Meta:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 3

__NOINDEX__

好玩
好玩
 * 你在做什麽？Fung ster (contribs - email - CA) 00:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit-request on July 8 2019
It is requested that a change to the Dormancy Policy be made.

On the section Dormancy Policy, please change Similar to the exemptions above, there are several wikis that are considered exceptions to this policy. The Dormancy Policy never has and never will apply to Meta Wiki (this central project wiki), loginwiki (which is required for technical reasons), commonswikiwiki (central image repository), cvtwiki, conductwiki, or staff wiki (which are all used for internal coordination). to Similar to the exemptions above, there are several wikis that are considered exceptions to this policy. The Dormancy Policy never has and never will apply to Meta Wiki (this central project wiki), loginwiki (which is required for technical reasons), commonswiki (central image repository), cvtwiki, conductwiki, or staff wiki (which are all used for internal coordination). per this section.

Cheers, --Fung ster (contribs - email - CA) 01:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks for the catch. -- Void  Whispers 01:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Entered bad address for phabricator registration
Hi, I entered a misspelled email address when I was registering for phabricator. It keeps telling me that the email has been sent and won’t let me correct it. The correct address is in my miraheze account settings. Can you reset it? Thanks, Eddie


 * Hi, i've deleted the account so you can recreate it with the correct email. Paladox (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

How can I get translator permissions?
I've tried to translate main page to Polish but extension says I don't have required permissions. "Get permission" link redirects me to deleted page (Translator). What should I do then?

Rail (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Posting here is fine! Someone who can help will be around soon! User:RhinosF1 - (Quirc) (chat (on meta) ) · CA 20:29, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ (I also created a short page with instructions there) -- Void  Whispers 21:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Rail (talk) 07:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Translator rights
I have noticed that the German version still needs some tweaks to it. I'd be glad to help with that, but I've never been autoconfirmed since I never made edits to the Meta Wiki.  – Pulsaris   08:55, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 09:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Znotch190711

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Znotch190711 is prohibited from creating further Requests for Comment, or adding additional proposals to an existing RfC. This does not, however, prohibit them from commenting suggestions in the comment sections of ongoing discussions.
 * As an aside, I would like to recommend that future proposals that have global consequences (RfCs may affect global policy) be put on the Community noticeboard. -- Void  Whispers 18:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I've opened this thread to discuss the actions of.

Firstly, this user has started a number of RfCs recently that they know are likely to fail and have been previously discussed varying from changes to the internal structure of Mirhaeze to CVT. Their latest RfC is a very long page with a number of proposals that even they themselves know are unlikely to pass and oppose.

I have also noticed that this user makes misleading comments as evidenced at their talk page where they claim to have not requested any wikis despite having done so and this discussion where they claim to have nominated me for sysop hypothetically and then deny this part way through which they refused to remove when I blanked it as I decided I did not want to be involved in this and are taking the mick about unaware WMF wiki users.


 * User:RhinosF1 - (Quirc) (chat (on meta) ) · CA 15:58, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposal (A)
is topic-banned from creating RfCs or proposing new options in RfCs.

Discussion

 * I have no way to know user's intention in opening RfCs, such as that he knew they would be unsuccessful. His initiatives are too bureaucracy-heavy and formal for my tastes, but I would not bar him from taking initiatives because of this difference in style.  I would not ask Miraheze users to conduct an open vote to disapprove of one of us.   16:54 12-Jul-2019
 * I think that the community should be allowed to vote on whether a user is wasting their time with such proposals. We are not Wikipedia, but I find that their community ban policy is sensible. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 17:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I wonder how long s/he should be banned, if this succeeds. Is it a permaban, or a ban for a certain limited amount of time?-- 17:54, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In the way that the current proposal is formulated, it implies an indefinite ban which can only be lifted by another community vote on the matter. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 18:01, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks for your reply.-- 18:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thinking about this and speaking with John, I have realized that as Proposal B, this proposal should also be made at Community noticeboard instead, as RfCs concern the global community and therefore decisions cannot be made on Meta. If this proposal were to pass, it would only affect RfCs that are for Meta only. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 13:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure - the decision will NOT affect RfCs created outside meta for sure, but all RfCs, including global ones, made on meta is technically activities on meta and thus meta can, at least, from a purely technical point of view, have a control on them.-- 13:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Votes

 * 1) as proposer User:RhinosF1 - (Quirc) (chat (on meta) ) · CA 15:58, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) Spike did a very good job explaining why an external user should not have decisions on an non meta wiki. Znotch190711 (Contribs - My wiki - CA) 17:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This should be under B shouldn't it. User:RhinosF1 - (Quirc) (chat (on meta) ) · CA 17:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) -- Dark Dragoon   (talk)  18:11, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) While I find most of the recent RfCs going in vain, I don't think all of the proposals were worthless. Thus, I'd like to agree to a ban on creating new RfCs, but would like to disagree on restricting to create new proposals on ongoing topics started by others.-- 18:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) RfC is a good way for the community to have their say but if you look on meta this user has created many useless discussions that had no point. For now we should not allow him to create them anymore but this can be changed later if they show better behavior. --DeeM28 (talk) 07:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposal (B)
moved to CN

General Discussion

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section