User talk:CircleyDoesExtracter

If you want to talk to me, hit build a topic!

On wikibreak until my birthday
Due to depression, I am inactive until August 12, which is my birthday. Have fun. Leave any comments supporting me. 18:11, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to wish you an early happy birthday Cirlcey. I hope that when you return to edit this project you will be better and I hope that the Miraheze community can support you better. DeeM28 (talk) 07:35, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've now returned. Hopefully, I will be active! CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 17:12, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

A few days till my birthday
Ok so I am an early teen, but in some days I will become 15, and will be a middle teen. So good luck for me. CircleyDoesExtracter ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 20:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Patroller granted - 2020-08-31
Hi, CircleyDoesExtracter. An administrator on Meta has granted you the  user group permission, which gives you the ability to   recent changes and new pages of other Miraheze users (both registered and anonymous) who are  not either autopatrolled or an administrator. In addition, this group also means that your edits are, so other patrollers or administrators don't have to patrol your edits. You should also be aware that the granting of this user group is at the discretion of Meta administrators, so different administrators will have slightly different criteria for granting. Likewise, just as it is a discretionary appointment, revocation is also at the discretion of Meta administrators and, again, each will have their own criteria for revocation.

In the medium-term, plans are in the works to develop a Meta Patrollers School, likely led by one or two active administrators, that will provide a comprehensive set of guidelines for patrollers and answers to commonly asked questions.

Nevertheless, the following are some of the main guidelines for patrolling. If you follow these guidelines completely, it is unlikely your patroller user group should ever be revoked. In technical terms, even when you find content that requires deletion by an administrator or otherwise requires remediation, undoing, reverting, or rolling back (if you are also a, of course), you should always first mark as patrolled any revisions regardless of whether that content is destined to remain extant to the page or even on Meta entirely.


 * 1) When patrolling talk pages, user talk pages, and noticeboards (in Main and Meta namespaces), you should first check to see whether the user properly signed their posts using four tildes . If they have not, you should add unsigned by substitution, where username is the user's username or IP address and the timestamp is the full timestamp from the diff page. As a best practice, you should also link to the diff in your edit summary, so other administrators and patrollers can easily tie your modification to the original edit being modified. To speed up this process, you can copy the   user script from line 5 of this page into either your (a) common.js or (b) global.js page (the latter applying globally on all Miraheze wikis);
 * 2) When patrolling the noticeboards, ask yourself whether this topic is on the correct noticeboard. If it is not, you should move it to the correct noticeboard, by either undoing the edit or manually removing the topic (if there have been intervening edits), again linking to the original noticeboard of the topic and the new noticeboard where it was moved in your edit summary. On the new noticeboard, you would simply paste in the topic (including the section header), linking to the diff page as in the first step. An example edit summary might be , where  ######  represents the numeric revision ID of the originally posted topic;
 * 3) Also when patrolling the noticeboards and talk pages (including user talk pages), as a best practice, take care to kindly fix any formatting mistakes (such as excess line breaks or incorrect wiki code), per WP:LISTGAP;
 * 4) If something requires deletion, you can add delete to the top of the page in question, taking care to follow the instructions on that template page;
 * 5) If you come across a user who repeatedly makes the same mistakes, send them a guidance note on their user talk page, informing of the steps need to edit and post constructively on Meta; and, finally,
 * 6) If in doubt whether something requires remediation or not, patrol it, and then ask any administrator via their user talk page or at Administrators' noticeboard if any further action needs to be taken.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to reach out. Thank you! --Dmehus (talk) 03:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Investigation invitation
Could you help me find a potentially corrupt looking Wiki and send it to me by tomorrow?--Μπέλα2006🌎 (talk) 00:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Which potentially corrupt looking wikis? I looked through most of the reception wikis and I don't see it's corrupt.  Circley  Does Extracter    ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud )  00:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Go into some wikis that I can investigate per request or Dmehus for a week.--Μπέλα2006🌎 (talk) 00:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * For the record, I did not request that you undertake this. You asked me, in this thread if you could post one thread on CircleyDoesExtracter's user talk page. In that same discussion, I also noted that corrupt wikis does not exist as a term within the Code of Conduct, Content Policy, and other global policies. Any Mirahezian is welcome to look for problematic content revisions on customer wikis that contravene our global policies; however, given your continuing to describe this endeavour of yours as looking for "potentially corrupt looking wiki[s]" and because you have mischaracterized what I said, I have serious concerns about your ability to assess whether content on wikis complies with the aforementioned global policies, and would urge you to instead turning your efforts to other productive wikis, such as your wikis. As you've said yourself, you're always looking for help with your wikis, but I would just note that all this time you've spent on users' talk pages (here on Meta) could've been spent improving your wikis, writing content, and generally being productive in that way. Dmehus (talk) 01:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Interested in becoming a wiki creator?
Hi CircleyDoesExtracter,

Though we've added several wiki creators, including myself, in recent months, we've also lost a greater number due to either (a) inactivity or (b) resignations. We now have only 21 non-steward wiki creators, of which only 13-14 are active in the preceding thirty calendar days. Even without those resignations, I always wanted to see us have ~35+ wiki creators, to best manage the backlog and ensure wikis are created, ideally, within only a few hours of being requested (assuming they have a clear and acceptable purpose, topic, and scope, of course). You are quite active on Meta, and I've been particularly impressed with your  work, taking to the suggested patroller guidelines like a hand in a glove. Moreover, and crucially, you seem to have a solid understanding of Content Policy, so I thought I'd reach out to you see if you'd be interested in either (a) self-nominating yourself or (b) me nominating you for wiki creator. It does require a community vote, but there's no minimum support threshold, so long as there's at least a rough consensus of support with no meaningful opposing arguments. In this way, it really is a relatively low risk way of expanding your Meta and Miraheze volunteerism, which has been excellent, if you're so inclined. Dmehus (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah I will become interested as a Wiki Creator, so I accept it! I dreamed it one time when I'm in bed :P  Circley  Does Extracter    ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud )  17:58, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * then. I will craft a solid nomination statement and advise everyone not to vote till you've accepted. Dmehus (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Awaiting your acceptance on the page. Dmehus (talk) 18:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi i would like to report a problematic wiki
Theres a wiki named unfavorable fandoms and users wiki and keep making false information about us like this one:https://unfavorablefandomwikis.miraheze.org/wiki/ACT4

I would be happy if you warn or ban them (sorry for bad grammar) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oejhaahah181hhay (talk • contribs) 20:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not a global sysop/steward. The ACT4 page on the UWAUW did not exist, as I got to the page it said the page is not created yet. The UWAUW provides constructive criticism for users and might be real information. Our admins on UWAUW can remove false information. Also, remember to sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ). I have added an unsigned signature for you.  Circley  Does Extracter    ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud )  20:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * To add to what CircleyDoesExtracter said, unless there violations of Content Policy and/or our Code of Conduct, there is very little that global functionaries can do. In any case, your report must link to the problematic page(s), explain exactly on the pages is problematic and which global policy it contravenes, and what step(s) you've taken to try and resolve the issue. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 22:41, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Wiki creator helpful tips
Hi CircleyDoesExtracter,

First off, I will just start by welcoming you to the wiki creator team. Thank you for volunteering, and for agreeing to be nominated. 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) "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 is currently a known issue with this in that the requestor isn't notified via e-mail unless their wiki is either (a) approved or (b) declined. 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:RequestWikiEdit/  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;
 * 2) 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;
 * 3) 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;
 * 4) 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";
 * 5) 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;
 * 6) 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,
 * 7) 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) 23:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

A couple more great best practices
Hi again CircleyDoesExtracter,

Sure enough, after I posted the above, I realized 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 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. I see you are already doing this, and this is a great practice. Again, this is technically optional, but is definitely a good practice to continue, if you want.

Cheers,

Dmehus (talk) 23:18, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikia Request
Hello, CircleyDoesExtracter, I am about to edit the request but I was wondering, can I also edit the subdomain and the wikia name as well to make the wikia immediately recognizable by the Italian audience? Also to avoid incidents in case somebody wants to create an international crappypasta wikia in the future. And is it better if I write in English in the request? Thanks. --Grand Albert (talk) 18:52, 21 September 2020 (UTC)