Jump to content

Meta:Requests for adminship

Edit links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Shortcut:
WM:RFA
This page hosts requests for administrator access on the Meta-Wiki; for requesting administrator access on any other wiki, please find the appropriate venue on the index of request and proposal pages. Requests for bureaucrat, checkuser, oversight and bot, as well as removal of them (other than inactivity) are also made here. Before making a request here, please see the administrator policy.

Most requests should be listed here for at least seven days; bureaucrats should only close after the minimum time foreseen in the relevant policy. Discussions are not closed early. Adminship will be granted by a support ratio of at least 75%. If a request hasn't been addressed by a bureaucrat after a lengthy period of time, please leave a note at Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Requests may be extended, or put on hold by bureaucrats, pending decision or finding of consensus.

Requests for temporary adminship and bot requests may be less formal and often go for a shorter duration if consensus becomes clear after only a few days of discussion.

All editors with an account on Meta, at least one active account on any Wikimedia project, and a link between the two, may participate in any request and give their opinion of the candidate. However, more active Meta editors' opinions may be given additional weight in controversial cases.

See below for information on prerequisites on submitting a request, and how to add a nomination.

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
This box: view · talk · edit

Information

Note that this page is for access on Meta only. See the permission request to stewards page for adminship/deadminship requests on other projects.

Regular adminship

  1. Before requesting admin access, please check the policy for requesting adminship.
  2. Use the box below, insert your username:

  3. Place a request on this page, by transcluding the subpage, for example {{Meta:Requests for adminship/Username}}. Please put the newest request on the bottom. Bear in mind that even if you do meet the criteria above this does not mean that the community will automatically approve a request.
  4. Please note, past administrators who have given up their rights must meet all criteria at the time of the new request. There is no separate process for reinstating past administrators.

Please note: Ill-considered nominations for adminship can be draining and deflating to both the community and the candidate. Any successful candidate will need to be able to demonstrate sufficient experience within the Wikimedia community, in addition to a familiarity with Meta-Wiki. If a candidate is not already a local administrator or holder of advanced permissions on a Wikimedia content project, they are less likely to pass a request for adminship here at Meta-Wiki.

Bureaucratship

Add your request below under the bureaucratship section. Please note:

  • Only active administrators can become bureaucrats, and only after at least 6 months of regular adminship.
  • User is endorsed by two current bureaucrats after they nominate themselves here.

If you fail any of these requirements, you will not be assigned the bureaucrat flag. For more information see the Meta bureaucrat page.

Other access

For these types of access, create a subpage just as you would for regular adminship and add it to the appropriate section of this page.


  • Limited adminship: If you need sysop access for a particular reason (such as ability to edit protected pages), you may request limited adminship on Meta. If granted, the user understands that they will only be allowed to use the tools for the tasks they were approved, and not doing so will be grounds for immediate removal. Temporary sysop access will normally be valid for one month unless requested and granted otherwise.


  • CheckUser: please read the CheckUser policy and add your request below under the checkuser section, in the same way as an admin request.

  • Oversight: please read the Oversight policy and add your request below under the oversight section, in the same way as an admin request.


  • CentralNotice administrator: The Central Notice administrator group grants access to manage and edit banner campaigns. Because of the potentially huge impact of banners on the wikis, this should be granted carefully and sparingly. The WMF requires two-factor authentication for this access.

For these types of access, just ask on Meta request for help from a sysop or bureaucrat page:

Requests for global renamer permissions are handled at global permission requests to stewards page.

Wikimedia Foundation staff and contractors

If you are a Wikimedia Foundation staff member or contractor and need rights on Meta-Wiki to perform your duties, the request process is different. Please review the WMF staff userrights policy on Foundation-wiki and follow the procedure described there. If in doubt, please contact Trust and Safety by sending an email to ca@wikimedia.org.

Requests for regular adminship

None currently

Requests for limited adminship

None currently

Requests for interface adminship

None currently

Requests for bureaucratship

None currently

Requests for CheckUser access

"Meta:Requests for checkuser" redirects here. To request checkuser information, see Meta:Requests for CheckUser information.
None currently

Requests for Oversight access

"Meta:Requests for oversight" redirects here. To request oversighting, see Meta:Oversighters#Requests.

EggRoll97

Not ending before 19:19, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello all. I'll get right to the point that I've seen an uptick (or perhaps just usual activity, at this point) from LTAs making frankly abusive attacks against anti-vandal editors. I've been sending these to the Meta oversight queue and revision-deleting. These responses are often very quick in some time zones (mine is -5, though I edit both within that time zone, and during odd hours of the night), but at times can be delayed by a few hours, or overnight. I think it may be better for all involved if I volunteered to perform suppressions myself, so I am presenting myself to the community today and asking to be entrusted with oversight permissions. I have, of course, read the Oversight policy, and signed the Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy confidentiality agreement. --EggRoll97 (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply


Support
  1. Support Support Trusted! --Wassimtalk 19:24, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  2. Support Support NDG (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  3. Support Support I agree, there are a lot of these attacks and I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to perform this yourself. Thanks for helping out! --Icodense (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  4. Support Support valid use case. Borhan (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  5. I have full faith and confidence in EggRoll. Support Support! HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:55, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  6. Support Support Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 21:47, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  7. Support Support Trusted user, and more oversighters from a wider range of timezones cannot hurt. //shb (t • c) 23:01, 27 August 2026 (UTC)reply
    Just to clarify, I'm not too concerned by the percentage of declined requests. A lot of OS requests can be borderline, up to the suppressor's interpretation of the wording. OS (along with CU) is something where a lot of it is something you learn along the way – what ultimately matters here is whether EggRoll has the ability to heed on the feedback provided by other Meta OSs, and take a bit more caution, both of which I trust EggRoll can do (though a confirmation comment from them would be nice here). Also, as a side point, unlike a CU check, an OS suppression can always be undone. //shb (t • c) 09:44, 29 August 2026 (UTC)reply
    Correct. I certainly would be taking more caution knowing that I was actually the one performing the suppression (meaning, without someone else to double-check prior to suppression), and I certainly welcome any feedback the current oversighters would be able to provide. EggRoll97 (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  8. Support Support🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 10:02, 28 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  9. Support Support Valid use cases and highly trusted. Veritas Sapientiae (talk | email) 10:05, 28 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  10. Support Support Looks fine. aqurs 🍧 10:31, 28 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  11. Support Support. While I was surprised to see this request given that OS/CU on this wiki are for the most part a subset of stewards, and I don't tend to see a lot of OS-worthy content on this wiki (might be just me), I don't see anything wrong with the request. I have to agree with SHB2000 in that (i) there's an element of subjectivity, and (ii) it's easy to reverse. Leaderboard (talk) 16:51, 29 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  12. Support Support Highly trusted + valid use case. --V0lkanic (talk) 09:11, 30 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  13. Support Support - Out of the seven OS, six are stewards, so I don't see having one more non-steward OS as being too much. EggRoll97 would be a useful addition, and they could also help take some of the workload off the stewards, who already have plenty of other things to deal with. I can understand Xaosflux's concern about the number of declined requests, but what SHB and EPIC said also makes sense to me. Some OS requests are going to be a bit subjective, and people are bound to get a better sense of where that line is as they gain more experience. I trust EggRoll97's judgement, and their response makes me confident that they'll be careful with OS and take the feedback from the other OSs on board as they get more experience. Max (talk) 10:45, 1 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  14. So I have neither prejudice nor objections to granting OS access to ER97 (and an additional oversighter in my time zone would be beneficial), but the false positive rate mentioned below seems somewhat concerning to me. Also that being said, I also don't see any merit (if at all) about the amount of our current oversighters being sufficient, as most (or all) of them seem to be outside of UTC-5 (or North America), some might delay in actioning and responding, etc. I can see Jianhui67's argument below which further reiterates my response. If this request goes unsuccessful, I would advise to continue your revision deletion work, truly report whatever needs to be suppressed to be actully suppressed (avoiding a risk of creating a false positive), and in a few months, once you have gained additional experience, you can give another oversighter access request a try.  Weak support. Codename Noreste /// ⭐️✨ 13:19, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  15. Support Support Divinations (talk) 20:35, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose In looking at the last 3 months of OS requests in the VRT queue, it appears that about 40% of your requests did not result in suppression actions. I think that is too high of a recent false positive rate for someone that will be making suppressions. (To be clear, i don't think there is anything wrong with contributors having non-acted upon referrals, and this is a perfectly acceptable rate for contributor referrals - we encourage reports whenever someone comes across things that are suspect.) No complaints with your rev-del work, keep up the good work there. — xaosflux Talk 16:29, 28 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  2. Oppose Oppose per above, and keeping the number of OS low to make sense of the idea behind this role. Best, —DerHexer (Talk) 18:25, 29 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  3. Oppose Oppose In the last few years a few additional Oversighters have been elected and I think that the current amount of Oversighters should be sufficient. --Ameisenigel (talk) 09:31, 30 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  4. Oppose Oppose I am leaning more towards an oppose based on what I read above. PieWriter (talk) 22:42, 30 August 2026 (UTC)reply
  5. Oppose Oppose – user is trusted, but OS is a powerful option to suppress contents and a false-positive-rate of 40% (xaos mentioned) sounds a bit alarming to me, with two oversighters opposing so far. Maybe it's better to get more experience with that and come back once the current oversighters are supporting this request for OS. --Ten 14:50, 1 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Neutral
  1. Neutral Neutral I'm not sure what to think. I trust EggRoll, I really do. I think the issue of rejected OS requests can be subjective and so can the number of oversighters, and I don't want to close the door completely here, but I'm not sure about the need for new OS at the moment. For the few months I've been an OS requests have been handled quite quickly most of the time, I'm a bit less active at the moment myself but I check the queue every now and then (sometimes others get them before me though) and tend to respond quickly to Discord requests. I could see myself voting support but I'm not sure at present. EPIC (talk) 07:24, 1 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  2. Neutral Neutral leaning support. My thoughts are not yet crystallised. Like EPIC, I trust EggRoll fully and I do not doubt their ability to perform suppression-related actions (Xaosflux's point does not bother me much). It's the lack of support from the current OS team that's making me hesitate here. I remember looking for a Meta OS between UTC+3 and UTC+5 on Discord before, and there was no active OS at that point of time. So I sent an email to the OS team. Turns out EPIC was the one who responded to me on Discord about 1-2 hours later, while my email has yet to be answered. I do know Minorax is up between UTC+3 and UTC+5, but their user page has an explicit notice that says they are not very active on weekdays due to real life commitments, and that is fully acceptable as no one is perpetually on-wiki. Not every Meta OS is on Discord, hence I'm thinking whether or not we need coverage on Discord as EggRoll is pretty active on Discord. This will potentially reduce the time OS requests get answered on Discord. That said, this is only a personal opinion/suggestion from a Meta admin who uses Discord and the ultimate decision still lies in the hands of the current OS team. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:42, 1 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Requests for translation adminship

Alan Colin Arce (WMCA)

Hello, I am the Administrative Manager for the Wikimedia North America Hub. We are hoping to have our Meta-Wiki page available in English, Spanish, and French to reach the different linguistic communities in the region. Therefore, it would be helpful for me to be able to mark pages for translation and update the translated pages as we add more content to our page. On Meta, I am one of the main contributors to the North American Hub page.

I have read the documentation on translation and translated the Hub’s page into Spanish, after my colleague Sophie, from Wikimedia Canada (and a translator admin) marked the pages for translation for me.

On my personal account, I have translated several Wikipedia articles from English into Spanish, so I already have experience with translation on Wikimedia projects. Thank you for considering this request. --Alan Colin Arce (WMCA) (talk) 15:56, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

@Alan Colin Arce (WMCA) Please mark a sample page for translation as per Meta:Internationalization guidelines. PieWriter (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Apologies, I have marked this sample page for translation. Please let me know if I should provide more information. Alan Colin Arce (WMCA) (talk) 15:32, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Requests for CentralNotice adminship

Aude

Not ending before 13:35, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I would like to assist User:Pharos and the Wikimedia NYC chapter with setting up central notice banners for various events, like CentralNotice/Request/National Hispanic Heritage Month US 2026. I have been actively involved with Wikimedia NYC for many years, previously a board member and also was a board member of Wikimedia DC chapter.

I am an admin on Commons (currently one of the most active there), and was previously an admin on Meta wiki and enwiki, but lost those due to inactivity. I am more active again now, and would like to help with the Central Notice banners.

I also am knowledgeable with how CentralNotice works and recently fixed some bugs in the extension phab:T370798, phab:T230857 and phab:T420810

Disclaimer: I also work as a senior software engineer at WMF (see User:KFilbert-WMF), but my work on central notice and under this account is in personal capacity. --Aude (talk) 13:35, 29 August 2026 (UTC)reply

Requests for bot flags

NellieBly Bot

Not ending before 06:18, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I crafted that bot to perform different set of tasks, some with impact on meta, namely: logging discussions from other channels (Telegram, Discord, IRC), creating other channels discussion digests and documenting them on meta and also creating a new tool digest of new tools creation. Now that most of my tests are done, and that some more substantial page edits and creation can happen. After a few days/weeks testing the code, I'm starting to use it in a more systemic approach and I would like to grant it the bot flag to limit spamming RCs.schiste (talk) 06:01, 19 August 2026 (UTC)reply

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_adminship&oldid=31006006#Requests_for_bureaucratship"