Steward requests/Miscellaneous

Shortcut:
SRM

This page is for Wikimedia wikis having no active administrators. Requests can be made here for specific administrative actions (such as page deletion) to be performed by a steward or global sysop. In other cases:

If the wiki does have active administrators, file the request with one of them.
If the wiki has an active editor community, any potentially controversial action (deletion of actual content, edit to a protected page, renaming of a protected page, etc.) should receive consensus from the wiki community before being requested here, and a link should be provided to that consensus in the request.
For global lock/block requests, file a request at Steward requests/Global.
For non-controversial deletion requests such as empty page, simple spam or vandalism, and non-controversial or emergency requests to block vandals, spammers or other malicious users, you may use global sysop requests instead.
If a consensus is considered required to act, similar principles apply as expressed at Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements, and can be used for guidance to how and what should be done at small and medium communities to gain a consensus.

To add a new request, create a new section header at the bottom of the "Manual requests" section using the format below:

=== Very brief description of request here ===
{{Status|In progress}}
Give details about your request here. --~~~~

It is helpful if you can provide a link to the wiki (or the specific page on the wiki) in question, either in the header or in the body of your request.

When reporting cross-wiki vandalism, the following template calls can be used to link to a user's contributions across all Wikimedia content wikis (these are for logged in users and non-logged-in users, respectively):

* {{sultool|Username}}

* {{luxotool|IP.address}}

Template {{LockHide}} can also be used in appropriate cases.

To request approval of OAuth consumers please use {{oauthapprequest}} (see the documentation before using).

Old requests are archived by the date of their last comment.

Cross-wiki requests
CheckUser information Global blocks/locks Permissions (global) Permissions (bot) Permissions (other) Username changes/ usurpation requests Miscellaneous requests URL blacklisting Title/username blacklisting Email blacklisting
Meta-Wiki requests
CheckUser information Deletion Permissions Requests for help

Bot-reported requests

See Global sysops/Speedy delete requests.

Manual requests

Cleaning up unused files

Status: In progress

Hi! This is not an ordinary request to do something but a suggestion for a project to clean up in unused files. In the RFC from 2016 "Disable local uploads on smaller wikis" someone wrote that "Smaller wikis are typically a graveyard of copyrighted content".

Files can only be hosted on a wiki if they meet the requirements in wmf:Resolution:Licensing_policy so all unused non-free files and files without a license or source/author should be fixed or deleted.

There are 868 wikis and it is almost impossible for one person to check them all. So I made a list in User:MGA73/UnusedFiles with the 320 wikis that have unused files.

My idea is that if someone would like to help check they go to a random wiki and check the files:

If the files are good they move them to Commons or ignore them
If the files are bad they fix them, delete them or tag them with no license etc.
Once a wiki is checked the wiki is removed from the list

The format of the list is this:

Wiki	Files
https://af.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UnusedFiles	574
https://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UnusedFiles	67
https://ang.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:UnusedFiles	1
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UnusedFiles	6

But it can be changed if anyone have a better idea.

Depending on how many would like to help it could take weeks or months to complete. So if there is a better place for this notice let me know. --MGA73 (talk) 12:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also made a list of files that are also on Commons if someone like to clean up those: c:User:MGA73/CommonsDupes

But if you prefer to keep this page clean you are welcome to close this request and put it to the archive. If any one would like to work on this they can just "bookmark" the post in the archive. --MGA73 (talk) 18:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working through this starting at afwiki, requesting deletion of files at GSR. @MGA73: maybe you could advertise this better at Commons and/or make a WikiProject? I doubt stewards can do everything by themselves —Matrix (_{user page} ^{(@ commons)} - _talk?) 21:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Matrix: Thank you for your comment. I agree that it is unlikely that stewards will find the time to do everything themselves. My thought was that stewards and global sysops and everyone who like to help out on various wikis might notice and pick a few wikis and check some files and/or post a message on the local villagepump. I think that I have posted a message on Commons at some point suggesting that if someone have a little time to spare they go to a wiki and move good files to Commons and nominate bad files for deletion. It has been a long time since I made those lists so I should probably update them before I make a new post. --MGA73 (talk) 08:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting closure of RFC

Status: In progress

Requesting closure of Requests for comment/Should paid editing as a CU be allowed by a steward! The RFC has been open for almost a month and discussion has slowed down. -- Sohom (talk) 15:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One month is quite a short time for an RfC on meta, I don't think there's harm in keeping it open for longer, there are new comments coming in every couple of days. Johannnes89 (talk) 15:44, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's been open for long enough for the consensus to become clear. That's all that matters. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 16:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is obvious, that the community isn't willing to accept a paid editor with elevated permissions. No more new information is to be expected. --Beobachtungsliste23 (talk) 07:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I might be biased but I think some valid concerns were raised in the Yes, it is compatible section as well and they are not to be disregarded. A09|(pogovor) 08:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably high time to do this, the last input was on 19th August. Sohom (talk) 23:20, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has been closed by Codename Noreste --Johannnes89 (talk) 11:07, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that there have been procedural concerns with the close at Talk:CheckUser_policy#Changing_this_policy_to_disallow_paid_editing, I would appreciate a steward reverting the closing (or ideally reclosing) the discussion since it looks like that takes care of the procedural issues. Sohom (talk) 16:19, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The closure was already discussed privately and our conclusion was that while it should not have been performed by a non-steward, there is no apparent need to reverse it just to re-close it again if it's going to lead to the same result anyway. EPIC (talk) 16:28, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair! Sohom (talk) 16:29, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assessing consensus at Requests for comment/Welcoming policy

Status: In progress

This global RfC will turn 1 year old next week, and it is worth considering if a closure is ready. --JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 03:26, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC is now one year old. Has any steward looked at this? JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 23:34, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OAuth permissions

Preferably permission requests should be submitted using the form from Special:OAuthConsumerRegistration.

After submitting this form, you will receive a token that your application will use to identify itself to MediaWiki. An OAuth administrator will need to approve your application before it can be authorized by other users. It is possible to request approval using {{oauthapprequest}}; please create a sub-section of this section.

A few recommendations and remarks:

Try to use as few grants as possible. Avoid grants that are not actually needed now.
Versions are of the form "major.minor.release" (the last two being optional) and increase as grant changes are needed.
Please provide a public RSA key (in PEM format) if possible; otherwise a (less secure) secret token will have to be used.
Use the JSON restrictions field to limit access of this consumer to IP addresses in those CIDR ranges.
You can use a project ID to restrict the consumer to a single project on this site (use "*" for all projects).
The email address provided must match that of your account (which must have been confirmed).

OAuth consumer cleanup

I would like to disable/cleanup some historical/un-used OAuth consumers:

e387eb2cff48ed6fc642c709827d3571 - domain changed from wmflabs.org to toolforge.org
81427dc2a6287c1428184fed744331b6, b9f62fee7a94f2c7793fc0ddff135b57 - no longer used
df4cccf3389f6092e61676deadeb4cb2 - replaced by 2b0fdc6fb0bd1bd9565f6d5ac47ed084
38381665bd3c4afdc81f50f01ef57e01, 0dde2fe105deaaa8b92b0bd4a9e22947, 576b1c0c768cdd65eb27bc5c0eddc6fa, 9f9a5df6b2742e937551bfb9dbb94f87, 032457f0510e61497364b837da38a305 - replaced by c342e23b00c2f1f8b88599e8f4ba9131
5cf3522727331892d3fd1d578481eed9, 6229eccdfe4041094dc46ca7849e20b7 - replaced by eb048a6f73a7d9e4e8813b77fbd02ded

That should leave 4 consumers associated to me, which are still in active use:

c342e23b00c2f1f8b88599e8f4ba9131 [review development]
eb048a6f73a7d9e4e8813b77fbd02ded [review production]
2b0fdc6fb0bd1bd9565f6d5ac47ed084 [report staging]
d6fe7b30457ece6ecf48d3aaaf9b82ff [report production]

DamianZaremba (talk) 19:18, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bot-reported requests

Manual requests

Cleaning up unused files

Requesting closure of RFC

Assessing consensus at Requests for comment/Welcoming policy

OAuth permissions

OAuth consumer cleanup

See also