User talk:MechQuester - Wikidata

Archive 1

Your edits are acceptable, but I feel if you fill admins task along with editing, both of them would be sub par. I feel that MisterSynergy can edit without distraction on admin tasks. That's why I weakly opposed on your candidate so far.

It is difficult to spot mistakes for accounts with 100K+ edits.

Feel free to fill another request, but please be more specific what you intend to maintain and how. d1g (talk) 17:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

What prompted you to write this? MechQuester (talk) 18:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Your user profile. d1g (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@D1gggg:, I was thinking of dealing with administrative things for now on. MechQuester (talk) 18:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

What do you mean by this edit? Since this is your bot request, I am afraid you can only withdraw the request, and from the discussion it does not look to me like you are withdrawing.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:09, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I will revert that. MechQuester (talk) 19:46, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi MechQuester. I am writing to inform you that I am removing claims that you created, see Special:Diff/432754268 for example. It seems that you added this incorrectly, since the locations aren't in UTC+8 time zone, but UTC+7. You may find the evidence by querying in Google and find "time in Central Java". Best, ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 05:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Rachmat04:, thanks for letting me know. I appreciate it. Just note, Indonesia has 3 time zones. MechQuester (talk) 12:28, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Correct. All administrative divisions located in Central Java are in UTC+7. It may cause confusion to anyone who sees that Singapore (Q334) or Malaysia (Q833) are in UTC+8, but areas in Java (Q3757) that are situated more eastern that those country, still in UTC+7. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:51, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi MechQuester, I had to fix around one hundred taxon related items created by you. Please be more carefull using your bot account. --Succu (talk) 20:57, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Succu:, Im really sorry. I should not have checked everything on Petscan. Thank you for notifying me. I'll go back and check some of the items. thanks. MechQuester (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Please check your method, which claims genera to be species or adding strange values for instance of (P31). It's not the first incident in this domain caused by you. --Succu (talk) 21:12, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

of course. MechQuester (talk) 21:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

You have been blocked for 1 week for abusing multiple accounts. Not only were the accounts not disclosed, but they were also used on the same items, for example [1]. You are welcome to appeal using {{Unblock}}.

I will also be blocking the alternate accounts indefinitely. --Rschen7754 00:32, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Rschen7754:, I have already an appeal with Arbcom on enwiki. Would you like to know anymore? You also might to know that he might use this 1 week block to dominate the conversation at my bot request. MechQuester (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

What ArbCom does on enwiki has little bearing here. --Rschen7754 01:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Of course not. I have little to say, unless.... you actually have some interest why I used multiple accounts. MechQuester (talk) 01:08, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

The rules here are different: all accounts must be disclosed openly, per WD:SOCK. --Rschen7754 01:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

I know. I have to disclose them. However, its moot since the entire community already knows now. MechQuester (talk) 01:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

I gonna go now. I also...... will just have to leave for the time being, and perhaps indefinitely.

also, XXN, feel free to do whatever you want to that Bot request. If you are willing, you can do whatever you want with it, whether you can scream the most, take a piss on it, whatever.

Wikidata will just not receive free contributions from me anymore. I have my own life to live and it does not have to be digital avatars. 300,000+ edits is great enough, just enough for my appetite. Take care everyone. MechQuester (talk) 01:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi:

I noticed a bunch of incorrect edits attributed to you, such as adding Q28197431 as an isntance of railroad and transport. Although the definitions of these classes are typically much too sketchy I don't think that a light-rail station can be considered as a railroad or a transport. I suggest that you go through all these edits and fix them up.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 19:46, 16 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

[2] --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

⁠ Rschen7754 18:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

The block was for sockpuppetry as discovered on enwiki, using User:Artix Kreiger. --Rschen7754 18:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy Jura1

I know its not the proper time but I think I want to say, I wish to com plete the task of descriptions. Terms and conditions to be applied by admins. HOw do I convince the community to not commit sockpuppetry?

As you h ave seen, I have only done good edits. The only destructive thing is the abuse of trust with sockpuppets and new accounts. With the block of the 2 bots, I am now saddened it cannot be finished. I have pasted translations below.

PS, I have cancelled the QS batches.

MechQuester (talk) 12:27, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well, it is certainly going to be difficult.

• On your sockpuppetry history: prepare a list of *all* your accounts and how/when they were used in Wikidata. As far as I remember, socking was more severe in other projects than in Wikidata. Here we at least have the most recent activity which is a clear block evasion; maybe there was more, I cannot look for details right now.
• There was also that testwikidata adminship incident last summer which probably some editors have not forgotten about.
• On your current batch: it is not about time to discuss this now, although I understand your motivation. Since server load is another issue that was recently related to your edit behavior, you should take measures to streamline your efforts. Technically it is not so complicated to add all descriptions at one swoop per item. Yet: this is not your problem right now, focus on the unblock request; if you gain edit rights back, I could help you with the streamlining.

I suggest to file a *really well-prepared* {{Unblock}} request on this page. Take your time to prepare it, and make sure that you don’t forget or hide anything which other users would debunk for you. I am not sure whether it works out for you in the end, it really depends on *your* credibility and honesty. Feel free to ask questions, I’m watching here. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy, How long should I wait before making a request for an unblock? I hope wikidata community is more forgiving though. I just want to finish and leave. MechQuester (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I leave this decision up to you. Based on the reaction in this short discussion (April 2018) I would be very careful if I was you. You don’t have many attempts left, and today’s episode doesn’t help you either. I guess the more you are able to deliver a brutally honest, self-critical statement of your criticized past behavior, particularly in the light of the three aspects listed above, the earlier an unblock request would be accepted. You really need to try to convince the community to trust you again. Such a statement is very difficult to compile, however. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy, request posted below. MechQuester (talk) 16:25, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Okay, seen and read. I will post a comment on the administrators' noticeboard to raise attention for it, and maybe also involve myself in the discussion. Yet I will of course not be the one to finally make a decision. —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

list by User:MechQuester [3]

Just to understand the task: your plan is to add all of these 52 descriptions to each of these 589k items, right? With one edit per descriptions this would sum up to ~30M edits or around 1 year of continuous editing at 1 edit/s; if all descriptions were set in a single edit, which is technically rather simple, the task would reduce to 589k edits or 1 week of continuous editing at 1 edit/s. I guess we can only permit the latter, if at all. —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:04, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

yes. If the latter is fine, I guess that can be implemented, if ever. I plan on adding a few more translations soon enough. MechQuester (talk) 19:24, 14 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy, anything? MechQuester (talk) 20:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

See Special:Diff/680124935. Technical things like the ones in this section should wait now. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:56, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy, did you already know since beginning? or you choose to not pursue the issue? MechQuester (talk) 23:11, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

You mean the Artix Kreiger = MechQuester identity? Yes, this was pretty obvious all the time to me. Artix came here and made tons of edits, so I worried about edit rates and looked at those accounts to see what’s on. Since the MechQuester account wasn’t blocked and didn’t interfere with Artix, I assumed you wanted a “fresh start” just as you confirmed in your own statement. However, I didn’t see a reason to complain about socking. —MisterSynergy (talk) 04:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I see several here which appear to be incorrectly capitalised. Have you actually checked them with native speakers? If you want to add these to over half a million items, you should really make sure they are correct first. We've had enough trouble already with people adding huge numbers of descriptions in languages they don't speak which have mistakes in them. - Nikki (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nikki, MisterSynergy, All of them were responded by NATIVE speakers. Capitalization corrected. Can someone use a bot to deal with it? I don't have the skills to do so. Also, please see the note below by Green Giant. Conversation in OTRS says I can edit again, if an unblock is decided first. 185.212.171.13 18:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

As it stands, I still don't trust these translations. Could you explain how you've sourced them? Are you sure the people who checked them are actually native speakers? You've got some languages there with very few native speakers (not to mention Classical Chinese). I still see a number of capitalisation mistakes (I counted 9 that I would question), there's also one with multiple scripts (kk) and two using the wrong code (no and bh - you should definitely not be using those or you'll trigger another half a million edits moving the descriptions to the right codes). An Estonian speaker (albeit non-native) I asked says that the Estonian text you have does not actually mean the same as "village in China" and says "küla Hiinas" would be better. - Nikki (talk) 20:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I understand if you don't trust them. Are there any specific ones, besides Literary Chinese, you don't trust? I could point out specific sources of them. Also, for Estonian, I got them --> c:User:Taivo/Archive18 Jan–Mar#A request for a translation. Taivo is an admin on commons and Estonian Wikipedia. 185.212.171.13 20:54, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nikki, For starters, the Dfa and Daz is from a steward. here. Swedish is from here, Dam is from Til Euspanigel, who's alt is the bureaucrat on am.wikipedia. Dga and Dgv are from here, who is an admin on enwiki, gawiki, and gvwiki. (as well as functionary on enwiki. Those are a few samplers. 185.212.171.20 16:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I would question the capitalisation of az, bar, eu, gsw, kk, pfl, tr and uz (assuming I didn't miss any). I'm pretty confident that bar, gsw and pfl should start with a capital letter because their wikis follow German capitalisation where all nouns are capitalised. For az, kk, tr and uz, I don't know much about the grammar of Turkic languages but I think they may be using the structure "China-LOC village" (i.e. China in the locative case). As for eu, I know even less about Basque but a quick search suggests that this could be "China-GEN village". In those cases, someone who speaks the language needs to confirm what the correct capitalisation is. I can't comment on the actual content for most of them, but the one for pfl doesn't seem to match the most common spellings in pflwiki (Dorf and Schina are a lot more common than Doaf and China). The one for gsw doesn't match alswiki usage (which uses China, not Kina - the only references to Kina are talking about the currency of Papua New Guinea). I wouldn't include gv, the person you asked said they're not a fluent speaker and didn't even seem that confident. If that one is not by a native speaker, are you actually sure all the rest are by native speakers? - Nikki (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

As for bar, gsw,pfl, we could follow the standard German capitalization where nouns are capitalized. That can be done. A;sp. we could use Dorf and Schina. As for not including items, we could scratch out gv, and others you could include.

Are you sure that all of them are fully familiar with Wikidata’s description guidelines? —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:30, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

MisterSynergy, the ones with cyrillic script, such as kk, and Latin alphabet, the letters we are familiar with, can be easily converted to lower case. Other ones, such as Dfa, Dmai, Dbh, Dar, do not distinguish between capital and lowercase letters. Capital and lowercase only exist for languages written in Latin and Cyrillic scripts. 185.212.171.19 22:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nikki, Template:MisterSynergy, As for the description guidelines, Number 2 is satisfactory. I think. As for Number 1, the subheadings 1.1,1.2, and 1.3 are not applicable, as they are uncontroversial, neutral, and is respectful of the namespaces. As for 1.1, the villages are unlikely to change, if at all. I hope all are satisfactory. 185.212.171.18 15:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Changing half a million items is not easy even if all you're doing is changing the capitalisation of one letter. It takes a long time to do all the edits and tends to lead to problems with dispatch lag if done too fast (e.g. with QuickStatements). The number of descriptions is so large that the query service times out when trying to query them. That's why I'm keen for the descriptions to be right the first time, even if it seems like I'm being really pedantic. From the examples you've provided, it wasn't clear that the capitalisation matters (some people responded with the same capitalisation you used, i.e. with capitalised "village" or lowercased "China"). It also seems that you've changed some of the capitalisation yourself (e.g. for the Estonian one I mentioned above, I was told that changing the capitalisation changes the meaning). - Nikki (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

No worries about being pedandic. It is necessary for quality control. As for estonian, we can go with what you feel is proper. If it means anything, we can cross out and not edit/add several descriptions. 185.212.171.18 20:55, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nikki, MisterSynergy, anything? 185.212.171.38 18:37, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hopeless honesty. 185.212.171.40 15:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC) Hi Nikki, has there been any developments recently? I'd like to contribute thanks. 185.212.171.50 02:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, sorry I haven't responded for a while. The past few weeks have been a bit chaotic for me. I also spent quite a bit of time extracting the existing descriptions, tracking down the original requests, checking them capitalisation and had been waiting for some clarifications from people. I'm now waiting to see if the person who already ran a bot for adding "village in China" descriptions minds running it again to add the new descriptions and fix the mistakes you already made. - Nikki (talk) 20:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

meaning? I still want to contribute some of the edits. Specifically, I rather have the edits corrected by someone, and performed by me. 185.212.171.9 17:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

And how are you going to do them? This is something which should be done with a bot and you said you don't have the skills to run a bot. QuickStatements is not suitable for this task and you weren't given permission to do the task using QuickStatements either (see Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/MechQuesterBot 2). - Nikki (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well, a year has passed since then. I have learned some programming skills, although they have to be fine tuned. There is another editor here on wiki who is willing to perfect it (He prefers to be anonymous until I am unblocked). Then, I can convince the community, per crat, with the endorsement of the editor (who is well-established here).

However, I will concede I will not use Quick statements at all. then. It is totally in-efficient.

185.212.171.18 19:05, 20 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Information here for a formal unblock request.

1. User:TheDwellerCamp – made a few edits before blocked on enwiki
2. User:MechQuester - master
3. User:MechQuesterBot - bot
4. User:Artix Kreiger – intended “fresh start” (locked)
5. User:Artix Kreiger 2 – alt for fresh start (locked)
6. User:Cayleigh elise – for QSbot
7. User:Tim Hardcastle – for Qsbot

I want to note that these are all the accounts I have used on Wikidata. Key importance is “active” use.

Of course, there are other accounts listed in en:Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Winterysteppe. Winterysteppe is the master account on enwiki, but MechQuester on wikidata. I should mention that the edits from other accounts have by-products edits that originate from other wikis ie. Renaming pages, adding stuff to interwiki links. Those were “passive” edits.

I have no excuses for that. I will not run for admin powers

To be discussed afterwards.

I am truly sorry and apologetic to the community for the deception. There is little commentary in which the displeasure can dissipate or be forgiven.

In this unblock statement, I will address the sockpuppetry issue.

Previously, my issues are very very stupid and rabid. I had my chance to acknolwedge my mistakes and reconcile with the issues and solutions presented to me. I had ignored them all. Previously , I had operated under the assumption that I can “ignore all rules” for the better and that people will thank me future. I presume I am terribly incorrect. Sockpuppetry is a very deep would healed only by repentence and apology.

Therefore, I apologize to the entire community for my actions. I apologize to every person who has trusted me in helping this wiki. I also deeply apologize to Mahir256, who was close to a “friend” on wikidata that I had. I also, apologize to the community of people, as I am the first of the wiiki's history that I have legitatemly broken the collective trust of the wiki, that is, en masse. Previously, no one else, as far as I can tell, caused deep wounds for sockpuppetry, something that I acknoledge.

Apologies are only for forgivness and an willingness to unblock. An actual technical unblock needs a solid plan of action to be accomplished. As you can see below, I have listed numerous translations I have accumulated below. They were the result of asking multiple people about translations in various languages. I intend to continue and contribute to greater success in translations. I will do nothing more, nothing less. Just those translations. Each of the translations will make 588545 edts per run, so I have several million more to go. Upon completion of the edits, I will leave Wikidata a better place. I will be 100% satisfied and will not need to edit anymore. That will be my legacy. In short, If I am to be unblocked, I will make up to 20 million edits, although 5 million is already done, and be done editing on Wikidata, leaving never to return.

Conditions I accept below, subject to more admin requirements.

• 1. I know tat any further breaches can be grounds to a indefinite block and ban from Wikidata
• 2. This is my aboslute FINAL Chance at this community.
• 3. Absolutely no other accounts.
• 4. Only User:MechQuester and User:MechQuesterBot
• 5. No usage of QuickStatementsBot to avoid scrutiny.

NB: For the reviewing administrator, an unlock request has been made through stewards OTRS. We do not wish to intervene in the block discussion but just wanted to let you know that if it is decided to unblock the user on WD, then the global lock will be reconsidered. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I was asked to review this unblock request but given that MechQuester appears to be unhappy with me following the descriptions section above, I don't think it would be appropriate for me to be the one to accept or decline it. That said: I find it very hard to take such a request as being sincere when the last known edits by one of the socks were just six days before the formal unblock request and the unblock request was created just a few hours after the last block. I also came across Special:Contributions/OceanAtoll which appears to be yet another sock (making the same edits and globally locked at the same time as all the others) and which made one edit here after the unblock request. - Nikki (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

@MisterSynergy, Nikki: As global locked user can not log in to account (and make an appeal via talk page or email), I propose a global unlock (leaving any local blocks intact) for appeal local blocks only. Any thoughts? (note per above this user already contacted stewards).--GZWDer (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I did indeed not consider the global lock while writing the decline message above. I have no idea what happened in other projects, so I have no opinion whether or not they should be globally unlocked. For Wikidata only, however, I do not have any concerns about their participation in future, but I guess someone else should make the formal decision. —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)Reply