Steward requests/Global/2009-10

Hey hey hey, why was I blocked? Can't even edit my talk page. My nick is Saluton on ru-wiki and The Other Saluton on en-wiki. If I click the "screeenshot" link, the "page is not found. Saluton 10:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment — I'm not a steward but as far as I can see you are not personally blocked. Perhaps your IP adress, IP range or network is globally hard-blocked. What is the block message that it appears when you try to edit a page on a site different to meta-wiki?. --Dferg 11:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

"You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia.

You can still read pages, but cannot edit, change, or create them.

Editing from your IP address or IP address range has been disabled on all wikis by Mike.lifeguard (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given was "".

To request unblock, visit your talk page and add the text {{unblock|global block — REASON}}. Replace "REASON" with the reason for requesting unblock.

Additionally, you may appeal the global block at Steward requests/Global.

The block expires on 23 March 2010 at 23:20."

This is what I see on en-wiki. Strangely enough, sometimes the block doesn't appear when I click "edit". Saluton 11:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Seems okay now. Saluton 12:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Nope. This block pops up again. Saluton 12:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

What is your IP?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 14:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Now it's fine for sure, I can edit articles. I'm not sure about my IP, I edit from a corporate computer, sorry :) Saluton 04:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I see no reason why I was blocked. What I get is:

Editing from your IP address or IP address range has been disabled on all wikis by Mike.lifeguard (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given was "".

To request unblock, visit your talk page and add the text {{unblock|global block — REASON}}. Replace "REASON" with the reason for requesting unblock

But, I can't even edit my talk page. Thus, no reason is given and the indicated way to request unblocking is also blocked. Jim.henderson 21:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Nobody said anything to me, but after using a slow connection for a couple hours I tried again editing a Wikipedia article using my fast connection, and it worked, so someone must have unblocked me. I hope in future if such a mistake is made again, the blocked persons will at least be allowed to write a request in their own talk pages as the block notice suggests. Jim.henderson 04:28, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, what was your IP?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Here I am, feeling a bit odd to be editing Wiki without logging in. I haven't done that for a month or two I think, and not a dozen times in the past year. Three or four other people use this machine in the course of a day; I don't know whether they edit Wikipedia or have an account. If they were to vandalize anonymously, would a IP block intended for them also apply to me, even though I'm using my account as usual? That would seem an odd way to do it. Hmm, I haven't checked to see whether I can edit Wikipedia without logging in. 166.68.134.174 20:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The IP you just edited from is not globally blocked. Can you please let us know which one you are using that is blocked? Thank you.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 21:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this computer was blocked for a few hours yesterday. It became blocked about an hour before I entered the message asking why I was blocked, and it became unblocked an hour or two before I entered the thankyou message saying it had become unblocked. This is the same computer and same connection. I don't know whether it has changed its IP address, because I never knew that number or how to change it. So, it's just a matter of curiosity at an upsettingly mysterious event now past. If the block is finished and untraceable, then the question is finished, except that I wonder why it's untraceable. Why, when Wikipedia showed me the block notice that I pasted above, didn't it say what particular address had been blocked, or why, or give a case number or other method to allow learning anything? Why is this information not recorded before making a global block? And why tell me to use my Wikipedia talk page to request unblocking, and then block me from doing that? At least I wasn't blocked from appealing here. I only hope to assure that the Wikimedia blocking process can be improved so such mysterious events won't happen to others. Jim.henderson 23:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The IP has never been blocked - that is why I cannot help you without more information.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

It seems nobody has more information than I have already supplied, since the block notice provided nothing more. If it recurs, there still won't be any way for me or anyone to know. We can only hope that either this mysterious event doesn't happen again to me or anyone else, or that the block notice or other recording system will be improved to provide the information. 166.68.134.165 03:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Suddenly, having logged in, I find myself again blocked, with the same uninformative message:

You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia. You can still read pages, but cannot edit, change, or create them. Editing from your IP address or IP address range has been disabled on all wikis by Mike.lifeguard (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given was "".

To request unblock, visit your talk page and add the text {{unblock}}. Replace "REASON" with the reason for requesting unblock.

Additionally, you may appeal the global block at Steward requests/Global.

The block expires on 23 March 2010 at 19:20.

But, at least now I know where to notify you, in case quick notification might help discover the cause. Jim.henderson 03:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

And, in case this may provide additional useful information, I have logged out and am editing here once again. 166.68.134.165 03:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - unblocked  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

PLease can anyone tell me why the heck am I blocked? I got this message: Editing from your IP address or IP address range has been disabled on all wikis by Mike.lifeguard (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given was "".

Wow. What's the reason? I haven't done ANY kind of vandalism? Wow. I'm amazed.195.229.237.37 18:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

195.229.237.37 isn't globally blocked - what IP are you talking about?  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

User in question is a sockpuppet of cross-wiki vandal Bambifan101. Been blocked at cs.wp, en.wp, simple.wp, and editing plenty of other projects. Previous sockpuppets of Bambifan101 have been globally blocked after discovery.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 12:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

  Done --FiliP ██ 06:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocked? can't edit talk?--68.192.158.195 22:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I notice you've been creating nonsense pages like w:sg:Accueil. Please stop creating pages like that, it is unhelpful. I've unblocked you now.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 22:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Due to this wonderful video, I was reminded by the fact that in 2007, en:Ichirou Mizuki was mass-translation-spammed across 90 Wikipedia projects. I've got a full list that consist of projects where Seansoo (or a sock account) created the page, and then nearly every subsequent edit to the page was by an interwiki bot (or local users cleaning it up a bit). I still need to find the page to organize a clean up (and possible deletion) of this article on the 88 projects where it was not authored by Seansoo through machine translation, but in the meantime he needs to be globally blocked. I've been informed, though, that he has not unified his accounts and because he is Indonesian his ISP has dynamic IP allocation.

As far as I am aware, he has been indefinitely blocked at his home wiki (id.wiki) and all I have seen him do on any of his accounts is directly copy articles myself and other users have worked on word for word and then directly translate it (with the formatting) for use on the Indonesian Wikipedia. He is currently editing under Seansoo3 on all projects, but has edited ko.wiki with Seansoo as late as June.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Locked Seansoo3 & 4 as those had global accounts; blocked the other local accounts.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 03:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Help! My global account has been blocked at the English Wikipedia, and I cannot even edit my own Talk page using my account! I have been a victim of misidentification of IP addresses for a long time, and I cannot explain it. I've been mistakenly blocked from editing in the past due to other people's offenses. This needs to stop once and for all! Hope(N Forever) 14:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure that you haven't been blocked from the English Wikipedia for vandalism or something else like that? If you were blocked locally on the English Wikipedia, there isn't much one can do here, but it could just be that your IP was hardblocked, which makes it so that you can't edit using your IP. Check the block log on the English Wikipedia and see if either one of the above is true. Razorflame 06:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Hope. Your account is not blocked, but you may be experiencing an autoblock— that means that someone was recently blocked, and the wiki mistakenly suspects you are the same person (because your IP address is the same). When you try to edit your talk page, do you get a message that says "You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia"? —Pathoschild 06:15:35, 02 October 2009 (UTC)

• name hidden

Pattern vandal. --Dferg 14:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

  locked — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 21:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I bought a vps service with a static IP recently and I am using it to run my bot. Unfortunately, that IP range is blocked in en, it and nl wikis (currently that I have found out. there may be more) for cross wiki vandalism and open proxies. Since I cannot request to unblock the range blcok, I would like to request for an Ipblock-exempt for my bot, since I badly need this to run my bot. Please help. thanks, --Jyothis 06:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, global IP block exemption is for users affected by global blocks. You can ask to have ipblock-exemption on enwiki and nlwiki.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Mike, As I learn, that IP range is notorious for the open proxies, and that is the reason why it was blocked. It is not uncommon for other wikis to follow that, since it is a common threat. However, if you are telling me that I can start requesting for Ip block exempt in each wikis, i doubt if it is practical. I do not wish to run a bot for 3 days to find out where else I am listed in the block list. If you could look up and tell me where all my bot's IP is blocked, that would be helpful for me to start reuesting in each wikis. Thanks. --Jyothis 05:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Not a steward but: The problem is that a global IP exemption doesn't actually get around those local blocks :( it only gets you around Global blocks. So even if you get the exemption here you will have the problem on the locally blocked wikis. If your asking for someone to look up the bots you use you shouldn't need it, an IP block exemption gets you around them all (without the admin having to know the actual IP) Jamesofur 05:24, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

That isn't a problem - that was done on purpose. Global IP block exemption is for exempting people from global IP blocks.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I´m monitoring cvn-sw for most 6 months, and at this moment I have enough of messages like: undone by Wutsje, Majorly (or someone else)... when I´m trying to revert some vandalism, just becouse there are faster with undo :(. So I´m requesting global rollback. I´m a Sysop on bs.wiki and bs.wikiquote, speak fluently german, bosnian, croatian and serbian, understand the most slavic languages on the level 2 or 3, and have poor knowlage of english :). I have an unified account and I´m waiting for the last usurpation on en.wiki, which will be done in two days. --WizardOfOz 15:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Now account is unified. --WizardOfOz 16:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Good call on mentioning your old username - I was thinking "W(ho)TF is WizardOfOz?" but I remember Seha :D I see no problems here, you've done good work over a reasonable time period.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I know :D. The most of others will be thinking the same "wtf". :)--WizardOfOz 15:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

  Support Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 15:35, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure a good addition to the GR team. Barras 15:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Sufficiently active. Could do with GR. Pmlineditor ∞ 15:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I endorse the granting of this user the Global Rollback because he will use it to the best of his ability and I trust him, even though I've hardly worked with him. Razorflame 17:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

support, user is actively helping with vandalism reversion over a longer time period, trusted user, thanks for helping, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 19:08, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

  GR flag granted keep up your good works --Mardetanha ^talk 23:45, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I've been working at SWMT now for some time (excluding breaks) and this is my second request for Global rollback. As you can see in my global edits, I've been reverting vandalism on several small wikis, and have local rollback on four wikis. The last time I requested global rollback the concern was that I didn't have enough experience and not enough time yet on cross-wiki reverting, but ever since I've started, I've been using undo and there have been cases where the vandal has made more then one edit and having to go through the history, selecting the revision, and saving that version, which was a manual process. Global Rollback would help make the process faster. If you still think I don't have enough experience, I will not take it against you, since it's not a big deal anyways. Techman224^Talk 00:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

By request, here's the link to the last request for Global Rollback here. Techman224^Talk 03:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

•   Sorry, I don't think your unblocking project tonight was appropriate and I am worried you would likewise be unresponsive to concerns about your actions. Please learn what actions are acceptable and ask where you are unsure. In some time, you may regain my trust but at present I would not want to see you with extra permissions on small wikis where such communication and the like is a necessary skill. Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
• I am going to have to agree with Mike_lifeguard on this one. Some actions are just not appropriate, and your actions just showed us that we have a reason not to trust you with extra tools at this point in time. Please note that this is not an actual !vote, merely just a comment, so please take it in stride. Thanks, Razorflame 05:16, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
• Share Mike's concerns. Pmlineditor ∞ 15:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Not done per the comments above. Sorry. --Erwin 20:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I have been doing some SWMT work, and currently am a local rollbacker on a number of small projects. I would like the tool to assist me in reverting vandalism. I am an administrator on en.wiki, commons, and simple.wikiquote. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 23:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I fully trust Tiptoety and trust that he would not abuse the right. His anti-vandalism work on the projects which I am in contact with him on is top notch. – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Agree. Tiptoety is sufficiently trustworthy and active. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

•   Support, sounds fine to me.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
•   Support Trusted user should be fineJamesofur 04:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
•   Support for me--Nick1915 - ^{all you want} 09:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  Done per consensus above. --თოგო ^(D) 11:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I've been doing some SWMT work over the past few weeks, including on #cvn-sw and #cvn-sw-spam. I've tagged quite a few pages with {{delete}} and removed a few spam links. I'm a rollbacker and accountcreator on enwp, and I've been around Wikimedia (actively editing) for close to a year (with a break for about a year). Global rollback will just allow me to revert...faster then usual; a big help. I believe I'm trusted enough for the tool, but of course that's for anyone who watches this page to decide. ;-) Thanks, GrooveDog 02:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

While I trust you, I'd like to note that less than 100 edits is too few for Global Rollback. That said, I don't think that you will abuse the tools. Pmlineditor ∞ 09:24, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

=) thanks for your opinion. To note, over the past week I've accumulated quite a few more edits, see here. :) GrooveDog 04:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  No, I'm sorry, but I don't think you have enough experience at the moment. I'd prefer to see you stick around and do more work before granting the request.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

  Not done No consenus to promote , please feel free to apply in couple of month when you more more cross wiki experience --Mardetanha ^talk 07:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I've already been a global rollbacker, but resigned due to few time to edit. I'm back to #cvn-sw, reverting vandalisms and marking speedy deletions when possible; doing a special countervandalism work on Spanish projects. Actually, have rollbacker rights on enwiki and ptwiki, beyond admin on ptwikisource. This demonstrates my sufficient cross-wiki experience to have global rights again and help more. --Lucas Nunes 00:43, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Trusted user, confident he won't abuse the tool. GrooveDog 00:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

  Support, should be fine (again).  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 15:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

  Support if you can use it well once you can use it well again (especially when you have already show you know when you should give it up)Jamesofur 04:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

  Welcome Back --Mardetanha ^talk 07:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I currently have local rollback on 6 projects and have been actively doing swmt work (as well as vandalism patrol on non small English wiki's) for about 6-7 weeks and would love the added abilities Global Rollback gives to be able to do so quicker and more efficiently especially for mass vandalism attacks. I generally idle on IRC and am often most active at times where there is little additional help available (especially late at night american Eastern time, which yes is my time). I don't see GR as a huge deal so if people would rather I wait a bit longer I don't mind :) Jamesofur 04:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I know James from several Wikimedia projects that we both participate in and trust his decisions fully. I believe that granting him this extra right would be very helpful in his SWMT work. – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 04:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Endorse Sufficiently active and clueful. Deserves GR. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
• I trust you with this tools. You will be a good addition and help. Barras 08:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
• James' does a lot of anti-vandalism in cvn channels, no problem with him. Nifky? 04:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Endorse Razorflame 04:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Endorse. Noting problematic with this request. NonvocalScream 04:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Endorse per above -- Mercy (☎|✍) 06:52, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Another pile-on non-steward endorsement. Trustworthy and active user; no reason as far as I'm concerned to reject this request. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  Done per the above & observing their good work on several projects.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:55, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

• I would like to recover articles which have been earased only because it is incomplete.

So, I would like to have roll back rights

I'm sorry, but Global Rollback is only given to people who help on vandalism Wikimedia-wide. Looking at your edits, it seems you only have worked on 6 wikis. Please join SWMT and help revert vandalism using undo for a while before requesting Global Rollback. Techman224^Talk 01:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  No, that is not what global rollback is for. --FiliP ██ 08:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Oppose You don't understand what GR is about. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  No no need with given reason. Laaknor 08:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Oppose You are not trusted. And you are blocked in two projects (jawiki and kowiki) due to sockpuppet abuses. And I and Korean Wikipedia community think your edits are counter-productive. (PauloHelene, please read ). And he has been desysopped on strategywiki, kowiki (cracking b'crat's account), and ko.wikia. I can't, and won't trust you. Kwj2772 (msg) 13:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Oppose no countervandalism work, blocked in two projects. --Lucas Nunes 13:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Oppose No countervandalism work and your blocked on two projects. You don't even have a global account. Techman224^Talk 16:19, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Oppose per all above. Blocked on two wikis and then GR? Barras (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  Not done obviously.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 17:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm a rollback in the English and Spanish wikipedia. I delete a lot of vandalism edits with Huggle in this two wikis. I think that I'm prepare to do a good task with the Global rollback so I request the flag. With the global rollback I will patrol the English, Spanish, Deutsch, Catalan, Aragonés, Asturianu, Galego, occitan and French wikipedias. I know Spanish and Catalan. I have a good level of English and French. --by ----> Javierito92 ||| Message/Mesajes 21:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I see very little evidence of sustained cross-wiki anti-vandalism/spam work. I suggest waiting a few months and becoming more active with SWMT, then filing another request. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but for me this is a clear   no due to a total lack of swmt activity. --თოგო ^(D) 23:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

So, If I'm not in the SWMT group, I can't have the flag? --by ----> Javierito92 ||| Message/Mesajes 10:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It's about whether or not you've proven you have a need for global rollback and are actually active on a lot of different projects. At this moment you aren't, so I'm afraid   I can't support your request either. --Erwin 10:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

•   Oppose No reason for getting GR. Please return in a few months after doing SWMT work. Pmlineditor ∞ 16:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
• I do not endorse this user getting the GRB flag at this point in time as he is not active in SWMT. Cheers, Razorflame 21:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

While you don't have to "formally" join SWMT (it is a very informal group) you do have to be active doing countervandalism or anti-spam work cross-wiki, which isn't the case here. Please feel free to help out (whether you sign up or not) and make a request again here when you have a history of good cross-wiki work.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I would like to request global editinterface rights for one day. I want to update gadgets for Polish projects, where I don't have sysop rights (pl.wikibooks, pl.wikiquote, pl.wikinews). I want to link gadgets copied from Wikipedia to original sources, which are actively maintaned. Sample edit. Thanks. Beau (talk) 13:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Editinterface rights granted, please let us know when you are done. LeinaD (t) 13:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. You can remove me from that group. Beau (talk) 15:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

  Removed — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

ko:위키백과:사랑방/2009년 제39주#PauloHelene 관련 문제