Wikiversity:Notices for custodians/Archive/3

Japanese copyvio
It seems we have bulk uploading of copyrighted popular japanese song lyrics from User:Okanosato. (now blocked for 6 months) I think I've deleted all the copyright material, but please also see: Special:PrefixIndex/User:Okanosato. Mostly it consists of sports scores. Also, a wikipedia sysop who reads the language has informed me that the talk page posts from this user appear to be Google translated and not from a native speaker of the language. There has been no response from requests by custodians to discuss these issues. see questions from custodians dating back to March at User_talk:Okanosato and last Sept. - Oct.   --mikeu talk 12:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This has been an ongoing problem, please also see: Requests_for_Deletion/Archives/4 and Colloquium/archives/September_2008 --mikeu talk 12:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think this is still a problem since the 6 month block ran out. has been undoing attempts to communicate on his/her talk page and has been continuuing to add possible copyvio material into user sub-pages in Japanese.  -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I have asked for input from the Japanese Wikiversity. -- dark lama  22:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request watcher
If we're going to be using these sorts of rangeblocks, I think we should talk to commons:User:Bryan about setting up a category watching bot to bump unblock requests on a page all custodians can add to their watchlists. I suspect the Moulton situation will be with us for a while, and if so we should have a good method of sniffing out unblock requests. Checkusers will in most cases be able to see if the requests are from Moulton. --SB_Johnny talk 18:10, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that a bot would be desirable. I did not see any mention of category watching for the bots run by Bryan...  For now, custodians should check Category:Requests for unblock.  Please note, that we also need to make sure that the user_talk pages of blocked ips have a template with instructions on how to use the unblock request.  --mikeu talk 13:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am running tests for an unblock request watcher bot. User:Mu301Bot checks for pages listed in Category:Requests for unblock and edits User:Mu301Bot/Requests for unblock if a page has been added to or removed from the category since the last time the bot checked.  No edits are made to the userpage if the category has not changed.  If you watchlist that userpage you can tell if there are any outstanding requests by looking for a number greater than 0 in the edit summary, and then click on the page to read the username.  Any questions or comments about the way this works?    --mikeu talk 14:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: the bot is now checking every hour, at 10 min. past the hour. --mikeu talk 15:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * See User talk:Mu301Bot/Requests for unblock for more information and to discuss. --mikeu talk 17:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

The testing phase of the request watcher is now complete and custodians should watchlist User:Mu301Bot/Requests for unblock. --mikeu talk 17:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Candidates for speedy deletion
I ran a bot to search for pages that only contain whas or we and then tag them for speedy deletion. Please have a look at the list at User:Mu301Bot/Candidates for speedy deletion. Most of these were originally created with just the template or were test edits that were blanked and tagged. But, I did find one page where an anon blanked some content, and it was later templated with expand. I'm looking for other custodians to review the selection of pages. --mikeu talk 23:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I now have a bot updating User:Mu301Bot/Candidates_for_speedy_deletion and User:Mu301Bot/Contested_candidates_for_deletion once per day. Custodians are requested to watchlist these pages to keep up with requests.  Please also let me know if this is of use or something that we should have another method for.  --mikeu talk 17:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

transwiki from wikipedia
FYI: there is a w:Template:TransWikiversity that adds pages to w:Category:Articles to be transwikied to Wikiversity. Also, please note, that there is a w:Template:copy to Wikiversity and (an uncreated) w:Category:Copy to Wikiversity. Please watchlist Import to keep an eye out for wikipedia articles that are out of scope there, but might be of interest to wv. We might want to mention these templates and categories at wp to alert them that there might be some articles that would be out of scope for wp, but within our project. --mikeu talk 14:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we should try to get a wikiversity-transwiki option listed on w:Wikipedia:No original research/noticeboard as well (new page to me!)... I'll leave a note on the talk. --SB_Johnny talk 19:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I've suggested a merge of the two templates at Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion. --mikeu talk 16:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The template to use on wikipedia is w:Template:Copy to Wikiversity which adds articles to w:Category:Copy to Wikiversity. --mikeu talk 13:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

template @wikipedia
I've created a new category at w:Category:Wikiversity templates and tried to add all the wv related templates to it. If we want to attract editors or import content from wp we really should try to get more organized about coordinating things there. --mikeu talk 16:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Open Proxies
I'd like to remind everyone of a long neglected page at Open Proxies. We also have openproxy which should be used on the user talk page of the blocked ip. There has been some recent activity by custodians to block these open proxies. Not all of them have the template on the talk page. I'd suggest we request a bot to go through the logs and template the talk pages of blocked ips that lack the template. We might also want to look into setting up a page like meta:Meta:Open_proxy_detection which is updated by a bot. --mikeu talk 13:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Twitter
We have created a Wikiversity twitter account. If you would like to contribute, let us know. Once we have a few tweets, we can promote more widely. See: Twitter. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

OzonAction
Hey

so I believe this article is a copyright violation, in fact, I checked on Wikipedia OzonAction Programme and there is a similar tag someone put on it. If you follow even the first link you will find that the information is entirely lifted. The markup in the WV article even has templates from WP, so I imagine whoever posted it in WP, upon finding it getting removed, moved it to WV. - Theornamentalist 00:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

User:188.17.67.125
has been creating a lot of unnecessary, single-page categories that appear to have no relevance to one another. What should be done about them? TeleComNasSprVen 03:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Unofyjan blocked
Link spam / vandalism. Diffs: 1 2 3 4 5. Blocked for two hours incl. IP & user creation, rolled back all of the above. I'm not expecting the user to return after two hours, and I want to avoid blocking a school IP, but feel free to extend the block if you feel it's appropriate. --Draicone (talk) 05:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * You failed to put a block notice, a welcome notice, or anything really. You stated you were going to take over welcoming. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I added a message to their talk page, but I'm not going to use a welcome template for a link spam bot. Spam continued when the block expired; I've blocked the user for a month. --Draicone (talk) 07:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like a global Mediawiki spam bot with no intention of IP editing -, I'm extending block to indefinite for the account but without the IP restriction. --Draicone (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Userspace page with personal names
Please see this page and the discussion here. It is my opinion that all of the revisions that include personal information should be struck (hidden) from the page history and that it should be left in the state that it is in now with a note indicating that information has been removed. But I'd like a second opinion on this. I've left one prior revision in place, for now, so that it can be reviewed by non-custodians. Fwiw, I discussed this with User:Moulton in irc and he requested an opportunity to defend his inclusion of this information in the page. As I noted on his talk page, this seems to me to be a clear violation of WV:Privacy. --mikeu talk 16:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Update: I've received a complaint regarding the above page here. At this point I think we need to open a Review to clarify how WV:Privacy applies to pages such as this. --mikeu talk 12:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This issue was resolved by fiat from the Dark Junta. Upon review, the above complaint was dismissed as "silly."  —Moulton 13:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * See discussion at Wikiversity talk:Community Review/Pseudonymity and external correspondence‎ --mikeu talk 12:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Warning?
? I don't know if disabling your own page is accetable or not, but certainly that's not the way to express yourself. Magister Mathematicae 21:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked 1 month, but not for this reason in particular. --SB_Johnny talk 00:18, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

WV:Privacy and blocks
User:Moulton and User:Caprice have been temporarily blocked for violations of WV:Privacy until such time as there is an agreement to abide by policy or the community changes the policy. --mikeu talk 20:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It's unlikely the community will arrive at a consensus either to change the wording of the policy or to even agree on what the current wording means. In the meantime, is there some reason Moulton and Caprice have not been afforded a fair hearing by a jury of their peers to determine if there has even been a breach, under any reading of the policy as currently worded? —NotNewYorkBrad 18:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Rangeblocks
I'm performing some rather drastic rangeblocks in order to prevent further disruption by my friend Moulton. There are other ranges that will need to be blocked too, since he apparently has access to other dynamic ranges. I'm not quite "hard blocking", but I am preventing account creation on these ranges for now.

I'm going with the range blocks because I know that Moulton can easily switch IPs within a few seconds, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he will do what he can to go around these blocks.

I'd like to make it clear what I mean by disruption here:
 * 1) Moulton has over the past month or so made it a point to call out various Wikimedia contributors using their "real" names, when almost everyone else has expressed their desire that he not do so. This ends up creating needless chores for custodians (revision deletions, etc.), and he's quite aware of that. This also doesn't seem to serve any purpose that benefits the WV community or mission (quite the contrary).
 * 2) Moulton has been consistently cluttering up the public fora with contributions which seem to have little value other than to his own personal agenda, to the point that he has effectively hijacked them and made them useless for everyone else (particularly new users, who I suspect might see the public fora and have a "WTF" experience that discourages them).
 * 3) Moulton has been attempting to educate certain individuals who are "regulars" here, and while I absolutely have "good faith" in his motives, his pedagogical approach is inappropriately confrontational and ends up causing more disruption as he "follows" these people from forum to forum.
 * 4) Finally, Moulton seems to hold "community preference" in extreme disregard (if not scorn), which is, frankly, completely toxic to a volunteer-oriented and consensus-driven community. We need to feel free to do our work, and feel free to express our needs and desires without being subject to snide and sarcastic comment at every turn.

I'd also like to make it clear that I am not "assuming bad faith" here: on the contrary, I believe that Moulton really does want to educate people, help people understand themselves better, and introduce people to the scientific way of thinking. The problem with Moulton is that he tends to take the low road and "act even crazier the people he thinks are crazy" in order to make his (valid and good) points. He just doesn't seem to mind that this approach puts a burden on well-meaning people who don't really want that burden.

I think we should change the "blocked editor" text to point to Blocked ranges on the off chance that somebody gets caught up in this and wants to know why. --SB_Johnny talk 20:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Johnny, if you admit that Moulton is your friend, then you would be advised against taking any administrative action either for him or against him. If you act against your friend, you jeopardize your friendship and you still can be accused of going easier on your friend than you would have, had the damnable miscreant been some random doofus who means nothing to you.  And of course, as soon as you start to negotiate terms to remove the sweeping rangeblocks, your critics will be all over you either for letting Moulton off too easily or for unjustly punishing thousands of innocent people who also use those 327,936 IPs.  Only a damned fool would do what you are doing.  Ask Perry or Lisa.  They'll tell you how an Alpha dog is supposed to behave.  —Caprice 05:11, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Presumably, with the blocks of his continuing escalating socks and IP addresses that we are (or he is) looking for a sitewide ban of him from Wikiversity until he learns not to use other people's real names here. (Then we can appropriate apply WP:RBI; that is, revert and block on sight any sock he makes.) TeleComNasSprVen 04:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Abd
I'm making an emergency request at meta to at least temporarily remove Abd as a custodian, following some rather sudden actions this morning. The actions include:
 * 1) altering the conditions of his own probation
 * 2) deleting the page that had the agreement
 * 3) unblocking Poetlister1, when there was certainly no consensus to do so (discussions here, and despite the fact that the matter was under discussion.

For those not familiar with his status, I closed his most recent RFC as "no consensus to promote", but he retained his status as an ongoing probationary custodian because he hadn't up until that point used the tools in a controversial or provocative way. This morning's actions seem to go beyond what is acceptable for a custodian who has failed to get community support, and certainly beyond what any probationary custodian should do without prior discussion and/or consultation with the mentors. --SB_Johnny talk 14:58, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I consulted with my mentor, extensively. SBJ is merely assuming that I did not. However, I'm responsible for the action, not my mentor. My mentor neither approved the action nor did he prohibit it.
 * An emergency removal based on actions of that level (a single unblock, what amounts to a single file deletion with the associated talk page, in my user space without my permission), given what actions SBJ has himself done without support in policy or consensus, is not appropriate. There is no ongoing danger. Policy covers my custodianship. SBJ himself moved my agreement out of WV space on the argument that it was just my own private proposal. He claimed consensus for it not belonging in WV space. He claimed it was not accepted. So I accepted that, and acted based on the alleged non-acceptance. I considered just placing a speedy deletion tag, but if this was just my own work, now in my user space, moved as such over my objections, I certainly have the right to delete it. I then notified that the agreement was being withdrawn, in case anyone was relying upon it, and my mentor is free, then, to withdraw mentorship. I grant my mentor the right to immediately request removal, instead of providing the 48-hour period for me to find a new mentor as provided in policy. SBJ does not have that right.
 * SBJ is highly involved here. My actions that he's cited both involve specific disagreements between him and I. He is not acting for the protection of Wikiversity and Wikiversity users, to the contrary.
 * If he misrepresents the situation at meta, and a steward acts on that, it can be fixed. There is no emergency here, in any direction.
 * Again, if anything I've done is improper, it can be fixed. I do not wheel-war. SBJ's doesn't mention that it was he who blocked the user, violating our policy. There is no wave of actions here, I'm busy and don't plan to be doing anything more today, for sure, and only happened to notice this by accident.


 * I think mistakes have been made, possibly due to a false premise. Consensus may have been that the page didn't belong in WV space, but that was the extent of the consensus. I think a documented agreement between mentor and the mentored belongs in user space. I think there was no intention to void that agreement or the mentorship. I think withdraw of an probationary custodian agreement is grounds for termination of the probationary custodianship, but I think the withdraw was done because of the false premise. I think that can be overlooked and could have been resolved by restoring the agreement to your user space. However I think termination of the probationary custodianship was the right call to make because you didn't wait for consensus to develop at the global ban review before acting on Poetlister's global ban. I think if the stewards remove the tools, the only purpose restoring the agreement would have left is to preserve the history of you probationary custodianship. -- dark lama  17:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to make it clear, this was not a "documented agreement between mentor and mentored." It was something I offered the community that was never formally accepted, and that probably had no effect. That's obvious from the history. I.e., I'd still have become a probationary custodian. The decision on termination would be up to the mentor, and to avoid argument with the mentor, I've now agreed that the mentor(s) may revoke mentorship and may request lifting the bits, without delay, whereas policy would allow me 48 hours to find a new mentor.
 * Darklama, either I had the right to delete the file or I didn't. I believe I had the right, but if you disagree, you are a custodian. I'm not going to consent to undeletion, but if deletion was a violation of policy, if it harms the wiki, you have the same rights as any other custodian to restore it, on your own responsibility. I will reserve judgment on what I would do then, until then. My withdrawal from the agreement, at this point, still stands. I'm now, as far as I'm concerned, an ordinary probationary custodian, with the same rights as I'd have without that agreement.
 * There was no "consensus" that the page did not belong in WV space. There was a hasty action, by you, with no prior discussion, reversed by me. There was then a *little* support for the original action, with little or no consideration of the issues. I proposed process that would, indeed, seek consensus. SBJ acted precipitately, as he has, many times, with damaging effect. --Abd 19:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)


 * At some point I think it would be helpful to have Abd's indef WV probationary custodial status move on to either full custodianship or not a custodian. The latter could occur via meta if considered emergency (pending ATM). Alternatively we could re-open the Abd3 nomination for full custodianship or start a new discussion. How would others suggest proceeding? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:41, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

My Wikiversity account was hacked
Username: FrequentIntenseMatureSuggestiveThemes

Password: htfflippy

My Wikiversity account was hacked! When logging in to Wikiversity I was greeted, but when clicking on links I am logged out. When logging in using the above credentials, I get an error message saying 'Incorrect password entered. Please try again'. Am I now forced to create a new account? What the heck just happened with my account? --189.70.92.232 05:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It has been locked, like the rest of yours
 * See Steward requests/Global -- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd like a custodian to block this IP for like a month.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest waiting on the outcome of Steward requests/Global. No action on Wikiversity may be necessary. The edits from this IP on en.wv to date are mostly additions of Wikipedia block-related templates. Import of such pages would be preferred, so that the edit history is maintained. . -- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I would like FrequentIntenseMatureSuggestiveThemes to be unlocked. I did a lot of constructive contribs to Wikiversity! --189.70.92.232 16:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle
Hello, Custodians. This is to notify you that I've copied the entire Twinkle script. Can anyone put it in Gadgets section, please? User:Dipankan001/Twinkle.js. Dipankan001 (talk) 07:33, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Proposed deletions
This is quite backlogged, good if a custodian could see to it. --Claritas (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Leading Editing Supervisors
Please see the above page. It states "If you would like to be a leading editing supervisors (sic), please put your name on the list of candidates." The author of the page, World historia, has placed himself at the head. He adds "However, if you remove names from the list of elected supervisors and the list of candidates or put your name on the list of elected supervisors without the head or vice heads' permissions, you will be punished by our policy."

So far as I can see, World historia is not a custodian. Does this page have any authority? If not, can it be deleted, as it is clearly misleading. Thank you.--Collingwood (talk) 12:19, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Y Done -- dark lama  12:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Copyright of MicroSoft clip art
I recently deleted some MicroSoft clip art as a copyvio. The uploader, Aabrell, claims that it is not a copyvio. Can I please seek other custodians' advice.--Collingwood (talk) 12:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Clip art in Microsoft products is subject to copyright and may only be used in accordance with EDP. The key part is no free or open equivalent available. The Youtube screenshot depends upon the licensing used for the video. Geoff (talk) 21:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Sidebar needs to be amended
Strategy wiki Strategy:Main Page has been locked for a couple of years now&mdash;it should be removed from the "wikimedia projects" sidebar. Also, I'd recommend capitalizing "Wikimedia". —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ This wiki is locked, but the contents are still there for reference. As far as I can see, Wikimedia already has a capital W.--Collingwood (talk) 10:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Global Sysops
@Collingwood: I'm going to ask you (it seems as if you are one of the few admins active) what you would think about opting into the scope of GSs (as Jasper Deng suggested above). I've seen before on RC Billinghurst blocking and deleting spambot stuff; well, he shouldn't do it theoretically, but there's a great deal of spam here so he was somehow forced to deal with it. IMHO en.wikiversity is one of the most bombarded wikis by spammers and according to a ToolServer's tool there are just 2/3 admins active right now (even if there are lots of custodians here). That's why I'd suggest doing an Opt-in for GS so that they could help here (only) deleting spam stuff (other things are managed by local sysops). That's just a suggestion of course. -- Frigotoni ... i'm here ; 14:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have copied the above from my talk page in case anyone else wants to comment. I would be happy to agree but am reluctant to do so without giving others a chance to comment.  There is a fair amount of spam fighting being done by non-custodians here, but certainly more help would be welcome.--Collingwood (talk) 09:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The community can decide whether to opt-in or not to, and my request at Collingwood has to be accounted just as an advice. -- Frigotoni ... i'm here ; 13:21, 30 December 2012 (UTC)