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).
Please note that Global rollbackers discussions are not votes. Comments must present specific points in favor of or against a user's approval.
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.
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.
Strong support Of course, active sysop in a large wiki. Per usual standards that any active sysop in large/medium wikis in good standing should be granted this right (or even bundled in their toolkit). They are active in SWMT and crosswiki, so no issues for them doing global queues either. Thanks for volunteering. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Leaderboard For Global Renamers, the crosswiki experience I am looking for is slightly different from Global Rollbackers / Sysops. If the candidate is wanting the access for their homewiki, I am okay with 0 experience elsewhere. For candidate who wish to work on global queues or didn't indicate, I will want to look for some crosswiki experience, i.e. some experience with how global things works. They have tons of edits on enwp, over 200 plus on meta is enough for them to know somewhat how other wikis work in term of username policies and that is the "cross"-wiki experience I am looking for. Hope this explains. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Active user on some large wikis. There are some block what you done in accordance with the username policy on Commons. I have no reason for oppose. :) --Uncitoyentalk14:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I would like to see a bit more cross wiki experience, but this is something user can learn "on the job". Good luck! Nadzik (talk) 16:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Trusted user wants to help so why not? I know they have little or no experience in this field but as Nadzik said "this is something user can learn on the job". I'm sure they won't break anything. Thanks for volunteering. -- CptViraj (talk) 08:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I'd like to request global rename permissions to help our polish global renamers (because there's only one active polish renamer). I've read the global rename policy and familiarised myself with other pages connected to the topic (and past requests). I'm mostly active on the Polish Wikipedia, where I'm somewhat experienced in looking out for names violating our local policies. --MemicznyJanusz (talk) 10:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not ending before 22 February 2021 10:30 UTC
Strong support. User is active in reporting users who violate local username policy and ilactively engages in leaving notes for them on their user talk pages. He will be useful in dealing with a local queue, and in time (when he gets cross wiki experiences) might even be eligible to do renames in global queue. Nadzik (talk) 10:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Per Nadzik endorsement. Trusted user locally, active in renaming, the lack of sysop doesn't trouble me with strong local endorsement. Thank you for volunteering. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 10:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support As far as I can see from contributions on plwiki, MemicznyJanusz sends messages to inappropriate usernames and if necessary, reports to admins. Most reports were also processed by the admins. If Nadzik trusts, no problem for me. --Uncitoyentalk11:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per plwiki users' vote of confidence. I was a bit hesitant at first, but after looking at the endorsements from plwiki users, I'm inclined to support. Jianhui67talk★contribs10:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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 stewardswikimedia.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.
If you want to edit the Chinese Wikipedia, usually global IP block exemptions will not help you. Please see this instruction to request a local IP block exemption.
Instructions for making a request
Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that:
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.
Hi. On my second laptop, I've been blocked on Meta, Wikidata and many other projects (except on my home wiki :fr as I'm sysop) since 13rd of January. IDs are #321954 and #321964, with message "No open proxy". Thanks. Zetud (talk) 22:51, 7 February 2021 (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:
@JonathanCross Hello, this request is necessary, because it is really easy to lock yourself out of your account with no way to recover, should you lose both your 2FA device and scratchcodes. If you are okay with this risk, and you have read the documentation, we will happily enable 2FA for you. Best, Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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:
You are logged in on this wiki;
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.
So, basically the same rationale as Meta:RFA and Meta:Babel, but evidently the community does not think that limited adminship is the right role for me, and no consensus could be obtained for the other two. This leaves AFH as the only option. Please do not tell that I should be applying for Meta limited adminship (as I already did it), because in that case I'll be left with neither. Thanks in advance. --Leaderboard (talk) 08:14, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No issues. Yes I think this should be the best route. Anyway can someone verify the end date, there's an amendment for AFH to take 1 week, does it apply to this? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Of course, active sysop in a large wiki. Per usual standards that any active sysop in large/medium wikis in good standing should be granted this right (or even bundled in their toolkit). They are active in SWMT and crosswiki, so no issues for them doing global queues either. Thanks for volunteering. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Active user on some large wikis. There are some block what you done in accordance with the username policy on Commons. I have no reason for oppose. :) --Uncitoyentalk 14:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Weak support Ideally you should be a sysop, but this is not mandatory and you look fine otherwise. Leaderboard (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
