Consumer Rights Wiki talk:Moderators' noticeboard

Welcome — post issues of interest to Moderators

• Post appeals to article notice templates (e.g. Incomplete, Stub, etc.)
• Post requests for moderator action here (e.g. blocks)
• Just need a mod? Post here or ping a mod with a question.
• Post any information or news relevant to the moderation team here.
• To request an article to be created, do not post here, try Article suggestions instead.
• Do not report technical issues here, please use the Bugs noticeboard instead.

Start a new section

Previous discussions
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Open tasks

• Category:Articles with deletion requests
• Category:Articles with merge requests
• Category:Articles marked as irrelevant
• Special:NewPages

Archive everything

is there a way the checking process for refs be automated? it is user maintained and isn't always accurate. perhaps all refs could be checked if they have the archive-url= filled? SinexTitan (talk) 18:26, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Bots existed on Wikipedia that automatically archived links, but for complicated/opaque reasons didn't sustain operation. Probably a big project. Is that what you mean? Weirdly, Wikipedia insists on archive-date, even though generally it's in the archive-url.

On a somewhat related note - @Sojourna, the link you added [1] doesn't really work. Maybe use a better archiving service? .is or ghostarchive? .is usually does a better job than .org with such content and the archives are not prone to become unavailable (i.e. hidden by robots.txt changes). CrookKilla (talk) 04:51, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

From what I recall, Ghost Archive and Megalodon did not fare as well when I attempted to archive MegaLag's YouTube Community post; both were not displaying the second image in said post. And Archive.today is blacklisted on CRW owing to its owner's actions early this year that brought its credibility into doubt.

The capture I used from Internet Archive loads rather slowly, but it does display all the important parts. — Sojourna (talk) 04:59, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Projects:Archive_everything#Archival_services is incredibly one-sided. I disagree with the blacklisting. Reasons:

• There was no significant archive tampering. The way what did occur is described on the pages linked to from there calls into question the reliability of the narrator/narrative found on those pages.
  • By contrast, we KNOW archive.org is likely to take down content essentially upon request by the archived site. For defensible reasons, but ones that make it markedly less useful for a Consumer Rights Wiki that is typically documenting bad behavior the actor typically wishes to hide!
    Recent examples noted: https://x.com/archiveis/status/2014729926847373506 , https://x.com/archiveis/status/2013987834022043841
• "bizarre internet argument" is an inappropriate way to describe getting upset because someone ( Jani Patokallio ) was trying to doxx their staff, which I *think* is what was happening.
  • Doxxing isn't okay, we agree?
  • Rampant self-censorship to avoid all controversy bad, we agree?
• It's claimed "there's also a very real risk that they just take the site down" - claim lacks evidence.
• Probably many more; there's plenty I haven't read on the topic. I could be wrong, but I have looked well below the surface, and I use the site regularly. I'm a fan of IA, but... well, archive.is usually works better.
• They state, "among our users who are particularly wary of the FBI, there are also less frequently mentioned groups, such as environmental activists or right-to-repair advocates." src

Its page notes: "In early 2023, a team of researchers at the University of Amsterdam identified archive.today as the most-used open-access archiving service among fact-checking organisations."

I would like to know what others who haven't assumed Wikipedia made the right decision think. It's notable how much discussion it's engendered - 5 RFCs on the topic... clearly there's lots of disagreement.

- CrookKilla (talk) 07:58, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

@CrookKilla, from what I've seen, the 'doxxing' only ended up going as far as saying the owner is Russian, which isn't any info at all considering that the owner refuses to let content get removed, including some that can doxx people themselves.

Archive.today is definitely the best, and while it can be taken down at any time due to only having ONE owner, that is very unlikely, and for all we know the IA could suddenly shutdown.

I agree that there wasn't much archive tampering, but since this site is owned ny pne person, they can do what they want with the archives and can very easily tamper more.

Also, we don't want to be directing our users to a site that DDOSes a blogger's website.

(Noting that I'm the one who told this issue to Keith) AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 06:31, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for being the first to engage. From what I've seen, the doxxing involved disclosing what were believed to be the full names of people behind the site. A GDPR complaint was filed.

What does "including some that can doxx people themselves" mean? Garbled? ("ny pne" too.)

Who says Brewster Kale would have a harder time tampering with the archives? I understand the DDoS is disabled (and prior to that, fetches were modified to be so limited as to be merely symbolic.)

"Archive.today is definitely the best" - for archives that have the persistence required for a Consumer Rights Wiki? Possibly. Certainly better than IA's. CrookKilla (talk) 06:37, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Terms of Service info to share...

Talk:Terms_of_service#Terms_of_Service_info_to_share... Feedback, anyone? CrookKilla (talk) 03:10, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Re: Question regarding what can be added to a page.

Heyo,

I occasionally edit stuff on the Honda company page regarding data breaches and their data collection.

Is there any restrictions to adding links that can allow users to request control? Specifically I was interested in adding this link somewhere: https://www.honda.com/privacy/disconnect-remote-vehicle-access which allows users to disable remote features on their car, allow users to retain some more privacy controls over their vehicles from Honda.

Best, Em Emlynet (talk) 20:29, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Just go for it, although I'm honestly not sure if it's allowed. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 06:27, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Templates and Bots

Hope we can import better templates and get some bots working. Any plans for this?

e.g. {{Archives }} is not going to scale and doesn't support search. CrookKilla (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

We had a bot that ran for a while before (Bananabot) but it hasn't been run since February, and I'm sure if anyone wants to make a bot it'd get approved!

Templates could definitely be improved, especially if we give more of them Lua support. Sadly, since I don't think any of us know Lua, we're currently relying on Wikipedia for our few Lua modules. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Userify JS article

I guess this is an appeal to the deletion notice on this article

I propose to move it to my space (even without redirects), please. To preserve revisions/history, and to have it as a sort of "archive" so that it can be easily restored in the future Rudxain (talk) 05:15, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

 Done. (User:Rudxain/JavaScript) AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Better Logo instructions

I want to replace the text "Upload an image of the company's logo" that appears when making a new company page, e.g. at https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Special:FormEdit/Company/Instacart&preload=Template%3ACompanyPreload should say something like

Upload an image of the company's logo or, if it already has a logo on Wikipedia / Wikimedia Commons, you can just provide the name of the logo file, thanks to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/InstantCommons.

Longer instructions: For a company, do they have a wikipedia page? e.g. for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instacart, we can mouse over the logo and see "Instacart_logo_and_wordmark.svg" at the end of the URL. We can just paste that ("Instacart_logo_and_wordmark.svg") into the field on the page.

Speaking of the form, why ask for a description and not use it? It's put into the Description= field, but the contents of that field are not displayed on the page. Is this a bug in {{CompanyCargo }} or intentional? CrookKilla (talk) 18:33, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Request for neutral review of a userspace draft (COI disclosed): Sony India BRAVIA warranty denial and legal notice

Requesting neutral review of a userspace draft before any move to mainspace: User:Laxmimerit/Sony India remote warranty denial and legal notice to BRAVIA owner.

COI Disclosure: I am the consumer in the dispute the draft describes, so under the conflict of interest policy I am not moving it myself.

Why I think it meets the inclusion guideline: the subject is a practice, not a single service complaint. Sony India decided warranty eligibility from technician photographs reviewed remotely on WhatsApp, with no test or written report, and then served a legal notice threatening a ₹5 crore claim on the consumer for publishing the correspondence while a statutory consumer complaint was pending. As of 3 September 2026 the story has been reported by six outlets (Times Now, News18, Digit, LatestLY, Sportskeeda, Gizbot), all cited in the draft, and other owners have described the same photo-based "external damage" findings in the Reddit thread cited.

The draft uses plain-text reference addresses because the abuse filter blocks external links in userspace. If an editor moves it, I will supply the same references as Cite web templates with url= parameters, or convert them on request. Happy to make any changes asked for on the draft's talk page. Laxmimerit (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Laxmimerit!

I've taken a look at the article, and I think it looks good! there are a sufficient number of external sources to meet notability and merit a movement to mainspace, so I'm happy to make the move. Keith (talk) 19:38, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

i've also confirmed your account, so you shouldn't have any trouble with user pages in future. Keith (talk) 19:46, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much Laxmimerit (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2026 (UTC)