson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Please remove translation admin rights from this user's account. He's been inactive since December 23, 2015 (see log). Besides, he's marked for translation pages that are in German, with no English version available at all (like this one: Commons:Swiss GLAMmies/2015-02-28 Bockenkrieg – seems to be in German, this one Commons:Swiss GLAMmies/2014-03-31 Das Motorrad mit den Skiern is in French). Now I'm deleting them from translation system and placing the /en ones on a speedydelete queue. Perhaps the /de versions should be deleted too (they're duplicates)?--Piramidion (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done (removed) --Krd 08:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Krd 12:28, 6 January 2017 (UTC)