Meta:Administrators' noticeboard

User:Colby Russell - Request for autopatrolled and confirmed
I'd like to request for any administrator to please grant Colby Russell autopatrolled indefinitely and, on a temporary basis of between 3-12 months confirmed user status, so the user can edit semi-protected pages. In my discussions with Colby on various talk pages on Meta, it's clear to me that the two most important criteria for these user group rights, that the user (a) remembers to sign and date their discussion contributions and (b) knows the scope and purpose of Meta are met. As well, the user is a  and   on the Triple Scripts Wiki, where he has already made nearly 300 edits. Further, the user is active on the Wikimedia wikis, especially MediaWiki. Together with the user's status as a developer, I am very confident in the user's abilities, and would've requested these user group rights sooner, but wanted to wait at least thirty days. My reason for requesting  temporarily is because it is a duplication of , so once the user is autopromoted to that group, it won't be required. Looking at Special:ListUsers/confirmed, we do have a few  users on Meta who are active on other Miraheze-hosted wikis, so there's definitely precedent for this, and this is such a strong use case. Dmehus (talk) 17:25, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ for autopatrolled / ❌ for confirmed - already is autoconfirmed user.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 18:23, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks. At the time I submitted this request, the user wasn't yet autoconfirmed, but I did suggest to the user to make only six more edits on Meta to be autopromoted (at Talk:Custom domains), so it seems that's what he did. Nonetheless, thanks again. Dmehus (talk) 18:32, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia indefinitely semi-protected pages - Request for history merge to Category:Indefinitely semi-protected pages and delete
Could any administrator kindly perform a history merge of Category:Wikipedia indefinitely semi-protected pages to Category:Indefinitely semi-protected pages, the latter of which had already existed but as an empty category with no history. Now that I have corrected Module:Protection banner/config used by pp-template, there is such a strong use case to history merge in my revision(s) from the former into the latter, after which the former can be swiftly deleted. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

When will extension Score be working again?
It has been a while that I get an error message, in my wiki in German: ''LilyPond konnte nicht ausgeführt werden: /dev/null ist eine nicht ausführbare Datei. Es muss sichergestellt sein, dass $wgScoreLilyPond in der Konfigurationsdatei richtig eingestellt wurde.'' Will the extension Score ever work again? Lily (Lilypond Wiki talk and I will listen) 05:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * We were made aware of a security issue so we switched it off. As soon as they fixed that, they found another. Sorry, ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  05:13, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks for the info, Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 08:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, to keep you updated, We were supposed to be waiting on the public disclosure and fix but have now been told that the fix is leaking memory and been stopped so it could be longer. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  14:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

User:InspecterAbdel - Request for autopatrolled
InspecterAbdel has more than 100 edits on Meta, which, in and of itself, is not necessarily enough for ; however, the user is helpful on the noticeboards, has demonstrated they know Meta's scope and limitations, and understands the purpose of each noticeboard. My only concern was the user's forgetting to sign their posts, with my having to add unsigned as recently as a week ago. However, separately, I had the user really make a concerted effort over the past week, and agreed to nominate them for  on 1 August 2020 when I was satisfied that the improvement had been met. I'm now satisfied, particularly with the user also adding unsigned signatures correctly to other users' posts, and because I haven't had to add unsigned to the user's signatures for (roughly) the past week. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, thank you for requesting this! I appreciate it a lot! InspecterAbdel (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * for his great work, and being helpful, although the only concern is that he kinda forgot to sign posts. CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 19:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Okay.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 19:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Request for version invisibility
Please make this difference invisible.thinks.--松•Matsu (talk) 23:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Void  Whispers 01:39, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--松•Matsu (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Restoring Auto patrolled For Cocopuff2018
User Cocopuff2018

Reason About a few days ago MrJaroslavik‎ Removed me from autopatrolled without any consult of the admins nor was there any notice of this removal he told me to go to another admin as If he had no idea how to handle it and seems to poorly handle Dealing with issues, on top of that this is considered power abuse as it was not part of the actions taken When i was banned from the miraheze discord server this was not part of the actions taken so Here is my proposal.

Proposal 1 - Restore my autopatrolled  (proposal 1 Support, oppose, Strong Support)

Proposal 2- make a Meta guideline Including Auto patrolled to be voted on before being removed from a user (because this makes it fair to everyone)

Proposal 3 - Hide the Removal of my auto-patrolled from the log (Because this Clearly does not need to be there for everyone to see)

and lets just add on I am Unhappy with how MrJaroslavik‎ as he refuses to answer any other concerns i have towards this matter it was poorly Handled and should be dealt with using the new 3 proposal's

Proposal 1,2,3 it was an unfair removal Cocopuff2018 14:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Autopatrolled is a right given to people we trust that's edits don't require further review. Given you are under active sanctions both on and off wiki for harrasment, I don't think that applies and I standby all 3 proposals. I'm therefore all the options.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  14:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ( edit conflict ) First of all, autopatrolled is not a right that requires votes or community discussions. Autopatrolled is a right that is delegated by Meta administrators to users they trust to allow them to patrol revisions. Autopatrolled is not a "status" and it serves a purpose, to patrol the edits of less experienced users. MrJaroslavik revoked your autopatrolled because he felt that you can no longer be trusted, and at this time you have given no evidence that you can be trusted to get autopatrolled back. Thirdly, the request to hide the removal from the log is absurd, we do not perform such censorship. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 14:33, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

2 & 3, they are 100% unnecessary. For proposal 2, if you do that for removal you also need to do it for adding it which would just make no one get it. For 3, why would you possibly want to hide any logs? They need to be there for record purposes. 14:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * Having reviewed edits, I am not sure why autopatrolled was removed from your account. I'm going to invite to review his decision and provide evidence of meta-based evidence to back up his decision. If there is not a satisfactory response, I am tempted to restore autopatrolled based on discretion as an administrator. John (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I concur with completely here, but wished  might've waited, as I planned to discuss this, first, privately with other administrators. Sure, Cocopuff2018 has issues making typographical errors, but that's not a reason, on its own, to remove autopatrolled. Autopatrolled, primarily, reduces the patrol backlog of autopatrolled users and administrators. So, I personally do feel that   should be re-added. The issues with respect to Cocopuff2018 not respecting no contact orders and excessive pings on Discord and IRC are separate issues, and should be dealt with separately (which they are). Dmehus (talk) 15:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I hope I don't conflict with anyone here but I would just like to add that another issue here is an odd thing we have on Meta - the fact that autopatrolled users can also patrol other users. This right should probably be split into a "Patroller" group. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 15:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with you here that we may want to consider including  in the autoconfirmed implicit user group, and renaming the "autopatrolled users" to "patrollers." We could also just create a separate "Patrollers" group, too. I'd support either of those options, and was thinking of a potential draft local Meta RfC in the next couple months (have some other higher priority ones, though). Dmehus (talk) 15:09, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be against splitting it into a separate group as suggested. Actually I think that's a great idea.  15:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * Hey, 1) Every time you contacted me on my discussion page, I replied to you. You could contact another administrator who might consider restore of your 'autopatrolled' right. 2) If you think it was power abuse, you can create confirm vote (request of no confidence) on RfP per policy. 3) Autopatrolled from your account was removed for (also reply to ):

--MrJaroslavik (talk) 15:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Harrasment other users (for example k6ka, he blocked you on discord, you harrasment him though IRC despite his request to leave him)
 * Ghost pings (message with ping, then deleted) on discord - in 3+ cases
 * I think autopatrolled users should know they should sign their comments
 * per Code of Conduct - there Discord and IRC are included - "Harassment of other users is unacceptable. Depending on the severity of your actions, you may be warned once or immediately banned/quieted depending on the medium."
 * 'autopatrolled' group include 'patrol' right