Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tag: 2017 source edit
Line 95: Line 95:
=== CheckUser access ===
=== CheckUser access ===
{{TNT|Steward requests/Permissions/CheckUser|uselang={{int:lang}}}}
{{TNT|Steward requests/Permissions/CheckUser|uselang={{int:lang}}}}
==== جار الله@arwiki ====
{{sr-request
|status = <!--don't change this line-->
|domain = ar.wikipedia
|user name = جار الله
|discussion= [[:ar:ويكيبيديا:طلب تدقيق مستخدم/تصويت/جار الله|here]] '''--'''[[User:علاء |<font size="3" face="Script MT Bold" style="color:black;">Alaa</font> ]] [[User_talk:علاء |:)..!]] 17:07, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
}}


=== Oversight access ===
=== Oversight access ===

Revision as of 17:07, 29 December 2017

Shortcut:
SRP

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. The list of archives is below.

  • 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

(translate | edit)

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page

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

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name = 
 |discussion= 
}}
(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]]"). This should normally be for at least one week, but no more than three weeks (if so, you'll need to restart the process).

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.

Requests

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

 and also mistakes. Thank you. 
}}

Administrator access

See Administrator for information about this user group.

  • MediaWiki interface translations are done at translatewiki.net. Please do not request administrator access solely for that purpose; your request will be declined.
  • Stewards: Please use {{Systmp}} for approved temporary requests.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

Please start a new discussion about requesting the permission on the local village pump, administrators' noticeboard or a designated page for requesting permissions each time you request or renew adminship.

  • Discussions should be open for seven days. Please request adminship here seven days after discussions started. This page is not the place for any discussions or votes. (For wikis with few active users, it is OK to have no comments.)
  • If you only want adminship for specific tasks, please state for how long and for which tasks you need it. Otherwise stewards will decide whether to assign permanent adminship and the duration of adminship. See Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements.

BukhariSaeed@urwiktionary

Status:    In progress

I need sysop rights for few days to delete these kind of pages. --Bukhari Talk 04:17, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please start a local discussion and link it here--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 05:53, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is no user on urwiktionary (please check the recent changes of urwiktionary, i'm among the acive user of urwiki.--Bukhari Talk 17:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter, still you have to do as Shanmugamp7 said. Stryn (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pirsharafshah@glkwikipedia

Status:    In progress
GLK Wikipedia is so small and we can't voting every 3 month. pleased you to grant me administrator access at least for 12 months.--Pirsharafshah (talk) 20:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I dont see any new discussion at Wikipedia:قأوه دیکؤن/کارکیاگری, please start a fresh discussion and leave it for a week even if there is no community.--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 05:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Surprizi@ab.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hi, could you please give me admin access more then 3 month? Cheers.--Surprizi (talk) 18:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2018-06-28. Ruslik (talk) 19:34, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

محمد9088@arzwiki

Status:    In progress

(your remarks) I want requests adminstrator محمد9088 (talk) 17:12, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pestering multiple stewards about giving you local administrator rights isn't going to make them grant it to you. Especially when your discussion link goes to your user page instead of actual discussion. --Wiki13 talk 17:18, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You should ask arz:user:Ghaly, who is a bureaucrat, to grant you this permission. Ruslik (talk) 18:35, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruslik0: I need requets adminstrator and This User Ghaly Stoper--محمد9088 (talk) 20:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ymnes@nl.wikinews

Status:    In progress

This project has restarted on 19 January 2017 and re-opened on 5 July 2017. The local regulation that became active again provided in permanent administrators, as it had been open yet for a longer time (the original start was on 28 January 2005). The community yet elected me for a permanent adminship in July and now I have been re-elected (reconfirmed) again. The motivation in July to grant an adminship of six months instead of a permanent one, was as follows:

"Given the situation, I personally would recommend a six-month starting term, which is at the longer end of usual practice for administrators in new wikis. Once the community becomes a little more established in its own subdomain, you and they can figure out what the proper term should be. But this election is certainly every bit as legitimate as any other RfA in a new subdomain. StevenJ81 (talk) ('crat on Incubator) 20:31, 13 July 2017 (UTC)"

The community has become 'a little more established' now indeed, in fact it has become a really established project where a lot of people are contributing. The following examples should underline that a permanent adminship is valid now as the project has shown to be established:

  1. This Wikinews is very active in comparison to other Wikinews' where they have permanent adminships as well (link to: new pages, recent changes). On an average of the past half year it has been more active than English Wikinews. Only Wikinews in Portuguese, Russian and Arab languages are more/equal active.
  2. At the moment of the reopening from the incubator, four people contributed. Meanwhile there have been dozens to edit our project. At least (I may have forgotten some) twelve people wrote (many) new articles ([1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]).
  3. Next to that we have people that don't write articles but give support in cleaning up regularly. Two of them are very active ([13][14]).
  4. The Nl.Wikipedia community just closes a poll whether there should be linked from Wikipedia to sister projects. Despite it's a critical project, a majority voted to keep on being connected with the sister projects. There has been voted for Nl.Wikinews as wel with a majority of 43 (of 75) votes (link).
  5. There are some more things that have shown me in the last half year that Nl.Wikinews is being adopted in the society and by the media. It's hard to give solid evidence (links) for that.

So I hope the project may be granted permanent adminships now and that my adminship will be converted to a permanent one. I think it is fair enough to follow up the words of July last that the project would be granted permanent adminships when it has proven itself to be an established one. Ymnes (talk) 08:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just 3 supports in your RfA and most of users said in #2 aren't active anymore. I would say to grant temp adminship for one year. Matiia (talk) 16:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Only one is inactive. Romaine is still active (on Wikidata for us and with his bot and delete log - we abandoned press releases). Who knows him, knows he won't go. The voting system still needs a reform, that's why only three (exclusive of me) have voting rights. This rule still needs a reform. Please take into account that we are very active (see the sum of my list here above: that is not "little more established" but very much established - that was agreed half year ago). And please regard that there is not any binding of anybody of Meta with nl.wikinews and insofar no need that the supervision should be effectuated from here. Next to that, me myself I'm yet active since 2013: long enough to trust that I won't walk away. Ymnes (talk) 17:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat access

See Bureaucrat for information about this user group.
  • In principle, requests for temporary bureaucrat access are not granted.
  • A small project does not need bureaucrats. Currently whether a promotion is valid or not is decided by stewards. See here for a guideline.

Requests for removal of access should be posted at the section below.

CheckUser access

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.
  • One-time CheckUser access is not permitted and temporary access is only used by Stewards or when the mandate of the CUs has an expiry date specified in local policies.

جار الله@arwiki

Status:    In progress

Oversight access

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 .
  • When a new user is assigned to this group, please add them to this list.


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 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 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 Admin activity review applies.
  • See the instructions above for adding new requests. Please post new requests at the bottom of the section.

Miscellaneous requests

Requests for permissions that don't fit in other sections belong here. Importer rights can be granted on most wikis by stewards only. Please gain local community consensus before posting a new section here.

Note that the following types of permissions requests belong on separate pages:

  • SRB — Local or global bot status
  • SRGP — Global permissions

Bot flags on ur.wikibooks & ur.wikiquote

Hi, could the following users get the bot flag set on ur.wikibooks & ur.wikiquote:

Thanks. --Bukhari Talk 16:21, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BukhariSaeed See Steward requests/Bot status to request bot flags. — xaosflux Talk 16:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&oldid=17584650"