Steward requests/Permissions/2008-02

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in February 2008, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Contents

Administrator access

Jiròni@ocwiktionary

Dear steward, I hereby request sysop access for Jiròni on oc.wiktionary.

Many thanks in advance, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 10:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --Thogo (talk) 10:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Herzlichen Dank, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 10:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Kurniasan@bug Buginese Wikipedia

I request sysop access.

Thank you. Kurniasan 13:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Not done No votes there. --Thogo (talk) 13:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

តឹក ប៊ុនលី@km Wikipedia

Request Again! Due to Khmer Wikipedia is always vandalized from bad users very often and they said they won't stop their actions for instance on Khmer_Wikipedia and many other pages, so that I request regular Bureaucrat and sysop access​ on Khmer Wikipedia. I had already requested before but Mr. User:Thogo couldn't give me these access because there is no community there. Now I am a temporary sysop there and will be expired soon. There is no Bureaucrat User on Khmer Wikipedia. I am worry on my Wikipedia Language. I work hard there, So I hope you give me my request or I request regular sysop Bureaucrat access on Khmer wikipedia.

Best Regards Thank you. --តឹក ប៊ុនលី 06:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Two questions:
  1. While an extension of the temporary sysop permissions may be reasonable, what is the rationale for Bureaucrat access? There are no local outstanding rename requests nor bot-flagging requests that I can find, and those can be done by a Steward in any case. I would suggest simply requesting an extension instead.
  2. I'm a fan of Bookofjude, great guy, but he hasn't been around in nearly a year. Was that a temporary adminship? ~Kylu (u|t) 06:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I think Bureaucraf access has the right to rename users and promote them to help my wikipedia. So request them. I hope steward would give these access. I already asked User:Bookofjude but no answer! Thank you! --តឹក ប៊ុនលី 07:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Bureaucrat access certainly won't be given to someone with temporary status. It's logical. I'm sorry, but I don't think there is a need for this on kmwiki. Thanks, --FiLiP ¤ 07:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
How about Sysop access? Could I get regular sysop? Thank You! --តឹក ប៊ុនលី 07:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Your status expires in more than 2 months. When it expires, we can talk about regular status. :) --FiLiP ¤ 07:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


Now the bad users is vandalizing there. I blocked them but they still can create many users to use for vandalizing. And They said that WITHIN 3 MONTHS, VANDAL BOTS WILL COME. How can I solve these problem? Thank You. --តឹក ប៊ុនលី 07:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
kmwiki is currently monitored by SWMT--Nick1915 - all you want 11:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Not done--Nick1915 - all you want 12:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Gu-Wiki

I request sysop access for gu-User:Dsvyas on gu-wiki. We had a vote Here and it was 2-0 pro. --Jose77 07:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

On hold Since the community is not that large, I would recommend temporary sysopship only. Btw., translations of the MediaWiki software should be done only on Betawiki, not locally. --Thogo (talk) 08:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Not done (marking as not done, because this user was made temp sysop already [1]), best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 01:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sw-Wiki

I request sysop access on sw-wiki for sw-User:Muddyb_Blast_Producer. We had a vote on http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi and it was 6-0 pro. (by sw-user:kipala) --91.62.26.120 07:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Not done You now have a local bureaucrat with Oliver Stegen. He can do that. --Thogo (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Note: sw:special:listadmins shows two local bureaucrats now. ~Kylu (u|t) 01:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Demmy@YO-Wikipedia

Please add administrator flag for Demmy on Yoruba Wikipedia project. Bureaucrats is not active. This is the second time I made request and also non of the current sysops is native Yoruba.

Not done One support and one oppose is not enough to get sysop rights. Sorry. --Thogo (talk) 21:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Comment: The IP which opposed seems to have been lying. He seems to have 1818 edits. I haven't checked conformation with the rest of the rules to see if he could be eligible for a temp sysopship. Maybe you could do that.. --Jacob 21:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Even so, there is no community consensus nor large enough community. Only temporary sysopship can be granted, but that is a different subject. --FiLiP ¤ 21:15, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
So should I make a separate request for temporary sysopship then? Demmy 21:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Demmy, yes please can You make that in the section Requests_for_permissions#Temporary_permissions_for_emergency_or_technical_purposes, and please state the purpose, in other words, why You are asking for sysop rights, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 22:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Clerk note: User was given 1-month temporary sysop. ~Kylu (u|t) 06:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Sp5uhe@PL-Wiktionary

Please add administrator flag for Sp5uhe on Polish Wiktionary project. Bureaucrats is not active.

Thank you. Equadus 06:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --Millosh 06:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

WODUP@testwiki

I request sysop access.

Thank you. WODUP 10:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Granted temporarily for about an hour. Expiring at the latest 5 February. --Thogo (talk) 11:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
And removed. So this is Done. --Thogo (talk) 11:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yun@brwiktionary

I request sysop access.

My temporary access on the Breton wiktionary has expired (see archived request). Thank you. --Yun 07:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Not done. The local community seems very small to me, and the request you linked to is from December. However, if you wish to have temporary adminship again, I have no problem with that.--Shanel 08:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Վազգեն@hy.wikisource

I request sysop access.

Thank you. The voting in the local request page has ended today with a clear majority. ― Teak 03:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Two voters supported, 24 total users including global stewards, meta and commons admins, and commons delinker. May I suggest requesting temporary adminship instead? There's really no local community as of yet. ~Kylu (u|t) 03:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't see a point in the temporary adminship, if I have to be the one coming back every couple of weeks or so and requesting extensions. The adminships are not only to lead the community, but for technical reasons as well (the main reason I nominated this user for adminship, since a recent update broke the way things are done, and I, the only admin, was busy at the time to fix it). At this point the community has decided that there is a need for this adminship (however small, there certainly IS a local community), and as far as I know the stewards are there to implement local community decisions (anyone is welcome to scrutinize the local policies and procedures). Thanks for the suggestion though. ― Teak 15:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Temporary adminships can be for far longer than a couple of weeks, depending on the situation. 3 months is not at all uncommon. Thats a fair bit of time to get a lot of work done, and perhaps, build a community to support a permanent adminship. I highly recommend you ask for a temp adminship for say, 3 months. ++Lar: t/c 19:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Teak, thanks for Your work at hy.wikisource, please let me clarify a missunderstanding: You said: "The adminships are not only to lead the community, but for technical reasons as well" - sorry but the adminship is not to lead anyone, it is technical only, any admin is just a normal user with the same rights and voice but has additionally to fulfill the communities requests for deletion, maintaining, etc. this is not a status of leadership at all but like the status of a janitor. Thanks for Your understanding.
I agree with Lars suggestion for 3 months, I think we can do this in this request (so You don't have to open a new one) if You agree, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 20:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
To amplify on what 'birdy's saying... an adminship is not given to "lead" a community by telling them what to do. But an admin, even a temporary one, can cause a community to come into existance where one was not present before. If there is leadership to be done it is leading by example... showing others who maybe stopped by briefly and did one or two edits, that there is a cadre of interested and active workers (even if it's a cadre of just one person at first) and thus encouraging them to get involved... and once they are, showing them the wiki way of cooperation, open-ness, consensus and creation of neat stuff to draw them in and make them feel welcome. that's leadership all right, but it's not the boss people around kind, it's far harder than that. ++Lar: t/c 20:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea why we are talking about this here, but there was no misunderstanding to begin with, though it did seem to develop in the last two comments. The verb "lead" in my first reply was meant in the sense of "showing leadership" (by example, by actively engaging in the development of policies and procedures, helping newcomers, soliciting community opinions on controversies and so on), and not in the sense of "ruling" (I strongly disagree with birdy's definition of a sysop=solely_"janitor", and don't think anyone who doesn't have an established leadership presence in the community should be granted adminship, but that's beside the point here). Kylu suggested that the small size of the local community implies lack of necessity of an admin (no community, hence no need of leadership in the sense stated above). In response to this comment I explained the reason why I nominated this user, and why I'm against temp adminship. Lar says that the temp adminship may be requested for longer periods, though my experience has been that temp adminships are given for particular tasks. When the project was created, I asked for a temp adminship for one month for import from test project + "general sysop chores", and was given sysop rights for only two weeks. Then had to come back and ask again for temp adminship for "general sysop chores", which expired in another month. I know that some temp adminships are for periods of half a year or more, but they are generally for first projects in a language, for which there is a huge amount of sysop work even with no local community. This is not the case with hy.wikisource, which is quite an active project, even with a small community (wikisource doesn't require a large community to thrive). In hy.wikisource we have a very cooperative (although small) community, and there is a need for a sysop who can fix things fairly quickly when they are broken, without having to go through the whole meta-monster and the bureaucracy of requesting a temp adminship. And the community has measured the pros and cons and voted on it. So please implement the community decision by granting the sysop status to the user. ― Teak 08:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Kylu's statement is that there isn't a big enough community on that wiki, yet, to support a permanent sysop. I'll be blunt, if I may: Requesting permanent sysop-hood isn't going to happen at this time. Put in a request under temporary, ask for three months, and let them grant it so everyone (including yourself) can go back to what we do best. ~Kylu (u|t) 23:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Kylu. I'd grant you a 3 month temp if you ask for it, it seems reasonable not to make you come back every so often, but at this time a permanent doesn't seem warranted. I do hope you understand++Lar: t/c 03:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Kylu, don't let me keep you from going back to what you do best... Lar, who decides whether at this time it "seems warranted" or no?! I went over steward policies several times, and it doesn't look like such a decision belongs with the stewards. If there is a specific policy I'm not aware of, which specifically says that there must be a community of specific size to "support" a specific number of permanent sysops, please let me know. And in case there is such a policy, let's apply it universally to all projects. Otherwise, I've explained my position on the necessity of the admin, and have communicated the community decision. It's now up to the stewards to implement this decision by granting the status, or deny it on specific grounds. If you think that the status should be granted temporarily, please do so with your reasons for converting a community decision on permanent sysop into a temporary status (and I hope you do so by starting a new policy, and not on an ad-hoc basis). ― Teak 06:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll raise this with the other stewards so I'm not acting unilaterally but time and time again, when the community is very small, when the votes are very few, I've seen other stewards decline to give permanent sysopship, and instead offer a long duration temporary. As of right now, I recuse myself from this matter. Another steward will have to grant or not grant you permanent sysophood, and if they decline to do so, and you eventually take the advice given and ask for a long duration temp, another steward will have to grant it... Do please note that I'm not all by myself here, Spacebirdy, also a steward, has agreed with me and endorsed giving you 3 months temp if you ask for it. ++Lar: t/c 07:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Permanent sysop access is not granted. The community is too small to have permanent sysops. (I know that in former times, stewards granted permanent sysopship/bureaucratship even in such small projects, but since this caused problems on some projects, we will not do that any more.) You can easily get a temp sysopship for (not more than) 6 months and then we will see if there will have grown a big enough community to change the status to permanent. If this is not the case, we will easily extend the temp sysopship for another (maximally) 6 months on request, and so on. If you agree to get temp sysopship, please state for how long you want and we will grant it. Thank you for understanding. @Teak, please note that granting you sysopship on that project was a mistake by me and should also have been done temporarily only. --Thogo (talk) 13:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thogo, please do convert my permanent sysop on hy.wikisource to a temporary one (with a period of whatever is a common practice), if you think you've made a mistake. As to this request, I don't deem myself having the right to change the community decision (even if it involves only 2 other users). I'll let the nominated user know about this discussion, and he will hopefully make his own decision about his rights. ― Teak 16:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Changed link--Nick1915 - all you want 16:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you both. Btw., technically it's no difference between temporary and permanent rights since expiring dates can be extended easily, it's just that we have a possibility to check after a while if everything is alright in the project and to react if not. (The community can do that itself only if it is large enough.) --Thogo (talk) 16:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, then can you please give me temp sys op on hy.wikisource.org for 5-6 months or whatever period you find is acceptable to give? Վազգեն 12:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Done. Expiring 4 August 2008 --Thogo (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Loco085@es.wikinews

I request sysop access.

More than seven days passed since I put the request for adminship. Our bureaucrats are inactive for more than 15 days. Can some steward close the rfa? Thank you. Loco085 15:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried sending e-mails to those bureaucrats? 15 days is not much. I suggest action from stewards only in case none of quite a few b'crats is avaiable. --FiLiP ¤ 15:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Not done, hay suficientes burócratas. Carlosar p.e. o Edub parecen ser activos. Saludos, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 15:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I sent an email to Edub and tried to contact Carlosar in other project, but not responses yet. Anyhow, thank you. So I will continue waiting. Loco085 15:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Edub incluso participó en la votación el 25 de enero, y Carlosar editaba algo ayer, lo siento, no podemos llarmar eso inacitvo. Por favor vuelve en una semana si no habrá respuestas, entiendo que necesitáis biblios activos por allí, saludos, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 15:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, gracias de todos modos. ;-) Loco085 15:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
On hold, waiting some days up to one week reason see comment for bureauctratrequest. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 17:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Done on es.wikinews by n:es:Usuario:Superzerocool ;) Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 21:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Gracias de nuevo. Thank you again. :-) Loco085 23:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Prince Kassad@abwikipedia

I request temporary sysop access. This wiki is full of copyvios which need to be deleted. (The only sysop, Untifler, ignores my requests)

Thank you. -- Prince Kassad 17:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. The only admin (except Drini, now) has been inactive for quite some time. Expires February 8, 2008. --FiLiP ¤ 22:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Removed --FiLiP ¤ 09:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Alison@gdwiktionary / Scots Gaelic Wiktionary

I request sysop access.

Hi. I'm Alison, aka w:en:User:Alison, sysop from the English Wikipedia and Irish Gaelic Wiktionary. I have had temporary sysop status on the Scots Gaelic Wiktionary for the last three months but it is now due to expire. There is currently no active community there and I remain the only local sysop on that wiki. I obtained temporary access on the Irish wiktionary at the same time but turned my focus towards rehabilitating that and turning it into a living wiki with a community. This has now succeeded and I passed my RfA last month :) Similar to this experience, I'd like to remain on as sysop at gdwiktionary in the hope of reviving the wiki, translating and stabilizing the MediaWiki localization for Scots Gaelic and encouraging people to contribute. I've already done some translation work, updated MediaWiki messages, set up some bots and tidied up some of the few articles that are up there. There is still a lot of work left to do.

Best regards - Alison ❤ 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Alison,
First of all, thanks a lot for your work. However, permanent sysop access is only granted after RfA/consensus by the local community. I think that the best we can do here is give another three months temp access. I certainly hope that you gdwikt will grow, so your RfA will succees by then :) (granted temporary access for another three months, expires february 10, 2008) BR, Effeietsanders 11:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
That will be just perfect! Thank you so much :) This should give me enough time to get things properly rolling over there. Míle buíochas! - Alison ❤ 14:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed. --Thogo (talk) 08:42, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Jergen@de.wikipedia

I request removal of sysop access. There is a community consensus (see confirmation link) to remove sysop rights for one week.

Thank you. 88.65.35.199 11:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Sysop status will be re-activate next Tuesday (12 February)--Nick1915 - all you want 12:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Please note that reactivating is due to the local bureaucrats. --Thogo (talk) 23:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

Alexsh@zh.wikinews

Chinese Wikinews bureaucrat election is finished.Now I request my wikinews account bureaucrat access.

--Alex S.H. Lin 14:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Done Jon Harald Søby 15:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Krls@cawikt

I request conversion of sysop into bureaucrat of ca:wikt:User:Krls. We have one bureaucreat, ca:wikt:User:Llull, but is missing since may 2007 (contributions), so we have to request meta user renames and new sysops. Thank you. -Aleator (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Four supports, user is already a sysop. ~Kylu (u|t) 21:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Done--Nick1915 - all you want 11:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Sw-wiki

I request bureaucrat status on sw-wiki for sw-user:Oliver Stegen. We did an election at http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi. For Bureaucrat the vote was 7/0 für user:Oliver Stegen. (by sw-user:Kipala) --91.62.26.120 07:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --Thogo (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Francis Tyers@tg Wikipedia

I request bjurokrat access.

Thank you. FrancisTyers 09:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

No local bureaucrats, 4/0 election, user is already a sysop. ~Kylu (u|t) 23:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Done ++Lar: t/c 03:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Loco085@es.wikinews

I request bureaucrat access.

In es.wikinews the administrators are also bureaucrats. Thank you. Loco085 15:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Not done, hay suficientes burócratas. Carlosar p.e. o Edub parecen ser activos. Saludos, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 15:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

We've been trying to contact burocrats for a week, we'll wait more, but there are already 2 approvals pending, and if they won't show up I'll re-request again (I'd do it myself but then I'm a candidate so I'd prefer some other steward doing it). As I said, I may return in a few days. drini [es:] [commons:] 15:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok Drini, I am confused because I saw one bureaucrat voting there on 25.1. (and another one editing on 31st but I learned that he does not even know he has the sysop buttons and knows only little spanish), lets wait a few days and fulfill this request if nothing happens until then, On hold here no need for a new request after the few days have passed, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 17:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Done on es.wikinews by n:es:Usuario:Superzerocool ;) Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 21:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

CheckUser access

Hei ber

Please grant me checkuser access as member of the ombudsman commission for log reviews at the following wikis: enwiki, jawiki, frwiki, ruwiki, and dewiki. After changing the checkuser-logfile handling, my meta checkuser permission is not working any longer for those wikis. Thank you. --Hei ber 23:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I will confirm that Hei ber has been identified. Cary Bass 23:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Done --FiLiP ¤ 00:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

User:TheDaveRoss

I made it to twenty five votes again, and request checkuser on en.wiktionary per this vote. Have identified, have access to #wikimedia-checkuser, will resubscribe to mailing list. Thanks! - TheDaveRoss 00:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 00:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Bastique@commonswiki

as per Commons:Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Bastique (rfcu). Regards, abf /talk to me/ 09:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --FiLiP ¤ 10:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

רחל1 @ hewiki

Requesting CheckUser access.

Thank you, Rachel

Done, please suscribe to the checkuser mailinglist, see instructions above, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 12:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

ca.wikipedia

As Thogo has wrote me on IRC I edit the request for SMP and I.

Request for Pasqual@cawiki and SMP@cawiki.

After the votes at Checkuser elections


Pasqual (ca) · CUT 22:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Done--Nick1915 - all you want 23:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Rojelio @ it.wikipedia

Please give it:User:Rojelio CheckUser access due to successful election.

PS User hasn't confirmed his identity yet... waiting cary--Nick1915 - all you want 23:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Rojelio identified 9 Feb 2008. Cary Bass 19:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
And Done. --Thogo (talk) 19:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Cassiopeia sweet @ ja.wikipedia

Please give ja:User:Cassiopeia sweet the CheckUser permission.

Thank you. --Bellcricket 13:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

On hold while the user identifies to the Foundation, i.e. Cary.--Nick1915 - all you want 13:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Received identification. Cary Bass 17:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Done --FiLiP ¤ 17:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

海獺 @ ja.wikipedia

Please give ja:User:海獺 the CheckUser permission.

Thank you. Bellcricket 12:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

On hold while the user identifies to the Foundation, i.e. Cary. --FiLiP ¤ 12:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Received identification. Cary Bass 17:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Done --FiLiP ¤ 17:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Oversight access

User:Raymond@commonswiki

as per Commons:Commons:Administrators/Requests and votes/Raymond (RfO). Regards, abf /talk to me/ 13:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment as an OTRS-Admin he is identifyed to the foundation. abf /talk to me/ 13:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
On hold until Cary confirms this. —DerHexer (Talk) 13:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Done confirmed by cary via IRC--Nick1915 - all you want 17:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of access

Spacebirdy@ocwiktionary

Dear steward, I hereby request the removal of my sysop status on oc.wiktionary, because there is a local community now.

Many thanks in advance, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 11:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Dear steward, thank you for your work! :D--Nick1915 - all you want 12:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Grazie tanto, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 13:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Stahlkocher@commonswiki

I request removal of access.

Thank you. abf /talk to me/ 19:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Done, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 19:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Superchilum @ it Wikipedia

I request removal of my admin rights on it.wiki.

Thank you. Superchilum(talk to me!) 11:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Done Thank you for your work as administrator. --Thogo (talk) 11:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Zaarin@no.wikipedia

I request removal of access.

Thank you. 80.212.111.143 18:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Done and thanks for serving. --FiLiP ¤ 21:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ilya@uk.wikipedia

I request removal of bureaucrat access.

  • Language Code: uk
  • Local Confirmation/Request Link: [5]
  • Local User Page: uk:User:Ilya

Thank you. --Ilya K 21:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --FiLiP ¤ 21:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Timichal@incubatorwiki

I request removal of my sysop/bureaucrat access.

Thank you. — Timichal 20:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Done drini [es:] [commons:] 20:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Meta

As you may recall Meta had a reconfirmation discussion and some sysop accesses were already brought here to be removed. There were two sysops where consensus was not clear and further discussion was needed. This is a "heads up" that those two results are likely to be brought here shortly. ++Lar: t/c 16:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Per bureaucrat consensus here, please remove admin status from User:Dmcdevit. Thanks. Majorly (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I confirm this is the outcome. Meta is a "home wiki" for me so I'd prefer some other steward (not a 'crat on meta) do this one. ++Lar: t/c 01:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Done--Shanel 04:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Waiting for the result for User:Aphaia before archiving. ~Kylu (u|t) 05:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Result: Despite Anthere's comment, the consensus among active 'crats, including Anthere, was that the reconfirmation failed. Aphaia has accepted a temporary adminship here to continue the work she does. That means we will have to deal with this again, potentially. There was a minor question about whether her permissions should be turned off and turned back on or if that was needless process. By default, I think, we seem to have come to the second conclusion, to not bother turning off and back on. That means we are all set, requests for permissions-wise and this is OK to archive. ++Lar: t/c 14:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Babaroga@no wikipedia

I request removal of access.

Thank you. Babaroga 10:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Done and thank you for your work!--Nick1915 - all you want 11:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Please summarize your request in the "summary".

Archtransit@en wikipedia

By direction of the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee, this confirms the request that administrator access be removed from En Wiki user Archtransit. An announcement and explanation is being posted on WP:AN. Newyorkbrad 02:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Done ++Lar: t/c 02:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete.Bot@pt.wikisource

I request removal of access.

Thank you. 555 22:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Done, thank You, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 22:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Albedo@uk.wikipedia

I request removal of access.

  • Language Code: uk
  • Local Confirmation/Request Link: [7]
  • Local User Page: uk:User:Albedo

Thank you. Ahonc 20:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Note: At uk.wiki user must have more than 50% of votes "support" for unsysoping.

Done--Nick1915 - all you want 21:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Silje@no.wikipedia

I request removal of access.

Thank you.  SLB (no) 20:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Done--Shanel 20:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Viridae@enwiki

I request removal of access.

Thank you. ViridaeTalk 23:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Done and thanks for serving. --FiLiP ¤ 00:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. ViridaeTalk 00:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Brunoy Anastasiya Seryozhenko@pt.wikinews

I request removal of access, after votation, for decision of the community.

Thank you. Alex Pereira falaê 15:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

His rights already had been removed[8], he requested it by himself. [9], best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 15:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm sorry about this double request. Alex Pereira falaê 16:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Np, I mark this as Not done then, so it can be archived, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 16:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Freddie Mercury@yo

I request removal of access.

Thank you. Freddie Mercury 17:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --FiLiP ¤ 17:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Vkem@fi Wikipedia

I request removal of access.

Thank you. — Str4nd 18:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Done--Nick1915 - all you want 18:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hapsiainen, J.Pitkä and Jannev @fi Wikipedia

A consensus was reached on reducing administrator inactivity time from two years to six months before admin status is removed (policy). According to this new Finnish Wikipedia policy, above mentioned three administrators should have their adminship removed.

Thank you! --Joonasl 08:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

In Finnish Wikipedia consensus is declared by voting. There was no official voting about this important principle, so in my opinion request is not (yet) valid (although J.Pitkä is reaching 2 years inactivity time in March). Bureaucrat and admin of Finnish Wikipedia: --Tbone 08:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
So apparently there is no community consensus about this. Thus, Not done. --Thogo (talk) 08:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Paweł ze Szczecina@pl Wikipedia

Please remove my admin rights on Polish Wikipedia.

Thank you. Paweł ze Szczecina 16:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Done --FiLiP ¤ 16:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Londenp

Please remove my admin rights on Dutch Wikipedia