Steward requests/Global permissions
This is not a vote and any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion.
Global rollback and global interface editor requests require no fewer than 5 days of discussion while abuse filter helper and maintainer requests require no fewer than 7 days. Global renamer and global sysop requests require no fewer than 2 weeks of discussion. For requests that are unlikely to pass under any circumstances, they may be closed by a steward without further discussion (after a reasonable amount of input).
Quick navigation:Cross-wiki requests |
---|
Meta-Wiki requests |
Requests for global rollback permissions
| Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Global rollback for Sonic Speedy
- Global user: Sonic Speedy (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
- Not ending before 3 November 2019 12:09 UTC
Halo, saya Sonic Speedy. Saya mengajukan untuk hak global rollback untuk memberantas vandalisme di proyek Wikimedia -- Sonic Speedy (talk) 12:19, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose very little crosswiki experience. No demonstrated need and user only has what is essentially 3 months of editing despite registration date. Praxidicae (talk) 12:25, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Praxidicae -MrJaroslavik (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Not enough crosswiki experience and global edit. --Streetdeck (Talk) 04:26, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Praxidicae --Holder (talk) 05:02, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per others --janbery (talk) 14:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Praxidicae -J. Ansari Talk 15:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Requests for global sysop permissions
| Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Global sysop for Iluvatar
- Global user: Iluvatar (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
- Not ending before 2 November 2019 01:41 UTC
Hello. I’m in Wikimedia Movement since 2008. I have a technical right to delete pages in ruwiki, 5.5 years i'm a global rollbacker. My favorite activity is fight against vandalism/spam. Unfortunately, there is not always enough time, but now I am relatively free.
I believe a GS should be just a technical flag. The GS shouldn't be analogous to a local flag. The GS shouldn't block experienced conflicted users, shouldn't try to reconcile users, shouldn't act as a mediator or make decisions in non-obvious discussions. In my opinion, it is a flag only for more effective counteraction to vandalism, realization obvious technical requests from a local community and response to requests for help.
I'm developing software for SWMT to fight vandalism. 2FA is enabled.—Iluvatar (talk) 01:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Of course! I've had nothing but good experiences with Iluvatar, and am confident in his trustworthiness and responsibility. Thank you for volunteering, Vermont (talk) 01:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trust user. Catherine Laurence discussion 04:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Experienced and trusted user with a valid need. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 04:51, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Long-term experience in multiple fronts. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:18, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Very active in SWMT and experienced user. --janbery (talk) 06:07, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per Janbery - MrJaroslavik (talk) 07:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support Active with the SWMT and trusted user. --Turkmen talk 08:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted and experienced. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:57, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support, why not?--BRP ever 11:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support very good work--WikiBayer 👤💬 11:13, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted. 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 11:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Worth granting them. Trusted user. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 12:02, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support per all above. --Ashok Talk 12:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. —Sgd. Hasley 14:26, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support per 1997kB and BRPever -J. Ansari Talk 15:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted and very active. Thank you for your help. Esteban16 (talk) 16:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Already a global rollbacker. Trusted. EPIC (talk) 16:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted. --Streetdeck (Talk) 01:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Will be a great addition. --94rain Talk 02:03, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I cannot support giving global sysop to someone who does not hold sysop on a local project. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted user, active with the SWMT, and has experience using sysop-level permissions on a large project. – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:38, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I'm a little bit curious about why they did not accept the RFA on ruwiki ~1 year ago as some
complaintsconcerns about not holding sysop flag on content wikisblahblahis posted above. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 05:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)- I don't really think that's a respectful way to address someone's concerns; and actually shows why I have trust on content projects as a fundamental requirement for either global sysop or renamer. Global rights exist to help content projects, and if someone wishes to use them, they should demonstrate they have gained the trust of at least one community they are active in. When people make comments such as not holding sysop flag on content wikis blahblah is posted above it shows that people on meta/xwiki vandal fighters really have become disconnected from the reason that we exist. The way to solve that disconnect is to insist that people gain the trust of content wikis before considering global permissions. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Do you think being sysop is the only way of proving that they have gained the trust of a commuity? I never viewed trust that way so I am kinda confused here.--BRP ever 05:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- It is the only objective way to prove that unless people who actively edit there are also active here; and can speak to it. That’s not the case here. Trust in reverting vandalism xwiki is pretty meaningless in my view because it’s a small group of people who usually don’t actively edit the projects they focus on. That doesn’t tell us anything about how they interact with others while having access to admin tools. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:06, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict.) I apologize for any impolite expression while which is not I originally meant and tried to make it better. I personally agree with that a local sysop-wise trust shall exists (though becoming a sysop may not be the unique way to demonstrate such trust per above, but it's the easiest way for anyone who does not speak that language to examine) and that's why I dug into their home wiki RfA pages. There are many factors preventing one from accepting an RfA - perhaps they finds they do not gain the trust from local community early, or that trust do exists but they don't want the flag due to personal reasons - sadly the page is deleted and I cannot figure it out by myself so I post it here looking for answers. --WhitePhosphorus (talk) 05:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Do you think being sysop is the only way of proving that they have gained the trust of a commuity? I never viewed trust that way so I am kinda confused here.--BRP ever 05:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- In a home wiki, it is a social flag. And if you requested sysop, you must use sysop. To remove pages, I have a Closer rights. A RFA page was deleted because request was submitted by another user (Sealle) without my consent.—Iluvatar (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- I don't really think that's a respectful way to address someone's concerns; and actually shows why I have trust on content projects as a fundamental requirement for either global sysop or renamer. Global rights exist to help content projects, and if someone wishes to use them, they should demonstrate they have gained the trust of at least one community they are active in. When people make comments such as not holding sysop flag on content wikis blahblah is posted above it shows that people on meta/xwiki vandal fighters really have become disconnected from the reason that we exist. The way to solve that disconnect is to insist that people gain the trust of content wikis before considering global permissions. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 20:35, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support done good work.—Ah3kal (talk) 03:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- CptViraj (📧) 05:35, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support everyone else has already said it. I don't know why this hasn't happened sooner. Praxidicae (talk) 15:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support --Holder (talk) 12:28, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Biplab Anand (Talk) 18:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good. Hiàn (talk) 04:15, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support--UltimoGrimm (talk) 15:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support-- FitIndia Talk Commons 17:00, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 10:29, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. RadiX∞ 17:59, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Infinite0694 (Talk) 04:22, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support can be trusted --DannyS712 (talk) 04:40, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Global sysop for Bovlb
- Global user: Bovlb (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
- Not ending before 13 November 2019 04:27 UTC
Hello. I have been a sysop on English Wikipedia for 14 years, and sysop on Wikidata for 14 months. I am mostly active on Wikidata and on English-language projects, but my Wikidata work often leads me to investigate cross-project issues on smaller projects, including (with appropriate caution) those in languages with which I am unfamiliar.
I anticipate using global sysop in the following ways:
- Examine deleted articles to inform decisions on other projects (e.g. Wikidata)
- Skip captcha
- Edit as autoconfirmed to bypass certain edit filters, e.g. for removing large amounts of content
- Rollback edits by cross-wiki vandals
- Rarely, to protect pages or block users in the case of cross-wiki vandalism
My sysop philosophy is to be cautious in tool use, encouraging of new users, and responsive to criticism. I also have the privilege to be a real-life mentor to a number of wiki-editors, again including some who use languages in which I am not fluent. I use 2FA. I am not a member of SWMT. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 04:27, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- My thanks to those of you who have responded so far. I wanted to address a few points that have been raised.
- I acknowledge that most of the benefits listed above would be satisfied by global rollbacker, and it was specifically suggested that I should be applying for that first. I was unaware that experience as a global rollbacker is considered a prerequisite for global sysop but, if that is the consensus, I would be happy to downgrade my request.
- The major additional (over global rollbacker) benefit I would hope to exercise as global sysop is the ability to examine deleted revisions. The typical scenario is that articles are created on one or more language Wikipedias, linked from a Wikidata item, and then one or more of those articles are deleted. Sometimes articles are created and deleted multiple times. Although the bar for notability on Wikidata is lower than is typically the case for Wikipedias, the (likely) existence of a Wikipedia article is a major factor when deciding whether to delete items on Wikidata. While the deletion comment gives some guidance, examination of the content gives more. The content of deleted articles is also a factor when deciding whether to merge Wikidata items (instead of deleting one). I use this ability a lot on the English Wikipedia, but am often frustrated in my efforts because I cannot elsewhere. Neither shows up in my logs, of course.
- I agree that my cross-wiki experience could be greater, but my activities are driven by the traffic I encounter, which obviously tends to bias to larger projects. Reviewing my editing logs, I concede that, while I have editing experience on a couple of dozen projects, it does appear largely confined to projects that are currently on the opt-out list.
- Thanks again for the constructive comments. Bovlb (talk) 18:06, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. Global rollback is not a prerequisite to global sysop; rather, some editors think it would better suit your need. I would oppose both, due to lack of experience in that area of editing which I would have used to judge your ability and need for those rights. I think you misunderstand the scope of global sysop. You would be able to view deleted pages on most projects that have less than ten administrators, which are usually the projects with no formal deletion policy and/or no community to speak of. You would not be able to view deleted content on basically any project you'd want to. Vermont (talk) 09:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose No cross-wiki experience. Try global rollback.-MrJaroslavik (talk) 14:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Could you give an example of when this right would have been useful on a global sysop wiki, and how you would have used the rights? You have no experience on non-English projects and that causes me to hesitate supporting global sysop, a right with very limited scope that I also don't think would help you very much. Vermont (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Virtually no xwiki experience.Praxidicae (talk) 14:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose No crosswiki experience. --Holder (talk) 05:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Neutral Looking at your reasons for GS, the only one that's useful is the ability to examine deleted articles; everything else can be done using GR. That being said, you do present a convincing reason for why you think you need GS. I recall a special permission (is it still there?) that allows users to view deleted pages; maybe consider that? Leaderboard (talk) 05:13, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- There is Special:GlobalGroupPermissions/global-deleter, It is for Synchbot so it also has right to delete pages. -- CptViraj (📧) 06:40, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Requests for global rename permissions
Steward requests/Global permissions/Global renamers
Global rename for Catherine Laurence
- Wiki: meta.wikimedia.org (list 'crats • bot policy • summary • 'crats rights)
- User: Catherine Laurence (talk • edits • logs • UserRights • activity • CentralAuth • email • verify 2FA)
- Not ending before 3 November 2019 02:40 UTC
Hello, I am a global rollbacker. I noticed that zh:WP:UC requests usually take a week to complete, and I want to help with them to better meet their needs because my native language is Chinese and I am familiar with local, and global user name guidelines. I also want to assist in renaming queues for other wiki. Regards. --Catherine Laurence discussion 02:40, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose A few issues: one, being a global rollbacker doesn't really mean anything in regards to global renaming. Global renaming, despite the name, is a fundamentally local process that usually does not involve cross-wiki work in the overwhelming majority of circumstances. On the next point: there is no such thing as a global username policy, and I think anyone who thinks there is does not understand enough about how renames work to be trusted with the permission. There are many local policies on usernames because many different local cultures have different values. The over emphasis on global actions is very concerning. Would you decline to rename a user on de.wiki who has a corporate username because you think that's globally prohibited? What about rename someone on ar.wiki to be the name of the town their from, because that seems like a good faith request that isn't globally prohibited?
Finally, we need more Chinese renamers, but I see nothing to demonstrate that the local community has placed trust in you beyond simple vandal fighting. I would really like to see more zh.wiki sysops apply, but I do not want to see someone who as of late has mainly focused on xwiki work, and thinks that they'll be doing more global work using zh.wiki to get another global hat. Pretty strong oppose on this one. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:48, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Support Catherine is trusted and helpful, keep it up. --Streetdeck (Talk) 12:06, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- I Support Catherine Laurence to run for the global permissioner.He was very helpful for the world revert,so I think that he is very good to do this job.I don't think so that he is no good for this job.And he was very many thing that do good in the wiki data,whole world reverter and OTRS,then I think is can do very good for this job.If I say something wrong or I don't know the other thing,please comment here.very thank you.--SickManWP (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Same as TonyBallioni. --Streetdeck (Talk) 12:14, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support can probably be trusted with the tools. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:24, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 20:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per Ajraddatz.--Turkmen talk 21:18, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trust, not doubt. And I fixed the interwiki link flaw in the application. --Super Wang hates PC You hate, too? 23:59, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Clear use-case. Reasonable crosswiki experience. – Ammarpad (talk) 16:54, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support fine by me. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support -J. Ansari Talk 11:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Question: In you rationale you mentioned that you want to assist renaming queue for other wikis. Which wikis are those and do you think that you understand their local guidelines for renaming? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 11:41, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- @1997kB: Because I am familiar with English, and I have carefully read the English wiki local username policy. So I will assist in dealing with the relevant rename queue. Other languages, because of language barriers, would choose to handle some apparently uncontroversial requests. Also because Cantonese is one of my native languages, the username policy is similar to the Chinese wiki. So if there have a request, I will also assist in processing.--Catherine Laurence discussion 02:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I can't trust them on request related to enwiki wiki just with just ~350 edits (most because of file renames) and almost no experience at all on English Wikipedia. As Tony explained above renaming is more of local process and need atleast some experience before jumping straight. Additionally I only see them actively helping on zhwiki venue since 13 October. IMO a bit more experience is required on venue's where they want to handle requests. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Global rename for Turkmen
- Wiki: meta.wikimedia.org (list 'crats • bot policy • summary • 'crats rights)
- User: Turkmen (talk • edits • logs • UserRights • activity • CentralAuth • email • verify 2FA)
- Not ending before 12 November 2019 20:11 UTC
Hello. I'm a global rollbacker and a global sysop. Furthermore, I'm a local sysop on multiple projects. I'am familiar with the global rename policy. I can speak and understand multiple Turkic languages. Thus, I believe that I can help as a global renamer. Also, I can help in reducing the queues in large projects and Meta-Wiki. Thank you!--Turkmen talk 20:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Trusted. --Streetdeck (Talk) 04:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support -MrJaroslavik (talk) 13:48, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 14:27, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support --janbery (talk) 14:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Requests for global IP block exemption
| Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Global IP block exempt for IP Range of WikiLoop Battlefield
- Global user: Xinbenlv / all logged in users with WikiLoop Battlefield (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
I am a developer, and we are building a counter-vandalism tool called WikiLoop Battlefield, and here is its source code. We recently start to roll out Oauth login and in-place revert feature. When we move our test from localhost to our dev and canary(staging) environment, we noticed that we received the following error.
{ "error": { "code": "globalblocking-ipblocked-range", "info": "'''Your IP address is in a range which has been blocked on all wikis.''' The block was made by [//meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Kolbert Jon Kolbert] (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is ''[[NOP|Open Proxy]]: Webhost: Contact [[m:Special:Contact/stewards|stewards]] if you are affected ''. * Start of block: 2019-07-23T12:01:56 * Expiration of block: 2021-01-23T11:01:56 You can contact [//meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Kolbert Jon Kolbert] to discuss the block. You cannot use the \"Email this user\" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your [[Special:Preferences|account preferences]] and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is 3.86.232.24, and the blocked range is 3.86.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make.", "*": "See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php for API usage. Subscribe to the mediawiki-api-announce mailing list at <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-api-announce> for notice of API deprecations and breaking changes." }, "servedby": "mw1346" }
We host our server on Heroku, does it mean that the IP address of heroku is being blocked globally for MediaWiki API? Can we apply to be whitelisted for our legit use-case?
Thank you!
- @Xinbenlv: Heroku is a shared host, and Wikimedia discourages hosting service in third-party shared hosts (it may host VPN or reverse proxy, which can hide users' IP address). You should either:
- Move the project to Toolforge (recommended) or Cloud VPS
- Create a edit service in Toolforge similar to toollabs:widar, and invoke the service (you must use GET or JSONP, Cloud does not support POST from third-party service) in the project (not recommended, this may have security issues)
--GZWDer (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- @GZWDer: thank you.
- First sorry I just noticed I didn't use the template (which doesn't apply to IP range extemption for al IPs), I updated it.
- Second, here we are building an app that requires a user to login with Oauth. We only conduct edit on-behalf of loged-in users and their username will show up.
- 3rdly, with respect to your suggestion, We've considered porting the project to Toolforge but we are waiting for the Toolforge to support modern Kubernates https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T214513.
- It is not particularly feasible for all users to rely on IP addresses because as many of people who submit for permissions here, IP addresses are only largely available in USA and a few developed countries who took part in early Internet infrastructure development discussions. Many other countries they have to rely on NAT that shares limited IP addresses. Our app hope to expand to all language locales to help users with counter-vandalism efforts. If we block IP addresses, it will reduce the access of these users from Non-USA/developed countries who would like to help.
- In summary, can we apply for unblocking any IP addresses if we have allowed users to identify themselves with login? Thank you!
Xinbenlv (talk) 21:21, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- all, I don't know who to send this argument to... Xinbenlv (talk) 10:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- I start a discussion en:User:Xinbenlv/Propose:Allow_Login_Users_By_Default_When_IP_Range_Blocked
Global IP block exempt for User:Celestmist
- Global user: Celestmist (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
Hello. I live in Turkey where because of the block I need to use a VPN to edit. Although mostly I would be editing Turkish Wikipedia I would also occasionally like to edit English Wikipedia. I have created my user on Wikivoyage.176.235.251.26 11:34, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Please login your account. --Catherine Laurence discussion 11:57, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I logged in with a VPN but I'm unable to edit.
Global IP block exempt for 陳寅恪
- Global user: 陳寅恪 (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
Hello, please allow me to take the liberty to bother you.
When I used the company network to log in to the wiki, I found that:
You are currently unable to edit Wikipedia.
Editing from your IP address range (203.205.128.0/19) has been blocked (disabled) on all Wikimedia wikis until 22:51, 26 April 2021 by Jon Kolbert (meta.wikimedia.org) for the following reason:
Open Proxy: Colocation webhost - Contact stewards if you are affected
This block began on 22:51, 26 October 2019
I come from China, I need the VPN to edit wiki. I hope that you can unblockingn the IP, thanks. --陳寅恪 (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Global IP block exempt for 百战天虫
- Global user: 百战天虫 (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
I'm an active editor in Chinese Wikipedia from Mainland China, since the GFW blocked the Wikipedia in all languages, I have to use the proxy to access the website. However, by this way, I found that some IP addresses were global blocked affecting my contributions to the website. Therefore, I hope the steward can grant me the exempetion, thx. --百战天虫 (talk) 03:07, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Requests for 2 Factor Auth tester permissions
Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
|
2FA Tester for Chunheisiu
- Global user: Chunheisiu (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
I am in the process of adding security to all my internet accounts. I would like to have 2FA enabled on my account. Thanks!
- @Chunheisiu: Have you read the documentation? Ruslik (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Ruslik0: Yes I have read the documentation and understand the risks.
- Done Please, @Chunheisiu: sign all your posts with four tildes. Ruslik (talk) 19:14, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
2FA Tester for jaim3 th3 h4ck3r
- Global user: jaim3 th3 h4ck3r (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
I want all my internet account to have 2FA for security, thanks, --Jaim3 th3 h4ck3r (talk) 20:25, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Jaim3 th3 h4ck3r: Have you read the documentation? Ruslik (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
2FA Tester for JustDone
- Global user: JustDone (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
Hi there, I know that I rarely ever contribute to Wikipedia but I am very conscious about security after being hacked, so I'd like to have 2FA enables on all my accounts - I do understand the risks of enabling 2FA on my account and hope that you could enable it for me. Thanks --JustDone (talk) 18:31, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
2FA Tester for Fishdavidson
- Global user: Fishdavidson (edits (alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)
I am a new user to wikipedia and would like to enable to 2FA to keep my account secure. I have read the documentation on 2FA per the instructions , thanks, --Fishdavidson (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
Requests for other global permissions
Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
|
See also
- User groups — Information on user groups
- Global rights log — Log of global permissions changes
- Archives
General requests for: help from a Meta sysop or bureaucrat · deletion (speedy deletions: local · multilingual) · URL blacklisting · new languages · interwiki map
Personal requests for: username changes · permissions (global) · bot status · adminship on Meta · CheckUser information (local) · local administrator help
Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation