Stewards' noticeboard

Dormancy Policy exemption for a currently private wiki
I would like to apply for dormancy policy exemption for my currently private wiki.

For the following reasons:

1 - There is only so much I can take of going back and forth using wayback machine to retrieve the data, I need breaks. There was no xml dump (that I know of) and the way the publisher hosted it was extremely limiting, we editors didn't have the delete power at all nevermind administrator powers. The currently private wiki is a rebuild of a lost wiki (it was essentially deleted when the publisher lost rights to the game and failed to pass the wiki to new publisher) I am one of the original wiki editors and I absolutely despise that publisher for deleting 10+ years of work that the community put into that wiki, (I contributed about 7 years of work before I left when that publisher first took over, I knew they were bad due to disrespecting of experienced wiki editors). So I guess its essentially me taking it back and rebuilding it better.

2 - I'm an active gamer, every so often I find a slew of games that I'm interested in trying out. Recently there had been 3 in a row (one after the other, spending a few weeks in each one, which took up the time I would have otherwise spent on my wiki) this triggered the inactive warning which I then had to spend 10-15 mins searching how to get rid of it, time I rather spend editing when I'm back after playing.

3 - I have a burning hatred of the publisher that I blame for the loss of the wiki, I will eventually have it back to its former glory, once there I will most likely make it publically viewable but not editable unless by admins. I do not want to lose the wiki again. Mystic (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Could I get a reply? If the information above is insufficient, please contact me on Discord (preferred way of contact) Thanks. Mystic (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for the delay, I assume this just wasn't seen until now. I have made your wiki exempt from the Dormancy Policy, so you shouldn't have to worry now. -- Void  Whispers 00:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you Mystic (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Could these pages be imported?
I created a list here of pages from the now-closed New Reception Wiki that should be imported to another wiki. As suggested by in the comment section of this blog post I made about it on The Chill Place, the pages could possibly be imported to that wiki. Could a steward please take a look at this? FatBurn0000 (talk) 03:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This seems like a request better suited for Phabricator. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 03:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As I recall, solicited the suggestion of pages to export from the wiki as a Steward when refusing a request to reopen the wiki. Therefore in this case I believe the message being placed here is appropriate unless noted otherwise, as something that I believe would require a Steward to process. --Raidarr (talk) 18:25, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Creating a steward requests page to be used for requesting (b)locks, permissions, CU
Hi. I am proposing to create a page where users may report user account and IP's to CVT, request CU information and permissions from stewards after holding Local election or after successful reopening request. All the above mentioned things will be divided into sections for the clarity. The locks and blocks can be performed by CVT but the other requests such as CU and permissions requests will be performed only by Stewards. This noticeboard will still be used for miscellaneous requests and other things which are not mentioned above. The page will be titled CVT requests or Steward requests (preferred). --Magogre (talk) 04:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Stewards noticeboard is also often cited to report users who have committed vandalism, and even request a block, and email is currently a good option, so I don't think that would be necessary --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 05:02, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Email is not used to request blocks or report users/IP's, if I am not mistaken. It is used to request oversight, appeal locks and blocks and discuss other private matters with stewards which cannot be publicly discussed.SN is cited to report, but that's what I am proposing to change in regards to above mentioned things (blocks, CentralAuth locks, CU information and permission requests) --Magogre (talk) 05:19, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * SN has too many purposes, to me.  Anpang 📨 05:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * How would you propose this page be structured? In a fashion like that of Wikimedia Meta-Wiki's Steward requests/Global? I was actually reviewing this topic with another volunteer today and suggested perhaps following Orain's approach to the Stewards' noticeboard as a demo perhaps. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 08:00, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Agent, Orain's page (you linked) looks similar to what I am saying. As I have said above, there will be a section for each type of request - one for CU, one for permissions, one for blocks and locks with a general header on the top and a specific header in each of these three headings properly guiding users where and how to request. Magogre (talk) 12:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Magogre, I do not believe we need to replicate the Wikimedia way of doing things, with multiple noticeboards for stewards to monitor. We're just not big enough, nor are there a sufficient number of requests, to warrant multiple noticeboards for each type of requests. Global Sysops will monitor stewards' noticeboard for certain requests within their scope and mandate, and assist with those requests where they are able to do so. There's also issues with a lot of these requests are actually requested on IRC in . As well, many users will post on the wrong noticeboard, with one stewards' noticeboard; let alone four or five. We could, however, create separate boilerplate templates for common steward requests (such as a local election request, local interwiki administrator request,  request, CheckUser request, or other request), but still have them be added to this noticeboard. That in and of itself, with consistent subject headings, would go a long way towards improving the organization. Dmehus (talk) 18:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Not every user uses/will use IRC or Discord. Off-wiki #cvt should be only for emergencies or where CVT need to act instantly. Everything should be centred on-wiki. I have even seen users requesting to perform CheckUser on someone and a lot of similar cases, daily on Discord. I am not trying to replicate Wikimedia's way, I never said that. It is for the simpleness and separating the noticeboard. I agree that there aren't too many requests, but it is better to have one instead of monitoring spambot list userspace pages. Magogre (talk) 20:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, for spambots, we don't necessarily need to have those retained in an archive in perpetuity. Also, locking spambots without soft blocking the IP ranges is of only marginal and very short term use, as additional spam only accounts are created on a daily basis, but upon re-reading your reply, I see that's not really what you were requesting, so that's fine. CheckUser requests for non-routine evasion are rather infrequent (i.e., AllTheTropes Wiki was the last one, as I recall), so I don't see why those can't remain on stewards' noticeboard. I do agree with maintaining simplicity, but speaking with Reception123 and others in the past, fewer noticeboards are way this achieved. Thus, if we make any changes, I would suggest a streamlining of the Steward request workflow to use common request templates, similar to the process used at requests for adoption. Hope that clarifies and is helpful. Dmehus (talk) 20:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * While I like the idea of a streamlined process, I believe it would first be important to consider and develop the reporting platform that has come up in odd discussion and previous Miraheze Meetings. Said platform can suppelment the current Noticeboard function without adding too much more inline structure to the way this page and the process works. I think the objective should be minimizing complications for reporting as possible, and as such we should consider the above before splintering off different noticeboards. If that is too far in the future or not feasible I encourage developing a proof of concept or collaborating for one in a dedicated space, be it Meta userspace, split to Public Test Wiki for scale or a different dedicated area so the structure can be made, reviewed, styled and implemented cleanly. Developing clarity and a comfortable interface is critical for an idea such as this to work, and to reduce what I consider WMF's flaw of having a questionably offered interface with too many divisions for people trying to solve issues, as I think is already something of an issue for how Miraheze already works. --Raidarr (talk) 14:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I concur largely with Raidarr's comments above. While it's true not everyone users IRC or Discord, the vast majority of those active volunteers do, including Magogre. I also agree that we should not replicate the many imperfect aspects of Wikimedia, in terms of on-wiki reporting of what are routine or reports (i.e., requests to block open proxies, lock obvious spambots, or even lock obvious vandalism only accounts). If user does not use IRC or Discord, the on-wiki reports are not too frequent so as to be to require segmentation to a separate noticeboard. Consolidating requests on a single noticeboard means fewer noticeboards for Stewards to monitor, and it should be noted that it is not a noticeboard used exclusively by Stewards' either; Global Sysops monitor for requests within their mandate and with which they're able to handle. I think Miraheze has a unique multi-channel reporting structure, and this is the best. If at some point, a particular type of request requires a separate noticeboard, we can consider that, but I would probably be more inclined to favour a local election assessment request noticeboard, retaining CheckUser requests and global lock/block requests at stewards' noticeboard. Dmehus (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Yandex. Critical error


Message sent by Yandex to my email address:

Hello!

The average server response time is longer than 3 seconds. Slow page loading makes it difficult to use the site https://wikifrases.miraheze.org. Examples of pages where a slow response was detected:

/wiki/Categor%C3%ADa:Im%C3%A1genes_por_licencia 2022-01-01 00:53:01 UTC 6286ms

/wiki/Plantilla:Aviso/doc 2021-12-30 21:34:32 UTC 3499ms

/wiki/M%C3%B3dulo:Date/ejemplos/doc 2021-12-30 19:02:11 UTC 12489ms

/wiki/Plantilla:Purgar/doc 2021-12-30 16:35:01 UTC 3026ms

Check the server response and contact your hosting provider if necessary.

Go to the diagnostics section to find out about all site issues known to Yandex. Sincerely, The Yandex.Webmaster robots

Happy 2022 everyone! Hugo Ar (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Answered here. Greetings. Hugo Ar (talk) 12:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Crappy GachaTubers Wiki
Could a steward please close this wiki? stated in this topic that he was going to delete this wiki and Bad Quotev Users Wiki, also BQUW was renamed and rebranded and later closed, so there's no need to worry about it. Anyway, most (if not all) pages are not actual criticism and are instead just spreading rumours about GachaTubers. If the userbase wants a wiki about bad GachaTube content, then they should probably make a new one instead, and it should have a slightly different focus. FatBurn0000 (talk) 03:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * And I noticed that edits there need to be approved by moderators. He's flouting the Content Policy (Miraheze does not host wikis with the sole purpose of spreading an unsubstantiated insult, hate or rumors against a person or group of people) and the stewards must have forgotten about that. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000, as I recall, I said that this is sort of meh, given the extremely low number of pages created. More importantly, I also indicated my preference would be for you, or someone else locally, to begin a discussion on the wiki, in a prominent location, and after at least seven (7) days have elapsed, then we could close it per the local wiki's request. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 03:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem is, as said, the wiki has moderation, so my edit will have to be reviewed by a moderator. FatBurn0000 (talk) 04:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000 Since the wiki has only one local bureaucrat/sysop, whose only recent log actions have been to reopen the wiki, and since the wiki does have some content issues that you've noted above, the fact that the Moderation extension is enabled and there are no local administrators available to approve legitimate community discussion requests, or worse, is contrary to the very ethos of local community-controlled discussions. I've approved the outstanding edits by you and YellowFrogger in lieu of locally available moderators, and while Stewards could've granted you the local  group on this basis, since you're seeking to start a community discussion, this is problem. As such, per this reasonable request, and because additionally there does not appear to have been any local discussion to enable the extension, even among local administrators, I have ✅ the Moderation extension. Should you encounter attempts to subvert the democratic process on that wiki, please ping me here or another member of the Steward team. Dmehus (talk) 04:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Really Bad Admin Alert
His name is WellFiredToast. His wiki is called mightythornberry.miraheze.org. He blocked me permanently for no damn reason at all. He even revoked tpa and eMail. I never abused those ever! The user should be spoken to, then banned.

I never did anything wrong, I left a message on his meta talk page yet hasn’t responded. All I did was improve on the main page, this block is super unfair and I should be unblocked. TheCoolStranger45 (talk) 08:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * TheCoolStranger45, that's good that you left them a message on Meta Wiki, as that would be your first step. That being said, your tone here is not helpful, nor is calling the user an "ugly prawn." I would suggest posting a second message on their user talk page, on Meta Wiki, with a ping as well, and take a conciliatory approach. If they still do not respond in a few weeks, then we can revisit this. Dmehus (talk) 08:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Morbius
I posted to this user's talk page three times now. I was blocked on their wiki for no reason and just want to be unblocked. I have no plans to edit Project Saramora, but I want my CentralAuth to show I am in good standing globally. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 04:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note that I am not a steward or an admin. But, CentralAuth negated might be bad, but note that it doesn't fully indicate that a user has committed malicious acts or anything like that. I've been blocked on two wikis I haven't edited on, and several experienced Meta users have already been blocked on several wikis. Often times, a block cannot be taken seriously. Relax and and don't worry about it. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐)
 * This user and all others have been cleared from the blocked list. The blocks were due to previous difficulties on a former wiki with bots and spammers and our misunderstanding of the existence of observers and the like on Miraheze who would visit the many wikis in such fashion.  We apologise for the misunderstanding and hope future interactions may be more amicable! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbius (talk • contribs) 14:23, 5 January 2022‎
 * OK understood! (: --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 16:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thank you and happy new year! <3 &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

CheckUser request on a suspected Quarrow sockpuppet:
I have a good reason to believe this is Quarrow doing his usual vandalism tricks. These following diffs here are pretty consistent, with the first diff being an obvious hint that it's a sockpuppet. Also compare this same edit by Computer2003michael to this edit made by AVXUser, and you'll see that there's a pattern going on here, especially with the comparisons between this diff (which is the same one by the way) and this deleted photo, which I believe had a picture of someone in a diaper, which was uploaded by DiaperFan. Pinging so he can investigate this in an orderly manner. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 18:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Computer2003michael
 * Also, compare this edit summary made by Computer2003michael and every disruptive vandalism and/or other disruptive edits in general made by this user to this edit by LOTRMaster, as that particular edit is obviously vandalism. Same hatred, same behavior, same pattern, and same about everything, which can be seen from the edits, and the behavior appears to be quite obvious here. In general, Quarrow doesn't even try hiding the fact that he's evading locks, nor does he hide any of his "Quarrow" nonsense either. Hopefully, additional evidence I've provided is enough to warrant a check, and to do a sleeper check, so we can flush out all the sockpuppets he might have created with the IP range he might've used. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 03:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This same user, Computer2003michael, has already been ✅ for likely abusing interwiki and vandalism by Raidarr. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that doesn't matter. It's still pending an investigation, so by doing this, we might even find a bunch of sleepers the user might have utilized under the same IP range. Also, that comment you posted above doesn't really help much, I'd like you to refrain from making unhelpful comments in the future, if you can. :) --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 04:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You did not like the nature of my comment, although I agree it didn't count. So my theory is that global locks can restrict access to other accounts. Anyway, I will try to limit this by avoiding this kind of comments. Thanks. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 05:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * These edits are also made to mark up or remove my inactivity. I don't have to say what users say on the noticeboards, so I don't want to be inactive in the project. 05:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It is true that I have locked the account for vandalism at the time, spurred as well by the compelling signs of an LTA that I highly suspect to be true, as well as no faith in good change or further benefit to Miraheze while unlocked. However, I avoided locking for LTA pending proper confirmation from Stewards, as well as the fact I still need to have a proper LTA discussion with dmehus. I think the comment is made with good intentions and does not deserve to be struck as it was, though I confirm that this SN post is an appropriate follow up for the topic. This shouldn't have to become a discussion on peanut galleries, though for that matter nor should any user feel obliged to make edits to stave off a perception of inactivity that would be in no way accurate. At times withholding comments can indeed be the wiser move, but in any case continuing that tangent is probably best for a different discussion area. My 2c here. --Raidarr (talk) 09:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, and I also noticed you didn't sign your name, so I did the rest for you using the  template. In the future, it's best you sign your name using the ~ code, which I'm sure a lot of users may have pointed this out to not only you, but a lot of Mirahezians that come to contribute to this project. Hope this helps. :) --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! But remember that I'm not new to wikis, my device bug caused me to sign it with five tildes, so this if looks more like an accident, and the community shouldn't care for that. --YellowFrogger  (Talk — ✐) 20:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have already ✅ on Discord. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 16:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

How about I place this request for a while, to see if a new account starts cropping up and repeating the same behavior? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Some things I'd like to ask about
FatBurn0000 (talk) 06:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Could you possibly close Horrible Music & Songs Wiki? Someone tried to adopt it, and the election took too long, so mh:worstmusicandsongs:Worst Music & Songs Wiki was created instead, therefore, we don't need the wiki.
 * 2) Could you please reopen Amazing Scratch Projects Wiki? It was closed with no consensus much like the website reception wikis.
 * 1 is a duplicate premise of now two wikis that exist (a wikia port also using the 'horrible' flair in its name and the mentioned Worst M&S). It's possible the content is similarly pulled from one or the other wiki, as half of WM&S is from the direct wikia port. Unless substantial violations can be found though, the Stewards may prefer leaving the matter to local vote much in the same way as Crappy GachaTubers. --Raidarr (talk) 09:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * About the HMASW I'm talking about, it is actually the first one, however for various reasons, this does not mean it should be the one that is kept. It was originally founded by CHICHI7YT, the owner of the Fandom version at the time, on September 23, 2018, due to the fact that the Fandom version was probably going to close soon considering that was around the time when reception wikis (especially negative ones) were being shut down on Fandom. However, for whatever reason, the Fandom version didn't close until eventually, a Fandom staff member discovered the wiki on September 30, 2020 and by the time that was happening, the Miraheze version had been expanded by outcasts and ultimately looked like it was deliberately made to duplicate and defame the original wiki. This caused the new owner to believe this is what it was, and as a result tried to get the wiki closed and made a new wiki for migration. However, a user replied to them here and the owner falsely believed that they were an actual global staff member (when they were not) and as a result thought that the request to close the wikis had been denied. However, since the election took too long and has now been duplicated, it should be closed. Also, what about ASPW? FatBurn0000 (talk) 02:49, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1 is still likely to fall under community discussion unless it provides substantial content concerns. As for 2, that is entirely Steward discretion given the wiki's private nature. If it was the same type of circumstances as the website wikis it may be reopened; but if the editing was very minimal and no local contributors objected, it may be even clearer than TNRW and remain closed. --Raidarr (talk) 09:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Checkuser Request for a possible ban evader
All The Tropes requests a Checkuser of User:Iloveicecream and User:Thistroperz

User:Iloveicecream is currently on a temporary block (scheduled to end at 2022-01-11T17:51:23) for multiple violations of section 2 of att:All The Tropes:Terms of Service followed by a violation of section 1 ("abusive behavior") of the same core policy.

User:Thistroperz displays the same idiosyncrasies in the use of wiki markup (or the lack thereof) and the English language that User:Iloveicecream displays.

If User:Thistroperz is the same user as User:Iloveicecream, then this is "evidence of ban evasion" which as per att:All The Tropes:How We Do Bans Around Here we consider to be grounds for a permanent ban without warning on the first occurrence. If this is the case, then we authorize Miraheze to block both accounts indefinitely on All The Tropes.

--Robkelk (talk) 00:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a few examples of Iloveicecream using another account attempting to go around a block given to the said user? That would be most helpful. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , this appears to be the first attempt (at least, the first attempt that we've spotted) of Iloveicecream attempting ban evasion. we have a zero-tolerance of ban evasion on All The Tropes, which is why we're requesting the Checkuser in the first place. --Robkelk (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500, the edits by Thistroperz are behind the Moderation extension, so Robkelk can't provide live diffs. That being said, I do see the behavioural similarities/traits Robkelk mentioned. Dmehus (talk) 01:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've approved this edit (after checking that it wasn't in violation of section2 of our Terms of Service) so that you have something to work with. --Robkelk (talk) 01:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Ah, okay then. :) --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Robkelk, I've ✅ the illegitimate sockpuppet user account, and ✅ the user via their main account. Please advise me if you should see any future, or, conversely, pre-existing user accounts behaving in a similar manner. Dmehus (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Concerning behavior from a Meta patroller.
Are you aware that the patroller by the name of Bukkit recently vandalized a page on Terrible Shows & Episodes Wiki in response to a page they disagreed with? To be frank, this action is very concerning to me given that the user showed no signs of behavior like this previously. What I want is for the stewards to look into this to determine what should be done. Marxo Grouch (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Marxo Grouch I agree the blatant vandalism is concerning, and especially so since the linked page is not particularly problematic, from a Content Policy or other policy perspective, but I'm uncertain as to what you're wanting Stewards to do here? Engaging in cross-wiki vandalism could be a reason to revoke Bukkit's  bit, but that would be best handled by a Meta administrator at Administrators' noticeboard. Unless you have significantly more evidence of vandalism or disruptive behaviour across wikis, or have evidence of abusing multiple accounts, I don't really see a need for Steward involvement here. Dmehus (talk) 00:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Surprised that such a communicative user, Bukkit, patroller on Meta, couldn't hold back the urge to vandalize (remove content) on Miraheze's own wiki. I don't think it's necessary yet, although the stewards who evaluate it, a revocation. In this case, an attention to what this user does lately is necessary. But that's sometimes just him showing what he really is. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 00:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

System problem
Hello. I just found a problem in the system. All usergroups from all wikis send to this page and not to the wiki page about this group. Also groups like administrators and bureaucrats write their system only in English and not in other languages. Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This was probably a MirahezeMagic update yesterday, it also happened to me (See about this in GitHub: ) --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 20:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! AlPaD (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The link change was done recently in a bid to aid users and wikis in understanding some of these user groups better. You can change where the page links to by changing the link in your wiki's local MediaWiki:Grouppage- (e.g. sysop for admin, bureaucrat for bureaucrats, etc.). Agent Isai  Talk to me! 20:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! AlPaD (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete this wiki
Hello. I am requesting the deletion of the following wiki:


 * 1) gtavariantswiki

The name, scope, and description are perfect for me. However, the wiki is totally messed up full of pages and inaccurate edits. I could even ask to restore it to Phabricator, but due to server migration, we can't do that until January 14th. I need this wiki deleted to soon request another one of a similar scope. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 21:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * YellowFrogger, though TheNino is also a bureaucrat and administrator on that wiki and is a relatively equal contributor to you, I do know that you and TheNino often work and collaborate with each other roughly in sync, so this has been ✅. Note, though, that the wiki database still exists, it's just marked for deletion and users will see a 404-like error page. The actual database will not be dropped for at least two weeks from today, and even then, it is at SRE's discretion (though, in practice, it's usually when I nudge the SRE team member chiefly responsible). :) Dmehus (talk) 04:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello, good to see you back,, and thanks for taking the action. Universal Omega said they are no longer performing wiki restores by migration, order given by Reception123. I don't know why, but it makes me think that maybe this process takes time to complete. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 04:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * wikis can be deleted via ManageWiki, without the database being dropped. We are holding off on dropping databases or completely resetting wikis until after the migration, but Stewards can still mark wikis as deleted. 04:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC) ］ |
 * In addition to what Universal Omega said above, I would also just add that the reason SRE is likely holding off on import requests until after the migration is a combination of things, ostensibly owing to SRE being very busy with the migration and also to either potential strain on the servers as the migration of data takes place and/or essentially freezing manual changes to the database servers. Dmehus (talk) 04:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing problem with maintaining 404 error page, this is normal/typical of non-existent wiki. Also,, could you look at these two recent requests in the administrators noticeboard?. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 04:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Requesting a Dormancy Policy exemption for Zendari
Hello! I'd like to request a dormancy policy exemption for https://zendari.miraheze.org/. We've been continuously vandalised over the past few months, so I set the wiki as private, however I've received a few requests to open up the wiki again because people are still reading the articles and still want to know some history behind everything in the contest as we've put lots of effort into it. However I'm afraid to put it as closed or inactive because we may risk deletion (and I've heard that someone can claim the wiki as their own, which would likely mean that a vandaliser would take it over - although I'm not sure if this is true or not), so I'd like to request for our wiki to be exempt from the dormancy policy rule. I think I've cleaned up all the vandalism that happened so putting it as read-only would be a great solution until further notice. We created a fantasy world and it would be a real shame if everything was lost due to inactivity. Hope it's alright! Stewen (talk) 19:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Request of dormancy policy exemption for three encyclopedias
Dear Stewards, I have contributed three encyclopedias, based on content from Wikipedia but substantially expanded with my own contributions.

Wikipedia is appropriately credited at the bottom of every page with content sourced from Wikipedia.

They are.

1. Astrobiology Wiki https://astrobiology.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page (redirects to https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org)

2. Microtonal Encyclopedia https://microtonal.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page

3. Doomsday Debunked wiki https://doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page

I did a lot of activity when creating the encyclopedias but only rarely add new content to them.

All three fall under your first exemption:

QUOTE "Wikis made to be read, where a lot of information is already on wiki and doesn't need to be actively edited."

So I'm requesting for an exemption from your dormancy rule.

Thanks! Robertinventor (talk) 20:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Robertinventor, thank you for your request for an exemption to Dormancy Policy, which I've now assessed. In terms of need, with regard to, you appear to be the only contributor to the wiki, other than one potential spam only account and DarkMatterMan4500, a Counter Vandalism Team volunteer, who appeared to have created their local user talk page for an avoided red link. In terms of  , again, you appear to be the only contributor to the wiki, surplus of spambots notwithstanding. In terms of  , again, you also appear to be one of only a handful of contributors to the wiki, one of which has since been globally locked. In terms of content, as you say, much of it has been copied from (English) Wikipedia, though you do note it has been expanded, adapted, and otherwise added original text, which is good, as we would not want to just host unedited copied forks of Wikipedia. Thus, I'm going to ✅ you the requested exemption indefinitely, but please do note that this is an indefinite, not a permanent, exemption, and may be removed or otherwise altered to include an expiration date at any time, with or without advance notification to you should your wiki no longer need the exemption for a variety of reasons (including, but not limited to, content, activity, etc.). In practice, though, if removing an exemption, we would almost certainly provide such an advance notification; only an alteration (i.e., to add an expiration date) may not have with it advance notification. Finally, while I've not checked every page of your wiki, please do ensure your wiki links appropriately to every source Wikipedia page (or other external wiki page, as applicable), in order to provide attribution for copyright purposes. This can be done by including an interwiki link in an edit summary, in the format of  . Thanks! Dmehus (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You paged me? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * He didn't call you, but pinged linking to your user page, then you get a notification. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 16:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I did receive a notification from, mentioning me, so I came here. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for granting the indefinite (but not permanent) exemption. Oh I see, I understand your point of view and why you wouldn't want wikis that are just clones of Wikipedia - that makes sense. That's not what I'm doing.

They are all specialist wikis that go into much more detail than is permitted in Wikipedia. They also all have embedded YouTube videos which is not permitted in Wikipedia.

I have made a special template En-WP-Attrib to attribute the page to the same named page at Wikipedia where appropriate.

Yes I am the only contributor to all the encyclopaedias except the microtonal one. I was not aware of the spam bots or the other authors you mention. With the microtonal one then I added some material contributed by others but edited it myself crediting them as appropriate. Again with Doomsday Debunked I'm the only author. In all these cases I initially expected others to join in with the editing but it didn't happen but there are others that read the encyclopaedias.

It may help to go into a bit of detail on each encyclopedia to help explain why I made them.

Astrobiology wiki covers potential for present day microbial life on Mars - and much more detail on planetary protection
For instance, for some reason the current Wikipedia editors don't permit astrobiology articles that discuss the possibility of microbial present day life on Mars unless the articles say that present day life there is impossible. They claim ionizing radiation makes present day life there impossible. This is out of date thinking and no longer accepted as valid reasoning on the topic by astrobiologists.

I was eventually indef blocked for adding this article, and then defending it from deletion and not agreeing to the request of other editors to modify it to say that microbial life on present day Mars is impossible.


 * Possible present day habitats for life on Mars (Incuding potential Mars special regions)

The Astrobiology wiki also has numerous embedded videos which would not be permitted in Wikipedia such as the first video on that page with an expert talking about droplets on Mars here 2 minutes 13 secs on


 * This is a small amount of liquid water. But for a bacteria, that would be a huge swimming pool ... So, a small amount of water is enough for you to be able to create conditions for Mars to be habitable today.

WikiNews do permit articles about the possibility of present day life on Mars. However the interview went into more detail than they permitted so I did an expanded version for my wiki.

[https://astrobiology.miraheze.org/wiki/Sponges_on_Mars%3F_We_ask_Stamenkovi%C4%87_about_their_oxygen-rich_briny_seeps_model Sponges on Mars? We ask Stamenković about their oxygen-rich briny seeps model]

Wikipedia were also restrictive on what they permitted by way of material on planetary protection, at one point other editors removed just about all the material on the topic from the encyclopaedia, both material contributed by me and by others before me - although they later permitted me to restore some of it. I wrote most of their main Planetary protection article.

But they only permitted me to add planetary protection content to that one article and wouldn't let me go into the level of detail I do in articles like this one.

Protecting Mars special regions with potential for life to propagate

This one was deleted by Wikipedia editors who didn't feel it was appropriate to cover this topic at all except as a very short mention of one paragraph or so.


 * Planetary protection for a Mars sample return

It became impossible to continue editing in Wikipedia because of the many restrictions and requirements on what they let me add to it.

Eventually they did that indef block - and that's why I created this new wiki to have a place to cover the topic of present day astrobiology of Mars and planetary protection in much more detail than was permitted in Wikipedia.

Both topics are the subject of numerous paperes every year and specialist conferences.

Microtonal encyclopedia would be considered not encyclopedic enough by Wikipedia and also has embedded vidoes
The microtonal encyclopedia contains a lot of microtonal material that can't be included in Wikipedia because they regard it as not encyclopedic enough - it is modern research by present day microtonalists which hasn't yet reached the point where it has enough cites to be included in Wikipedia.

This is an original article from that wiki written by a microtonalist - not by me though I was the one who added it to the encyclopedia.

Why twelve notes as one attractive arrangement

It also has a short article about my own microtonal software

Tune Smithy

This is not the primary use of the wiki so it wouldn't count as commercial use by your terms - indeed I doubt if many people have read it and it is very short.

However, it was deleted from Wikipedia at the same time that they indef blocked me, although it was at one time a widely used microtonal program and one of only three programs at the time that microtonalists could use for composition via software, mine for Windows another for Linux and another for the Mac (it is not used much now as there are now many programs with microtonal capabilities).

The microtonal wiki also has numerous embedded YouTube videos of microtonal compositions which would not be permitted in Wikipedia as they don't permit YouTube embedding. There are many examples on the Main page and throughout the wiki of these embedded videos.

Doomsday Debunked for scared people
With the Doomsday debunked wiki it was a similar story. I was able to expand and develop this article in a way that would not have been permitted in Wikipedia because of the endless discussions you have with editors, who often don't know much about the topic, and take a lot of convincing to add simple things that are well established in the literature e.g. from the big USGS survey of the topic and now the IPCC reports.

Clathrate gun hypothesis

It also has embedded YouTube videos later on that page.


 * Video interview with Carolyn Ruppel (USGS Gas Hydrates Project)

I also have an edited version of the Wikipedia page of false prophecies which omits all future dates.

Past dates for failed doomsday prophecies

This is to help people scared by false prophecies who find it comforting to read all the past failed prophecies but don't want to see future ones.

They also include many pages copied over straight from Wikipedia with little or no editing but the reason for the wikis is to host the original content that I provided.

Hope all that makes the situation clearer and thanks for the exemption.

Robertinventor (talk) 06:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * No problem, and thanks for the very thorough explanation. That's great. I could see that you were likely not seeking to merely replicate English Wikipedia, or a subset of it, though, but this is a great explanation of your wikis. Dmehus (talk) 07:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Closed wiki error (?)
I think my private wiki was closed by mistake because I was interacting with it in the last 60 days (creating new pages...) I need help to understand what happened and how to fix it. Here's the link of my private wiki Anduril (talk) 21:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, after the migration of Miraheze servers, the wikis were unintentionally "closed" by the build process, including recent changes that shrunk. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 22:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Horrible Companies Wiki was closed too. FatBurn0000 (talk) 00:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000, ✅. Dmehus (talk) 01:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Anduril, looks like you ✅ this in ManageWiki. Dmehus (talk) 01:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Request to remove a bureaucrat
Hi Team, My name is Sunil Butolia (user:sunilbutolia) and I am founder of famepediawiki and famedatawiki. Last year I promoted a user to bureaucrat because he had good knowledge of managing wiki, but later some time he started claiming ownership of both the wiki's. I feel insecure by this behavior of him.

So kindly help me to come out of this problem.

When I promoted him: https://famedata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=1010

Kindly remove (user:ugochimobi) from both of my wiki's.

Sunilbutolia (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, you're in the good spot. It's stewards who do that. Also, could you tell more about Ugochimobi, he is a global interwiki admin on Miraheze. What did he do? --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * He was the Global Interwiki Admin in Mirahej, he took the wrong advantage of this and made himself a bureaucrat in Fampedia and is now sitting in the wrong way as the founder. There was no local policy on my wiki and no agreement was made between the two of us.
 * I didn't know he was an InterWiki admin, otherwise I wouldn't have dealt with him in any way.
 * Later, he started making his acquaintances as admins so that his place would be confirmed in Famepedia.
 * I just want that he should be removed from the post of bureaucrat, this has not happened of my will. Rather it was done by deception. Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sunilbutolia Okay, can you link me to the local discussion where there is consensus among at least some of the wiki's recently active contributors to remove the applicable  bit from the user? Likewise, given that the two of you both founded Famepedia and Famedata wikis, Ugochimobi, please link me to where you had consensus to create a   group to which you added yourself but not Sunilbutolia? Separately, I believe you have an outstanding question from the Trust and Safety team at: your local user talk page. Dmehus (talk) 03:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I want to know who has given bureaucrat permission to ugochimobi and why? Because I remembered, I just introduced him with the miraheze team so that he can make necessary configuration. That time I didn't know he is global interwiki admin.
 * And now you all are taking his side because he is interwiki admin? Why you don't want to remove him? There is no agreement between us so it's not safe for future. Sunilbutolia (talk) 03:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This is certainly not the case. It is a standard of Miraheze that a community-centric project requires community consensus to make any changes required at the Steward level. As there are several active users on FAMEpedia, it is a requirement that there is consensus of all the active users to remove bureaucrat from Ugochimobi. This would occur regardless of which user were having their permissions removed. dross  (t • c • g) 05:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Why Miraheze staff did not ask for consensus when Ugochimobi was made bureaucrat ? It's a scam!
 * I am paying for domain names for last 3 years and Miraheze staff made him bureaucrat without original founders concent Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * All the active users on Fampedia are his acquaintances and friends whom he keeps instructing on Discord. He has brought them all on Fampedia. Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Do note that global Interwiki administrator is a rather small role that involves just having the ability to the edit local interwiki table of any wiki, not manipulating rights or doing advanced things such as Stewards do. As such, no one would have any reason to take Ugochimobi's side as he's not what you would consider 'Miraheze staff'. Here at Miraheze, we deal with facts and from what we can see, you granted him bureaucrat willingly. If you wish to demote him, simply attain local consensus and it will be done as the community wishes. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 05:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In fact, the Miraheze team are all volunteers who edit and help users to make it better. This includes interwiki admins or even a regular user, this even includes Ugochimobi as he did something to become interwiki admin. These things: stewards, administratores, staff, are just rights, and administrator interwiki requires a lot of responsibility and trust, because despite being simple to change an interwiki table, it must be confirmed that the user has no malicious intentions in adding phishing or malicious sites to the wiki, although it can be avoided, and the right is global and the user can add any type of site to any of Miraheze's 5,000 wikis. That's why it's important to review Ugochimobi's attitudes, both recent and past, as well as the weird past of an eponymous Wikipedia account blocked by (something I can't remember). --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 06:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * When Miraheze staff made him a bureaucrat without any voting and local policy, then why voting and local policies are needed to remove him now? Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Where did the trust and safety team go when he was made a bureaucrat without my consent?
 * Miraheze staff did not confirmed me even once before giving him bureaucrat rights, nor I was told that the bureaucrat would not be removed at a later stage, even if I wanted to do so. The Miraheze team should have asked at that time on the basis of which agreement Ugochimobi was being made a bureaucrat. Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, you gave Ugochimobi bureaucrat permissions. Bureaucrat permissions also gave Ugochomobi the permissions necessary to grant himself bureaucrat permissions, also allowing the removal of expiry dates on user rights. No Miraheze representatives or stewards were involved in the process which lead to the granting of bureaucrat rights to Ugochimobi. However, it is notable that the 'crat rights were to expire 6 May 2021, which was bypassed through technical means. dross  (t • c • g) 05:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * But I did not know that after giving the bureaucrat rights, he can not be removed, I have been cheated and this has happened without any consensus. So why consensus needed now? Now his friends can remove me using consensus, do you think this is happening good? Sunilbutolia (talk) 05:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. According to the data on this page, you yourself added him as an administrator temporarily, then the user added more rights. Could you explain how the Miraheze team was responsible for putting as a bureaucrat when it was actually a conflict between you (who added admin rights) and the user (who was probably himself who added himself as a bureaucrat). --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 05:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You're understanding this the wrong way. The miraheze team was not responsible, Sunilbutolia is just requesting a trust and safety (I think) action to make Ugochimobi not become the sole "founder" of the wikis.  Anpang 📨 05:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I don't want him to sole founder because I started both the wikis and maintaining domain names since starting then who the hell he is to takeover the wikis. Sunilbutolia (talk) 08:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Consensus tends to be the default policy where policy does not already exist. It is not necessarily a requirement that Miraheze projects honor consensus or have processes which democratize the community, though it is necessary to create policy if a certain aspect of the project requires protection. In this case, if there was intent to create FAMEpedia as a dependent project of FAMEpublish under your executive control, that needs to be clearly documented on FAMEpedia and users visiting your site need to be made aware of this fact. You are correct that the addition of bureaucrat permissions was performed without consensus. Consider this in the future, and perhaps do not assign such impactful permissions without consensus. Due to all the details of this specific case, you may end up with a favorable outcome. However, this is not guaranteed, and unfortunately, the FAMEpedia project has already become very autonomous with an organic community. It is for this reason that I do not believe it will be possible to implement my advice above on FAMEpedia at this time. dross  (t • c • g) 05:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It is indeed very interesting noting that the set expirations were bypassed. was there any community consensus to back this right expiration change up? If not, I will be looking to remove your user rights on the wikis as this does fairly bring up a concern that you were granted the user rights on a temporary basis, and without agreement of the user who granted it or the community, you have self modified the rights not the expire. If relevant community discussions are started now, I will hold off revocation temporarily to allow said discussions to establish a late consensus. I will allow 24 hours from now before going ahead with the removal to allow time for either a justification or due process to begin. John (talk) 05:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you @john for looking into the matter. Sunilbutolia (talk) 13:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sunilbutolia, So you seem to be a bit confused about a few things here. The Trust and Safety would not get involved in any sort of community-related matters. It enforces the legal obligations of Miraheze Limited, essentially. As to Ugochimobi being an interwiki administrator, he was actually a local interwiki administrator on that wiki before being a global interwiki administrator. His local election was held open for at least five (5) calendar days, and there were was no opposition, so it was granted. Being an interwiki administrator does not give him the permissions to add local . While dross is correct that you granted him   permissions, you did also only grant him temporary   permissions. Complicating this is your apparent wiki partnership agreement with Ugochimobi. Since there is no signed agreement by both of you, I'm inclined to view this wiki as not being an equal partnership between the two of you. As such, I'd like to hear from Ugochimobi on what local policy grounds and/or correspondence/authorization from you (public or private) he was justified in making his   permissions permanent. Failing that, I'd probably favour reverting to the status quo ante (which was May 6, 2021) as one possible outcome here. But before we proceed further, you have outstanding questions from the Trust and Safety team that need local response. :) Dmehus (talk) 06:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Dmehus, I have replied there. I also confirm that I never collected personal information or photo ID's from Miraheze users. I just remarked log because I know those two users personally. You can ask any user anytime if I asked someone for their personal information. Sunilbutolia (talk) 08:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sunilbutolia, thank you. Given the log actions, I'd feel more comfortable if those two users could confirm on your local user talk page that no personally identifying information that you describe was collected from them, and that they know you personally. Dmehus (talk) 08:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Please bring out ugochimobi from two of my wiki's because he wrongly extended his bureaucrat rights. (That time I was unaware that bureaucrat rights is superior and irreversible, thats why there is no valid agreement).
 * His intention was wrong since starting because he has asked me login details of domain name many time during this period which I never gave him. He wanted to become sole owner since starting. Trust me he is a cheater and scammer. Sunilbutolia (talk) 08:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is screenshot when he asked for dns login details https://famepublish.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Screenshot_20220118_141204.jpg
 * This proves he wanted to become superior. He also added so many his known users to work consensus in his favor in the future. I was innocent please remove his bureaucrat rights.🙏 Sunilbutolia (talk) 08:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've been observing this since before the relationship turned sour primarily over Ugo pursuing an entirely different vision for the wiki than Sunil had envisioned, over the founder bit which was not added to Sunil (though clearly didn't stop him in rights, and he was largely inactive at the time, but I digress), and over the promotion of various staff in the meantime who Sunil has called ugo's staff without his approval. The problem is that the wiki was not built with even a shred of consensus or policy discussion in place. That just isn't the heart of the place and it puts making a Steward decision here on the wrong foot, because consensus and in fact an army of imported content from Wikipedia were the first policy structure that Famepedia had ever seen. It was sloppily done, but it was there. I would argue it didn't have much more consensus either though; in making sweeping changes, never as many as five users actively supported motions at a given time. Engagement was awful and editors often just did their own thing. The most participants on average I recall was two.
 * Between this and Sunil's management of the domain, plus the transparent use of the wiki to promote his businesses, associations and own identity, I think Famepedia is and always was 'his baby' on Miraheze, and it is inappropriate to treat it as a regular community. Of the people who typically edit(ed), a majority of structural and managerial changes from early to late summer were strictly from Ugo's temporary-made-permanent bureaucracy and noble, if unauthorized attempts to expand the wiki including at least attempts at consensus. Though as said, the consensus was often very slight.
 * When the communication broke down after Sunil came back and didn't like what he saw, he removed who he saw was his overreaching deputy and what I believe he assumed were 'cronies' from permissions. It's not an elegant term, but attempting to see from his perspective it seems to fit. At this point Ugo has since forked to an entirely different wiki and project under his exclusive control, removed a great deal of the infrastructure that he imported to FP (to the point that the navigation was a bit borked last I came in) and likewise the admins appointed or, frankly, rather weakly elected have moved on. I think this is a hard call to make, but should accept that mistakes were made (I hate to say it, but I told you to worry about a sleeping founding bureaucrat when we were looking at FP policy structure), that he lacks the principle right or jurisdiction to continue, and that he has his own wiki to work with and should resign any claim over rights to Famepedia. Being a global interwiki administrator as referenced above is completely irrelevant and confers no more rights to management than the fact I am a Global Sysop. It just doesn't work that way. --Raidarr (talk) 09:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Raidarr, Ugo was experienced and aware of all policies of Miraheze so his mistake are not mistake. It's called cheating and scam. Mistake means who is unaware of policies. Sunilbutolia (talk) 10:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This process has been void of clarity and valid local policy since the start. Whatever it's called semantically, this is what I see. --Raidarr (talk) 10:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Requesting Removal of Inactive Status & Bureaucrat Permission
Hello, I'm a contributor on Comic Crossroads. I believe there was some kind of error because the wiki has been marked inactive. I edited pages on the wiki throughout December (as late as December 26th). Could the inactive status be removed, please?

Additionally, I would like to request to be made a bureaucrat for the sake of efficiency so that I may remedy this if this happens again.

Thank you and best regards, RoninTheMasterless (talk) 06:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This was due to a bug with ManageWiki and empty Recent Changes. You yourself have the power to reopen it via Special:ManageWiki by unclicking "Closed". Agent Isai  Talk to me! 06:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It is not allowing me to. The boxes are inaccessible to me. I believe I need bureaucrat permissions to change it. --RoninTheMasterless (talk) 07:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , yes but a steward can also do it for you given the only bureaucrat on Comic Crossroads have been inactive for a while. --Magogre (talk) 16:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This appears to have been ✅. Dmehus (talk) 16:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

holmiwiki
"This wiki has been closed because there have been no edits or logs…" Why did you write this? I have often edited my wiki, last time on 26 December 2021. See this page: ÉS 2021. (Unfortunately, I only know a little English.) Nozder (talk) 15:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Nozder This is due to an issue with the Recent Changes and ManageWiki thinking your wiki has had no edits in 60 days. You can simply reopen the wiki yourself via Special:ManageWiki. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 15:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Nozder, ✅ your wiki. FYI, you can do this yourself in the future here. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It is an error after the migration of Miraheze servers, in the process of restoration which has shrunk the recent changes. My wiki cache is 181 days old. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 16:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! - Nozder (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem! :) Dmehus (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for Reopening of Wiki listed Inactive in error
I would like to request a reopening of the breedersofthenephelym wiki page as a good faith user, per the Dormancy Policy.

I believe it was considered dormant in error, as there have been recent edits made, and others have mentioned this happening to their pages as well. Also relevant as part of the Dormancy Excemptions policy, this wiki is largely made to be read for reference purposes, and only requires edits when something needs to be added or corrected as the game progresses in its development. Please allow the wiki to reopen so that we may continue updating the page to reflect the state of the game, and refer players to it in order to assist them with gameplay.

Also, I would like to request adoption of the wiki, so that we may appoint admins to facilitate its care and curation in the future. One of the game moderators and I both attempted to do so on the Request Adoption site; however it seemed to be closed to editing. Thank you for your consideration. MadCatMonkey (talk) 16:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * MadCatMonkey, ✅ the wiki for you. As to adopting the wiki, you should hold a local election, which could include requesting the permission from a local  on said wiki, then requesting a Steward add a sitenotice on the wiki that links to your permissions election request on the bureaucrat's user talk page. After a reasonable period of time, you can return here, and request a Steward assess your local permissions request in absence of locally available bureaucrats. Dmehus (talk) 01:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Requesting a fix for Inactive Status
Greetings. After the recent server migration, the recent changes list on the evilbabes.miraheze.org wiki went blank and it became inactive by mistake because of it. I'm not sure how long it will take for any of its moderators to see what happened, so I'm requesting a bureaucrat role in it to fix it by myself. Thanks for your attention. ObscureTangent (talk) 17:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ObscureTangent, ✅ the wiki for you. With regard to requesting  permissions, please request this locally, including on the user talk page of any local  . If they're not recently active, you can request a Steward add a local sitenotice to prominently advertise what is, in effect, your local permissions election request. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Greetings. This happened on many wikis after the migration, ending with the inactivity script being fooled by recent changes blanked by restore process. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The content policy of Miraheze is flawed and should change
Miraheze does not allow articles about people in wikis when in reality we aren't harassing anyone, we are just criticizing people, and this rule should be removed since there are celebrities that are bad at acting and/or are rude towards their fans and also, there are some celebrities that have committed crimes, such as Victor Salva (who has been convicted of sexual misconduct with a 12-year-old boy), Bill Cosby (who has been found guilty of rape in 2018) or Amber Heard (who abused Johnny Depp and accused him of abusing her, she also abused of her ex-girlfriend and got arrested as a result, and also stole money from charity, which is a felony), there are also YouTubers that have committed crimes such as Peluchin Entertainment (the boy who murdered kittens and also appeared in the news because of it) for example, and horrible people like them deserve to be criticized.

also, back in 2019 pages about FuturisticHub were banned, I know this is an old thing but this was a very dumb move, the reception wikis were not harassing him, just criticizing him plus this shows how he can't take criticism at all, there is no need to ban pages about him since we are criticizing him since he as done bad things such as harassing people.

It is just stupid how no one had the guts to speak out about this. SuperSoul (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * for a number of reasons. For 1, not a lot of the pages on the celebrities were sourced, and 2nd, even if that were to happen, it would be chaotic for everybody, so therefore, not going to happen for those reasons. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In addition, we have no plans on re-adding the articles about users or groups of people as part of the ban against articles on real people on the Qualitipedia Network. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Pages about celebrities shouldn't be banned on the Qualitipedias because:
 * 1.- We do not harass people, we criticize them.
 * 2.- Some celebrities mistreat their fans (such as some Funimation voice actors) and/or have commited crimes such as those I've mentioned before or even support criminals, and we need to criticize that kind of behavior.
 * 3.- it is so hard to add sources to a page?.
 * I am criticizing this because this is just bad for the Qualitipedias. SuperSoul (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. Content against a person or group of people is not allowed on Miraheze, even if they have done something controversial (let's be partial on the information). Miraheze funded solely by donations, and if judged by the content of these wikis, by one of these people? It's what I think. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 19:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, Miraheze could be harmed just by hosting these categories. If you want such a wiki, you can host your own and import its contents into Special:DataDump. See the MediaWiki installation tutorial. Unfortunately it can be annoying, but it's to avoid any problems. Thank you for your understanding. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 19:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * you can't differentiate between harassment and criticism? how dumb, as I said multiple times bad people deserve to be criticized, even if they are criminals, being not able to handle criticism is a red flag. SuperSoul (talk) 09:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * SuperSoul, firstly, you should know that Content Policy does not prohibit pages which provide for reliably sourced encyclopedia content about real people; content which is potentially defamatory and libelous, is, of course, prohibited by Content Policy, as well as other policies. Content Policy does prohibit wholly or significantly negative content about subjects (usually people, since those are the ones that are the source of complaints, whether from the subject or from the community). As well, noting your pattern of editing contributions which is substantially similar to two or more user accounts that were globally locked, I can you also clarify whether you have created other accounts and/or used on Miraheze? Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 19:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * We are not defaming anyone, we are against defamation, and we are criticizing nasty people who do bad things, plus some famous people can't take criticism (such as for example Derek Savage, who once threated someone who made a video criticizing him), don't be an idiot. SuperSoul (talk) 19:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be insulting a Steward like that, as that's not going to bring you anything good. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 I'm not sure you said "insulting a Steward." Insulting any user, is not okay. :) Dmehus (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but seeing as though SuperSoul doesn't get the point only bothers me, and I'd bet it would bother you if it was going on constantly from a user, wouldn't you say? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 21:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree the user's conduct is indeed problematic, but where I disagree is the need to differentiate or distinguish between conduct directed to a user holding advanced permissions and one that holds no advanced permissions. Hope that clarifies. Dmehus (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * the Miraheze staff are the ones acting dumb here, that's the problem here. SuperSoul (talk) 09:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Please remember to maintain civility and avoid rudeness. Your remarks are clear personal attacks and as such, you are encouraged to stop calling people 'dumb' while keeping in mind that we are talking about a policy, not about someone. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 09:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my rudeness, but the content policy of Miraheze has problems and needs some changes. SuperSoul (talk) 09:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * SuperSoul, I'm not sure what you're getting at, as I've not received any complaints from users about one or more pages on your wiki. I'm not even aware on which wiki you're talking about, either. Furthermore, I would additionally note that, on occasion, Stewards have removed a few pages from Qualitipedia wikis (usually ) for Content Policy issues, but closing or deleting a wiki is not taken lightly. Where possible, as with the Trust and Safety team, we take the minimum required remedial action. Dmehus (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * According to his final words, the type of content on QP can now be contested. And, it can't follow Qualitipedia's standards with Why this is bad? sections if it did, it would be defamation against a group of people, according to CP. You can bring partial and true information. And, calm down, and follow the code of conduct. Thanks. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 20:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No, we are not defamating anyone, we are just calling out people for their bad actions such as mistreating people or commiting crimes, and I am critizing Miraheze for how it has done downhill by becoming more strict. SuperSoul (talk) 09:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * As a local bureaucrat on Qualitipedia wikis, let me make a few things clear.
 * What's in issue here is the local policy of respective wikis, not the overall Miraheze Content Policy as outlined above. This was an issue decided upon locally by RfC. If you have an issue with it, you should take it up locally.
 * There are too many editors who lack the maturity to address real people especially on negative wikis in a neutral way, too quick to cause controversy in a simple exchange. At best it would be a headache to moderate the pages in a way that wouldn't require extensive local or even global intervention.
 * This thread is a case in point for above, abrasive from the start diving into uncivil and muddied conversation. The above was for the history of the subjects. This thread continues the case in point.
 * There is considerable mixed information on the subject and I am available to direct inquiries on the matter being discussed. The above I believe is the true response to this topic. --Raidarr (talk) 23:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Raidarr, for clearing that up. That's a good point that the Qualitipedia wikis have an additional, local content policy, which the global Content Policy strongly encourages local wikis to adopt a supplemental local policy. Dmehus (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The reception wikis are dedicated to criticism, not insult people, and those articles were not dediated to defamation, if disussions happen you can delete those posts or even block those users, it is very easy to delete things as an admin, as I mentioned before some celebrities have commited crimes or mistreat the people who worked with them and their fans, and those articles had a lot of useful information, think about that again. SuperSoul (talk) 09:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The reception wikis are dedicated to definable reception.That is their objective and that is what they are being organized around. People are not topical to any of the particular reception wikis and have demonstrated enough issues. Spending excess time deleting symptoms of problems does not solve them. There are other places on the internet to document what you speak where the pages are on topic. There is even a wiki on Miraheze for what you speak of where the content is actually topical and curated. I suggest dedicating your attention there if you believe in what you are posting and intend to use proper sourcing for bolder claims. --Raidarr (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki exemption request
This wiki should be added to the exempt list from the inactivity policy: https://mountainbot.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page. The reason for this request is because it’s a wiki I created to document everything that is related to a Discord bot I created, named MountainBot. I may not active here, and I know that might be a weak reason for this request. But I’m still requesting it. Paramount1106 (talk) 05:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

❌ at this time. Dmehus (talk) 06:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Paramount1106, thank you for your request for an exemption to Dormancy Policy, which I've now reviewed and assessed. In terms of need, while you and Rainbowuwu are only two contributors to the wiki, that first part of a likely two-part test is likely met; however, in terms of content, there are only ten (10) or fewer pages, including the wiki's Main Page, all of which are either stub- or sub-stub class pages with minimal content. As well, as your wiki is a public wiki, please do note that it is regularly backed up, with its XML dumps shared publicly at The Internet Archive by Reception123, so your wiki is easily recoverable should it be inadvertently dropped due to Dormancy Policy. Do note, too, that it takes over 180 days of complete inactivity (i.e., no edits of any kind and no log actions, other than global rename and user merge log actions, and CentralAuth automatically added user account log actions) before a wiki's even marked for deletion. Even then, it's still undeletable by Stewards. Additionally, you can also use Special:DataDump to generate both XML and image dump backups of your wiki freely and at any time. As to your latter point, though, activity or inactivity on Meta Wiki is not considered all in terms of assessing wiki Dormancy Policy exemption requests, so not to worry there. Accordingly, I'm going to mark as

Using Template:RfC on Requests for Comment/preload
I created a template (Template:RfC) which can be used on the RfC subpages to automatically place them in the categories. The parameters of the template are defined on it's documentation page. If the Stewards (as the ones who close the RfCs) have no issues, I'd like to incorporate it into the mentioned preload page. Thanks! --Magogre (talk) 09:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Solicitud / Request
Hola a todos.

Me agradaría que  apareciera en la cabecera de las páginas. No es práctico que aparezca en el pie de las páginas.

Me ha sucedido leer páginas que no son de mi idioma nativo y encontrar debajo, al final de mi lectura, la existencia de traducciones.

No sé si existe alguna norma al respecto. Por eso, antes de cambiar, prefiero consultar. Muchas gracias. Hugo Ar (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Translated by Google Translate

Hi all.

I would like  to appear in the header of the pages. It is not practical for it to appear at the bottom of the pages.

It has happened to me to read pages that are not in my native language and find underneath, at the end of my reading, the existence of translations.

I don't know if there is any rule about it. Therefore, before changing, I prefer to consult. Thanks a lot. Hugo Ar (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello. This is to correctly structure the content of the pages (like the main page, which it puts at the bottom as well) and it is also done on important pages so as not to shrink the content, it is not done on all pages, and some pages are not possible to do this. Could you show, in addition to the main page, articles that show the at the bottom? Thanks --YellowFrogger  (Talk — ✐) 16:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There's another page too, comp the help center, for reasons of correctly aligning the page with the tables. But that, it is, especially since the Miraheze project is English-speaking. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 16:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Sí, puede ser que Help center sea una de las pocas páginas con los idiomas en la parte inferior. Pero dada la importancia de esa página, tanto para los usuarios nuevos como para las IP, que no conocen completamente el funcionamiento de Miraheze, sugiero otorgar mayor visibilidad a . Me sucedió cuando ingresé por primera vez a Miraheze como IP y luego como usuario registrado. Gracias. Saludos. Hugo Ar (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Translated by Google Translate
 * Yes, it may be that Help center is one of the few pages with the languages at the bottom. But given the importance of that page, both for new users and for IPs, who don't fully know how Miraheze works, I suggest giving more visibility to . It happened to me when I first entered Miraheze as an IP and then as a registered user. Thank you. Greetings. Hugo Ar (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There is a warning at the beginning informing that the page is translated, and it asks to scroll down --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 00:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ by Anpang. Gas given more visibility to the ad. Thanks! Hugo Ar (talk) 04:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * What? That is completely unrelated  Anpang 📨 04:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You didn't make the change after the user desdr warning, is that it? Could you emphasize all of your answers? He was asking for the page to be accessed easier with the tag, or just to leave a more visible warning about it, you did that but it seems like you didn't have any other intentions. --YellowFrogger  (Talk — ✐) 04:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My edit is completely unrelated, I don't know why he brought that up. I didn't even know that this topic on SN existed when I did that edit.  Anpang 📨 05:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Bot on a wiki
At creaturathegame there is a bot creating pages and uploading images with very long and non-descriptive titles. For several months there has been no human activity on the wiki. You can see what happens at recent changes. Greetings. Hugo Ar (talk) 03:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Statistics: 2 good pages, 494 881 total pages, 240 631 files.
 * Hello. What are you requesting here? So that the bot has its rights revoked and/or something against the wiki? If you can clarify. Thanks. --YellowFrogger (Talk — ✐) 03:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ¿Te has fijado el sinsentido de las creaciones del bot? ¿El bot está controlado? Si lo estuviese, ¿está permitido semejante derroche de recursos para Miraheze con medio millón de páginas absurdas y un cuarto de millón de imágenes sin licencia?
 * ¿Cuál es el sentido de que Miraheze aloje una wiki de esas caracterísitcas? ¿Gana o pierde en calidad y credibilidad?
 * Como mínimo, solicitaría que se revise la situación. Sienta un mal precedente. Porque si esto está permitido, entonces podrá ser el punto de partida para que los bots generen millones de páginas que solo aportan confusión y derroche de recursos.
 * Por favor, solicito la respuesta de un steward o administrador. ¿En Mirazehe se permite esto? Hugo Ar (talk) 03:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Translated with Google Translate
 * Have you noticed the nonsense of the bot's creations? Is the bot controlled? If it was, is such a waste of resources allowed for Miraheze with half a million nonsensical pages and more than a quarter of a million unlicensed images?
 * What is the point of Miraheze hosting such a wiki? Does it gain or lose in quality and credibility?
 * At a minimum, I would request that the situation be reviewed. Set a bad precedent. Because if this is allowed, then it could be the starting point for bots to generate millions of pages that only add confusion and waste of resources.
 * Please, I request the answer of a steward or administrator. Is this allowed in Mirazehe? Hugo Ar (talk) 03:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Though the bot activity may be a bit fast, I found that, upon my own examination, the page titles are in fact not nonsense or gibberish, but DNA sequences of fictional plants and creatures from a game or simulation by the name of Creatura. It is worth noting that the bot is official to the project, as it has been flagged as both a bot and an administrator. dross  (t • c • g) 04:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Los títulos son extremadamente extensos. No resultan amenos ni coloquiales. Imposible de buscarlos de esa forma. ¿Quién va a buscarlos así?
 * Al ser contenido de ficción (solo es fantasía) es factible la creación de billones de esos seres. Si Miraheze es un proyecto de recurso limitados, ¿es correcto, es justa la situación?
 * ¿Y qué me dices de las imágenes sin licencia?
 * Todo ello sin la intervención de seres humanos. Ningún humano está presente en la wiki ¿Quién controla al bot? ¿Cuál es el límite para la creación de esta clase de páginas? ¿Hay normas que regulan este tipo de creaciones? Hugo Ar (talk) 04:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Translated by Google Translate
 * The titles are extremely long. They are not pleasant or colloquial. Impossible to find them that way. Who is going to look for them like this?
 * Being fictional content (it is only fantasy) the creation of billions of these beings is feasible. If Miraheze is a limited resource project, is that correct, is the situation fair?
 * And what about the unlicensed images?
 * All this without the intervention of human beings. No human is present on the wiki. Who controls the bot? What is the limit for the creation of this class of pages? Are there rules that regulate this type of creations? Hugo Ar (talk) 04:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

What happened to Internet Villains Wiki?
I decided to go to this wiki to see how it was going since I last edited, but it's now gone. What happened to it? Was it deleted? And why is it outright deleted rather than just closed? It wasn't closed a few months ago, so I don't see how it's already deleted. FatBurn0000 (talk) 08:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * It was closed due to Content Policy violations. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 08:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000, to further ellucidate what Agent Isai said above, that particular entire wiki, which consisted of a couple handfuls of pages, was set up with the sole purpose of defaming, harassing, trolling, flamebaiting, and otherwise targeting Miraheze users, which is not permitted per Content Policy. Given that, there was nothing worth keeping. Dmehus (talk) 08:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, but I still have two questions:
 * Why was the wiki deleted rather than just closed?
 * Would it have been okay if the wiki was a proper encyclopedia?
 * --FatBurn0000 (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I did already answer the first question, but in short, to retain the wiki would've meant retaining an empty wiki. Given that the wiki request was questionably approved, you can request a new wiki, defining a clear purpose, scope, and topic(s) for your wiki. Do note that we already have this encyclopedia-style wiki. If you're wanting to just recreate a wiki that trolls, harasses, or flamebaits users, that is not okay and wiki creators would not approve that. Dmehus (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It's worth noting that scopes with focus on users of a particular type or in general, particularly with a negative focus are scrutinized far more heavily and are not guaranteed acceptance even with reassurances of compliance with the content policy. It's simply a very badly handled subject on every wiki that has been requested so far regardless of its promises. --Raidarr (talk) 09:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)