Steward requests/Global permissions

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by ~riley (talk | contribs) at 02:06, 18 November 2019 (→‎Global rollback for ~riley: d). It may differ significantly from the current version.
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.

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:
Dynamic pages:

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 Bovlb

Status:    Not done
Not ending before 15 November 2019 22:00 UTC

Hello. I have been a sysop on English Wikipedia for 14 years, and sysop on Wikidata for 15 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 other projects, including (with appropriate caution) those in languages with which I am unfamiliar. I often find cases where a user has caused disruption across multiple projects, or where facts are inconsistent between the corresponding Wikipedia articles, and do my best to follow up everywhere.

I anticipate using global rollback in the following ways:

  • Skip captcha
  • Edit as autoconfirmed to bypass pending changes and certain edit filters, e.g. for removing large amounts of content. I have found cases where I have been prevented from reverting vandalism because of the edit filters on a particular project.
  • Rollback edits by cross-wiki vandals

My wiki 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) 22:00, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And in the interests of full disclosure, see Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2019-11#Global_sysop_for_Bovlb. Bovlb (talk) 22:02, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your request for GS was denied/or withdrawn not even a week ago. Why you are applying for another global right when you don't have enough cross-wiki experience? My suggestion would be to wait a while, use SWViewer or similar tool to revert cross-wiki vandalism and work on small wikis. Until you gain sufficient experience, Oppose Oppose. By the way there is another global group with the skip captcha right. You may wish to apply for that instead. But that is only for visually impaired persons IIRC. Masum Reza☎ 06:23, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masumrezarock100: CAPTCHA exemptions: another accepted rationale for granting this right: : Because one is often asked to enter CAPTCHA when editing other wikis (and not be a bot), thanks to NigelSoft. SWViewer is interesting for rb (local or gr) or gs. —Eihel (talk) 07:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masumrezarock100: Thanks for the response. You will note from the link I supplied that I explicitly withdrew that request in favour of this one, in response to the feedback I was given.
    Regarding cross-wiki experience, I'm sure there are many editors with more cross-wiki experience than me, but I'm curious to know what your threshold is. Bovlb (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Unlike global sysop group, global rollbacker group is true global and let's the right holder use it on any wiki. You are familiar with big wikis, but the scope of global rollbacker is patrolling all wikis even smaller ones. I am pretty sure that you wouldn't abuse this right but it's pretty easy to mess things up without having sufficient experience. Working cross-wiki helps the candidates of GR and GD to learn more about those wikis. If you are not going to be an SWMT member, then there's no point in granting these rights to you. You should ask for these rights on each wikis where you need them. Masum Reza☎ 18:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masumrezarock100: Please forgive my directness, but you don't seem to have responded to my second point: I am really interested to know how you measure cross-wiki activity and what your threshold is.
Thanks for the suggestion. I could certainly seek rollbacker one-by-one on the Wikis where I encounter problems most frequently, but I don't have a specific set of wikis in which I work. I am seeking global permissions because I do not want to limit the set of projects to which I can contribute efficiently when performing cross-wiki countervandalism.
If you are not going to be an SWMT member, then there's no point in granting these rights to you. If this is a de facto policy, then perhaps it should be made explicit. Bovlb (talk) 20:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for missing your second question. I measured your cross-wiki activity using these tools. Per [1], as of now, you have
  • More than one edit in 28 wikis
  • More than 5 edits in 7 wikis.
  • More than 10 edits in 7 wikis
  • More than 25 edits in 6 wikis.
  • More than 50 edits in 4 wikis.
  • More than 100 edits in 3 wikis.
  • More than 1000 edits in 2 wikis.
  • More than 10000 edits in 1 wiki.
Also see StalkToy. Your global contributions analysis shows that you are not active in those wikis where you contributed in the past. I could not possibly go to every wiki and check your contributions there. These tools are very very slow and sometimes they return blank response, I have to admit. But GUC tool is more faster IMO. There could be other tools out there. Also I do not have any specific GR criteria. Masum Reza☎ 04:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose An crosswiki experience was requested for gs, for gr too. —Eihel (talk) 07:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Trusted user with good judgement, no doubt, but limited crosswiki experience. I am unable to support someone for GR if they are not interested in being a member of SWMT. ~riley (talk) 08:05, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @~riley: Thanks. I choose to spend my limited volunteer time primarily as a sysop on Wikidata and related cross-wiki actions, and I am making this request in support of that. I'm sure the SWMT does great work, but I know from experience that I should not take on another commitment that might stretch me too thin, hence my clarity on the subject above. I am surprised to learn that this might be considered to be a necessary precondition. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bovlb: My necessary precondition is based on the Global rollback policy (see below).

    Users must be demonstrably active in cross-wiki countervandalism or anti-spam activities (for example, as active members of the Small Wiki Monitoring Team) and make heavy use of revert on many wikis

Your application reads, " I often find cases", which implies you are stumbling across vandalism or spam, rather than actively monitoring it. Twinkle likely will better suit your needs. ~riley (talk) 18:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@~riley: Thank you for clarifying. I read that reference as providing membership in SWMT only as an example of how to demonstrate cross-wiki activity, not as a hard requirement. My record clearly shows cross-wiki activity and reversion on multiple projects in multiple languages. Maybe my level of cross-wiki activity is too low for you, but I'm having real trouble here understanding how this is measured, or what the threshold would be. The policy you cite provides no specific guidance.
I'm not sure what distinction you seek to draw between monitoring for vandalism and finding it. I primarily monitor for vandalism on Wikidata. When I find it, I perform cross-wiki checks, and often find more elsewhere. Sometimes I encounter difficulties in reverting it, which I am seeking to reduce here by requesting global permissions.
Thanks for the suggestion to use Twinkle. I was unaware that it could be enabled globally across all projects (and the documentation I just looked at does not mention this possibility). Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 20:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal.js is what you are looking for - it will allow you to undo more than one edit by the same editor (aka rollback) similar to how it functions on enwiki. In response to your question about how I am measuring your cross-wiki activity, crossactivity illustrates a low threshold of activity. ~riley (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@~riley: Thanks for the Twinkle pointer; I will try that out. Your crossactivity link just returns an empty response for me; I have been assuming that the tool was broken for everyone. Bovlb (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose For which global permission do you candidate next week without a crosswiki work? look now to this premissionSpecial:GlobalGroupPermissions/captcha-exempt and later higher premissions.---𐐎ℹ𝕜ⅈ𝓑𝒂𝕪ⅇ𝕣 👤💬 09:15, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @WikiBayer: I have read and re-read your comment above, and I'm afraid I am unable to determine its meaning, and hence to understand the basis for your strong opposition. Could you please clarify? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 20:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You have recently request for the global sysop permissions and you have been said that you need global work for global premissions as well. Since the candidacy has not changed, but you are now request for a global permissions again--𐐎ℹ𝕜ⅈ𝓑𝒂𝕪ⅇ𝕣 👤💬 18:38, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the clarification. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that "global work" is a prerequisite for both global sysop and global rollback, but the latter has a higher threshold, hence your oppose on my application for global sysop, and your strong oppose here. Bovlb (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose I don't think GR will serve your needs (as your original request said that you wanted to delete pages cross-wiki); even GS is better than that. My preference would be for you to apply for global delete instead. Leaderboard (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Leaderboard this premission is only for bots see Global deleters--𐐎ℹ𝕜ⅈ𝓑𝒂𝕪ⅇ𝕣 👤💬 15:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @WikiBayer: It's not set in stone, and I think he has a valid use-case to request a right this specific. Leaderboard (talk) 17:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Leaderboard: Thanks for the feedback. I think you must have misread or misremembered something, as I have no need to delete pages cross-wiki and did not request it. I did spend some time expanding on the use case for examining deleted pages, primarily to justify why I was requesting global sysop rather than global rollback. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bovlb: I apologise for that mistake. However, global delete does allow users to view deleted pages, and hence I still prefer that you take that route for now. Leaderboard (talk) 14:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Bovlb (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose due to lack of relevant experience. I'd like to see more evidence of capability handling vandalism and other content they would use GR on in wikis where they don't know the language before I would support. I would also like to note (to the other opposers) that being a SWMT member is not a prerequisite or a requirement for Global Rollback. Although most uses for GR are within the scope of SWMT, there are plenty of acceptable use cases that are not connected to the userright. Best regards, and thank you for volunteering. Vermont (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak support Reading their rationale I see that they stated they wanted to skip captcha, revert vandal and edit as autoconfirmed user. Most of small wikis provide autoconfirmed status after 4 days of registeration (i.e acewiki) and while they say they want to skip captcha and revert vandalism but I don't see much activities related to that. Edits they have on most of wikis are big one and have their own requirements for rollback, and Global rollback should not be used to skip that. I'm weak supporting because user is trusted and sysop on two large projects, but still there are requirements for GR which don't meet. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:00, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Long term experience and demonstrated valid need. With their experience on two of our largest projects and length of editing tenure, they clearly know what they are doing. And that's sufficient for me. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:41, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support per Ammarpad and 1997kB.--Turkmen talk 19:31, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Low crosswiki experience. --Holder (talk) 08:46, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose --Herby talk thyme 17:06, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment I wanted to give some feedback on how I have experienced the process here. I apologize in advance if this comes across as ungracious, but I feel that it is important for me to express myself candidly and communicate the sense of frustration that I have come to feel. Perhaps we can make some changes that will help future applicants.
    • Several users have expressed opposition to my request on the basis that I have insufficient cross-wiki experience. I am happy to concede that there may be many editors with far more cross-wiki experience than me, but from my perspective I would not be coming here if I were not actively engaged in cross-wiki work, and experiencing the problems that these permissions are designed to alleviate. Before making this request, I read the policy carefully and satisfied myself that I met the plain-language interpretation of the criteria For consideration, users must be demonstrably active in cross-wiki countervandalism or anti-spam activities (for example, as active members of the Small Wiki Monitoring Team) and make heavy use of revert on many wikis.. It appears that my level of cross-wiki activity is being measured in some way, and it falls short of some threshold. There doesn't seem to be any agreement on what the basis of measurement is (including reference to a tool that doesn't appear to work), and no-one is prepared to suggest what the threshold might be. I hope you can see that, from my perspective, this makes the process seem arbitrary and non-transparent. If there is some specific level of cross-wiki activity required for these permissions (beyond that suggested in the policy), then future applicants would benefit greatly from being provided with specific guidelines.
    • Two users have explicitly and unashamedly tied access to these permissions to membership in a specific clique (the SWMT). This team is mentioned in policy, but only as an example. Looking at the archives for this permission, I don't see any intention of there being such a restriction. Notwithstanding, if it is to be a restriction, it should be made clear in the policy, so that future applicants don't waste their time. If it is not a restriction, then !votes citing it as such ought to be disregarded.
    • A couple of users suggested that I apply for other permissions instead. I recently applied for global sysop and withdrew that request in favour of this one on the basis of similar feedback. My experience here makes me disinclined to follow such advice a second time.
Having gotten that off my chest, I want to express my appreciation for all those who have taken the time to give me feedback and advice. I still believe that we're all here for the benefit of this project, and I accept this feedback as sincere and well-intended. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 22:17, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No consensus. If you have any issue with captcha, you can use User:Krinkle/Tools/Global SUL and you'll be autoconfirmed on most of wikis in a few days. Yes, we could say this proccess is arbitrary, there's no number of reverts you have to do, you just have to revert many edits on many wikis and if they are fine and users think you are active, they'll support you and you'll be granted the access. You don't need to be a SWMT member. Checking your reverts, I'd recommend to continue doing it for a few weeks, once you have done many of them acrross multiples wikis in diferrent languages, you can re-request it, if you want. There's no way to say if someone is active and experienced enough, it depends the criterion of every user. Matiia (talk) 01:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for ~riley

Status:    Done
Not ending before 17 November 2019 05:11 UTC

Hey there, I have been an administrator at Commons for several years now and am a rollback and/or patroller on a few other projects; I figure it's time to throw my hat in the mix to be considered for GR. Being an admin on Commons, I get to work with a broad range of languages and I have found this experience has been priceless when working with the SWMT. My tool of choice is SWViewer, which I have been lending a hand to improve lately, as I believe in providing specific rationale for reversion of edits as well as issuing local warnings to help prevent further abuse. I think its important to acknowledge that patrolling dozens of languages means that there is potential for error; I try to be the first to notice when I screw up and I correct by going back and fixing it. If I'm not the first to notice, I'll at least be quick to own up to the mistake. I feel I have significant crosswiki experience to warrant this request and as a holder of advanced permissions (sysop, OTRS, etc.), that I can be trusted to use global rollback wisely. Thanks for your consideration. ~riley (talk) 05:11, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Matiia (talk) 01:36, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for your support! ~riley (talk) 02:06, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Shortcut:
SRGS
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 Users with global sysop access and ask them to subscribe to the global sysops mailing list.
Instructions for making a request

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).
=== 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''

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.


Requests for global rename permissions

Steward requests/Global permissions/Global renamers

Requests for global IP block exemption

Shortcut:
SRIPBE
Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions. Please review 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.
Instructions for making a request

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.
=== 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}}
}}
<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~

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.

Global IP block exempt for IP Range of WikiLoop Battlefield

Status:    In progress

Statement

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 (talk)

Responses

@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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

all, I don't know who to send this argument to... Xinbenlv (talk) 10:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I start a discussion en:User:Xinbenlv/Propose:Allow_Login_Users_By_Default_When_IP_Range_Blocked
There is a block configurations to let logged in users edit while on blocked IP: However we usually do not allow it on NOP blocks. We cannot let anyone using your tool be exempt from the block, this is a software restrictions. There's just no way to do that. And since we are not going to unblock AWS — thus Heroku — I think your only bet is to follow GZWDer's advice. — regards, Revi 07:54, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@-revi:, @GZWDer: thanks for answering. How about the following solutions sound to admins?
  1. if we use certain way to crypt-sign a request from our app's server, can you grant app-specific exception for this use-case? (rather than unblocking all IP-addresses but unblockgin all users who have signed in and use our app)?
  2. if we managed to find a fixed IP address, can you unblock individual IP address of the one that we use for our webapp?
Xinbenlv (talk) 22:37, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
#1: There's no such feature(tm) to do so. #2: I think I can do that, with two conditions: You notify us when you stop your project (thus releasing the IP to the shared pool) and you absolutely always require authentication. — regards, Revi 04:40, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@-revi: thank you! Yes. We are likely to use at most 3 IP addresses at this moment:
  • 35.222.141.110 for dev
  • 34.67.56.51 for canary (staging)
  • 34.69.252.115 for prod
and I agree to both terms: we will absolutely require authentication(in fact you can just allow only login users to edit from these IP addresses) and we will notify you when we stop project and release the IP to the shared pool. (once the Toolforge support mount on Root or custom domain, or we are approved for WMF Cloud VPS)
Xinbenlv (talk) 06:13, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note individual IPs can not be globally whitelisted (phab:T42439). They can only be whitelisted locally.--GZWDer (talk) 19:58, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@GZWDer:, thank you!
Do I understand it correctly that both the global and local needs to unblock the IP for any IP address to be used? While I will work on applying for individual local wiki's IP whitelist approve, can I ask why individual IPs can not be globally whitelisted? In particular, is it a policy or a technical reason?
  1. If it's a policy, I'd argument by fixing the static IP, it's no longer an Open Proxy since being reserved and occupied by an application, a random internet user cannot use it. Given that we promise that we only authenticate users, it's a fixed set of users (only registered Wikipedian users) rather than open to public.
  2. If it's a technical issue, I'd argument previously we are blocking IP range IP1 to IP3, now if we have a static IP2 to unblock, you can block [IP1, IP2), (IP2, IP3]
Dear global admins, what do you think? Thank you!
Xinbenlv (talk) 21:35, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please let me know if there are other information you would love me to provide accompanying this application Xinbenlv (talk) 22:49, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's a technical reason. We simply cannot globally whitelist individual IP addresses, even if we wanted to. Trijnsteltalk 23:06, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Trijnstel: thank you for your answer. Can you help me understand how that is not technically possible? I suggested that you can unblock [IP1, IP2), (IP2, IP3] instead of the range [IP1,IP3]? Or what are alternatives if you could kindly suggest? Xinbenlv (talk) 02:54, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RonaldB: What can you tell me about the IP address 3.86.232.24? Currently the whole /16 IP range has been blocked and I don't think it's possible/desired to unblock a part of it, but perhaps you can advice? Trijnsteltalk 18:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RonaldB:, @Trijnstel:, @GZWDer:, @-revi:, thank you, do I understand it correctly that you are helping us to find the technical solutions because there is no other concerns in the policy aspects right? If there are policy concern, could we discuss policy concern in the meanwhile? Xinbenlv (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for Nurseways

Status:    In progress

Hi, I only connect to the internet through a VPN due to freedom of speech limitations in my country. For instance, see this recent news article from MSN Brazil (content from Deutsch Welle Brazil) about the current far-right government trying to censor a Wikipedia article and seeking legal prosecution of an editor:

https://www.msn.com/pt-br/noticias/politica/minist%C3%A9rio-da-educa%C3%A7%C3%A3o-tentou-censurar-a-wikip%C3%A9dia/ar-AAGU1Ee

I can supply other examples if needed. The IP I am editing from is my personal VPN, not an open proxy - I am the sole person with access to this IP. I received an error message regarding an IP block when I tried to create an account at the Brazilian Wikipedia directing me to contact user Jon Kolbert who directed me to make a request for an IP Block exemption here. May I use Wikipedia with this VPN? I do not need an exemption for any other IP, thanks --Nurseways (talk) 12:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You said that "you are editing" but the only your edit is to this page. Please, clarify. Ruslik (talk) 17:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nurseways:? Ruslik (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for Uzielbot

Status:    In progress

I am using this bot account to upload data to Wikidata using script. I am having issues running the script on my own machine due to connectivity issues etc. and tried to get this to work on Digital Ocean droplet, just to find out their IP range is blocked. Will be glad to remove the global block for my bot account, in order to use Digital Ocean servers for bot activity, thanks, --Uziel302 (talk) 13:17, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why not use Toolforge instead? Masum Reza☎ 06:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User_talk:Masumrezarock100, I thought it is more for public tools or long term bots, my bot is one-off, I only need to upload the 500k forms I extracted from other resource. I don't care using both, I will try to apply to Toolforge, but would like to be exempted anyway. Uziel302 (talk) 17:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the exempt need to be global? --Krd 18:13, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the block is global and I needed exempt from it, I can have it specific to my above needs. Uziel302 (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Local IPBE can override global blocks, but global IPBE can not override local blocks.--GZWDer (talk) 17:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GZWDer, so I need local IPBE. How do I get it? Uziel302 (talk) 05:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See links on d:Q4048709, or directly contact an administrator if the wiki is not listed.--GZWDer (talk) 09:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for 港九自由嘻嘻嘻

Status:    Done

Occasionally I want to edit from China but it's impossible because of the firewall. Can you please grant me exception? Thanks, --港九自由嘻嘻嘻 (talk) 10:42, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What did you mean by "occasionally"? Are you switching countries or something? Masum Reza☎ 10:54, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Shenzhen.--港九自由嘻嘻嘻 (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
According to your CA, zh wikis are your home wikis. Global IP block exemption won't help you if an IP is locally blocked. You may wish to ask exemption there instead. Masum Reza☎ 10:09, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you to apply for an IP block exemption here on zhwiki locally, unless you are sure that you will be editing under a *globally* blocked IP. --Techyan（Talk） 05:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "CA"? "home wikis"? I tried to edit different wikipedias and each one said my VPN is block globally.--港九自由嘻嘻嘻 (talk) 09:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First, Are you need to edit in another wiki, such as Wikicommons and enwiki? Second, Is your vpn is blocked globally or locally? Thank you!--SCP-2000 (talk) 12:12, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I want to edit but the page say I am using IP address is block globbally.--港九自由嘻嘻嘻 (talk) 13:06, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"CA" means CentralAuth which shows stats of accounts connected through SUL. Your CentralAuth page is Special:CentralAuth/港九自由嘻嘻嘻. Where you have more edits/more active, is called your home wiki. Masum Reza☎ 15:23, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done Ruslik (talk) 18:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for 荣智浩

Status:    In progress

<我是中国大陆用户，需要解锁全域IP>，谢谢, --荣智浩 (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

你确认你遇到的是全域封禁吗？你在commoms上也遇到过这种现象吗？如果没有的话，我建议你在中文维基本地申请IP封禁豁免。另外你需要用英语解释你遇到的情况。—Techyan（Talk） 06:01, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for Rowe Wilson Frederisk Holme

Status:    In progress

Hey, Due to work and some reasons in life, I now have to live in mainland China for a long time. But because of the China's Censorship and Great Firewall, I had to edit it via Proxy. But my activity IP has recently been blocked by metawiki. I am in a lot of (Chinese) wiki projects, so asking for IPBE permissions on a local basis is complicated and cumbersome. So I want to be able to get global IPBE permissions to solve these problems. Thanks. --Rowe Wilson Frederisk Holme (talk) 12:03, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for 2 Factor Auth tester permissions

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Testing this service may result in the loss of your access and is not recommended for inexperienced users.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting 2FA tester global permissions, make sure that:

  1. You are logged in on this wiki;
  2. You have read the help page about two-factor authentication and understand how it could lead to irrecoverable loss of access to your account ;
To request 2FA tester global permissions
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and INDICATE you have read the Help page.
If the request page is currently protected, please file as an edit request on the talk page.
=== 2FA Tester for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global <!--don't change this line-->
 |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}}
}}
<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~

The request will be approved if there is no reason not to grant one. A steward will review the request.

2FA Tester for Z Everson

Status:    In progress

<Please enable 2FA access to this account. Thanks.>, thanks, --Z Everson (talk) 14:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Z Everson: Have you read the documentation? Ruslik (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for other global permissions

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Instructions for making a request

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.
=== <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 = Username
 |discussion=
}}
<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~

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

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global_permissions&oldid=19566223"