Test Wiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions

From Test Wiki
Latest comment: 19 April 2022 by Arcversin in topic In regards to User:Seiyena.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 54: Line 54:
----
----
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it</b>. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' </div>
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it</b>. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.'' </div>
:Noting that the aforementioned abuse filter has been deployed. —&nbsp;<span style="font-variant: small-caps">[[User:Arcversin|Arcversin]] ([[User talk:Arcversin|talk]])</span> 01:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


== Lift protection on [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] ==
== Lift protection on [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] ==


Could the steward-only create protection on [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] be removed? I'm trying to deploy some styles to get the {{tl|mbox}} series of templates properly working. —&nbsp;<span style="font-variant: small-caps">[[User:Arcversin|Arcversin]] ([[User talk:Arcversin|talk]])</span> 01:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Could the steward-only create protection on [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] be removed? I'm trying to deploy some styles to get the {{tl|mbox}} series of templates properly working. —&nbsp;<span style="font-variant: small-caps">[[User:Arcversin|Arcversin]] ([[User talk:Arcversin|talk]])</span> 01:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:15, 19 April 2022

The community portal is Test Wiki's all-in-one help, proposal, and on-wiki action request venue.

Archives: 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09


Mind if I suggest something?

Instead of having your access to the admin tools after 1 month goes by without activity, why not just have it be 3 months instead? I'd say that 1 month is a bit too short, and I'm not sure how one month would be enough of a reason. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supports

 Support I like this idea, and can't see any drawbacks to it. Sei (My changes here | Drop me a line) 16:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support I think it should be extended. LisafBia (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support Per nom. I am one (as you are three) 23:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support I absolutely agree with that! AlPaD (talk) 14:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose

 Oppose We're giving out adminship and 'cratship as if they were candies. Isn't that good enough? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh (talk) 10:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's definitely good but it would save bureaucrats some work by not having to re-add user rights so often and also save everyone else the hassle of having to ask for the rights again after just a short one-month hiatus. Sei (My changes here | Drop me a line) 12:32, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CheckUser request

These 2 users are blocked intefinite on Chinese Wikipedia and locked on Wikimedia foundation, this action is suspected and 想舞花 had approved 七海娜娜米's request for adminship even though another bureaucrat had rejected it. Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Special:AbuseFilter/52

The third line should have been & !page_id == 702. Currently it's checking for spam edits on TW:RFP... NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh (talk) 10:48, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pinging @Dmehus. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh (talk) 10:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can't admins edit the filters themselves? I know that on another wiki that was possible. Just saying. Sei (My changes here | Drop me a line) 19:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Filters with restricted actions (namely, blocking) can only be edited by Stewards. — Arcversin (talk) 01:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would actually be page_id != 702, since this is an equality check. Also, it's generally good practice to surround any negation that isn't a single function with parentheses, like so: !('x' in y) — Arcversin (talk) 01:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In regards to User:Seiyena.

Noting that the aforementioned abuse filter has been deployed. — Arcversin (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lift protection on MediaWiki:Common.css

Could the steward-only create protection on MediaWiki:Common.css be removed? I'm trying to deploy some styles to get the {{mbox}} series of templates properly working. — Arcversin (talk) 01:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]