(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions - Meta Jump to content

Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 94: Line 94:
:::{{Ping|Như Gây Mê}} Unfortunately the project is not so large and doesn't need other bureaucrats (so we won't flag new 'crats - see [[Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements#Bureaucrat|here]] for further informations). If I looked correctly, the current 'crat falls into [[AAR23]] and, if they don't reply after the notifications, will likely be removed. For obvious reasons we cannot remove bureaucrats where they already exist but, in small projects where they don't exist or have been removed, we currently manage the permissions, also because it's difficult to see a project with 6 permanent sysop and 15 votes made by active users. I personally don't see the need for bureaucrats in projects with very few actions required (this flag is mainly needed in larger wikis). Furthermore, local bureaucrats generally give flags without expiration, this, in projects where there is no broad consensus and users are often inactives, can lead to problems. If I were the only bureaucrat of such a project, personally, I would resign immediately so as not to leave problems even in the event of my inactivity (but it is a personal opinion - even if I have seen others who have done so in the past - but I also see some users who want to keep the 'crat flag even without performing any action for years). Thanks :) [[User:Superpes15|Superpes15]] ([[User talk:Superpes15|talk]]) 12:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
:::{{Ping|Như Gây Mê}} Unfortunately the project is not so large and doesn't need other bureaucrats (so we won't flag new 'crats - see [[Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements#Bureaucrat|here]] for further informations). If I looked correctly, the current 'crat falls into [[AAR23]] and, if they don't reply after the notifications, will likely be removed. For obvious reasons we cannot remove bureaucrats where they already exist but, in small projects where they don't exist or have been removed, we currently manage the permissions, also because it's difficult to see a project with 6 permanent sysop and 15 votes made by active users. I personally don't see the need for bureaucrats in projects with very few actions required (this flag is mainly needed in larger wikis). Furthermore, local bureaucrats generally give flags without expiration, this, in projects where there is no broad consensus and users are often inactives, can lead to problems. If I were the only bureaucrat of such a project, personally, I would resign immediately so as not to leave problems even in the event of my inactivity (but it is a personal opinion - even if I have seen others who have done so in the past - but I also see some users who want to keep the 'crat flag even without performing any action for years). Thanks :) [[User:Superpes15|Superpes15]] ([[User talk:Superpes15|talk]]) 12:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
::::I understood, thanks! [[User:Như Gây Mê|<span style="color:orange;"><strong>Halley</strong></span>]] [[Philippines|<span style="color:#00bbe6;"><strong><sup>luv Filipino ❤</sup></strong></span>]] 12:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
::::I understood, thanks! [[User:Như Gây Mê|<span style="color:orange;"><strong>Halley</strong></span>]] [[Philippines|<span style="color:#00bbe6;"><strong><sup>luv Filipino ❤</sup></strong></span>]] 12:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

==== ToprakM@trwikisource ====
{{sr-request
|status =
|domain = tr.wikisource
|user name = ToprakM
|discussion= [[:tr:s:Özel:KalıcıBağ/165146#Arayüz_yöneticisi_başvurusu_(ToprakM)]]
}}
I applied for the fourth time. It was last granted for two years in January 2022. --[[User:ToprakM|<span style="font-family: old english text mt;color:blue;font-size:93%">'''''ToprakM'''''</span>]]&thinsp;<sup>[[User talk:ToprakM|<span style="color: #bf0023;">✉</span>]]</sup> 16:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


=== Bureaucrat access ===
=== Bureaucrat access ===

Revision as of 16:53, 28 January 2024

Shortcut:
SRP

This page is for requests to have stewards grant or revoke administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight rights on Wikimedia projects which do not have a local permissions procedure. Minimum voting requirement are listed here.

Old sections are archived. The list of archives is below.

  • Requests for bot flags are handled at SRB, and requests for global permissions are handled at SRGP.
  • If you are requesting adminship or bureaucratship, and your wiki has a local bureaucrat, submit your request to that user or to the relevant local request page (index).
  • For urgent requests, such as to combat large-scale vandalism on a small wiki, contact a steward in the #wikimedia-stewardsconnect IRC channel. In emergencies, type !steward in the channel to get the attention of stewards. Otherwise, you can type @steward for non-urgent help.

Other than requests to remove your own access or emergencies, please only make requests here after gaining the on-wiki approval of your local community.

Quick navigation: Administrator | Interface administrator | Bureaucrat | CheckUser | Oversight | Removal of access | Miscellaneous | Global permissions

(translate | edit)

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page

1. Place the following code at the bottom of the appropriate section below: 

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- Don't change this line -->
 |domain    = <!-- Such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name = 
 |discussion= 
}}
(your remarks) ~~~~

2. Fill in the values:

  • domain: the wiki's URL domain (like "ex.wikipedia" or "meta.wikimedia").
  • user name: the name of the user whose rights are to be changed (like "Exampleuser"). In case this is for multiple users, leave this field blank and give a list of these users in your remarks.
  • discussion: a link to the local vote or discussion about the rights change (for example, "[[ex:Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#ExampleUser]]"). This should normally be for at least one week, but no more than three weeks (if so, you'll need to restart the process).

3. If anything is missing from your request, a steward will request more information.

Confirmation of signing confidentiality agreement

Certain permissions (notably CheckUser and Oversight) additionally require users to sign a confidentiality agreement. Users requesting these permissions must make a request below, and must also sign the confidentiality agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation. The request is placed on hold temporarily, until the receipt has been formally confirmed by the Office.

Requests

COPY THE FOLLOWING CODE to the bottom of the appropriate section below: 

==== User name@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
  |status     = <!--don't change this line-->
  |domain     =
  |user name  =
  |discussion = 
}}

Administrator access

See Administrator for information about this user group.

  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at translatewiki.net. Please do not request administrator access solely for that purpose; your request will be declined.
  • Stewards: Please use {{Systmp}} for approved temporary requests.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

Please start a new discussion about requesting the permission on the local village pump, administrators' noticeboard or a designated page for requesting permissions each time you request or renew adminship.

  • Discussions should be open for seven days. Please request adminship here seven days after discussions started. This page is not the place for any discussions or votes. (For wikis with few active users, it is OK to have no comments.)
  • If you only want adminship for specific tasks, please state for how long and for which tasks you need it. Otherwise stewards will decide whether to assign permanent adminship and the duration of adminship. See Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements.

RG72@eowiktionary

Status:    On hold

Hello! I have been working for Esperanto-Wiktionary since 2014, having created a number of articles like [1], [2], [3] and major lists like [4], [5] and I believe that this important project needs an administrator, which it has not had for many years.

I announced my candidacy on November 12 and have since received 10 votes in favor (one was later withdrawn due to a smear campaign launched by former administrator Taylor79, who was deprived of this status by decision of the stewards due to endless conflicts and arbitrariness), 4 votes against. For this reason, please, promote me to administrator position.RG72 (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold Per removal request below. -- Amanda (she/her) 19:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I checked this project a lot in the last 2 years and I didn't notice a lot of active users there! Some of voters never edited there. Is there an explanation for this (like notifying them on social or on another projects)? Thanks. Superpes15 (talk) 00:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Other request was closed with removal. -- Amanda (she/her) 06:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AmandaNP: just a heads up, the removal request was for eowiki, but this adminship request is for eowiktionary. EPIC (talk) 07:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, struck and still up for consideration. -- Amanda (she/her) 07:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the project is not yet ready to have a local sysop. I see this election with a lot of votes made by users who aren't active here (and are from eowiki). Stewards removed the local sysops on eowikt after quarrels and abuse between two administrators some years ago and, since that, I've always observed the project while also performing ordinary maintenance actions (the two formers sysops continued to argue also using heavy insults between each other). I don't think it's a very good idea to give the flag to a third user who hasn't really been active in the project for a long time and immediately after their deflag on eowiki! Thanks
P.S. Note that the support votes are 9 and not 10 (although, coming from users who are not very active there, I couldn't define their value). Superpes15 (talk) 09:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic
Comment Comment @RG72: Please don't attack other users when applying for adminship. @Stewards: Please note the vote stacking. Also, RG72 applied for adminship for a special purpose: to ban me due to personal hate. wiki wiktionary Please see also Steward_requests/Miscellaneous#Please_help_to_remedy_piracy_and_harassment. Taylor 49 (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Comment Can anyone stop this? I think everyone is already tired of this endless stream of accusations and paranoid fears. This is Wikimedia, not a psychoanalyst's office! RG72 (talk) 09:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Taylor 49 and RG72: Once again, I hope it's the last time that I've to say this (and next time other measure would be applied), we cannot accept comment here (above all comments like the one above). If we decide to give the flag and then there are abuses, the flag will be removed, so there is no issue about this but, please, don't say that a user request a flag only to harass you! You (Taylor) already requested an invalid CU, already made some inappropriate comments in the previous request for deflag, and now you're continuing! This is unacceptable and we don't play this game here. On the other hand, you know that I've always followed eowikt and helped you cleaning some things, and I know that, after Vami's inactivity, Taylor has worked a lot to improve the project (and certainly does not vandalize). Before, however, there was a climate bordering on blocks, I saw comments in which Taylor and Vami called each other "terrorists", sufficient stuff for an immediate block. So, please, let's stop acting like we are in kindergarten. You both must use different and more cordial tone, in compliance with Wikilove and UCoC, and start working for the same goal (more content and more quality in the projects). Remember that it is not the users that count, but the contents, so please let's focus on them and stop fighting! If you don't like each other, try to work on different topics, the important thing is that the project does not get involved in disputes between users! Thanks for your understanding! --Superpes15 (talk) 00:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree that it is high time to stop this kindergarten with infantile grievances and fears. I will add that I have nothing to do with Vami - the statement that I and Vami are the same person is another one of the paranoid statements, which I did not even comment on due to its obvious absurdity. RG72 (talk) 03:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RG72: Yep, I never thought it, I mentioned Vami just to remind people of the climate of discord present on the project (a project in which the stewards removed the sysops after serious abuses)! Thanks --Superpes15 (talk) 11:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hzy980512@zh.wiktionary

Status:    In progress

The election had ended with 5 supports and no oppose. Seeking for prolonging the adminship. --—TongcyDai  ฅ • ωおめが • ฅ 05:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

李り瞬まどか生せい@lzhwiki

Status:    In progress

My rights will soon expire. Ask for approval to extend the term, thanks. The vote has ended with 4 supports. --李り瞬まどか生せい (talk) 14:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Non-steward comment @李り瞬まどか生せい: I'm assuming you are requesting a renewal of your rights, and not a removal of access? If so, this should be placed under the section "Administrator access". Now done by user. EPIC (talk) 14:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohanad@arwikiversity

Status:    In progress

For a while, I contributed to the project from time to time, and sought to improve it and protect it "as much I can" from vandalism. Recently there is a very weak activity and sometimes the only admin has been busy and may need some help --Mohanad (talk) 02:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interface administrator access

See Interface admin for information about this user group.

  • If you are requesting adminship and the interface admin at the same time, you can file one request in administrator section and state you want interface adminship as well.
  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at translatewiki.net. Please do not request interface administrator access solely for that purpose; your request will be declined.
  • Since the end of 2018, all interface administrators are required to have two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled. Please, enable it before posting your request here.
  • Stewards: Please use {{Systmp}} for approved temporary requests.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

Please start a new discussion about requesting the permission on the local village pump, administrators' noticeboard or a designated page for requesting permissions each time you request or renew interface adminship.

  • Discussions should be open for seven days. Please request interface adminship here seven days after discussions started. This page is not the place for any discussions or votes. (For wikis with few active users, it is OK to have no comments.)
  • If you only want interface adminship for specific tasks, please state for how long and for which tasks you need it. Otherwise stewards will decide whether to assign permanent interface adminship and the duration of interface adminship. See Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements.

Như Gây Mê@cebwiki

Status:    On hold

It's been 7 days since the discussion (Asia/Manila time, UTC+8). Thanks! Halley luv Filipino ❤ 05:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold Hello @Như Gây Mê:. You should have mentioned here that you've a local bureaucrat. I'll put this on hold and will wait for another week (I'm trying to contact the local bureaucrat and, if they don't reply after a week, we'll proceed). Thanks --Superpes15 (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understood and will wait! But I have a question, do I need to create another discussion to request bureaucrat permission? Thanks Halley luv Filipino ❤ 12:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Như Gây Mê: Unfortunately the project is not so large and doesn't need other bureaucrats (so we won't flag new 'crats - see here for further informations). If I looked correctly, the current 'crat falls into AAR23 and, if they don't reply after the notifications, will likely be removed. For obvious reasons we cannot remove bureaucrats where they already exist but, in small projects where they don't exist or have been removed, we currently manage the permissions, also because it's difficult to see a project with 6 permanent sysop and 15 votes made by active users. I personally don't see the need for bureaucrats in projects with very few actions required (this flag is mainly needed in larger wikis). Furthermore, local bureaucrats generally give flags without expiration, this, in projects where there is no broad consensus and users are often inactives, can lead to problems. If I were the only bureaucrat of such a project, personally, I would resign immediately so as not to leave problems even in the event of my inactivity (but it is a personal opinion - even if I have seen others who have done so in the past - but I also see some users who want to keep the 'crat flag even without performing any action for years). Thanks :) Superpes15 (talk) 12:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understood, thanks! Halley luv Filipino ❤ 12:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ToprakM@trwikisource

Status:    In progress

I applied for the fourth time. It was last granted for two years in January 2022. --ToprakM ✉ 16:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat access

See Bureaucrat for information about this user group.
  • In principle, requests for temporary bureaucrat access are not granted.
  • A small project does not need bureaucrats. Currently whether a promotion is valid or not is decided by stewards. See here for a guideline.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

CheckUser access

See CheckUser policy for information about this user group and the policy governing the use of this tool.
  • To request CheckUser information, see Steward requests/Checkuser. This is the place to request CheckUser access.
  • One-time CheckUser access is not permitted and temporary access is only used by Stewards or when the mandate of the CUs has an expiry date specified in local policies.

Oversight access

See Oversight policy for information about this user group and the policy governing the use of this tool.
  • To request to have content oversighted, ask for a steward in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect and contact a steward privately. This section is for requesting access to the Oversight tool.
  • For contact details about oversighters across the wikis, refer to this page.
  • Note that temporary Oversight access is not permitted and temporary status is only used by Stewards .
  • When a new user is assigned to this group, please add them to this list.

Miscellaneous requests

Requests for permissions that don't fit in other sections belong here. Importer rights can be granted on most wikis by stewards only. Please gain local community consensus before posting a new section here.

Note that the following types of permissions requests belong on separate pages:

  • SRB — Local or global bot status
  • SRGP — Global permissions

Removal of access

  • If you're requesting the removal of your own permissions, make sure you're logged in to your account. If you have multiple flags, specify which you want removed. Stewards may delay your request a short time to ensure you have time to rethink your request (see previous discussion on 24 hour delays); the rights will not be restored by stewards once they are removed.
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions, you must gain consensus on the local wiki first. When there is community consensus that the user's access should be removed, provide a link to the discussion, with a brief explanation of the reason for the request, and summarize the results of discussion. However, as bureaucrats of some wikis may remove users from the administrator or bureaucrat group, please see also a separate list of these specific wikis.
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions for inactivity, link to your local inactivity policy. If your site does not have inactivity policy, the global policy Admin activity review applies.
  • See the instructions above for adding new requests. Please post new requests at the bottom of the section.

Hammad@urwiki

Status:    In progress

Please remove admin access. Inactive admin for a quite long. Local consensus link has been provided above.─ The Aafī (talk) 12:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A note about this inactive admin. They appear to have one protect log in entire 2023. Very few logs in 2022/2021. Overall inactive. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:42, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Umair Mirza@urwiki

Status:    In progress

Please remove admin access. Inactive admin for a quite long. Local consensus link has been provided above.─ The Aafī (talk) 12:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A note about this inactive admin. Their administrative logs except deletion are empty, and the last deletion log is from 17 September 2021. I could see a total of "11" delete logs. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ساجد امجد ساجد@urwiki

Status:    On hold

Please remove admin access. Inactive admin for a quite long. Local consensus link has been provided above.─ The Aafī (talk) 12:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheAafi:, this sysop seems to be active. Why don't you create a precise local policy? This request seems a bit difficult to me, because it's true that there is a certain consensus, but I see actions from the admins reported both in the last months of the 2023 and (for this user) also in 2024, so they're technically active and they don't even fall under the AAR. What is your inactivity threshold and how did you consider the inactivity of the admins? Just want to understand better! Thanks :) --Superpes15 (talk) 14:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Superpes15: I positively take your concerns. What concerns the local community is the inactive involvement of the user in administrative areas. I do see their recent logs (more recent) although these don't appeal me. For example, deleting an article and then restoring it, one single log of protection after more than one and half a year; the last was on 31 October 2021 and more recent is on 20 December 2023. Last block log is from 2012. This is to say the user has entirely three (one protect, one delete and one restore) administrative actions in 2023. I do not see a precise procedural policy (which discusses administrative involvement) per se and would initiate a discussion likewise on the Village pump. ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:46, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have initiated a discussion right away here. ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just waiting for its result (so we have clear inactivity parameters) and deciding if proceed with the requests above :) Superpes15 (talk) 16:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Superpes15: I should have an update about the inactivity parameters on January 28 after 15:58 UTC. ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Вальдимар@ukwiki

Status:    Done

Please remove admin access. --YarikUkraine (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Amanda (she/her) 00:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&oldid=26149855"