Steward requests/Global permissions/2017-03

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

Requests for global rollback permissions

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Billinghurst

Not ending before 1 March 2017 01:38 UTC

Hi to all. I am looking to do some xwikisource work, or at least to be able to work with the smaller WS communities in that space to resolve some issues. I could apply for Global interface editors to do the WSes work, however, it is probably okay for to just put my hand up for GS rights as I have continued doing holistic anti-spam work through AbuseLog/Title blacklist/Spamblocklist/COIBot. I am an active and experience editor and administrator across many wikis; currently have five admin rights (enWS, enWP, C, M, MW) plus GR. I have had other advanced admin rights and believe that I have acted responsibly with those rights and can demonstrate that I can act appropriately with communities while holding advanced rights. I am not looking to do more in the SWMT, though as bibs and bobs pop up, I would deal with them directly rather than mark for others. Anyway, I will throw it over to the community and check back in a couple of weeks. If you have any questions please do ask, and please do ping me as I am not actively following this page. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:38, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Support He is a very experienced user in the technical aspects of spam control, so it would be quite useful in this aspect. Alvaro Molina ( - ) 01:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Savhñ 01:52, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. I am sure I represent the opinion of 99% of all other Stewards that miss you on the group.—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 02:17, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Give steward-rights instead. ;) RadiX 02:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support No concerns here. Active in spam control, so definately can use the extra bit.—Ah3kal (talk) 05:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Please Sir, Can he have his Stewards rights back instead?--Stemoc 06:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for all the \o/, this is as good as it gets at this time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support! --Vituzzu (talk) 09:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support. Most certainly. (@Teles: definitely, he can't be missed.) Trijnsteltalk 09:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Very experienced, no concerns. --Ks-M9 [disc.] 11:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support Support --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Dan Koehl (talk) 12:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support of course! --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 12:25, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support no questions --Bjarlin (talk) 20:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support No brainer, but please get your steward rights back when you're able to. —MarcoAurelio 23:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -jkb- 09:22, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not? — regards, Revi 09:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support, but please be a steward again! Syum90 (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support No brainer. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 13:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support MBisanz talk 15:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -FASTILY 01:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 'Support'--Alaa :)..! 10:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support DARIO SEVERI (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --TJH2018talk 22:33, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Natuur12 (talk) 23:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support MechQuester (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Mardetanha talk 07:47, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --Samuele2002 (talk) 17:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Ks0stm (TCG) 10:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support SE2018 Alan (talk) 11:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -- Per nom rationale. Wikicology (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Ankry (talk) 19:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support--Lanwi1(Talk) 20:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support - Maybe + steward would be better for you! -Barras talk 23:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Yes I think :) Murbaut (talk) 04:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --Melos (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support. Of course. Trusted, experienced and active user. Érico (talk) 04:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Oppose Experienced not enough or too much if does not recognize bad and good. More over I am little bit worried if I read, that you are going to take care of small Wikisource communities. Your involvement in the past conflicts on small projects was not neutral as a steward, so I cannot support this idea. --Juandev (talk) 14:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC
    I said that I was going to work with the smaller wikisource communities (primarily assist fix Mediawiki: ns configuration of proofread page), not take care of them. The only person who thought that I was not neutral was you and that was when I blocked an IP (not even your account) for abuse, sockpuppetry and abuse of proxies. I believe that I have a demonstrated understanding and perspective of bad and good administration, and that my editing will show that I am not a problem on small, medium or large wikis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Billinghurst (talk) 14:33, 25. Feb. 2017‎
  • Support Support -- Enfcer (talk) 03:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Trusted and good candidate. --SM7 --talk-- 13:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support no question --Herby talk thyme 14:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Trusted and experienced --Biplab Anand (Talk) 17:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support --rxy (talk) 17:20, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support absolutely! A great fit for the GS team with extensive experience working on gs projects. Snowolf How can I help? 18:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, please. Matanya (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support--Mirinano (talk) 03:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support- Peace1 (talk) at 09:18, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done - clear consensus. Matiia (talk) 01:55, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for Giandomenicolombardi

Dear administrators, I'm an italian linux system network administrator and webmaster ( member for 8 years) 30 years old has always been a lover of culture in all its facets. In the past, a little for lack of time, a little because of the Tor nodes block, I could never help as I wanted and add content to y/our great project, because running a Tor exit node (7EEDFBF70DE60E789E478C0B1E59050F35DE0059) I would be forced to restart every time my connection with dynamic IP ( to bypass the block and you can post. Very uncomfortable and unpleasant as something that does not always I can do for various reasons.

Kindly you can receive an exemption for my audience when logged?

If necessary, to get it, they are also willing to add the rule to block outbound traffic to wikipedia from my Tor node.

Thank you very much, and good weekend! :) --Giandomenicolombardi (talk) 17:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for AnonCoal

hi, i tried to document edit. but i blocked from tor block extensions. i didn't use tor or anything open proxy servers. please grant ipblock exempt rights to me. i wrote this request with my private vpn server. thanks,

P.S. this is blocked messages.

Your IP address, 115.20.*.*, has been automatically identified as a Tor exit node. Editing through Tor is blocked to prevent abuse.

--AnonCoal (talk) 11:39, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which project do you want to edit? Ruslik (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I want to edit anything projects. but my ip is banned all wikimedia projects cuz 'Tor'. i didn't use tor or anything proxies :(.. --AnonCoal (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 19:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for Just Chilling

Not ending before 11 March 2017 21:42 UTC

I am currently spending much of my time at English_Wikipedia_Unblock_Ticket_Request_System and, latterly, at Category:Requests for unblock where many of the appeals can be resolved in part or whole by renaming. I am familiar with the Global rename policy. Acquiring this permission will make my work more efficient and clearly benefit the Project. Just Chilling (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Support I do not see any problems with this request, except probably the fact that it does not have cross-wiki activity, however, I do not see it being relevant to being a global renamer. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 17:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I do not understand the significance of the unblocks? Blocking and unblocking is a routine part of my administrative duties on enwp. With regard to the crosswiki work, in order to do renaming on enwp I need global renaming rights. However, if granted I would then help out on renaming crosswiki. Just Chilling (talk) 15:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are claiming to spend much time at utrs and Category:Requests for unblock thus i am wondering about the low number of such unblocks (compared to other enwiki admin). --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! I understand. I have been working mostly at UTRS. Appeals to UTRS either should have been heard on the user's talk page or come to UTRS after talk page appeals have been exhausted. In the former case I redirect the user back to their talk page. In other cases, where talk page access has been revoked, this is time consuming work, particularly in sockpuppet cases, but rarely would this result in an unblock. With regard to Category:Requests for unblock, I said "latterly" and have been working there for a couple of months. If you look at that category, unblocks, except where there are username issues, also seldom happen. Block changes happen a little more often, I have just changed a block today for example.
However, if granted renaming rights my unblocking would rise sharply because I could resolve username issues. To take just today, for example, I would have been able to offer to rename Caper Travel that came to me at UTRS, Oh Fuuck! I have constipation! is waiting at Category:Requests for unblock for a rename, also there Ancientcointraders needs a rename as does St Cuthberts Mill and Frecuenciaprimera. At these deletion forums we only have one user currently working regularly on renaming and every day there is new work to be done. Just Chilling (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth I can confirm that they are fairly active on UTRS in the last 3 months. --Rschen7754 19:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support sounds reasonable, though I am slightly concerned with the lack of apparent activity. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; enwiki should change its excessive blocking rules. --MF-W 20:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps, but do you really think this global renamer request is the right place and time to make a stand on that issue? Your oppose is completely unrelated to the qualifications of the candidate at hand. Ks0stm (TCG) 07:45, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Seconded. @MF-Warburg: This is a comment about enwiki policies and not the candidate, and let's be frank: opposing someone based on policies they are merely following is unfair, to say the least. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:43, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - no reason to opposing (imo). I think is a reasonable request, and renaming users who have requested a rename on a local wikis is ok, and in my opinion cross-wiki activity isn't required for this right. The candidate can also help in queues or SRUC requests, if he is interested to help here. --Ks-M9 [disc.] 21:24, 1 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Once I am fully conversant with the procedures I should be delighted to help. Just Chilling (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support, being active in queues would be a plus point. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 07:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support I don't see why not. The user has clearly explained why he needs the right. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support -FASTILY 09:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Support Well I don't see any reason why giving global rename to this user would be a significant problem. Let's not also forget that I did not have much cross-wiki activity when I applied for global rename (And I still don't, to be fair). If the user can be trusted not to rename users like ClueBot NG, that's more than half the battle for me. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:44, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Matiia (talk) 22:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for other global permissions

remove global OTRS member for Regasterios

Thx. --Krd 08:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for Darwinius

Thx. --Krd 08:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:19, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

re-add global OTRS member for Darwinius

Thx. --Krd 14:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done. Stryn (talk) 14:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove OTRS-member from EuroCarGT

Thanks, —MarcoAurelio 12:52, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Matiia (talk) 14:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove OTRS-member from Bsadowski1

Thank you, —MarcoAurelio 22:20, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done --Defender (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove OTRS-member from Ireas

Thank you, —MarcoAurelio 22:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done --Defender (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

add global OTRS member for Dan Koehl

Thx. --Krd 11:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done. Stryn (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Dan Koehl (talk) 23:09, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

two-factor authentication tester for Devwebtel

I just want to protect my account, thanks, ----Devwebtel (query) 23:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 08:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

add global OTRS member for Coffee

Thx. --Krd 07:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 08:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for 1989

Thx. --Krd 14:22, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done.--HakanIST (talk) 14:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for Mike V

Thx. --Krd 05:34, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done.--HakanIST (talk) 05:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]