Steward requests/Permissions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from RFP)
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Permissions) latest archive
This page is for requests to have stewards grant or revoke administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight rights on Wikimedia projects which do not have a local permissions procedure.

Old sections are archived by a bot. Click here for a list of archives.

  • If you are requesting adminship or bureaucratship, and your wiki has a local bureaucrat, submit your request to that user or to the relevant local request page (index).
  • For urgent requests, such as to combat large-scale vandalism on a small wiki, contact a steward in the #wikimedia-stewardsconnect IRC channel. In emergencies, type !steward in the channel to get the attention of stewards. Otherwise, you can type @steward for non-urgent help.

Other than requests to remove your own access or emergencies, please only make requests here after gaining the on-wiki approval of your local community.

Quick navigation: Administrator | Bureaucrat | CheckUser | Oversight | Removal of access | Miscellaneous | Global permissions | Unexpired temporary access

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page[edit]

1. Place the following code at the bottom of the appropriate section below:

==== User name@xxproject ====
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name =
(your remarks) ~~~~

2. Fill in the values:

  • domain: the wiki's URL domain (like "ex.wikipedia" or "meta.wikimedia").
  • user name: the name of the user whose rights are to be changed (like "Exampleuser"). In case you're requesting access for multiple bots, leave this field blank and give a list of these bots in your remarks
  • discussion: a link to the local vote or discussion about the rights change (for example, "[[ex:Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#ExampleUser]]").

3. If anything is missing from your request, a steward will request more information.

Confirmation of signing confidentiality agreement[edit]

Certain permissions (notably CheckUser and Oversight) additionally require users to sign a confidentiality agreement. Users requesting these permissions must make a request below, and must also sign the confidentiality agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation. The request is placed on hold temporarily, until the receipt has been formally confirmed by the Office.


COPY THE FOLLOWING CODE to the bottom of the appropriate section below:

 and also mistakes. Thank you. 

Administrator access[edit]

See administrator for information about this user group.

  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at Please do not request administrator access solely for that purpose; your request will be declined.

  • Stewards: Please use {{Systmp}} for approved temporary requests. Approved temporary access requests are listed at SRAT. Requests are moved to that page by a bot.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

For permanent adminship, please provide a link to the local community approval. For temporary adminship please state for how long and for which tasks you need it, and link to a local announcement.


Gmentis (talk) 14:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

On hold until 3 February (first revision of the request). --MF-W 15:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a local bureaucrat who is somewhat active. Have you asked him to grant you adminship? MBisanz talk 23:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
@Gmentis: please contact the local bureaucrat and ask for access first. – Ajraddatz (talk) 09:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


please renew my adminship in lrc wikipedia. so thanks.lrc lori (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Note; there are some issues with him using sockpuppets; I blocked them on lrcwiki and seems only 1 valid vote is left. Stryn (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2017 (UTC) I'll leave this to another steward to decide. Stryn (talk) 20:41, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Where's the discussion? The link only goes to M.'s userpage. My decision would be in favour, if there was no oppose. Sock puppet usage is very bad of course, but as long as it's uncontested I don't think it's [too] harmful to give adminship to this long-term contributor. --MF-W 18:22, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Link. Stryn (talk) 09:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

please help me this process. I'll waite for your responce best wishes.lrc lori (talk) 14:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Андрей Козлов 123@abwiki[edit]

I'm acting administrator Abkhazian Wikipedia. My powers will expire on 14th February. I opened a new discussion. Please hold the rights until the end of voting, which will end on 18th February at 18:00. Андрей Козлов 123 (talk) 10:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

On hold until the 18th. Savhñ 11:40, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Please remove administrator rights in Abkhazian Wikipedia prematurely due to the fact that at the moment I don't have support. Besides, I'm a little active. Thanks. Андрей Козлов 123 (talk) 17:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Already removed a few days ago when they expired. So closing now as not done. Re-apply again if you plan to be more active. Stryn (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
@Stryn:, I already saw that was removed. By the way, Savh said that right will on hold until the 18th. Until the end of voting. Андрей Козлов 123 (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
No, sorry - I meant that the request for extension was on hold until the 18th, to allow for local community input. I don't think not having the sysop rights a few days is worth the mess of extending an already temporary request. Savhñ 21:50, 18 February 2017 (UTC)


I'm a native speaker of Zazaki and would like to have my adminship extended. Thank you! - Mirzali (talk) 11:25, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Support Support - As the sysop of the Zazaki Wikpedia, I need help of Mirzali. --asmên 11:37, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
No need to vote here; consensus should be built locally instead of on this page. That said, on hold until 18 Feb to allow for a week of discussion. – Ajraddatz (talk) 11:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Support Support - Support --Memedaga 14:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Even though this might not have been very clear in the original request, your adminship was granted for the duration of three months until the 12th of March. I suggest you leave the current request open and file a new request here in about 3 weeks. Savhñ 21:53, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Cumbril@et.wikiquote[edit] has no admins or bureaucrats. There is quite a lot of vandalism in the wiki recently. I'm asking for admin rights to combat vandalism: delete pages, revert harmful changes, block IP-s, etc. I'm already an elected admin user in Cumbril (talk) 19:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold till 21 February. Stryn (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


Please renew my adminship because it will expire on February 24. --Booklety (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access[edit]

See bureaucrat for information about this user group.
  • In principle, requests for temporary bureaucrat access are not granted.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

CheckUser access[edit]

See CheckUser policy for information about this user group and the policy governing the use of this tool.
  • To request CheckUser information, see Steward requests/Checkuser. This is the place to request CheckUser access.
  • Temporary CheckUser access is not permitted and temporary access is only used by stewards.

Marcelo Victor@ptwiki[edit]

As per local policy (which sets CheckUser terms at one year's length), please turn off and on the bit in order to register another term. Thanks, RadiX 10:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done; if the term continues, there is no consensus for removal. --MF-W 11:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
It is not a request for removal. The same was previously done here, here, here and here, as per standard practice. RadiX 11:11, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
It was done, which doesn't mean it made sense. The checkuser policy does not envision temporary CUs. If a local project decides to have terms and then re-elections, it is entirely up to them - requests here just need to be made if a new user should get CU, or if someone should lose it, as a result of the local processes. --MF-W 11:18, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Not really. Ptwiki local policy determines that the bit should be turned off and then on in order to register another term. Sorry, but there is no wording related to temporary access at CheckUser global policy, and it's not up to you to decide what should not be done in this specific situation either. If it was not allowed per policy, it would not have been done before. :/ RadiX 11:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Your last sentence is spot-on. --MF-W 11:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Pinging @Ajraddatz, MBisanz, and Einsbor: as they attended these previous requests. RadiX 12:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
The CheckUser policy says that local policies can be more restrictive than the global one. If they mandate temporary access, then I see no reason why that can't be enforced. As to the physical refreshing of the bit, I agree that it's perhaps unnecessary, but at the same time it takes 2 seconds and doesn't cause any harm either. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz: I know that this userright change may seem utterly pointless or a waste of time from the outsider's perspective, and it has never been my intention to create a incident here. However, our local policies do emphasize the temporary access, and I only need a link to the physical refreshing of the bit in order to properly archive this request for CheckUser permission. I cannot do that as ptwiki is my homewiki. RadiX 01:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
You're a local bureaucrat, therefore you can close the request and stewards can't. Stewards could remove the access if the user was not reelected, but that is not the case here. --MF-W 01:56, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
First, there is no need to be a bureaucrat to close a request for checkuser permission: it's subject to simple-majority vote. Furthermore, restrictions inherent to local policies cannot be ignored as far as they don't override the global checkuser policy, in which, as I previously said, there is no wording regarding temporary access and how should we handle this. Therefore, you can not take a decision based solely in your opinion, as you did here. That is the point. RadiX 03:07, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
The directions to this section do say "Temporary CheckUser access is not permitted and temporary access is only used by stewards." --Rschen7754 03:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@Rschen7754: I think this refers to users that have not been approved as checkusers through a vote. There is nothing about 'terms' and its lengths here. RadiX 03:38, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
I really wonder what you are trying to achieve here. Reading the local pages, pt:Wikipédia:CheckUser mentions neither term limits nor procedure, while pt:Wikipédia:CheckUser/Candidaturas at least mentions the term limit and the fact that there are no liminations on the number of renewals. However, I can't find anything even slightly indicating a need of such a silly procedure as it has been requested here. Also, I can't see any bureaucrat linking to meta in previous cases where this has been done except for you (once). Imagine all communities started doing this with e.g. admins (like dewiki). What a chaos. --Vogone (talk) 04:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
I find this refusal bizarre. The local policy was correctly conveyed by RadiX and it baffles me that such a very simple request is creating such discussion. Chico Venancio (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Please point out where the local policy wants this to be done. Even if it did btw, it would be pointless and should not be done. A simple request would also be to give myself the templateeditor right for no reason on enwiki and to remove it then immediately. It would likewise be rejected. —MF-W 02:22, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Oversight access[edit]

See Oversight policy for information about this user group and the policy governing the use of this tool.
  • To request to have content oversighted, ask for a steward in #wikimedia-stewardsconnect and contact a steward privately. This section is for requesting access to the Oversight tool.
  • For contact details about oversighters across the wikis, refer to this page.
  • Note that temporary Oversight access is not permitted and temporary status is only used by stewards.

  • When a new user is assigned to this group, please add them to this list.

Removal of access[edit]

  • If you're requesting the removal of your own permissions, make sure you're logged in to your account. If you have multiple flags, specify which you want removed. Stewards may delay your request a short time to ensure you have time to rethink your request (see previous discussion on 24 hour delays); the rights will not be restored by stewards once they are removed.
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions, you must gain consensus on the local wiki first. When there is community consensus that the user's access should be removed, a trusted user from that wiki should provide a link here to the discussion, a brief explanation of the reason for the request, and summarize the results of discussion. However, as bureaucrats of some wikis may remove users from the administrator or bureaucrat group, please see also a separate list of these specific wikis.
  • See the instructions above for adding new requests. Please post new requests at the bottom of the section.

The Doc@it.wikibooks[edit]

Inactive since 24th June 2014. --Gce (talk) 00:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests[edit]

Requests for permissions that don't fit in other sections belong here. Importer rights can be granted on most wikis by stewards only. Please gain local community consensus before posting a new section here.

Note that the following types of permissions requests belong on separate pages:

  • SRB — Local or global bot status
  • SRGP — Global permissions

See also[edit]