Stewards' noticeboard

←Stewards

Stewards' noticeboard

Archives→

Welcome to the stewards ' noticeboard. This message board is for discussing issues on Wikimedia projects that are related to steward work. Please post your messages at the bottom of the page and do not forget to sign it. Thank you.

• This is not the place for stewards requests. To make a new request, see steward requests and requests and proposals .
• For illustration of steward policies and use, see the steward handbook .
• See also: Access to nonpublic personal data policy noticeboard.
• This page is automatically archived by SpBot. Threads older than 30 days will be moved to the archive.

Stewards

• About stewards
• Elections
• History

Requests

• CheckUser information
• Global blocks & locks
• Global rights
• Local bot rights
• Local rights
• Account renaming
• Miscellaneous requests
• URL blacklisting
• Title/username blacklisting

For stewards

• Help
• Policies
• Bugs
• Mailing list
• #wikimedia-stewards^connect

Noticeboards

• Access policy noticeboard
• Stewards' noticeboard

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Proposals at Talk:Global rollback involving user rights

I see at least two proposals which might need closure:

• Talk:Global rollback#Add apihighlimits to GR (started on April 20, 2024, which was more than a year ago)
• Talk:Global rollback#Add abusefilter-view to the global rollback toolset? (I started this a month ago [roughly], and there is clear consensus to add the aforemented user right to the global rollbacker group.)

Thanks. Codename Noreste (discuss • contribs) 01:49, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

The later has been closed. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:59, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@EPIC: want to take a look at the former? The requester suggests you were working on this. 11:09, 28 January 2026 (UTC) — xaosflux ^Talk 11:09, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: This came up quite some time ago after a GR/GS requested the separate apihighlimits global flag (Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2024-04#API_high_limit_requestors_for_WikiBayer). TenWhile6 suggested to me that the right should have just been added to the GR toolset instead and I pointed them to open a discussion about it. As for how this should be closed I have no particular opinion - I don't mind either way of closing it. EPIC (talk) 11:14, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Welcoming policy

Notifying here (instead of SRM, which received no response) on behalf of @JJPMaster.

It's been a little more than a year since Requests for comment/Welcoming policy was published, and it might be worth considering if this should be closed. Codename Noreste (talk • contribs) 20:28, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

It's part of the backlog, there are even older ones at Requests for comment as well. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:23, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Pings at SRG

I would like to ask that stewards explicitly ping the requestor when replying to and/or declining a SRG request. SRG gets a lot of edits everyday; it's unlikely that all requestors watch the page, and, even if they do, see every change to the page, botted or otherwise. Such feedbacks are necessary for requestors not to make repeated vague/futile requests, so they would be more effective if more requestors are aware of them. Thank you. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 17:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

If the decline is procedural (such as declining stale reports) then I generally don't notify the requestor, but for other cases I think it's useful. I understand that some stewards may not do so, however, since we frequently decline SRG reports to clear backlogs and notifying people might not be necessary at that time. EPIC (talk) 16:09, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

I will ping if I think the report is improper, but there are other reasons to decline where the request itself was fine that make up most of my declines and there isn't really a need to ping over them. – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:44, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Planned addition of a global user group: 'local-bot'

Hi. We're working on some MediaWiki changes to allow local bots that have been approved on any wiki to have higher rate limits when accessing shared content (e.g. Commons images). As part of this, we would like to create a global user group, tentatively named "Local bots" (or 'local-bot' internally), which would be automatically synchronised with user group changes on each Wikimedia SUL wiki – any user added to a local 'bot' group would also be added to the global 'local-bot' group. This would use the same mechanism as the Global temporary account IP viewers group (global-temporary-account-viewer), which is synced with the local 'checkuser' and 'suppress' groups.

I'm going to document this new group in a section at the "Bot" page (with a redirect from Local bots), unless you can suggest a better place.

Please let me know if you see any issues with this plan, here or on the Phabricator task: T415588. I am hoping that this will go live this week or next. Matma Rex / Bartosz Dziewoński (WMF) (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@Matma Rex can we exempt testwikis, etc from triggering it? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:06, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

We could, but then bot authors testing on testwiki would be subject to different rate limits. Do you expect much noise from such rights changes? I took a look at https://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/rights and I only see 4 changes granting or removing bot rights in all of 2025. Matma Rex (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Likely not much noise. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:02, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Will be removed from all local bots trigger automatic removal? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:08, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes. Expiring local group membership will also expire the global group membership. Matma Rex (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Renommage

Il est souhaitable que la barre d'outils doit comporter un mode { Annuler Renommage } pour les nouveaux utilisateurs selon leurs expériences. Diaphonème. Gif (talk) 04:53, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

• Message layout and/or software settings are not something this team deals with. If there is a specific system message you would like updated, please use an edit request or ask at RFH // [TRADUCTION AUTOMATIQUE] La mise en page des messages et/ou les paramètres du logiciel ne sont pas du ressort de cette équipe. Si vous souhaitez que l'un des messages système soit mis à jour, veuillez utiliser une demande de modification ou poser votre question sur RFH. — xaosflux ^Talk 10:47, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Follow-up on U4C filings

@Ajraddatz: following your instructions, I filed an appeal to u4c@wikimedia.org on 27 Jan 2026 (with a supplemental filing on 29 Jan) — could you confirm if this channel is monitored or advise when a reply might be expected? InOrIsTr (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

@InOrIsTr It's best to ask queries regarding U4C at their respective talkpage (assuming it's regarding the UCoC Coordinating Committee). Steward team does not have access to U4C materials otherwise. A09|(pogovor) 17:10, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

This question was directed to a specific steward (Ajraddatz) for a reason, as he was the one who advised on the appropriate course of action. He has not yet had an opportunity to respond, and until he does, it remains unclear whether he has relevant context or access to information needed to clarify the matter. Accordingly, the section does not appear resolved at this time. InOrIsTr (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@InOrIsTr Yes, that email address is the correct email to contact the U4C. If you would like questions on U4C response times, you will have to direct them to the U4C. AntiCompositeNumber (they/them) (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

@InOrIsTr: Hello, yes that email is monitored. Your email has been received and is being discussed by the U4C. If you would like further updates, please ask on the U4C talk page or email us again. We should get back to you soon. Thanks, – Ajraddatz (talk) 00:57, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

 This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --A09|(pogovor) 11:49, 11 February 2026 (UTC)