Steward requests/Permissions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to 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

Contents

Using this page[edit]

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

==== User name@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name =
 |discussion= 
}}
(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.

Requests[edit]

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 translatewiki.net. 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.

Tuyenduong97@vi.wikivoyage.org[edit]

Currently, Vietnamese wikivoyage hasn't administrator, I want to be granted this right. Tuyenduong97 (talk) 23:48, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Vietnamese wikivoyage is being vandalized [1], [2], but we don't have the authority to delete or at least hide those fault articles. A discussion is unlikely because only a few members often online. Please reply soon. Thanks! Tuyenduong97 (talk) 09:13, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Link to a local election page that has been open for at least seven days. -- Tegel (Talk) 09:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
@Tuyenduong97: please open a local discussion page to grant you sysop flag in vi.wikivoyage, even there's no contributes in the local discussion we'll grant you sysop flag after 7 days from the beginning of the local discussion --Alaa :)..! 09:18, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you! Tuyenduong97 (talk) 09:33, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Time2wait.svg On hold until 14 August --Alaa :)..! 10:01, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2018-11-14. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. — regards, Revi 06:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Mahir256@bn.wikisource[edit]

This is a request to renew my administrator privileges on the Bengali Wikisource as they have just expired today. Mahir256 (talk) 21:11, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold until 14 August --Alaa :)..! 08:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2019-08-14. — regards, Revi 06:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Wasami007@zhwikiversity[edit]

This user requests sysop rights. Local discussion not possible as there's no community yet, but this user is a sysop in beta Wikiversity. GZWDer (talk) 23:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@GZWDer: he should open a local discussion page to grant the sysop flag , even there's no contributes in the local discussion we'll grant him sysop flag after 7 days from the beginning of the local discussion! --Alaa :)..! 08:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I have moved the discussion here.--GZWDer (talk) 08:47, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold until 15 August --Alaa :)..! 09:11, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2018-11-15. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. — regards, Revi 07:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

ThiênĐế98@viwikivoyage[edit]

Please grant sysop flag for 1 year. Thanks! Tuyenduong97 (talk) 13:27, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

On hold for 14 August (and 1st temp adminship is not 1 year). Stryn (talk) 16:20, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2018-11-14. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. — regards, Revi 06:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Icem4k@nywikipedia[edit]

I would like to request to be an admin at the Chi-Chewa Wikipedia to fix basic things, translate the main page of the site and also import stuff. I cannot provide a local discussion because there's hardly anyone active there. Chabota (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Still you should put a notice on a village pump or other appropriate forum and wait for one week. Ruslik (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Ruslik Thank you will do so. Chabota (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to happen, closing as not done. Stryn (talk) 08:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Huỳnh Nhân-thập@viwikibooks[edit]

Huỳnh Nhân-thập ran for administrator a year ago but their candidacy went mostly unnoticed and didn't garner enough support. Within the last couple months, now that the requests for permissions page is linked more prominently, the discussion has received more attention. There seems to be a consensus that they should have administrator rights, despite the extraordinary length of this poll (by Vietnamese wiki standards, at least). – Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:14, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Does he still want the permission? Sometimes they don't know they are getting the permission when the request is rescued from the realm of the forgotten. — regards, Revi 13:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, he does. He has confirmed his election few day ago. --ThiênĐế98 (talk) 15:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2019-08-13. — regards, Revi 17:31, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Alex Nico@ro.wikipedia.org[edit]

His candidacy ran for 7 days, as requested, and has not encountered any opposition. I believe it can now be closed.--Strainu (talk) 13:30, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Wiki looks big enough for perma-sysop. — regards, Revi 13:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Bobbyshabangu@sswiki[edit]

Request is open since 27 July without objections. --MF-W 16:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2018-11-14. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. Ruslik (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

FrankyLeRoutier@frwikinews[edit]

Bonjour à tous, j'aimerais obtenir les statuts d'administrateur et de bureaucrate à la suite du vote communautaire, j'estime le résultat légitime malgré le faible nombre d'avis, il y a très peu de contributeurs actif sur ce projet actuellement et j'aurais sans doute dû mettre des messages sur ceux qui sont toujours là mais j'ai pas voulu faire du démarchage, j'ai déjà eu par le passé le statut d'administrateur voici mon journal d'opération sur Wikinews j'ai mis plusieurs messages au bureaucrate Grondin sans avoir eu de réponse. Cordialement. FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Revenant de vacances, j'ai pu examiner la candidature. Au regard de la prise de décision concernant l'élection des administrateurs et des bureaucrates, aucune des conditions n'a été remplie. J'ai répondu sur la page de candidature.-- Bertrand GRONDIN  → (Talk) 15:23, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Merci beauccoup, donc dossier clos. Amicalement. FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 21:39, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done. Local bureaucrat is active and can handle this. Matiia (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Mass request@zhwikiversity[edit]

Mass zhwikiversity requests were marked on hold. — regards, Revi 07:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
I know that communities are generally self-managed. But zhwikiversity is a brand-new project, just spun off from Beta, and I seriously question whether that many sysops are really necessary. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Based on the discussion with other stewards (this was the reason I put it on hold), I am declining this mass request for A/IA. We are in favor of the (miraculous) growth of the wikis, but this wiki is barely two weeks past the wiki's creation, and our assessment is that zhwikiversity is not yet at the stage where you need 29 admins. I ask that zhwikiversity choose the most trusted candidate, 2-4 preferably, but no more than 5. The same applies to int-admin. — regards, Revi 14:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @-revi:can we at least have 10. Many of the candidates have other wiki sysop/patroller duties/school work (these are the strongest candidates). We need every manpower.--Cohaf (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @-revi:@StevenJ81:I agree with Cohaf's opinion that we need at least 10 admins. What's worse, 10 may be not enough, because most of candidates are still busy students now. When they start a new term, they may become much more inactive. On the contrary, enthusiastic users mightn't mind whether there were active admins or not, and this must cause a large amount of work for only 5 admins. Mass admins or backlog? If you do want to limit the number, I suggest restart the discussion after 3 months; but before that, can we get the authority to finish early tasks.--Blissghost (talk) 19:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Come on. Where do all these users suddenly come from? Did 100 vandals appear suddenly as well? --MF-W 19:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
      • I've got to admit: One thing made me nervous about recommending this project for approval: Enormous numbers of edits at Beta had been made by anonymous users. So it's entirely possible that all of these folks are the "anonymous users" from Beta.
That having been said, let me share some numbers here: Currently, v:zh:Special:ActiveUsers gives a list of about 80 users, of whom about 30 had more than 10 actions. (And you're one of them, MF-W.) The most users that the zh test at Beta ever had in any given recent month was about 16, including "Anonymous".
Are any stewards or GS fluent enough in Chinese to look this over? Otherwise, I'm inclined to pick the three people from among the applicants above who were most active while this test was still at Beta and flag them for no longer than 1–3 months—none as IA, and none before 27 August. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@StevenJ81: As I can see, no steward know any Chinese. Maybe you may consider picking the first 10 (if possible, or at least first 5) users to be zh.wikiversity sysops. Sæn 00:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Maybe we can flag those (max 5, again) who were active during betawikiversity, but I'm not convinced that the zhwikiversity is different from any other new wikis that this unprecedented 29 admins are really justified. — regards, Revi 02:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Agree. One more number: Not counting the big multilingual wikis like Commons, Meta and Wikidata, there are something like 25 projects in the entire WMF world with that many sysops. StevenJ81 (talk) 03:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@-revi: I disagree with the max. no. of 5: comparing with other wikis, ratio of sysops to other users are commonly 1:10, and you now fixed the no. of sysops to 5, which means the ratio is now 1:16, which means the no. of sysops in the Wikiversity is not sufficient. I strongly recommend to increase the no. of sysops to 8 to 10, to fulfill the ratio of 1:10. Sæn 04:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not willing to negotiate, and actually if other steward closed this, you'd have to choose 1 or 2 among them. — regards, Revi 04:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@-revi: OK, then I submit these 5 names: Wasami007, Xiplus, WQL, 夢蝶葬花, and -Zest; same 5 for interface administrator access; they are the most trusted users. Sæn 04:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@Sanmosa:Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose: Currently no consensus have been made over the community. I think Samosa's behavior is inappropriate and confusing.--Panzer VI-II (talk) 04:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
No consensus? You seems not joining any discussion in the Wikiversity.Sæn 04:55, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
It's obvious that only a few users have joined the discussion while different opinions exist. Having not joined the discussions (for I'm busy these days) doesn't mean that I haven't viewed the pages on the zh-Wikiversity.--Panzer VI-II (talk) 05:03, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Actually even we made a consensus, it may still be rejected here, so the main point is not consensus, but whether stewards trust them or not. Sæn 05:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Provided you have community consensus for 5 or less (int)admins, I can flag them subject to usual conventions. — regards, Revi 06:59, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @-revi and StevenJ81:we got to know about the project based on the notice on the centralized discussion noticeboard on zhwiki and will like to lend a hand. I cannot speak for others but to label us as anon, I did not anon edit before, am a patroler at zhwiki, etc. Since zhuniversity is so prominently, even the recent changes at zhwiki included a link to zhuni, vandals , lta can follow the same and appear. I will hope for 10 or not least 8. --Cohaf (talk) 07:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
    • @Cohaf: Thank you for that explanation. I was simply speculating about where all of you might have come from, and whether or not any of you ever contributed to the zhwikiversity while it was still at Beta Wikiversity. No insult was intended, by any means. But the fact that a big announcement was made at zhwiki explains a lot.
@Sanmosa: Ordinarily, consensus is the most important piece of this. But given that the wiki and community are brand new, I think you are actually correct that steward trust is going to be a component of the decision at this stage of the game. (Put another way, is there a real, functioning community yet whose consensus we can accurately measure?) Given that, then ...
@-revi: You're the steward, not me. But let me suggest the following four individuals as representing a reasonable place to start for now:
  • User:Stang. This user is one of the five users who were very active on the zhwikiversity test project at Beta from the beginning of 2018 until the project was spun off. This user, in fact, is the only applicant who is a sysop (custodian) on Beta Wikiversity; the user is also a 'crat and sysop on zhwiki. So this user knows how to use mops.
  • User:夢蝶葬花. (In case I miscopied, that's the first person on the list above.) This user is also one of the five users who were regularly active at Beta. This user is sysop and IA on zhwikivoyage.
The other three of the five active users from Beta have not applied so far. Among everyone else who has applied, several have light rights like patroller and rollbacker on some zh projects, and a couple made a handful of edits at Beta. But only two others have sysop experience somewhere:
  • User:Xiplus. This user is sysop and IA on zhwiki, and sysop on zhwiktionary.
  • User:Kanashimi. This user is sysop on zhwikinews and on test.wikipedia.
So unless the community has a real problem with any of these four, that's probably where I'd start, were it my decision to make. (All applied for sysop; all but Stang also applied for IA.) StevenJ81 (talk) 16:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @StevenJ81:please hold for community discussion. For information, the patroller flag on zhwiki is autopatrol, patrol, file mover as well as page mover combined into one. For roll backer it's page mover, rollback as well as abuse filter private. Each application will undergo a mini RFA where questions are asked as well as votes tallied, community play a role. it's not the enwiki PERM where no community input is allowed. These are not minor rights but important rights and we are listed on the list of administrative personal online chart at zhwiki. I will personally be contended with a curator flag but then this must be on hold. Early community consensus does not tally with your recommendations totally although Xiplus is definitely in. If need be, can grant him the flag.--Cohaf (talk) 16:14, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
No worries, I'm not going to grant the permissions overnight, and I trust other steward not to do so. — regards, Revi 16:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
In any event, it's -revi's decision to make, not mine. I was providing information. (Side note: the one applicant I would suggest is not eligible, even if the community supports, is User:UserZx. That user has a grand total of 156 edits across all projects. So unless there is editing history under a different name somewhere, in general that user would be considered too inexperienced.) StevenJ81 (talk) 16:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @Cohaf: Mea maxima culpa. No rant necessary. I'm convinced that the trust level involved with those two rights sets on zhwiki is just about the same, if not exactly the same, as RfA. There's still the issue of experience with the toolkit itself. After all, patrollers and rollbackers cannot delete pages, block users, revision-delete, and other such things. In that sense, even on zhwiki, patrollers and rollbackers do not have experience with the full toolbox.
Look, ultimately, the decision here is -revi's, and the community's, not mine. But if my opinion is worth anything, I need to point out that Stang and 夢蝶葬花 worked hard to get zhwikiversity to the point where it could be approved and spun off. In my opinion—and it's only my opinion, of course—your community is not established and stable enough to decide that they don't deserve a role. Remember: you would not have a zhwikiversity now if it weren't for them. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
  • (edit conflicted)@StevenJ81:I fully support them and was in the process of removing the rant with this edit summary "removed rant as it's a little too much retrospectively and does not help in discussion, sorry for inconveniences caused" pardon me for carrying local issues here and sorry for the one additional nonsense ping you have to bear. I collapsed my discussion to prevent this being too long (I would like it removed but can't since it is replied to).To be crystal clear, I'm fully in support for Stang/夢蝶葬花, the former I interacted very frequently in CAT:CSD and AFD as well as numerous admin requests and is one of the zhwiki admins I am closest to and I enjoyed seeking help from him. As the latter, we participated in AFD, policy making together and there is no one ounce of doubt they can be a good sysop. In fact, the community is trying to nominate 夢蝶葬花 also. The rest of the proposed nominees are, for clarity is -Zest/WQL. (i.e. 4 additional sysops proposed now are 夢蝶葬花,Xiplus,WQL,-Zest).And to be clearer, the level of trust for rollbackers/patrollers is much lowerthan RFA, I'm just comparing the application process vis-a-vis other project, in fact, no RFA succeeded for a year already--Cohaf (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Alphama@viwikiquote[edit]

Five supports and no disagreement. He is also a sysop on Vietnamese Wikipedia. Thanks Tuyenduong97 (talk) 19:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2019-02-15. Ruslik (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

ThiênĐế98@viwikiquote[edit]

Five supports and no disagreement. Thanks. Tuyenduong97 (talk) 19:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2019-02-15. Ruslik (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Icem4k@nywikipedia[edit]

I would like to request to be an admin at the Chi-Chewa Wikipedia to fix basic things, translate the main page of the site and also import stuff. I posted on our local discussion but there's hardly anyone active there. If you check the last edits you see that its mostly me making edits at the moment am very active on simple and english and i really want to help this grow as well.

Time2wait.svg On hold until 23 August 2018 Ruslik (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Klein_Muçi@sqwikiquote[edit]

Three supports and no disagreement. Liridon (talk) 12:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2018-11-17. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- --Alaa :)..! 13:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

ThiênĐế98@viwisource[edit]

Four supports and no disagreement. Thanks. Tuyenduong97 (talk) 15:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2019-02-18. Please remember to translate the interface at translatewiki.net only and preferably upload images to Wikimedia Commons. To prolong your adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. Ruslik (talk) 20:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Ruthven@napwiki[edit]

Temporary adminship's expiring. Can you please grant me adminship for 6-12 months this time? Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 14:17, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold till 2018-08-28. — regards, Revi 14:20, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Interface administrator access[edit]

See Interface admin for information about this user group.

  • If you are requesting adminship and the interface admin at the same time, you can file one request in administrator section and state you want interface adminship as well.
  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at translatewiki.net. Please do not request interface 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 interface adminship, please provide a link to the local community approval. For temporary interface adminship please state for how long and for which tasks you need it, and link to a local announcement.

Mass request@zhwikiversity[edit]

Yuriy_kosygin@zhwikivoyage[edit]

3 supports, and no oppose or neutral. 夢蝶葬花 () 14:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Granted to expire with the adminship. — regards, Revi 14:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

夢蝶葬花@zhwikivoyage[edit]

3 supports, and no oppose or neutral. 夢蝶葬花 () 14:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Granted to expire with the adminship. — regards, Revi 14:40, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
@-revi: My administrator is appointed until 2018-11-26, not 2018-11-8. Can you re-edit the authorization time? Thank you.--夢蝶葬花 () 14:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Fixed. Probably confused with Yuriy. — regards, Revi 14:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Xavier Dengra@cawikiquote[edit]

Two active admins of the project would be able to edit sitewide CSS/JS pages per community discussion. --Docosong (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 20:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Docosong@cawikiquote[edit]

Two active admins of the project would be able to edit sitewide CSS/JS pages per community discussion. --Docosong (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 20:52, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Xavier Dengra@cawikibooks[edit]

Only active admin of the project would be able to edit sitewide CSS/JS pages per community discussion. --Docosong (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Wargo@pl.wikinews[edit]

Openbk (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2018 (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.

Itsmine@zh-classical.wikipedia[edit]

Per community discussion WAN233 (talk) 09:49, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I doubt that the community is large enough to have bureaucrats. Ruslik (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
lzh:維基大典:會館 has too many backlog complex discussions that need to be handled properly.They are all the best administrator at zh-classical wikipedia.Interface-admin needs to be elected.There will be many people in the election.Local bureaucrats can make community work efficiently--WAN233 (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, a community with only 4 sysops doesn't need bureaucrats. --MF-W 15:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
+1. Complex discussions can be handled by a uninvolved admin and we can grant the Interface-admin requests. Matiia (talk) 02:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Marking all 3 as not done. --MF-W 01:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Davidzdh@zh-classical.wikipedia[edit]

Per community discussion WAN233 (talk) 09:49, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

丁子君@zh-classical.wikipedia[edit]

Per community discussion WAN233 (talk) 09:49, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

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.

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.

vlsergey@ru.wikipedia[edit]

Local bureaucrats refused to remove flag from my account at ruwiki. Please, just do it. Vlsergey (talk) 06:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Please hold this request on 3 days, this a emotions. Thanks. // Просьба отложить решение на 3 дня, это на эмоциях на фоне конфликта в рувики. Спасибо. [3] -- dima_st_bk 06:38, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Being a member of Arbitration Committee (ru:Википедия:Арбитражный комитет), I would like to ask for putting this particular request on hold, as well as any similar requests coming from ruwiki within next a couple of weeks. The thing is there is an active conflict between some sysops, engineers and bureaucrats in ruwiki, which is related to the new technical flag (interface-admin) to be given to a couple of non-technical sysops, and which results into emotional reactions. A couple of active editors already requested to remove their flags in ruwiki, and local bureaucrats indeed refused to do that. Vlsergey is only one of them, and the only one who decided to get in touch with Stewards. But just so you know the order of magnitude, 5 out of 10 existing engineers in ruwiki requested the flags to be removed, so you can only imagine what would happen to the technical side of ruwiki if all of these requests were executed. I believe we will address the issues with the interface-admin flag within next 2 weeks, have the community to approve the related rules and policies, and after that engineers and sysops will be able to make well thought-out decisions. --Good Will Hunting (talk) 06:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
6 of 10, and 2 more on hold. --Serhio Magpie (talk) 06:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done there's 5 bureaucrats, so it should be handled locally --Alaa :)..! 07:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Additional explanation: Stewards do not perform actions on wikis with ability to self-manage, unless there is emergency ("crat says no" is not an emergency) or all the crats are gone for a long time (at least 6 months - 1 year). Not the case here. — regards, Revi 10:59, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@-revi and علاء: The following is not meant to suggest that you act contrary to an explicit request from ruwiki's ArbCom at all. But if @Good Will Hunting had not appeared, I do not see where policy would allow anybody to force a user to hold rights that s/he does not want to keep.
We have a 24-hour hold rule here for resignations of rights, and for good reason. But if someone wishes to resign rights on a self-managing wiki, and bureaucrats fail to act within (3 days?)(7 days?)(surely something longer than 24 hours), then in my opinion stewards actually should act. This is not like most other situations where we normally don't want stewards to act when 'crats can. This is a case of a user not being permitted to voluntarily give up rights. And as long as we're satisfied there has been a cooling off period, we should facilitate that. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:22, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Policy(+"If there are any doubts as to whether or not an action should be performed, stewards should not act unless it is an emergency or there are no active local users to do it.") is that we do not intervene on the projects with active crats, so it's unactionable. — regards, Revi 01:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Question is "What is an active local crat?" I'd argue that if crats are missing from a project for a week (and, let's just say, haven't left a return date on-wiki), that constitutes "no active local users to do it" for this purpose. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
I agree and have said so already several times in this section, although mostly with regard to sysop resignations from wikis where bureaucrats can remove sysops. I find it ridiculous to refer resigning sysops to such a local bureaucrat, no matter whether active or not. A resignation by itself cannot be controversial (it may very well be "under a cloud", as enwiki likes to say, but it is by definition requested by the affected user), so there is no harm if a steward executes it. On the contrary, a user who really wants to get rid of a usergroup (while the community is trying to convince him to stay and delays acting on the request) can simply start to act rogue to force stewards to remove him. Before going into such childish games, I'd prefer if the rights are simply removed... --MF-W 13:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
How comes there is no harm in getting the request executed by a steward, if both local crats and local arbitrators do explicitly confirm they are active, and do confirm they are working on addressing the issue that caused the resignation request, and the user has been active in ruwiki and has not been playing any childish games (at least before you suggested that brilliant idea)? --Good Will Hunting (talk) 06:48, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
If local users want to try to convince someone who wants to resign to change his mind, that is of course a very good thing. But if the user comes back to insist to lose his rights (which he didn't do here, to be clear), what I said applies. --MF-W 01:12, 17 August 2018 (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]