Wikidata talk:Requests for checkuser

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Requests for checkuser.
Use the "Add topic" button in the upper righthand corner to begin a new discussion, or reply to one listed below.

Comment[edit]

Ciao @Sotiale:,

I haven't seen any other page regarding this, so I'm talking about it here. If another page exists concerning this object, would you be so kind as to give me the link? A few comments:

  • Yes, I also see a query formulation button to avoid omissions in the formulation, with a translatable sub-page on the query.
  • Template: Discussion_navigation should also be changed to 4x4 columns
  • The header in sub-page translatable like the other pages
  • Depending on your experiences as a stew or CU: a space for archiving requests. Maybe in months?

Anyway, are we making changes directly here, then the page is published in the right place? Are we chatting here? —Eihel (talk) 15:05, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eihel: I am glad you are interested. Yes, as you thought, if a page is created for Checkuser request, {{Discussion navigation}} should be corrected. Because there are 16 items, we can arrange 4x4 nicely. The CU team has not decided on either 1) case type (commons, enwiki/ex. Wikidata:Property proposal) or 2) thread type (SRCU on meta/ex. Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard) request method yet. I'm listening to some checkusers from other wikis, and I think it will be decided considering the advantages and disadvantages of each type. Currently, this rudimentary draft is based on the case type. It's still a draft, so if you need any corrections, you can leave a comment here, or you can do it yourself. --Sotiale (talk) 12:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving[edit]

Can we make a rule that says that CU cases should only be archived after two weeks without any edits? I dont wanna have to keep adding them back from the archive every time there's an update. --Trade (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Yes please, but would prefer a bot to do this since it's repetitive. For the time being, suggest to add <noinclude> as some cases (this and this are getting way too long. @BRPever, Jasper Deng, Sotiale, علاء: ping CUs for comments. --Minorax (talk) 09:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Untranscluded RFCU cases[edit]

I ran a query and found a number of cases never transcluded in the main request page and never proceeded by a checkuser:

Some of them are now (or will soon be) stale.

To prevent these from being happened I propose one of this:

  1. Let user directly add requests to the main request page and make subpages only archives.
  2. Let user directly add requests to the main request page and archive them like normal discussions; do not use subpages at all.

@Jasper Deng, Sotiale:.--GZWDer (talk) 23:05, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose The subpage system works perfectly fine. If users want their cases actioned then they need to follow procedure.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think cases as subsection of page is not a good idea because cases need to be preserved for future as if someone found a new sock they can easily find the case and compare, instead we should have a bot that automatically does this transclusion step. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:48, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving[edit]

Hello @جار الله: can you please help by JarBot on archiving this page? as:

Thanks on advance. (FYI @Jasper Deng, Sotiale, BRPever:) --Alaa :)..! 14:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @علاء: done, if you decide to make separate pages for each year please let me know, regards.--جار الله (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks جار الله. I'll ping you for any updates --Alaa :)..! 16:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
جار الله, Could this bot also transclude cases on main page when user forgot to do so? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1997kB I will try and see what the bot can do. regards.--جار الله (talk) 05:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1997kB Done. regards.--جار الله (talk) 03:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
جار الله, Thanks! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@جار الله: Is there a problem with archiving by JarBot? Lymantria (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Too many templates[edit]

The page belongs to the pages where template include size is exceeded. How can we reduce the number of templates? Lymantria (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, maybe fasten the archive bot? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but the longer running cases have many templates. Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ananislam138 is not transcluded now, for instance, and is very large. Perhaps move older parts to a subpage? Lymantria (talk) 16:52, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For the Ananislam138 and Marcyway4 cases I created a history subpage and moved older parts there. Now all cases are included again. Please let me know if you think this should be dealt with differently. Lymantria (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lymantria, I have discussed it with other CUs and we think we need a new setup, maybe like enwiki one, where we archive each case to its subpage like you did. So we need to build a setup in the background but I am busy these days so it will take time. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I have done this as a temporary solution. Good to see that you all are thinking to find the good solution. The enwiki way indeed is a neat one. Lymantria (talk) 17:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why the checkip template in report?[edit]

If you are not allowed to report an IP here, why is there a place to add an IP when you make a report? Shouldn't that be removed? Sjö (talk) 13:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please link users[edit]

When listing usernames, please link them. This is a big timer saver for anyone trying to act on results, not least because it allows the "mark blocked" script to indicate whether the user is currently blocked. Thanks! Bovlb (talk) 14:31, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It also means that it is possible to find the checkuser page from the user's page, which can be important. Bovlb (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions missing[edit]

Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Header only contains instructions to create the subpage, but not to transclude it here. Also, the page comment instructing that new cases be added to the bottom is above the section header, which prevents users from seeing it when they use the edit section link. I'd move it below the header but thought it might break the bot. --Paul 012 (talk) 19:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog on unblock requests[edit]

Could we please set some expectations on how long it should take to get a checkuser response on unblock requests? I know we're all volunteers here, but the current three month backlog seems excessive. Bovlb (talk) 17:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata_talk:Requests_for_checkuser&oldid=1905212525"