Stewards' noticeboard

My restrictions.
I moved topic here. What's the status on the ban for another wiki creation? Thank you. SperosDurrell (talk) 06:53, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you would like to appeal your ban on wiki requests, you should formally state that you are doing so. I would also highly suggest that while doing so, you state the details of the wiki you wish to request should your ban be lifted, and show that you have maintained activity on your other wiki(s). — Arcversin (talk) 07:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * OK but the wikis I have are dead sadly. Can you close them? Thanks. SperosDurrell (talk) 07:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You can take a backup of them and delete them if you want.  Anpang 📨 08:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * SperosDurrell, okay, so you're looking at your restriction on creating wikis. This is the issue, though. You request wiki, after wiki, after wiki, etc., make a few edits, post on community noticeboard for users to help you edit your wikis, then you lose interest, get bored of them, declare them dead, often requesting closure and/or deletion, then request a new wiki. I would just note you still haven't requested a personal private wiki for yourself, so you still have that option. Moreover, I would be inclined not to remove this restriction, at this stage, as I'm not seeing evidence of enough of a behavioural shift. I would, however, entertain one additional public wiki creation, by having you define, here, the sitename for your wiki, the subdomain for your wiki, and a clear purpose and scope for your wiki (a sentence or two should usually be sufficient. How's that? Dmehus (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds good 👍 thank you. SperosDurrell (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Soccer wiki, Sports, It will be about Soccer players old and current, teams, personnel, etc. Anywhere in the world. Statistics, Arenas (stadiums).
 * Sitename, World Footy Wiki. Public
 * Under category sports. Anything else you need, please add. Also I would like to say thank you Doug for possibly allowing this. SperosDurrell (talk) 14:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If accepted I will really try hard to contribute cause I love Footy!!! SperosDurrell (talk) 02:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * SperosDurrell, okay, I'm not comfortable removing your wiki creation restriction limiting you to one (1) public and one (1) private wiki. Nevertheless, I am comfortable with mediating your wiki request for you. Do you agree not to post more than one (1) thread on community noticeboard promoting your wiki and/or seeking potential volunteers to assist in any assistance you require, and, furthermore, do you agree not to spam users' user talk pages on Meta Wiki asking for help with your wiki? Also, please also specify your . Thank you. Dmehus (talk) 02:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I abide by these rules. Also subdomain footyworld.miraheze.org
 * Sincerely. SperosDurrell (talk) 02:56, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * SperosDurrell, ✅, per the above. Dmehus (talk) 09:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much Dmehus!!! (Doug)!!! 😊👍 SperosDurrell (talk) 03:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Please make sure you live up to the agreement, and that you stay focused on this wiki over the medium- and long-term. This will make loosening or removing your wiki creation and/or global user restrictions easier. Dmehus (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Request to remove Bureaucrat status for a resigned user
A bureaucrat who announced their resignation on Discord, who is on our wiki (, User:Catte) has been removing content they deem theirs, however when edits are undone, it disturbs a lot of edits others have made and so on. I made this individual a bureaucrat a month after the wiki was created almost three years ago. We would like to request this bureaucrat be removed as a bureaucrat on our wiki, and edits made from 3/2/2022 onward be reverted on our wiki. The individual can contact us separately and we will go back through and assess and remove this content so it doesn't harm the wiki itself or any other updates other users have made as far as templates. Thank you for your help. -- RuneTree (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * RuneTree, are you able to link me to the Discord thread on your Discord server where they resigned? Dmehus (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * RuneTree, having joined your wiki's public Discord server, linked from your wiki's main page at, and having verified Catte's resignation request in the Discord administrators' channel you temporarily provided me access to, this has now been ✅. I will let you remove the   permission, as the local bureaucrat on this wiki. Thank you. Dmehus (talk) 02:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Can users stop disabling talk page access or emails whenever a user is blocked?
Most of the time, whenever a user is blocked forever, they actually get their talk page access and email disabled, despite the fact that those are both ways to be unblocked. MarioBobFan (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Is there something in particular you wish to address? If you wish to address this type of practice on a wiki, please raise it up with the local administrators. Meta does not control admins on other wikis. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 05:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This needs context. Some Qualitipedia administrators still follow poor administrator blocking practice. I would suggest raising this issue with the blocking administrator. If that fails, I would suggest bringing it up on the user talk page of a bureaucrat on the listed here. I suspect you will find at least one bureaucrat with a sympathetic ear, who will surely reply locally. Dmehus (talk) 06:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Can users please stop reverting errors?
A lot of users on these site actually infamously revert errors. https://loathsomecharacters.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Timmy_Turner_(Seasons_9_%26_10)&diff=78065&oldid=78022 MarioBobFan (talk) 05:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * This is an issue you should raise with the local community if you have a concern with it. Please remember that Miraheze Meta is not for resolving little issues like that as we don't control users nor do we manage any wiki. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 05:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As per what Agent Isai said, I will just note that as an infrequent  patroller and page reviewer, I've locally endorsed your reasonable edit. Dmehus (talk) 05:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Rights to be bureaucrat on Cancelled Movies Wiki
https://cancelledmovies.miraheze.org/wiki/Cancelled_Movies_Wiki

Hello. Can I be granted Bureaucrat rights on Canceled Movies Wikis  https://awfulmovies.miraheze.org/wiki/Topic:Wr2bli0pbahhbtlw as seen from this topic, thanks Gilimaster69 (talk) 14:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'm going to follow up from what I advised within the topic. As an existing bureaucrat of the wiki in question I refuse the bureaucrat request here on the spot because a) you have no edits, b) I've advised you to make edits to demonstrate interest before requesting any rights in the wiki, and that was for sysop, not bureaucrat, and c) the wiki does not have a problem with bureaucrats or people in leadership positions; primarily it needs people to contribute, and just adding bureaucrats for the sake of it has never been a solution as demonstrated on the main line of QP wikis that we are both familiar with. I wish you'd taken my advisement within the thread, as now I have to refuse you outright. --Raidarr (talk) 14:56, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I understand what you mean, you don't have to give Bureaucrat if I am not ready, Thanks. Gilimaster69 (talk) 15:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Global lock for MirahezeBots
User:MirahezeBots's name is not in compliance with the username policy. Usernames containing "Miraheze" must have an official connection to Miraheze, which this account does not. It is run by a third-party group which was given 3 months (December 4th, 2021 - March 4th, 2022) to remove all Miraheze-related branding from their group, and this commitment was not met, in fact, zero progress has been made and there is no indication of any change. As such, this account needs to be locked for violating the username policy with no commitment on changing their username. Naleksuh (talk) 19:51, 5 March 2022 (UTC)


 * One question: Wouldn't this pretty much screw anything relating to relaying messages up? Aside from that, the fact that you are bringing this up again pretty much begs the question of what the point was behind this request. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * To my knowledge it would not break anything (doesn't appear to have edited recently, nothing I know of relies on this account), but if it does that's not Miraheze's problem. The account is violating the username policy and they had three months to request a rename (most accounts in the username policy violation usually get just a few days). Naleksuh (talk) 20:08, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is potentially a good avenue to pursue this, yes. However, MirahezeBots has had the implicit endorsement of Miraheze (SRE + Steward + Board) functionaries since its original name (ZppixBot). Indeed, Void even renamed it from ZppixBot. Thus, this would need either (a) consensus of Stewards or (b) a community discussion/RfC to see whether the community explicitly endorses that username, in my view. As well, this would only apply to the on-wiki account, not the IRC bots, so I'm not certain to what end this would accomplish, since the wiki account isn't even active globally. Dmehus (talk) 20:17, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, the IRC bot is being handled separately. This thread is just about the wiki account. It doesn't appear to need an RFC, especially when that is not how username policy violations are handled. The account is violating the username policy, but may be unlocked upon a successful rename. Naleksuh (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, yes re: the IRC bot, but in terms of global locks per Username Policy, an immediate lock would not be appropriate, as there's no evidence of bad faith. Because of the age of the account, and the fact its rename has been implicitly endorsed by the community, I would not be in favour of issuing a uw-username warning without at least consensus of Stewards to do so&mdash;that is to say, at least three of four Stewards agreeing that it's a Username Policy violation. Alternatively, consensus of Stewards may opt, on a non-binding and advisory basis, seek the community's feedback via a community discussion or RfC (probably the former) on whether MirahezeBots has the community's explicit endorsement to continue using the username it has implicitly endorsed in the intervening years. Dmehus (talk) 20:45, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Consider the above mentioned three of four Steward ratio compromised as I also consider the lock suggestion inappropriate, and frankly I think the basis of the request as well as other efforts to de-integrate the bot to be made in poor faith related to a larger, more murky background of grievance rather than a substantial community issue. --Raidarr (talk) 13:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * While I don't agree the Steward ratio to be "compromised" in any way, I do agree that the request by the requestor was likely made in poor/bad faith and completely agree that, given MirahezeBots has had the implied community support by virtue of no one, other than one user, raising a grievance, over the years, it should have a community discussion prior to having the account locked. Dmehus (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I want to delete my account
I want to delete my Miraheze account, Deleted user 08:05, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Deleted user, by delete, do you mean rename and lock your own account, making it recoverable, later, or do you mean an irreversible anonymization? Dmehus (talk) 08:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I want to delete my account Deleted user 08:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Deleted user, accounts can't be deleted, per se, but the Trust and Safety team can initiate a process to fully anonymize your account, renaming it to a random username, and removing all PII from your account. Is that the process you wish to undertake, and do you reside within the European Economic Area (inclusive of the UK as well)? They will still honour your request, regardless of where you reside, but they have certain compliance obligations for users within that region. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 08:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes but which of the options? Agent Isai  Talk to me! 08:17, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Deleted user, a reply please? Dmehus (talk) 08:43, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Um. then what? Deleted user 08:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Deleted user, please confirm that you want the Trust and Safety team to irrevocably anonymize your account, and whether you reside within the European Economic Area + UK or not. Dmehus (talk) 08:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, saw your e-mail. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

2fa OATH
Hello, I have 2fa OATH on Miraheze. I would like to have on Wikimedia and testwiki.wiki, Is it activated if I have the same username there? Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * No, they are completely separate sites. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  13:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, but I could put on my factor authentication program 2 same usernames from 2 different sites? Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think RhinosF1 may have misunderstood your question. It is indeed possible to a site external to Miraheze use the shared Miraheze consumer/token, as is done with MirahezeBots Phabricator using Miraheze Meta Wiki as the OAuth authentication mechanism. This, however, would require that the site owner request for a new OAuth consumer to be approved. Miraheze SRE would then need to review the new OAuth consumer request and provide a decision. Dmehus (talk) 15:24, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * OATH is 2FA. They are annoyingly similarly named. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  15:27, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, right, it's those two apps with the same spelling, but different capitalizations. :P Dmehus (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Most 2FA apps should allow you to store more than 1 account and differentiate by something other than username. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  15:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that is what I was just about to reply to next, as I suspect that's what they were asking about. For the record, I use, and prefer, Authy, as it allows syncing my keys across devices + works on desktop devices. Dmehus (talk) 15:40, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have Google authy. AlPaD (talk) 20:50, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Someone put a rude edit summary about me.
mh:loathsomecharacters:Special:Diff/84348 MarioBobFan (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * That's not really that rude, as far as I can tell. It's a bit uncivil. Both of you seem to be engaged in a content dispute. I've restored the status quo ante in my local capacity on that wiki, but I would suggest either of you request page protection and both of you discuss the dispute on the talk page. Dmehus (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Delete mcnbwiki
Could mcnb be deleted? I've got an xml dump and have put the pages in my private wiki.  Anpang 📨 04:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Anpang, ✅ per your well articulated request, with a note that you're the only contributor to this private wiki. Dmehus (talk) 04:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Crappy GachaTubers Wiki is using moderation again despite not a lot of admin activity
Crappy GachaTubers Wiki is using moderation again despite the fact that the only administrator, FranciscoLol2009, is not very active; although they did edit two days ago, that was their first time editing in a month and 16 days (I think that's it at least, I'm not the best at that kind of math). They are mainly semi-active, therefore it is unlikely that moderation could work easily. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 00:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)


 * It's a strange wiki, frankly. It has a variety of discretionary rules and Moderation seems to be his thing even if indeed the formula might not be sustainable. But I'd encourage contacting him to see what's up, since it's not preferable to intervene locally unless truly necessary with a clear global policy concern, and he has demonstrated the bare minimum activity to be sure he is around enough to exercise agency and make decisions. --Raidarr (talk) 15:12, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000, I've taken a second look at this wiki again, and am not impressed with what I am seeing. What I am seeing is most of the pages are wholly negative attack pages meant to denigrate a particular YouTube personality. Compounding the problem, there are concerns with potentially libelous information about some of the said personalities. As well, the user's re-enabling of the Moderation extension without consensus to do so is also a bit problematic. Consensus is not required to enable extensions, but given several users have expressed problems with the extension, it should have it in this case. Moreover, former wiki creator SA 13 Bro expressed reservations about this wiki here, and yet former wiki creator Amanda Catherine approved it unquestionably without explanation as to being satisfied it would not be a Content Policy violation. As such, given the local bureaucrat's apparent unwillingness to make the necessary corrections, I'm favouring deletion of this wiki at this point. Dmehus (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please reopen this wiki?
https://fantasticlegosets.miraheze.org/. MarioBobFan (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅. --Raidarr (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * YAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!! MarioBobFan (talk) 03:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't expect this type of response from you, but good luck with the wiki. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Undeletion of miniescwiki
Per RequestWikiQueue/23425, please undelete miniescwiki. Pinging original requestor Thatnickperson. — Arcversin (talk) 21:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅. --Raidarr (talk) 23:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I tried to reopen the automatically closed zenbuddhismwiki. The page did not respond.
How should I do? Rdaido (talk) 05:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on this? Agent Isai  Talk to me! 05:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I see what you meant; I saw this a few minutes ago, checked, and noticed the 'closed' notice was a bit inconsistent. I tried to access it centrally (through Meta) and it appeared to be open. I went back to the wiki now and it appears to now be consistently open. I'd conclude that you encountered some sort of slowness in ManageWiki response and that it should work properly now, but do report to Phabricator if other changes take say, more than 10 minutes going forward. --Raidarr (talk) 10:08, 12 March 2022 (UTC)