Steward requests/Permissions

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

Using this page[edit]

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

==== User name@xxproject ====
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibook -->
 |user name =
(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 identity[edit]

Certain permissions (notably CheckUser and Oversight) additionally require users to confirm their identity. Users requesting these permissions must make a request below, and must also submit the relevant identification to the Wikimedia Foundation. The request is placed on hold temporarily, until the receipt has been formally confirmed by the Office.


COPY THE FOLLOWING CODE to the bottom of the appropriate section below:

==== User name@xxproject ====
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    =
 |user name =

Administrator access[edit]

See administrator for information about this user group.

  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at 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.


My 6-months adminship has expired, I noticed, therefore I would like to ask for a new adminship so that I can improve this wikipedia which used to be terrible, but starts to get better. Bokareis (talk) 03:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold until 03.09.2015 to allow a full week of discussion since you posted today your request. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio 08:55, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


I request permanent adminship on sq.wikipedia. Thank you! Olsi (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Have you contacted the bureaucrats about it (one participated in the request, ok)? --MF-W 00:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
I did, but because of his vote, I'm afraid he will take a lot of time to approve my request. --Olsi (talk) 00:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Normally one of the other bureaucrats should handle it. --MF-W 00:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Other bureaucrats are inactive. --Olsi (talk) 00:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
The active bureaucrat hasn't edited since you requested that he approve your request. I think we should give him a few more days to respond to it before taking action ourselves. MBisanz talk 20:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


Please grant Doostdar permanent sysop, as he has been always active since the creation of fawikivoyage but also in fawikibooks had permanent sysop and been active; fawikivoyage has become more active and has 3rd grade in wikivoyage table based on article count. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 16:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@Mjbmr: Thanks for stating the request.--Doostdar (talk) 10:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Doostdar is the only admin on fa.wikivoyage. I would prefer to renew the temporary adminship for another 6 months to see if the community becomes more active in the number of people undertaking maintenance tasks. MBisanz talk 20:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
@MBisanz: We had four active admins including me and فلورانس which he also has an active poll, but lightly new contributions needs admin actions, no high new articles as we have almost articles for every city, and new contributions more involves new informations from locals. I highly support this request due to rise of community activities in recent months. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 22:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
The number of edits made by participants in the request are: 1140, 12, 11, 8, 1, 12, 435, 11, 6871, 3, 7, 23. One might as well say that only 3 people voted. On this basis, I do not think permanent adminship should be given. --MF-W 01:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: You again arguing with me just because it's me requesting this, all sister projects in Persian have permanent admins, this should be given right away. Mjbmr (discussioncontribs) 07:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The existence of permanent sysops on other projects in the same language is not an argument. Stewards decide on granting permanent adminship only on the basis of participation of active users in the request. Besides, I will from now not respond anymore to your paranoid comments in which you suggest that I am somehow on a mission to obstruct things proposed by you. --MF-W 13:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: I've been with it from the beginning of the Persian Wikivoyage. Till now I've created many pages, designed the frameworks of pages, attracted new users, contributed in technical issues, etc. As you see Persian is one of the main wikivoyage versions and someone is needed to guide the users and organize the tasks. If I don't qualify for doing this, who should do it, then? --Doostdar (talk) 11:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
I am familiar with the history of Persian Wikivoyage, having imported the content from Incubator etc. I have not said that you cannot be an admin, only that on the basis of participation in the request, permanent adminship cannot be given. This is a steward practice in force since quite a long time. - On a side note, you seem to have a wrong understanding of adminship; admins are certainly not there to "organize tasks" for users. But that is for local users to decide upon. --MF-W 13:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

David Saroyan@hywikipedia[edit]

--ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 01:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


As this RfA which has passed 2 weeks after begin of, Please grant me Sysop flag. Meanwhile tg.wikipesia hasn't got any local 'crat yet! Best Regards Arash (talk) 21:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Done Granted for 7 months to expire on 2016-03-31. --MF-W 01:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


This RfA which has passed 2 weeks thanks --Florence (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2016-02-31. per community consensus, Adminship granted for 6 month, will expire on 2016-02-31 Mardetanha talk


--Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 03:05, 1 September 2015 (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.

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.

  • Stewards: Before granting this permission to a user, please check the current policy and make sure that the user has identified to the Wikimedia Foundation. An email template is available for requesting new users to identify. Breaching these rules may be the cause for removing your steward access.

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.

  • Stewards: Before granting this permission to a user, please check the current policy and make sure that the user has identified to the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • 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.


For the Arbitration Committee, Guerillero 18:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

David Fuchs@enwiki[edit]

For the Arbitration Committee, Guerillero 18:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


For the Arbitration Committee, Guerillero 18:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - @Barras, Billinghurst: Could you please take care of removal from mailing lists, wikis and IRC channels where needed? Thanks. —MarcoAurelio 18:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
You forgot to mention me, but all Yes check.svg Done. Face-smile.svg Trijnsteltalk 20:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
/me feels ashamed Face-crying.svgMarcoAurelio 10:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


Please remove both administrator and bureaucrat flags. Thanks, Hesperian 03:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Done, thanks for their past work. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests[edit]

User Tchoř@cs.wiktionary[edit]

During the vote on Milda's desysop on Czech Wiktionary, I was asked by several users for voluntary reconfirmation. Because of the atmosphere of suspicion at that time (e.g. possible sockpuppeting; admins and bureaucrats being wildly accused of being biased) and rules on adminship still only in preparation, I have agreed with the community on two step reconfirmation (first reconfirmation of sysop rights, then in case of success reconfirmation of bureaucrat rights) with the voting evaluation being done by the stewards as an independent authority. The sysop rights voting has been evaluated, now the bureaucrat rights voting has ended, so I ask you if you could evaluate linked reconfirmation. Thanks in advance.--Tchoř (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment Comment All the users who supported the confirmation show no sign of being canvassed. One user who voted against it does (given the amount of support, not sure it actually matters anyway). Elfix 06:38, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • As things stand now, Tchoř has 75% of support, which is the percentage used at most wikis to perform rights promotions. I'd say confirmed. —MarcoAurelio 16:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree that Tchor should be confirmed. The level of support is more than what most projects expect their administrators to maintain. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I concur as well -- Avi (talk) 05:38, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

See also[edit]