Test Wiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions
From Test Wiki
Content deleted Content added
m Text replacement - "Test Wiki:Request permissions" to "Test Wiki:Request for permissions" |
|||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
::::{{done}} [[User:Zippybonzo|Zippybonzo]] ([[User talk:Zippybonzo|talk]]) 04:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC) |
::::{{done}} [[User:Zippybonzo|Zippybonzo]] ([[User talk:Zippybonzo|talk]]) 04:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC) |
||
==Proposal: Non steward CheckUser & Oversight/Suppressors== |
|||
{{Discussion top|Clear community opposition and proposer blocked. [[User:X|X]] ([[User talk:X|talk]]) 12:47, 14 September 2023 (UTC)}} |
|||
Hello, I am proposing non-steward check user and oversight/suppressors, whilst there isn't an active need for extra check users or suppressors as of now, in my opinion, if there are enough people able to perform the role, then they should be in the role as it's always better to have more people when you don't need them but to have none when you need them. Because the two roles are quite high trust, I am proposing the following requirements for each role. |
|||
Checkuser: |
|||
#Basic understanding of IP addresses and ranges and CIDR syntax. |
|||
#Pass a vote on the community portal with either 80% support, or 70-80% at a steward's discretion. |
|||
#Have a good understanding of account security. |
|||
#Performing unnecessary or abusive checks will result in having your access revoked. |
|||
Suppressor: |
|||
#Basic understanding of suppression criteria. |
|||
#Pass a vote on the community portal with either 80% support, or 70-80% at a steward's discretion. |
|||
#Have a good understanding of account security. |
|||
I believe that this is also a way for users to gain additional trust. |
|||
Being that the implementation of this could result in a lack of transparency with the community, I think that 2 additional groups should be added. These groups may not be added immediately, |
|||
<code>non-steward-suppressor</code>Non-steward suppressor |
|||
With the following rights: |
|||
<code>unblockable</code> |
|||
Add groups to own account: Suppressor |
|||
Remove groups from own account: Suppressor |
|||
<code>non-steward-checkuser</code> Non-steward CheckUser |
|||
With the following rights: |
|||
<code>unblockable</code> |
|||
<code>checkuser-log</code> |
|||
Add groups to own account: Check user |
|||
Remove groups from own account: Check user |
|||
Thank you, [[User:Zippybonzo|Zippybonzo]] ([[User talk:Zippybonzo|talk]]) 13:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*<s>{{support}}: This is a reasonable proposal, and allows trusted community members to assist Stewards in maintaining the wiki if they don't want or need the full steward toolset. Although, if someone is trusted enough for either of these, they should have at least part of the privileges of a Steward, such as the ability to [[Test Wiki: Bureaucrats|indefinitely block in difficult cases, being exempt from the recommendations for bureaucrats]]. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 14:52, 28 July 2023 (UTC)</s> |
|||
*{{oppose}}: Why do both sets of rights need the <code>unblockable</code> right? [[User:Dusti|Dusti]] ([[User talk:Dusti|talk]]) 14:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*{{oppose}} as written, why should non-steward functionaries have the unblockable user right? If an emergency happens, a Bureaucrat should be able to block them from editing. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 13:24, 7 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*{{oppose}}. Why do they need unblockable? [[User:X|X]] ([[User talk:X|talk]]) 11:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
==Please remove X's interface admin rights== |
==Please remove X's interface admin rights== |
||
| Line 261: | Line 210: | ||
==Non-steward oversighters/checkusers - alternate proposal== |
==Non-steward oversighters/checkusers - alternate proposal== |
||
{{Discussion top}} |
|||
:There is unanimity in one area of this proposal, and no consensus for another. There is unanimous consensus to allow non-Stewards to access the <code>suppressor</code> tools, but there is no consensus to allow them to access the <code>checkuser</code> tools. I will implement this myself through pull request within the week starting tomorrow (Sunday, December 3rd). <small>(involved closure)</small> [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 14:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
I propose allowing non-stewards to access checkuser/oversight tools, similar to the above proposal, but without the unblockable right. Being that the implementation of this could result in a lack of transparency with the community, I think that 2 additional groups should be added. |
I propose allowing non-stewards to access checkuser/oversight tools, similar to the above proposal, but without the unblockable right. Being that the implementation of this could result in a lack of transparency with the community, I think that 2 additional groups should be added. |
||
| Line 293: | Line 243: | ||
*::'''Partially supporting'''. With suppression, I have no problem granting it to non-stewards as well. I therefore support that part. Granting a checkusser to non-stewards is not a good idea in my opinion. That right is so sensitive with privacy that I prefer to keep that with the stewards and since we have 4 stewards of which 2 are active and 1 semi-active, I see no reason to grant it to non-stewards as well. And otherwise, steward elections can always be held. [[User:Drummingman|Drummingman]] ([[User talk:Drummingman|talk]]) 08:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC) |
*::'''Partially supporting'''. With suppression, I have no problem granting it to non-stewards as well. I therefore support that part. Granting a checkusser to non-stewards is not a good idea in my opinion. That right is so sensitive with privacy that I prefer to keep that with the stewards and since we have 4 stewards of which 2 are active and 1 semi-active, I see no reason to grant it to non-stewards as well. And otherwise, steward elections can always be held. [[User:Drummingman|Drummingman]] ([[User talk:Drummingman|talk]]) 08:50, 23 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
*:::I don't think there's a serious actual privacy issue, although I can see your point that someone with non steward checkuser access would be practically on the same level of trust as Stewards. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 02:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) |
*:::I don't think there's a serious actual privacy issue, although I can see your point that someone with non steward checkuser access would be practically on the same level of trust as Stewards. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 02:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
| ⚫ | |||
==Formalize [[Test Wiki:Blocks and bans]] as a guideline== |
==Formalize [[Test Wiki:Blocks and bans]] as a guideline== |
||
| Line 299: | Line 250: | ||
:Due to non-participation, I'll withdraw this within 4 days. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 20:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC) |
:Due to non-participation, I'll withdraw this within 4 days. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 20:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC) |
||
:: Withdrawn. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 23:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC) |
:: Withdrawn. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 23:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC) |
||
==Block appeal== |
==Block appeal== |
||
{{Discussion top}} |
|||
::Though their behavior is utterly unacceptable (as an AuADHD person myself, it's no excuse), I have taken the advice from [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] below. [[User: Piccadilly|Piccadilly]], you are indefinitely prohibited from editing Test Wiki due to repeated sockpuppetry. If you wish to be unblocked, you must go through staff@testwiki.wiki, after '''at least''' a [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Standard offer| 6 month abstention from editing Test Wiki, using your main account or other accounts]]. At least 2 of the current 4 Stewards must endorse your appeal to be unblocked, and they have the discretion to forward it to the community instead. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 03:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Piccadilly sent this into the staff email address today: "The issues I have had on the wiki have been making random talk pages, using bad language in some of my edits, spamming random letters, and evading my block through IP addresses. I am not sure of all the reasons I thought any of that would be okay, but I do remember thinking at times "this won't hurt anything" or "I'll undo this right afterwards so nobody will even notice". I definitely should have been thinking more maturely or at least sensibly when doing any testing on the wiki. |
Piccadilly sent this into the staff email address today: "The issues I have had on the wiki have been making random talk pages, using bad language in some of my edits, spamming random letters, and evading my block through IP addresses. I am not sure of all the reasons I thought any of that would be okay, but I do remember thinking at times "this won't hurt anything" or "I'll undo this right afterwards so nobody will even notice". I definitely should have been thinking more maturely or at least sensibly when doing any testing on the wiki. |
||
If I am allowed back, I will be extremely careful in all my tests on the wiki. I also promise to adhere to any conditions that might be set for my unblock, including when I can ask for administrator and/or bureaucrat." |
If I am allowed back, I will be extremely careful in all my tests on the wiki. I also promise to adhere to any conditions that might be set for my unblock, including when I can ask for administrator and/or bureaucrat." |
||
| Line 312: | Line 266: | ||
*# This is more of a Test Wiki-specific reason, but Test Wiki's community, aside from several core users is transitory in nature. Users come and go frequently and often have to "follow the herd mentality" of a few in community discussions, which is not a substantive community [[w:WP:CON|consensus]] |
*# This is more of a Test Wiki-specific reason, but Test Wiki's community, aside from several core users is transitory in nature. Users come and go frequently and often have to "follow the herd mentality" of a few in community discussions, which is not a substantive community [[w:WP:CON|consensus]] |
||
*# I suspect the behaviour is more of Piccadilly's reversion to the mean of not being to help themselves. They're [[w:WP:AGF|good-faith]], have made positive steps in terms of reforming themselves and even been a constructive contributor for several months, but then they revert to non-constructive gibberish outside of their own userspace and clearly marked test pages. The sockpuppetry is more of a symptom of their self-disclosed ADHD + autism, in being frustrated by stewards not responding to their appeal. That's not to ''excuse'' it, but I ''do'' think it provides a mitigating circumstance |
*# I suspect the behaviour is more of Piccadilly's reversion to the mean of not being to help themselves. They're [[w:WP:AGF|good-faith]], have made positive steps in terms of reforming themselves and even been a constructive contributor for several months, but then they revert to non-constructive gibberish outside of their own userspace and clearly marked test pages. The sockpuppetry is more of a symptom of their self-disclosed ADHD + autism, in being frustrated by stewards not responding to their appeal. That's not to ''excuse'' it, but I ''do'' think it provides a mitigating circumstance |
||
: In summary, subject to the conditions I described above, I think they need a clear break, so no objections from me in imposing a steward-imposed indefinite block/ban on Test Wiki, provided it's made clear that (a) the appeal venue is to <code>staff[at]testwiki.wiki</code> and to Stewards and (b) that an appeal will ''only'' be considered after a reasonable break (of say, a minimum of 1 and maximum of 6 months) '''from date of last confirmed sock'''. If the above is true, Justarandomamerican, please feel free to self-close this and impose the block/ban as such and make clear your appeal conditions. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 02:30, 26 November 2023 (UTC) |
: In summary, subject to the conditions I described above, I think they need a clear break, so no objections from me in imposing a steward-imposed indefinite block/ban on Test Wiki, provided it's made clear that (a) the appeal venue is to <code>staff[at]testwiki.wiki</code> and to Stewards and (b) that an appeal will ''only'' be considered after a reasonable break (of say, a minimum of 1 and maximum of 6 months) '''from date of last confirmed sock''' (note that each confirmed sock would reset the appeal date, which is why, in Piccadilly's case, a 1 month minimum block period can be the ''minimum'' sanction necessary; if they continue, it effectively becomes a longer block because the appeal date keeps getting pushed out, but, if they can keep their nose clean and steer clear, then they've shown they still have the capacity to '''follow direction''' from Stewards and, by extension, the community, which is ''always'' our aim). If the above is true, Justarandomamerican, please feel free to self-close this and impose the block/ban as such and make clear your appeal conditions, which could include appeal to a single steward alone or require support from a plurality of stewards (i.e., at least 50%). [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 02:30, 26 November 2023 (UTC) |
||
{{Discussion bottom}} |
|||
==Move Test Wiki:Request for permissions to ''[[Test Wiki:Request for permissions]]''== |
|||
{{discussion top}} |
|||
{{Done}}. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 20:47, 2 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Per Wikipedia, their requests page is under that title. [[User:Username|Username]] ([[User talk:Username|talk]]) 19:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:{{support}} per consistency. [[User:Sav|Sav]] • ([[Special:Contribs/Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff"> Edits</span>]] | [[Special:Newsection/User talk:Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff">Talk </span>]]) 20:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Doing...''' as relatively uncontroversial. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 20:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{Discussion bottom}} |
|||
