Meta:Requests for adminship

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests and proposals Requests for adminship on Meta Archives
This page hosts requests for administrator access on the Meta-Wiki; for requesting administrator access on any other wiki, please see the index of request and proposal pages, where a Steward can do the job if required. Bureaucrat, checkuser and bot requests are also made here. Before making a request here, please see the administrator policy.

Requests should be listed here for at least seven days; bureaucrats should only close after this minimum time. 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


Note that this page is for access on Meta only. See the Steward requests/Permissions page for adminship/deadminship requests on other projects.

Regular adminship

  1. Before requesting admin access, please ensure you meet all of the minimum criteria:
    • Have a user page on Meta, with links to the user pages on other participated projects. This can state that SUL is activated or be provided via a Wiki matrix if that is not possible.
    • Have a valid contact address (either a confirmed email address in preferences, or a valid email address on the user page).
    • Be a currently active contributor on Meta. This is a subjective, not an objective, measure and there is no official post count.
  2. As Meta has a cross-wiki role, admins here are expected to have cross wiki experience. SUL confirmation or a matrix will ensure that editing on other wikis can be easily seen. It would be expected that those seeking adminship here would have both reasonable experience here and on other wikis.
  3. Given the multi-lingual nature of Meta, {{#babel:}} information will be of use to others.
  4. Place a request on this page, by transcluding a subpage, for example {{Meta:Requests for adminship/Example}}. Please put the newest request on the top. Bear in mind that even if you do meet the criteria above this does not mean that the community will automatically approve a request. Please add a minimum ending date to the election, allowing a full 7 day period from the first timestamp:
    ''Ending {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+1 week}} (UTC)''
  5. 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, he or she is less likely to pass a request for adminship here at Meta-Wiki.

Interface adminship

Add your request below under the interface adminship section. Please note:


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 he/she nominates themselves here.

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

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.
  • Bot: Please read the bot policy. This wiki allows global bots and automatic approval of certain types of bots; for other bots, add your request below under the bot section, in the same way as an admin request.
  • 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.
  • Translation administrator: please read Meta:Translation administrator and Meta:Translate extension. No fixed time limit for these requests is defined, and there are no particular requirements; if you provide a valid reason your request will be granted.
  • Centralnotice administrator: Meta:Central notice administrators grant 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:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.
  • MassMessage sender: please read about MassMessage, and provide a clear reason for requesting access. Specify a duration, or specifically request ongoing if needed.
  • Uploaders
  • Patrollers
Global renamer permissions are handled at Steward requests/Global permissions.

WMF Office Staff and Contractors

  • If you are an WMF Official or Contractor and need rights on Meta-Wiki to perform your duties the process is different. Please have a look at the WMF Staff userrights policy on Office Wiki[restricted access] and follow the procedure described there. If in doubt, please contact Trust and Safety; or send an email to trustandsafety(at)

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

None currently

Requests for translation adminship

None currently

Requests for CentralNotice adminship

Corinna Hillebrand (WMDE)

Hi, I'm working for the German Wikimedia chapter (together with Tim Eulitz and Gabriel Birke) on the annual fundraising campaign. I need CentralNotice adminship, ideally until I leave WMDE (for which there is no planned date in the foreseeable future). Thanks, Corinna Hillebrand (WMDE) (talk) 09:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose multiple issues even creating this request, including not following the directions for formatting the request or using a transclusion suggest unfamiliarity with technical syntax. — xaosflux Talk 10:58, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
    Hey Xaosflux, Corinna has just joined Wikimedia Deutschland a couple of days ago as a software developer and requires adminship on CentralNotice as part of her daily work routine in the technical fundraising team. Any unfamiliarities with MediaWiki syntax and CentralNotice will be cleared up in the coming weeks as part of our onboarding process where she will be paired with senior developers who know the ins and outs of the platform. Tim Eulitz (WMDE) (talk) 08:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
    @Tim Eulitz (WMDE): until trained perhaps she should have a code review process before directly implementing production changes to these global configs, wherein someone else from WMDE implements the changes. — xaosflux Talk 11:26, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
    @Xaosflux: Additionally to CI systems which catch technical errors in banners, our regular processes include code reviews of the banner code, manual tests and at least 2 people (developers, product manager, fundraising team) look at each banner and campaign setup in CentralNotice. Please be assured that we're aware of the impact these permissions have and that we're using them responsively. Do you still oppose the permission under these circumstances? --Gabriel Birke (WMDE) (talk) 12:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
    If you are already using a multi-party code review and deployment process, perhaps this person shouldn't be at the "commit" phase? I could certainly be in the minority here, although noone else has commented yet. — xaosflux Talk 14:46, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
    I see no problem here with granting a "work-related" requests even if the person is not experienced yet. One assumes that she will inevitably learn how to do it, or risk displeasing mighty WMDE :P I will grant this request if there are no other objections. --MF-W 17:24, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Question: this access requires 2FA on your account, are you able to comply with this requirement User:Corinna Hillebrand (WMDE)? — xaosflux Talk 00:42, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
    @Xaosflux:I will comply with the requirement of 2FA, yes --Corinna Hillebrand (WMDE) (talk) 14:11, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support As this is a work related one as stated by multiple WMDE staffers and MF-W. Although I fully understand Xaosflux's concerns (e.g. we've recently had a WMF employee revoked her mass message sender permissions) I think we're not in a position to outright deny an employee to do her work, and I trust the statement above that her supervisors/bosses will review her work before any banner gets activated. This does not means that we should be automatically granting this permission to whoever asks for it. There's a reason why CN access was unbundled from the sysop pack on Wikimedia wikis.—MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
    @MF-Warburg: A few years ago, I would have agreed on that (that CNAdmin was a 'subset' of admin, which can reduce the risk of needless admins) - and to some parts, it is still true. The access to raw code that will be executed by readers on any project has since been identified as a higher risk activity, thus the new 2FA and removal of CNAdmin access from Admin over the last year. Admittedly, I'm not well versed in the nature of chapter employees, if this was a new WMF employee we wouldn't really be having this discussion. Would you expect that any chapter employee should be "shall issue" on this? — xaosflux Talk 11:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Requests for bot flags


Thanks --Chilfing (talk) 10:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

  • Support Support approval. Given the low edit rate of the bot, a bot flag might not be needed at this stage unless the operator wants it anyway in which case I'd not really object. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:19, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Krd 11:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Support bot seems fine, suggest not using a bot flag for this task - it is low enough volume to not impact recent changes feeds. — xaosflux Talk 17:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. Bot is approved to do the mentioned task. Bot flag doesn't seem to be needed for now. Matiia (talk) 01:47, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

See also