Wikiversity:Notices for custodians

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Wikiversity logo 2017.svg Action required

Wikiversity logo 2017.svg Templates

Wikiversity logo 2017.svg Development

Wikiversity logo 2017.svg Reference

Wikiversity logo 2017.svg Events and news

This page is a central location for communication between custodians.

Been Busy[edit source]

Hi everyone, must apologize I have been very busy the last 6 months or so due to a severe publication schedule for a number of papers, also here on Wikimedia I have been added to the Ombuds Commission. I do try to visit here when I can but have not been very visible. Things should settle down in the next few months. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 17:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to m:Talk:Universal Code of Conduct/2021 consultations/Discussion[edit source]

Please move this note if incorrectly placed.

I am interested in hearing the input of Wikiversity administrators and other users about the application of the Universal Code of Conduct, especially from the perspective of interactions on Wikiversity at the linked page. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Xeno Since you said you are interested in "hearing the input":

Multiple times, I have woken up to discover that someone has been globally banned for an unspecified offence...I imagine that enforcement of the UCoC will increase the number of these unannounced global bans

Most global blocks and locks are executed by Stewards who are volunteers, not wmf employees. There are currently about 3 dozen Stewards, supposedly elected by the global community, however not many are aware of these elections and only a minute percentage of the global community votes. Members of the community who have been blocked globally (or at Meta) are unable to participate in these elections, even those with thousands of edits who have been part of the community for many years.
The Stewards do not have a stewards noticeboard where community members can have questions answered. Some of the stewards have only been part of the community for a year or two, and many do not speak English well enough to understand the issues or communicate with fellow Stewards. It appears that Stewards are not accountable to members of the community, and those who are concerned are not permitted to ask questions, let alone encouraged to help others.
There are a lot (hundreds if not more) of globally blocked (and locked) users, but I don't know where one could see who these users are or the why and who blocked them.
I posted here because I am one of the community members who are not permitted to participate in this global discussion on META . I sincerely hope that posting my input here will not be grounds for blocking me at wikiversity (its a long story, but I have been blocked for this type of "offence" before on another wmf-wiki, and have been threatened with further blocks since - look up editing by proxy if you don't believe this is a blockable offence). Ottawahitech (discusscontribs) 20:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ottawahitech. I'd absolutely love to address your concerns, because, as usual, they're patently unfounded.
1) Stewards are elected and confirmed in annual steward elections, and yes, they're volunteers. Hundreds of editors participate, and the requirements to participate are very minimal. Banners are shown to logged-in editors on practically every project and turnout is generally quite good. But yes, if you are locked or blocked on Meta you will not be able to vote, obviously. There are very few editors with your edit count who have caused enough problems on Meta-Wiki to necessitate an indefinite block from the project. You are one of them.
2) Regarding the fact that your comment is a reply to that quote, Stewards do not impose global bans. Global community bans take weeks or months of RfC discussion on Meta-Wiki, where Foundation bans can be imposed overnight by the Foundation. So I assume the person is referring to Foundation bans. More often than not (aka basically every instance) these Foundation bans involve private information. It would be utterly asinine to expect the Foundation to make private information public to justify a ban. The point of T&S is to handle such cases. And no, the UCoC would likely not have any effect on the frequency of Foundation-imposed bans.
3) The stewards have about a dozen noticeboards which practically anyone (except you, of course, you're blocked on meta) can leave requests or questions on. There's also the Wikimedia Forum and various other pages. You have no idea what you're talking about.
4) There are no stewards who have been around for that little amount of time, and all of them know English well enough to communicate on-wiki and with other stewards in English. Again, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
5) Stewards are accountable in elections and yearly confirmations. Concerned editors are obviously able to ask questions, whether it be on the talk pages of stewards, the various mailing lists, email queues, noticeboards, or forums. Again, you're making sweeping claims with absolutely no remote concept of what you're saying.
6) There are tens of thousands of locked accounts. There's a public log, on Meta. Just because you failed to find it in 10 seconds of clicking doesn't mean there's an evil cabal keeping you from the truth.
It's crap like this that got you blocked on Meta-Wiki. Here's my advice: stop making shit up. If you have a question, ask the damn question, don't assume the answer. I gave you three methods to contact me (talk page, email, IRC) on Meta, none of which you used before your block there became necessary. You even ignored talk page messages trying to help. Instead of asking questions and allowing more experienced contributors to clear things up, you decided to fabricate the answers to justify your crusade against perceived evildoers. Your comments here, based nearly entirely in personal fantasy, could very easily be confused for trolling. Regards, Vermont (discusscontribs) 14:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Common.css Update[edit source]

We need to update MediaWiki:Common.css to support Phabricator:T280766, as noted in this week's Tech News. Is anyone available to make the change? -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dave Braunschweig: I can if given the rights (technically, as a global sysop I can already, but since I'm a member of the community I'd prefer not to use my GS access to go around local procedure for interface admin, though this might be worth starting a discussion about) --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 17:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@DannyS712: Rights granted. Thanks! -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 17:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Copied to common.css as a temporary fix, per tech news, at some point I'll try to go through and see if these are actually needed anywhere. I'll remove the rights in a few days if nothing is broken --DannyS712 (discusscontribs) 17:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Atcovi Custodianship[edit source]

@Bert Niehaus, Cody naccarato, DannyS712, Evolution and evolvability, Faendalimas, Green Giant, Guy vandegrift, Hasley, Juandev, Koavf, Lbeaumont, Mikael Häggström, and RadiX: Atcovi has been nominated for custodianship. It is important for active Wikiversity:STAFF to participate in these discussions. Please share your thoughts and vote. -- Dave Braunschweig (discusscontribs) 14:13, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Link for reference Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 01:40, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]