Wikidata

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/CheckUser/Sotiale

< Wikidata:Requests for permissions‎ | CheckUser

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed as successful--Ymblanter (talk) 08:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sotiale edit

Vote
RfP scheduled to end at 26 April 2020 01:00 (UTC)

Hello, colleagues! I would like to apply for CheckUsership. Some of you might be wondering why Wikidata needs CheckUsers. Wikidata is a global project that has served as link between Wikimedia projects and has continued to grow. In the meantime, the number of sockpuppetry cases is increasing and the need for CheckUsers is also increasing.

In dealing with LTA cases, I find cases involving Wikidata, which are often used to insert fake information or spamming. These users use multiple accounts at the same time or create accounts in advance and use them whenever necessary. In this case, if there is CheckUser, it is possible to respond appropriately. This is because I can check their simultaneous active accounts or pre-created accounts. In addition, it is clear that it will help to catch active malicious sockpuppetry on Wikidata. Of course, all of these actions are subject to Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy and will be conducted in accordance with Wikidata community's established procedures. The use of CheckUser will be limited to what is clearly necessary to prevent malicious behavior.

I'm a steward, and stewards can do checkuser if necessary. However, because I have been a sysop on Wikidata since 2013, I can't use this tool to avoid COI. So in these cases, I have to delay processing or find another way. Because some manual spammers are found after 3 months, there is a limit to checking information through loginwiki. As long as they are active on Wikidata, there is no other suitable way other than checkusering on Wikidata. I think that if I can use CheckUser on Wikidata, I will be able to deal more effectively with users who have long-term activities and abuse on Wikidata.

Because I have been a CheckUser on kowiki since 2013, I have 6+ years of experience. Also, I have been identified to the foundation since 2013. And as you can see here, I've been checkusering through loginwiki to stop spambots and LTAs. I believe that with Jasper, who has considerable experience with LTA and spam, we can contribute to stopping the malicious users who are acting deftly on Wikidata. I am located in the UTC+9 timezone, and Jasper is located in UTC-7 or UTC-8 timezone, so I think each other will be able to fill timezones enough without much space.

If you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them. Thank you and I hope you stay safe. --Sotiale (talk) 01:00, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Votes edit

  1.  Support You were voted your way to stewardship with flying colors; I see no reason why this should end up differently. Mahir256 (talk) 01:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  2.  Strong support you are a trusted sysop here, with a valid need for this right, trustworthy enough and additionally have prior experience at kowiki. Happy to see you finally doing it. --Kostas20142 (talk) 01:17, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Support Sure there is a need and I trust Sotiale with the right. On a side note, although previously we could ask stewards for checks but having local CUs for such big project gonna be more helpful. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  4.  Support Already trusted with the steward right and across different wikis. --Rschen7754 04:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  5.  Oppose user isn't particularly active on Wikidata (to find the 7th most recent item they created, one has to look in 2013). Hat collection should be discouraged. --- Jura 05:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is disappointing that you are mentioning hat collecting (to a steward.. really?) instead of appreciating the commitment and additional responsibility that Sotiale is offering to take on. ~riley (talk) 07:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Somehow I fail to see active commitment in 7 contributions since 2013. I think community roles should be held by active contributors of the Wikidata community. Alternatively, we could just ask WMF to take this on. --- Jura 10:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't know since when user activity is decided by just alone item creation. To me these stats shows enough activity. Items these days are most created by automated scripts or bot and as a "not much of technical" user myself I can understand why some people choose more general editing approach than item creation. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's for each of us to decide what these criteria are when supporting or opposing such requests.
            In theory, we could have admins or CU who aren't active on Wikidata at all. For CU, this could even be WMF staff. If we consider this should be a community role, I think it should be an active Wikidata contributor. It can be counterproductive, if we had users doing admin tasks where it's unclear if they actually know how to contribute, especially as it can involve explaining to contributors how they should contribute. It could even be bit creepy, if they had gained that level of access through support of otherwise inactive users. Are there such wikis?
            At some point, it's just not possible to contribute actively without creating items, doing that with a script or not. If all item creations are either in 2003 or yesterday/today, to me, it's a clear sign that the user's commitment is too limited.
            The user's more general level of activity might even suggest that the user (who was granted adminship on project creation - is that without any prior activity?), merely maintained a minimum level of activity in order not expire their admin rights. I wonder what percentage of the edits are actually remote edits replicated from another wiki.
            Obviously, it would be good to have more active contributors with knowledge of Korean .. personally, I think it just takes a disproportionate amount of time if look into them or of I have to explain it to an admin with none either. --- Jura 17:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  Support - Nikki (talk) 05:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  7.  Support - experienced in the use of tools and active in the areas where the tools are needed. Possibly the best candidate in the current situation with prior experience somewhere else.-BRP ever 06:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8.  Support - Sotiale is the best candidate for this both as a steward and experienced checkuser. I have no concerns for their local activity on Wikidata considering their global activity; it is quite clear that he will handle any requests brought forward. As Wikidata grows, Sotiale will be able to mentor and train up future checkusers. ~riley (talk) 07:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  9.  Support A steward who already have access to the tool here is someone that can easily give my support to. Friendly and approachable and able to share CU information to the extent which admins can do meaningful job with while not violating the CU policy of non-disclosure is admirable. He is also very responsive to CU requests on SRCU, the meta page for wikidata CU also. I am glad to see him volunteering. As of hat-collecting, this is just an extension to their original access (albeit in an emergency as stewards policy prohibit local usage on homewikis) and they can don't ask for local access and do the same thing, it's not additional rights to them but additional work (as they are now doing wikidata CUs rather than the rest of the stewards). Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Why not. — regards, Revi 12:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  Support per Access to CheckUser, and must trusted contributor. Thank you for your work and best wish for CheckUser holding on Wikidata. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 14:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  12.  Neutral; the candidate is fit for this position, but I do not see the need for local checkusers —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  13.  Support. Sotiale seems reasonably qualified. Hiàn (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. Stryn (talk) 06:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  15.  Oppose Their real interest in Wikidata is too recent (see Wikiscan with barely any activity in 6 years, their blank talk page, ...). — Envlh (talk) 08:05, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  16.  Support I trust all three of you. --Wolverène (talk) 10:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  17.  Support Competent and trusted, I don't see why not. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 16:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Support We do need local checkusers given growing vandalism here and a few evidently persistent members of that group, thanks for trying to get this started. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  19.  Support Trusted user. Esteban16 (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  20. I understand the concerns raised; I am confident, and I always see Sotiale is the one who best active to solving the queries over IRC. Activity shouldn't be the barrier to trustworthy users from accessing tools. Though activity seems very fine for me while the candidate is a steward. I  stand by him. Thank you for volunteering! Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat [ contribs | talk ] 01:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  21.  Support Trusted user, experienced, a recently-elected steward, and a long history on Wikidata. No issues. Vermont (talk) 02:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  Support Nice to finally have some local candidates! -- Ajraddatz (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  23.  Support No issues. ミラP 14:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  24.  Support Considering that many LTAs converge here to create spam items, etc, and Sotiale is a trusted user with CU access on ko.wiki. Minorax (talk) 08:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  25.  Support Trusted user --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:14, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  26.  Support. Trusted and experienced user. No concerns. —Hasley 22:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  27.  Support - Trusted and competent user with the experience of using the tool. I'm familiar with their cross-wiki work as a steward (on meta) and I'm sure that they will be of help. I agree with others that Wikidata needs a local CU team (it's a mother project and many LTAs and spammers use it for spamming, I'm personally familiar with some of them and I feel the need for a CU team). Thanks for offering to help. Ahmadtalk 01:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  28.  Support No concerns. -- CptViraj (📧) 09:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  29.  Support Sotiale highly involved on CU stuff, so will be too helpful as local WD CU --Alaa :)..! 07:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  30.  Support steward, trusted, knows how to use the tool, etc --DannyS712 (talk) 07:59, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  31.  Support--MichelBakni (talk) 08:10, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  32.  Support--Pasleim (talk) 08:26, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  33.  Support--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  34.  Support--باسم (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  35.  Support. To stop (for example) spammers, local CUs will be a huge help in my opinion. Thanks for volunteering! Bencemac (talk) 17:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  36.  Support TonyBallioni (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  37.  Support clearly has skills and trusted, and the community does need checkusers  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  38.  Support Mz7 (talk) 06:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  39. SupportI know he has less activity, however He is highly skilled and trusted in checkuser rights.--*Youngjin (talk) 07:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

  • Long term abuse. Stryn (talk) 08:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the question. As Stryn already explained, LTA stands for ‘Long-term abuse’. The simplest example is, after certain users are blocked because of advertising and promotion only, they register other accounts to advertise and promote. They continue to do this to achieve their goals, and to avoid blocking. Common cases are certain users who consistently make items about people who are not notable. They sometimes create pages in several Wikiprojects and then link these pages in Wikidata. --Sotiale (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's hard to predict exactly how many users will be appropriate. WD has never operated local CheckUser yet. The burden varies widely, especially depending on how community design local CheckUser policy. But in my opinion, we need at least three users for normal operation. I think the most appropriate number of users will be known when the community actually runs it. --Sotiale (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/CheckUser/Sotiale&oldid=1175810470"