TestWiki:Stewards' noticeboard

Stewards' noticeboard
This is a page for stewards to discuss matters that pertain to them. Non-stewards may request steward actions here, including check user requests, or inform stewards of overdue requests at the community portal. All community requests should be directed to the community portal and all permissions requests should be directed to the permissions page.

Closure request: Requesting steward rights - Justarandomamerican

There appears to be clear community consensus, can this be formally closed? Justarandomamerican (talk) 17:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done by Matttestzh. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 19:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Unprotection request for the main page

I would like to request the Main Page's protection be changed to bureaucrat protection, not steward. I doubt that much disruption will occur because users have to become crats before editing. If it doesn't work, we can always reprotect. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 15:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Oppose: When Justarandomamerican becomes a steward, you can just request an edit be made and they will be able to respond quickly. Zippybonzo (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Note:@Zippybonzo: This is not a discussion, merely a request from me to the stewards. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 20:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't feel too strongly about this, so community comment and comment from my fellow steward are both welcome. Justarandomamerican (talk) 23:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I have thought about this for awhile, and in hindsight, I am not sure it’s a great idea. I mean, it’s the first page people see when they visit our wiki. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 23:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Definitely. Potential for abuse? High.  Not done for now, considered withdrawn. If someone else wishes to bring up a good case, they may do so. Justarandomamerican (talk) 23:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 23:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Closure request of X's request for stewardship

Hello stewards, (now that we have 2)

My request for stewardship has been open for a few days and has obtained 2 supports and a weak support. All users who actively participate in community discussion have expressed their opinion and I think it can be closed. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 19:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll say just a few more days, 4 or 5, to allow comments from those who occasionally participate in discussion, such as Matttestzh, who performed an action just today. Justarandomamerican (talk) 21:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

4/5 more days or total days? Thanks for replying on this clarification. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 21:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

To clarify: I feel like around 5 total days is appropriate. Justarandomamerican (talk) 21:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense to me! ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 21:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I started the request on the 12th and it’s now the 17th. I believe it can be closed, and I would also like them soon to investigate some abuse regarding Apex. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 02:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing... Justarandomamerican (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

 Closed. Congratulations, and thank you for taking on the duties. Justarandomamerican (talk) 02:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Update main page

Please change this:

For-Test Wiki is a place where you can test the tools of a MediaWiki administrator or bureaucrat freely. Unlike other test wikis, our commitment is to protect users' privacy. There is no JavaScript which is required to browse or edit the site, we do not use third party analytics, and we do not share user IP addresses to third parties. Feel free to request Administrator and Bureaucrat permissions at TestWiki:Request permissions.

to this:

For-Test Wiki is a place where you can test the tools of an administrator or bureaucrat on the MediaWiki software freely. Unlike other test wikis, our commitment is to protect users' privacy. There is no JavaScript that is required to browse or edit the site, we do not use third-party analytics, and we do not share user IP addresses with third parties. Feel free to request Administrator and Bureaucrat permissions here.

Thanks! ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 23:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done! Justarandomamerican (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but you have only added parts of my requested change. Are you aware of this? ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 23:44, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I am not, thank you for making me aware. I'll fix it. Justarandomamerican (talk) 23:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I have a few other small changes I would like to make, but I don’t want to bore you all night making requested edits, so I’ll just wait till my steward request is accepted. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 00:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, please categorize the main page to Category:Non-test pages. Username (talk) 00:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Sitenotice

What protection should this have? Since it is arguably more visible then the main page, I feel it should be protected at steward level, but other users disagree. What do the other stewards think? ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 19:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Although highly visible, the present protection is fine unless it is actively disrupted, IMO. Justarandomamerican (talk) 21:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 21:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Zippybonzo's request for stewardship

This request has been open for a few days and I believe it is time for us to discuss it. Only 2 users participated in the discussion and neither supported or opposed. I believe there is consensus that the user is competent, but the need is questioned. I say we need to leave it open for a little while longer, but what should we do then? I am open to declining the request for stewardship, but granting suppressor rights to start if no one else votes. What do the rest of the stewards think? ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 17:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Close the RfS as no consensus. Suppressor rights are at your discretion, make sure to evaluate the previous request for that, of course. Justarandomamerican (talk) 19:09, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I have closed the stewardship request as no consensus, but I have accepted the request for suppressor as the only opposing vote is now invalid. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 19:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Username cross-wiki disruptive editing and lack of communication

Hello fellow stewards. I wish to discuss the behavior of Username. A few hours ago, I blocked them indefinitely for mass-reverting another users edits without discussion or consensus on testwiki.wiki. They then started being disruptive on their talk page and adding the word “Foo”, so I protected their talk page. This is not the first, and probably not the last instance of username’s inability to communicate. I and others have left multiple questions or comments about this users editing and never receive responses. Username has a history of not seeking community feedback or discussion on issues and often deletes categories or redirects for no reason, here and cross-wiki. None of these characteristics are suitable for an IA, or a bureaucrat for that matter. The stewards need to discuss a possible solution removing of rights, user restriction, or potentially, a block. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 01:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards blocking him until an explanation of his lack of communication is received. Communication is required. Justarandomamerican (talk) 02:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I have blocked them indefinitely and asked for a reply on their talk page. I am open to shortening the block to a week/month if we recive no responce. If we do recieve a responce, what should we do? Should we grant rights back and unblock? ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 12:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it's probably worth it to discuss with the community what we should do if an explanation is received, or if one is not received in the coming weeks, as I have no opinion on whether a CONDUNBLOCK or something else should be imposed. Justarandomamerican (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I would be open to a conditional unblock. BTW, can you come online on testwiki.wiki and share your thoughts about revoking Usernames TPA. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 14:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I really hope they respond on their talk page and agree to communicate with the community more. They are clearly a good-faith contributer that simply needs to communicate and seek discussion. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 15:20, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Note I have created a filter (Filter 19) to alert them that they may have not received consensus for delete move and protect actions. Zippybonzo (talk) 06:27, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but if they have the ability to perform these actions, they also have the ability to disable the filter. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 12:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Not if you set it to block for 1 second as it then contains a restricted action. Zippybonzo (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Request for unprotection of Common.js and Common.css

There is little reason for them to be protected to stewards as the only non steward who can edit the pages is myself. There's also no reason for any interface pages to be protected, as only bureaucrats can edit them, and I can if needed make a filter so non interface admins can't edit the site notice or sidebar, which if set to block, only stewards can disable the filter. Yours, Zippybonzo (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I am neutral, so I would like the opinion of another steward before I am comfortable removing it. Ideally, there should be community consensus before changes to this page occur. Also, we would never set a filter to block just to make it un-editable by non-stewards. The minimum time a block by the abuse filter can be set for is 2 hours, so it wouldn't work anyways. I think some interface pages should be protected, particualurly the sidebar and other high risk pages, bureacrat is mainly a testing right after all. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 16:08, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Common cascade style sheets and JavaScript pages affect everyone, which is why there should ideally be community consensus. Justarandomamerican (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

So are you saying that they shouldn’t be unprotected? ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 19:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Edits to pages affecting everyone in a significant way such as JS or CSS should require community consensus in most cases. Justarandomamerican (talk) 19:58, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree with you here. ZB, if you ever want to make small changes to the page, just let me know and I can do it for you. I agree with justa that large changes should be discussed on the community portal, like the one about moving the staff highlights script there. I left it open for awhile, confirmed that he requestor was aware of their inability to edit it in the future, and made the change after no comments opposed. Do the same if you ever need a big change ZB. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 21:41, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

If you wouldn’t mind unprotecting the common.css if staffhighlights is moved, so I can maintain the list of users with particular rights, that would be preferable. Zippybonzo (talk) 07:19, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

I would like to hear another stewards opinion before doing so. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 10:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

That request seems reasonable. I would agree. Justarandomamerican (talk) 10:34, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

 Unprotected. ZB, only make changes to the staff highlights part and don’t add or change anything else. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 10:54, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Piccadilly's Partial Block

Hello! I am here to notify fellow Stewards and the community that Piccadilly has been indefinitely partial blocked as a Steward action from most talk page namespaces for abuse of talk pages. Thank you, Justarandomamerican (talk) 12:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Private steward wiki

This link contains a link to a private wiki for stewards to use to coordinate with each other, specifically regarding the checkuser and oversight tools. Please login there, and I will assign you the member group. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 02:21, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

@X: does this relate to suppressors in any way, as you mentioned oversight? Zippybonzo | talk (he|him) 19:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Also, doesn’t this violate the transparency that this wiki is built on. Zippybonzo | talk (he|him) 19:26, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Why not make use of the IRC channel that the wiki has for off-wiki discussions that don't involve checkuser/suppression. Zippybonzo | talk (he|him) 19:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

To address all of your points, this wiki is for the stewards to discuss private matters involving mainly the checkuser, but also occasionally oversight tools. We would discuss private findings and whether or not a block should be placed. This is designed with privacy in mind, so we can make an appropriate action without accidentally leaking users IPs or UAs publicly. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 20:20, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

On test.wikipedia.org - Wikipedia:Requests/Tools

Shall I update the bug report page to link to the sysadmin noticeboard, or would one of you be able do it, probably best if one of you does it because you are stewards and therefore can verify that it has been ‘approved’ by someone with authority on the wiki. Thanks, Zippybonzo | talk (he|him) 19:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Approved. I don’t edit on Wikipedia, but you have my permission to make the edit. ✖ - (Talk • Contributions) 20:18, 2 June 2023 (UTC)