Talk:Global sysops: Difference between revisions
Praxidicae (talk | contribs) →Actions by Praxidicae: Reply |
→Actions by Praxidicae: Reply |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
:I've already explained why I blocked them - I'll gladly change the reason to "spammer" as spambot is just an automated edit summary. They have only contributed copyright violations and SEO spam (which they are '''paid''' to insert cross wiki, to the tune of hundreds of edits). Which has also resulted in their URLs being blacklisted. If any functionary/steward would like, I'll also gladly send the off (and even on-wiki evidence, where Baranov admits on my meta talk page that they were abusing their editing rights) wiki evidence if needed. The only outcome here should be a global lock for Baranov's account. [[User:Praxidicae|Praxidicae]] ([[User talk:Praxidicae|talk]]) 13:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC) |
:I've already explained why I blocked them - I'll gladly change the reason to "spammer" as spambot is just an automated edit summary. They have only contributed copyright violations and SEO spam (which they are '''paid''' to insert cross wiki, to the tune of hundreds of edits). Which has also resulted in their URLs being blacklisted. If any functionary/steward would like, I'll also gladly send the off (and even on-wiki evidence, where Baranov admits on my meta talk page that they were abusing their editing rights) wiki evidence if needed. The only outcome here should be a global lock for Baranov's account. [[User:Praxidicae|Praxidicae]] ([[User talk:Praxidicae|talk]]) 13:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
:[[User:Renvoy|Renvoy]], thank you for your concern in this case. It's difficult when people, especially longer-term editors, mix good contributions in with policy-violating ones. The prevailing goal here is certainly to prevent ongoing abuse of Wikimedia projects, and if this user continues with their cross-wiki link spam a lock would likely be necessary independent of the positive contributions. [[User:Vermont|Vermont 🐿️]] ([[User talk:Vermont|talk]]) 18:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 18:22, 12 September 2022
 | For requesting global sysop action, see Global sysops/Requests or Steward requests/Miscellaneous. |
Actions by Praxidicae
Hi all! First of all, I am not pleased that this situation got to the stage when stewards need to be involved but I am left with no choice, so I ask stewards to look into following set of events. Being admin on ukwikibooks I descovered that User:Baranov107 was baned indefinitely by global sysop Praxidicae with rationale "Spambot". Straightaway I thought that it looks weird because 1) user certainly does not look like a bot 2) two years ago user had decent contribution uk:b:Гітара (which involved link to other website but it was not off). Later I dicovered that user was banned on all small wiki projects. In conversation with global sysop I discovered that reason for ban were spam contributions to OTHER projects. These edits indeed look spammy but I do not see clear reason for bans on small wiki projects. On ukwiki, user also had some not bad contributions. I understand that at least some of edits were definiely spam, such bans on small wikis seems to me as rushed decision, better to be held by local admins, who understand language. I ask stewards to give their opinion on this situation. reNVoy (user talk) 13:35, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've already explained why I blocked them - I'll gladly change the reason to "spammer" as spambot is just an automated edit summary. They have only contributed copyright violations and SEO spam (which they are paid to insert cross wiki, to the tune of hundreds of edits). Which has also resulted in their URLs being blacklisted. If any functionary/steward would like, I'll also gladly send the off (and even on-wiki evidence, where Baranov admits on my meta talk page that they were abusing their editing rights) wiki evidence if needed. The only outcome here should be a global lock for Baranov's account. Praxidicae (talk) 13:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- Renvoy, thank you for your concern in this case. It's difficult when people, especially longer-term editors, mix good contributions in with policy-violating ones. The prevailing goal here is certainly to prevent ongoing abuse of Wikimedia projects, and if this user continues with their cross-wiki link spam a lock would likely be necessary independent of the positive contributions. Vermont 🐿️ (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)