From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Autopatrol and CN admin

Is there any particular reason why autopatrol isn't part of central notice administrators other than no one thought to include it when CNA was created? 18 of the 30 CNA are also autopatrolled, the other 12 consists of 11 WMF staff and 1 WMDE staff accounts. If someone can be trusted with putting up banners across all Wikimedia projects, then there's no reason they can't be trusted with autopatrolled as well. (Yes, this is a very minor minor technical thing, but it occurred to me so I thought I'll mention it :) -- KTC (talk) 22:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Instead of changing the config, maybe we can add the right to those ones. Minor change indeed IMHO. —MarcoAurelio 12:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Policy (Meta:Autopatrollers; "Any administrator can grant this right at their discretion to trusted users who regularly create pages and have demonstrated they are familiar with Meta's policies and guidelines.") requires familiarity with metawiki content, which is not necessarily given in case of CN admins. Vogone (talk) 23:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Prevent non-contributive users from endless reverting

Moved to Wikimedia Forum. Matiia (talk) 14:36, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Please protect my user-page

Moved to Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.--Syum90 (talk) 11:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I´m not sure that this is the right place to ask on meta, but could someone please protect my user-talk-page here? I have been hunted on English Wikipedia for years by this vandal: JarlaxleArtemis, and my talk-page there is protected. I got a SUL-account just a couple of months ago, and now he follows me around on commons and here. 10:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


There're so many vandals here. I think a local rollbacker group should be created.--GZWDer (talk) 06:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Agree with you, I think that in a wiki like this it is totally justified, I support the idea.--Syum90 (talk) 07:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I think we have enough groups around here. Sysop is granted liberally to people who need it. --Nemo 07:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
As Meta has a cross-wiki role, admins here are expected to have cross wiki experience. The same things can be said of this right...--Infinite0694 (Talk) 07:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Nemo here, however I also accede to the points of the supporters. Notwithstanding, I'd preferr not to granularize even more the standard sysop package and promote those with need of the tools to the sysop group (if they have a need for them and are responsible enough to be trusted with an adminship that gives them access to pages that do affect every WM project...). Best regards. —MarcoAurelio 18:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
I think rollbacker would be a good idea. Becoming an admin here appears to be of similar difficulty to many wikis. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

A stub untouched for six years. Any reason to keep this? Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't see a reason to delete it either because it's still accurate and is not outdated. --Glaisher (talk) 05:44, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Is it useful? Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 06:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Several users from other projects are confused about the difference between main namespace and meta namespace here. This page helps in clearing some of the confusion, so yes, it is useful. Being an untouched stub for several years does not necessarily mean it should be deleted, imo. And it does get page views. (Let's assume that the tool is accurate!) --Glaisher (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure what's so surprising about a stub being untouched for several years. Meta-Wiki is not the busiest wiki in the world. :-) That said, this is a wiki and I'd encourage improvement and expansion of the page over deletion. Be bold! --MZMcBride (talk) 02:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)