User talk:Ugochimobi

From FAMEPedia, The free encyclopedia

Farhan Rana Rajpoot

I am very realy Respected You and FAMEpedia Team. So, I you can help me my orginal article FAMEpedia page Farhan Rana Rajpoot Please article creation no deleted please. So, myself advanced FAMEpedia article creation permission I am Famous Celebrities & Pakistani Youtuber Farhan Rana Rajpoot. Farhan Rana Rajpoot Verified (talk) 09:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Farhan Rana Rajpoot Verified: You can get your article undeleted by Requesting undeletion, request and if it should not remain deleted then it'll be undeleted.
Kind regards. Chimobi (talk) 10:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Ģ[reply]


Following a report by RhinosF1 to the Trust and Safety team regarding potential confusion of your FAMEpedia:CheckUser page, with the thesis being that since FAMEpedia has no CheckUsers, it's providing potentially confusing and false information to users. While this was not in scope of the Trust and Safety team, I did, however, and as a Steward, find that the page in question contained particularly egregious copyright violations of Wikipedia:CheckUser, as you've not provided any attribution to the source page whatsoever. While copyright violations are in scope of the Trust and Safety team, Owen has said that Trust and Safety should only be engaged in these cases where the complaint comes from one or more bonified copyright owners and there's been no attempts to remediate this in a community (whether local administrator or Steward/Global Sysop) capacity. As such, I've suppressed this page in my Steward capacity. If the page is to be recreated with proper attribution, that is fine, but speaking as a local sysop on this wiki, I'd advise against it given the potentially false, confusing, and misleading information contained therein. I'd instead suggest a soft redirect to CheckUser. Thank you Dmehus (talk) 03:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dmehus, I have made Famepedia:CheckUser a soft redirect to m:CheckUser per your good suggestion. What about De-wikipedia-fying FAMEPedia. Centering all tasks that admins can do at FAMEPedia:Administrators' noticeboard and abolishing/deleting all other pages (example FAMEPedia:Requests for permissions, FAMEPedia:Requests for undeletion and others). Because Famepedia isn't such a big wiki and all those tasks can be best handled at FP:AN. Can I create at programme at meta (like metawikimedia:Wiki Loves Women on Wikimedia meta) which will aim at de-wikipedia-fying Famepdia where willing users will take part to achieve the aim. ~ Mazzaz (talk) 10:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I am okay with the soft redirect for sure, the reason why we have those subpages are not whether FAMEPedia isn't such a big wiki as Wikipedia or the reason why Wikipedia has those extra pages isn't that the wiki is big too, It's for the sake of orderliness which extremely appropriate, Requesting a Sysop can always and forever be requested at the Administrators' noticeboard, I mean whatever the case may be, But those other pages are specified separately for their unique reasons.
Another reason I shouldn't even go with the deletion of those pages is because most of our script/gadgets are either depending on some of those pages to work, for example if a user wants to report vandalism using twinkle, it has to go in Administrators' intervention again vandalism and even Requests for Page protection using twinkle too. Deleting those pages will cause us to start redefining our gadgets, which I'm actually not ready for yet.
These are outstanding ideas that will be definitely helpful to the community you know, I would love us to move this discussion to the Village pump Ideas Laboratory, let's measure, sample, test, record and analyze this Ideas together. Chimobi (talk) 11:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would be inclined to prefer modifying the Twinkle gadget to link to fewer pages; it's rather "bloated," if you will. That said, I agree, there's not immediate urgency to mass delete the pages, but if there are further copyright violations, plans to modify Twinkle should be expedited and the pages deleted within the next 30, ideally, or, worse case, 60 days. Dmehus (talk) 02:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we reach to the conclusion to do what I said above, maybe we need to find an editor who can modify the gadgets because, sadly, I don't know anything about coding. ~ Mazzaz (talk) 09:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mazzaz, to your latter question, I'm inclined to think Miraheze Meta Wiki doesn't need a Wiki Loves Women page, so would prefer either (a) a soft redirect to the page you mentioned (from FAMEpedia, to be clear), or (b) a page on FAMEpedia, providing attribution to the source page. Dmehus (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of FAMEPedia:Bots/Requests for approval/StatsBot

The page FAMEPedia:Bots/Requests for approval/StatsBot has been speedily deleted from FAMEPedia. This was done for the following reason:

Copied from wikipedia. There is no User:StatsBot on FAMEPedia

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with FAMEPedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ~ Mazzaz (talk) 05:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]