User talk:DarkMatterMan4500/Archive 1

__NOINDEX__

Hello
Hello.

--SoloPatriot7890 (talk) 16:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

How to invite users into Discord servers
Linking to Discord channels won't allow the users into the server. It's making an invite link by clicking invite links then editing the link to indefinite that allows you to do so. I noticed that on your youTube profile.

--SoloPatriot7890 (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Alrighty then.
 * (Sorry for my late reply.) DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Miraheze!
Hello,, and welcome to Miraheze! Miraheze is a free, non-profit wiki hosting service. If you would like to start a wiki please fill in this form or, if you'd like to contribute to an existing wiki, please see a few wikis here or the full list of wikis here. Note that (private) wikis aren't accessible unless you are given access, and closed wikis cannot be edited.

For more information, please see our FAQ. If you have any additional questions, concerns, or comments, please feel free to contact us. Amanda Catherine (talk) 13:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Please unban QwertyMan'65 on wikis
You betrayed me by banning in crappygames.miraheze.org. Please stop doing that behavior because it's encourage cruelty. I am not a freaking troll nor vandal, i excuse my forgiveness, because i explained with ADHD to my behavior, Then i need change of heart. You're such a bad move by betraying me at crappy games wiki. Also you banned me from awesome games wiki, because you're a cruel person in general. How much in the user can ban another user for petty reason?! I want forgive my actions and need some work! Why you block forever to me? this was a harsh criticism, and treated like a torture. When we just need some treatment from kindly people, then i need to seek out the new life and the wikis will be forgivable. They need to reveal the about QwertyMan'65, so they need to find the human rights abuse? Well this is such a abused action made by darkmatterman4500! I want to be an ordinary man with change of heart. QwertyMan'65 (talk)) 06:14, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * First off, you have been vandalizing multiple wikis by adding non-sense. Second, how the hell was I even abusing you in the first place? You've been spamming not only me with messages, but also spamming other users. You've been constantly spamming the Stewards on the Stewards noticeboard, and finally, please stop lying. I do not have time to deal with your persistence. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 13:06, October 18 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, you're a freaking liar to me! I'm not spamming towards steward, you're trying to slander me, by calling me a liar?!

Stop doing offensive actions towards me, and you should know that try be nice and be civil while talking so you could be a respectful person. I'm not a freaking spammer you understand!?. Look, i'm trying to seek out the newcomers in wikis to work someone out in order to get happiness around internet, then i mentioned that code of conduct is a key to success while contributing toward wikis. QwertyMan&#39;65 (talk) 08:38, 19 October 2020 (UTC)


 * QwertyMan'65 Okay, now you're just asking for drama. Here's something to do, stop calling DMM a liar (It's also ironic that you're calling him out for braking TOU and yet you're doing the same thing) second, try taking a 1 to 3 day break. I did that on Scratch (I'm Rainbowkid35 there) and maybe improve your English. A similar thing happened to Μπέλα2006 (he was whining at Duchess) and Naturecat1998, a user on FANDOM (Ask the Qubo Wiki admins). Also, the way you're exactly doing does sort of look like that you're spamming. So... --Madelinefan (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As I have noted on QwertyMan'65's talkpage as well, it is important that the Code of Conduct is respected when discussing things with other users, which includes Meta. The discussion above does not seem to adhere to the Code of Conduct. As I have done with DarkMatterMan4500 and QwertyMan'65, I recommend that you stop interacting with each other, as it seems nothing good comes out of these interactions. I also would like to say that any accusations should be backed up by facts and evidence and that empty accusations will not be taken into account. If these senseless discussions continue further and repeat themselves, "official" interaction bans may be imposed. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 10:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Your interactions with QwertyMan'65
Hi. I just wanted to let you know that it would probably be preferable if you limited your interactions with QwertyMan'65 globally. While he may have violated local policies and vandalised certain pages, I don't think that it's appropriate to target him by blocking him on every Reception wiki before he even edits there, and that that behavior may border on a Code of Conduct violation (harassment) and not assuming good faith. I would suggest that you report specific instances of on-wiki vandalism on SN so that a Steward or Global Sysop can handle it, rather than handling it yourself. In your warning to him which you then deleted you mention that he has been "constantly spamming on multiple wikis". If that is the case, please do feel free to report that, as "spamming on multiple wikis" would amount to cross-wiki vandalism and be subject to a global lock. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 14:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice. I will limit my interactions with him. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 15:01, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I also apologize for technically trying to block him on every other reception wiki. The only reason for that was to prevent him from messing up pages, just as a precaution. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 15:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Reporting without evidence
Hi, this is for documentation purposes, as I've already told you this VIA discord:

If you continue to report others without evidence to Stewards, and/or CVT you could have action taken against you tor disruptive behaviour. This is your ONLY warning, as you have been told in the past. Thanks! Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 15:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright, I won't do that again. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 16:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Asking questions concerning other users in appropriate revenues
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

I have reverted your good-faith question regarding another user's steward-imposed sanction at BlackWidowMovie0000Editor for a couple reasons. One, there are privacy limitations on what a steward can or cannot say. I suspect you have all the publicly available information to make an accurate inference. Two, even if comment or response could be provided, it would be most inappropriate to engage in a dialogue with uninvolved third parties on the subject user's user talk page.

If you have any questions, please kindly direct message or me on Discord.

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I had no other place to say it as of the time I wrote you a message. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries, I just wanted to provide you some guidance. To be clear, I was referring to your posting on BlackWidowMovie0000Editor, not your asking me on my user talk page, which you posted after asking on the former page. Hope that makes sense, and trust your questions have been answered? Dmehus (talk) 15:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, it's all answered. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

irc or discord
hey do you have discord, or irc i have something i want to show you privately? and can you leave me your discord username+tag or irc username? --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 15:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I already have you on Discord. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Welcoming users to Meta
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

Thank you for welcoming new Miraheze users to Meta, as you did with welcoming this user; however, I thought it would be helpful to let you know of our non-codified conventions and guidelines with respect to welcoming new users, which is to welcome new users only after they've made contributions to Meta. The two reasons for this are as follows:


 * 1) New users usually have their account automatically attached to Meta wiki without ever having any intention of participating here; and,
 * 2) New users also end up being spam-only or vandalism-only accounts, so there's no need to welcome what will be those single-purpose accounts. Instead, it is best to check their Special:Contributions and welcome new users only when they make their first (or more) contribution(s) to Meta.

As well, in this case, OmarTheSponge is a legitimate alternate account of another user, as seen here. Because that user has yet to login to that alternate user account, it's not yet attached as a global account, as seen here.

Also, separately, regarding the Twinkle templates, Naleksuh is working on de-Wikipedia-ifying them, as we don't use all those templates. So, for now, you may want to just use  There's no need to sign your posts, as one will be included for you with that substituted template.

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 14:50, 14 November 2020 (UTC)


 * That's quite understandable, especially since I am replying a bit late to this thread now. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I will reiterate what Dmehus has says: Don't use Twinkle for welcoming as this part was not changed for Miraheze for the moment. Thanks! HeartsDo (Talk / Global / Wiki Creator) 11:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Very well. I will wait until it is complete. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Guiding you on appropriate use of the Report tool
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

Thank you for being the first person to use the newly added Report tool in your report of this revision; however, as far as I can tell, that doesn't require reporting. In my view, this tool should be for reporting specific revisions requiring (a) revision deletion (after which an administrator would privately determine whether suppression is required after handling) or (b) reversion (i.e., blatant vandalism). I'd like to allow all registered users to use the report tool, but if it is misused too often, we may need to restrict it to patrollers, perhaps. , do you have anything to add?

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Alright then, thank you very much. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, thank you for understanding. Dmehus (talk) 19:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

We REALLY need to talk, this is getting out of hand
I want to know why you and DuchessTheSponge have been blocking me on wikis I haven’t done anything wrong on. First of all, let me just say, I unblocked you and everyone else on The Wow House Wiki. I know you and Duchess hate me but seriously, this is getting far to out of hand, and if it continues, I may have no choice but to get the stewards involved. Because I caused no drama on those wikis, and by blocking me you are just opening up more opportunities for drama. You and Duchess don’t have to like me, but since I am gonna be here for a while, can we please just co-exist in the meantime, and you and Duchess can unblock me, and we can have peace. Once my FANDOM global block is up, I may be returning there. Also, I literally have been inactive for the past few days. I have not made any threats. I admit I did start a little drama on Terrible TV Shows Wiki over that blog post but I got my month block for that and learned by lesson, there is no need to continue blocking me cross wiki for things I did on one wiki. You can keep me blocked Terrible TV Shows Wiki if you want, but I want you and Duchess to unblock me on the wikis I did nothing wrong on. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


 * You have since been unblocked from those specific wikis. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Template:Helped
Are you sure that isn't enough? --Integer talk 01:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I saw that has deleted them understandably. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note that I have procedurally moved this discussion from Template talk:Helped following Template:Helped's deletion. Where deletion of a subject page or template is a distinct possibility, please try and centralize the discussion at Administrators' noticeboard or on the user talk page of a relevant user. Hope that helps.
 * I personally agree with you Integer. This template is a duplication, though a duplication of Template:Done. Dmehus (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Integer talk 01:25, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. Dmehus (talk) 01:26, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I've only added those templates simply because Meta could use some more of them. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Yeah, that's fine, and it was done in good-faith, but just try and consider that if we have too many duplicates of templates that do the same thing, that's more templates to update periodically. More work with a limited supply of volunteers. Dmehus (talk) 01:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Mass creation of templates for Meta Wiki
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

As with Integer, your creation of templates for Meta Wiki is done in good-faith and laudable, so for that (Reviewing is a  useful template you added, by the way). However, I can't help but feel like you are both adding templates en masse from English Wikipedia, principally, without regard to the templates' utility. Additionally, please consider that Meta Wiki is not Miraheze Template Wiki, the free template repository. In my local capacity as an administrator on Miraheze Template Wiki, I'd be willing to grant you local importer privileges on that wiki if you are wanting to assist in importing useful templates that have broad, pan-Miraheze applicability, but only if you commit to importing templates that are (a) not too Wikipedia-specific, (b) in keeping with Miraheze Template Wiki's community-approved scope, and if (c) you commit to de-Wikipedia-ifying them. I wouldn't want to add  on that wiki, though, until I get a feel for whether or not you understand the wiki's approved purpose and scope.

Additionally, while being bold is good, please do consider the rate of your page and template creation on Meta Wiki. There isn't a terrible lot more that needs doing, but if you're interested in helping in some other way, just ask.

In addition, in your case, I was particularly troubled by your involved involvement, appearing to act in a pseudo-Meta administrator capacity, on the user talk page of a user with whom you have shared local  relationship on various local wikis, despite Reception123 and I asking you to avoid doing this here (and elsewhere).

I'm going to allow your  user group to stand for now, but bear in mind that if administrators feel your revisions need a bit of extra review with the heightened awareness that unpatrolled revisions provide, it may be revoked for broad, discretionary reasons.

Thanks for your understanding. :)

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 15:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll stay out of it as much as possible and will only allow you guys to do so. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * And, the reason why I acted the way I did was to give them advice, and I had no intention of acting like an admin, when I'm an admin on other wikis, and not here. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you. Yeah, it's honestly best you just not comment on interactions by a third-party with a user with whom you have close contacts elsewhere. Definitely don't have to participate less, just reach out to us to see what you can help with. Dmehus (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Asking for confirmation edits when Stewards and/or Global Sysops have already done so
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

While you are doing this in good-faith, I'm going to ask you to please cease asking for confirmation edits, somewhat broadly construed, as you did here, especially when a Steward and/or Global Sysop has already done so.

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk) 02:24, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * That's perfectly fine, but if you have a minute (or when you are finished doing whatever you're doing), feel free to see your messages on you know what channel I'm talking about, so I'll save you some time when you're finished doing whatever task you're doing at this fine moment. :) DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, about what you said, I mostly have this type of need to jump in and do all of this stuff out of impulsiveness. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll try and get to it before bed tonight, but no promises. It might wait until tomorrow. Dmehus (talk) 02:37, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Tomorrow sounds like a done deal to me. :) DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Apology for posting on a locked and closed wiki
I'm very terribly sorry for posting on a locked wiki that had a ManageWiki bug issue. But, for what it's worth, thanks for deleting them anyway. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 ✅. It was related to a bug, so it was good in that sense in that it identified a bug. Dmehus (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Can I be unblocked on Rotten Websites Wiki
I didn’t do anything wrong there, the block summary says “An SJW” even though I am not an SJW and political beliefs are not a reason for a ban. The user who blocked me, SpazJR61, is globally locked so I figured I would ask you instead. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I already unblocked you on that wiki as soon as I saw the feed on Discord. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok Blubabluba9990 (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Editing Archived Discussions
Hi, I have reverted your edits to an archived discussion. Once a discussion gets closed, except under exceptional circumstances they shouldn’t be edited. Typos do not fall under exceptional and the value a correction after a discussion gets closed is extremely minor compared to a live discussion or one where no reply has been received for. Thanks John (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks anyway. I did spot the mistake in my sentence there. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:34, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Wiki creator helpful tips
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

First off, I will just start by welcoming you to the wiki creator team. Thank you for volunteering. As you are no doubt aware, Content Policy is our key global policy that guides us in creating wikis for customers. Essentially, every wiki needs to have both a clear purpose, some sort of scope (broad or narrow), and a topical focus. This is the main criterion that helps us to determine whether a wiki will have any potential Content Policy problems.

Second, I wanted to share with you a few tips that I found helpful when I first joined as a wiki creator:


 * 1) Study the wiki creator's guide. It contains many best practices, some of which are required steps wiki creators are required to undertake in approving requests.
 * 2) "Request comments" tab. Intuitively, one would think to use this tab when requesting more information, but as Amanda Catherine (and others) pointed out to me shortly after I joined as a wiki creator, there used to be a known issue with this in that the requestor wasn't notified via e-mail unless their wiki is either (a) approved or (b) declined. While there are now notifications, it's still advantageous to decline wiki requests needing more information to maintain a streamlined queue and to take "ownership" of requests, in a sense. Thus, when requesting more information on a wiki request, you really either (a) use the "decline" tab, referencing your follow-up comments in that text box and telling them to back into Special:RequestWikiQueue/  in order to add to, but not replace, their existing description with the needed information or (b) use either the "request comments" or "decline" tab in combination with a message on the requestor's user talk page on Meta. The approach you use is entirely up to you. I personally prefer option A, but either one is fine;
 * 3) Private wikis. Private wikis can generally have a shorter description and a less specific purpose, scope, or topic, but they do still need one. If you have some reservations about approving it as, say, a public wiki, due to that vagueness, you can tell them, in your comments prior to approving it, that you're approving it only as a private wiki and remind them to ensure their wiki complies with all aspects of Content Policy;
 * 4) Eurovision song contest and fictional worldbuilding wikis. These are two types of wikis that have few, if any, problems with them. So, as long as there's a clear sitename, URL, and at least a few words in the description that indicates this as the purpose, it's fine to approve them;
 * 5) Reception wikis (positive and negative). Many of the Reception wikis tend to give us the most the grief, especially in terms of content that is very negative about users. If it's a Reception wiki that focuses on terrible fast-food restaurants, that's usually less problematic than, say, one that focuses on gamer or YouTube celebrities, mainly because you're not dealing with content about real, living people. Please don't hesitate in asking follow up questions, sometimes multiple times, of these wikis, trying to narrow down whether the wikis will write about real people in some way and, if so, how they will do it. And, at the end of the day, if you are still not comfortable approving, you can write "on hold" for review by another wiki creator in "request comments";
 * 6) Chinese language mini-world wiki requests. These ones are tricky, but cause us arguably the most grief, particularly when they publish personal information of real people without their consent. Stewards have recently closed a swath of them following a detailed report on stewards' noticeboard, but some of the tricks I've observed them using are odd descriptions like "anti-dog wiki" or to "expose the truth and scandal". Somewhat less common, they will use a completely different, but vague, description, then change their tune when you follow up with them and use some of those key phrases I mentioned in the previous sentence;
 * 7) Google Translate. Don't hesitate to use Google Translate to review non-English public and private wikis. Notwithstanding the above point, most of these wikis' descriptions translate surprisingly well. As you've probably already noticed, I like to copy and paste the translated to English description into "request comments," so other wiki creators can see it easily. This is optional, but it's a good practice, I think; and,
 * 8) Don't hesitate to reach out on Discord and ask for a second opinion. If you are still unsure about approving a wiki, or just want a second opinion, don't hesitate to reach out to any wiki creator on Discord. This might be the most important guideline.

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I won't hesitate to deal with those with certain entities in place. But thanks for the tip nonetheless. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

A couple more great best practices
Hi again DarkMatterMan4500,

A couple more essential best practices I thought I'd share, one or both of which may already be doing...


 * 1) After approving a wiki, it's a very good  required practice to either (a) visit the wiki you created and use Special:ListUsers to make sure the requestor has   rights on the wiki or (b) use Special:CentralAuth on Meta to verify the requestor has   rights on the wiki. I personally use option B now as it is (a) quicker, (b) I manage the number of wikis to which I attach my user account, and (c) with private wikis, you can't view Special:ListUsers anyway; and,
 * 2) It's helpful, I think, to provide comments prior to your approving a wiki. Again, this is technically optional, but is definitely a good practice to continue, if you want.

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh, I didn't know that I could do that. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:37, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Okay, cool. Dmehus (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So this essentially means that I, as a rookie wiki creator, should check on their wikis from time to time to check on their progress? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:51, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, no not exactly. I mean, that is a fine practice if you want to proactively reach out to wiki requestors to see if they require assistance with their wiki and also to ensure their approved wiki is indeed what they requested their wiki for, but wasn't what I meant by the above added section. What I meant above is that after you approve a wiki, you should verify in CentralAuth, or by visting the wiki, whichever you prefer, to ensure (a) the wiki was created by the CreateWiki extension and (b)  and   rights were assigned to the requestor, as on rare occasions, this doesn't happen. Dmehus (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, I understand now. Yes, I've seen people come to the Stewards' noticeboard telling them that their rights weren't immediately added, so it essentially does make more sense, as well as additionally requesting their rights be added as soon as possible. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Declined
May I ask why my wiki request was declined? I'd just like to know as I do want to have a wiki here. Blaze The Wolf (talk) 20:38, 18 March 2021 (UTC)


 * That's because the database for that wiki name already exists. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh ok. I can choose a new name then. My apologies, I'm new to this site and have no clue where to search. Blaze The Wolf (talk) 20:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * But you did it in good-faith, so that's okay. But, in the future, it's best you have a look to see if it already exists before requesting. Hope that helps. :) DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Organization and proper formatting of SN reports
Hi DarkMatterMan4500,

Thank you for your duplicate reports regarding  at Stewards' noticeboard here and here, which I'm reviewing now. I just wanted to let you know that your second report was actually the correct way to handle this, rather than tacking on a report about another, unrelated wiki with potential Content Policy issues to an already ✅ report about an entirely separate wiki with other Content Policy issues. I suspect you just forgot to remove your added reply, but if you intended to create duplicate reports, please do avoid duplicate reporting in the future at stewards' noticeboard. If it's regarding a separate wiki, please remember to create a new thread. If it's related to an existing report about a wiki or user and the existing thread has not been archived, then by all means feel free to add it to your existing report.

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk) 16:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'm sorry, and thanks for investigating them, as I intended to investigate any problematic wikis, and I did just that with 2 wikis. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Okay, thank you for your reply, and no problem. You may wish to migrate and incorporate this reply into your separate, fuller reply as well. Dmehus (talk) 16:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So, what did you find on the  regarding my report? Because I did find some egregious insults, and leaked personal information such as this one, this one, and many others on all the other pages that I found numerous Content Policy violations on, so please have a look at all their pages if you would. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 I've only looked through the three pages you've tagged for deletion on that wiki, two of which seem highly problematic to me. I'll have to discuss with other Stewards when they're around for their thoughts as well, and then agree on the best course of action. If you can link to several additional pages which clearly violate Content Policy in some way, that would also be helpful. Dmehus (talk) 18:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, there's more alright. This one, this one especially, since it reveals which school this person was in (apparently), and even this one, as it has a bunch of leaked information, like their real name, and their contact information, in which I'm sure they never got permission to get at all, and finally, this one in particular, as it is exactly the same thing as the other aforementioned list of problematic articles, and I discovered this when I went through some of the articles that were on the wikis. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Thanks for the additional page links. Yes, I'd seen a couple of those; a couple others I hadn't yet seen. Anyway, though the wiki appeared to have some legitimate content pages related to a Minecraft server of some sort, there were a relatively high number of problematic pages from the perspective of both Content Policy and Code of Conduct, so I've ✅ and ✅ the wiki pending a larger discussion with fellow Stewards to both review the wiki and decide on the most appropriate next step(s). Dmehus (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I bet you'll be locking not only the owner, but many of the contributors involved in this, aren't you? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There's really no need to make such comments speculating about what actions a Steward might or might not do on a thread like this, they really bring no value to the discussion. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 20:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry . DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:26, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I'm just one of those people who think they can predict the future, even if it's obvious it may or may not result in the exact results I wanted it to be. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also I'll update you in case I find more wikis that are violating both the Code of Conduct and/or Content policies. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:25, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Question
Do you like comic books? Because mywikipedia.miraheze.org could use some more of them--Iron Sword 22 (talk) 22:37, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Waiting
I'm waiting to be unblocked... Eric Bagwell (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Please be patient. I won't unblock you if you spam on my user talk page here. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:18, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Special:RequestWikiQueue/17677
Why did you decline it? The reason made absolutely no sense. Thanks. 20:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I was asked a similar question the other day, so in return, my same reply will go like this: I thought it could cause problems. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay and I am going to repeat my question which has not been answered: Why did you decline it? 20:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Mainly due to the concerns that some of the contents would probably violate the Content Policies. Remember this request for comment? I do hope the wiki in question doesn't get the same violations as what the other Scratcher Wikis had. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That is why me and Dmehus asked questions. shrugs Anyway, please do not decline such requests from the next time. Thank you. 20:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ If anything, those canned responses are the only things I'm allowed to answer with rather than my own when declining or approving. I don't know why that's the case, but I guess that's how it is. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * "I don't know why that's the case, but I guess that's how it is." It used to be different before canned responses were implemented, you could write whatever you wanted. But that has changed and you must choose from that dropdown now but you can add more items by requesting Sysadmins. 20:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Canned replies in this situation shouldn't be a requirement for this exact reason. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 21:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Canned responses aren't perfect, but in situations like this, one can always add a comment either before or after actioning the wiki request. For what it's worth, my personal view here is that it would be reasonable to decline this wiki request if the user didn't respond to the question(s) posed within a few hours, but then I'd just decline it as "needs more details," and add an additional comment (if required). Dmehus (talk) 21:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * While we're on this exact topic, those canned responses should've been optional, and not a requirement. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 21:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, the idea behind the canned responses was two-fold, namely to:
 * Streamline and automate wiki creator workflow; and,
 * Improve the accuracy of the CreateWiki extension's machine learning algorithms so that we can one day allow for wiki requests to be automatically declined or, eventually, automatically approved within prescribed metrics. Dmehus (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * While it doesn't make sense for some Wiki creators, it's important to be sufficient when comparing how many requests we get on a day-to-day basis. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 21:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 That's exactly right. Canned responses may not be perfect, but overall, they're designed to help us operate more efficiently. Dmehus (talk) 21:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * At least it's better than your typical generic responses like "Approved!", or something like that. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 00:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)