维基物种:监督员

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of the page Wikispecies:Oversighters and the translation is 100% complete.
Other languages:
English • ‎Türkçe • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎magyar • ‎polski • ‎русский • ‎עברית • ‎മലയാളം • ‎中文 • ‎日本語

本页解释了监督员在维基物种上的作用。

在紧急情况下,若维基物种上没有在任的监督员,请联系监管员。他们在您遇到跨维基问题时会帮助您。

目前维基物种上有0个监督员。

Oversighters as of 11月 2019: 0 (edit)

In emergencies (e.g. when no local oversighter is available), oversight requests can be referred to the stewards, who can be contacted at stewards@wikimedia.org.

监督员是什么?

监督员带有特殊权限的管理员,可通过技术手段隐藏部分数据,使得普通编辑者无法看到它们。隐藏的数据类型包括页面或文件历史、编辑历史中的用户名和日志以及部分个人日志。

被隐藏的数据在维基上永久不可访问,即使页面被删除和恢复。被隐藏的数据只能被监督员审阅或恢复。

根据全域监督方针,以下四种情况需要隐藏:

  1. 移除非公开个人信息,例如电话号码、家庭住址、工作单位、匿名及化名人士未公开的身份、或公眾人物的未公開的個人信息。
  2. 移除疑似诽谤内容,包括︰
  3. 应维基媒体基金会要求移除侵犯版权内容
  4. 隐藏日志及用户列表中攻击性用户名,这将不会影响编辑历史。攻击性用户名指带有侮辱、诋毁、威胁、骚扰或诽谤性质之用户名。

元维基的监督员方针

维基物种上的监管员遵循元维基监管方针元维基隐私方针维基媒体基金会非公有信息方针

如何成为监督员?

首先,请阅读维基物种:监督员/如何

准备好后,使用下面的框发出请求,将“Username”替换为您自己的用户名。



为获得广泛关注,所有在此处递交的请求将会被统一嵌入至请求和投票页面。

投票

任一註冊用戶都可以在這投票,即便那些很少甚至沒有編輯過的人可能不會被計算在內。閣下最好在Symbol support vote.svg SupportSymbol oppose vote.svg Oppose時都給予理由,這能幫助行政員更好地關閉個案。如果需要的話,有支持理據的論證會比簡單的投票更被看重。

Purge the cache使用下方的编辑链接来编辑嵌入后的页面。

This is an archive of closed discussions. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.

Result: This nomination failed to garner at least 25 support votes as per policy for obtaining access. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Dan Koehl (talk-contribs-block-all projects)

Wikispecies has no local oversighter. Since I had the communitys confidence regarding the previous application for Checkusers rights, I herebye apply to get Oversighters user rights, as a request to the Wikispecies community, as per local Oversight policy on META. On wikis without an m:Arbitration Committee, the community must approve oversighters by consensus. The candidates must request it within the local community and advertise this request to the local community properly (community discussion page, mailing list, etc). After gaining consensus (at least 70–80% in pro/con voting or the highest number of votes in multiple choice elections) in their local community, and with at least 25–30 editors' approval, the user should request access on m:Steward requests/Permissions with a link to the community's decision. I am well over 18 years of age, of legal age in my place of residence, and I am already identified to the Wikimedia Foundation (Verify identification at Wikimedia). I already signed the Wikimedia Foundation's confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information and I am familiar with the privacy policy.

Please also note that Oversighter actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Oversighters. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two oversighters, for mutual accountability. I don't want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for oversighters rights.

Dan Koehl (talk) 12:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Requests for oversighter run for two weeks.
Poll started 13:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC). Poll ends 13:25, 17 March 2017 (UTC).

Support

  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support — He convinced me. - BanKris (talk) 13:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support — Me too. Seems a very good idea all in all to have Oversighters. Andyboorman (talk) 14:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. Trusted user and a need for local oversighters. –Juliancolton | Talk 15:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg SupportAlvaro Molina ( - ) 15:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support Nothing against ;) Céréales Killer (talk) 15:15, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  7. Symbol support vote.svg Support Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 15:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  8. Symbol support vote.svg Support Full confidence! Orchi (talk) 16:12, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  9. Symbol support vote.svg Support Plantdrew (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  10. Symbol support vote.svg Support MKOliver (talk) 18:07, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  11. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Samuele2002 (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  12. Symbol support vote.svg SupportJustin (koavf)TCM 19:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  13. Symbol support vote.svg Support --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  14. Symbol support vote.svg Support --DenesFeri (talk) 08:57, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  15. Symbol support vote.svg Support Burmeister (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  16. Symbol support vote.svg Support Accassidy (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  17. Symbol support vote.svg Support Jianhui67 (talk) 15:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  18. Symbol support vote.svg SupportGreen Giant (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  19. Symbol support vote.svg SupportTommy Kronkvist (talkcontribsblockall projects) 18:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC).
  20. Symbol support vote.svg Support - PeterR (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  21. Symbol support vote.svg Support - Franz Xaver (talk) 14:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

For greater visibility, all requests made here are transcluded onto the central Wikispecies:Requests for Comment page.


The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.


This is an archive of closed discussions. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.

Result: This nomination failed to garner at least 25 support votes as per policy for obtaining access. OhanaUnitedTalk page 15:20, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Koavf (talk · contribs · block · all projects)

Per our other Oversighter request, we must have at least two members with this advanced user right. I am nominating myself, Koavf (talkcontribsblockall projects) and hope that you'll see me as a fit option to view our deleted entries. Per m:Oversight policy, "Local oversighters should generally handle local oversighting, when they're available" and this would be a useful step in Wikispecies being a mature and self-regulating wiki. Frankly, I hope that if we end up deciding to have Oversighters we never have to use our privileges but if someone has to do it, I hope it's a local trusted member. I would encourage anyone investigating me to take a look at my CheckUser application. Please feel free to ask me any questions on- or off-wiki that you think are relevant. If you find me unsuitable, I'd suggest that you nominate yourself or ask someone else whom you think is a good fit so that Dan can get these rights and help the community. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

This poll will run for two weeks: 15:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC). Poll ends 15:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC).

Support

  1. Symbol support vote.svg SupportBanKris (talk) 19:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support Céréales Killer (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support Sensible choice for the required second oversighter. –Juliancolton | Talk 20:23, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg SupportAlvaro Molina ( - ) 20:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support RLJ (talk) 21:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  7. Symbol support vote.svg Support MKOliver (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  8. Symbol support vote.svg Support --DenesFeri (talk) 08:57, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  9. Symbol support vote.svg Support Accassidy (talk) 17:17, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  10. Symbol support vote.svg Support--Rojypala (talk) 08:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  11. Symbol support vote.svg SupportSobloku (talk) 05:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
  12. Symbol support vote.svg Support Jianhui67 (talk) 15:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  13. Symbol support vote.svg SupportGreen Giant (talk) 22:48, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  14. Symbol support vote.svg Support Andyboorman (talk) 08:58, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  15. Symbol support vote.svg Support Burmeister (talk) 12:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  16. Symbol support vote.svg SupportTommy Kronkvist (talkcontribsblockall projects) 18:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC).
  17. Symbol support vote.svg Support - PeterR (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Discussion

Really, the title should be "Overseer", from the verb to "oversee", not "Oversighter" from the noun "oversight"... but then I speak English not American! Accassidy (talk) 17:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Acassidy: The user right is also known as suppressor. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:00, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Accassidy: I agree that "Overseer" sounds a lot better, however the term "Oversighter" is used by all other Wikimedia projects. I guess the underlaying reason is that it is derived from the now deprecated MediaWiki extension (and noun) Oversight (superseded by RevisionDelete in the MediaWiki core database). For the sake of consistency we should use the same title. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:43, 9 March 2017 (UTC).
Not until now I realise that the information about the title is actually shown in plain sight on the Wikispecies:Oversight page itself. Silly me had an awkward time figuring it out using archived extensions- and tech pages on MediaWiki instead... :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:20, 11 March 2017 (UTC).

(Moved from talk) Hi Dan, I noticed the two requests for oversight. I know that it's kind of late to comment, but do we really need such rights on Wikispecies? I mean: how many needs for such actions are needed yearly? More than 2-3? --Ruthven (talk) 15:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ruthven:, I don't know who decided which user right that should exist on Wikispecies, and which not, this may even have been performed without any formal decision on Phabricator, which may be a starting point to find out about the origin and reasons for different user rights on different projects. It seems originally, that the user right was an MediaWiki extension more than a specified user right. I suggest you start there with your request, but maybe someone else has an idea as to find out why certain user rights exist on Wikispecies, and not.
As for your second question, I also don't know where to find those statistics, how many cases there has been, and how many cases there should be, or what to expect in the future. I remind you that this falls under the Privacy cases, why a fully exposed transparent statistic may not be available. On the page global oversight policy no specific numbers are specified, it only says:
On wikis without an Arbitration Committee, the community must approve oversighters by consensus. The candidates must request it within the local community and advertise this request to the local community properly (community discussion page, mailing list, etc). After gaining consensus (at least 70–80% in pro/con voting or the highest number of votes in multiple choice elections) in their local community, and with at least 25–30 editors' approval, the user should request access on Steward requests/Permissions with a link to the community's decision.
If I understand you right, that you believe this user right should not exist on WS, I guess a suggestion to remove it could be brought up here, and with a link from the Village pump, so everyone are aware of the suggestion to remove the right. After that, if there is a consensus to remove the right, I guess next step would be to discuss it on meta and/or Phabricator.
Maybe you will get response here, right now also, as to what other users think regarding your question. I hope my answer address your question at least in some parts. Dan Koehl (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Dan Koehl (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Stewards handle oversight actions on all wikis without oversighters. That's a better option than removing the right entirely, which WMF might not be okay with, and which is a bad idea because then I could put in someone's credit card number onto a page, hit Save, and nothing could be done to remove it. --Rschen7754 00:42, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
I was just surprised that local oversighters were necessary here when on it.wiki the stewards are sufficient. Generally the revdelete is enough to hide private information, which is something that admins do, and hiding information even to admins is quite rare. --Ruthven (talk) 20:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
@Ruthven: I don't know how necessary it is as such but it's just generally better for this project to be self-sustaining and it's generally better for Stewards to have their workload reduced. I don't have any anticipation that Dan or I would need to use CheckUser or Oversight but if it's needed, it's nice to have someone local who can do it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.

现任的监督员

参见