Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 199: Line 199:
==== Kascyo@pt.wikipedia ====
==== Kascyo@pt.wikipedia ====
|status = <!--don't change this line-->
|status = done<!--don't change this line-->
|domain = pt.wikipedia
|domain = pt.wikipedia
|user name = Kascyo
|user name = Kascyo
Line 205: Line 205:
Please remove my bureaucrat acess. [[User:Kascyo|Kascyo]] ([[User talk:Kascyo|talk]]) 20:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Please remove my bureaucrat acess. [[User:Kascyo|Kascyo]] ([[User talk:Kascyo|talk]]) 20:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}. [[User:Trijnstel|<font color="#064EA3" face="Verdana" size="2">Trijnstel</font>]]<sub>[[User talk:Trijnstel|<font color="#000000">talk</font>]]</sub> 20:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

=== Miscellaneous requests ===
=== Miscellaneous requests ===

Revision as of 20:19, 10 April 2013

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.

  • Requests for bot flags are handled at SRB, and requests for global permissions are handled at SRGP.
  • 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 | Interface administrator | Bureaucrat | CheckUser | Oversight | Removal of access | Miscellaneous | Global permissions

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page

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

==== Username@xxproject ====
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibooks -->
 |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 signing confidentiality agreement

Certain permissions (notably CheckUser and Oversight ) additionally require users to sign a confidentiality agreement. Users requesting these permissions must make a request below, and must also sign the confidentiality agreement with 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:

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

Administrator access

Steward requests/Permissions/Sysop-header


Please extend the duration of of my adminship at dv.wikt. SR/AT#Ushau97@dv.wiktionary. Ushau97 talk 13:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for a week until 9 April. --MF-W 14:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-09. --Bencmq (talk) 13:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


My temporary adminship has expired. I need permanent access now. Votes for are under Разы дæн in the request page. Bouron (talk) 05:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis of this vote I can only extend your temporal access. Ruslik (talk) 07:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. What's wrong with this vote? --Bouron (talk) 07:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean the number of votes, then you should know that Ossetian Wikipedia have only 3-4 active users, including me.--Bouron (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If there are only so few active users then the project does not need permanent administrators. I can extend your sysop access for 6 months. Ruslik (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please provide a link to the policy stating that? As I can see on the top of this section, for permanent sysopship one need to provide a link to the local community approval. I do have local community approval with 100% support. So where the rule about few active users came from? Also please consider stewards policy which says "Stewards should not override consensus, such as whether or not a user should be given a particular user right". In addition let's take a look at the page about Stewards. It says "They [stewards] are tasked with technical implementation of community consensus". So I still think you should give me permanent access, because oswiki doesn't have own bureaucrat to implement community consensus.--Bouron (talk) 19:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Ruslik, as a permanent administrator of the Ossetian Wikipedia I would like to speed up the process of providing Bouron with a permanent access. Could you please specify is there any problem with that? All our active contributors said that they are "pro". Bouron can contribute with an advanced level of the Ossetian language, that is why he needs permanent access in order to improve all pages, templates and articles in Ossetian Wikipedia. Thank you for your comments. Taamu (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment You quote this: "Stewards should not override consensus, such as whether or not a user should be given a particular user right" as indicating a Steward must grant the right. However, this sentence has a fuller meaning. The Steward is acting as the Bureaucrat for the project and is required to determine whether consensus has been achieved first. Determination of consensus would usually include assessing whether the number of votes in support, the users who voted, the size of the community, etc., is adequate to show consensus. Three votes in support might not be considered adequate to show this consensus clearly (depending on the other factors). QuiteUnusual (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Four days left since I posted a link to the vote. Why stewards are determining consensus so unusually long?--Bouron (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-08. -- Vituzzu (talk) 18:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Posting request on user's behalf. On hold until the 10th April. Malafaya (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In these circumstances we can only grant temporal sysop access (for three months). Ruslik (talk) 17:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I warned the user about that probability, and that he would have to renew it eventually. Can it be done then? Thank you, Malafaya (talk) 19:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Requesting permanent sysopship again, Savh confirmed that he was not oposing. Regards. Gusta (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Ruslik (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Best regards! Gusta (talk) 17:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a lie! The consensus was not reached, and several who supported him were meat puppets, if he wants the flag, he will have to reopen the discussion, we not vote to choose things there. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 06:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is so not consensus that he did not warn the community that he made ​​the request here. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 06:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I already rejected the request here basing my judgement not on templates but on the discussion (surprise, surprise, I can understand Portuguese!). Btw I see a strong bad faith in waiting until the bot has archived the older request before opening the new one. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, i thought you hadn't seen Savh's comment. You said that he was clearing opposing and they he came and said that was not, you said nothing about it. I thought you would revert me if i changed the template so the bot does not archived it. It's there, i linked the Sahvs comment so Ruslik could see the old request. Gusta (talk) 21:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have meat puppets. Zoldyick is active and came from Wikipedia long time before. Érico is a global sysop, already had edited there. Matheus came for the sysopship. I warned the community Gusta (talk) 21:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly I can confirm my original evaluation, I must underline, again, I didn't evaluate anything than *arguments* within comments. Furthermore the project is definitely too small for granting any permanent adminship. Anyway, since another steward has judged there's a sufficient background for an adminship I think a the best deal is a temporary one, I'd tend for 3 months by now. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a correction, Texugo already has permanent it. If you want to give temporary no problem. Gusta (talk) 22:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat access

Steward requests/Permissions/Crat-header

George Animal@ku.wiktionary

the inactive bureaucrats on ku.wikt have been removed so that we don't have any bureaucrats on our wiki.I nominated myself as bureaucrat see here.The German Wiktionary has got 3 bureaucrats and have (252.364 entries), but the Kurdish Wiktionary hasn#t got any bureaucrats although its is one of the biggest Wiktionaries.Thanks for understanding. and regards (George Animal)-- 18:29, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
X mark.svg Not done Hi George. What matters for a wiki to have local bureaucrats is the size of the community and the number of active admins, not the number of pages. This project is still not big enough (community size speaking) to have bureaucrats right now. I just checked and there were only 25 user right changes done by stewards since the beginning of the project, which clearly shows that there is no need for this. If you need some precisions, feel free to ask. Sorry, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 04:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could you say me why the Afriakkans Wiktioanry has got 2 bureaucrats?There are only 7 active users? Is that big community? I think, no.--Thanks85.176.139.54 12:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also the is.wiktionary has got 2 bureaucrats?Big community, I thin, no-- 12:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser access

Steward requests/Permissions/CU-header

Oversight access

To request to have content oversighted, ask in #wikimedia-stewards, or, for requests regarding English Wikipedia email This is the place to request Oversight access. Note that temporary Oversight access is not permitted and the temporary status is only used by Stewards.

Do not grant Oversight access unless the user is identified to the foundation, which will be announced on the Identification noticeboard. When you give someone oversight access, list them on Oversight.

Removal of access


  • 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 [[<tvar name="self-discussion">Talk:Steward_requests/Permissions/2011#Self_requests</tvar>|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, provide a link to the discussion, with 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 [[<tvar name="crat-rem">Bureaucrat#Removing_access</tvar>|separate list of these specific wikis]].
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions for inactivity, link to your local inactivity policy. If your site does not have inactivity policy, the global policy [[<tvar name="aar">Admin activity review</tvar>|Admin activity review]] applies.
  • See the [[<tvar name="usage">#Using this page</tvar>|instructions above]] for adding new requests. Please post new requests at the bottom of the section.</translate>

Manuel Trujillo Berges@an.wikipedia

The community of the Aragonese have agreed in a discussion aproved (here), that due to a misuse of the user sysop privileges, these should be removed. Thanks in advance. --Willtron (talk) 08:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Time2wait.svg On hold until 11 April. Ruslik (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The community of the Aragonese have agreed in a discussion aproved (here), that due to a misuse of the user sysop privileges, these should be removed. Thanks in advance. --Willtron (talk) 08:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Time2wait.svg On hold until 11 April. Ruslik (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jirka O.@cswiki

Please remove my sysop rights. Thank you, Jirka O. (talk) 18:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you do, but do you wish to resign as a bureaucrat as well? Trijnsteltalk 22:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes check.svg Done removing your administrator flag. On hold for 24 hours for bureaucrat flag as you have not clearly specified your intent.--Jusjih (talk) 14:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zaidpjd @bug.wikipedia

Please remove the inactive user from administrator flags. He already inactive in since 2005. Now it's already 8 years he didn't give any edits from him. Thanks.--法尔汉 Aplikasi 06:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done -- Quentinv57 (talk) 06:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rafael Kenneth@pt.wikipedia

Please, remove bureaucrat access. This user was elected in March 2012 for a one year term, which expired yesterday. Érico Wouters msg 23:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done My read of this discussion suggests me to also remove the bureaucrat status to the following users : Alchimista, Érico Júnior Wouters, Luckas Blade, Ruy Pugliesi and Teles. Am I right ? -- Quentinv57 (talk) 06:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No. Luckas resigned on february and Rafael received the rights as substitute. The election system of bureaucrats changed and bureaucrats elected in 2012 passed a new process: Teles (closed-successful), Alchimista (closed-successful), Ruy Pugliesi (open) and me (closed-successful). Érico Wouters msg 14:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, great. Thanks for the info :-) -- Quentinv57 (talk) 04:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Inactivity, per local policy. He was warned about this an month ago. Érico Wouters msg 02:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done Can you please send him a mail to warn him that his sysop access has been removed, per policy ? Thanks by advance. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 04:23, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The email was sent before this request. Thanks Quentinv57. Érico Wouters msg 12:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Your remarks, etc. --Müdigkeit (talk) 18:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear this. My condolences. I have removed the sysop bit following dewiki's practice to remove userrights from deceased user accounts. Best regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 19:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Please remove my bureaucrat acess. Kascyo (talk) 20:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes check.svg Done. Trijnsteltalk 20:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous requests

Steward requests/Permissions/Misc-header

See also

Steward requests/Permissions/Footer