User talk:Naleksuh

From TestWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hey Naleksuh,

I see that you partially blocked yourself for testing purposes for a period of two hours, and you have the ability to unblock yourself before that so there's nothing really to do, but what I had a question about—whenever you return—is where it says, "from specified non-editing actions with an expiration time of 2 hours (autoblock disabled)," I can't figure out what those non-editing actions are. Did you just prohibit yourself from editing your own user talk page for the prescribed period? If so, then I think I've understood the log entries correctly.

Also, it's probably not a big deal since the block was a test block you made on yourself, but just a heads up with regard to revision deletion, we try for transparency here. I made the mistake of test blocking a consul for a couple minutes, so hid my block log entry from the consul's block log, but they said not to worry about it and that it's better to keep log actions unhidden. So not sure if you maybe want, perhaps as a rest of undoing the revision deletion, to unhide the "username hidden" and "edit summary hidden" actions? Up to you, though, as I say, it was a test block on yourself and you're not hiding the log action itself.

Dmehus (talk) 21:11, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: Yeah, I didn't know that text was in the interface either. The way this works is by placing a partial block that does nothing - i.e. no actions are set to be blocked, not even editing. As for why I revision deleted, was just somewhat dicking around, but I could see how that would be confusing as it could be confused with a real block. I will undelete that revision now Naleksuh (talk) 21:40, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
@Naleksuh: So basically, you show as being partially blocked, but because nothing was selected, all you got out out of it was a block log entry? Interesting. Anyway, revision deletion is a powerful tool. We have Revision deletion test where you can create revisions, hide them, and the like. No need to undo the revision deletions on that page, since it's specially earmarked for that purpose (though if revision deleting a log entry for a revision deletion, I'd still undo that). Let me know if you'd like to play around as a bureaucrat and I'll grant that. Dmehus (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dmehus: Ten edits are required for bureaucrat, but it would be interesting for sure once I have met them. The idea of a public test wiki instead of each user creating their own is chaotic as hell for sure, but also part of fun and allows users to help (for whatever reason, dicking around here is a lot more fun than on localhost). Hope to learn policies, interact with the community, help others, and possibly become consul one day! Naleksuh (talk) 22:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
@Naleksuh: You're half way there on Public Test Wiki in terms of edits, but you have been an administrator for at least 24 hours. More importantly, though, you're fairly active on Meta and you have your own wiki, so you are trustworthy. Dmehus (talk) 22:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 Done. If you are interested in helping out on Public Test Wiki and aren't sure if it's something that you should change, I'd recommend running it by any consul to see if there's support for the idea. Now that you are a bureaucrat, you can assist at RfP by actioning permissions' requests. Dmehus (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Useful user scripts I'm using on Miraheze[edit]

Hi Naleksuh,

Thanks for approving that user's administrator request. I noted you included the permanent link to the revision. Though not required here, I do try to do that also when I remember as it's a good practice. Not sure if you have this script installed, or if you're using a different script, but I've been using DannyS712's permaLinkSection. If you check out my global.js, you can see which user scripts I've tested and confirmed as having worked without issues on Miraheze. Feel free to copy the code into your global.js file if you wish. Easy Link, in particular, is especially useful for creating wikilinks without page-stretching underscores. I'm waiting to hear back from Enterprisey on what fix he recommends to his links-in-logs user script, which will be super handy. For now, what I am doing to get logids is, check the "change visibility of selected revision(s)" box, and then it shows the selected logids in the URL address bar. Do you know of a simpler method, or is that what you do as well?

Dmehus (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: Thanks for offer, but am interested in such scripts at time. Is useful information though! :) Naleksuh (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Protection removal of User:Killarnee[edit]

Hi Naleksuh,

I noticed this log action you made in which you, logically and in good-faith, removed the page protection of User:Killarnee; however, the user has only had their bureaucrat user group removed by a consul. I wondered if the protection was required, but it was in their own userspace and we do have former administrators who have base user pages protected at administrator. Ideally, like you, I would love to remove the page protection from those pages, so that's why I've been trying to ensure user pages are protected at a level no higher than administrator.

So, unless Killarnee has made a request for their page protection to be removed, I do think you should reinstate it.

Dmehus (talk) 14:08, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dmehus: Ah I see. I was not aware that they still had administrator so I thought that the page was now protected at a a level they couldn't edit. In that case, I probably should not have removed it, but wouldn't reinstate it either, as they can simply re-protect it at administrator level if they desire. I would disagree with blanket removals though. Users may want their page protected at a higher level though, since its so easy to get administrator on this wiki. Naleksuh (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
@Naleksuh: Thanks for your reply and clarification. Protection likely isn't needed here, but I'm going to re-protect it (call it a procedural re-protection) on the basis that they never asked for it to be removed and to clarify the details in their protection page log. As to the other point, well, Bureaucrat is generally given out fairly liberally as well, provided the user has shown they can be trusted (principally, through their edits and tests as an administrator and/or through other methods). I generally think that most userspace page protections are unnecessary, personally, unless there's been a recent habit of other users mucking about with editing other users' base userpage. Dmehus (talk) 20:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry to make you misunderstand[edit]

I should have written to clear the sandbox.-- (talk) 04:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC)