There do not seem to be any active checkusers. This is a bit of a problem. For example, there is an outstanding request re User JB196, a prolific sockpuppeteering vandal, who uses open proxies; checkuser on the accounts identified and blocked will allow the quiet blocking of some open proxies. Maybe that's not what checkuser is for (but then, maybe it is).
Anyway, do we need to get a couple of technically savvy long-term trusted admins to request checkuser access, and if so what's the best process to avoid a trollfest?
Guy (JzG)
On 06/05/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
There do not seem to be any active checkusers. This is a bit of a problem. For example, there is an outstanding request re User JB196, a prolific sockpuppeteering vandal, who uses open proxies; checkuser on the accounts identified and blocked will allow the quiet blocking of some open proxies. Maybe that's not what checkuser is for (but then, maybe it is).
There are, but checkers are not in fact obligated in any way to look at WP:RFCU.
(It was created to steer querulous requests to, so that checkers wouldn't get badgered on IRC for daring to show up. That's why I avoided IRC for about six months. Essjay discovered the same.)
Anyway, do we need to get a couple of technically savvy long-term trusted admins to request checkuser access, and if so what's the best process to avoid a trollfest?
It's parceled out by the ArbCom, so ask them. The usual answer is "WP:RFCU isn't evidence of a need."
- d.
On 06/05/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/05/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
There do not seem to be any active checkusers. This is a bit of a problem. For example, there is an outstanding request re User JB196, a prolific sockpuppeteering vandal, who uses open proxies; checkuser on the accounts identified and blocked will allow the quiet blocking of some open proxies. Maybe that's not what checkuser is for (but then, maybe it is).
There are, but checkers are not in fact obligated in any way to look at WP:RFCU.
But since you're asking and you're not a waste of time, I'll go look now ;-p
- d.
On 5/6/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/05/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
There do not seem to be any active checkusers. This is a bit of a problem. For example, there is an outstanding request re User JB196, a prolific sockpuppeteering vandal, who uses open proxies; checkuser on the accounts identified and blocked will allow the quiet blocking of some open proxies. Maybe that's not what checkuser is for (but then, maybe it is).
There are, but checkers are not in fact obligated in any way to look at WP:RFCU.
(It was created to steer querulous requests to, so that checkers wouldn't get badgered on IRC for daring to show up. That's why I avoided IRC for about six months. Essjay discovered the same.)
Anyway, do we need to get a couple of technically savvy long-term trusted admins to request checkuser access, and if so what's the best process to avoid a trollfest?
It's parceled out by the ArbCom, so ask them. The usual answer is "WP:RFCU isn't evidence of a need."
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Some tech savvy long time admins like me asked for CU, but then the "sign up if you like CU page fiasco" fux0red everything
On 06/05/07, Pedro Sanchez pdsanchez@gmail.com wrote:
Some tech savvy long time admins like me asked for CU, but then the "sign up if you like CU page fiasco" fux0red everything
Yeah, it's a bit dumb sometimes.
Note for admins: a good way to get a checkuser quickly is to go to #wikipedia-en-admins and go "!checkuser" - if someone's on they'll likely respond. Admin checkuser requests are noticeably less likely to be (tries to pick a nice word) (fails) a waste of time.
(And if you're an admin and don't have access to the channel, leave me an edit on my talk page with your Freenode IRC cloak requesting access. Several others also have access-granting powers.)
- d.
My nick is JzG, if you would be so kind.
Thanks,
Guy (JzG)
On 0, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net scribbled:
My nick is JzG, if you would be so kind.
Thanks,
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
Too, I just go by 'Gwern'.
-- Gwern Inquiring minds want to know.
On 06/05/07, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
On 0, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net scribbled:
My nick is JzG, if you would be so kind.
Too, I just go by 'Gwern'.
Better cloak link: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~swhitton/cloaks
- d.
On 06/05/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
My nick is JzG, if you would be so kind.
Do you have a cloak set up? 'Cos that'd be good. Then I don't have to cross my fingers and key it to your IP.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_channel_cloaks
- d.
On 06/05/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
(And if you're an admin and don't have access to the channel, leave me an edit on my talk page with your Freenode IRC cloak requesting access. Several others also have access-granting powers.)
Please get a cloak first -
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_channel_cloaks
- so I don't have to use part of your hostname and cross my fingers (just because I have l33t p0w3rz doesn't mean I'm that good with them).
- d.