Talk:Steward requests/Permissions/Approved temporary

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

New Status[edit]

The new status

Status:    In progress

has been added to indicate a request for rights has been approved temporarily and those rights need to be removed at a certain date. Please use

Status:    Done

only when the right has been removed again and the request has been handled finally. a×pdeHello! 10:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weird order for sections[edit]

Anyone know why the bot is placing new requests at the top now, instead of where they should go chronilogically? Am I filling in the tempsysop template incorrectly? Ajraddatz (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Old sections not removed[edit]

Hi @Steinsplitter: Why is the bot not removing requests from January, etc.? The requests are marked as extended/removed all of them. Regards. -- M\A 13:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed :-). --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :-) -- M\A 14:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @Steinsplitter: - It looks that again the first section of the page is being ignored by the bot :) Regards. -- MarcoAurelio 21:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why, can you archive it by hand pls? (can't edit the page by hand because of ABF) --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to save my request for the prolong adminship[edit]

See that my adminship expires on 2016-06-16. I need prolong adminship. I already submitted our community consensus.--Info-farmer (talk) 07:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is your problem with saving the request? Which error message do you get? --MF-W 07:45, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He is trying to edit Steward requests/Permissions/Approved temporary page which is protected by Special:AbuseFilter/93. @Info-farmer: Please add your extension request at Steward requests/Permissions--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 08:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bot can't archive global requests[edit]

@Ajraddatz: the bot has never archived those global requests AFAIK. They need to be archived manually. Stryn (talk) 04:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah cool thanks. Do you know which page those are actually archived to? – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:24, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This one from August should go to Steward_requests/Permissions/2016-08 on the "Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)" section. Stryn (talk) 04:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC) Fixed. --Stryn (talk) 08:44, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well seems like I was wrong: Steward_requests/Permissions/2016-08#Global_editinterface_for_Jack_Phoenix is correctly archived by the bot, but this (maybe because of "expired" text before the remove?), this (no sr-request template?) and this (I don't know what's wrong here) it didn't archive last year, so I had to archive them manually. Steinsplitter maybe you can look at this? --Stryn (talk) 09:03, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing my Approval from User:1233thehongkonger to User:1233[edit]

{{editprotected}} The edit was said to be harmful and was not approved. Please can someone make a note or just to change the name ?--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 15:48, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —MarcoAurelio 10:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for *not* reading[edit]

[1]. Now if I want to see if the system works as expected in a large scale as it happens now, I have to go digging on edit histories. Great. —MarcoAurelio 09:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Matanya: Stryn (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, those requests that were removed should have been moved to the relevant archives. —MarcoAurelio 18:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for not noticing that. I wonder, why do you think this needs extra checking more than other features ? Matanya (talk) 18:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We're responsible on granting those rights and are also responsible to verify that they are removed in a timely fashion. The system is new errors can be found. I think it was a sensible idea to continue using this page as I noted here and in the stewards' noticeboard, and of course I think it's still mandatory to list the requests in the relevant archives, where they were moved only after the right expired. We should keep track of the requests IMHO and let the bot take care of them IMHO. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio 18:54, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Still needed?[edit]

It seems that the new expiring system is working well, so can we stop marking successful local rights requests with {{Systmp}} template soon? Maybe someone could program a bot that goes through Special:Log/rights and creates an automatically updating list of current users with expiring user rights? Only for global user rights we still would need to add the {{Systmp}} until phab:T153815 is developed. Stryn (talk) 17:42, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Systmp template has functions other than notifying bots. Ruslik (talk) 12:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How would they be archived if we get rid of this page? I'd still keep the template as it comes handy, but maybe the behaviour of the bot could be changed. —MarcoAurelio 17:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Ruslik. The template is still pretty useful despite some change needed in the bot. RadiX 14:25, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At least the bot should automatically move requests from this page to the archives. Now we need to write the extra "removed" part or they won't be archived. I have done it actively myself in the past but I stopped it now as the bot should do the work... + not all stewards always remember to add the template. Stryn (talk) 14:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More missing from this page: Krenair's global editinterface. Also the rule "If you remove or extend global rights, please add in bold extended or removed, so the bot knows what can be archived" is not followed. Stryn (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also is missing. Stryn (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I started a duplicate discussion. After temp rights could be granted through Special:UserRights I stopped using the tempsysop template on SRP. Whoops. I'll resume using it til we figure out if we need the old page or not anymore. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page is getting messy. Can a bot please start to remove old entries to the correct archives again? --MF-W 08:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask again if this page is still needed. Is there a value in keeping it (e.g. because it allows to see how many temporary adminships are currently running and for how long) or should the requests simply be archived on the SRP monthly subpages immediately? --MF-W 15:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Local rights can directly go to SRP monthly archive IMO, but global rights... meh. Until global rights have "expiry", this page can serve for global rights (Global EditInterface, GIPBE from SRGP...) — regards, Revi 15:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do we want to start a specific page for global expirations then? Because I don't think this page is needed for local permissions anymore. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Probably some subpages in SRGP then... sure. — regards, Revi 15:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes let's stop using this page and create a new page for temporary global rights. Stryn (talk) 08:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since there was no opposition here (and no archiving bot working currently, it seems), I have taken the liberty to archive some temporary requests from SRP to Steward requests/Permissions/2018-08 and put a note on this page that it should not be updated anymore. --MF-W 19:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StevenJ81: FYI. — regards, Revi 06:54, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Created SRGP/AT for the new global-rights. — regards, Revi 06:59, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MF-Warburg, Stryn, and -revi: Just clarifying: Obviously no new entries here. But this page still needs to be cleaned up one or twice a month and its content archived to the monthlies until it's empty. Right? Or do you just want to let the current contents be the final archive of these particular items? StevenJ81 (talk) 13:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...or, I suppose, we could take the current items, take them back to their approval months' archives, and put them there. Your call. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What would make most sense to me is to archive them away from this page when they expire, as was the custom here. That's why I wrote This page should not be edited anymore, except to remove expired permissions. Would be nice if a bot could start to do this again. --MF-W 17:01, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]