Stewards' noticeboard/Archive 26

__NOINDEX__

My friend YashiMC lost access to his acccount along with his wiki
So recently my friend YashiYC lost access to his wiki: https://dubiouslymadness.miraheze.org/wiki/Greetings,_fellow_member_of_the_community. , his old laptop broke down and he forgot the password he used to log on his account, the email he used for his miraheze account was also a temporary email so he can't ask for a password reset either. Before he lost access to his account though he gave me admin and bureaucrat perms. Is there anyway that the wiki ownership can be transferred from his account to mine? Happy Days (talk) 04:28, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I might be wrong here, but bureaucrat is basically owner I think Anpang   Talk  04:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no 'wiki owner' on Miraheze. Bureaucrat and admin, along with any local policies and convention are what set local management. You have everything you need to assume control. Ideally though, you make a local post to explain the situation as best as possible so it is not weird and appears to be a coup to anyone who is present in the community. --Raidarr (talk) 10:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Happy Days If your friend has no access to their recovery e-mail address for their user account and there are no other bureaucrats on that wiki, and they do not have an alternate account which they've confirmed on-wiki as their alternate account, they will need to complete a local permissions election on the wiki, following these guidelines, then return to this noticeboard when the local process has concluded. Dmehus (talk) 16:13, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Happy Days It looks like you're already a  on this wiki, so you have the capabilities to grant the additional permissions to any newly created user account for your friend. If your friend wants their old username back, they can post a note here requesting to usurp the former username. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 16:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit rights on nfcwiki
https://nfcwiki.miraheze.org/ was reopened per Lesogorec's adoption request but turns out that editing of the wiki is restricted only to Verified users group (so previous bureaucrat is the only one who can edit pages on the wiki). I ask you to make that other users could create and edit pages on the wiki so we can have local elections and keep writing articles. WerySkok (talk) 15:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I support this request. Lesogorec (talk) 15:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * WerySkok and Lesogorec Thank you for identifying this issue. Since the wiki has no recently active local administrators, there were a couple options here. One of which could've been inviting users to attend stewards' noticeboard to request the "verified users" local user group from Stewards in absence of locally available administration, and the other of which would be to grant the  user right to the   group. As this wiki generally does not have a recently active community, nevermind administrators, the former seemed to be a bit problematic from the standpoint of future permissions requests in that only those users who'd requested the verified users group via this noticeboard would be able to participate any such local discussions. So, I've ✅ the   user right to this   user group. If there any other permissions you require below   not requiring an election or any other ManageWiki configuration/extension changes, in order to develop this wiki, please start a new thread on stewards' noticeboard. Thank you Dmehus (talk) 16:06, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, about that. Looks like I don't have right to create pages, even in the main namespace. Can you add this right too? WerySkok (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * WerySkok That also seems reasonable. Do you want me just to reset the  permissions to the default   group permissions, so that your wiki can have a further local discussion with respect to user groups that exist on the wiki? Dmehus (talk) 16:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that would be reasonable so yes, that would be helpful. WerySkok (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * WerySkok, This should be ✅ now. Dmehus (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

I need to be autoconfirmed on the Horrible Songs and Music Wiki.
I need to be autoconfirmed on the Horrible Songs and Music Wiki. Why? Because so I can edit. That's the thing. MarioBobFan (talk) 04:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * If you mean this wiki, I wouldn't recommend contributing to that wiki, because someone tried to adopt it, and the election took forever. I'd recommend contributing to mh:worstmusicandsongs:Worst Music & Songs Wiki, as it is the new version. FatBurn0000 (talk) 07:27, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh. MarioBobFan (talk) 01:55, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Dormancy Exemption - Hypothetical Hurricanes Wiki
Hello I would like to request a dormancy exemption for hypotheticalhurricanes.miraheze.org as this wiki as of the time of writing has over 13,000 pages and I am working with another user uploading all the images currently. I believe a wiki of this size and potential activity should warrant an inactivity exemption. Thank you in advance. Hypercane (  talk ) 07:30, 15 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Hypercane, thank you for your request for an exemption to our Dormancy Policy, originally made via IRC, which I've now reviewed and assessed. That's great you're working on importing images still&mdash;it's important work, but can be time-consuming. We typically assess requests on a two-part basis, one being sufficient quality content made to be read by real human beings and the other being need&mdash;a wiki with a very activity community of users would not need an exemption. In your case, the first part is easily met, having migrated existing content from the Fandom wiki version, with some 13,000 (or so) quality and substantive pages. In terms of need, this is also met, as your Miraheze community is still small and has few active contributors. Thus, I've ✅ this request indefinitely, but please do note that this is not a permanent exemption, and should your wiki's activity change that it no longer needs an inactivity exemption, this can be removed. Additionally, you're encouraged to proactively advise us here of such circumstantial changes. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 07:37, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

An issue on mh:awesomethemeparksandattractions:Awesome Theme Parks and Attractions Wiki
For some reason, despite that I am autoconfirmed on this wiki (I have made over 10 edits and have been registered to the wiki for over 4 days) I cannot comment on pages. FatBurn0000 (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi there! It looks like you have not yet assigned the required  permission to any of your user groups. You can assign this permission to your desired group by visiting Special:ManageWiki/permissions on the wiki in question and assigning   to your desired user group. Hope this helps!  dross  (t • c • g) 10:02, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Are you sure I don't have to be a bureaucrat to do that? FatBurn0000 (talk) 21:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I could get that fixed. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 22:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Global lock for Key-Power
He is going to make the fake Usopedia. There is evidence on this page. "偽Usopediaでも作りません?" means "Would you like to make a fake Usopedia?". This is a sabotage to Usopedia. I would like a global lock for Key-Power.--Egg (talk) 12:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Egg While there is no policy to globally lock users who are making a content fork, these forks (if on Miraheze) must abide by the Content Policy. One of the provisions of it states "A wiki must not create problems which make it difficult for other wikis" which includes making a content fork with little to no attempts to meditate any issues with the original community. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 13:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I will examine this more closely, Egg. Another user from that wiki, who is a wiki creator but whose username uses a non-English script so can't easily copy/paste due to technical issues with my Vivaldi web browser, reported this user for potential abuse of multiple accounts and crosswiki vandalism. That investigation has largely been completed, but has been pended for consultation with other Stewards. Dmehus (talk) 00:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * S/he was determined by Usopedia to be a ロープTA sock puppet and was blocked indefinitely. The rationale is described below.
 * Uncyclopedia's CheckUser proved that the user named "風呂ックス" who was active in Japanese Uncyclopedia was the same as Uncyclopedia's ロープTA (CheckUser request page in Uncyclopedia).
 * 風呂ックス suggested in Japanese Uncyclopedia that it was the same as Miraheze's account "Key-Power" (My talk page in Uncyclopedia has the description "どれだけPowerをかけても壊れなさそうなKeyをどうぞ! {English: Please have a Key that will not break no matter how much power you apply!}", which contains the words "Key" and "Power").
 * In other words, ロープTA = Japanese Uncyclopedia's 風呂ックス = Miraheze's Key-Power.
 * Therefore, we will request global lock for each of the following accounts, assuming that they are abuses using sock puppets.
 * ロープTA
 * ロープ (Sub account of ロープTA)
 * C2H6O (The first account used to break the block)
 * Key-Power (The second account used to break the block)
 * Special:CentralAuth/Key-Power(Bot) (Sub account of Key-Power)
 * -- Schwarz ・ Talk /  ウソペディア  05:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Schwarz, apologies for no ping. I'm not sure if this was a Vivaldi web browser change or what, but I can't seem to copy and paste your username without it pasting the unicode equivalents. At any rate, I appreciate your follow up, and for the additional details. I need to refresh my memory on this, and will aim to have this resolved this week. Dmehus (talk) 05:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Schwarz, the users you've identified have been ✅ in accordance with user accounts policy, per their obvious attempts to use their accounts for deceptive and/or nefarious purposes (i.e., to vandalize or otherwise disrupt local wikis). If you identify accounts operating in a similar fashion, or have specific wikis this user, or their socks, has created that we should be paying particular attention to, please do follow up here, whether in this thread or a new thread (if it's archived). Dmehus (talk) 07:37, 17 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your support. When a block or other disposition is imposed, this user tends to be upset against the user who made the disposition or the user who is hostile to him. Therefore, s/he may break the block or destroy the wiki again. Therefore, if similar users or similar behaviors are confirmed again in the future, I will promptly report.-- Schwarz ・ Talk /  ウソペディア  08:21, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Requests for adoption
There appears to be a problem going on with this page and its archives. Multiple requests keep getting archived despite not being finished. For example, worsttvnetworks.miraheze.org, ethereumanarchy.miraheze.org, phix.miraheze.org, 5b5t.miraheze.org, doktok.miraheze.org, symbian.miraheze.org, ukps.miraheze.org, rebelwisdom.miraheze.org, samsstudynet.miraheze.org, justparty2022.miraheze.org and umga.miraheze.org were all archived at Requests for adoption/Archive 8 despite not being looked at. Also, beautifullogos.miraheze.org and villains.miraheze.org were marked as not done, but they had received responses by the requester that were ignored. Could someone please have a look at this? Thanks, FatBurn0000 (talk) 11:11, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Archival is occurring as an automatic process, but the Stewards are simply incapable of keeping up in pace to both review previous entries comprehensively and keep up with new ones in a timely manner. There are two answers here, fixing bot to accommodate the status or fixing the pace particularly given a new hand on deck... --Raidarr (talk) 11:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I have responded to all current requests. With regards to archived in progress ones dating from month than a month ago - if the requester still wishes to have the request reviewed, they are more than welcome to re-make the request to show continued interest in re-opening the relevant wikis. John (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reviews, as well as additional steps to review the system in general as I notice in Recent Changes. --Raidarr (talk) 15:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

And what about the wrongfully archived discussions? FatBurn0000 (talk) 06:07, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I would like you to lock my account because I no longer want to use it
I would like you to lock my account because I no longer want to use it Brownie the Quincy Elf (talk) 03:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Brownie the Quincy Elf, ✅. Dmehus (talk) 07:15, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Request for revoke globalblock-whitelist permission on local wiki
The  permission can be granted using the ManageWiki on the local wiki. As a result, User:Key-Power, who is requested to have a global lock on this page, is trying to break the block by invalidating the global lock of his IP address on the mh:jpbankwiki: (at that time, a global lock request was issued. Immediately after it was done). Therefore, I request that the  permission cannot be granted locally. Schwarz ・ Talk /  ウソペディア  05:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Schwarz, while I do agree that there are few legitimate reasons for this user right, I do think this would need a global community discussion that assess those likely few legitimate use cases and weighs them against reasons for limiting this user right to Stewards. In any case, I also feel this isn't the right approach in this case. The global block can instead be reenabled on this wiki, to prevent further abuse. I'm keeping an eye on this wiki, and related wikis, created by the user you've identified. As you've been monitoring this user's crosswiki behaviour and editing fairly closely, any additional wikis we should be monitoring would be helpful. Dmehus (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Dmehus Thank you for your support. At this time I am not aware of any other wikis or users that need to be monitored. However, if similar users appear in the future, I will keep you informed.-- Schwarz ・ Talk /  ウソペディア  08:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Can you please reopen these wikis?
Can you please reopen these wikis? https://fantastictoys.miraheze.org/wiki/Fantastic_Toys_Wiki https://upsettingtoys.miraheze.org/wiki/Upsetting_Toys_Wiki https://fantasticlegosets.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page https://garbagelegos.miraheze.org/wiki/Main_Page That's the things. MarioBobFan (talk) 23:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * None of these require Steward involvement, at least through the noticeboard. The toy wikis were manually closed by a request for comment process on the central Qualitipedia area. Admittedly I'm not sure why they were made actually private and a proper notice was not placed on them as I recommended at the time. However, per the link I outline above you may request to adopt them as a wiki normally would be or contact if you want to take administrative responsibility. The first lego wiki is not closed. The second appears locked by genuine inactivity, but based on its list of staff you would be able to contact the user, who is very active on other reception wikis and would be able to assist you with this. Alternatively you could start the adoptions process with it. Raidarr (talk) 01:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * MarioBobFan, I'll take a look at this request tomorrow. From the linked local RfC, I'm seeing users having mixed feelings on closing the wikis, or to "cutting them loose" from the Qualitipedia wikis. Given there was no consensus for closing the wikis, reopening these wikis is reasonable, and given that DarkMatterMan4500 has locally expressed a view to either close them or cut them loose, that is, arguably, his de facto abdication of any role in the wiki. So, it seems to me what needs to happen is for the wikis to be reopened, and for me to invite remaining contributors to the wiki to put their names forward for the remaining community's consideration for election. Dmehus (talk) 04:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Fantastic LEGO Sets Wiki is still open, and plus, the toy reception wikis were closed for a reason. I'm unsure why GLSW was closed, in fact, if you ask me, they actually have potential unlike the toy wikis, as their toys are probably easier to make pages on than other toys. FatBurn0000 (talk) 08:02, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * and ;GLSW was timed out from inactivity most likely. The Toy wikis were not closed in a way that prohibits re-opening by invested users, in fact the linked Request for Comment and the summary provided above indicate that interested parties can still adopt and reopen them if they wish. They were simply closed in addition to cutting off from QP because nobody, including their current most active members who I went out of my way to contact, wanted to a) do anything with them or b) take administrative responsibility by adopting them. So they were closed until such a time someone proved they had the interest to actually give them a shot, which wasn't really proven in their lifespan previously. It's worth noting that there is only one case here of 'mixed feelings' to close the Toy wikis, and previously there was a snowball against their continued operation again by the aforementioned RfC. The oppositions largely lacked any actual contribution to the wikis they were defending and only opposed on principle they 'could be useful', not with any apparent intent of actually addressing the concerns of their operation. --Raidarr (talk) 12:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I could re-open them at a reasonable request, so, if I do see the next one, I will probably re-open given that I'm a bureaucrat of that wiki. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 That's up to you, but did you have a discussion with other contributors or bureaucrats on that wiki to close them? If so, then I'd recommend discussing with those parties first before reopening. Also, if you can link me to the discussion, that'd be great, too. Dmehus (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Why yes, there was a mention of closing the wikis as part of this RfC on Qualitipedia Central. I'd be more than inclined to re-open it if people vote for it to be re-opened. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:30, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Thank you for that, and for saying they're part of that the included scope of wikis to either cut loose or close. I would personally recommend closing that discussion. If you and other bureaucrats are not comfortable reading the consensus of the discussion, or your local policies or conventions preclude involved closures, I'd be most happy to assess that consensus and close that discussion for you. From my initial read, there's a clear/strong consensus against retaining the wikis as Qualitipedia wikis. There's not a clear consensus as to whether there's a preference to close or cut loose the wikis, so that's within the closing bureaucrat's discretion, unless local policies preclude that, or it would fall to existing bureaucrats, presumably as part of some sort of 'crat chat, to determine how to administratively effect the outcome of the RfC. If you do opt to administratively cut loose the wikis instead of closing them, arguably, that then becomes a new wiki, and so there should be some sort of new discussion for the prior community contributors to the wiki to decide to the initial team of bureaucrats, administrators, etc., and what the requirements are for those team members to be elected, removed, or how they may be removed (i.e., by local bureaucrat or, as is preferred, by Steward). So those are the sort of procedural/administrative things you and your team need to decide as part of that RfC's closure. If Stewards' assistance is requested in some way, whether to close the RfC or administratively remove bureaucrat rights or reopen the wiki(s) to allow a new community formation discussion to get underway, we're happy to assist, but as of this point, the ball is in your court, so to speak. :) Dmehus (talk) 15:51, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The discussion was already closed awhile back. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:40, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: GLSW has been reopened thanks to JrStudios. FatBurn0000 (talk) 22:57, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Just a question
How do you merge wikis? FatBurn0000 (talk) 19:54, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * FatBurn0000, for your question. There isn't an easy one-click way to merge a wiki, but rather, what you can do is, using the Special:DataDump, then, on your new wiki, create a separate namespace, perhaps bearing the name of the merged wiki for convenience, and file a Phabricator ticket for SRE to import the XML dump you generated into that newly created namespace on your new wiki. Once that's done, you can then move the pages, without a leaving a redirect, out of the temporary namespace into your new wiki's main, project, and other relevant namespaces. Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 08:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

When you say "new wiki", do you mean the wiki that the other wiki is going to be merged into, or do you mean the wiki that is going to merge into the other one? FatBurn0000 (talk) 09:03, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * FatBurn0000 Good question. It could be a brand new wiki, or just a surviving wiki that shares a similar purpose and broad scope to the wiki you're seeking to merge. Essentially, the merged wiki would be better to refer to as the merging wiki (i.e., the one you intend to delete once the merge is finalized) and the merging wiki is the other wiki/new wiki to which the merging wiki would be merged into. Hope that clarifies. Dmehus (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I'm replying to this so late, but what are the required permissions to merge a wiki? FatBurn0000 (talk) 23:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)