Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Removal of access: - Delete.Bot@pt.wikisource, Personne@lawikisource
Line 210:
Thank you. ~~~~
</pre></div>
 
====Mww113@wuuwiki====
I request temporary sysop access. I was told by wpedzich to make a third rfp if after contacting the active local sysop, and receving no reply.
*'''Language Code:''' wuu
*'''List of local sysops:''' [[wuu:Special:Listadmins]]
*'''List of local bureaucrats:''' [[wuu:Special:Listusers/bureaucrat]]
*'''Local User Page:''' [[wuu:User:Mww113]]
*'''Preferred duration and reason:''' 2 weeks, deletion of copyright violation images, and general cleanup/ deletion in the mainspace.
 
Thank you [[User:Mww113|Mww113]] 11:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
:{{Done}} for a week. No reply from one of 4 local sysops who have been elected on the project, very few edits of the only active sysop and Mww seems to know what there is to be done. [[User:Wpedzich|Wojciech Pędzich]] ''[[User talk:Wpedzich|Talk]]'' 11:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
:: Thank you. [[User:Mww113|Mww113]] 11:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 
===Miscellaneous requests===

Revision as of 04:43, 11 July 2008

Shortcut:
SRP
This page enables stewards to handle permissions requests, including the giving and taking of administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight rights, for all Wikimedia wikis which do not have a local permissions procedure. 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 (see the index of request pages). Requests for bot status, URL blacklisting and whitelisting, and CheckUser queries belong elsewhere.

Interface-translations are done at Betawiki.

For urgent requests, such as to combat large-scale vandalism on a small wiki, contact a steward in the #wikimedia-stewardsconnect IRC channel (see a web-based IRC client). In emergencies only, type !steward in the channel to inform stewards that you need help.

Please only make requests here after gaining the on-wiki approval of your local community.

Quick navigation: Administrator | Bureaucrat | CheckUser | Oversight | Removal of access | Temporary permissions | Miscellaneous | Global permissions

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page

When requesting permissions, copy and paste the following text into the correct section. Please fill in all the required fields -- language code, link to the local request (or other means of confirming that the request has approval), and link to your local user page. Without this information, a steward cannot process your request.

Please summarize your request in the "summary". 

==== Username@language-code project-name ====
I request sysop access.
*'''Language Code:''' xx
*'''Local Request Link:''' [[:xx:Project:wiki]]
*'''Automatic List of local bureaucrats:''' [[:xx:Project:Special:Listusers/bureaucrat]]
*'''Local User Page:''' [[xx:User:Example]]

Thank you. ~~~~

The project names are coded as follows:

  • Enter "wiki" for Wikipedia after the language code.
  • Enter "wiktionary" for Wiktionary after the language code.
  • Enter "wikibooks" for Wikibooks after the language code.
  • Enter "wikinews" for Wikinews after the language code.
  • Enter "wikiquote" for Wikiquote after the language code.
  • Enter "wikisource" for Wikisource after the language code, but enter "sourceswiki" for the Multilingual Wikisource without a language code.
  • Enter "wikiversity" for Wikiversity after the language code.
  • Enter "commonswiki" for Wikimedia Commons without a language code.
  • Enter "specieswiki" for Wikispecies without a language code.

Confirmation of identity

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 Foundation. The request is placed on hold temporarily, until receipt has been formally confirmed by the office.

Instructions for how you can confirm your identity can be found at: Steward handbook/email templates.

For stewards: Identification noticeboard.

Requests

Administrator access

See administrator for information about the position. Requests for temporary permissions and removal of access belong in other sections.


Evertype@my.wikipedia

I request Administrator access. I am one of the authors of the Unicode Standard and was responsible for developing the Unicode 5.1 revision of Myanmar script encoding, which replaced the Unicode 4.1 version. This has massive ramifications for fonts, encodings, articles, links, redirects, and so on. There has been an enormous amount of kerfluffle about this activity over the past week, evidently stemming from turf wars from some font designers in Burma. This has led to two requests for Adminship from people with fewer than ten edits on the Wiki, and a splendid campaign of supporters of those and opposers of others from people who have one or two edits, only on the request for Adminship page. It has been a bit exhausting. Jimbo Wales has offered his support; he took notice of my interest in Burma in October 2007.

Thank you. Evertype 10:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would decline it. 5:4 votes is not really a good support. Additionally, You don't speak the language and You don't contribute to the wiki (except for creating articles in English, which can't be counted since they are in the wrong language and should be deleted anyway). Other opinions? --Thogo (talk) 17:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have offered the user a temp-status when he requested it the first time [1], the vote was 3:1 back then. Now this has changed to 5:4... he seems to want to help in changing the font in my.wiki and seems to need the status for technical support (if I understood it correctly). However he seems to decline the temporary status for some reason I don't understand but insists of being permanent sysop, even though the community seems too small for a regular voting and 56% favour is not the best outcome... I would decline it too, other views are welcomed, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 17:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why apply for an temporary access when you can have a permanent access? I too, don't understand it. I was given temporary access twice (I guess). --Filipinayzd 22:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thogo, would you mind, please, looking at the nature of the votes Against? One user had three edits 2007-11-07, and twelve edits 2008-07-07. One user has had only 8 edits, all from 2008-07-07, all on the request page (he now has more, mostly attacks on the other existing Admin, MyMyanmar). The third user voting against my request had four edits as of 2006-07 and no further edits until 2008-07-07, on this page. I didn't work out how many edits the fourth one had; it was doubtless few. And both Okisan and Sithu015 now want to be Admins, having no experience editing ANY Wikipedia. The articles I created are all from the Simple English Wikipedia and MyMyanmar's father is going to be translating them into Burmese. There are only 10 of them, the Sun and the eight planets and Pluto. They are there because the articles are good and the plan is to let them serve as a model for other good articles. Translation on Saturn has already begun.
The Myanmar Wikipedia is in a shambles. The character encoding model is broken, half the articles are in one encoding and half in another. For a week now there've been turf wars going on regarding personalities and dragging in sockpuppets from non-Wiki forums and none of that is getting anything done. MyMyanmar and I are trying to work together on this; he knows Burmese and programming, I have a lot more Wikipedia experience than he has. We both applied for Adminship last year; he was given permanent access and I was given three-month access which expired. I have been talking with Jimbo Wales about the problems on the Wiki and will have a call in to the Deputy Director of the Wikimedia Foundation after 23 July about my participation in trying to sort out the problems here. And on top of all of this I am a very busy person who does not want to have to come begging here every six months when my access expires. I've wasted a great deal of time this week alone negotiating with you about this whole situation. (I've no specific complaint about you.) Two of the current Admins on the Myanmar Wikipedia want me to be given permanent status. So does Hintha, a frequent contributor So does Wales. The negative votes against my request are without merit. Please, gentlemen. Nobody else seems to be volunteering to sort out the problems this Wiki has. Burma has enough troubles without us getting bogged down in "temp-status" or counting the votes of people who are not voting in good faith. Evertype 22:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Birdy, the first time I asked for Admin access was 2007-05-17; it was granted on a temp basis and expired. I'm back. Evertype 22:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are we going to request over and over again? --Filipinayzd 22:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Filipinayzd@bcl.wikipedia

I request permanent administrator, bureaucrat or sysop access.

Thank you. --Filipinayzd 16:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can get temporary sysop rights for 3 months. This voting is just nonsense, since all people who voted there have 0 edits except for the voting page and their user pages and were only registered to vote. Since you are one of two active people on this wiki, you should maybe have sysop rights (as well as Ringer), but permanent rights are not necessary in such a small community of two people. --Thogo (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Filipinayzd 22:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On what grounds are permanent rights not necessary in a small community? It seems to me that the Bikol Wiki shouldn't just lose its Admin(s) every three months. Evertype 22:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They don't lose the rights if they just drop by and leave a message shortly before the status expires, the community is obviously too small to hold a regular voting, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 23:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look!
№ Language Language Wiki Articles Total Edits <Admins> Users Images Depth
159 Central_Bicolano Bikol bcl 765 1 261 6 189 <0> 306 34 2
256 Afar Afar aa 8 1 357 2 406 <3> 544 0 -- --Filipinayzd 23:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat access

See bureaucrat for information about the position.

Ahonc@uk.wiktionary

I request bureaucrat access.

Please contact the local crat, he seems to be not totally inactive, last edit 30.june. Consider mailing him, which is mostly fastest. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 12:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He makes one edit per month. He did not provide email address in preferences.--Ahonc 18:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that makes him not inactive :S ... I believe I mailed him once, when I needed something, on wikipedia he has an email in his settings, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 19:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


CheckUser access

To request CheckUser information, see Request for CheckUser information. This is the place to request CheckUser access. Note that temporary CheckUser access is not permitted.

Stewards: When someone asks for CheckUser status, please check the current policy regarding bestowal of status before giving the status. Do not grant CheckUser access unless the user is identified to the foundation, which will be announced here. Breaching these rules may be cause for removing your steward access. When you give someone CheckUser, please list them on CheckUser, ask them to subscribe to checkuser-l, email checkuser-l-owner@wikipedia.org so that the listadmins know the person is allowed on the mailing list (the list may contain confidential information), and make sure they contact an op for access to #wikimedia-checkuser.

Request For CheckUser Status In Azerbaijani Wikipedia

Following users have gained the on-wiki approval of our local community in az Wikipedia:

Please grant them local checkuser status in Azerbaijani WIkipedia.--Mehrdad 17:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that's not enough votes. You need to have at least 30 votes. --FiliP × 05:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Altough it might seem logical, I could see no such requirement here. Neither it existed when the vote was started. There is a genuine need for local checkusers to prevent periodic disruptions to the Azerbaijani wikipedia's work and going to meta each time is not effective. Therefore, the community has decided to elect local checkusers. Thank you. --TimBits 07:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am surprised by this voting too, never seen such for a cu. I wonder if the "change" of the policy here is official. I would say lets see what cary has to say about it. It is  On hold anyway as these persons have to identify to the foundation. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 13:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the link. When I looked for the info at that page, I was surprised I couldn't find it because I swear I saw it a while ago. I still believe that the number of voters in this election is very low and I suggest not doing this. But yes, let's wait for Cary. --FiliP × 09:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The change was the result of a long discussion on the checkuser-L mailing list. The problem, essentially, is that there is no single system, and no simple way to describe the current systems. For example, enwiki has an Arbcom, which appoints checkusers. dewiki has an arbcom, but checkusers are elected. eswiki (if I recall correctly) has one CU elected by the community before the creation of their arbcom and one CU appointed by the arbcom, with no clear decision (and some controversy) about whether future CUs will be elected or appointed. There was also concern on the list about the recent attempts to establish an arbcom in order to appoint some people as CUs who had failed to be elected (I think it was en wikiquote but I would have to look it up to make sure). I think the requirement of having a minimum number of votes and 75-80% consensus is a good idea, especially if it has been established as a precedent. But that language was being used by some people on enwiki to justify creating an election mechanism that would be independent of Arbcom. There was also some confusion about whether this policy describes the appointment of checkusers for meta-wiki or for all wikis. So that's the problem. Perhaps the confusion could be addressed by saying, "If a wiki currently has a mechanism to appoint or elect checkusers, future checkusers must be selected using the same mechanism. If a wiki does not have checkusers, the 30 vote/80% consensus rule applies." I confess I have not given this much thought recently but does that seem reasonable? For what its worth, during these discussions, the Foundation was silent and did not offer firm direction, or indeed any direction. Thatcher 17:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, changes of the CU policy are not duty of people on mailing lists, but have to be first approved by the global community (which wasn't asked so far) and second approved by the foundation. So this change is not valid. --Thogo (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This was discussed on the list and I posted my changes there, and you are all on the list, so you've had at least 3 months to object. Do as you like. I've lost most of my interest in wiki-governance anyway. Thatcher 17:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thatcher, please don't take it personal, Thogos argument is not destructive criticism. I am sorry, but I must say it was impossible for me to follow and read that monsterthread for me and You might agree that such an interpretation as we see it here can't be what was intented, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 17:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that 7 votes is unreasonable. But it was also unreasonable for the text of the prior version ("On a wiki with no Arbitration Committee or where the community prefers independent elections) to try and bypass enwiki's arbcom, and Jdforrester's version about "approved arbcoms" does not reflect the situation with eswiki or dewiki. I posted my suggestion to the policy talk page, suggest further discussion there. Thatcher 18:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not offended, just tired. Thatcher 18:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You for Your input, it is very appreciated, never give up too easily :) if You are tired just take some rest but only to come back with renewed strenght ;) kind regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 18:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally it would be good, if it is changed (and these changes seem to be a proposal which have to be approved still by the foundation), that there is some clause so votings with 7:1 like [2] can not happen, that is simply ridiculous for a cu, who has access to sensitive private data, sorry, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 17:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Private list is not the place for talking about the policy. I reverted edits and talk may start at the talk page. --Millosh 18:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In all fairness, we in the Azerbaijani wikipedia have hold the voting, being under the impression that the latest version of the policy was official and the results are valid according to that version. I don't see anything ridiculous in that. It is inconsequential whether the person making those changes had different things in his/her mind or has erred in making the said changes. I don't see how we can be blamed for that. Therefore I'd like someone to clarify it to us- what is the current official, valid policy, so that we can hold a new vote if necessary and make our request accordingly? Thank you.--TimBits 20:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have our apologies for the mixup, but at the moment the current version of the checkuser policy is at Checkuser policy#Access to CheckUser. It states 25-30 users minimum and 70-80% approval, as determined by the local community. Thanks for your understanding. Kylu 22:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pap3rinik@it.wikipedia

Please grant checkuser access to Pap3rinik@it.wikipedia due to successful poll

Thanks. --Brownout(msg) 10:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold please provide to send your identification to the Foundation--Nick1915 - all you want 12:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cruccone@it.wikipedia

Please grant checkuser access to Cruccone@it.wikipedia due to successful poll

Thanks. --Brownout(msg) 10:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold please provide to send your identification to the Foundation--Nick1915 - all you want 12:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight access

Do not initiate an oversight request here. The Arbitration Committee will make the request once there is consensus on the local wiki (this process is currently for en-Wikipedia only).

Stewards: Do not grant Oversight access unless the user is identified to the foundation, which will be announced here. When you give someone oversight access, list them on Hiding revisions.

Removal of access

If you want to request that your own status be removed, please don't forget to place a note on your local user talk page (preferably with an English translation). This is required to prove your identity. And then add the request here. You should add the difflink of your local confirmation edit to the request.

To request the removal of another user's status, you must gain consensus on the local wiki first. All discussion must be kept on your local wiki. When there is community consensus that the user's access should be removed, a trusted person from that wiki should provide a link here to the discussion, a very brief explanation of the reason for the request, and summarize the results of discussion.

Copy and paste the following text into the correct section. Fill in all the required fields -- language code, link to the local request, and link to your local user page. Without this information, a steward cannot process your request. 

==== Username@language-code project-name ====
I request removal of access.
*'''Language Code:''' xx
*'''Local Confirmation/Request Link:''' <!--Difflink of the local confirmation edit (for own requests), or link to the community decision-->
*'''Local User Page:''' [[xx:User:Example]]

Thank you. ~~~~

Please summarize your request in the "summary".

Temporary permissions for emergency or technical purposes

If you are requesting administrator status to make a translation of the wiki interface, see also the BetaWiki project, which seeks to make a neutral MediaWiki translation that will then be default for all wikis. That is more useful than only making a local translation. You can ask questions in the IRC channel or in the mailing list. See also MediaWiki localisation. If you are requesting adminship to handle one-time vandalism incidents or clearing a deletion backlog, please see Vandalism reports and Multilingual speedy deletions.

Stewards: Currently active temporary permissions are listed at /Approved temporary. When granting a request, please copy the request to the appropriate section there, and clearly state the date of removal. Requests only need remain listed below for a few days, and may afterward be removed as long as they have been copied to the subpage.

Copy and paste the following text into the correct section. Fill in all the required fields -- language code, link to the list of sysops and bureaucrats, local request link, link to your local user page, and the preferred duration with a reason. Without this information, a steward cannot process your request. 

====Username@language-code project-name====
I request temporary sysop access.
*'''Language Code:''' xx
*'''List of local sysops:''' [[xx:Special:Listadmins]]
*'''List of local bureaucrats:''' [[xx:Special:Listusers/bureaucrat]]
*'''Local Request Link:''' [[xx:Example]]
*'''Local User Page:''' [[xx:User:Example]]
*'''Preferred duration and reason:''' 
Thank you. ~~~~

Miscellaneous requests

Requests that don't fit in other sections belong here. Note that the following types of requests belong on separate pages: bot status, URL blacklisting and whitelisting, and requests for CheckUser queries. If you want to have your Meta username changed, please go to Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. If you want to have changed a username on a Wikimedia wiki without bureaucrats, please go to Requests for username changes.(Existing requests have been moved to the appropriate page.)

Reminder

  • Import rights can be granted by stewards only, not bureaucrats, so the automatic list of local bureaucrats is irrelevant for this.
  • Usurpation requests should be placed at Steward requests/Usurpation.
  • Username changes should be placed at Requests for username changes.
  • Please make sure you have your accounts renamed before merging them.

Requests for global permissions (please don't add requests yet)

This section is only for users that are unified and on the list of GlobalUsers.
ATTENTION: Please don't add requests yet.


See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&oldid=1081174"