Steward requests/Miscellaneous

← Requests and proposals

Steward requests (Miscellaneous)

Archives→

This page is for Wikimedia wikis having no active administrators. Requests can be made here for specific administrative actions (such as page deletion) to be performed by a steward or global sysop. In other cases:

• If the wiki does have active administrators, file the request with one of them.
• If the wiki has an active editor community, any potentially controversial action (deletion of actual content, edit to a protected page, renaming of a protected page, etc.) should receive consensus from the wiki community before being requested here, and a link should be provided to that consensus in the request.
• For global lock/block requests, file a request at Steward requests/Global.
• For non-controversial deletion requests such as empty page, simple spam or vandalism, and non-controversial or emergency requests to block vandals, spammers or other malicious users, you may use global sysop requests instead.
• If a consensus is considered required to act, similar principles apply as expressed at Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements, and can be used for guidance to how and what should be done at small and medium communities to gain a consensus.

To add a new request, create a new section header at the bottom of the "Manual requests" section using the format below:

=== Very brief description of request here ===
{{Status|In progress}}
Give details about your request here. --~~~~

It is helpful if you can provide a link to the wiki (or the specific page on the wiki) in question, either in the header or in the body of your request.

When reporting cross-wiki vandalism, the following template calls can be used to link to a user's contributions across all Wikimedia content wikis (these are for logged in users and non-logged-in users, respectively):

* {{sultool|Username}}

* {{luxotool|IP.address}}

Template {{LockHide}} can also be used in appropriate cases.

To request approval of OAuth consumers please use {{oauthapprequest}} (see the documentation before using).

Old requests are archived by the date of their last comment.

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

Bot-reported requests

See Global sysops/Speedy delete requests.

Manual requests

Update a common gadget

Status:    In progress

list

alswiki Done arwiki Done arwikisource Done avwiki Done azbwiki Done azwiki - [1] azwikisource - [2] banwiki Done bawiki - [3] bewiki - [4] cawiki Done cewiki Done ckbwiki Done cswiki Done cswikiversity Done dewikisource Done dewikivoyage Done dsbwiki Done elwiki Done eowiki - [5] eswikivoyage Done fiwikiquote Done frpwiki Done gagwiki Done gomwiki Done hewiki Done hiwiki Done hsbwiki - [6] (local modifications) kawiki Done kowiki Done kowikiversity Done kowiktionary Done krcwiki Done lawiki Done lezwiki - [7] lvwiki Done map-bmswiki Done mwlwiki Done nlwiki Done nlwikibooks Done nlwikiquote Done nlwikisource Done nlwikivoyage Done nlwiktionary Done orwiki Done plwiki - [8] (local) pnbwiki Done pswiki Done shnwiki Done skrwiki Done skwiki Done slwiki Done slwikiquote Done slwikisource Done srwiki Done srwiktionary Done suwiki Done tddwiki Done test2wiki Done testwiki Done tgwiki - [9] thwiki Done thwikibooks Done thwikiquote Done thwikisource Done tkwiki Done trwiki Done tumwiki Done uawikimedia - [10] udmwiki - [11] ukwiki - [12] urwiki Done wikidatawiki Done fawiki - [13] idwiki Done incubatorwiki Done ruwiki - [14] (local) eswiki - [15] viwiki Done ptwiki Done frwiki - [16] metawiki - [17] (local)

An enwiki gadget that I use was broken.[18] It has recently been fixed. There are 102 copies of this gadget at various wikis.[19] I suspect that nearly all of them need to be fixed. The canonical version at mw:Snippets/Direct imagelinks to Commons. This edit shows the changes that fixed things at enwiki. It requires an IA, so I'm bringing it here for help. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Looks like a GIE, Krinkle is already engaged on this? Krinkle, do you plan on doing others? Perhaps this should just be an import from commons? — xaosflux ^Talk 19:44, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Until issues like T197137 are improved, this is a non-starter for me as I simply don't have the time to spend two full days repeatedly re-authenticating on each of these hundred wikis separately (which in turn involves unlocking my password manager, copying 2FA over bluetooth which overwrites my clipboard, and fighting timeouts T423193). This is on top of the "real" work for this: hundred times review each wiki's version to look for any unrelated changes, replace or incorporate the latest snippet, test the current and drafted version ahead of time in safemode on a random artice on that wiki.

Last year, this would have taken two hours total, which I can do. Line them all up, batching the tests and edits, clipboard magic, multi-tasking. Now, it would take ~5min per wiki serially (instead of 1min) and thus ~10h total (instead of 2h). Krinkle (talk) 03:18, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

65 of 82 Done. There are some local versions that I marked, and some more that were based on ruwiki and I'll leave that to someone else to take care of Neriah - 💬 - 10:10, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Xaahax's articles in Sakha Wikipedia

Status:    In progress

This user in Sakha Wikipedia since 2015 made a 4716 edits in Sakha Wikipedia. Reasons to delete this pages from Sakha Wikipedia:

1. All of this edits is quoting yourself (All of this pages has a "References" and have a quotes to "Каженкин И.И." or "Xaahax" or "Уйбаан - Xaahax") - this means that these "articles" express only one opinion, a maximally subjective one, without any sources other than their own books, which is quite strange and should not be present in Wikipedia.
2. All of this pages doesn't have a categories (even after bureaucrat`s request [20]), doesn`t have any other references (again after bureaucrat`s request [21]). This user totally ignores now inactive bureaucrat and any other users ([22])
3. This user come to Wikipedia only to write this journalistic subjective articles (by the opinion of HalanTul [23]). Articles that look like wikified articles have only been wikified to some extent by other people, stub templates and categories have been added, but this does not change the essence of these articles, and this essence is not allowed in Wikipedia.

I think, all pages created by Xaahax needs to be deleted from Sakha Wikipedia. Thanks --Sauit (talk) 07:04, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Needs to say, Sakha Wikipedia now have only 1 active sysop and that's why I'm writing here Sauit (talk) 07:24, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Missing categories or templates (even missing references) don't justify deletion, that's pretty much the norm on smaller wikis (and that's how many articles on large wikis also looked like 25 years ago). But I agree many pages appear to be personal essays instead of encyclopaedic articles. I'll delete those which are clearly out of project scope. Johannnes89 (talk) 05:47, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

@Johannnes89: I've added a list of all the pages created by this user at User:DreamRimmer/RandPage. I also added excerpts and English translations if you find them useful. – DreamRimmer ■ 10:47, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Unusual editing patterns on taywiki

Status:    In progress

I would like to ask for a review of some unusual activity on the Atayal Wikipedia (taywiki). User:Font8388608 drew my attention to the matter here. Doesn't seem like an uncontroversial task for GSR, so I'm transferring this here.

The users Watan Pyasan and Sugiy-tosi frequently build pages through many consecutive edits adding only one word or a few characters at a time. Similar highly fragmented editing patterns can also be seen among several other active taywiki contributors, e.g. Sabi Nobu, Seku300228 and Reko871031. At the same time, Sugiy-tosi has been active since 2021 and has made more than 2,000 edits, so this doesn't seem highly problematic. It is difficult for users unfamiliar with Atayal and the local project to assess what exactly is happening there. Several pages appear to be coherent texts about traditional Atayal practices, but they are written more like educational or ethnographic material than conventional encyclopedia articles. The pages also frequently mix Atayal written in the Latin alphabet with Chinese translations or explanations. I don't really know if any action is needed here, but I just wanted to leave a note about it. @Font8388608: for your attention. --Icodense (talk) 20:39, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

X-wiki spam/promotion

Status:    In progress

Over the past week or so, pages for the Indian actor Pranab Kr Nath has sprung up across 20 (mostly) minority language wikis. 14 of those were created by the same user with the rest being TAs or new users, with 13 having been made in the past 48 hours. It's already been deleted on one wiki and nominated for deletion on another https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q141201798 (apologies if I posted in the wrong place) --CiphriusKane (talk) 19:05, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Zazaki Wiktionary

Status:    In progress

In accordance with the U4C motion and findings of fact, the stewards and global sysops are asked to restore attribution of pages on the Zazaki Wiktionary for which the following conditions are met:

• The page was deleted by Mirzali and later re-created by Mirzali.
• The last version prior to deletion was substantially similar to the first revision of the re-created page.
• Mirzali was not the only contributor to the page prior to deletion.

EPIC (talk) 10:26, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I've prepared a list of pages that, if I'm not mistaken, meet these criteria [24], except for the content-similarity criterion. AramilFeraxa (talk) 10:56, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I've undeleted revisions for around 1000 pages from the query above, there are about 1300 left. "Substantially similar" is kind of hard to define and takes a fair bit of time to check revisions, so I'm a bit hesitant to undelete the rest. Max (talk) 12:04, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Agree, this seems like something the U4C should provide clarification on. The stewards and GS teams should not be making "content" decisions (e.g. determining what content is "similar") - so who is to do this work? @EPIC: - please advise. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:17, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

EggRoll97 originally drafted the motion, but I think the way U4C intended here is to restore attribution where Mirzali deleted pages and recreated them himself with the same, or very similar, content. That is what we want to fix here by restoring pages where Mirzali has taken the attribution themselves. We discussed among the U4C and came to a conclusion that throwing this onto global sysops and stewards would be complex, but at the same time, there isn't really a better option. EPIC (talk) 14:30, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

I suspect this is going to linger open for quite some time. If someone proficient in diq that also has no conflict with Mirzali (on any project) wants to step up, let us know and we can get you evaluated for temporary diqwikt sysop to do this work. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:44, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

It sounds like something related to me, but I completely understand the need for impartiality in the process. You might consider reaching out to @Guherto, since he was the one who came with the notice in the first place. Kurdanparez (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Chaos in the Zazaki Wiktionary by User Mirzali

Status:    In progress

This is related to the case up over here. Since the user Mirzali lost his sysop permissions in the Zazaki Wiktionary, he has directly targeted me and my work in the Wiktionary after my unblock. There are no admins on the Wiktionary at the moment, and he is harassing me, hounding me and reverting my edits. I have reverted some of his edits now, but since I find it pointless to edit-war, I wish to get some involvement from an admin who can help.

• In the Template Şablon:g He reverts edits I made to accommodate the Vate orthographic standard of Zazaki, which is the predominant writing system of Zazaki in government and signage, alongside the Jacobson standard used in the Wiktionary.
• I tried to make my proposal(s) public in the community portal, but Mirzali, the only active user besides me, has [deliberately not responded and instead insulted me] by saying "nobody takes me seriously", "I don't know Zazaki", and saying: "You should turn to the Kurds; you have come to the wrong place", accusing me of being a "Kurdish nationalist", and continuing the xenophobia which was addressed in the UCoC motion.
• Review his latest edits (September 15th), he has specifically targeted my edits here.

He wants to bully me out of this project, and we need some adults to evaluate the situation. This is an urgent matter, as he is continuing his past behavior.--Kurdanparez (talk) 23:18, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

I am sorry @Kurdanparez, but I think there is a misunderstanding regarding the issue. I think @Mirzali said was that his main issue is not that you are using the Vate orthographic standard, but the fact that you do not speak Zazaki. He claims that your sentences full of Kurdish and Turkish words.

However, telling you "You should turn to the Kurds; you have come to the wrong place" is not a good sign. Thisconversation clearly indicates his hate to the Kurdish community. he has also made a problematic underlying assumption that Kurdish editors are acting in bad faith to sabotage the project which is hate speech. Furthermore, this completely ignores the fact that there are already 2 Kurdish Wikipedias. i also believe that he should understand that No single editor owns a Wikimedia project, regardless of how long they have been there or if they helped set it up. Treating a wiki as personal property to gatekeep new users and push them out is unacceptable behavior that runs completely counter to the collaborative spirit of the movement. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

After analysing his edit history, it is evident that @Mirzali's behaviour violates UCoC section 3.2, Abuse of power, privilege, or influence as he is abusing his seniority to intimidate others. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer! I appreciate it. His adminship issues are already being addressed in the U4C.

As stated in the U4C as well, I believe an important step here is to find a solution to deal with edit warring, harrassment etc. if it occurs again, and if all other solutions to reconcile have been attempted. I am afraid that there’s politically sensitive aspect to Zazaki-language topics. Kurdanparez (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

@Kurdanparez, even though @Mirzali's comments show a clear hostile bias against the Kurdish community, I would still strongly advise you to focus on improving your Zazaki and try to minimize the use of Turkish and Kurdish loanwords where possible.

While his behavior and exclusionary language are unacceptable and are rightly being reviewed by the U4C, addressing his underlying complaints about vocabulary and grammar will protect your work from being easily targeted. Ensuring high-quality Zazaki text will keep the focus entirely on building the Wiktionary, rather than giving anyone an excuse to start content disputes or edit wars. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 21:13, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I will remember this. I’m ultimately not a native speaker, and even with Kurmanji which I natively speak, I still have difficulties communicating in the standardized edition primarily used in the Wikis.

I definitely understand the importance of having a lexicon that’s more or less in line with Zazaki convention. In this regard, I actually base most of my lexicon on the Vate dictionary here, without doubt when editing in the mainspace.

Other than that, I highly emphasize the usage of sourced material in order to stay neutral, both informationally and linguistically. Finally, I should note (if you see references I mentioned in the U4C page), just to keep in mind, that it seems like some speakers including Mirzali try to create their own standard of Zazaki outside of convention (in this case also linguistic purism). Such attempts also seem to be made in Kurmanji circles generally, which I am a bit skeptical of due to language representativity, which is why it could implicitly exclude a ton of native speakers.

Regards, Kurdanparez (talk) 21:32, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

@Kurdanparez, I am not trying to discourage you, editing in a language you have a medium level of proficiency is itself a feat, but why don't you try editing in Kurmanji Wikipedia. It would be easy for you as you are a native speaker. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:45, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

It’s naturally a good idea to edit in a language one is native in (though my dialect is like comparing Scots to RP English, nevertheless I have been active and acknowledged in Kurmanji projects as well). I only want to do something that ultimately benefits the wider Wikimedia community and our common goal of ensuring a wide range of knowledge for all. One of the reasons I also saw myself engaging in the Zazaki projects was that I had some technical know-how (templates), and I’m aware that some active users in the Kurmanji side historically assisted with this in the Zazaki Wiktionary as well. Kurdanparez (talk) 22:06, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I understand you, but editing in a language in which you have limited proficiency does have some drawbacks. btw, I am not a steward so I cannot take any decision regarding the issue. Lets wait till a steward solves the issue. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

I understand. I should note that what I said earlier wasn’t an insistence on editing in the Zazaki wiki projects, it was just an explanation of some of my reasons for wanting to do so. Kurdanparez (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

I understood that it was an explanation. I was just saying that there is a small issue. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Removing ResourceLoader from Gadgets-definitions

Status:    In progress

T298199 has removed ResourceLoader as a gadget option. It now does nothing and can be safely removed. For more information on available and removed options, see mw:Extension:Gadgets § Options.

Out of the 462 wikis whose Gadget-definition page still contains at least one ResourceLoader at the time of writing, the following 216 have no interface admins (though some of them have bureaucrats):

No interface admins (3 left, including 1 ongoing)

azwiktionary ( Done) cawikibooks ( Done) cdowiki ( Done) cswikiversity (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) cswiktionary (2 bureaucrats, not GS wiki) cuwiki ( Done) dawikibooks ( Done) dawikiquote ( Done) dawikisource ( Done) dawiktionary ( Done) dagwiki ( Done) dewikiquote ( Done) dewikiversity (3 bureaucrats) ( Done) dinwiki ( Done) diqwiki ( Done) diqwiktionary ( Done) dkwikimedia (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) dsbwiki ( Done) dvwiktionary ( Done) elwikiversity ( Done) elwikivoyage ( Done) enwikiversity (5 bureaucrats) ( Done) eowikibooks ( Done) eowikiquote ( Done) eswikibooks (5 bureaucrats) ( Done) eswikiquote ( Done) eswikiversity ( Done) etwikiquote ( Done) etwikisource ( Done) euwikibooks ( Done) euwikisource ( Done) euwiktionary ( Done) extwiki ( Done) fawikibooks ( Done) fawikiquote ( Done) fawikisource ( Done) fawikivoyage ( Done) fawiktionary ( Done) fiwikibooks ( Done) fiwikiquote ( Done) fiwikiversity ( Done) fiwikivoyage ( Done) fowiki (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) gagwiki ( Done) glwikibooks ( Done) glwikiquote ( Done) glwikisource ( Done) glwiktionary ( Done) gnwiki ( Done) gomwiki ( Done) gomwiktionary ( Done) gotwiki ( Done) guwikiquote ( Done) guwiktionary ( Done) hakwiki ( Done) hiwikiquote ( Done) hiwikiversity ( Done) hiwikivoyage ( Done) hrwikiquote ( Done) hrwikisource (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) hrwiktionary ( Done) hsbwiki ( Done) hsbwiktionary ( Done) huwikiquote (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) huwikisource (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) huwiktionary (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) hywikiquote ( Done) hywiktionary ( Done) hywwiki ( Done) idwikibooks ( Done) idwikiquote ( Done) idwikivoyage ( Done) igwiki ( Done) itwikiquote (6 bureaucrats) ( Done) itwikiversity ( Done) jawikibooks (2 bureaucrats) ( Done) jawikivoyage ( Done) jawiktionary (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) jamwiki ( Done) kawiktionary ( Done) kabwiki ( Done) kaiwiki ( Done) kbdwiki ( Done) kkwiktionary ( Done) kmwiki ( Done) kowikiquote ( Done) kowikiversity ( Done) kowiktionary ( Done) kswiktionary ( Done) kywiki ( Done) lawiktionary ( Done) ladwiki (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) lbewiki ( Done) lmowiki ( Done) lnwiki ( Done) ltwiktionary ( Done) maiwiki ( Done) map_bmswiki ( Done) mhrwiki ( Done) minwiki ( Done) mkwikisource ( Done) mkwiktionary ( Done) mlwikibooks ( Done) mlwikiquote ( Done) mlwikisource (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) mlwiktionary (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) mnwwiki ( Done) mnwwiktionary ( Done) mrwiki (1 bureaucrat, not GS wiki) mrwiktionary ( Done) mrjwiki ( Done) mswikibooks ( Done) mwlwiki ( Done) mznwiki ( Done) nahwiki ( Done) napwiki ( Done) ndswiktionary ( Done) newikibooks ( Done) niawiki ( Done) niawiktionary ( Done) nlwikisource ( Done) nowikibooks ( Done) nowikiquote ( Done) nowikisource ( Done) nowiktionary ( Done) nrwiki ( Done) nsowiki ( Done) nvwiki ( Done) ocwiki (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) ocwiktionary ( Done) orwikisource ( Done) orwiktionary ( Done) oswiki ( Done) pawikibooks ( Done) pawiktionary ( Done) pdcwiki ( Done) pflwiki ( Done) piwiki ( Done) pnbwiki ( Done) pntwiki ( Done) pswikivoyage ( Done) pswiktionary ( Done) ptwikiquote ( Done) ptwikisource ( Done) ptwikivoyage ( Done) rmwiki ( Done) rowikibooks ( Done) rowikiquote ( Done) rowikivoyage ( Done) rowiktionary (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) ruwikibooks ( Done) ruwikiversity ( Done) ruewiki ( Done) rwwiktionary ( Done) sawiki ( Done) sawikiquote ( Done) sawikisource ( Done) sawiktionary ( Done) sahwiki ( Done) satwiki ( Done) scnwiki (2 bureaucrats) ( Done) scowiki ( Done) sdwiktionary ( Done) shwiktionary ( Done) siwikibooks ( Done) siwiki ( Done) siwiktionary ( Done) simplewiki (5 bureaucrats, not GS wiki) ( Done) simplewiktionary (2 bureaucrats) ( Done) slwikibooks ( Done) slwikiquote ( Done) slwikiversity ( Done) sowiki ( Done) sqwikiquote ( Done) sswiki ( Done) stwiki ( Done) suwiki ( Done) svwikibooks ( Done) svwikiquote ( Done) svwikisource (2 bureaucrats) ( Done) svwikiversity ( Done) szlwiki ( Done) tawikiquote ( Done) tewikibooks ( Done) tewikiquote ( Done) tewiktionary ( Done) testcommonswiki (closed) ( Done) tgwiki ( Done) tnwiki ( Done) trwikibooks ( Done) trwikisource ( Done) trwikivoyage ( Done) tswiki ( Done) ttwikibooks ( Done) ukwikivoyage ( Done) urwikibooks ( Done) urwikisource ( Done) urwiktionary ( Done) vewiki ( Done) vecwiktionary ( Done) vowiktionary ( Done) wawikisource ( Done) wawiktionary ( Done) wowiki ( Done) wowiktionary ( Done) wuuwiki (1 bureaucrat) ( Done) xhwiki ( Done) yiwiki ( Done) yiwikisource ( Done) yiwiktionary ( Done) yowiki ( Done) yuewiktionary ( Done) zh_min_nanwiki (2 bureaucrats) ( Done) zh_yuewiki (1 bureaucrat) ( Doing...) zhwikiquote ( Done) zuwiki ( Done)

To global sysops, interface editors and stewards: Please assist with the work. Thank you. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:55, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

A bit of trivia: On August 31 (before the patch was deployed), there were 549 pages with ResourceLoader; 87 pages have since been edited to remove it. I would like to thank @Neriah, who made 70 of those edits. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 05:55, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't think we need a request with a list right now. I've already started removing this, but it's taking some time with 800 projects. A total of 409 GS wikis include this at the moment. [25] 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 07:34, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

This request is mainly for tracking. I intend to work on this list myself today, but if someone else is up to it, feel free to go ahead. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 07:58, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

The main part of the work is reauth over and over, which is annoying but doesn't require concentration. and since it's not urgent, I don't think you need to invest in this whole list yourself. I did my 70 edits during a meeting - meaning I prepared it before the meeting, and during the meeting I just clicked save and rested my finger on the computer's sensor, so it didn't cost me much time :).

I suggest we do it the same way, rather than you having to sit for a few hours on this right now. I can continue next week (Monday is a holiday for us, so I'll be back to work only on Tuesday). If everyone does a bit in "dead time", even if it takes a few more days until we finish everything, it'll waste a lot less valuable time. Neriah - 💬 - 08:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I removed it from enwikibooks, enwikiquote and outreachwiki. Codename Noreste /// ⭐️✨ 07:42, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

per up i close this, a request is not needed on this page at this time --𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 16:16, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Reopening. I'm going through the list using a script (with careful supervision). It should take no longer than half an hour. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:09, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

171 done. All of those had neither interface admins nor bureaucrats. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:47, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

19 more done. These had at least one bureaucrat but no interface admins. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:13, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

---

Update:

GS wikis with at least one interface admin (174, 153 done)

Link Sysops Interface admins Bureaucrats Done? kawikisource 1 1 0 Done kaawiktionary 1 1 0 Done mywikisource 1 1 0 Done tddwiki 1 1 0 Done cvwiki 2 1 0 Done guwikisource 2 1 0 Done hiwikibooks 2 1 0 Done hiwiktionary 2 1 0 Done hifwiktionary 2 1 0 Done hrwikibooks 2 1 0 Done ilowiki 2 1 0 Done inhwiki 2 1 0 Done jvwiktionary 2 1 0 Done kswiki 2 1 0 Done lowiktionary 2 1 0 Done mniwiktionary 2 1 0 Done mrwikibooks 2 1 0 Done mrwikisource 2 1 0 Done mywiktionary 2 1 0 Done myvwiki 2 1 0 Done nywiki 2 1 0 Done sahwikisource 2 1 0 Done shnwikibooks 2 1 0 Done shnwiki 2 1 0 Done shnwikivoyage 2 1 0 Done shnwiktionary 2 1 0 Done thwikisource 2 1 0 Done tiwiki 2 1 0 Done tkwiki 2 1 0 Done tlwiktionary 2 1 0 Done tokwiki 2 1 0 Done udmwiki 2 1 0 Done uzwiktionary 2 1 0 Done viwikiquote 2 1 0 Done viwikivoyage 2 1 0 Done nnwiktionary 2 1 1 Done vecwikisource 2 1 1 Done cswikisource 2 2 0 Done eswikivoyage 2 2 0 Done mswikisource 2 2 0 Done tcywikisource 2 2 0 Done iswiktionary 2 2 1 Done cawikiquote 3 1 0 Done cewiki 3 1 0 Done eowikisource 3 1 0 Done guwiki 3 1 0 Done hifwiki 3 1 0 Done jvwikisource 3 1 0 Done kcgwiki 3 1 0 Done kuwiki 3 1 0 Done lezwiki 3 1 0 Done lgwiki 3 1 0 Done lowiki 3 1 0 Done minwiktionary 3 1 0 Done mniwiki 3 1 0 Done napwikisource 3 1 0 Done plwikivoyage 3 1 0 Done pswiki 3 1 0 Done ptwikibooks 3 1 0 Done rowikisource 3 1 0 Done scwiki 3 1 0 Done svwikivoyage 3 1 0 Done thwikiquote 3 1 0 Done trwikiquote 3 1 0 Done urwikiquote 3 1 0 Done fiwikisource 3 1 1 Done ndswiki 3 1 1 Done gorwiki 3 2 0 Done itwikibooks 3 2 0 Done ptwikiversity 3 2 0 Done thwikibooks 3 2 0 Done viwikibooks 3 2 0 Done viwikisource 3 2 0 Done itwiktionary 3 3 1 Done hywikisource 4 1 0 Done mnwiki 4 1 0 Done orwiki 4 1 0 Done plwikibooks 4 1 0 Done sdwiki 4 1 0 Done smnwiki 4 1 0 Done tawikisource 4 1 0 Done tewikisource 4 1 0 Done thwiktionary 4 1 0 Done tumwiki 4 1 0 Done wawiki 4 1 0 Done jawikisource 4 1 1 Done mtwiki 4 1 1 Done mywiki 4 1 1 Done ukwiktionary 4 1 1 Done frrwiki 4 1 2 Done jawikiversity 4 2 0 Done kaawiki 4 2 0 Done zhwikiversity 4 2 0 Done cawiktionary 4 2 1 Done nlwikivoyage 4 2 1 Done ruwikivoyage 4 2 1 Done itwikivoyage 4 2 3 Done srwiktionary 4 3 1 Done vecwiki 4 3 1 Done frwikivoyage 5 1 0 Done kowikisource 5 1 0 Done mswiktionary 5 1 0 Done ukwikisource 5 1 0 Done huwikibooks 5 1 1 Done slwikisource 5 1 1 Done sqwiki 5 1 1 Done ukwikiquote 5 1 1 Done vlswiki 5 1 1 Done hiwikisource 5 2 0 Done uzwikiquote 5 2 0 Done ruwikiquote 5 2 1 Done ruwikisource 5 2 1 Done sewiki 5 2 1 Done srwikiquote 5 3 3 Done cebwiki 6 1 0 Done nds_nlwiki 6 1 2 Done nowikimedia 6 1 2 Done pawikisource 6 2 0 Done trwiktionary 6 2 0 Done frwikiquote 6 2 1 Done srwikibooks 6 2 2 Done ckbwiki 6 3 0 Done zh_classicalwiki 6 3 0 Done frwikibooks 6 4 2 Done zhwikibooks 7 1 0 Done ptwiktionary 7 1 2 Done tawiktionary 7 1 2 Done lawikisource 7 1 3 Done kuwiktionary 7 2 0 Done ttwiki 7 2 0 Done zhwikivoyage 7 2 0 Done fiwiktionary 7 3 0 Done lbwiki 7 3 1 Done srwikisource 7 3 3 Done hiwiki 8 2 0 Done eswikisource 8 2 1 Done frwikiversity 8 2 1 Done idwiktionary 8 3 1 Done shwiki 8 3 1 Done viwiktionary 8 3 1 Done itwikisource 9 1 1 Done trwikimedia 9 1 4 Done zhwiktionary 9 2 0 Done idwikisource 9 2 1 Done ltwiki 9 2 1 Done plwikiquote 9 3 2 Done srwiki 9 9 3 Done svwiktionary 10 1 1 Done hywiki 10 2 0 Done pawiki 10 2 0 Done tlwiki 10 2 4 bewiki 10 3 0 Done wikifunctionswiki 10 4 0 Done uzwiki 10 4 2 incubatorwiki 13 3 4 swwiki 14 2 2 Done ruwiktionary 14 3 2 hawiki 15 1 0 kkwiki 15 1 1 nlwikimedia 15 2 4 mswiki 15 3 2 viwiki 16 4 3 Done foundationwiki 18 4 8 Done thwiki 18 7 3 uawikimedia 19 3 9 lawiki 21 1 1 Done specieswiki 22 2 5 ruwikimedia 29 1 2 enwikivoyage 34 4 2 testwikidatawiki 36 12 13 wikimaniawiki 41 7 7 labswiki 66 6 16 test2wiki 103 14 28 mediawikiwiki 125 14 19

Non-GS wikis with at least one interface admin (47)

Link Sysops Interface admins Bureaucrats Done nlwiktionary 6 3 1 kawiki 6 4 3 urwiki 9 3 4 skwiki 11 1 1 tewiki 11 1 2 iswiki 11 1 9 euwiki 12 1 3 eowiki 12 2 1 dewiktionary 12 3 1 dewikivoyage 12 3 2 mkwiki 12 4 2 mlwiki 13 3 2 sourceswiki 13 4 2 lvwiki 14 2 3 nnwiki 14 3 2 hrwiki 14 3 3 plwikisource 14 5 2 dewikisource 16 1 2 bnwiki 16 2 2 frwikisource 17 5 1 rowiki 18 3 0 bgwiki 19 1 5 enwikisource 20 1 2 elwiki 22 2 4 slwiki 22 2 4 huwiki 22 5 5 trwiki 22 9 5 kowiki 23 3 4 dawiki 24 3 3 cawiki 25 4 3 sewikimedia 30 2 5 cswiki 30 3 4 tawiki 31 1 2 frwiktionary 32 17 4 nowiki 35 4 3 fiwiki 35 10 3 etwiki 36 4 2 fawiki 40 5 5 jawiki 40 9 5 plwikimedia 44 7 12 idwiki 47 7 5 eswiki 52 6 45 wikidatawiki 62 14 3 ruwiki 63 9 4 enwiktionary 76 15 5 itwiki 102 9 5 commonswiki 170 27 6 enwiki 809 15 15

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 08:57, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Should we skip wikis that have local interface administrators, for a change that is purely cleanup and doesn't affect the user? Neriah - 💬 - 09:10, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, we should leave them a message at their local noticeboard. Veritas Sapientiae (talk | email) 09:12, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Wikis that have bureaucrats but don't have interface administrators? Neriah - 💬 - 09:15, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Can safely edit without issues, I think so. Veritas Sapientiae (talk | email) 09:17, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

@Neriah: I decided to be BOLD in this case and have already edited all wikis with 9 sysops or fewer (per GS wiki definition), no matter how many interface admins and bureaucrats they have. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 10:28, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Using AI to Translate Wikipedia Articles

Status:    In progress

Following this discussion, I am publishing the results of using Google Flash 3.6 to translate the article about en:Boris Perchatkin. The table lists articles translated since May 17, 2026. The goal of this discussion is to reach a decision regarding the acceptability of using AI to translate Wikipedia articles.

No.	Article	Current status	Translation quality	Article creation date
1	pt:Boris Georgievich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-05-17
2	de:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin	N Was deleted	Y Good. The text was checked as verified.	2026-06-24
3	lt:Borisas Perčatkinas	N Was deleted	N Bad. Homo ergaster deleted it as a machine translation	2026-06-28
4	et:Boriss Pertšatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Two local sysops (Juhan121 and Velirand) edited categories and did not marked the article as a machine translation	2026-06-28
5	fi:Boris Pertšatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Two local editors (Kärrmes and Samoasambia) edited categories and did not marked the article as a machine translation	2026-07-16
6	no:Boris Pertsjatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. 1000mm deleted it as a machine translation	2026-07-17
7	da:Boris Georgijevitj Pertjatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Pelle S.H. deleted it as a machine translation	2026-07-20
8	it:Boris Georgievič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Two local autopatrolled editors (Cipintina and AndreA) made technical edits and did not marked the article as a machine translation	2024-05-15
9	ro:Boris Gheorghevici Perciatkin	N Was deleted	N Deleted as AI-generated article without human review	2026-07-22
10	cs:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	N Was deleted	? Unclear - KPX8 deleted the article as spam.	2026-07-22
11	sk:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-23
12	sl:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local bureaucrat Yerpo made a grammatical edit, local sysops Romanm, Pinky sl and A09 made technical edits and did not marked the article as a machine translation	2026-07-24
13	hr:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local patroller Croxyz made 3 edits and did not marked the article as a machine translation	2026-07-24
14	sr:Boris Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-24
15	sh:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	N Was deleted	Y Good. The Edgar Allan Poe deleted article as a non-notable rather than as a machine translation	2026-07-24
16	bs:Boris Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-24
17	mk:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-24
18	el:Μπόρις Γεόργιεβιτς Περτσάτκιν	N Was deleted	N Bad. Εὐθυμένης deleted it as a machine translation	2024-06-06
19	sq:Boris Perçatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. The article was marked as patrolled by local sysop Leutrim.P	2026-07-24
20	hy:Բորիս Պերչատկին	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop ԱշբոտՏՆՂ made 2 edits and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
21	vi:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-25
22	zh:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local patroller ChemicalCatalyst edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
23	ja:ボリス・ペルチャトキン	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editors (曾禰越後守, Keruby and Kekero) edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
24	ar:بوريس غيورغيفيتش بيرتشاتكين	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor عبدالرحمن edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
25	ko:보리스 페르찻킨	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. The article was fully rewritten by local editor Braveattack	2026-07-25
26	af:Boris Pertsjatkin	Y Is not deleted	Neutral First Gemini's version was marked as a machine translation, later ChatGPPT rewrote the article and local bureaucrat Oesjaar approved the version	2026-07-25
27	he:בוריס גאורגייביץ' פרצ'טקין	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local patrollers (Assayas, Mod, קיפודנחש, חזרתי and דוד55) edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
28	tr:Boris Georgiyeviç Perçatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local patroller LM.CR marked the article as patrolled and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
29	ca:Boris Gueorguievitx Pertxatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local autopatrolled Davidpar edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
30	be-tarask:Барыс Пярчаткін	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local editor Dymitr edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
31	be:Барыс Георгіевіч Пярчаткін	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local sysop DobryBrat edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-25
32	eo:Boris Georgijeviĉ Perĉatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local sysop Kani edited the article and marked it as a patrolled	2026-07-26
33	simple:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-26
34	az:Boris Perçatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local autopatrolled editor C Mirəli2001 edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-26
35	bcl:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local editor LeahLhey edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-26
36	id:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-26
37	th:โบริส เกออร์กีเยวิช เปอร์ชัดคิน	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-26
38	te:బోరిస్ పర్చాట్కిన్	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop యర్రా రామారావు and local editor Divya4232 edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-26
39	hi:बोरिस पर्चातकिन	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-26
40	fa:بوریس گئورگیویچ پرچاتکین	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local patroller Mehrabpr edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-26
41	ka:ბორის პერჩატკინი	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local patroller Beqabai edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-26
42	ba:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor Телсе edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-27
43	tt:Борис Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysops Il Nur and Frhdkazan edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation. Also the article took part in edithaton	2026-07-27
44	ur:بوریس گیورگیوش پرچاٹکن	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-27
45	ceb:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-27
46	arz:بوريس بيرشاتكين	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-27
47	war:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-27
48	an:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Lazaro d'Aragón deleted it as a machine translation	2026-07-28
49	als:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local sysop Pakeha edited the article and marked it as a patrolled	2026-07-28
50	as:বোৰিছ গেঅৰ্গিয়েভিচ পাৰ্চাটকিন	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-28
51	ast:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local bureaucrat Omarete and local editor Limotecariu edited the article and marked it as a patrolled	2026-07-28
52	ay:Boris Pertxatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-28
53	ce:Перчаткин, Борис Георгиевич	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-28
54	bat-smg:Borisos Perčatkėns	N Was deleted	? Unclear: Hugo.arg deleted the article for an unspecified reason	2026-07-29
55	bar:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-29
56	ban:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-29
57	azb:بوریس قئورقیئویچ پرچاتکین	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-29
58	btm:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-30
59	bxr:Борис Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-30
60	br:Boris Georgijevitch Perchatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Huñvreüs deleted it as a machine translation	2026-07-30
61	bn:বরিস গেওরগিয়েভিচ পেরচাতকিন	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local patroller Sàádî edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-30
62	bi:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-30
63	bh:बोरिस जोर्जेविच परचात्किन	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-07-30
64	rue:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. The article was fully rewritten by local editors Igor Kercsa, Halajkovič and Rue323	2026-07-30
65	ch:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-03
66	cdo:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Yejianfei deleted it as a machine translation	2026-08-03
67	ckb:بۆریس گیۆرگیڤیچ پیرچاتکین	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-04
68	co:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local editor Fausta Samaritani edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-04
69	crh:Boris Perçatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local editor Хтосьці edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-04
70	cv:Перчаткин Борис Георгиевич	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-04
71	cy:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. At first translation made by Gemini Flash 3.6 was marked as a bad text by local sysop Llygadebrill, but then I made translation using Gemini Flash 3.8 and after this another local sysop Craigysgafn edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-05
72	diq:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local sysop Mirzali marked the article as needed to rewrite	2026-08-05
73	eml:Boris Georgievič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop Mirandolese edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-06
74	eu:Boris Georgievitx Pertxatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. Local sysop Lainobeltz and local bureaucrat Xabier Armendaritz edited the article and Xabier Armendaritz thanked me for creation of the article	2026-08-06
75	frr:Boris Georgijewitsch Petschatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Murma174 deleted it as a machine translation	2026-08-27
76	fo:Boris Georgijevitsj Pertjatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-27
77	ga:Boris Georgiyevitsh Pertshatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-27
78	ext:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-27
79	gn:Boris Georgievich Perchatkin	N Was deleted	Y Good. Hugo.arg deleted the article with mark "AI" rather than as a machine translation	2026-08-28
80	gv:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. MacTire02 deleted it as a machine translation	2026-08-28
81	gl:Boris Perchatkin	N Was deleted	N Bad. Chairego apc deleted it as a machine translation	2026-08-28
82	hak:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-31
83	hif:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-31
84	hyw:Պորիս Փերչաթքին	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor Կարէն edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-31
85	ia:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-31
86	ie:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor Dorlota edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-31
87	ilo:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-08-31
88	io:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local sysop Joao Xavier marked it as a machine translation	2026-08-31
89	is:Boris Georgíevítsj Pertjatkín	N Was deleted	Y Good. TKSnaevarr deleted it as a cross wiki spam rather than as a machine translation	2026-09-01
90	jv:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local bureaucrat Meursault2004 marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-01
91	kaa:Boris Perchatkin	N Was deleted	? Unclear - Kvazimodo deleted it as "Text translated by artificial intelligence without human control". It's unclear what they ment.	2026-09-01
92	kaj:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-01
93	kab:Boris Georgiyevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-01
94	knc:Boris Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-08
95	ku:Borîs Perçatkîn	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor Dorlota edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-08
96	kk:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop Kasymov edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-08
97	kbp:Boris Pertchatkine	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-08
98	kw:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-09
99	ky:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editor Artelow edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-09
100	la:Boris Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local sysop Grufo marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-09
101	lb:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local sysop GilPe marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-09
102	lez:Борис Георгиевич Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-09
103	lij:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	N Was deleted	Y Good. N.Longo deleted it as xwiki spam rather than as a machine translation	2026-09-09
104	lmo:Boris Georgiyevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-10
105	mad:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-10
106	mg:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-10
107	mhr:Перчаткин, Борис Георгиевич	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-10
108	min:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-10
109	ml:ബോറിസ് ജോർജിയെവിച്ച് പെർച്ചാത്കിൻ	Y Is not deleted	N Bad. Local editor TheGreatEditor024 noticed me that it is a bad machine translation so I decided to start this discussion	2026-09-10
110	mn:Борис Перчаткин	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-11
111	mr:बोरिस जॉर्जीविच पर्चाटकिन	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear - local bureaucrat अभय नातू marked the article with template informimg that "The content of this article does not adhere to the encyclopedic writing style of Marathi Wikipedia"	2026-09-11
112	ms:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-11
113	mt:Boris Georgijevič Perčatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-11
114	mwl:Boris Pertchatkin	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-11
115	my:ဘောရစ် ပဲချက်ကင်	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop Dr Lotus Black edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-12
116	myv:Перчаткин, Борис Георгиевич	Y Is not deleted	? Unclear (no non-creator human text edit).	2026-09-12
117	nah:Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local sysop Akapochtli edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-09-12
118	lv:Boriss Perčatkins	Y Is not deleted	Y Rather good. First Gemini's version was marked as a machine translation, later ChatGPT rewrote the article	2026-06-28
119	hu:Borisz Georgijevics Percsatkin	Y Is not deleted	Y Good. Local editors Tombenko, Vépi and Tulipanos edited the article and did not marked it as a machine translation	2026-07-22
Total:	119 language editions	Y 103 preserved (86,55%) N 16 deleted (15,38%)	Y 43 Good / Rather good (36,13%) N 13 Bad / Rewritten (10,92%) Neutral 1 Neutral (0,84%) ? 62 Unclear (52,1%)	2024-05-15 — 2026-09-12

My conclusion is this: AI knows some languages well and others poorly. Therefore, each local wiki must decide for itself whether to use AI for translating articles or not. Asorev (talk) 21:24, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Discussion on Using AI to Translate Wikipedia Articles

• Support as proposer: each local wiki must decide for itself whether to use AI for translating articles or not. Asorev (talk) 03:10, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

  Modern translation tools use neural networks, a primitive form of LLM. A good chatbot can sometimes provide better translations because you can give it the relevant context. Translating content using LLMs should therefore be considered one of the exceptions to restrictions on using LLMs for writing articles.

  Yes, I would leave it to each project to adopt its own policy addressing the use of LLMs for translation, but such policies should not prohibit their use altogether. Amitie 10g (talk) 04:52, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all articles without proper local oversight. Creation of content in languages one isn't proficient in is inexcusable. And since Asorev fails to understand the issue, I see no other option but to impose a global block as well to prevent further detoriation of content standards. --A09|(pogovor) 16:35, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

  The ruwiki's guideline ru:ВП:LLM allows using LLM while creating articles and requires to inform about the fact that LLM was used to write article. If your suggestion to ban on using LLMs while creating articles is accepted then what are you going to do with local ruwiki's consensus? Asorev (talk) 17:36, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

  The Universal Code of Conduct states:

  In all Wikimedia projects, spaces and events, behaviour will be founded in respect, civility, collegiality, solidarity and good citizenship. This applies to all contributors and participants in their interaction with all contributors and participants, without exceptions based on age, mental or physical disabilities, physical appearance, national, religious, ethnic and cultural background, caste, social class, language fluency, sexual orientation, gender identity, sex or career field. Nor will we make exceptions based on standing, skills or accomplishments in the Wikimedia projects or movement.

  It also states:

  Assume good faith, and engage in constructive edits; your contributions should improve the quality of the project or work. Provide and receive feedback kindly and in good faith. Criticism should be delivered in a sensitive and constructive manner. All Wikimedians should assume unless evidence otherwise exists that others are here to collaboratively improve the projects, but this should not be used to justify statements with a harmful impact.

  Therefore, "preventing further deterioration of content standards" should not be pursued at the expense of providing a diverse, inclusive, and accessible space, nor should criticism of contributors be presented in a manner that is inconsistent with the UCoC's requirement that criticism be sensitive and constructive. Amitie 10g (talk) 05:08, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Amitie 10g: Ruwiki policy only applies to ruwiki, until then status quo should be assumed and pages dealt with as they were handled in practice with. Don't cite me UCOC as it doesn't cover content issues apart from vandalism-related behaviour. Being a diverse, inclusive and accessible space for contributors doesn't mean we should accept bad WP:CIR alike issues and accept translations made by non-speakers. On the second thought, AI usage is a bigger action of unfairness towards communities and their strive for quality content especially in cases of abuse to such extent. A09|(pogovor) 17:51, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  The table above shows that, in many cases, the translation produced by AI is of quite good quality. This proves that each local wiki must independently decide on the use of AI for translations. Asorev (talk) 18:58, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  Because your methodology is wrong. Most wikis outright delete bad translations or admins fix it themselves, so marking them as good purely because they weren't tagged as machine translation is a logical fallacy. A09|(pogovor) 19:03, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  In the table above are listed all cases of deleting and rewriting of bad translation. This is why I disagree that my methodology is wrong. Could you give an example of the opposite? Asorev (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  You mentioned that my methodology for classifying translations as "good" was flawed because admins might delete bad translations without explicitly tagging them as "machine translation". I acknowledge that my statistical table may not perfectly reflect the nuanced reality of local moderation. However, imposing a permanent global block on a user who operates in good faith, manually formats local templates, and actively seeks dialogue on Meta contradicts the collaborative spirit of Wikimedia. I have stopped mass-creating articles in wikis where I am not proficient, out of respect for the patrollers' workload. But the core principle remains: the acceptability of AI translations should be governed by local consensus rather than by a unilateral global mandate. Asorev (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  Supporting @A09. Mass-creating articles in languages where one isn't proficient hurts the local project quality. However, rather than rushing straight to a permanent block, I believe that the movement should consider a temporary educational block first. This gives the editor a clear window to step back, read local consensus, and actually learn the guidelines before any permanent actions are taken. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 08:40, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  I appreciate your more measured approach compared to the call for a permanent global block. The very reason I initiated this discussion on Meta was to engage with the community, understand the global perspective, and find a consensus. I have already taken a step back to learn and adjust my actions based on the feedback provided here, so an educational block is unnecessary. Asorev (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  I hope so. Please don't produce another AI-generated article. Try to create articles on your own, using reliable sources. Even though it is hard work, in the end, it is all worth it. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• The table above relies on two assumptions:
  • If the article had been deleted with any reason other than "machine translation" or "AI-generated", then its quality must have been good.

    Wrong. Admins don't always include every reason in the delete summary, if at all. Some do try to be as specific as possible, but for many others one is good enough.

  • If the article had been edited by local users and yet not marked as machine translation or AI-generated, then its quality must have been good.

    Also wrong. Local users might make such edits without having carefully examined the actual content. Even if they did read the content and found no glaring translation or tone issues, there's no guarantee that they have verified the article against the sources it cites. When you patrol hundreds, potentially thousand of edits per day, most of which are in topics you don't know or care about, it's impossible to thoroughly check all sources.

  Machine translations and AI-generated contents are frowned upon because it takes almost no time for the "author" to create them, compared to that of patrollers who have to manually verify those. You don't get to create more work for others.

  NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:28, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  If I were translating these articles myself without using AI-tools or if I were writing a new article, it would also place a burden on the patrollers. In accordance with your approach "you don't get to create more work for others" all translations and writing articles are prohibited. Asorev (talk) 06:40, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  In an ideal world, everyone would only create perfect articles and no one would have to fix problems. That is not the case, however, so patrollers exist. To develop anything non-trivial, a process is required, and for that process to succeed, it needs to be effective. The goal is to increase the benefit–cost ratio, not to decrease it. Machine translation/AI-generated content, as stated above, bring little benefit and a huge cost.

  From the perspective of a patroller, yes, every new article and edit incurs a cost. They can choose whether to pay (part of) that cost now and/or let others pay it later, or even not to pay it (i.e., deletion). The part that isn't immediately paid for becomes a debt. In big wikis with large readership and therefore a large pool of users, that debt might be picked up in at most a few days. In small wikis, it can remain for years, even decades, multiplying itself during all that time (think misinformation).

  By "more work", I mean "more work than the average work necessary to prevent the cost from becoming a debt".

  NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 09:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  I really have to echo NDKDD here. //shb (t • c) 09:07, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  @NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh, @SHB, thank you for your detailed and constructive feedback. You make a very fair point about the benefit–cost ratio and the "debt" that unverified translations can create, especially in smaller wikis with limited patroller resources. I also concede your point that a technical edit (like adding a category) does not necessarily mean the local editor has thoroughly verified the translation or the sources. My intention was never to overwhelm patrollers or create long-term debt. Because I manually format categories, infoboxes, and reference templates for each specific wiki, I mistakenly believed I was reducing that burden. However, I understand now that verifying the prose itself remains a significant task for local volunteers. In light of your arguments, I am willing to compromise and adjust my approach. I have paused cross-wiki mass creations in all wikis where patroller resources are scarce. However, I still firmly believe that large wikis with robust local policies (like ruwiki, which has a specific policy for LLMs) and active communities should retain the autonomy to decide whether to accept, regulate, or ban AI-assisted translations. A global ban overrides this local autonomy. Asorev (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all of these articles on GS wikis, per A09. Oppose stewards taking action on non-GS wikis, since, despite my feelings on AI and thinking this whole project was a very stupid idea wikis that have chosen to opt out of global sysops are deliberately taking the burden of dealing with this problem for themselves and should be held to their choice. Weak oppose globally blocking Asorev, since I generally think blocking people for one incident is a bad idea basically regardless of what that incident is. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 18:34, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  (ftr, the SRG req has been marked as not done – to be honest, I probs would've also marked it as not done were I not involved, for similar reasons to what Pppery mentioned) //shb (t • c) 22:22, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  Do you mean Steward_requests/Global/2026-w38#Global_block_for_User:Asorev? Asorev (talk) 04:17, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Pppery Hey, sorry if my comment was misunderstood – of course I'm not vouching for a stew intervention on small wikis, but large wikis are in minority in the table above, so I thought it was clear to propose deletion on small wikis and request deletion on large wikis where appropriate :) Best, A09|(pogovor) 17:56, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: I see a table of articles marked "good" and "bad". It appears that an article is considered "good" as long as the next editor to edit the article didn't immediately delete it as a bad machine translation. How do you know the other editors actually reviewed the translated article in detail? Have you specifically asked them to evaluate the translations? Please explain in more detail how you are sure these are high quality translations. LWG (talk) 03:28, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Also, the table says de:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin was "checked and verified" but I don't see anything in the article history or talk page about checking or verification. Who checked and verified it? LWG (talk) 03:34, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I do not know that other editors actually reviewed the translated article in detail - I did not asked them to evaluate the translations. I just rely on existence or absense of template marking article as machine tramslation. As to article de:Boris Georgijewitsch Pertschatkin then I saw on its history page mark "gesichtet von Zollernalb" and that several editors edited the article. From this, I concluded that the article had been checked and verified. Asorev (talk) 05:32, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Another comment: at minimum, all these projects must be notified that this mass translation has been done, so they can adequately review the results, and in order to comply with the attribution requirements of the CC BY-SA license of the original English article. LWG (talk) 03:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  In this case, regarding compliance with the CC BY-SA license, there is no need to mark these translations in any way, since I wrote the original Russian article myself. Asorev (talk) 05:36, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  That's not how CCBYSA license works ... A09|(pogovor) 17:57, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Here is Jimbo Wales' opinion: "This thread was called to my attention on English Wikipedia and I just wanted to weigh in to say this very clearly: guidelines on English Wikipedia are not rules which are applied globally to all other Wikipedias. Every Wikipedia has a right to make individual decisions within the context of their project, so long as they do not violate global guidelines. There is no global guideline on wriiting articles with LLMs and there is unlikely to be one any time soon. I am not commenting on whether or not what Asorev was doing is a good idea or not, just responding quite firmly to the idea that somehow English Wikipedia is superior to other language versions of Wikipedia - it is not." Asorev (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  I completely agree with Jimbo here: it is up to the other wikis whether they want to accept your translations or not. But you need to tell them what you have done so they can properly assess your work, and so they can find the original Russian source article to compare against when checking the translation. You shouldn't assume that just because nobody noticed your work was a translation that your work has been assessed as good. LWG (talk) 20:47, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  Just noting how funny it is to try and preach to @TheGreatEditor024 about automatic validity of enwiki rules on xwiki when Asorev has done exactly the same above with ruwiki LLM policies. XD. Needless to say, big wikis should sort this out themselves through local procedures, calling Jimbo for his opinion was honestly unfounded and uncalled for. A09|(pogovor) 15:10, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  @A09, actually I am happy that @Asorev brought it up, because now I know exactly what to do if I feel an article needs to be translated into the Russian Wikipedia. However, I completely support your point that calling Jimbo was unnecessary. Wikipedia is a community-driven project, and it is stated that no single editor owns a Wikimedia project, regardless of how long they have been there or if they helped set it up. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:33, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  Is there a policy outlining the circumstances and issues for which one may contact Jimbo, and those for which one may not? Asorev (talk) 19:10, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Please read Appeals to Jimbo and Quoting Jimbo is not a replacement for a good argument.

  Also read Argumentum ad Jimbonem, which you used to make a point. However, this is the main part you have to read. Appeals to Jimbo#And now a word from our sponsor... TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:12, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Neutral and Comment: Using AI can lead to multiple errors, and also can possibly hallucinate information (like adding fake facts or misinformation). I believe it is up to the individual wikis to either keep or delete them, but, if errors exist, need to be fixed up. --Viyowoyero-vya-Malaŵi (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: Thought I would share my own perspectives. I largely work with minority Wiki such as Kurmanji/Zazaki Wiki projects and LLM's hallucinate to a very high extent, which obviously does not benefit these projects at all, alongside potential hallucination of sources etc. Hence, I am in favor of some basic universal guidelines across Wikimedia, just as long as we give space for each individual project to evaluate the scope of AI usage. LLM's can still be helpful in writing a good Wiki article if used consciously and responsibly to evaluate grammar and issues related to original research or synthesis, and it is an opportunity to reduce potential issues and discussions related to article quality.-Kurdanparez (talk) 17:56, 29 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: As far as I know, "user edited after creation" does not really mean that the article is good for readers or does not meet the requirements to delete. It may meet the minimun requirements to stay, but there is a potential possibility that the user afterward is just a reader not reviewer. I'll say it a machine translation article is human-readable does not reflect it's a good translation article, as each language has its different tone and sound. --Hamish one great show can change the world 20:00, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete all at least on the GS wikis (except for those pages which editors fluent in the respective languages have confirmed to be fine); I think the non-GS wikis have enough of an editing userbase to be able to independently check the quality of the LLM translations. Given the known hallucination and source-integrity issues with LLM-assisted translations, I feel that the default position for unreviewed LLM translations (especially in languages that the translating user is not fluent in) should be deletion in the absence of other evidence about the suitability of the translated content. I agree with the others above that the criteria about the suitability (or otherwise) of the translations in the table above are dubious. JavaHurricane 09:44, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

I reviewed the translation into Marathi (marked in the above table as being of unclear quality), and I am afraid it is of poor quality. Here are some examples, where I have translated some of the lines in the Marathi article back into English and highlighted the differences from the original English line in the original English article:

Original line in English	Translated line in Marathi	My manual English translation of translated line	Comparison of original and translated lines
Boris Perchatkin ([...] born 1 July 1946) — the most famous participant in the Nakhodka's religious emigration movement of the late 1970s and early 1980s, a human rights activist who lobbied in the United States for the adoption of the "Lautenberg's Amendment" in 1989, as a result of which about 1 million people emigrated to the United States from the countries of the former USSR.	बोरिस जॉर्जीविच पर्चाटकिन ([...] जन्म १ जुलै १९४६, मिरगोरोड, युक्रेनियन एस.एस.आर., सोव्हिएत युनियन) हे सोव्हिएत आणि अमेरिकन मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ते आणि धार्मिक नेते आहेत. ते १९७० च्या उत्तरार्धात आणि १९८० च्या सुरुवातीस नखोदका शहरातील धार्मिक स्थलांतर चळवळीच्या मुख्य आयोजकांपैकी एक होते. ते १९८९ मध्ये अमेरिकेत "लॉटेनबर्ग दुरुस्ती" मंजूर करून आणणाऱ्या प्रमुख कार्यकर्त्यांपैकी एक होते, ज्या कायद्याने माजी सोव्हिएत युनियन मधील देशांतील १० लाखांहून अधिक लोकांना अमेरिकेत स्थलांतर करण्याची परवानगी दिली.	Boris Georgiyevich Perchatkin ([...] born 1 July 1946, Mirgorod, Ukrainian SSR, Soviet Union) is a Soviet and American human rights activist and religious leader. He was among the main organisers of the religious migration movement in Nakhodka in the second half of the 1970s and the early 1980s. He was one of the main officials who in 1989 passed "Lautenberg's Amendment" in America, which permitted more than 1 million people from the former Soviet Union to migrate to America.	The original line did not mention his birthplace at all (in fact, it does not appear anywhere in the enwiki article), nor called him a "religious leader". Also, some other subtle but important differences of meaning in the two versions.
Boris Perchatkin was born in family of a military pilot who died in a car accident shortly after Boris was born.	बोरिस पर्चाटकिन यांचा जन्म एका लष्करी वैमानिकाच्या कुटुंबात झाला; बोरिस यांच्या जन्मानंतर लगेचच त्यांचे वडील बोरिस यांचा विमान अपघातात मृत्यू झाला.	Boris Perchatkin was in the family of a military pilot; shortly after Boris's birth, his father Boris died in a plane accident.	Naming Boris's father as "Boris" and turning a car accident into a plane accident is unacceptable.
Later, he collected information about the persecution of believers and actively shared it with foreign journalists.	त्यानंतर, त्यांनी सोव्हिएत युनियनमधील विश्वासांवर होणाऱ्या अत्याचारांची माहिती गोळा करण्यास सुरुवात केली आणि रोटाप्रिंटद्वारे ती परदेशी पत्रकारांपर्यंत पोहोचवली.	Thereafter, he began to gather information on the atrocities committed against beliefs in the Soviet Union and sent it to foreign journalists using Rotaprint.	Translating believers to विश्वासांवर (which actually means "beliefs") is outright wrong (a mistake repeated several times elsewhere in the translation); and Rotaprint was not mentioned in the original line.
On December 20, 1978, Perchatkin tried to send a congratulatory New Year's telegram to US President Jimmy Carter through the Nakhodka Post Office asking for attention to those who do not have freedom of religion.	२० डिसेंबर १९७८ रोजी, नखोदका पोस्ट ऑफिसमधून, पर्चाटकिन यांनी अमेरिकेचे अध्यक्ष जिमी कार्टर यांना नवीन वर्षाची तार पाठवून धार्मिक स्वातंत्र्य आणि स्थलांतराच्या हक्काचे रक्षण करण्यासाठी मदत मागितली.	On 20 December 1978, Perchatkin sent American President Jimmy Carter a New Years' telegram from the Nakhodka Post Office, in which he asked for help to protect freedom of religion and of immigration.	The two versions clearly don't say the same things.

This is only a small sample; I went through some other lines quickly and found similar glaring errors. The prevalence of basic translation errors alone, as well as the additions in the LLM output, show that the translation is of low quality and fidelity. I believe that identifying and rectifying these errors would take as much time as it would to translate the enwiki article from scratch. JavaHurricane 13:40, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all. I discovered this discussion coming from Talk:Wikiproject:Antispam § Boris Perchatkin. As I mentioned there (I apologize if I repeat myself here), it seems that people increasingly distinguish between using AI for creating articles and using it for translating existing articles, with the former often being viewed as somewhat problematic while the latter is treated as legitimate. I come from Latin Wikipedia, where we tend to have a somewhat different concern: we generally do not object to someone using AI to develop ideas for their creations—as long as they are well sourced—but we do have significant problems with machine translations, because they are often very poor and can introduce serious linguistic and substantive errors. A few months ago I proposed a general policy requiring humans to review any content before publishing it. Writing an article in a language that one does not understand makes any review impossible by definition, and without that review, AI can populate an encyclopedia with errors at a pace that no human can keep up with; therefore, if the policy I proposed were to be adopted, mass translations would raise a policy issue as well. --Grufo (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

I have deleted the article on my home wiki German Wikipedia for violating our policies on AI and translations. I will also delete the article on all global sysop wikis as these are typically too small to have an active community that could properly patrol such pages (as NDKDD, JavaHurricane and others pointed out as well). --Johannnes89 (talk) 20:05, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

After a lot of reading and rechecking, The Malayalam Wikipedia article can be easily fixed. So, I believe that instead of deleting the article, I can improve it. But, I am not sure regarding the notability of the subject. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 03:43, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

What are the notability criterias in the Malayalam Wikipedia? Asorev (talk) 04:25, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Same as English Wikipedia, except that Schools in Kerala are also notable.

However, what makes me doubt your topic is that he is notable just because he is the most famous participant in the Nakhodka's religious emigration movement of the late 1970s and early 1980s TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 07:17, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

When I started writing this article, I was guided by the Russian Wikipedia's notability criteria, which include a criterion such as ru:ВП:УНИКУМ "People who have committed some extraordinary act — regardless of whether that act is judged from a moral standpoint as positive (heroes, saviors of others, pioneers in important scientific experiments, etc.), negative (terrorists, notorious criminals, etc.), or neutral." In other words, are there many known individuals who lobbied for a law that allowed over a million people to enter the United States? Asorev (talk) 07:35, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

TheGreatEditor024, also Boris Perchatkin is not an arbitrary or marginal subject. As to the English Wikipedia, then his notability can be assessed under the en:Wikipedia:General Notability Guideline (GNG), which requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. There is independent coverage of Perchatkin in major English-language sources and in academic literature. For example:

• The New York Times, “Soviet Pentecostals Meet Illegally and Form Council” (5 September 1979), reported on the Soviet Pentecostal emigration movement in which Perchatkin was a prominent participant.
• The Washington Post reported on Perchatkin in connection with the 1988 meeting between Ronald Reagan and Soviet dissidents, identifying him as a Pentecostal church organizer: [26]
• The Washington Post also reported on Perchatkin immediately after that meeting: [27]

His activities are also discussed in scholarly publications, including Michael Rowe's “The Soviet Pentecostal Emigration Movement” (Religion in Communist Lands, 2008) and Catherine Wanner's work on religion and refugee resettlement (2010). Asorev (talk) 09:25, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Look @Asorev, I get that he is reported in many media outlets. But, we need sources that gives significant coverage on the subject, not just passing mentions. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 10:17, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

TheGreatEditor024, that's a fair distinction. I agree that simply collecting many passing mentions would not establish notability. However, there are sources that go beyond passing mentions and discuss Perchatkin directly and in some detail.

For example, Michael Rowe's The Soviet Pentecostal Emigration Movement in Religion in Communist Lands (11(3), pp. 337–339) discusses Perchatkin as one of the leaders of the emigration campaign, describes his role in the movement, his prominence among Western correspondents and dissident circles, his arrest and his two prison sentences. The article is primarily about the broader movement, but the GNG explicitly says that significant coverage "does not need to be the main topic of the source material."

There is also a peer-reviewed historical study by O. P. Ostrovskaya, Emigration Movement among Far Eastern Pentecostals in the 1960s–1980s: Causes and Forms of Manifestation, published in Oikumena (2018, No. 2, pp. 46–56). It gives Perchatkin several paragraphs of direct coverage: it identifies him as the most active leader of the emigration movement in the late 1970s–early 1980s, describes his organizational activities from 1976 onward, his role as secretary of the Council of Pentecostal Churches seeking emigration, his arrest and imprisonment, his interaction with the human-rights movement, the materials he provided for the Madrid Conference, and the continuing activities of his family.

So I would not rely on the New York Times and Washington Post mentions alone. The stronger argument for notability is the combination of these independent secondary sources, particularly the scholarly study by Ostrovskaya and Rowe's historical study of the Pentecostal emigration movement.

In other words, the question is not whether Perchatkin's name appears frequently in the press, but whether independent reliable sources address him directly enough that a biography can be written without original research. I believe there is a reasonable basis for saying that they do. The English Wikipedia GNG does not require the subject to be the sole or primary topic of every source.

I agree that passing mentions are not enough. But I think we have something more substantial than that. Ostrovskaya's peer-reviewed historical study (Oikumena, 2018, pp. 46–56) contains several paragraphs specifically about Boris Perchatkin's leadership, organizational activities, arrests, human-rights contacts and role in the emigration movement. Rowe's The Soviet Pentecostal Emigration Movement also discusses him as one of the best-known leaders of the campaign and describes his activities and imprisonment. These are independent secondary sources, not merely press mentions. The GNG also explicitly states that significant coverage does not have to be the main topic of the source. So the relevant question is whether these sources provide enough direct material for a biography without original research; I believe they do. Asorev (talk) 10:26, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

• Neutral, however I have comment about test-setup and how I would interpret it. The cases where articles were not deleted doesn't really measure the how good the machine translations are or are they accepted by community but it is more about benchmark for to communities ability to monitor incoming content. Even before LLM:s we did know that communities abitility to detect and process automatic translations werent that good and result was that the articles were just stayed there even if they were just spamming, COI translation campaings etc ( example analysis for 100 articles created in one of such case from 2023: Steward_requests/Global/2023-w16#Global_lock_for_user:AllThisPaperwork_and_socks) --Zache (talk) 14:22, 4 October 2026 (UTC) Edit: [[Here is current status of articles created in 2023: User:Zache/machinetranslations --Zache (talk) 16:01, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

Is there anything more to do here? Johannes89 has deleted everything in a global sysop wiki. The rest is not a matter for Meta. I propose to close this thread. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 05:08, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Just because a wiki isn't in the GS wikiset does not necessarily mean it has enough resources on its own to handle every incident proactively. While global sysops and stewards can't delete those directly, we can still notify them, which I have just done by tagging the rest (only those were created in 2026) for deletion. If anything, were we to ignore those, it'd send a very bad message. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 12:47, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Deleted on rowiki based on the local CSD that mirrors en:WP:G15. Thaks @NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh for reporting. Gikü (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2026 (UTC) (forgot to mention: the translation quality was bad.)

User:ANTORLGOY

Status:    In progress

Hi. Requesting steward review of User:ANTORLGOY for block evasion and cross-wiki spam.

This user is recreating pages deleted previously as spam, such as si:සොනාල් දහනායක. The title was deleted in connection with a globally locked account (Renamed user 86b7651314b97c07bfb294c41f05b19d), but it was never creation-protected. The account is also active on Wikidata and Commons.

I posted this at GS/R first, but was directed to SRM due to the cross-wiki/LTA context (see GSR thread).

Could you please check if this account is evading the global lock, and apply a global block and title protection on si.wiki if needed?

Thanks. IDB.S (talk) 17:40, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

For information on the username history

Alter Benutzername	Neuer Benutzername	Umbenennungsdatum	Wiki
Velorak	Renamed user 86b7651314b97c07bfb294c41f05b19d	10.07.2026 16:49	metawiki
SonalDahanayaka	Velorak	04.07.2026 07:42	metawiki

--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 21:32, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

For clarification, the former account was globally locked following my own vanish request; this account is not being used to evade that lock.

I also contribute across multiple Wikimedia projects and do substantial work unrelated to my own pages, so my broader contribution history is available for review.

The relevant account history and connection have already been disclosed to the Wikidata CheckUsers, and that disclosure has been acknowledged. I have also stated that I will not recreate deleted pages or attempt to bypass the applicable review processes.

I am happy to leave the question of any block-evasion or cross-wiki concerns to the reviewing stewards. ANTORLGOY (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Note: ANTORLGOY has also requested vanishing and was approved. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 13:31, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Could a steward also apply creation protection (salting) to si:සොනාල් දහනායක to prevent further recreation? Thanks. IDB.S (talk) 03:28, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Request for review of local block #807 – Somali Wikipedia

Status:    On hold

Hello,

I am requesting assistance with a local block on Somali Wikipedia.

• Username: Special:CentralAuth/Abdalablack
• Project: Somali Wikipedia (so.wikipedia.org)
• Block ID: #807
• Block duration: 1 year
• Stated reason: Use of machine translation
• Blocking administrator: Special:CentralAuth/Isma4l

I understand the reason given for my block. I acknowledge that machine-translated text should not be published without proper human editing, review, and compliance with Somali Wikipedia's translation guidelines.

I am willing to correct my previous contributions and to follow the rules and translation guidelines of Somali Wikipedia. I will not publish unedited machine translations in the future.

I was unable to submit an unblock request on my Talk page. Following advice from Wikimedia Stewards, I contacted the blocking administrator, Isma4l, through Meta-Wiki on 17 September 2026. However, I have not received a response.

I subsequently contacted Wikimedia Stewards again and was informed that the matter could not be resolved through email and that I should use the appropriate Meta-Wiki process.

I am therefore requesting that my local block be reviewed, or that I be directed to the appropriate process for an independent review, since I have already attempted to contact the blocking administrator and have not received a response.

I am not asking for special treatment. I simply want an opportunity for my block to be reviewed and, if appropriate, to return to contributing to Somali Wikipedia while following its rules and translation guidelines.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abdalablack (talk) 09:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm no steward or admin, but I should note that Abdalablack has done less than 10 edits, and only 2 medium-sized edits in the Somali Wiki. His discussion page is empty, so he does not seem to have been warned by admins prior to a block.

I cannot say whether his content is machine-translated or not, since I cannot speak Somali, but the block seems to be disproportionate. Perhaps Isma4l could explain his reasoning behind the block. Kurdanparez (talk) 18:05, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Isma4l: if this user had talk page access, this is something that could be followed up locally - is that feasible? — xaosflux ^Talk 19:23, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

  Done The user uses machine translation without reviewing it, but I will allow them to submit an appeal on their talk page if everything works as expected. Isma4l (talk) 19:47, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Abdalablack: you have a local venue available for appealing your block now - so that is where to start. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:19, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you, Xaosflux. I understand.

  Could you please provide me with the link to the local venue on Somali Wikipedia where I should submit my appeal for block #807?

  I was previously unable to submit an unblock request on my Talk page, so I would appreciate the direct link to the appropriate local appeal venue.

  Thank you for your help.

  — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abdalablack (talk) 10:52, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

  You should do it on your talk page. A09|(pogovor) 09:23, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

Attach my unattached account at banwiki to my global account

Status:    In progress

I recently found out that I have an unattached account on Balinese Wikipedia. I made a few small edits to a template while that wiki was in Incubator a while ago, but my account there is not attached to my global account for some reason. If I remember correctly, it's possible for stewards to fix this, so I am requesting that my account at banwiki be attached to my global account. DraconicDark (talk) 15:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Ajraddatz: are you working on a patch related to this? — xaosflux ^Talk 23:44, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
• CC also @Martin Urbanec. Veritas Sapientiae (talk | email) 13:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Car spam in be-tarask wiki

Status:    In progress

This summer, a mass deletion of car-related spam took place on the be-tarask wiki (example). Now, an anonymous author has started creating new spam articles: be-tarask:Газель (аўтамабіль), be-tarask:ГАЗель-NEXT, be-tarask:Austin K6. Please delete them and block the author.--Artsiom91 (talk) 19:59, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting @Artsiom91. I was involved in checking through the be-tarask car pages back in July. Now I've deleted the three pages and checked the edits of the temporary accounts. The (quite stable) IP-adress is reblocked. Could you please check for other pages? I will do another check on my own later, but it would be helpful if you could support me there. It was quite a mess going through that case weeks ago. Ping to @Icodense who did the cleanup for most of these pages. NDG (talk) 14:53, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

I have checked be-tarask wiki, there are no other problem pages now. But vandal can be active in other projects. He permanently changes accounts, it's difficult for me to check all his contribution.--Artsiom91 (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

I remember that there was no or just few x-wiki activity. I will check this, too. I suggest you, to keep your eyes open, and please report any suspicious activity at be-tarask Wiki to GSR NDG (talk) 17:10, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

This is a known crosswiki LTA, will clean it up in the upcoming days. A09|(pogovor) 22:16, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Unusual behaviour on the Vietnamese Wikibooks

Status:    In progress

~2026-53821-04's contribution there is unusual. This user seems to make constructive changes to a page while he vandalises another page and makes a test edit. Please review the user's behavior. --Pristome 17:10, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

This is a long-term disruptive user (disruptive, not a vandal, because they likely contribute in good faith), known as Quachthanh/Thanhtrungquach/Quachthanhcanada, originally blocked for publishing copyright violations cross-wiki. The three pages linked here were all created by them. Many of these creations remain alive because no one has made the effort to check them.

Note that deleting a large amount of content isn't necessarily vandalism, just as not following formatting conventions doesn't necessarily make an edit a test.

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:31, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

OAuth permissions

Preferably permission requests should be submitted using the form from Special:OAuthConsumerRegistration.

After submitting this form, you will receive a token that your application will use to identify itself to MediaWiki. An OAuth administrator will need to approve your application before it can be authorized by other users. It is possible to request approval using {{oauthapprequest}}; please create a sub-section of this section.

A few recommendations and remarks:

• Try to use as few grants as possible. Avoid grants that are not actually needed now.
• Versions are of the form "major.minor.release" (the last two being optional) and increase as grant changes are needed.
• Please provide a public RSA key (in PEM format) if possible; otherwise a (less secure) secret token will have to be used.
• Use the JSON restrictions field to limit access of this consumer to IP addresses in those CIDR ranges.
• You can use a project ID to restrict the consumer to a single project on this site (use "*" for all projects).
• The email address provided must match that of your account (which must have been confirmed).

Oauth for Broad Interwiki Enhanced Retrieval

Status:    Done

• Application name: [1.0] (consumers for this tool)
• Publisher: WikiBayer (user information · other consumers by this publisher)
• Consumer key: f4167d6359dd2bbe4bfb743d37adaf1d
• OAuth admins: review/manage this application.

I have a small tool ("Broad Interwiki Enhanced Retrieval") for retrieving CirrusSearch results and other informations interwiki that offers a few more features than Global-Search.toolforge.org. The tool can retrieve any CirrusSearch results. It can also perform a “legacy” search (using a search interface similar to global-search.toolforge.org), search through abuse filters and the abuse filter log (currently disabled due to ToolsDB limits), retrieve user information, view a user’s JS/CSS/gadget edits and rollbacks, and more.

The tool may be temporarily unavailable, this is not a bug, but is due to Toolforge limitations. I have already created a Phabricator ticket to fix the issue. please do not report a bug if this is the case.--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 18:01, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

@WikiBayer this is a searching tool - why does it need writing access? — xaosflux ^Talk 00:09, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@Xaosflux This tool may require write access for the interwiki template migration. In addition to searching, it can also write. (with user confirmation) 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 07:51, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@WikiBayer for 'View restricted log entries' - should you return any of these to the user, will you indicate the restriction on the results? e.g. if you have view suppression access, and retrieve things that are and are not suppressed in a query, you will need to know to handle private results privately so as to not accidently disclose them publicly later. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:26, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@Xaosflux By default, everything is cached and currently accessed via a private OAuth accestoken. Similar to (https://search-filters.toolforge.org/), however, for users without global permissions, each wiki is checked individually, and only the content the user is authorized to view is displayed. The user’s OAuth flow permission is not used, or is used only for verification. Logging in without the necessary permission is also possible, but this causes the permission verification to fail, and the user will not see any private filters/Logs.

Private filters are not disclosed. For Example: [28] has 4 Filters in dewikinews. With an account that doesn't have the necessary permissions, I can only find one filter (Filter 2) in deWikinews. (Only the “Public Description” is visible to everyone, exactly as on wikinews:de:Special:AbuseFilter.) 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 13:44, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

@WikiBayer here is the use case I'm trying to describe: if you have permissions to retrieve private information and you use this tool to produce some results - it seems that the results could include comingled public and private information. If so, is it clear to the user which portions of the results are private so they don't accidently take the results of this tool, publish it publicly such as on a project workpage, thinking it was only public information? — xaosflux ^Talk 15:38, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, A user always sees all the information related to the filter. The display looks like this. "dewiki · Aktiviert · privat · ID 462" or "kowikinews · Gelöscht · ID 3" "zhwikinews · Deaktiviert · privat · ID 8" Labels can also be in English, French, or other languages. The tool is multilingual (though some languages are only machine-translated). 𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 15:51, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 20:19, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

OAuth 2.0 approval request: Commons Android App

Status:    In progress

• Application name: (consumers for this tool)
• Publisher: VoidRaven-18 (user information · other consumers by this publisher)
• Consumer key: a118e2101557f767fc0865eaeb8bc882
• OAuth admins: review/manage this application.

--VoidRaven-18 (talk) 15:09, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

See also

• Global sysops
• Steward handbook
• Archives:
  • 2013: 2013.
  • 2014: 01-10, 11-12
  • 2015: 01-02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2016: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2017: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2018: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2019: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2020: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2021: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2022: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2023: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2024: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2025: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12
  • 2026: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12

General requests for: help from a Meta sysop or bureaucrat · deletion (speedy deletions: local · multilingual) · URL blacklisting · new languages · interwiki map

Personal requests for: username changes · permissions (global) · bot status · adminship on Meta · CheckUser information (local) · local administrator help

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation