Steward requests/Global permissions: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 205: Line 205:
:Just noting that there do appear to be [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/EdinBot at] [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/SpeedyBot least] two bots with the GIPBE flag. Not sure how or if that matters, though. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 17:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
:Just noting that there do appear to be [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/EdinBot at] [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/SpeedyBot least] two bots with the GIPBE flag. Not sure how or if that matters, though. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 17:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
:If you are only concerned with CATCHA, there is a separate global group ('captcha-exempt') for it. [[User:Ruslik0|Ruslik]] ([[User talk:Ruslik0|talk]]) 05:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
:If you are only concerned with CATCHA, there is a separate global group ('captcha-exempt') for it. [[User:Ruslik0|Ruslik]] ([[User talk:Ruslik0|talk]]) 05:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

=== OTRS for [[User:Olaf_Kosinsky|Olaf_Kosinsky]] ===
{{sr-request
|status = <!--don't change this line-->
|domain = global<!--don't change this line-->
|user name = Olaf_Kosinsky
|discussion=
}}
Has access to OTRS/permissions queues, see https://otrs-wiki.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_accounts&curid=1514&diff=51500&oldid=51498. —&nbsp;[[User:Pajz|Pajz]] ([[User talk:Pajz|talk]]) 14:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC) (OTRS admin)


== See also ==
== See also ==

Revision as of 14:02, 27 November 2014

Shortcut:
SRGP
This page hosts requests for global permissions. To make a request, read the relevant policy (global rollback, global sysop, global rename, …) and make a request below. Explain why membership is needed for that group, and detail prior experience or qualifications.
This is not a vote and any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion.
Successful global rollback requests require no fewer than 5 days of discussion, successful global renamer requests require no fewer than 3 days (if the user is a bureaucrat) or 2 weeks (if the user is not a bureaucrat or if valid concerns are raised), while successful global sysop discussions require no fewer than 2 weeks.
Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Requests for global rollback permissions

Shortcut:
SRGR
Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review the Global rollback policy.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that: You have sufficient activity to meet the requirements to be allocated the global rollback flag

To make a request
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable.
=== Global rollback for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = global <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} <!-- don't change this line unless you're nominating another user -->
}}
::''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+5 days}} UTC''

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than 5 days (with rare exceptions , no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Global rollback for The Herald

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Status:    Not done

I have been editing since May 2013 with over 7000 edits globally. Have the rollback rights in 3 wikis and now want it to be more better editor. Thanks.

Oppose Oppose I would like to see more cross-wiki activity, And having the rights doesn't make you a better editor - I think you already are a very good editor :) --Stryn (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose I've never seen you rollback before. And from what I've seen you are hungry for this right, correct me if I am wrong. --Goldenburg111 17:44, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose Generally rights are handed out when they are required. As stated on global rollback policy "users must be demonstrably active in cross-wiki countervandalism or anti-spam activities" but i don't see any cross-wiki activities. Besides that i'm seeing you seeking for rights on wikis frequently and that's also make me uncomfortable. You don't need GR right to be a better editor. ~ Nahid Talk 19:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After review x-wiki activity Oppose I can't support the request. Alan (talk) 23:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose Lack of crosswiki activity, there is no really need to have this flag. Restu20 23:44, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Previous request. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose Outrageous request, also considering the last one. Vogone (talk) 23:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question Question: Hi The Herald. I actually have a few questions. What has changed since your last request? Why are you so hungry for rights? Can you give an example of some good reverts/taggings xwiki? I'm not going to brag but I've been editing Wikimedia on this account for 3 months now and have edits over more projects and have a higher edit count than you. Is there a specific reason you need these rights? Eurodyne (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I swear this is not Hat-collecting. I use all the hats I had in the past. Since now I am acknowledged as a good editor, it's fine with me to be so. But rights are useful in many-a-ways. The changes which I had since last time is indeed more in en-wiki, commons and wikidata. So you see less x-wiki activity. --The Herald 10:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sufficient level of xwiki activity is required for GR. — revimsg 12:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose per above. — revimsg 12:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose Even if you are a good editor, good editors don't hat collect. They are here to help the project and not to game the system. I see no xwiki experience. Eurodyne (talk) 20:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose per above - limited x-wiki experience -FASTILY 19:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oppose per above --Grind24talk ??Contribs 22:44, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not done No consensus. Please feel free to reapply later when you gain more cross wiki experience --Shanmugamp7 (talk) 08:18, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Shortcut:
SRGS
<translate>

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review the Global sysops policy.
Stewards
When you give someone global sysop rights, please list them on [[<tvar name="T:GS">Template:List of global sysops</tvar>|Users with global sysop access]] and ask them to subscribe to the [[<tvar name="2">mail:global-sysops</tvar>|global sysops mailing list]].</translate>
<translate> Instructions for making a request</translate>

<translate> Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You have a global account ;
  2. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
To make a request
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable. If you previously requested that right, please add a link to the previous discussion(s).</translate>
=== Global sysop for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = global <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} <!-- don't change this line unless you're nominating another user -->
}}
:''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+2 week}} UTC''

<translate> The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential. Please note: Since 2019 all global sysops are required to have two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled.</translate>

Global sysop for DerFussi

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Status:    Not done
Not ending before 22 November 2014 09:28 UTC

I am bureaucrat on Wikivoyage de/en/it. Nobody seems to care for the small Wikivoyage versions. WV/vi is going to be spammed. I can only mark it as spam but would like delete it as well. Also active on commons adn global renamer -- DerFussi 09:28, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you see a mass spam attack on a small wiki without active sysops, you can report them at SRM and stewards/GS will look into it. It's not like we don't care about small wikis; no one has just seen them yet. I just deleted the spam pages at viwikivoyage and will try to setup a filter if there is a pattern I can find. Regarding the actual request for GS, I don't think GS tools are given to cleanup on only a small subset of wikis. Also looking at your global edits, I do not see much antivandalism/antispam contributions (without counting deleted edits). Additionally, GS states that "Global sysops are highly trusted users with a strong track record of cross-wiki contributions" and I see only ~40 wikis with edits with this account. So although I trust you and thank you for your efforts to tackle spam on small Wikivoyages, I will oppose this one, unfortunately. --Glaisher (talk) 09:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I think 40 wikis us not that bad, I agree with Glaisher. It would seem to be more efficient if you would apply for sysop on those small WVs. --Randykitty (talk) 11:45, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Weak Oppose Per Glaisher. 40 wikis is not bad although most Global sysops have edits across hundreds of wikis. Yes, you are definitely trusted although I would like to see a bit more cross-wiki edits. Eurodyne (talk) 19:11, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Highly trusted user who will certainly make beneficial use of the tools on our Wikivoyages. As one of the very first contributors to Wikivoyage and chairman of the Wikivoyage e.V., DerFussi certainly has the best in his mind and also sufficient experience in global administration of Wikivoyage projects. Vogone (talk) 22:45, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry but I agree with Glaisher and Randykitty. Alan (talk) 22:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support per Vogone. Ajraddatz (talk) 23:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support--DangSunM (talk) 02:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not really sure what to think about this one. On one hand, we could use someone to do maintenance work on Wikivoyage, especially on the smaller sites. On the other, I'm not sure that the candidate has enough experience on other Wikimedia projects to the point where I would feel comfortable granting admin tools on the other 600-700 global sysop wikis that are not Wikivoyage. --Rschen7754 08:12, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. --MF-W 00:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose - and while I get he's trusted (as editor/chairman, that's not relevant), imho high activity levels are more important. Trijnsteltalk 00:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • &   out of the 8 projects edited by the candidate in the two months, he has sysop on three, 4 others are not GS projects. The only project edited by the user in the last two months that would be covered by this request is Wikidata, which is a major project hardly in need of GS. Candidates for global sysop ought to be active on small wikis *before* requesting filing a request. The last time the user was active on a wikivoyage project where they didn't held sysop rights was mid-April. Therefore, there is no demonstrated need for this right, and so the question of whether it is worthwhile to grant such a sweeping right to somebody who intends to use it on a small subsection of wikis does not need to be considered. Snowolf How can I help? 04:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    A more in-depth look at this user's contributions on wikivoyage projects where he does not hold sysop rights show that the user has only ever nominated spam for deletion on one project during 1 day, the 8th of November, where he nominated 6 pages for deletion on viwikivoyage (all but one of the edits also had no edit summary). This project was not previously counted in my analysis above, as the user's edits there have been deleted, but this leaves me even more convinced that this request is very much premature. Snowolf How can I help? 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose per Snowolf. Restu20 17:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment I am aware, that this is a too early request. And understand your concerns. I would think the same. But i have seen, that the smaller WV wikis face some problems. And due to my own limited time i am too tired to firstly mark edit as spam and after that always writing requests here at SRM to have them deleted. To be honest. This process wastes my time. Either I can help the small WV wikis or I hope, people with the necessary permissions look after the small WV wikis more regularely. Maybe you can limit the permission to the WV wikis only. But I see no way to apply for an sysop at e.g. WV/vi because there so limited activity and i dont speak the local language. Just see spam. Any better idea? -- DerFussi 05:46, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment it is one of the times when I think that a sister-wide permission right would be useful, ie. letting the wikivoyages having admins that can manage cross-language activity, as the user will tend to be in that section of wikis, and that would alleviate the xwiki concerns in the broader set of sisters.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree 100%. The global sysop is the only way to take care of the small WV language versions right now. Actually I dont need it. I even have no time to work on the other projects. But I could help the small versions with MW namespace, blocking and spam deleting. -- DerFussi 12:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Support Support For want of such a right that applies to one sister project only, I just would like to say that I know DerFussi for many years now because I was one of those users who contributed to Wikivoyage when it still was on its own before becoming a Wikimedia project. At the time, I joined the team of Wikipedians who paved the way for Wikivoyage to the WMF. DerFussi is known to be a highly trusted user, and he will use his permissions with care. So I agree to Vogone and other users supporting his request.--Aschmidt (talk) 21:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose per above, limited x-wiki experience. I'd definitely support a future request however :) -FASTILY 02:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose per above, but will definitely support future requests. --Goldenburg111 17:46, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -- per Vogone and others --Timmaexx (talk) 15:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -- per Vogone and others -- Balou46 (talk) 15:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -- per Vogone and others -- FriedhelmW (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose per Snowolf. I'm going to say not now, but i will support in the future.--Grind24talk ??Contribs 20:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Not sure what you mean with "Nobody seems to care for the small Wikivoyage versions" I personally [try to] check every day all recent changes on Wikivoyages' without admins. If those wiki's are spammed then global sysops/stewards will delete spam when they see the spam. If you work mostly in Wikivoyage, then I think that GS is not really for you. --Stryn (talk) 21:06, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment - But unfortunately there is no project wide sysop right. Every contributor with a job in real life has no time to work on different WM projects regularely to meet the necessary demands to become a global sysop. Normally a contributor focuses on one project. In my case w work on WV and contribute to commons and wikidata. It's worth to think about a request for comments to introduce sister project wide admin right. I don't need sysop rights on Wikipedia, but it would be useful to have some local Wikivoyage wide admins to delete spam, edit protected sites and the MW namespace. just to help the new small wikis. -- DerFussi 06:23, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -- He has an obvious use for it. The requirement is strong interwiki activity. He has 10.000+ edits in 7 projects, 1000+ in another 2, and edits in another 30. I think anyone active with a 1000 edits in 9 projects is strongly interwiki active. I don't think interwiki necessarily means all 600 something projects. I can fully understand where Snowolf is coming from, but I have sufficient trust in this user to outweigh any concerns. I expect they will use the toolsand I trust them fully to use them correctly. SIncerely, Taketa (talk) 09:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not done. There is no clear consensus to grant this permission. Sister project wide admin right would be a suitable right for this request but for that a separate discussion should be started and consensus should be arrived.--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 08:18, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global IP block exemption

Shortcut:
SRIPBE
<translate>

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions. Please review [[<tvar name="GIBE">Global IP block exemption</tvar>|Global IP block exemption]]. You may request Global IP block exemption via stewards(_AT_)wikimedia.org if you can not edit this page.
Please note: Global IP block exemption does NOT make one immune to locally-created blocks of any sort, only global blocks.</translate>
<translate> Instructions for making a request</translate>

<translate> Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that:

  1. You have a global account ;
  2. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
To request global IP block exemption
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why you need the access and why you're suitable. If needed, link to relevant discussions.</translate>
=== Global IP block exempt for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global<!--don't change this line-->
 |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}}
}}
<translate><!--T:6-->
<Add an explanation here>, thanks</translate>, --~~~~

<translate> The request will be approved if there is demonstrated need for the permission, such as bypassing a global block from someone who is not the intended target.</translate>

Requests for global rename permissions

Steward requests/Global permissions/Global renamers

Global rename for -revi

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Status:    Done
Not ending before 22 November 2014 11:48 UTC

Hello everyone, I would like to volunteer myself to the Global Renamers. Yes, I am not bureaucrat on any wiki, but our only Korean-speaking global renamer Sotiale hasn't been around due to his real-life matters, and our CHU is being backlogged and I am the only one taking care of it. I have sent some users waiting for renames to SRUC (1, 2, 3, 4, Korean Wikipedia CHU- I am only guy clerking the page), but I believe I can process it faster with the tools. Thanks! — revimsg 11:48, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, nihil obstat. Trijnsteltalk 12:28, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global rename for NahidSultan

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Status:    Done
Not ending before 23 November 2014 15:56 UTC

Hi folks, I'd like to nominate myself as a global renamer initially for bn.wp. I don't have bureaucrat right on any wiki but i've an impression that bnwp needs one since bnwp bureaucrats are not really active and there are some pending rename requests since august. And for the record, there are no global renamers for bn projects. Thanks. ~ Nahid Talk 15:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, nihil obstat. Trijnsteltalk 16:17, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global rename for Mohamed Ouda

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 28 November 2014 07:12 UTC

I'm an admin and bureaucrat, at ar.wiki. That's why I think I have experience on dealing with renaming requests.. The access would help me in handling requests from Arabic wikimedia projects --Mohamed Ouda (talk) 07:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global rename for 분당선M

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 10 December 2014 17:45 UTC

Hello, I am going to applying global rename permission. I had no experience related to rename because I was became the crat at kowiki since October 16th, 2014 which is rename process is already centralized. I think it would be nice to have more Korean renamers(We have only one active) I think. I am working as crat on kowiki and admin as wikidata. I'll do my best:) Regards,--DangSunM (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for other global permissions

<translate>

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.</translate>
<translate> Instructions for making a request</translate>

<translate> Before requesting additional global permissions, make sure that:

  1. You are logged in on this wiki;
  2. No specific section on this page exists for the permission you want to request;
To request additional global permissions
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain what kind of access you need and why. If needed, link to relevant discussions. If you hold, or have previously held, the right and are asking for either a renewal or revival of that right, please add a link to the previous discussion.</translate>
=== <Add requested permission here> for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global<!--don't change this line-->
 |user name = <translate><!--T:4-->
Username</translate>
 |discussion=
}}
<translate><!--T:5-->
<Add an explanation here>, thanks</translate>, --~~~~

<translate> The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration. A steward will review the request.</translate>

Autopatrolled and Uploader for Amitie 10g

Status:    Not done

I'm an experienced user that currently contribute mainly in Commons, but my activities may be extended to other Wikipedias. So, I need to edit some Wikipedias, and some of them have the Version review policy (like german and polsky Wikipedias). Therefore, I request the global permissions indicated above, the both if possible. Thanks. --Amitie 10g (talk) 22:59, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Read Global groups. Requested global permissions does not exist. Cheers, Alan (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we can create our own global groups at will should consensus exist. However, autoreview is a content-related permission and is something that each individual wiki regulates, as out at Meta we don't generally control content. --Rschen7754 23:17, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not done These are rights that are allocated per community by those communities, and not allocated by stewards.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global confirmed for global IP block exemptions

I just noticed that one of my accounts is not autoconfirmed on itwikisource, despite passing the thresholds long time ago. Turns out it's because we use $wgTorAutoConfirmAge and $wgTorAutoConfirmCount to require 90 days and 100 edits (since before gerrit), probably to avoid that one registers and gains autoconfirmed on a non-Tor IP and then uses the privilege via Tor, or something like that.

Given NOP, this restriction doesn't make sense for users which were exempted from TorBlock: they should gain confirmed status on each wiki normally. Given only few wikis require more than 4 days or 0 edits to get autoconfirmed, it would make sense to just compensate TorBlock and give them "confirmed" everywhere; objections? Alternatively, we could at least add skipcatcha, as exempted users are definitely not bots. --Nemo 11:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that there do appear to be at least two bots with the GIPBE flag. Not sure how or if that matters, though. Courcelles 17:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you are only concerned with CATCHA, there is a separate global group ('captcha-exempt') for it. Ruslik (talk) 05:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS for Olaf_Kosinsky

Status:    In progress

Has access to OTRS/permissions queues, see https://otrs-wiki.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_accounts&curid=1514&diff=51500&oldid=51498. — Pajz (talk) 14:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC) (OTRS admin)[reply]

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global_permissions&oldid=10651337"