The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

 Done -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

Could someone action this item? I recuse. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There is at least one template at UTRS, "Refer to ArbCom ~ CheckUser block", that contains now-outdated instructions per the bottom of the current ArbCom noticeboard revision. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: I must confess to being confused. Do we no longer refer check user blocks to arbcom? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cause, the last I looked, the check user block notice said it's OK to send to ArbCom. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We passed a motion to restrict the circumstances under which we hear appeals of Checkuser blocks. It is expected that CU blocks are by default are appealed on-wiki (or UTRS); ArbCom would still consider appeals that are unsuitable for public discussion, for example, where there are compelling reasons to hear a private appeal, or in cases where CUs disagree about the technical findings. Maxim (talk) 21:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: is the UTRS checkuser-in-residence. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now what of the oversight blocks? That UTRS reply template says to contact ArbCom. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:12, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom will still handle OS blocks. Maxim (talk) 18:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pinging me. I'm aware of this change and happy to ensure UTRS gets CU attention. Did the UTRS template(s) get updated? --Yamla (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I wrote to email the check users. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huzzah! --Yamla (talk) 19:28, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, as long as we have Yamla . . . . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A list of Wikimedia projects acn be found is a typo. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 04:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this by searching onwiki or in the UTRS GitHub repo. Any other details? –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per this, template messages can only be updated by toolsadmins it appears. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have feasiblity to extend this system to other language wikipedias? If so what are the procedures to adopt it in their languages? -Neechalkaran (talk) 05:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Neechalkaran: UTRS 3.0 is an active work in progress, and subject to active grant funding. I'm hoping to have it done by the end of march, in which the process will develop for other language wikipedias - it's just the biggest hurdle, the ability to translate the interface to begin with is missing at the moment. Once that is complete, there will be more for this as many wikis have asked for it. If you are looking for an early start, a large community RFC with consensus to use UTRS when it starts will be required before I engage any other wiki. -- Amanda (she/her) 05:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AmandaNP Thanks for the response. We from Tamil Wikipedia community, one of the larger community in south Asia, would like to start with it. Please let us know once it is availble. Then I will get community consensus on this. -Neechalkaran (talk) 07:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that UTRS appeal #86181 appears to be a joe-job. Someone other than the claimed user made the request. That's not in itself that unusual, what's strange here is that the request itself didn't fit the usual behaviour of our more common LTAs who troll UTRS. I base this claim on both CU data and on User_talk:Yamla#Your_message_on_my_talk_page comments on my talk page. So, noting for the record. We already expect to have to be dubious of unverified UTRS requests. --Yamla (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone needs a hobby. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]