Մասնակցի քննարկում:Styyx

Block

Azniv Stepanian, would you care enough to actually provide a reason for the block? An IP blanked Վաղարշ Ա. in 2021, I reverted it now to the version edited by you, you revert me without giving a reason, put the deletion tag back, and block me without a warning. If you really want the page deleted, you can do it yourself, without the tag. Styyx (քննարկում) 13:24, 8 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

Azniv Stepanian, HoMen, ShahenWasHere, Սեւան Դանիէլեան Մկրեան: anyone who can give a reason for the block? Styyx (քննարկում) 10:59, 9 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

• Azniv Stepanian, I'm starting to get it. The pages I deleted a few days back we're restored by you due to "vandalism". Those were redirects that were created after a page move, and Kareyac tagged them for deletion, almost three years ago. I deleted them after they were brought to my attention since those are uncontroversial deletions. That's, however, not "vandalism". I'm sorry that you don't know how the deletion process works on Wikipedia. Would you be so kind to reverse your action, and maybe also revert actual vandalism? Styyx (քննարկում) 19:57, 9 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  User:Styyx, I'm Azniv, one of the co-founders of Western Armenian Wiki and I've been an admin for years.

  I was very shocked to find out that some that some articles were deleted. Wikipedia is a platform run by communities and groups of decision-makers who discuss and resolve issues together.

  Furthermore, when they deleted, no reason for deletion was given. We have now configured that it may have been because two similar articles had to be merged, but the request could’ve instead been a merging request instead of an unexplained deletion request that was later carried out under global sysop jurisdiction.

  Please let us know what we can do to further explain our position. All inputs and contributions are valuable on Wikipedia, and we’d love to know what you think should be the steps moving forward.

  Best, Azniv Stepanian (քննարկում) 11:46, 12 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Hi Azniv Stepanian, thanks for responding. Those weren't articles, they were redirects. As I said, these have had the deletion tag for years now, so I don't think much discussion is happening. I also did provide a reason for all of the deleted redirects, for example see here. If you don't want me to delete pages here anymore, you could've left me a message before taking such a drastic action as an indefinite block. If you don't want any global sysops whatsoever, you can start a discussion at Ուիքիփետիա:Զրուցարան to opt-out from global sysops. Styyx (քննարկում) 11:54, 12 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Also I still don't understand the blanking at Վաղարշ Ա. Styyx (քննարկում) 11:55, 12 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Hi Azniv Stepanian, I noticed this discussion just by chance! I understand that these actions have caused problems for the local community, and I'm sorry for that. Personally I don't think an infinite block solves the problem though. Precisely because "Wikipedia is a platform run by communities and groups of decision-makers who discuss and resolve issues together" (I quote your words) I believe that in front of similar problems it'd be enough to discuss them. Styyx is definitely not a vandal, and they intervened here because the redirects were tagged for deletion for some time. I personally find blocking exaggerated and I think you've several solutions if you have problems with global sysops:

  1) Create a local policy that limits the global sysops to do certain actions (for example, it's just an example, you can say that pages that aren't vandalism cannot be deleted - such as empty pages, redirect, template, modules, and so on - or to permit only GS who know the language well to delete them) and indicate the policy to any of us so that it is added in the list of local policies on the global sysops policy;

  2) Ask for an opt-out (so that global sysops can't intervene at all);

  
  

  For both you need a local consensus after discussion and personally I advise against 2, because if there is a period of local sysops inactivity, there is the risk that you will suffer vandalism and spambots without anyone being able to intervene (see recent changes in projects like dkwikimedia where, without global sysops, spam would be unmanageable). But I don't want to force any choice, you are also free to opt-out, and then opt-in again when you want.

  
  

  I don't like the fact that as soon as a global sysop intervenes, they're blocked without warnings, this creates a fundamental problem: no global sysop would be able to do their job peacefully knowing that in the face of an error they would be blocked. I understand the annoyance caused to the community but the GSs should also be able to work without the fear of a block.

  
  

  If you believe that there has been abuse by a global sysop (obviously this is not the case at all imho), as global sysops policy states, you can ask the stewards for a deflag or open a global request for comments on meta-wiki. So in the end I kindly ask you to evaluate the unblock for what I wrote above. imho it's really exaggerated and it doesn't solve anything from a collaborative point of view.

  
  

  Styyx, I'd like to make a small note for you. GS's work is very delicate and also very beautiful, we interface with communities that sometimes have difficulties and sometimes don't have the tools to face them. In other cases we interface with very small communities that live peacefully and manage themselves, and an external intervention can cause problems. If you notice that there are active sysops and pages to be deleted that are not clear vandalism, I advise you for the future to ask the local sysops or the community first to delete them (I often do this), especially if you don't know the language. For example - I mention your protections on itwikiversity - try to always be limited when using the tools, reasoning on the fact that you are not an active user of those projects and there will be other users after you who need to work there. You should take the best action to solve live vandalism/spam or do maintenance without taking action that could cause problems for the local community in the future. We should cooperate with the communities (understanding that they always decide and we don't decide anything) and we should appear not as intruders, but as a group that wants to solve problems and help solve difficulties, because that's what we actually do. I specific that it's a mere note and not a criticism, indeed your work is always well appreciated and I'm happy to see you in the GS team, having a great respect for you :)

  
  

  Wish you both the best :) Superpes15 (քննարկում) 09:57, 14 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Forgot to ping other sysops for knowledge and to ask for their opinions (Սեւան Դանիէլեան Մկրեան - HoMen - ShahenWasHere). Sorry. --Superpes15 (քննարկում) 17:55, 14 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Hi Superpes15, I unblocked the user Styyx․ Soon our community, I, and the administrators will try to create our local policy that will be clear for global sysops, which will clear the fog to prevent future similar incidents. Azniv Stepanian (քննարկում) 09:06, 24 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

  Hi Azniv Stepanian and thanks for your reply. Styyx hadn't done anything abusive so this is the right choice imho. About the policy, feel free to ping me when you're discussing or after the approval, I'd suggest not to opt-out since the community is not very big and GSs's help can be useful. You can look at some examples of local policies, about the global rights, here (or at this example of local policy about GS). Also, I recommend to read the global policy, which already provides several restrictions on the use of GS flags in local projects! Best regards Superpes15 (քննարկում) 10:44, 24 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)

• Azniv Stepanian, will you respond without a steward pressuring you again or? Styyx (քննարկում) 20:37, 23 Յունուար 2023 (UTC)