Wikispecies:Administrators' Noticeboard

From Wikispecies
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to the Administrators' Noticeboard. This space is for anyone who might need an administrator ("sysop") for actions such as protecting a page, deleting spam, or blocking vandals.
If you rather need to reach a Translation administrator, use the Translation Administrators' Noticeboard instead. For general conversation, see Wikispecies:Village Pump.

Start a new conversation.

Category: Taxonavigation templates confusion[edit]

I have noticed a few times during my edits that an admin @Koavf: has added <noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude> + <includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly> to many pages only for a fellow admin @Franz Xaver: to remove this content when editing, for example, Bernhartia. I am confused. Any help appreciated. Regards Andyboorman (talk) 14:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I did this specifically so that these were easier to find and pages would be taken out of Special:UncategorizedPages and Special:UncategorizedTemplates. Franz, why would you do this? —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
@Andyboorman, Koavf: You may remember the old discussion Wikispecies:Village Pump/Archive 39#Taxonavigation templates. These categories were added in a bot like manner using AWB, without having discussed the topic in advance. As far as I remember, in the follwing discussion this initiative did not get much support – and was stopped. Anyway, we may continue the old discussion, where it had ended then. The argument "these were easier to find" does not convince me, as I cannot not find anything in a category with thousands of entries. --Franz Xaver (talk) 15:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
@Franz Xaver: But they are impossible to find without categories. Either way, there isn't consensus to remove them so I'm not sure why clogging up the maintenance report is somehow better. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: So, now only a part of the taxonavigation templates do have these categories. You mean, these categories are useful, so that a bot could find them? I suggest, you make a proposal, which categories should be included in every taxonavigation template, and why this should be so. If there is support, the task should continued, where it has stopped then.
Anyway, taxon pages should remain in Special:UncategorizedPages, as long as they are not categorised in at least one of the author taxa categories. Adding a tracking category and thus removing them from Special:UncategorizedPages simply for having them removed, does not make sense to me. I am personally not against adding <noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>, but I am objecting against adding <includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly> --Franz Xaver (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

@Koavf: @Franz Xaver: Thanks for clearing up this confusion. This needs to go back to the pump I guess, as we have one admin adding unwanted data according to another admin and the later admin removing data without consensus from the community. Over to you, please Andyboorman (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Agree discuss this on the pump justify it and make a proposal. If accepted it can then continue. Personally I do not have an issue with these categories and I can see some use for them, however we do need consensus. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 15:37, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Sock back?[edit]

Have a look through the contributions for this recent editor. Please tell me I am wrong! Andyboorman (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

He once claimed not to be a sock of this guy – or did he just claim not to be an "amateur entomologist"? Anyway, it is remarkable, that he recently edited the user page of a permanently blocked user, who is supposed not to be him. Should we explain to him, that reference templates should be added to author pages, not user pages? Or is this enough evidence, that a CheckUser procedure might be appropriate? --Franz Xaver (talk) 21:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
He actually did not claim not to be the sock. I agree he confirmed not to be an "amateur entomologist", which I guess being published this claim could be considered legitimate. However, he also said to go ahead with a CheckUser, but if he had changed his IP, ISP and OS than this could result in a complete negative I believe. Indeed he also may have programmed a spoof - not that I know much about this side of computing. I agree to explaining that editing a blocked user page is a trifle bizarre and the data belongs elsewhere. We could agree to blank and delete the offending redundant user page, or is this just being vindictive or provocative? Andyboorman (talk) 10:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
For your information PeterR have also brought this matter up on my talk page. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC).
For me, Allspecies is Stohner. He works the same, make the same mistakes in the reference templates etc. PeterR (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
If anyone feels a CU is appropriate they need to make a request. With the evidence for doing it. Please note that CU`s cannot be done just because the person in question ok`s it. There must be evidence it is required presented in the application. Our 3 CU`s can then determine if this can and should be done. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 18:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
The evidence can include; editing the sock's blocked user page, working during a time frame similar to the sock, editing on pages created or edited by the sock, creating pages and working in areas of interest and relevance to the sock and also using formats similar to the sock. Is this enough? Andyboorman (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion, it is. --Franz Xaver (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Let's please use the process here: Wikispecies:Requests for checkuser. If someone formally requests and makes a case, then I can investigate (or decline if it's not warranted). —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I would like more admins contributing here before I feel that I could act, but it looks very much like a duck to me. Andyboorman (talk) 20:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
In my mind the type, style and frequency of the edits suggests it to be a new sock, but of course before a CU it's hard to know for sure. And as Andyboorman points out above, it may be hard even after that. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:39, 27 July 2017 (UTC).
Like before, a sort of consensus for a CU is needed. As well as a certain uncertainty. Dan Koehl (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
I think we have both of these. Andyboorman (talk) 11:59, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Another important question. Do I inform him on his talk page that a CU will be requested? Andyboorman (talk) 17:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

It should be sufficient to inform him, that a CU has been requested. --Franz Xaver (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
As a CU I am being neutral here at present. However all I ask is that you fill in the required form Wikispecies:Requests for checkuser that @Koavf: also pointed to above, ensure you present your reasoning and yes also note on their talk page with a link to the request. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 19:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Why can't Allspecies block like the other Sock names of him? Stohner of one of his socknames have no entree on If you don't block him I quit. Allspecies make again a lot of rubbish in his own style. PeterR (talk) 08:14, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
@PeterR: We need to go through due process, as his present edits are not spam or vandalism and indeed many are useful. I will put a CU request in soon, so please continue with your valued edits. The key issue is sockpuppetry and the fact that this is not tolerated across all Wiki projects. If this suspected sock wishes to rejoin WS then he has a process in place in order to do so. Andyboorman (talk) 08:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

CU request is now in, see it here. Hope I have followed the procedure correctly. Andyboorman (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Improved search in deleted pages archive[edit]

During Wikimedia Hackathon 2016, the Discovery team worked on one of the items on the 2015 community wishlist, namely enabling searching the archive of deleted pages. This feature is now ready for production deployment, and will be enabled on all wikis, except Wikidata.

Right now, the feature is behind a feature flag - to use it on your wiki, please go to the Special:Undelete page, and add &fuzzy=1 to the URL, like this: Then search for the pages you're interested in. There should be more results than before, due to using ElasticSearch indexing (via the CirrusSearch extension).

We plan to enable this improved search by default on all wikis soon (around August 1, 2017). If you have any objections to this - please raise them with the Discovery team via email or on this announcement's discussion page. Like most Mediawiki configuration parameters, the functionality can be configured per wiki. Once the improved search becomes the default, you can still access the old mode using &fuzzy=0 in the URL, like this:

Please note that since Special:Undelete is an admin-only feature, this search capability is also only accessible to wiki admins.

Thank you! CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Changes to the Help pages regarding author pages[edit]

I've edited the Help:Author Names page adding information about formatting Author pages. Please have a look, make revisions, and/or discuss the matter further etc. – Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:53, 7 August 2017 (UTC).

There is no mention of Standard Form or Abbreviation. This is very important for plants. Andyboorman (talk) 17:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
True. My main reason for adding the text about author pages was to explain why the "Authored taxa" sections shouldn't include exceptionally long inline lists of named taxa, but instead only a link to the "Taxa by author" category. This often seems to be a confusing issue leading to misunderstandings. (See for example this discussion archived from the Pump, but there are many more.)
At the moment the "Author Names" help page is quite poorly designed, with a mishmash of parts about author names, categories, "Authority control" templates, author pages and stuff about name catalogs all mixed up in a rather illogical way. Ideally I think we should make two separate help pages: one about how to create author pages, and one solely for how to enter author names in taxon pages and publications. Information about Standard Form or Abbreviation should of course be present in both. -Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC).
It is the taxon name, which has an author, not the taxon, which later on may be reshaped and emendated in various ways by different authors. --Franz Xaver (talk) 18:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Indeed, however this discussion regards the Wikispecies Help:Author Names page. Taxonomy and nomenclature is not involved. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:27, 9 August 2017 (UTC).
Sorry, I was not clear enough. I tried to explain my edit in that page. --Franz Xaver (talk) 09:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Okay, that's another matter of course. Two things though:
  1. Although you're right, there is no consensus that the heading should read "Authored taxon names" rather than "Authored taxa". If the community decides so then it must be changed on almost 34,000 pages. That can be done semi-automatically with the use of AWB or a bot, but we need to take the decision first.
  2. According to Help:Reference section as decided by this poll (in which you voted) there should be no space between "=="" and the name of the heading. A small detail I admit, but losing them all will save us 66 kilobytes on the server... ;-)
Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:44, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
@Tommy Kronkvist: I am not aware, that the question of no space between "=="" and the name of the heading should have been part of this poll. --Franz Xaver (talk) 11:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps not directly, but the examples on the "Help:Reference section" page (including but not limited to the Reference subsection) are based on the poll and the discussion preceding it. But as I said it's a minor detail, and nothing to make a fuzz about. Changing the "Authored taxa" heading should however be discussed, but probably not here on the Administrators' Noticeboard, and certainly not in this thread. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:37, 9 August 2017 (UTC).

Bot flag required[edit]

User:ThiotrixBot was approved some months ago and is listed here as having a bot flag. But really is has not yet. Can someone please add the flag? Thanks for your help, --Thiotrix (talk) 10:10, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

These seems to require more than admin tools. You probably need a bureaucrat; see Wikispecies:Bureaucrats. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:17, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 18:06, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Sock Back[edit]

Please check this user ISSN 0111-7696. The alias is a real ISSN for WETA and it is working in the same way as Thorpe. Block or not? Andyboorman (talk) 07:05, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this is Thorpe. Mariusm (talk) 09:42, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Indefinitely blocked, alerted stewards at Meta for a global lock. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Justin Regards Andyboorman (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Last night User:ZooNom visiting. Blocked by duck test. --Franz Xaver (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect wiki link in User lists[edit]

As you all know, a current and complete list of our bureaucrats can be found at Special:ListUsers/bureaucrat. However, the "bureaucrat" link after the user names there points to the Wikispecies:Administrators page rather than to Wikispecies:Bureaucrats. (By the way the "Bureaucrats" links on the Special:UserRights and Special:ListGroupRights pages are also incorrect.) The reason is that originally we simply did not have a complete page specifically regarding bureaucratship. Instead the "Bureaucrats" page was only a redirect to the Admin's page, more specifically to a Wikispecies:Administrators#Bureaucrats subsection. This was back in 2008 and since then we have created a complete and "proper" Bureaucrats' page. But how do we change the 'crat links in the User lists to aim for Wikispecies:Bureaucrats rather than the Admin's page? Is it done in one of the local MediaWiki files, or someplace else? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:57, 25 August 2017 (UTC).

Yes I think so. Ill take a look and see if this can be corrected easily. Dan Koehl (talk) 21:17, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
@Tommy Kronkvist:, I corrected the link at MediaWiki:Grouppage-bureaucrat. Dan Koehl (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved. Thanks Dan! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC).

Category:Wikispecies protected edit requests[edit]

Dear admins! Please check Category:Wikispecies protected edit requests. --Kaganer (talk) 13:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

@Kaganer: The category lists 54 pages in the MediaWiki talk page namespace, but no pages in the MediaWiki namespace itself. On what grounds should these talk pages be edit protected? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:02, 16 September 2017 (UTC).
@Tommy Kronkvist:These pages related with Wikispecies:Localization. Talkpages contains a proposed translations for related MediaWiki messages. Need to move them to these local messages. --Kaganer (talk) 23:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
And there is also two related requests from me: first and second.--Kaganer (talk) 23:14, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I have already taken care of all the pending protected edit requests in that category. Regards. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 02:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

New request for adminship: Kaganer[edit]

I thought that I could not do work with translations without administrative rights. I ask for your support: Requests for adminship#Kaganer and Requests for translation adminship#Kaganer. --Kaganer (talk) 23:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

@Kaganer: m:Meta:Translation_administrators/ru? —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:42, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Request updated. If in this project source pages is protected, that for improving markup needs admin rights with "translation admin" rights. I ask both flags at once.--Kaganer (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Otherwise, I'll permanently disturb everyone with my requests for changing protected pages ;) --Kaganer (talk) 23:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@Kaganer: Please see my answer to your request at Wikispecies talk:Administrators. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC).

@Koavf: Global account information for Kaganer. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC).

@Tommy Kronkvist: No blocks and advanced user rights on many projects. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Indeed. The user was a global-sysop between October 2014 and November 2016, and is currently Admin + Translation admin on six different wikis, with a total of +300,000 edits since 2008. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:48, 17 September 2017 (UTC).