User talk:Reception123

Post your messages BELOW the others

New wiki
Yes, it was my fault for lack of time. But now I'm focusing mainly on just these wikis: nanatsunotaizai, tokyoghoul, thehushhushsaga; And the new one that would be shingekinokyojin

Wiki Request
Hey there,

I mistakenly requested a new wiki at a custom domain (request 3034).

Could I request that the domain be, rather, a subdomain styled as: overon.miraheze.org?

Thanks for your time.

All the best, -Veldias

Un lock on my wiki
Can you unlock me on my wiki nasa.miraheze.org or make the user chicken nugget the sysop and bureaucrat

Moderate-Rightpedia
thnx for sticking up for our wiki, against Rushwrj13...

hello.
please ignore rush. our group, in fact, has not vandalized his wiki since August. he just wants our site to get shut down. he claims we are hacking his site. the only thing we did was misuse a speedy deletion template, which a VSTF informed him of and even after that, he still didn't accept that, and is stalking us everywhere we go, trying to get us taken off of every platform. we do not plan our attacks or any fowl activities to any platforms, on Miraheze. All members of the wiki have not taken part in a raid since August as well. We do not vandalize here, nor have we intentionally violated any Miraheze or MediaWiki ToU. Thank you for reading, and have a good day.

Unable to contribute aging.miraheze.org
I requested for the adoption of aging.miraheze.org which was abandoned and I was asked to contribute over the week to claim ownership of it. However, the wiki is set with permissions so that only approved users prior can contribute, and since I was not one I cannot add or remove content from it. I hope the permissions issue can be resolved.

CoCC reform
I edited your evolving RfC with a suggested rewording of one proposition. Separately, to abolish term limits, I wouldn't replace the text with anything. My state's constitution contains a platitude setting out the preferred attitude of "future legislators." It's meaningless and has led to a lot of drama. 12:01 11-Jun-2020
 * Thanks for the reword, your wording is more clear and makes more sense! Will just make one small change to make it clear that local actors also include IRC operators (which cannot be considered "sysops" really). Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:11, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Am eager to vote for this RfC. We don't need a committee to investigate every act of misbehavior. We need a rulebook, plus the CoCC committee to hear appeals, apply the rulebook, and ensure we are using principles and consistency. However, I'll vote against your first proposition because, again, it is a platitude, not a rule. We don't need to vote to agree on a state of mind, and it's not clear what changes if we do agree. 19:11 13-Jun-2020
 * I'm not opposed to the idea of a Code of Conduct Commission, but given the member volunteers are all either system administrators, co-founders, or stewards, it's kind of more or less redundant and, thus, not needed. If we're having trouble electing volunteers to serve on the Code of Conduct Commission (as an aside, I would volunteer), then that suggests it's not really wanted and, perhaps, any final ban or block appeals could just be referred to CN for the community to discuss, with closure by an uninvolved steward? In such a case, the steward should appropriately discount the "oppose" !votes that are either without merit or merely because they believe (falsely) indefinite blocks are permanent blocks and somehow "need to be respected." Likewise, the steward would also appropriately strike confirmed or probable sockpuppet (including meatpuppet) "support" votes. Dmehus (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Valid topics for debate, but neither one within the scope of this RfC. Reception was not reconsidering the existence of the CoCC but merely proposing to change the point at which it would get involved; and he didn't propose to change its decision criteria.  Yes, in general, votes that aren't authentic independent voices should be discounted.  Votes that are based on irrelevant prejudices should too, but who's to say?   02:33 14-Jun-2020

Reception123, it strikes me that elastic clauses have snuck back into your Proposal 1.2.
 * The Proposal (generally re-styling the CoCC as an appeals board) here gives it the power to make an initial request, of "global or local sysops, as well as any other groups mentioned in the Code of Conduct." I presume the Code of Conduct already specifies who can initiate action and your Proposal doesn't propose to change this.  If so, much of the text can be gotten rid of.
 * Similarly, the Proposal sets out a list of punishments, ending with, "or other sanctions." The listed sanctions may be good examples, but they are included in the last item.  (Bottom line, "Any punishment might happen.")  Again, I don't think your Proposal aims to change this at all.  The Code governs Conduct, including cost of misconduct.  If you just state your Proposal and don't try to set out the complete resulting state of affairs, things will be simpler.

What's left? The Commission does not have the right to initiate discipline, but may by majority vote ask any group authorised by the Code of Conduct to do so.  20:46 14-Jun-2020
 * Yes, I saw that, but I was thinking that if we're going to have a Code of Conduct Commission, that it may also want to be empowered to also be a neutral, or supposedly neutral, arbitrating body to initiate discipline (there are several use cases for this, but the obvious one would be when two stewards or global sysops disagreed on whether to or for how long to locally or globally block one someone; another use case could be arbitration enforcement-type sanctions at English Wikipedia. Also, this is part of my rationale for my proposal 1.6(c). Dmehus (talk) 21:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Moving a wiki to a Custom Domain
I was looking into moving https://hololive.miraheze.org/ into a custom domain that I have added an SSL certificate to, https://hololive.wiki. I was trying to understand the process in https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Custom_domains, but each link there leads to a form for SSL *creation*, and I'm unsure how to proceed to have the wiki moved to my desired domain. Is there perhaps a newer help page or form that I am missing? Catman504
 * I haven't looked at that form specifically, but don't worry too much about the specifics of whether you're requesting a new SSL certificate or requesting to use an SSL certificate you've created, but in looking at that page, it looks like that's the correct form. Is it a Let's Encrypt certificate you've created? Whether it is or isn't, just put as much detail into that Phab ticket you are creating (i.e., that you've already created the SSL certificate and from which certificate authority you used), and a staff volunteer will follow up with you with any additional details they need to activate it onto your custom domain. Dmehus (talk) 15:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

List
Hey, thanks for the list of wiki creators. I dont forgot, there was 503 backend error and I went to sleep. I wanted to create this page now, but it's already created. Thanks--MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:23, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll update it in few hours.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 07:00, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the 503, and it's no problem :) Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 09:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello
Hello. Could you block this Wikilouco account? I tried to contact the local Sysop, but the same is quite absent. Thank you very much in advanc --O Investigador (talk) 02:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Since the local administrators don't seem very active I've gone ahead and blocked the account locally for vandalism. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:23, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

requesting wiki issues
Hello, I have a big issue about requesting wikis and them already being taken. My friend and I have been requesting a wiki for a contest with the initials DSC, but it says it has already been taken. After looking at the wiki that already exists, it has been inactive since October with not a SINGLE edit. Since it was 2 months inactive, we tried to adopt the wiki, but again the mods reply with the wiki being private. The message says the wiki and subdomain will be deleted after 6 months of inactivity. It has been NINE months now and nothing has happened. We would like to know if you guys could do us a favor and let us take the subdomain for the wiki, so we can start working on the wiki. We have been trying so hard for months now to try to get this issue resolved, but each time we are denied and it seems like no one is listening to our messages. Hopefully you will allow us to take the wiki subdomain.

Thanks, CamdaNer
 * Looks like it could possibly be eligible for deletion now according to the logs on the wiki (would want someone else to verify, this is an unusual request). However, out of curiosity, how important is it to use dsc.miraheze.org when you could have picked another subdomain? -- Void  Whispers 23:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, DSC is a very important subdomain since any other subdomain would not make sense for the contest. The owner has really wanted this subdomain for months and he doesn't want to have to rename the initials of the contest after running it for 1 year now. There are 3 of us editors who are trying to work together to get this subdomain so we can create the wiki, hopefully we can get it soon.

Thanks for your understanding, CamdaNer

help needed with custom domain
I want to use the custom domain www.museummiddelland.nl for https://museummiddelland.miraheze.org with a certificate from Let's Encrypt, so I only have to point the domain to your server. I added a CNAME on www.museummiddelland.nl. Next I need to fill in this form on Phabricator to request a CSR (or directly a certificate). I tried to login with the username/password that I also use on museummiddelland.miraheze.org but it says that my "Username or password are incorrect". What can I do to proceed? Thanks in advance!
 * Hi, make sure you select the MediaWiki option below the login instead of trying to log in directly. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 16:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

New here
Hi, I'm new to Miraheze. I'm mostly into independently-hosted gaming wikis, so I am not looking to make a first wiki. However, I did want to bring up something, which has likely been done before: FANDOM used to be Wikicities but has since been ruined completely. One thing I hope for is that some of the oldest wikis can have new life here. For example, Seattle Wiki. It has been abandoned for years, and I feel wikis like this have untapped potential, as do several other long-since abandoned wikis that were created in the 2000s. It looked like a pretty good vision for a platform of real Wikipedia. Anyway, just wondering if you think it would be a good idea to revitalize some of those old, long-since abandoned wikis on Miraheze. With the CC-BY-SA license, it is allowed, as long as you attribute the original site. There are no communities either. I don't really plan on editing and mostly plan on reading them. There's a lot of subjects that I feel are waiting to have wikis -- something that was there with Wikia long ago but has since been completely ruined. Just wondered what your thoughts are, as you seem to be one of the admins here. Thank you, RMV2003 (talk) 17:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, welcome to Miraheze! If you think these wikis could benefit people I don't see any issues with bringing them over here, it's always great to get new wikis. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 18:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I want to change subdomain
Hi :-) I want to change my subdomain I want to change 'sciencepedia.miraheze.org' to free subdomains (from, freedns.afraid.org) 'sciencepedia.awiki.org'

Please help me I registered the subdomain 'sciencepedia.awiki.org' on freedns.afraid.org

I don't know next steps!! can you please help me???? RakeshKrushnaJoshiMan (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Please see Custom domains, follow the instructions, and then follow the think to the Phabricator form to request a custom subdomain on freedns.afraid.org be associated for your wiki address. Dmehus (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

[Now at Requests for Comment/Require that RfCs undergo a public comment period]
Promised for months! What do you think? 12:54 15-Jun-2020
 * Looks like an interesting proposal, though I wouldn't necessarily agree with the 6th point you make which does change a lot. Though we can discuss all of them. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll copy your feedback to the proposal page and announce the proposal. 14:44 16-Jun-2020

User:Spike/Recommend that RfCs undergo a public comment period
The vote on the original RfC is nearly evenly divided, but you as well as one voter objected to the mandatory aspects. I've redrafted it as a recommendation, though I'm skeptical of adding a big new procedure that doesn't have to be followed. What do you think? (Not just whether the edits resolve your complaints, but do we need it?)  10:44 10-Jul-2020
 * Since it's optional, I'm not sure we even need to have a full RfC to adopt specific wording of the document. We could probably just refer to the current, as yet unclosed, RfC where was some support for rephrasing instructions for beginning an RfC by including a reference that RfCs be drafted and discussed somewhere prior to being launched formally. We're not writing policy here; this is well within editorial discretion of any user to add such phrasing to the information page. I think we should just make the changes, tag it as a "draft," and then discuss on the corresponding talk page, providing a notification link at CN to encourage more discussion on the talk page. These instructions seem too rigid for what's only a strongly encouraged recommendation. Hope that helps? Dmehus (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Points 5-7 are what I would object to, chiefly, if this were to go to another RfC. I don't think we need to dictate how a draft discussion should be closed. A week seems like a reasonable minimum comment period, but could also be shorter if there were, say, at least five participants and no opposition. It's really just a guide. Similar, to close the draft discussion, any of the participants could simply begin, in a new sub-section, a proposal to close the draft phase and move it to an RfC, pinging the existing participants. Dmehus (talk) 13:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps instead of it being an procedure, it should be a guideline or a recommendation that we could have somewhere, so that users know what is preferable to do. I don't think we need an obligation, we can trust users to follow the steps in my opinion. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 17:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks; then I won't advance it further. The existing RfC can probably be closed too; it isn't getting new input and wasn't passed, if you count the negative opinions.   17:45 11-Jul-2020