Stewards' noticeboard

Interwiki administrator for JJPMaster @ LifeWiki
I don't know if I have to run a local election before requesting this right given that I'm the only active member of the wiki, but I'd like to request interwiki-admin. JJPMaster (talk) 14:38, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * JJPMaster Typically, it just involves you creating a local election page on your, very much like this one on  . After approximately five to seven days, you would just return to this thread and link to your concluded election. Note that an election by acclamation is possible, unless your local wiki's permissions elections policies disallow elections by acclamation, of course. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 14:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ here. JJPMaster (talk) 15:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * JJPMaster LGTM&mdash;I'll take a look again in a few days. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 15:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You do realize what you've done... JJPMaster (talk) 14:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * JJPMaster Hrm? Dmehus (talk) 18:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. Dmehus (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Deleting my former wikis
Hello,

I would like to delete my former wikis (won.miraheze.org and siutalinn.miraheze.org). Both of the projects have been abandoned and the wikis are now redundant. C.antczak (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)


 * C.antczak Though we normally prefer to have Dormancy Policy take care of the wiki deletions, since these were private wikis for which you were either the sole contributor or the primary and most recently active contributor, I've ✅ these per your request. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 18:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Global lock request for Buytruefollowers and other spam-bots on the and/or other inactive wikis..
It is an apparent spam-bot as seen here, and there might be other spam-bots on there, and/or other inactive wikis like the ones on the Mad Gender Science Wiki. (Yes, that wiki again also.) I hope my report isn't much of a bother to you Stewards and/or Global Sysops if you are reading this message from me to you. Please have a look into this when you have time. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

GinaGiovanniello2001.....
Hey, remember when I mentioned something about GinaGiovanniello2001 creating a new account to start over? Well, the thing is..... GinaGiovanniello2001 has been creating WAY too many accounts that I've had to block over and over again. Here's a list of accounts she owns:
 * BellaJewelpet
 * RainbowKitty2002
 * RainbowKitty2001
 * Ra1nb0wK1tty101
 * CocoGirl2007
 * CocoGirl2004
 * CocoYoyo2001
 * KawaiiChan2001
 * KittyJewelpet74
 * MLPG3KawaiiGirl2001
 * KittyJewelpet

Here are some examples of her messing up a specific sandbox using these sockpuppets that I may not have listed in this report, but should not be exempted from being investigated: Diff #1, Diff #2 Diff #3 Diff #4. Also, please note that she did this on Mr. Dready's sandbox without his permission to do so.

And when you get a chance, have a look at her previous blocks, and you may or may not get the full picture right away. I've had just about enough of her persistently creating sockpuppet after another even after she was blocked. has more knowledge about her than I do, as she has done something quite similar on other wikis aside from the  and the   as well.

I would list the rest of them, but all they do is make nearly exactly the same amount of edits as GinaGiovanniello2001. Instead of me just simply going over what she did wrong, (with the exception of messing up a specific page, and stealing from other users), I'm expressing my concern that she's been creating way too many accounts for me to even count. I've lost count of how many she made (considering she has made a rip-off of one of our wikis on FANDOM, although, it's not exactly directly connected to Miraheze in anyway, but it's just an example.) Furthermore, if you were to ask either me or DeciduousWater534 on the matter, you may reach out to either one of us, and we should be able to answer it. I'd like to request a global lock on not only her original account, but also the remaining sockpuppets she has. Thanks for listening to what I had to say here. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:45, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Welp, looks like I found 1 more sockpuppet to add.
 * OjamajoCure DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Thank you for your report. While it's indeed a bit odd that the user would edit the sandbox of a locally blocked user, they may have done a search for that particular television series, character, or other plot element, and proceeded to edit it regardless of the namespace in which it is in. As to the other diffs, I'm not really seeing how they would be narrowly and globally construed as blatant vandalism. They largely look like constructive editing. So, really, I see two things here. Firstly, I see a lack of discussion of edits. Secondly, I see a lack of edit summaries. So I don't really see anything that warrants locking these accounts as vandalism only accounts when they've all been locally blocked for various reasons. It's up to you and your wikis whether you leave their user talk open, but you might consider advising them of user accounts policy, and how to correctly appeal their blocks. In terms of user accounts policy, there are several similar usernames, so they could well be related to two or three users, but I'm not seeing how they're all potentially related to the user referenced in the section header? Dmehus (talk) 18:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Most of the usernames include a year in the 2000s, are girly sounding in general, and include two different words that are styled LikeThis. If you look at the contributions of the accounts on Best TV Shows Wiki, you will see that the edits across the accounts mostly focus on shows for girls or little kids, with a bunch of these pages made by GinaGiovanniello2001. I don't mean to sound desperate, but she'll just keep coming back until her accounts are locked and her IP address is globally blocked. There's no need for us to just keep on blocking them and continue having something unnecessary to the admins' plate on the wikis, how hard/time consuming can it be just to do a CheckUser? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've blocked more of them. I wish it was possible for Void to perform a CU to prevent abuse on our wikis from re-occurring. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As I said above, it's possible that there has been some abuse user accounts policy; however, I'm not convinced that any abuse is limited to only one user, based on the evidence you've presented. Additionally, from the diffs I have examined, I haven't really seen what would constitute blatant vandalism for the purposes of locking any of the accounts as vandalism only accounts. I'll try and take a closer look through all of the accounts in the next day or two, unless John, Void, or NDKilla want to take a closer look before then. Dmehus (talk) 18:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, especially since all 3 of them are really good at what they do as Stewards. I don't know if their user pages are a dead giveaway or not. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 18:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that now. I'll review that with another Steward. There does seem to be clear enough evidence of abuse of user accounts policy, even if the edits by the crop of accounts wouldn't be what I would constitute blatant vandalism. Dmehus (talk) 18:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright, sounds good to me. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 18:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 and DeciduousWater534, so I've discussed this with John and, yes, while there does seem to be very apparent abuse of user accounts policy in that the user is apparently creating multiple accounts to continue their undiscussed editing on local wikis where blocked, it's not clear to me how locking the user accounts would necessarily help prevent account creation and encourage the user to appeal their original block (i.e., at  as just one example) since the user tends just to edit on the same wikis&mdash;that is to say, they don't continue to use any of the apparent alternate accounts on wikis where they've never contributed. You've effectively done the work of global functionaries by locally blocking the user's apparent alternate accounts on wikis where they frequently contributed. Personally, from my perspective, I would instead like to see you post separate talk page messages on the user talk pages of the user's apparent master account, GinaGiovanniello2001, linking to a couple diffs on each wiki where the user is blocked that clearly show which local wiki rule(s) the user is violating on each wiki. You can advise the user of user accounts policy and not to create any additional user accounts, and to instead appeal their original local blocks via their respective local wiki user talk pages. Leave their apparent master account's user talk pages open, so they can put forth a proper appeal of their original local blocks. If the user continues to create additional accounts after these notices have been put in place, then you can either (a) open a new thread on stewards' noticeboard, referencing this thread, if it's been archived or (b) add to this thread, if it's not been archived. Dmehus (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I will advise them on either wiki they have contributed the most on, and I am highly doubtful they will ever respond, especially since I tried to warn them to stop evading blocks in their block summaries, so I could try to reach out to them. (Again, I doubt they are going to respond to this.) DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 That sounds like a good approach. It doesn't have to be every wiki GinaGiovanniello2001 has ever contributed to, just several of them, but do be sure to make it clear which rules on each of the wikis, where you advise them, have been broken, and to stop create additional alternate accounts. With that in place, then you can return here, linking to the clear warnings, if further likely sockpuppet accounts are created from this day forward Dmehus (talk) 20:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The only thing this, what if it still continued? Would action still be taken? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 As I said in, ✅, as then we have a clearer case of crosswiki disruption together with the likely user accounts policy violations following your clear warnings that indicate, clearly, which local wiki rules the user is repeatedly breaking. Dmehus (talk) 20:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Welp, she didn't listen to my warning and created another alternate account after I specifically gave Gina her final warning and it seems clear she is only there to cause disruption by creating alternate accounts to evade her blocks. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's good that you did a CU, but I wonder why nothing really happened yet as of now? :/ DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:01, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Thank you for your follow up. Please note that I have now ✅ this technically in such a way as to guide the user via either their apparent main account or their latest account to appeal their local block(s) either via their apparent primary account's Best TV Shows wiki user talk page, if you and DeciduousWater534 have still left it open, or via one of your user talk pages on Meta. It's clear to me there's abuse of user accounts policy; however, as the user seems to just not understand that Miraheze wikis require collaboration, I believe that the measure(s) put in place will help guide them to doing so, to discussing with fellow community members, asking pertinent questions where they are unsure, and to appealing their blocks, as they've been asked to do. As they are locally blocked on all the same local wikis and they don't appear to continue disruption onto new wikis, technically speaking, there was little to no need to lock the alternate accounts. Plus, as I'm uncertain if the user even still remembers their apparent main account, I want to give them the opportunity to pick an existing account around which to appeal their blocks and to editing and discussing in compliance with local wiki rules and our global policies. You can see more in my notes here and here. Dmehus (talk) 16:22, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright, but again, I have my doubts on this situation, so we will wait and see. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 In any case, they shouldn't be able to create any new accounts, and they're locally blocked on all wikis of their existing accounts, so they should not be able to edit on any existing wikis where blocked. If you have evidence they appear to have created new accounts in some way, you can follow up with the accounts created after Kittyjewelpet76 was created earlier today, linking to further diffs for each one. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Got it. I'll keep an eye on additional account creations by her. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

, she still didn't listen to you and completely ignored you. At this point, I don't think she's going to listen to you. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 23:10, 6 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh, almost forgot about this one. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 23:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. For the reasons I've articulated above&mdash;that is to say that the user does not appear to edit on more than a handful of wikis, for which the user's alternate accounts are all locally blocked, because the edits themselves are made in good-faith but the user seems not to want to engage with the local wiki administrators and/or community members, and because I'm not even sure which account the user would wish to return to&mdash;I've simply ✅ the technical measures put in place a few days ago. The user should not be able to create any further accounts, at least while logged out. If you notice the user create any accounts while logged in to one of their existing accounts, then we can assume the user has identified an account under which they wish to continue editing and to properly appealing their local wiki blocks. For now, though, we should be able to consider the matter ✅. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 22:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Troll accounts that need locking.
SSBUfan1074 and Spy tf2 gameing. --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 01:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * DeciduousWater534 SSBUfan1074 is ✅ now; Spy tf2 gameing has only made one edit globally, which, while blatant vandalism, is a bit weak for a lock, so ❌ for now. Please keep us updated. Dmehus (talk) 01:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeciduousWater534 Looks like Spy tf2 gameing continued the vandalism, so they are now ✅ as well. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 01:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

global locks for automated spam bots
Naleksuh (talk) 02:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * LavadaPby6738879
 * CaitlynFenner5
 * MarcoCasillas08
 * JonasLutwyche42
 * DarwinOConor1
 * JuliaStocks247
 * DoreenSparkman


 * ✅. I'll investigate them now for possible open proxies to block. Dmehus (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The accounts are locked but I don't see any recent changes entries, any idea why that is? Naleksuh (talk) 02:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Naleksuh Oh, I used Special:MultiLock for the nice MultiLock list you provided and marked them as  entries, which we usually try to do for spam only account locks when there's more than five accounts to lock. Dmehus (talk) 03:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Old account needs renaming
Please can you rename User:Willy on Wheels to User:Willy on Wheels old 2017 - can't login to that account --Willy on Wheels on wheels! (talk) 13:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Willy on Wheels on wheels! Since we're not able to confirm that you own both accounts, can you please post a note at User talk:Willy on Wheels asking if the user has any objections to their username being usurped? After a period of at least 2-4 weeks, then we could look at renaming both accounts as you describe. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 13:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Globally lock this user
Can you globally block Larryding since he has left several spam comments about time travel on multiple wikis, and has been blocked several times. He also commented death threats on Terrible TV Shows Wiki (which have been deleted), he was blocked for edit warring on Rotten Websites Wiki (though that block has expired), and he has continued to bug me about said things, he claims that “I can’t tell him what to do” after I said that users are getting annoyed with his spam comments. As you can see by his global account contributions he is currently blocked on Awful Movies Wiki and Great Characters Wiki, and he has also been blocked in the past on Terrible TV Shows Wiki for sending death threats, Best TV Shows Wiki for his continuous spam comments, and as I mentioned above, he was blocked for a while on Rotten Websites Wiki for edit warring. So can you globally lock him because I think his behavior warrants a global lock. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 23:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Here are links for proof:
 * https://awfulmovies.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3ALarryding&type=block (block log on Awful Movies Wiki)
 * https://terribletvshows.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3ALarryding&type=block (block log on Terrible TV Shows Wiki)
 * https://besttvshows.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3ALarryding&type=block (block log on Best TV Shows Wiki)
 * As can be seen in the block logs, his behavior is quite disruptive and warrants a global lock. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Blubabluba9990 Thank you for your good-faith note to Stewards to look at the user's edits. When you say "spam comments," I think there's perhaps a misunderstanding, as spam in a global context implies that a user account is posting or attempting to post, exclusively, external links to commercial websites selling various products or servers, or is in some other way attempting to hawk commercial products or services. I haven't seen any evidence the user is either (a) a spam only account, (b) a vandalism only account, or (c) an account that has in some way violated our global policies. As long Larryding doesn't attempt to use additional accounts to circumvent the local blocks that have been in place, there's no need for any global action here. Dmehus (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * By “spam” I meant off-topic. I think he has violated the Code of Conduct though, which says death threats and harassment are not allowed. This is more of a Code of Conduct issue than a spam/vandalism only account issue. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 23:18, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Blubabluba9990 Can you link to the specific harassment and potential Code of Conduct issues (i.e., diffs), so I can take a look at it through that lens and with that context? Dmehus (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * He made death threats in some article comments on Terrible TV Shows Wiki, though it seems the comments were deleted. He has also left these off-topic comments on multiple pages, and I think the comments have been deleted. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 00:04, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Here is his comments log on Terrible TV Shows Wiki: https://terribletvshows.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=comments&user=Larryding&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter=
 * He made some death threats there as can be seen there. Here are the comments logs from the other two wikis I mentioned:
 * https://besttvshows.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=comments&user=Larryding&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter= (Best TV Shows Wiki)
 * https://awfulmovies.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=comments&user=Larryding&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter= (Awful Movies Wiki) Blubabluba9990 (talk) 00:08, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As can be seen there, he has left several repetitive comments and his behavior is disruptive. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 00:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, some of the comments are inappropriate, but looking at the context in which those comments you referenced were made in poor taste based on the user being upset with some aspect of the celebrity's work. Perhaps all that's needed here is just a reminder for Larryding to try and keep their cool during particularly passionate or heated discussions. Dmehus (talk) 03:08, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok. Though me and several other users have told him to stop but he hasn’t listened. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 20:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Exception to the Dormancy Policy in Idiotpaedia
Idiotpaedia is a wiki that only stores information about the different Nocyclopedias by language, and therefore it is not necessary to be constantly edited. Anthony8IA (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Anthony8IA Though your wiki only contains a Main Page, which normally would normally fall short of the topical minimum suggested content guidelines, seeing that this wiki is essentially a portal/hub that links to your various Idiotpaedia Network of wikis in other languages, with interwiki links linking to the various language spokes of the Idiotpaedia Network, you've articulated both a clear use case and need for an exemption to Dormancy Policy. So, I'm going to ✅ the exemption on that basis, indefinitely. Should you no longer require an exemption, please do notify us via this noticeboard. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 22:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

A request for Dormancy Exception for Santrovelo
Hello, I was wondering if it would be possible to request a dormancy exception for the Santrovelo Wiki. The wiki belongs to a non-profit community bike repair workshop and communicates the operating procedures for the shop to the volunteers that run it. The site is seldom updated as no new information is needed to run the shop but the contents are considered too useful to lose. The site was unvisited during the pandemic but the shop will open again soon. Thanks in advance for your help! Rudi51 (talk) 21:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Rudi51 Per my comments in on IRC (and via Discord thanks to the Discord/IRC relay), I'm placing this request on  until the Phabricator import request is done by system administrators. At that point, I'll be able to assess your wiki for the purposes of granting an exemption to Dormancy Policy. Not to worry, though, there's no danger of your wiki even going inactive for at least 45 days from now, and the task should be completed within the next day or two (at the most). Dmehus (talk) 21:59, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Rudi51 (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Rudi51 Now that the XML import request on Phabricator has been completed by system administrator Reception123, I have now been able to properly assess your request for an exemption to Dormancy Policy. In terms of need, it looks like this was originally created in this wiki request from 2016 by Treebrain (note the "null" database name, which, presumably, is either because (a) the record was imported into RequestWiki or (b) we used to set custom domains in CreateWiki). Looking at this wiki request from 2018, it looks like the wiki was recreated, possibly following a deletion per Dormancy Policy. Given that the wiki has likely been deleted and dropped at least twice and because you said that the non-profit Montreal, Quebec-based bicycle shop is only open seasonally and was closed due to COVID-19-related restrictions, there definitely is a demonstrated need for an exemption. Content wise, while there appears to be only approximately twenty (20) content pages, which might be a bit on the lighter side, looking at most of the content pages, in terms of page size, it's clear that there are a lot of documented store operating procedures and other resources that are used by the store's volunteers and would be potentially devastating if lost. So, accordingly, this exemption is ✅, indefinitely, as an organization's volunteer store training resource that is infrequently edited. As an aside, as Reception123 was able to specify  when he ran the maintenance script to import the XML file using the interwiki prefix I added locally, the edits were locally assigned to the previous users, who were also re-added to the wiki locally, and, as a result, we were able to determine who originally created the wiki. Dmehus (talk) 16:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * @Dmehus Wonderful, thanks to you all for your help! Rudi51 (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Rudi51 ✅. Dmehus (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Close wiki
Close this wiki: https://antsauutiset.miraheze.org/wiki/Etusivu. Anton (also known as Maantietaja, sockpuppet known person on wmf wikis) copied all news from Wikinews in Finnish. 85.23.95.148 16:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)


 * 85.23.95.148, thank you for your report. First of all, would you mind logging in to your Miraheze account? If you do not have a Miraheze account, please consider creating an account and then logging in. Alternatively, if you prefer, you can e-mail more details on your report to . Secondly, regarding your report, we would not close a wiki without attempting to work with the local wiki to provide for the necessary attribution to Finnish Wikinews. This was likely a good-faith misunderstanding on Anton's part, so I will instead reach out to them and ask them to add an edit summary on each of the imported pages linking to the source pages on Finnish Wikinews. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 21:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 85.23.95.148 I've ✅ for Anton to make the necessary corrections to what appears to be a good-faith, honest mistake on their part, and will follow up in a couple of weeks to ensure the edit summaries have been added to the necessary pages. Dmehus (talk) 21:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, well, well. Look at what I have discovered on the
I'm surprised nobody has even taken notice of these spam-only page creations dating back to August 16th, 2020. I took a look at one of the abuse filters from one of the spambots from that wiki, and when I took a look at the logs, I made a surprising find of multiple spam-only page creations like these. Would you mind having a look at the pages that appear to be created for spam/massive advertising purposes, (if there's any)? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:42, 7 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your report, DarkMatterMan4500. Page creations appear to be too old to use Special:Nuke, so I'll format a bulk page deletion list. Dmehus (talk) 15:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds ✅ DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:53, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, will there be locks against those spam-only accounts that created those pages, or no? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

QwertyMan&#39;65 Please unblock me in the "Rotten Websites Wiki"

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Steward attention not needed here right now. QwertyMan'65 was referred to a local administrator's user talk page on Meta, if the user was unable to use their local user talk page. Dmehus (talk) 16:23, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello it's me QwertyMan'65, I want to get being unblocked because I'm very pitiful person. Then I want to edit some unnecessary words like "and/or" because it's very ambiguous and confusing to understand. Please help me to unblock in the Rotten Websites Wiki, I'm trying my best to contribute content. We need some kindness to act soberly without any trouble that you can do in this wiki... Make me smile and never be alone during the pandemic, it's so sad for me being alone without any help. Asperger need some support without any attack to the threat. Autism is a condition that change the behavior forever without any change to the human. Then can I help DMehus to get a mentor to the rotten websites wiki to get unblocked. My heart needs some change to the great friendly manner. Cool huh? Look around to get a gif picture to chat with funny friends around us... Thank You...! QwertyMan&#39;65 (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * QwertyMan&#39;65 This doesn't need Steward attention. Please reach out to DarkMatterMan4500 and explain the above on his Meta user talk page if your local Rotten Websites Wiki talk page has been revoked. I'm sure he'll be amenable to providing you another opportunity to make good-faith contributions and copyedits to that wiki. Dmehus (talk) 16:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)


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

about Toxic Fandoms & Hatedoms Wiki
That wiki was NOT meant to harass users, it was meant for criticizing toxic fanbases and hatebases (internet groups that can't behave well, internet trolls, people who harass other people over an opinion, etc), it should be reopened now, because that wiki has a lot of important information about those toxic groups of people and those fandoms and hatedoms deserve to be criticized because many of those communities annoy a lot of people on the internet, but some kind of butthurt user misunderstood the purpose of the wiki and reported it, you stewards should change the Terms of Service of Miraheze and/or restore that wiki since that wiki was meant for criticizing toxic groups of people, not for insulting people, because of things like this now users from Miraheze don't know how to defend themselves, this is just disappointing. Everyone should be free of criticizing bad things, freedom is important. SuperSoul (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that's not going to happen anytime soon. Plus, it's getting closer to that time of getting deleted anyways. And aside from that, it breached multiple Code of Conduct and Content policies after being warned to administer misappropriations. The closure had absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech, and I have seen people make similar reports multiple times, but was ultimately declined. Besides that, if they were to reopen it now, then there would be a problem. Hope you understand this. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You seem to be very narcissistic, no? Because of people like you users get more useless with the time. The administrators of Miraheze need to know the truth of that wiki, free speech is a very important thing, this is not FANDOM. SuperSoul (talk) 11:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * What DarkMatterMan4500 has said above is correct. The wiki will not be reopened. Stewards warned the wiki administrators long before closing the wiki but they did not respond. The wiki will never come back. Please also remember to follow the Code of Conduct at all times. Thank you. 11:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * They misunderstood the actual purpose of that wiki!!!!!! understand that!!!!! you do not know what is this thing!!!! you guys were brainwashed by the those fools who do not know the truth! SuperSoul (talk) 11:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Criticizing is not the same thing like harassment nor insulting, their purpose was criticizing bad users, not harassing them. SuperSoul (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, I've heard users say that multiple times, and it doesn't really prove anything. It definitely doesn't help your case that multiple users have tried and failed to revive those problematic wikis. Besides that, there was a discussion banning those User Reception wikis, and it passed. Please try to understand that it's not going to be revived, no matter what happens. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Man, not just because they are the admins it means that you should praise everything that they do, they have some flaws, but no one is perfect, everyone commited mistakes, but some people commit really BIG mistakes. SuperSoul (talk) 01:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this has come up yet again after the decision has been explained multiple times. I've lost track of how many times I've made this point but the truth is there is a difference between criticising people and making unsubstantiated (and often very serious) claims that are not backed up by any evidence. One can't simply make up claims about another person without proving that these statements are actually true, or else that is called libel or defamation. The wiki in question was closed for that precise reasons: the pages fell short of this standard. I must invite you to re-read the Content Policy. Besides that, making generalized statements saying it was "just criticism" is definitely not going to convince anyone. The wiki as it was in its old form is not coming back. The administrators were given a chance to comply with our global policies, which they did not take. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I also must insist that this conversation takes place in a civil manner, and there is absolutely no need to throw insults at people: either calling them narcissistic or making silly accusations that we were "brainwashed". Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * SuperSoul I don't have anything else to add to what others above have said, but I just have one question for you. Since your account was created just yesterday, how would you know what content is on that wiki? That wiki is currently a private, closed, and locked wiki; therefore, only users with the local  or   user group(s) on that wiki are able to view more than its public main page. Did you previously go by a different account name and you've now adopted a new persona? That's fine, though I would just highlight user accounts policy, a global policy, which I'd encourage you to review as a proactive matter of good practice. Dmehus (talk) 15:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * most information on that wiki was actually true, such as the toxic JoJo's Bizarre Adventure fans that act superior towards other anime fandoms, even some articles had some YouTube videos on it that prove that the information is true, just look at it on the internet, if you are accusing that wiki of defamation, make your research first.
 * what NDKilla did to that wiki is just unforgivable. SuperSoul (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * SuperSoul I can assure you that the actions taken by NDKilla were not taken without discussion with other Stewards and even Global Sysops and other community members at the time. While it's been said many times why the wiki was closed, I will just briefly reiterate that it was related to systemic, unresolved Content Policy concerns (specifically provisions, "Miraheze does not host wikis with the sole purpose to spread unsubstantiated insult, hate or rumours against a person or group of people," and "A wiki must not create problems which make it difficult for other wikis.") as well as Code of Conduct concerns among the wiki's users, administrators, and bureaucrats, which went unheeded and unremediated when asked by multiple functionaries. As was made clear by your intimate knowledge as to the content of this private wiki, you're most welcome to use your alternate user account to use Special:Export or Special:DataDump on that wiki and export an XML dump of your wiki to self-host this wiki, assuming all the liability that goes along with that, if you wish. Dmehus (talk) 21:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No one is perfect in this world, everyone commited a mistake, but you guys commited a very big mistake, Toxic Fandoms & Hatedoms Wiki was meant for critizing toxic fandoms and hatedoms, not to spread hate nor rumours against a person nor groups of people, how many times I have to explain it?, in fact that wiki has information that is true, like a group of Steven Universe trying to make an artist commit suicide, Some people trying to act superior to other anime fandoms by worshipping highly acclaimed anime shows, a Rick & Morty fan killing a McDonalds employee because a sauce was removed, a Halo fan killing his father (I knew that before visiting that wiki), some groups exposing personal data of some people, as well some people celebrating and mocking the deaths of people that they hate (such as Michael Jackson, Chester Bernington, XXXTENTACION, Stan Lee, Cameron Boyce, etc. to name a few), aren't those things horrible? those fandoms/hatedoms deserve to be critcized, there was no need to close TF&HW, that's the reason why it should be reopened.
 * I also realize that that site had some flaws, such as some articles being mediocre and part of the userbase consisting of incompetent douchebags, but the community was mostly decent. SuperSoul (talk) 04:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As I said, you're welcome to use your original account and use Special:Export or Special:DataDump on this wiki and export an XML dump of this wiki if you wish to self-host, but it won't be reopened on Miraheze for the reason(s) I and others above (and previously) have articulated already. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 06:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to say it, when I was an user on that wiki (with another account) I made and edited pages with data based on my own research and my own experiences with those fandoms/hatedoms, the same can be said for other users on that wiki, I also collaborated with some sandboxes of other users, so do not accuse us of defamation.
 * I can't access to that wiki via an old account, sorry. SuperSoul (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * SuperSoul How come you can't access that wiki via the prior account? Can you tell me the error message you are receiving, so that I can try and assist you with being able to access that locked, closed, and private wiki? Dmehus (talk) 02:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

I need to get unblocked on "Crappy Games Wiki"
Hello guys. Stewards, they must to unblock me in Crappy Games Wiki, because my spamming on multiple wikis is over now. Just to be words that no one shall to be subject on the unfair block. DarkMatterMan4500 is such a questionable man that need to get consultant of the social needs of getting wellbeing. How much in the crappy games wiki could be blocked for no reason huh? Just shall that we need to be happy fun of editing article with contribution while being kindful person to you. Make me smile and help us to grown up into the care of disabled person. Neurotypical people are not like me because they type write normal without a problem. Autistic needs some support, and not to attack them. Please never be offensive on conditionally disabled person of neurodevelopmental disorders like ADHD, Autism, and Asperger. I need help towards stewards to get unblocked me in Crappy Games Wiki. finish... correct me if i am wrong... QwertyMan&#39;65 (talk) 10:04, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * While I understand that you feel like the block made by DarkMatterMan4500 on Crappy Games Wiki is not fair, it would not be appropriate at all for us to "override" local blocks. While there are some Miraheze global policies, each wiki has autonomy and gets to create their own local policies and as such to decide whether they want to block a user. I would really suggest that you contact DarkMatterMan4500 and make your case to him instead. As a side note, please also note that you do not need to include your signature inside the thread title itself, only at the end of your post. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:39, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Global lock requests
I see on the Public Test Wiki Special:AbuseLog that there are again globally lockable accounts. You can check these accounts and see what you do for them: Special:Contributions/Cherie14J1109 (testwiki:Special:AbuseLog/1434) and Special:Contributions/CandelariaPace4 (testwiki:Special:AbuseLog/1430). Thanks. --Anton (talk) 18:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅. Thank you. Dmehus (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Closure Request
I want to request the permanent deletion of my wiki, since I barely even update it. HopkinsTheMovie (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)


 * HopkinsTheMovie Though we usually prefer to have wikis closed and deleted in accordance with Dormancy Policy, as this was your personal, private wiki and you've specifically requested deletion, this has now been ✅. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I would wish to be a Local Interwiki Administrator on the Memes Wiki.
I wish to have Interwiki Administrator perms on my wiki, but as it is new, there is nobody to vote for me. Wiki JS 20:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * WikiJS Please create a local election page similar to this local election page, and return to this noticeboard when your election has concluded. Thank you. Dmehus (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * How long would the election last for? Wiki JS  20:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Typically between 5-7 calendar days. Dmehus (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * WikiJS Bear in mind, though, looking at your global contributions, you don't appear to yet meet either the local or global editing contribution requirement for local . So, you'd need to either (a) have at least 500 edits on the wiki where requested or (b) 1,000 edits globally. In the interim, you can always ask at community noticeboard for an interwiki administrator or steward to add any interwiki prefixes you require immediately. Dmehus (talk) 20:57, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh alright. Thanks for pointing that out. Wiki JS  20:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) Dmehus (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you give me a wikitext template for an election? If not that's fine. Wiki JS  20:57, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There's no local election template. It doesn't have to be fancy, but see my comment above. Dmehus (talk) 20:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Can you please lock NoobamationsGD's account?
He left loads of spam & gibberish comments on Best TV Shows Wiki. - Trashanimal (talk) 02:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Trashanimal While I do agree this user has left many bizarre gibberish and disruptive comments, I don't personally feel this necessitates a global lock at this time. At present, the user's account is too new to assess whether it was a throwaway, vandalism only account or not. Please keep an eye on it, and I'd also suggest warning the user on their user talk page on Best Television Shows Wiki. If they're still disruptive, local administrators can locally block, and further action globally can be examined after that point. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 02:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Username usurpation request
Hey, could I usurp the username "Elli" (is my username on WMF Wikis and some others). The user "Elli" here has made zero edits since their account was registered on any wiki. Thanks! 0xElli (talk) 10:10, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * 0xElli Looking at the global accounts for the user in question, it looks like no Meta or Loginwiki accounts were created; however, the account is a global account. Nevertheless, our usual practice is for the requesting user to post a message on the user in question's Meta user talk page, so I will reach out to a system administrator, likely Reception123, to see if he can run a maintenance script that will attach Elli's account to Meta wiki so you can post your message. After a period of typically 2-4 weeks time, you would just return to stewards' noticeboard, replying to this thread or linking to the archive thread and starting a new thread if it's already been archived, so that a Steward can process your request. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 14:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki deletion request
Hi, Since I decided to abandon the project is it possible to delete the related wiki (kaia.miraheze.org)? Thanks in advance. Etfs95c (talk) 15:46, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Etfs95c Though we normally prefer for wikis to be deleted in accordance with Dormancy Policy, as I can see your wiki only four content pages together with the default Main Page and because you were the only recently active contributor to the wiki and the only substantial contributor to the wiki, the wiki has now been marked as ✅ and will be dropped from the servers the next time Site Reliability Engineering runs the applicable maintenance script. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 15:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki family centralized file sharing and uploads
I would like to have  set up to use   as a media repository, for centralized file sharing and uploads. I would like 'Upload file' link of  to redirect to 'Upload file' of. Thanks. Gil Borlin (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Gil Borlin ✅. Please let me us know if you should need anything further, such as interwiki prefixes added to each of your two wikis' local interwiki tables. Also, it should be noted that any files uploaded to  prior to this change remain within that wiki's database. Upon checking, it appears that is only your wiki's favicon and logo. All new files uploaded will be uploaded to , though. Dmehus (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)