Stewards' noticeboard

Hello. The Ladino Wikipedia is a small community and a slowly improving WP as Judaeo-Spanish (Ladino) is a endangered language. It is my mother tongue and I've been active in the Ladino WP since 2008 as an admin. Unfortunately, due to real life problems, I couldn't continue my activities in the last 2 years or so. I am planning to resume my activities soon, however I have received a message about the removal of "advanced rights" due to inactivity. Other admins, such as Chabi also objected to this in our Village Pump. There are very few admins and it's hard to keep up with the administrative duties with our number. Please, also see my reply in our Village Pump. Due to all of these reasons, and for the efficient improvement of our WP, I would like that my rights and that of StevenJ81) remain as they are. Thank you in advance, --Universal Life (talk) 13:58, 5 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

FYI @Stanglavine and MarcoAurelio:, as it's related to AAR21#ladwiki. In addition to comments here. Best --Alaa :)..! 16:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the ping. The policy mentions that [t]he notified users should then post information to the local community about the notice of maximum inactivity they received from the stewards in order to discuss the matter. On past discussions there was some agreement in that indeed the user subject to review should reply to the notice and ask to keep their permissions. On the other hand, the policy allows for stewards' discretion on Admin activity review § Policy 4.3. Considering that all lad.wikipedia active users are asking to keep these users' permissions, I don't think we should be forcing a removal upon them when the aim of this process is ultimately to leave each decision to local communities and they're asking to keep them. I'd however mention in the local village pump that if they remain inactive, they'll be subject to the same process next year and so. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree with MA. If the community wish to keep their rights, as expressed, I think these rights should be kept. But if StevenJ81 doesn't return, they will be subject to this review again next year, and next, and next. We know how much important is a good admin team for a small project, but inactive accounts with advanced permissions are also a security risk. This is just a note to think, but I agree with keep these permissions on AAR2021. Regards, stanglavine ^msg 14:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Marking as not done then. I'll notify the lad.wikipedia community. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear Stewards,

The Chinese Wikipedia (zhwiki) community has reached consensus to set up the sockpuppetry investigations (SPI) board, having procedures similar to that of the English Wikipedia SPI. As of today, our CheckUser requests are still required to be processed here at Meta by you stewards and not locally. This message is to notify you that the local process on submitting CheckUser requests to SRCU from w:zh:Wikipedia:元維基用戶查核請求 (HAM) will soon be deprecated and instead be replaced by the SPI process at w:zh:Wikipedia:傀儡調查.

As of the local consensus, the zhwiki SPI system also consists of SPI clerks (調查助理), as in the enwiki system. The SPI clerk team (as a whole) shall be responsible for deciding whether CheckUser requests are coherent to local and global policies, and endorse or decline CheckUser requests accordingly (including self-endorsing their own requests). They shall represent the local community's decision on whether a case should require CheckUser, and thus be submitted to SRCU, in replacement for the original procedure at HAM where CheckUser requests are required to be endorsed by members of the community or wait for a few days before submitting a request to Meta.

The community agreed on requiring the SPI clerk team to be trusted by both local sysops and you stewards (as opposed to CheckUsers like in enwiki, which we don't have Orz). The self-nomination process has been going on for over a week, and the following members of the zhwiki community have received endorsements on being the first SPI clerks:

• LuciferianThomas (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
• Itcfangye (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
• SCP-2000 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
• Timmyboger (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)
• 1233 (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

The above clerk nominees list is required to be made public here at the Stewards' noticeboard for seven days before taking the position, in case any stewards would have any opinions on the credibility of the above users. If there is no opposition to the above nominations, these five (5) users will take their position as SPI clerks from February 14, 2022, marking the switch from HAM to SPI at zhwiki, and therefore, if you have any comments about the listed nominees, please do not hesitate to leave your comment below.

Thank you for your attention. (Pinging stewards who actively helped with zhwiki CheckUser requests in the past years: @Sotiale, -revi, علاء, AmandaNP, and Martin Urbanec, I apologize if I missed out any.)

Regards,
Luciferian☆ 16:39, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Additional note: As the system is newly set up, the community agreed on a backup procedure, where the local community can still forward CheckUser requests with consensus on checking if there were no active stewards on any cases for 7 days, similar to how HAM worked. This procedure is only left to ensure that SPI cases would not backlog if unfortunately all clerks are unavailable for a few days, and as there are no local CheckUsers to actively process the requests. --Luciferian☆ 16:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@LuciferianThomas: no active *clerks*? --魔琴 (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear zhwiki community members, thanks for sharing your news here. Before I give you my opinion, I would like to ask you a question about the change the steward team will experience. What changes will stewards experience? For example, I wonder if only the 5 users listed above can post normal requests from zhwiki to SRCU. --Sotiale (talk) 12:07, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

SPI Clerks, similar to that in English Wikipedia, will be responsible for the SPI+RfCU procedures, including endorsing CU requests (and thus submitting requests to SRCU), requesting more information before submitting (if necessary), or declining them. Stewards can expect requests that are less likely (and hopefully not at all) to contain obvious mistakes like insufficient reasoning, inclusion of IPs in regular requests (as SPI accepts cases on IP abuse), or situations like this etc., as it will be the responsibility of the clerk team to prevent these from happening.

As far as there are active SPI clerks, it is most likely that cases will be submitted to Meta by clerks, but if there are situations where the procedures cannot be completed (all clerks being inactive for a few days, which is unlikely, hence this is just a backup procedure), then SRCU submission through community consensus is allowed, similar to the original procedures of HAM, as written in local SPI guides. You would expect most if not all request submissions from clerks. Also about "only the 5 users listed", clerks are selected on as needed basis, so if the current five clerks aren't enough to handle SPI cases, then admissions will be welcome and more will be admitted into the clerks team (and we will notify stewards in a similar fashion while checkuser is still unavailable on zhwiki). It's still around the same number of zhwiki users who actively help on submitting reports to SRCU anyways.

On the Stewards' side, the introduction of SPI and the clerks system at zhwiki will hopefully improve the efficiency of SRCU processes by reducing possible mistakes, and also reduce miscommunication like in this incident. It is also expected to give a major boost on cooperation between the average users and sysops on anti-vandalism and sockpuppetry identification, as well as reducing troll-feeding situations on zhwiki local. Luciferian☆ 13:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Stewards should reject requests from non-admins from zhwp apart from the clerks (and I don't see a lot of admins doing the check thingy). So no more issues of "I don't know if I need to process the request of XXX from zhwp". It is also considered as a consolidation of the June 2018 consensus where a local page was set up to screen the requests.--1233 （T / C） 10:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps there were not many cases where non-admin requests were accepted. No, there wouldn't be. Then what about requests from admins? Of course, even if the admins make a request, it will be rejected if there isn't a good reason to ask the steward right away(ex. oversighted username or privacy related, etc), but has there been a separate consensus in your community about this? --Sotiale (talk) 11:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Note: Aside from my question, the list of clerks for which you requested comments seems fine to me. I don't know if I'm qualified to comment on them, but I think they are users with the right competencies to do their clerk mission. Since you volunteered, I believe you will do a great job as a bridge between stewards and the zhwiki community. Perhaps they are having a very difficult time, but good luck anyway. --Sotiale (talk) 11:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your comment. As for your question at 11:32 (UTC) about administrators self-endorsing CU requests and submitting them to SRCU, this seems to be overlooked in the discussions, I will raise the community's attention on these suggestions (probably will suggest with whether admins can self-endorse requests listed as local CUPs). Luciferian☆ 13:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I am contacting you regarding the notice that was left on Townsquare of Serbian Wiktionary, announcing that my Admin rights will be revoked on this project, due to inactivity of two years. Since the community on our Wiktionary is currently minimal, there is not enough people to join the discussion, so I am kindly asking you to let me keep my admin rights on it, in case there are some vandalisms or project proposals by the SR Wikipedia community. Thanks in advance. --Mickey Mystique (talk) 15:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I am contacting you regarding the notice that was left on my user page, announcing that my Admin rights will be revoked on this project, due to inactivity of two years. I am kindly asking you to let me keep my admin rights on it. Thanks in advance. --Aldedogn (talk) 14:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Due to the on-going attack on the global projects, I'm issuing Global Rollback and Abuse Filter helper to previous trusted community members with existing advanced permissions in order to abate the attack. The grants are limited to a max of 24 hours and, if required past this time, will be subject to community consent as per established policy. Operator873 ^connect 03:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks to those still volunteering, but right now we should have enough to mitigate the attack. Should that change, someone should post here again. -- Amanda (she/her) 15:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, can a privileged editor remove the visibility of several edits in my userpage where I've written my personal information? --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 23:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Done by another administrator. Next time, these types of requests can be placed in Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Thanks! —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 16:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

thank you, I'll note it. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 05:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

The 2022 Steward elections have ended today (13:59 UTC). The Election Committee, after verifying the votes, has announced the final results. The following 5 candidates were elected:

1. AntiCompositeNumber (talk · contribs)
2. BRPever (talk · contribs)
3. Hasley (talk · contribs)
4. TheresNoTime (talk · contribs)
5. Vermont (talk · contribs)

We thank all of the candidates for their time and interest and the voters for the time spent reviewing the candidates and taking part in this relevant global election. Also we wish to thank all the other volunteers who helped in the coordination of the process.

The results of the 2022 Stewards confirmation will be determined in the upcoming days, starting on next Monday.

For the Election Committee, RadiX∞ 14:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations  ! --Alaa :)..! 15:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congrats   --Uncitoyen^talk 15:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations to all the stewards elected and thank you to those who volunteered :) Ferien (talk) 15:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

The StewardMark data has been updated for 2022. Leaderboard (talk) 15:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations to all the new Stewards! JavaHurricane 15:39, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congrats, and last but not least, I believe we still have some work for newly elected stewards at SRG. Happy (un)(b)locking! NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:16, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks to everyone who voted—as always, I appreciate criticism and advice 😊 -- TNT (talk • she/her) 17:32, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations to the new and returning stewards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulation! Ruslik (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Woohoo! —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 20:34, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations! 🎉 ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congrats! -- CptViraj (talk) 04:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations! stanglavine ^msg 17:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

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

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

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

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