User talk:MarcoAurelio: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 03:07, 18 May 2024

MarcoAurelio is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Meta soon.

Please write your messages at the bottom of the page, use descriptive section titles and don't forget to sign your posts adding --~~~~ at the end of your comment. I will answer all messages left to me in this talk page so the conversations are not fragmented. Some additional notes:

I am a human and I can make mistakes. If you think I did something wrong, please tell me and we will discuss and review the situation.
- That said, communication is a two-way street, and good communication requires civility.
- As such, I reserve the right to remove, archive, ignore or leave unreplied messages addressed to me or left on this talk page which are insulting, provocative, disruptive or otherwise not helpful, at my own discretion.
Requests to add or remove domains to the spam blacklist should be addressed at Talk:Spam blacklist.
Requests for help from an administrator or bureaucrat should be addressed to Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat for wider attention.
Requests for CheckUser information for Meta-Wiki should be posted at Meta:Requests for CheckUser information.
Please see Meta:Oversighters for how to request permanent removal of content from this project. Please do not make your request in public. Use this form instead.
Requests for CentralNotice banners and campaigns are only addressed at CentralNotice/Requests.
I do not do dispute resolution. Please do not ask me to mediate between editors or resolve conflicts between them.
Older discussions on this page are kept in the archive.

Start a new section

Cross-wiki requests
CheckUser information Global blocks/locks Permissions (global) Permissions (bot) Permissions (other) Username changes/ usurpation requests Miscellaneous requests URL blacklisting Title/username blacklisting Email blacklisting
Meta-Wiki requests
CheckUser information Deletion Permissions Requests for help

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 15 days.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOINDEX__{{/Header}}
 {{Autoarchive resolved section | age = 0 | archive = '((FULLPAGENAME))/Archives/((year))' | timeout = 15 | show = yes}}
-== Request ==
-Hi @[[User:MarcoAurelio|MarcoAurelio]], could you grant autopatrolled to {{u|Owais Al Qarni}} so that I don't have to keep patrolling his edits made on [[Deoband Community Wikimedia/Proposals/February-July 2023]]. Regards, ─ [[User:TheAafi|<span style="color:SteelBlue">The Aafī</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:TheAafi|<span style="color:#80A0FF"><sup>(talk)</sup></span>]]</sup> 13:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
-:@[[User:TheAafi|TheAafi]]: Done, best regards. &mdash;[[User:MarcoAurelio|MarcoAurelio]] ([[User talk:MarcoAurelio|talk]]) 09:30, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
-== Withdraw your "[[Meta talk:Administrators/Removal (inactivity)#Amendment proposal (April 2023)|Amendment proposal (April 2023)]]" or not? ==
-This section:
-#isn't located within [[Meta:RFC]] which doesn't look like formal, so that many people don't know what you proposed
-#Currently got 5 support and 5 oppose votes, they don't seem to have any consensus reached
-#Affects only one small part of the currently [[Meta:Administrators#Policy for de-adminship|look-bad policy section]] (as far as I know, I was proposed a larger modification, but you opposed and hence "no consensus")
-In any cases, discussing modification to a policy only at talk page is realllll(65535*l)ly a bad idea, and such actions shall be dropped in the future. From my view, it's recommend to start a new Meta:RFC to discuss larger-and-larger modifications of that policy section. [[User:Liuxinyu970226|Liuxinyu970226]] ([[User talk:Liuxinyu970226|talk]]) 03:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
-:Sorry, but where is the need to write such a condescending comment? Policy changes have always been discussed on policy talk pages. There is no need to always exaggerate things by saying "there needs to be a formal RFC". The proposed change is indeed a minor modification, and not about completely changing the way we choose administrators. Also, why should MA withdraw his proposal just because it didn't get overwhelming support? This seems to be somewhat of a fashion nowadays (to open a big RFC, get some opposes and then retract everything just to make even more proposals), but it doesn't mean that it's a good practice. --<small>[[User:MF-Warburg|MF-W]]</small> 08:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
-::+1, relatively minor policy changes don't need a RFC. Some examples for successful talk page proposals [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta_talk:Interface_administrators][https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2018#SNOW_closures]. [[User:Johannnes89|Johannnes89]] ([[User talk:Johannnes89|talk]]) 08:42, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
-:::Thank you @[[User:MF-Warburg|MF-Warburg]] and @[[User:Johannnes89|Johannnes89]] for your input. I must say, I am sadly not surprised by this misguided provocation from @[[User:Liuxinyu970226|Liuxinyu970226]], given his most recent actions and behaviour. See e.g. [[Meta_talk:Administrators/Removal_(inactivity)#c-Liuxinyu970226-20230528223400-MarcoAurelio-20230411100900|his comments and later replies]] at that very proposal, or {{section link|Meta:Babel|Template:Proposed logo}} ([[Special:Permalink/25255723#Template:Proposed logo|permalink]]) where he's making random, unhepful comments about the matter. Or [[Meta:Requests for CheckUser information/Archives/2023]] where he goes on accusing a number of users of violating a WMF Ban. It's absolutely ludicrous that he affirms that "many people don't know what [I] proposed" when he seems to be the one clearly not understanding. I've been trying to assume good faith, but this is starting to wear thin.
-:::To answer the above:
-:::* Proposal: No, I am not withdrawing my proposal. I remain convinced that giving 7 days of notice is too few and leads to unfair removals. This is a serious, valid and legitimate reason, specially since as a bureaucrat myself I am tasked with enforcing said policy. If the community feels otherwise, that's absolutely fine. People is free to propose any period they feel appropriate if they want a change, or oppose if they want to keep 7 days.
-:::* RFC: Meta-Wiki policies have been amended through talk page discussions for as long as I remember (see [[Special:Permalink/24809501#Amendment proposal: inactivity review procedure|one of the latest proposals]]), so long they are duly advertised, as has been the case here. In addition:
-:::** i) This is not either an "issue of wider significance", as stated on that very page
-:::** ii) I am very well aware of [[Meta:Requests for comment]] considering that [[Special:Diff/10881890/prev|I did create the local process myself]].
-:::** iii) The proposal is all the serious it can be. People seem to be very well aware of what's being discussed there, and has been duly advertised ([[Meta:Babel/Archives/2023-04#Proposed amendment to the Meta inactivity policy|archived notice]], [[Template:Maintenance announcements|active notice]]).
-:::* Votes: consensus is not a matter of simply counting votes, and it's not up to me to close the proposal anyway.
-:::* Your third point makes no sense and fully invalidates your "complaint". If you say my proposal "affects only one small part" of the policy, then it's not an issue of wider significance what would require an RFC.
-:::As others have told you already, please try to familiarise yourself with Meta-Wiki policy and governance before trying to lecture others about it. &mdash;[[User:MarcoAurelio|MarcoAurelio]] ([[User talk:MarcoAurelio|talk]]) 18:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)