Test Wiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Harvici: Reply
(→Discussion: Reply) |
(→Harvici: Reply) |
||
| (52 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown) | |||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
==Crat requirements's [[User:Harvici/Bureaucrat requirements|policy]]== | ==Crat requirements's [[User:Harvici/Bureaucrat requirements|policy]]== | ||
{{discussion top |{{done}} After 2 weeks and with 3 votes in favour and 1 in opposition and no comments by any other users even after pinging I am closing this discussion as successful [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 13:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
As in the above discussion, I have established [[User:Harvici/Bureaucrat requirements|policy]]-related criteria for the CRT position, as previously stated by Dmehus, " {{talk quote inline|It's not [...] require an extra degree of trust as it includes extra permissions like nuke and import which can cause vandalism [...]}}. [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 18:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC) | As in the above discussion, I have established [[User:Harvici/Bureaucrat requirements|policy]]-related criteria for the CRT position, as previously stated by Dmehus, " {{talk quote inline|It's not [...] require an extra degree of trust as it includes extra permissions like nuke and import which can cause vandalism [...]}}. [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 18:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
*::I do suppose that ''could'' be added, but how would we handle legitimate test (such as testing the bureaucrat right on its own, without sysop) or cratbot accounts? [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 00:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC) | *::I do suppose that ''could'' be added, but how would we handle legitimate test (such as testing the bureaucrat right on its own, without sysop) or cratbot accounts? [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 00:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
*:::We wouldn't be able to technically restrict it, no, but, rather, it would provide automatic revocation criteria for the <code>bureaucrat</code> bit if Stewards suspect the two users are the same, or where the user has confirmed the two accounts are the same. That is, the bit would be removed from the legitimate sockpuppet accounts and a Steward would remind users to '''pick one''' account they want their bureaucrat bit on. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 02:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | *:::We wouldn't be able to technically restrict it, no, but, rather, it would provide automatic revocation criteria for the <code>bureaucrat</code> bit if Stewards suspect the two users are the same, or where the user has confirmed the two accounts are the same. That is, the bit would be removed from the legitimate sockpuppet accounts and a Steward would remind users to '''pick one''' account they want their bureaucrat bit on. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 02:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
*::::With the provisions for common sense exceptions by Stewards, that's fine. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 13:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*{{comment}} It has been 2 weeks since the start of the discussion, and there are 3 votes in support and 1 in opposition. I wouldn't close this discussion today and wait for 24 hours more to see if anyone else wants to opine and also suggest others do the same.The following users were active in the month of May (5TH May) so pinging them if they want to opine: @[[User:Aviram7|Aviram7]],[[User:Drummingman|Drummingman]], [[User:C1K98V|C1K98V]],[[User:Codename Noreste |Codename Noreste ]], [[User:DodoMan |DodoMan ]], [[User:Sav |Sav ]],[[User:Wüstenspringmaus|Wüstenspringmaus ]] [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 14:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{discussion bottom}} | |||
==Omnibus RfC: Unbundling abusefilter permissions from Administrators== | ==Omnibus RfC: Unbundling abusefilter permissions from Administrators== | ||
| Line 162: | Line 165: | ||
==Request for Block Against Piccadilly== | ==Request for Block Against Piccadilly== | ||
{{Discussion top|I have now been asked to review and close this request. Given people’s opinions, it seem like the consensus is for the indefinite block to remain standing. Per standard procedure, Piccadilly may appeal after six months. [[User:MacFan4000|MacFan4000]] <sup>([[User talk:MacFan4000|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/MacFan4000|Contribs]])</sup> 13:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
Good morning, | Good morning, | ||
| Line 196: | Line 199: | ||
*::I could not have said this better myself, Justarandomamerican. The ongoing back and forth with this user proves a conflict in opinions regarding the appropriate course of action. | *::I could not have said this better myself, Justarandomamerican. The ongoing back and forth with this user proves a conflict in opinions regarding the appropriate course of action. | ||
*::PSA for {{Ping|Dmehus}}, this request was discussed between myself and [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] on [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly's]] [[User_talk:Piccadilly#About_My_Current_Block|talk page]]. [[User:X|X]] was indirectly involved with this request. [[User:Sav|Sav]] • ([[Special:Contribs/Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff"> Edits</span>]] | [[Special:Newsection/User talk:Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff">Talk </span>]]) 03:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | *::PSA for {{Ping|Dmehus}}, this request was discussed between myself and [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] on [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly's]] [[User_talk:Piccadilly#About_My_Current_Block|talk page]]. [[User:X|X]] was indirectly involved with this request. [[User:Sav|Sav]] • ([[Special:Contribs/Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff"> Edits</span>]] | [[Special:Newsection/User talk:Sav|<span style="color:#0080ff">Talk </span>]]) 03:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
*:::I really would have to disagree with you on point #3, Dmehus. This is not a simple decision, it has been a continuous point of contention and issue for years on TestWiki. The community and stewards have seen many false promises and appeals over this time and it appeared that the stewards were going to listen to another appeal. I don't want to speak for Sav, but I can say that I was shocked to hear that an appeal was even being considered after the consistent disruption for years that Piccadilly has caused. Thus, I think enforcing a community block is a great option so that the stewards cannot unblock without consulting the broader community. {{ | *:::I really would have to disagree with you on point #3, Dmehus. This is not a simple decision, it has been a continuous point of contention and issue for years on TestWiki. The community and stewards have seen many false promises and appeals over this time and it appeared that the stewards were going to listen to another appeal. I don't want to speak for Sav, but I can say that I was shocked to hear that an appeal was even being considered after the consistent disruption for years that Piccadilly has caused. Thus, I think enforcing a community block is a great option so that the stewards cannot unblock without consulting the broader community. {{support}}. [[User:X|'''<span style="background:#3383ff;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">X</span>''']] ([[User talk:X|talk]] + [[Special:Contributions/X|contribs]]) 12:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
*::::First of all, as a point of clarification, nothing in [[Test Wiki:Policies|''policy'']] provides for the community to ''impose'' or ''mandate'' a block or ban, but Stewards will take into consideration from the community prior to unblocking. Secondly, as I've noted elsewhere in this discussion, part of the problem with respect to Piccadilly is test bureaucrats, such as yourself, proceeded immediately to a sitewide block earlier on rather than a rights revocation. Thirdly, perhaps I misspoke when I said the appeal was being ''currently'' considered; no, what I meant was that Piccadilly had an ''active'' but currently ''deferred'' appeal before Stewards. None of us were prepared to unblock at this point, and we wouldn't do so without agreement with other Stewards. Moreover, as I've said, we would seek the community's feedback through community discussion, but ''not'' simply a !vote (as we don't do that here), with respect to conditions for unblocking, minimum timeframe for unblocking, and what other parameters Stewards should impose. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*::[[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] and [[User:Sav|Sav]], I'm not suggesting continuing to extend 'rope' indefinitely. The reality is, Piccadilly is blocked indefinitely, and currently has their user talk page access revoked as well. They know they have an appeal in to Stewards, but it isn't being considered now because they're not ready. We don't want to just keep unblocking and reblocking Piccadilly. That being said, I'm willing to consider that there have been a number of procedural mistakes with respect to Piccadilly (i.e., test bureaucrats and administrators blocking Piccadilly unnecessarily when they should've left sanction to Stewards, not putting in place technical mechanisms to revoke their ability to edit abuse filters, etc.). I'm also willing to consider Piccadilly's neurodiverse condition that causes them to act in an immature and, at time, gross manner in terms of type of edits, so they require technical measures to control that (when they're not blocked). Sav hasn't proposed anything here beyond the status quo (i.e., they're currently blocked indefinitely). I cannot understand what this discussion aims to accomplish. Stewards ''will'' and ''should'' continue to decline the appeal until we have both the technical measures in place and feel Piccadilly has demonstrated sufficient ability to operate within the minimal community norms of community. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | *::[[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] and [[User:Sav|Sav]], I'm not suggesting continuing to extend 'rope' indefinitely. The reality is, Piccadilly is blocked indefinitely, and currently has their user talk page access revoked as well. They know they have an appeal in to Stewards, but it isn't being considered now because they're not ready. We don't want to just keep unblocking and reblocking Piccadilly. That being said, I'm willing to consider that there have been a number of procedural mistakes with respect to Piccadilly (i.e., test bureaucrats and administrators blocking Piccadilly unnecessarily when they should've left sanction to Stewards, not putting in place technical mechanisms to revoke their ability to edit abuse filters, etc.). I'm also willing to consider Piccadilly's neurodiverse condition that causes them to act in an immature and, at time, gross manner in terms of type of edits, so they require technical measures to control that (when they're not blocked). Sav hasn't proposed anything here beyond the status quo (i.e., they're currently blocked indefinitely). I cannot understand what this discussion aims to accomplish. Stewards ''will'' and ''should'' continue to decline the appeal until we have both the technical measures in place and feel Piccadilly has demonstrated sufficient ability to operate within the minimal community norms of community. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
*:::I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that everything would be much simpler if we simply stuck to what we said before: "One chance and no appeals if conditions are at all broken." (They were broken) It would be extremely easy to just say we're never going to consider an appeal from Piccadilly ever again and leave it at that... [[User:X|'''<span style="background:#3383ff;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">X</span>''']] ([[User talk:X|talk]] + [[Special:Contributions/X|contribs]]) 12:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*::::Simpler, maybe. But is it procedurally ''just'' and ''fair''? No. So far, they haven't been able to go a month recently without contravening user accounts policy. Let's see if they can even go three months, okay? If not, you have my promise Stewards will keep blocking any sockpuppets as crosswiki or long-term abuse. :) [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*:::::They've been given countless chances and appeals that were just and fair. Enough is enough. [[User:X|'''<span style="background:#3383ff;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">X</span>''']] ([[User talk:X|talk]] + [[Special:Contributions/X|contribs]]) 13:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*::::::There is no such thing as a 'permanent ban or block', on ''any'' mainstream, reputable wiki. I think a core part of the problem, aside from blocks by test bureaucrats early on that should've been left to Stewards, is that we haven't allowed a sufficient length of time to pass before assessing Piccadilly's capacity to heed instruction from Stewards, together with the community's advice. If you (or Sav) would like to have a constructive discussion on that timeframe is, I think ''that'' would be a productive discussion to have and I'm happy to have it. I think it's obviously longer than a month. Should it be three months, six months, or a year? Keep in mind, they haven't been able to go a month in recent months. And, what is your reason for choosing that timeframe? [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 13:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*:::{{tq|We don't want to keep unblocking and reblocking Piccadilly}} Unfortunately, I believe the ship of expressing a desire not to has sailed. That is what has happened. If the majority of [[Test Wiki:Stewards|us]] can promise that community consensus will be required for an unblock, that's great, and is an alternative way of resolving this discussion's aim. I'd be fine with that resolution. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 13:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*::::I'm curious for your thoughts on simply not allow Piccadilly to ever appeal again, given you did make [https://testwiki.wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Piccadilly&diff=prev&oldid=37774 this comment]. [[User:X|'''<span style="background:#3383ff;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">X</span>''']] ([[User talk:X|talk]] + [[Special:Contributions/X|contribs]]) 13:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*:::::I did not ''necessarily'' say that no appeals would be allowed. Rather, I extended [[WP:ROPE|rope]]. Even if community or steward consensus would be required for an unblock, [[WP:WP:Appealing a block|reasonable]] appeals should be considered, except in the case where no [[WP: reasonable person| reasonable person]] would be willing to accept the appeal. We are an open wiki, not a corporate community with irrevocable blacklists. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 13:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*::::::Maybe when the stewards forward my appeal to the community, we could include the condition that if I get blocked again, it will be almost guaranteed that no one would agree to unblock me if I were to get into trouble here again. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 13:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*:::::::Almost guarantees haven't proven effective before. [[User:X|'''<span style="background:#3383ff;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">X</span>''']] ([[User talk:X|talk]] + [[Special:Contributions/X|contribs]]) 13:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*:::::::As a community-advised, Steward-imposed block, that ''would'' effectively be what we would do. It wouldn't be an up-or-down !vote, but rather, a series of questions asking the community's input on minimum timeframe before unblocking, conditions to be imposed by Stewards upon a conditional unblocking, and what penalties shall occur based on the level of infraction. I think, fundamentally, if the community is able to advise on minimum timeframe away from Test Wiki, that would satisfy all concerned. At the end of the day, ''time'' often heals all wounds (apologies for the cliché!) [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 13:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
*So I see now that Sav just wants everyone to be on the same page in regard to this issue, which is understandable. How about the following proposal: | *So I see now that Sav just wants everyone to be on the same page in regard to this issue, which is understandable. How about the following proposal: | ||
:When the stewards feel I'm ready to be unblocked, which will most likely not be until at least August, they forward my appeal to the community, so they can all vote on it and can share any concerns or issues they may have with it? I'm willing to accept whatever is decided on by the stewards and community when that time comes, whether that means a full unblock, partial, or even no unblock. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 12:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | :When the stewards feel I'm ready to be unblocked, which will most likely not be until at least August, they forward my appeal to the community, so they can all vote on it and can share any concerns or issues they may have with it? I'm willing to accept whatever is decided on by the stewards and community when that time comes, whether that means a full unblock, partial, or even no unblock. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 12:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
::That's the status quo. You're currently blocked indefinitely by Stewards. Given your past disruption, Stewards ''would'' likely seek feedback from the community with respect to minimum timeframe for an appeal to be considered and to the technical measures that need to be put in place as well as conditions of such an unblock. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ::That's the status quo. You're currently blocked indefinitely by Stewards. Given your past disruption, Stewards ''would'' likely seek feedback from the community's with respect to minimum timeframe for an appeal to be considered and to the technical measures that need to be put in place as well as conditions of such an unblock. [[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 12:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
:So as I understand this discussion currently, it seems the ideal option right now is to agree on a minimum length of time before my appeal is forwarded to the community for consideration. That's fine with me, and I won't make any more evasion accounts or use IPs here any more. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 20:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
If I were to say away from here for 3 months, until August, would that be long enough? [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 16:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{Discussion bottom}} | |||
==Question== | |||
Is thanking a user for an action related to right management considered a logged action? [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 12:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I think it would show up in the log (https://testwiki.wiki/wiki/Special:Log?type=thanks&user=&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype=&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist), although not list the specific action. [[User:Piccadilly|Piccadilly]] ([[Special:Contribs/Piccadilly|<span style="color:red">My Contribs</span>]] | [[User talk:Piccadilly|<span style="color:#0080ff">My Messages</span>]]) 12:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==New Template== | |||
Hey everyone I recently created [[Template:Failed policy|a new template "Failed policy"]] which I moved from my user subpage to the template namespace.This template mainly uses the code already available on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Failed_proposal| English Wikipidea]. I think it is uncontroversial, but if you have any suggestions or concerns, please let me know. [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 16:39, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I created this template mainly for [[User:Harvici/Signatures| this policy]] which clearly failed but the recent nominations of policies like crat policy and abuse-filter policy was also the reason for creation of the template :) [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 16:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==Permission revocation request and block request== | |||
Can anyone block me (until 5:00 UTC, May 12, 2024) as I have something important coming up and don't want to be distracted and kindly remove my permissions as well [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 15:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|Harvici}} Done.[[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] ([[User talk:DodoMan|talk]]) 16:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==Phab help== | |||
So,it’s no sending the mail to my email adress.Help.[[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] ([[User talk:DodoMan|talk]]) 16:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|MacFan4000}} I also noticed the feed of recent activity on the homepage wasn't working, so multiple issues seem to be occurring. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 14:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::It's working again! [[User:Jody|Jody]] ([[User talk:Jody|talk]]) 02:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==Request for NSS: Aviram7== | |||
{{discussion top| | |||
I Withdraw this request for NSS. thank you to everyone to participated in this request.}} ~~ <span style="background-color:magenta; padding: 2px 5px 1px 5px">[[User:Aviram7|<span style="color:white">αvírαm</span>]]<nowiki>|</nowiki>[[User talk:Aviram7|(tαlk)]]</span> 07:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{userlinks|Aviram7}} {{RfP apl}} | |||
*'''Requested right''': Non-steward suppressor | |||
*'''Link to your account in other projects, e.g. Wikimedia, Miraheze, Fandom''' (optional): [[Wikipedia:User:Aviram7]] | |||
*[yes] I am familiar with all of [[:Category:Test Wiki policies|Test Wiki's policies]] and agree to follow them completely. | |||
*[yes] I agree that I am entirely responsible for all actions done under this account, including actions performed under this account by someone other than myself. | |||
*[yes] I agree that if I misuse the tools, my access might be revoked and I may be banned from Test Wiki without prior warning. | |||
'''Other comments''': Hi! I like to help out to as NSS on test wiki and I'm willing to help with suppression when needed, and I am available/24/7 for help on testwiki or discord and I have read [[Test Wiki:Suppressors]], and the [[Test Wiki:Privacy policy|privacy policy]]. {{Thanks}} ~~ <span style="background-color:magenta; padding: 2px 5px 1px 5px">[[User:Aviram7|<span style="color:white">αvírαm</span>]]|[[User talk:Aviram7|(tαlk)]]</span> 07:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:As I mentioned in previous requests, we don't need a new suppressor at the moment. There are already 5 stewards and 2 suppressors active on the wiki (7 in total), so I see no reason to become a suppressor. {{oppose}} [[User:LisafBia|LisafBia]] ([[User talk:LisafBia|talk]]) 08:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{ping|LisafBia}} Hello and Thank for making you're important comment on her and if a new NSS users are like to helping out to other NSS users and stewards; I like to help if i getting a chanced, I've 24/7 active on here. ~~ <span style="background-color:magenta; padding: 2px 5px 1px 5px">[[User:Aviram7|<span style="color:white">αvírαm</span>]]|[[User talk:Aviram7|(tαlk)]] | |||
:I am not a steward but I propose to grant the status for one week like my admin interface status.[[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] ([[User talk:DodoMan|talk]]) 15:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{oppose}} Even though there is a need for a NSS (EPIC isn't really active), I think you are relatively new to the Test Wiki and don't hold advanced positions like Sysop or Crat at other wikis (wikis that are not test wikis). [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 16:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{oppose}} Per Harvici and LisafBia. [[User:Jody|Jody]] ([[User talk:Jody|talk]]) 02:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{Neutral}}. Per Harvici and LisafBia. I know Aviram7 is a trusted and active user, but I think we've enough NSS. [[User:Wüstenspringmaus|<span style="color:grey;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Wüstenspringmaus</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Wüstenspringmaus|''talk'']]</sub> 06:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{discussion bottom}} | |||
==A newsletter?== | |||
What do you all think about creating a newsletter that tells you what changes have been made in terms of policies and technical changes and how many new users have been given crat and sysop rights (technically Wikipidea's administrator Newsletter)? [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 16:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{support}}. I think, that would be a good idea. [[User:Wüstenspringmaus|<span style="color:grey;font-family:Comic Sans MS">Wüstenspringmaus</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Wüstenspringmaus|''talk'']]</sub> 06:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==Question== | |||
Is the "pywikibot" directory uploaded to the server? [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 15:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:And is it possible to get shell access? [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 15:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{ping|Harvici}} No.But you can use https://hub-paws.wmcloud.org/ for testing pwb.[[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] ([[User talk:DodoMan|talk]]) 09:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
==Harvici== | |||
{{userlinks|Harvici}} {{RfP apl}} | |||
*'''Requested right''': IA | |||
*'''Link to your account in other projects, e.g. Wikimedia, Miraheze, Fandom''' (optional): | |||
*[Yes] I am familiar with all of [[:Category:Test Wiki policies|Test Wiki's policies]] and agree to follow them completely. | |||
*[Yes] I agree that I am entirely responsible for all actions done under this account, including actions performed under this account by someone other than myself. | |||
*[Yes] I agree that if I misuse the tools, my access might be revoked and I may be banned from Test Wiki without prior warning. | |||
'''Other comments''':I am requesting this right to import few gadgets from other wikis and write some gadgets on own.I have experience in Java,Python, a little bit of CSS, and some in JS. I am also testing a bot, which I will include to TestWiki on successful runs, as well as writing scripts for a bot on discord with [[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 17:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I can confirm Harvici have the competence for this role.He is dev with me a discord bot to possibly be deployed on the wiki test discord.[[User:DodoMan|DodoMan]] ([[User talk:DodoMan|talk]]) 17:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:@[[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]],[[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]],[[User:Drummingman|Drummingman]], pinging so they can review my request [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 14:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
::{{on hold|Granted on probation}}. This just means that the right may be removed upon request by any [[Test Wiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat in good standing]]. [[User:Justarandomamerican|Justarandomamerican]] ([[User talk:Justarandomamerican|talk]]) 20:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Thank you! [[User:Harvici|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#CC4E5C ; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Harvici</span>]] ([[User talk:Harvici|<span style="color:#228B22">''talk''</span>]]) 01:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC) | |||