User talk:TrustedInstaller

Add topic
From TestWiki
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Kiko4564 in topic Reblocked

Rights revoked[edit]

Hi TrustedInstaller,

Sadly, I have had to revoke your administrator testing user group right as your first action (aside from a test block of the Google Public DNS server IP address) was to undo @Naleksuh:'s block of a long-term abuse IP address, as you did with this log action.

It will not be reinstated, until you can satisfy, to Naleksuh's and my satisfaction, of your valid reason for unblocking that recently blocked IP address.

Dmehus (talk) 00:53, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dmehus: Hello, that IP was open on port 8080 proof. is now closed. Therefore it is impossible for the LTA to connect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrustedInstaller (talkcontribs)
I don't see any evidence that the proxy is closed. Either way, undoing an lta block only four minutes after gaining admin rights is a very bold action. Naleksuh (talk) 01:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have tried to connect and it is indeed closed. TrustedInstaller (talk) 01:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflict) I concur with @Naleksuh: completely. Moreover, as you explained in requesting testing rights, you wanted to test the MediaWiki interface, which this certainly wasn't that. Dmehus (talk) 01:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alright, sorry. But I can guarantee you there is no open proxy on that IP anymore. TrustedInstaller (talk) 01:07, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Still, I'm inclined to think it's best for you to take a brief pause before rerequesting administrator rights (at least two weeks). Dmehus (talk) 01:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was blocked for long term abuse, not blocked solely for being a proxy and nothing else, meaning that unblocking for the proxy being closed is not okay. I would be willing to re-grant administrator in two weeks per rope as long as it is used properly this time, but would avoid granting bureaucrat for a while. Naleksuh (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alright. Re request in 2 weeks. TrustedInstaller (talk) 01:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Concur completely. Bureaucrat should require a Consul to grant, given the level of trust required for that role. @TrustedInstaller:, you can re-apply at TestWiki:Request permissions for administrator on or after 20 August 2020. Dmehus (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've just seen this and TI is right here. A 6 month block would not have been appropriate had it not been an open proxy. That situation does seem to be resolved bar some blacklists caching it. Revoking sysop rights for unblocking someone when the situation is resolved is not an appropriate reason to revoke. If TrustedInstaller wishes to gain his rights back, I see no reason why not. The only thing I'm wondering is how he knew to go straight for that block to remove. RhinosF1 (talk) 07:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To add to my discussion on Discord, my reason for revoking the rights wasn't simply because TrustedInstaller unblocked an IP address, but it was the fact that he focused on that particular IP address used, presumably, by an LTA that Naleksuh monitors over on the Wikimedia projects or other wikis. Perhaps I should've questioned the original block of the IP, but it seemed consistent the block length used by stewards when blocking anonymous users for LTA and related issues, so simply opted to defer to you on that when you reviewed the block logs for TestWiki. Because of that, I was concerned that TrustedInstaller may continue with unblocking further LTAs, so removed the rights, at least in the short-term, in order for the user to provide a satisfactory explanation for the removal of that block and also why one of the user's first actions was to unblock that IP address, which didn't jive with the reason for requesting rights (i.e., "to test the MediaWiki interface") at TestWiki:Request permissions. I agree, though, I should've been more direct with TrustedInstaller in, and better articulated, my concerns. In fairness, I did hesitate on placing a two-week moratorium for re-requesting administrator, but since you're satisfied, I see no problem with TrustedInstaller re-requesting that right immediately, with either a strong recommendation that they test the other administrator tools (since they seem to be familiar with blocking/unblocking IP addresses). Dmehus (talk) 14:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preferred test namespaces, cleaning up after/reverting test edits, and RedWarn for testing outside of English Wikipedia[edit]

Hi TrustedInstaller,

It is good to see that you are making good use of the administrator tools; however, as part of my daily review of the public logs and recent contributions, I noted several items, neither of which are particularly problematic but nonetheless provide useful points to note for the future, so as to avoid potential future problems. I've listed them below, in unordered bullet point form.

  • Preferred test namespaces. I noticed your creation, protection, and subsequent deletion of a test page in project namespace that began with this log action. As noted by the new page notice in project namespace, TestWiki: namespace is primarily used for non-test pages, whether categorized in that category or not, related to the Public Test Wiki project. You are; however, free to test in most other namespaces, though Main: and User: are probably the most common testing namespaces.
  • Cleaning up after and/or reverting test edits. Per this section of our testing policy, please try and ensure that you always revert every test action you make. While you did delete the TestWiki:Example page after creating it, I noted in one of the intervening edits when you protected the page, you didn't unprotect it. This isn't necessarily a problem, per se, in that deleted pages with outstanding page protections don't show up in Special:ProtectedPages, so it's not essential or anything that you restore the page temporarily to unprotect it (though you certainly can, if you want), it is a really good best practice to remove page protection prior to deleting it.
  • Using RedWarn for testing outside of English Wikipedia. I noticed this edit of your planned usage of the English Wikipedia vandalism reverting tool RedWarn, so it piqued my interest to see if RedWarn was now available on wikis outside of English Wikipedia now. Sadly, it doesn't seem to be yet. (I also quickly checked the companion talk page on English Wikipedia.) So, I just thought I'd send you this friendly note before attempting to edit, as I know the RedWarn developers do caution strongly against attempting to use the unmodified, imported script on other wikis.

Anyway, that's all I had for now, and I hope you find these tips helpful for the future in making the most out of Public Test Wiki. :)

Dmehus (talk) 18:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blocking users based on the abuse filter[edit]

Hi TrustedInstaller,

While I noted that you haven't acknowledged my guidance notes in the above section, to ensure that you've acknowledged them, since two-way communication is so essential here, I did note your recent block of AurelioCottle based on their locally triggering global abuse filter 18. While this block is fine since it's so obviously a spam-only account, I just thought I should advise you that we have a global team of Global Sysops and stewards that generally take care of the obvious spam-only account global blocks and locks, to reduce the need for redundant local blocks on multiple wikis.

As well, since the user was prevented by this global abuse filter from inserting patently obvious spam onto any page on this wiki, the abuse filter did its job. It is good that you are alert and attentive to these things, but I also just wanted to make sure that you have been advised to be very cautious when blocking users based strictly on the abuse filters.

Thanks for your understanding and attention to this guidance.

Dmehus (talk) 18:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Communication is required[edit]

Hi again TrustedInstaller,

Noting further local block of a spam-only account, in this log action, by way of a reply to this discussion thread, please confirm that you have acknowledged the guidance notes in the above two sections, since two-way communication is required.

Dmehus (talk) 19:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indeed, I did block a spam-only account. I used the appropriate block message and there is nothing wrong with locally blocking a spam-only account. TrustedInstaller (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TrustedInstaller: Yes, I'm not saying there's anything necessarily wrong with it, other than it does create needless local clutter in the blocked users list. We do have User:Example and User:Example2 that can be blocked and unblocked freely. Dmehus (talk) 19:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Final Warning[edit]

Hi TrustedInstaller,

Over the course of the past hour, you've managed to import nearly 700 templates from English Wikipedia, mainly relating to public IP address block templates and various Wikipedia-specific infoboxes. You've not yet deleted each of those added templates, for which you've previously been warned above ensuring you clean up after yourself.

I would strongly urge you to explain, in detail, your purpose for using Public Test Wiki because, right now, all I have seen is a combination of disruptive editing and behaviour and a general lack of collegiality toward your fellow administrators, as demonstrated by your responses above.

So, this is your final warning that if you breach any of our policies, including unwritten customs and conventions, for which you're encouraged to proactively reach out to any Consul or Bureaucrat where you are unsure if something is permitted here, or anything which has been previously addressed to you above, your rights will be revoked for a period to be determined by any Consul.

Dmehus (talk) 14:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rights revoked[edit]

Hi TrustedInstaller,

As a Consul action, I have revoked your administrator permissions indefinitely, mainly as a result of your complete failure to communicate and demonstrate that you are understanding the concerns expressed to you. In addition, your attempt to import more useless Wikipedia templates again was in breach of your final warning.

As this is technically an indefinite restriction imposed by a local Consul, you are also reminded of our global policy, user accounts policy, with respect to using multiple accounts to evade scrutiny or otherwise attempt to circumvent locally or globally, as applicable, imposed restrictions.

Kindly govern yourself accordingly.

Dmehus (talk) 02:51, 12 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make non-destructive tests after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism, spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks, legal threats; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies will not be tolerated. You can request an unblock by placing {{Unblock|reason}} on your talkpage. Any patrolling Consul will shortly get to you.

Hi TrustedInstaller,

I have blocked you for a period of 1 week for your edit warring with a Consul by reverting, repeatedly, the Consul's good-faith reversions of your edits, and for your continued disruptive editing and for your failure to communicate.

Upon your return, your indefinite Consul-imposed editing restriction, described above, remains in full force. Additionally, if another Consul should decide to extend your sitewide temporary block, I would not be opposed.

Kind regards,
Dmehus (talk) 20:38, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You have been blocked indefinitely from editing TestWiki as a result of your disruptive edits. Please note that vandalism, spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks, legal threats; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies will not be tolerated. You can request an unblock by placing {{Unblock|reason}} on your talkpage. Any patrolling Consul will shortly get to you.

Kiko4564 (talk) 00:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]