Steward requests/Global permissions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests(Redirected from SRGP)
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Steward requests (Global permissions) latest archive
This page hosts requests for global permissions. To make a request, read the relevant policy (global rollback, global sysop, global rename, …) and make a request below. Explain why membership is needed for that group, and detail prior experience or qualifications.

This is not a vote and any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion.

Successful global rollback requests require no fewer than 5 days of discussion, while successful global renamer and global sysop discussions require no fewer than 2 weeks.

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Requests for global rollback permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review the Global rollback policy.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You have sufficient activity to meet the requirements to be allocated the global rollback flag
  2. You have a global account;
  3. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
To make a request
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable.
=== Global rollback for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = global <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = Username
}}
::''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+5 days}} UTC''

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than 5 days (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Global rollback for Eurodyne[edit]

Not ending before 21 August 2015 17:47 UTC

I think I can really benefit from this flag. I've been active with the SWMT for 6 months or so and took a break for a couple of months. I have now resumed normal activity. I usually idle in #cvn-sw most of the day. I would like to fully disclose my previous request and my former block a year ago on enwiki. Regards, --eurodyne (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Support does good work. Matiia (talk) 17:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support been done a good work, if only Eurodyne and Grind24 stop antagonizing with each other it would be better, fellow SWMT member should work closely together, like, being watchful for LTA and share information with each other, group work is paramount, and I wish both of you can make up with each other.--AldNonymousBicara? 18:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose because Eurodyne has not, as far as I know, renounced hat collection (in January and March, he requested license reviewer on Commons when clearly not ready for that), and I still don't trust his maturity.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:58, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 20:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Druddigon (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • {{neutral}} will look at contributions first (I just woke up). Jianhui67 talkcontribs 00:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Support Weak support On one hand, I agree with Aldnonymous. But this user just returned to activity not long ago after a major period of inactivity. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 03:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support A trusted user to me.--Infinite0694 (Talk) 05:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support - per Aldnonymous. Really... all these arguments about hat collecting that last happened a few months ago (if close or at half a year, it's a while) is redundant. The attack on x-user that also happened a few months ago... can't we just show forgiveness? Tropicalkitty (talk) 06:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support Of course, I thought he was already GR! --Unapersona (talk) 06:39, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Uğurkenttalk 10:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support Florence (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose per Jasper Deng. Nick (talk) 14:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support per Aldnonymous and Tropicalkitty.--Grind24 (talk) 18:18, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose This user is incompetent. --MF-W 18:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC) - Addendum: I just randomly browsed enwiki dramahz and came across this (perm.). I do not even want to imagine how one can incur a prohibition of using multiple (legitimate) accounts on enwiki, but it is surely not by a productive contribution to the project and also not an activity which casts a very good light on you to make yourself busy with getting it removed. --MF-W 21:04, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support ~ Nahid Talk 21:40, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support I would have reservations about him applying for gs, but I think he can handle one-click reverting (and the other minor rights) globally. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 03:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Support per Tropicalkitty & Aldnonymous. --Az1568 (talk) 05:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose I find myself hesitating here. Unfortunately, the first thing I think when I see Eurodyne's name is the socking and deception thing from a year ago on enwiki. (See en:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive851#Deception_by_Akifumii.2FXermano. (Xermano/Akifumii changed their username to Eurodyne, which I also feel was a move to avoid scrutiny.) There are also lingering issues with hat collection for this user. In addition, global rollback does confer some higher-level permissions as well, such as noratelimit and suppressredirect. I do not feel comfortable supporting an application for GR at this time. --L235 (talk) enwiki 22:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose I am not comfortable with granting the right at this point of time. There have been rename ... rename ... rename and that makes me hesitate.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:54, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Much better activity than in case of the 2 preceding requests by other users, but unfortunately no continuous revert activity either. Furthermore, I guess inappropriate behaviour off-wiki has been shown right after submitting this request, which makes me a bit unwilling to overlook the discontinuity in revert activity shown. --Vogone (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done No consensus. SPQRobin (talk) 20:59, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review the Global sysops policy.
Stewards
When you give someone global sysop rights, please list them on Users with global sysop access and ask them to subscribe to the global sysops mailing list.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You have a global account;
  2. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
To make a request
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable. If you previously requested that right, please add a link to the previous discussion(s).
=== Global sysop for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = global <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = Username
}}
:''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+2 week}} UTC''

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Noting proposal[edit]

Status:    Done

For those with an interest in global sysops and their actions, please see the following Requests for comment/Adding global abuse filter rights to global sysops.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:28, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Marking as done so it can be archived (1+ month is probably enough advertisement here). --MF-W 22:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Requests for global IP block exemption[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review Global IP block exemption. Not all rights changes are notified here; please watch Special:Log/gblrights to see them all.
Please note: Global IP block exemption does NOT make one immune to locally-created blocks of any sort, only global blocks created via Special:GlobalBlock.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that:

  1. You have a global account;
  2. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
To request global IP block exemption
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why you need the access and why you're suitable. If needed, link to relevant discussions.
=== Global IP block exempt for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global<!--don't change this line-->
 |user name =  Username
 |discussion=
}}
<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration (typically 5 days). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Global IP block exempt for krassotkin[edit]

I regularly open public Tor relays from my networks and can not edit some wiki and perform my cross-functions in a number of projects without global IP block exemption. For example file renaming on Commons and post global delinking using designed for this gadget. ----sasha (krassotkin) 07:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Done for 6 months. Please re-request if you need it after then. Ajraddatz (talk) 23:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you! --sasha (krassotkin) 07:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz: Unfortunately Krassotkin forgot to mention that in ru.wiki (his home wiki) ip-block-exemption flag was removed at 27.08.2015. He tries to appeal against this decision to other administrators (see discussion). Even if the discussion is not finished now, there is a strong consensus against the return of a flag. Since there is no other project where he currently needs this flag, it looks like he successfully tried to evade this decision by requesting ip-block-exemption flag on meta. In ru.wiki he brags with it and encourage other users to come with "any plausible-looking reason" ("с любой выглядящей правдоподобно причиной") to receive this flag. --DR (talk) 10:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this up. The global IPBE flag does not grant any exemption from local blocks, so this will not allow Krassotkin to bypass any local actions designed to prevent disruptive behaviour. Furthermore, IPBE flags simply allow a user to continue to edit - is there any indication why this should not be allowed to happen in this case? Does this user display a pattern of disruptive behaviour for which they should be blocked (and if that is the case, why aren't they)? It is true that some people probably collect this right as a fancy hat to wear, but ultimately that has no impact on anyone but themselves. Ajraddatz (talk) 11:08, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
As per IP block exemption policy in ru.wiki the user can receive this exemption only if he can show good cause. Throughout the discussion in ru.wiki Krassotkin has refused to name (privately or public) a reason why he need the flag - neither good nor bad. I don't see any difficulties in granting global IPBE flag to Krassotkin (we even encourage users in simular situations to request a global flag instead of local), but I want stewards (now and in 6 month) to know the whole background of this request. --DR (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the clarification and information. I'll discuss it with some others and see what an appropriate path forward on this case is. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:29, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for kevinwiki999[edit]

As you may well be aware that the entire Chinese version of wikipedia is blocked by the Firewall of the Chinese government at the moment, and on many occasions some pages of the English version cannot be accessed as well, which is why it led to many users, including myself, had to use proxy tool to bypass this censorship. For the above reason, I hope that wikipedia will, after reviewing my case carefully by considering my editing history and contributions to this website, grant me exemptions which will be essential for me to continue editing the Chinese wikipedia.

Done. Ajraddatz (talk) 23:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Requests for global rename permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
Please also review the Global rename policy.
Stewards
When you give someone global rename rights, please add them to the list of global renamers and ask them to subscribe to the global renamers' mailing list.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that:

  1. You have a global account;
  2. You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
  3. You have considered the addition of a user language box to your user page
To make a request
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable. If you previously requested that right, please add a link to the previous discussion(s).
=== Global rename for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = meta.wikimedia <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = Username
}}
:''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+2 week}} UTC''

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Requests for other global permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Please be sure to follow the instructions below:
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Instructions for making a request

Before requesting additional global permissions, make sure that:

  1. You are logged in on this wiki;
  2. No specific section on this page exists for the permission you want to request;
To request additional global permissions
Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain what kind of access you need and why. If needed, link to relevant discussions. If you hold, or have previously held, the right and are asking for either a renewal or revival of that right, please add a link to the previous discussion.
=== <Add requested permission here> for [[User:Foo|Foo]] ===
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global<!--don't change this line-->
 |user name = Username
 |discussion=
}}
<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration. A steward will review the request.

Ability to edit protected redirects for タチコマ robot[edit]

I operate my bot on practically every wiki where I deal with double redirects through pywikibot redirect.py. I infrequently encounter protected double redirects per individual wiki but they accumulate over time. Manually dealing with this on so many wikis is a thankless tiring task which I would prefer humans aren't involved. The bot would only edit protected pages where the page itself is a double redirect. I request whatever minimum permission that would achieve this. -- とある白い猫 chi? 16:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

The only way to do this is to add 'editprotected' userright to the "global bot' global group. This will allow editing protected double redirects on all global bot wikis but will require a consensus. For the wikis where global bots are not allowed there is no simple solution. Ruslik (talk) 20:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh indeed. I am only looking at wikis with global bot opt in with my request. My bot already has a global flag. I was told a special usergroup could be formed for allowing only protected redirect pages to be edited. This would be ideal for the purpose I am posting. It could also be beneficial to extend such a restricted extension to the global bot flag. Such a redirect bot flag would be helpful on wikis that opt-out of a global bot flag where the alternative is having an admin bot which isn't something many communities are comfortable in having. -- とある白い猫 chi? 11:51, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
The problem is that 'editprotected' userright would apply to any page in any namespace. There is no way to apply it only to redirects. Ruslik (talk) 18:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, in that case would it be ok for me to request just this userrright? -- とある白い猫 chi? 22:34, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
'Editprotected' is a serious userright. Giving it to you will require a broad consensus. Ruslik (talk) 19:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Could we get an idea of how many of such cases there are, approximately? I recall a previous request for globaleditinterface with a similar reasoning, then to correct double redirects after double renames. Savhñ 20:33, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, how many such pages are there? Or in other words, how many hours would you need to complete the job? I'd support granting the right for a day or two until the cases at hand are fixed. A steward can then check the global edits/logs to see nothing weird happened and remove the right again. Chances of abuse seem minimal, in such a way. --Nemo 17:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Oppose Oppose I don't think that it is appropriate for stewards to provide a global right that overrides local administrators, especially one that resides with a bot, for a limited needs case. The protection will have been placed purposefully, and it is not up to a person from outside that wiki to overwrite and override that purposeful decision. In the end it is up to local administrators to fix such issues of their making, and bots are just assistants to the process, not decision-makers.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Sorry for vanishing. I didn't see any responses here for quite some time and found myself to be distracted. :) The kind of activity I am trying to engaged with is covered by the global bot policy. It is that non-controversial. A double redirect is a redirect redirecting to another redirect which ends up at an article at some point. The bot will ignore it otherwise. So self redirects, redirect loops, broken redirects and interwiki redirects will be ignored.
  • There is no decision to be reached though. Local admin decision would not be overridden at all. The bot will only comply with consensus of the local wiki where the consensus is the move of a page. This is the main source of double redirects where redirects to an article suddenly become double redirects when the page they are redirecting to itself turns into a redirect after a page move. A Special:Doubleredirects report is generated infrequently (generally weekly). Redirects are typically protected against vandalism or other bad behavior and more often than not there is no reason to unprotected them since redirects aren't meant to change unless the page itself is renamed/moved (the page itself could be protected from pagemoves by non-admins for example to prevent abuse). So the protection is probably forgotten or left there over persistence of some troll or vandal.
  • This Special:Doubleredirects report has a finite length so if a wiki has over a certain number of redirects it will not generate any more of them. I think the limit is something like 5,000 and I do not imagine any wikis are remotely close to that but arguably it would reach it eventually if we assume every wiki will be as big as English Wikipedia. The problem here is with a performance impact. Since I am running the bot on practically every wiki the bot will check to see if the reported double redirect is fixable. This takes a few seconds but when you have ~200-~300 wikis and have just 10 from each you get fairly large number of pages to review with each run of the bot. It is nothing losing sleep over but it would be nice not to have.
  • Statistically, you typically see one or two of these popping up per medium sized wiki a month on average. This sort of a thing accumulates over the years. It is too much work to go through each wiki to verify if they handled all their protected double redirects. In the past often I found myself explaining why redirects need to be fixed since I make a point to solve this problem with my bot so that the local community isn't inconvenienced.
  • There is no reason to spend developer time or community/human time to fix this problem that already has a solution. The double redirect script never makes mistakes since it merely follows a redirect chain to its destination and posts that title as the new redirect. So, I'd rather have everyone work on everything else imaginable instead of hand fixing double redirects. :) I would be OK if this access is granted for 2-3 days a year (or every 6 months) since the problem does not need to be solved that often. Work load would be much less in future cases since the problem would not be allowed to accumulate.
-- とある白い猫 chi? 07:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

API high limit requestor for Mjbmrbot[edit]

To do null edits across the projects, thanks, --Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 07:29, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment Comment Please explain your indefinitely block on plwp.[1]--Infinite0694 (Talk) 07:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Infinite0694 They blocked inactive interwiki bots. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 07:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Comment Can you elaborate why null edits are needed? Thanks. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Steinsplitter Null edits, always required to update page links and categories, see: T86504 and T109404. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 18:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose This request is a total impertinence (an explanation for what the right is needed was only given after someone asked; and it's still not clear why high API limits are needed for some boring null edits) & the bot owner is not trustworthy at all (see e.g. block on fawiki). --MF-W 18:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
MF-W My block in fawiki is not about trustworthy, it was for a personal attack, definitely you are confusing things together because, you called me a troll on langcom mailing list and avoided to import pages for azbwiki for your racist material, you avoided to act as admin in incubator but acted as a boss and I'm not your slave, to always humiliate me everywhere, you don't have any code talent and know nothing about mediawiki. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 19:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Why do you need to bypass normal limits for this? --Glaisher (talk) 11:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Glaisher This right provides higher limits on each query (returns 500 pages for slow queries and 5000 fast queries while returns only 50 pages for a normal user) which makes a bot run really fast. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 12:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Glaisher This request is already declined, don't question me something already you know. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 12:08, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
If it does that many writes in a small time, I'll have to oppose this as doing that many writes has the potential to adversely affect site performance. But that being said, I don't think there's an issue if this is done on a reasonable rate. This type of updates are not high priority anyway. --Glaisher (talk) 12:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
AFAICS, this hasn't been closed yet and I wasn't questioning about something I already did know. --Glaisher (talk) 12:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Renew global editinterface for Kaldari[edit]

I've had global editinterface for many years and need to have it renewed. Specifically, I've been fixing broken gadgets on the French Wikipedia and the English Wikiquote over the past couple weeks, which I would like to continue with. Kaldari (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

BTW, I will not have any internet access whatsoever from August 30 until September 7 and thus will not be able to reply to questions here during that time. Kaldari (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

See also[edit]