Steward requests/Permissions

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status = <!-- Don't change this line -->
 |domain = <!-- Such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name = 
 |discussion= 
}}
(your remarks) ~~~~

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain =
 |user name =
 |discussion= 
}}

Steward requests/Permissions/Sysop-header

I would like to extend my sysop rights for as long as possible. The discussion has been open for over three days. I use my sysop rights to perform all types of cleanup as I was the only active sysop. Thank you. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 18:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

On hold til 10 Aug. Ajraddatz (talk) 19:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I won't close this as I am going to express an opinion - I think AmaryllisGardener has a long enough track record that I'd support making this at least a year. With > 13,000 edits and a track record with sysop rights, it's only the small community size that means it can't be permanent (IMO) QuiteUnusual (talk) 16:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2015年08月10日. Ajraddatz (talk) 04:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you! --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 16:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I request temporary admin rights on sc.wikipedia for ‎Dk1919 Franking too.--L2212 (talk) 18:36, 8 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

The request page seems to suggest that the request should last until 14 August? --MF-W 20:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Tecnically that's an election, but nobody is voting. I don't know if in that means 1 vote could be sufficient.--L2212 (talk) 11:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

The election closed.--L2212 (talk) 16:53, 17 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014年11月17日. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --MF-W 17:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Zhuyifei1999 is a temporary admin on zh.voy (see here), after our local vote, can any Steward extended or give him a permanent sysop rights?--TianyinLee (talk) 04:43, 9 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done permanent. Ruslik (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I had rights for adminship from 25 december 2012 (3 + 6 + 6 + 6 months) so I was Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014年10月03日 ( see = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions/Approved_temporary#Geoleplubo.40pcdwiki ). Because of a mistake my administrator rights are closed now. it is wrongly mentioned as 4th August here ? Please can you put again my temporary adminship. At the same time I put a vote on pcd.wikipedia to request for a permanent adminship. Thanks, Geoleplubo (talk) 00:46, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

With the size of the community, I would doubt that we would grant permanent adminship, though would see that we would extend the period of the granting of the right.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

According to the last renewal, the temporary adminship should have lasted until 3 October. I reinstated admin rights. --MF-W 17:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I request for the prolongation of admin rights (after first and second approval). After one week of discussion being open no user has responded. There has been more than one year now with no admin in slovene wikiversity although the need to have them exists. --Janezdrilc (talk) 12:55, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Comment Comment MZaplotnik and Xyxyx have been inactive on slwikiversity for quite some time (since 2012 / early 2013 -- though both seem active on slwiki)... only Hladnikm is currently active. Just a note... Personally I'm not fond of promoting rather inactive users to admins. Trijnstel _talk 22:05, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

As I am informed there was some lack of inactivity on Wikiversity due to the loss of adminship - the zeal for cooperation in some way went down with posting new requests (they were initiators of the project). If I may suggest I would try once more for all of them to get them back to Wikiversity and help the community. I think that in case of temporary rights it's better to try then not to try. --Janezdrilc (talk) 22:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Comment CommentThe whole conversation at slWV is a construction. The dates on the requests are 2012, and the page has been built in 2014. I do not think that we have evidence of people requesting rights, and a community having a reasonable chance for conversation. If rights are required, we need a proper conversation where someone nominates themself, or agrees to being nominated, and the community having the chance for comment. The purpose of rights is to allow active people to fulfil a role.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I understand. I have created the page for admin requests (link above) in 2014 for the reason of standardization of request pages across all sl: wikis. It also contains archive of 2012 requests (from the old page). The v:sl: community is very small so the actual voting can't be carried out - this is the situation of all sl: wikis except Wikipedia. There is no other way to become admin (again) than this way. They are highly trusted users and all of them are admins at least on one project. --Janezdrilc (talk) 11:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I sent them a notice to confirm their agreement on promotion. --Janezdrilc (talk) 12:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

They all confirmed. I'am sorry for procedure inconviniences. --Janezdrilc (talk) 17:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

You are missing my point. This is not a suitable process. If they wish to be admins, there is a process to be followed, and they should follow it. I do not see that it is proper for these users to be nominated by proxy, and not confirm their nominations on a page. If they canot do that, they are not worth having as administrators. So unless they are going to be active as administrators, it is better that they do not have the rights. They are real, not party decorations.  — billinghurst sDrewth 19:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

In slovene community the selfnomination is understood as kind of "less hygienic" (of course, such cases are completely acceptable). So it is common in our praxis that someone - if possible - nominate you and manage then the further process for you. I was nominated for admin on q:sl: by User:Dbc334, I agreed and got promoted. No problem with that. I am an admin for 7 years on w:sl: and 6 years on s:sl: and I think I know the whole slovene community quite well. What can I say more. --Janezdrilc (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

You are still missing my point. I covered both scenarios in my previous reply. And your niceness in process or not, stewards require this certainty of activity to comply with our due diligence, and our duty of care.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:13, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Hm, I don't know if I still follow you... they confirmed the nomination but didn't request for themselves here neither on v:sl:, am I right? (Is there any page in Meta where I can read about the whole procedure and conditions about adminship?) --Janezdrilc (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Our bureaucrat is inactive. Openbk (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold until 20 August we will give the 'crat a week to respond to your ping. And I will do a little digging around to look at the activity to see if we need to ping.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

@Rschen7754: mid Sep will be 2 years inactive.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

AAR was already done for this wiki, so AAR would not be a factor here. Of course, local discussions to remove should be respected as appropriate. --Rs chen 7754 02:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

@Openbk: which means that AAR in normal process won't revisit this wiki in a while. If your community has concerns about your missing bureaucrat, and its effects, that you should escalate that matter within plWN.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

We believe that the current AAR rules are good and we don't want to change anything. Openbk (talk) 13:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Steward requests/Permissions/Crat-header

Steward requests/Permissions/CU-header

Steward requests/Permissions/OS-header

I feel I can no longer discretefully perform tasks that are associated with administration in a community that propogates it's own interests above the privacy rights of individuals. Even though I respect anybody's opinion on that matter, I can not approve of this act of civil disobedience and therefor no longer wish to be associated to an organisation, in an administrative sense, that believes it's own values are more important than that of the individual. EvilFreD (talk) 19:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 24 hours as per standard practice. This request will be carried out tomorrow without any need for further communications, tho you are free to withdraw it at any time. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 19:52, 7 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Don't do this, EvilFreD.... Trijnstel _talk 20:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 06:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove the sysop bit and assign all rights I had before becoming administrator. It puzzles out that Wikimedia Foundation has intentionally installed a super-mistrust-the-community protection level and I am no longer inclined to carry out administrative activities during my spare time, including maintenance and replacing deprecated functionality. Either the scripts will break over time or they are removed. In the past, the Wikimedia Foundation software department has imposed new edit restrictions on adminstrators, so that we are no longer able to edit all pages (glamwiki namespace), we are no longer able to script Special:Preferences (the security claim is invalid). And at this Wikimania, I experienced that WMF has turned into a commercial enterprise with employees without own opinion (there are exceptions and I am glad I met them) or motivation to seriously test the tools they advertise their own; some even have never contributed an edit to any Wikimedia project. This felt unnatural. -- I believe contributors should help interested parties getting started with new projects, teach them how to use Wikimedia Projects, and not paid professionals.

I came to Commons and became administrator because it gave me great freedom, trust and confidence. I now decide not to tolerate the drop in freedom, trust and confidence; doing the tedious work only and leaving all other decisions to paid WMF agents.

Finally I disagree with Foundation's criticism of the right to be forgotten. This position doesn't fit into my European Culture. Rillke (talk) 22:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Hi, I enjoyed getting the chance to meet you this past week and believe you should reconsider, or at least wait until this whole situation blows over. If it bugs you that much, just stop editing. Legoktm (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

PS, disabling scripting on Special:Preferences is a legit security claim since a user's email is displayed on the page, and was done back in 2007 (rev:22008) by a volunteer, nonetheless.

Hey Legoktm, Enjoyed meeting you as well and want to thank you for the globaluserjs/-css :)

• Editing and coding: Of course I'll continue to, though I won't do the boring work at Commons as long as this issue is in place. And when the super-duper-protection is eventually removed, it's a good time for checking whether I still have the community's trust through an election, which is also a good place to get feedback. QA process.
• Security: If one wants a user's e-mail address, one does:

  $.get('/wiki/Special:Preferences')
  .done(function(p){
  console.log($(p)
  .find('.mw-email-authenticated')
  .text());
  });
  

  or meta=userinfo&uiprop=email. And if e-mail is considered private, I don't know why MW went for Bugzilla in the first place. I was almost sure site script was disabled later (late 2011/2012) on special:preferences but not so sure about it. Commit messages in this time are too trashy to search them. -- Rillke (talk) 00:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for at least 24 hours (per standard practice), possibly more (at the actioning steward's discretion). FYI, we cannot assign any rights on Commons (except CU/OS, but that's not the case here) - you will either need to ask an admin, or add the rights to yourself before the flag is removed. --Rs chen 7754 01:14, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I can commit to making sure Rillke gets all the local permissions on Commons that he needs. odder (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I'd say on hold until a statement by WMF on the current situation was published and we all had same time to think about it. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Meaning "old hold forever"? Vogone (talk) 10:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

No, a statement was announced for the next few days. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:40, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

The statement is there. Consequently, please proceed with the removal of the sysop bit in the planned schedule. -- Rillke (talk) 11:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I have reassigned, and upgraded Rillke's Commons rights with my Commons admin hat. I feel that I should recuse from the stewardry component as it is one of my 'home' wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done - thanks for your appreciable efforts over the years. QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you, all. -- Rillke (talk) 16:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove the central notice access. I think I am not going to organize next year's Picture of the Year. And personally, banners are not a good UX, I think: Distraction from content and education and banner blindness are non-neglectable side effects. Rillke (talk) 22:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I think that's a Meta crat responsibility, but I'll leave this open since there's enough Meta crats who come by. --Rs chen 7754 04:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done admin giveth, admin taketh away  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Due to our inactivity policy (criterion #3), I hereby request the removal of administrator rights from the aforementioned users. They have all been listed in the previous inactivity run and failed to perform the required number of admin actions in the past six months (see exact statistics). Thank you! odder (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

All done. Please thank them for their service. — TBloemink _talk 19:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

@TBloemink: Thank you! I have now contacted all those users and left them short notes, thanking for their service to the Commons community. odder (talk) 20:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove administrator privileges from the account of Zscout370. In response to a de-adminship warning e-mail that I sent them after the start of the current Commons admin inactivity run, they asked that their adminship be revoked due to lack of time. Thank you! odder (talk) 06:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done. -- Menti fisto 07:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

This user has been inactive for more 1 year and still has no edits for 1 month after reminding. Per our local policy the sysop and bureaucratic flags should be removed. Thank you.--Calak (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 07:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Been inactive for some time now, haven't had time to edit let alone use the other tools. --GoEThe (talk) 13:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Forgot: Please remove bureaucrat flags. Don't mind if you remove other flags as well. --GoEThe (talk) 13:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold - on hold until 13:18, 15 August 2014 (normal practice). QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done. Removed bureaucrat flag on ptwiki. Thank you for your work. Sa vh ^ñ 21:07, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

I decided to leave after reading this wikimedia-l thread. Please remove my admin status. — Revi_complaint? 15:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 16:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Withdrawn. — Revi_complaint? 07:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Same as above. — Revi_complaint? 15:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 16:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Bye :( Jianhui67 ^{talk ★contribs} 16:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Withdrawn. — Revi_complaint? 07:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Same as above. — Revi_complaint? 15:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 16:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Withdrawn. — Revi_complaint? 07:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Same as above. — Revi_complaint? 15:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 16:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Withdrawn. — Revi_complaint? 07:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove bureaucrat and sysop flags per Site administration policy. Pavlo Shevelo has voluntarily leaved the organisation, and thus is not an Audit Committee member anymore. Thanks — NickK (talk) 22:40, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done SPQRobin (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove my sysop/bureaucrat privileges on all wiki projects that I have. I have been away from Wikipedia for too long, and other wikipedians have taken over. misos (talk) 07:38, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please note at Admin activity review/2013/Data when this (and all requests below from this user) are done. --Rs chen 7754 13:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Same as above. 07:38, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Same as above. misos (talk) 07:38, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:50, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Please remove my sysop and checkuser flag on de:Wikipedia. Thank you. --Drahreg01 (talk) 13:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

It is allready on hold for two days. See the linked discussion above. Thank you. --Drahreg01 (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Sure, I'll remove it back home (in about 3 hours) where I can update all relevant pages more easily. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

This admin has not made any edits since 20th November 2013 and has got a notice about inactivity 7th July 2014, but has'nt made any edits since. Regards --Asger (talk) 09:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC) [reply ]

Steward requests/Permissions/Misc-header

Steward requests/Permissions/Footer

• Steward requests

• Pages using deprecated source tags
• Pages using deprecated enclose attributes