Commons talk:Oversight

Data protection & privacy regulation

"Accused", I resigned adminship, 12 years ago. According the law (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_à_l%27oubli), my real name on this page, its links, could it be changed by my actual user name ? I wrote a mail but if I understand, I had to be from a list member... Thanks. Florent Abel (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Initial version

This is a bare-bones version of the text, not sure what else is needed on the policy side. On the implementation front I have some concerns.

1. Could Lar and Herby add their emails to the page, so users can contact them other than through Special:Emailuser.
2. Should we set up a dedicated mailing list for Commons oversight? I doubt using the existing oversight-l is sensible, though it might be appropriate to sound out the enwp ArbCom about it.
3. When should we point users towards the stewards as opposed to local oversight?
4. What should we do about logging?

Apart from that, possibly more information on obtaining the permission. I don't think we need a copy of the help page for our oversighters.--Nilfanion 12:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I hope this isn't used too much. I would say... Emails=good, mailing list=too much, we direct people to stewards when the oversights aren't available (?), and for the logging, my comment's here. :) →Яocket°°° 13:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

1. Pointing to stewards - I usually put something on my page if I am away for more than a day or so. I will certainly do that when I'm actually travelling. Maybe that is a good time (Larry and I cover the "day" fairly well between us).
2. Logging - well I intend to continue logging as I have done. Give it a few months & we will have a far better idea of "need". Always open to thoughts though.

Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Nilf, for setting this up. Well done and much appreciated. ++Lar: t/c 17:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Mailing list

I am not keen on putting up a public (individual) email, that gets you spam and I get enough already. The oversight-l mailing list is currently for en:wp oversight only. I started (but didn't get closure on) a discussion about moving that to a more general purpose. I can create a temporary throwaway addy for now I suppose, or perhaps create a mailing list on the WMF servers with a name something like oversight-commons-l ... A mailing list is precisely the right way to do this I think. let's discuss further? ++Lar: t/c 17:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Mailing list is the obvious solution in the longer term, as we can give a single unambiguous contact. Might be worth reopening the discussion about the enwp list of course. As for the stewards email, I think if we have stewards as a routine option for our oversight, we should give the email as the relevant page on meta provides that for all projects.--Nilfanion 21:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've reopened the en:wp list discussion on meta. I am hopeful that stewards would be a very last resort here, that's why we had an election. If we find stewards are actually having to do oversight, we may want yet another one (from oceana perhaps for better timezone coverage?) but I'm hopeful that's not going to be the case. So far it hasn't been, but it's early days. The priv is getting more use than I expected, actually. ++Lar: t/c 12:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

What still remains

Can we call this draft done and get it ratified? It still wears the draft tagging. ++Lar: t/c 23:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

{{Guideline}} or {{Policy}}? Rocket000 03:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why we need this at all. We should link to Meta and add guidance about how to contact oversighters to that page.  — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

{{Policy}} I think it is identical of Foundation's policy.--Kwj2772 (msg) 07:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Minor's posting personal information

Is this an ipso facto breach of non-public information and automatically oversightable? -- Avi (talk) 05:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

RevDel

How is this different for specific revision deletion by regular administrators? Rehman 11:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

if I got your question correctly the answer would be , oversights have the option to hide revisions from admins too. Mardetanha ^talk 00:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh. Maybe it's good to mention this; just to avoid confusion? Thanks for clarifying! Rehman 01:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Good , i may update the page myself Mardetanha ^talk 12:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposal for new mailing list

Hello. Please see m:Requests for comment/Oversight mailing list for a current request for comment on creating an oversighter mailing list. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

The mailing list is being discussed at COM:VP#Oversight email issue.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 08:07, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

E-mail never answered

Two days ago, I revesion-deleted an edit which is easy to find since this is I believe my only revision deletion on Commons. As required by the policies, I immediately sent an e-mail to oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org (it can not be sent by wikimail, but I used the same e-mail address as I use for wikimail). I never received a response (checked my mailbox 5 minutes ago). Tonight, Revent left a message on my talk page, saying that they find my revision deletion in a log and oversighted it, but they coild not confirm whether a mail has arrived. It could be a problem on my side (in the past, on two occasions I did not get a response from WMF on mails which I considered high priority, and on one of them I followed up, with the recipient claiming the main never arrived), however, I send mail to English Wikipedia oversighters on a regular basis, and they always reply. If the problem is not on my side, it should be fixed as soon as possible, since this is a legal issue. Either the instructions should be changed, of the workflow on how the mails in the queue are acted on should be changed. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I like to add that handling such stuff via a un-encrypted mailing ist is a bad idea, there should be a way to contact the OS team or at least a few OS users via a encrypted tool (PGP mail). --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I checked the Oversight mailing list, no email from you I can see, only a lot of spam :-( Raymond 09:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, this likely means the problem is on my side, but the question is then how can I contact Oversight if needed. Would it be possible to organize it in the same way as the English Wikipedia, where I can just send a wikimail to the oversight team?--Ymblanter (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

As oversighter I would support to create an user account like User:Oversight email or similar (like de:User:Oversight-Email) with the email address "oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org" in user preference. Raymond 10:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Category tweak

{{Edit request}}

Could someone please change the last line from

[[Category:Commons help]]

to

[[Category:Commons help{{#translation:}}]]

After the page has been marked for translation it will place versions like Commons:Oversight/fr into Category:Commons help/fr. This declutters the list of files in Category:Commons help and makes it easier to review all the French-language Help translations. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 23:19, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit request - Special:MyLanguage

{{Edit protected}}

Please replace

Oversight actions can be performed by users with the <code>suppressrevision</code> user right — currently {{NUMBERINGROUP:oversight}} local Commons [[Commons:Oversighters|oversighters]] and a small number of [[m:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] employees.</translate> <translate><!--T:6-->
Oversight actions are covered by the [[m:Oversight policy|global oversight policy]], and their contents are protected under the [[m:Privacy policy|privacy policy]].

with

Oversight actions can be performed by users with the <code>suppressrevision</code> user right — currently {{NUMBERINGROUP:oversight}} local Commons [[Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Oversighters|oversighters]] and a small number of [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] employees.</translate> <translate><!--T:6-->
Oversight actions are covered by the [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Oversight policy|global oversight policy]], and their contents are protected under the [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Privacy policy|privacy policy]].

so that users are shown the pages in their preferred language. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 03:24, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thank you! -- User: Perhelion 11:01, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Reflect changes per phab:T112147

{{Edit request}} Hello. Will someone please replace Special:ListUsers/oversight and {{NUMBERINGROUP:oversight}} with Special:ListUsers/suppress and {{NUMBERINGROUP:suppress}} respectively on this page. --Magogre (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

@Magogre:  Done. Raymond 08:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Raymond. --Magogre (talk) 09:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Could this page be less useful?

This page says almost nothing. Its almost meaningless. There is no guidance. Could someone who knows what actually gets oversighted expand this, or at least do a little more to make this page useful to the newbie? Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 06:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Messages to oversight are being held

E-Mails to oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org are answered with an automated response “The message is being held because: The message is not from a list member”. This does not sound exactly promising. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

@AFBorchert Done and answered per Mail. Raymond 14:50, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Please change to VRTS

Sorry, my English is not the best but I guess you understand me. You already have discussed and then excluded the oversight mail traffic on VRTS. In my opinion, it would be an advantage, since we, the German oversights, often receive Commons Oversight mails, to be able to move them between the queues with an incoming ticket number. So it would be a relief for everyone if you would join the VRTS (or even go two-track). Unfortunately, forwarding to your oversight mailing list generates different ticket numbers that don't match. So replies and forwards are not assigned correctly and because of this we have to search and merge and link and so on all the time. If you're changing to VRTS we don't need all of this any more, and we wouldn't waste our resources on equally important things with that. It also eliminates the question of who answers to the customers. I see this as a clear win-win-win improvement for you, for us and for the customer. How do you think about it, let's discuss about it once more. Kind regards – Doc Taxon • Talk • 15:47, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

@Minorax, Odder, Rama, and Raymond: did you read this message? – Doc Taxon • Talk • 19:44, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doc Taxon Yes, I am open for a change. Raymond (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doc Taxon: Thank you for the proposal. I object to it on historical grounds—unless VRT administrators can provide solid assurances that all members of the oversight team will have equal and unfettered access to VRT and all of its related resources. Pinging @DCB, @Emufarmers, @Krd, @Matthewrb, @Reinhard Kraasch and @Ruthven so they're aware of this discussion. odder (talk) 23:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Change seems fine for me. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi all, I am not aware of past issues on that matter, but VRTS already hosts few oversight queues. The members of that queue can access to the specific oversight queue, and all of its related resources, which typically is the vrt-wiki. Managing other queues (like info-xx, where xx is a random language code) might require different procedures, like having experience in the xx-projects. Ruthven (msg) 12:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

@Minorax, Odder, Rama, and Raymond: Have you already made a decision to this subject? – Doc Taxon • Talk • 09:46, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

I understand that some Oversighters have difficulties accessing VRTS. As long as this persists, it is difficult to switch since it creates a difference in accessibility between oversighters.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit request

{{Edit request}} Please add translate tags for the sentence that has been added on 9 July. --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ameisenigel: Done. Raymond (talk) 15:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)