Steward requests/Global permissions/2013-08

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Very active in the SWMT now and am very much so lacking in my ability to help combat vandalism. I've had this bit in the past. Thanks, Razor flame 13:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

& That goes a bit fast. --MF-W 14:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

True, this request was a bit fast, but I'm finding myself more and more handicapped in fighting cross-wiki vandalism. I've had this bit in the past. Is there anything that I've done that shows that I cannot handle this bit again? Razor flame 14:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Don't you think it would have been appropriate to provide continuous activity before requesting this tool again, especially since this was mentioned in your last SRGP? I will not oppose here as your recent activity is quite impressive, but I also share MF-W's concern. Vogone talk 14:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought that my activity has been continuous? Yeah, that is something that I was specifically working on, but I'm not sure why you worded your comment that way? Have I not been active enough? Razor flame 14:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't feel I can count activity in 2010 + 1 week of activity now as continuous. :-P Vogone talk 14:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I guess that is your prerogative :) Razor flame 14:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Support Support I personally have no problem with this request, but maybe you should have waited a little longer. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Support Support, still. This is no big deal and I don't see a reason for him to not have this flag. - Hoo man (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose Oppose My oppose last time was on maturity and attitude, not activity, and that just doesn't change in a week. Courcelles 15:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support - Per last time, no concerns with how he'd use the bit. If this were a request for gs then I would have some concerns with attitude per some of his responses on the last request, but this is a request for rollback. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Support, per his experience with the tool and recent activity. LlamaAl (talk) 17:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose per Courcelles. Your statement didn't address whether the issues of the last request weren't going to reappear.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

  You're right. I forgot to mention both of those points in my statement for this request. Here's my addendum: I don't think I've treated anyone in a disparaging manner in this request, and I do not believe that I am being combative like I was the last time. I might still be replying to some comments on this request, but all replies to comments made in this request have been in a normal, mannered tone of voice with no hint of attitude. As for attitudes, I believe that they are easily changed over the course of a week, and I believe I have made the correct attitude adjustment since my previous request. As for the maturity, I cannot really say if anything has changed because I cannot tell if what I am doing is what others would consider to be the mature thing. What I'm trying to say is this: I don't know what others think of me because it is something that I lack. With that being said, I believe that I am mature enough to handle the bit, with any residual maturity issues being worked out in the interim. I don't believe that the residual maturity issues will hamper my judgement when it comes to my judgement in terms of what is appropriate or not in terms of whether or not to revert, but I do want to say this: I've been fighting vandalism on Wikimedia projects using the local rollback tools since 2008. I specialized in fighting vandalism on the English Wikpiedia using the Huggle tool when I was still active on that project, and I believe that when I was active on that project, I had a chance to possibly become a vandalism-only administrator on that project. I've also used the rollback tool on the Simple English Wikipedia since 2008, and while I did make some questionable reverts over my time period on that project, those questionable reverts happened over the course of when I first got the bit and first started fighting vandalism. I've also been a sysop and a bureaucrat on the Simple English Wiktionary, and while I did have a few bumps in the road (I was still new to being an administrator), I smoothed those out and handled every situation on that project with poise and maturity, in my opinion. I've also had the global rollback tool three times in the past, and each of those times, I used it in the correct manner and was trusted with it. I don't know what has changed since then, but I think that I am being held up to a bit high of expectations. While maturity and trust are key for getting the global rollback tool, I believe that both of those criteria are met. I am speaking honestly here, and I am not trying to be combative. I hope this alleviates any concerns you might have about my ability to handle the global rollback tool. Razor flame 19:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support Support I am surprised that this is any controversial. He gave up his rights voluntarily and there's no reason he shouldn't be getting them back. -- Liliana • 21:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Support --cyrfaw (talk) 04:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose - Per Razorflame's combative behavior. Because global rollback affects so many small wikis that often go unwatched, those with global rollback must be able to demonstrate their ability to self-police and positively interact with members of a large variety of projects. Tiptoety ^talk 04:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

  I don't think there has been any combative behavior during this request for GRB. While I understand your concern, I've only had positive encounters with those in the smaller Wikimedia projects, and I'm sure you'd understand it more if you asked them about my behavior on their Wikimedia projects. Thanks, Razor flame 23:20, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Oppose Really sorry about this, and I think you mean well, but this is just too soon since the last request. :( For the record, I still don't have GR and I've made it just fine with global Twinkle. --Rs chen 7754 05:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
• Support Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Two requests in about one week plus the fact that Razorflame just got back from a rather extended wikibreak. I'd like to wait a bit longer. -Barras talk 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Weak oppose Although reverts are fine, this is just is too soon. --Glaisher [talk] 15:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Weak oppose per Glaisher--Steinsplitter (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

  Why does everyone think that this is too soon since my last request? I understand that it might be too soon since the last request, but what about the quickness of my requests shows that I wouldn't know how to use global rollback correctly? Razor flame 23:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support Support Rollback is no big deal. -FASTILY 00:12, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

  Not done as no consensus to promote emerged from the above discussion. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 11:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

because i want to do rollback in wikipedia,so i vant to have Global rollback .

• Oppose Not now I'm sorry, but global rollback requires considerably more cross-wiki vandalism fighting (meanwhile, you can use User:Snowolf/How to globally TWINKLE), and Wikimedia experience in general (under 500 global edits).--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
• & at 468 global edits, you are far too inexperienced for this userright, and failed to provide a compelling rationale for it too. Please check back on the GR policy's requirements for the permission to be granted. If you are interested in antivandalism, I would advise you to start working or keep working on it on zh_yue wiki (your homewiki) until you have significantly more experience and then join the SWMT helping out on other wikis. Only with significant and heavy use of reverts cross-wiki you should request this userright. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 07:59, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose, obvious, as per above. -Barras talk 16:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose per all above--Steinsplitter (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose per above, global rollback needs experience. --Rs chen 7754 17:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose per above. However, I concur with the idea of you getting it in 6 months after good hard work of vandalism reverting and great editing. Best. WorldTraveller101 (talk) 20:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

---

• Not done, long-term abuse. --Bencmq (talk) 03:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

In de:wiki and en:wiki I'm already rollback. I actually just need the right to move sites without creating redirects (suppressredirect), because I'm moving sites in de:wiki (35.000+ edits) very often and have to request speedy deletions for the useless redirects. If it's possible to get just this right, I'd be very happy; if it's not, I would also be happy, if I'd although get the global rollback right; it would be a great help. In de:wiki I'm a mentor and I'm cleaning up vandalism. Regards --CherryX (talk) 21:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support Support -jkb- 23:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC) - CherryX is a qualified user whom can be simply trusted who I know very well from dewiki.
• Oppose Oppose This rationale is outside the remit of global rollback, which is cross-wiki counter-vandalism.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:13, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose out of scope; GR is not a substitute for dewiki adminship. --Rs chen 7754 02:07, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - Out of the global rollback scope, per above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
• Is there any chance to get the right without being a global rollbacker? --CherryX (talk) 07:13, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

  My primary suggestion would be for you to obtain local adminship on the German Wikipedia. Unless the local community decides to create a separate right, that's your only option at this time.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

  @CherryX: Auf der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia existiert ein seit 2010 eingeschlafenes Meinungsbild zu diesem Thema. Wenn du es wieder „erwecken" und durchbringen könntest, hätten alle Sichter auf dewiki dieses Recht. Grüße, Vogone talk 15:38, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Mh... allen Sichtern dieses Recht zu geben, halte ich nicht für besonders geschickt; da sollte man dann doch noch eine Art Zwischenstufe einführen (ähnlich wie bei Artikeln gesichtete und überprüfte Versionen – leider wurde auch das abgelehnt). --CherryX (talk) 18:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Es geht nicht dass jeder der supressredirect benötigt GR bekommt. Da muss imho ein MB auf dewp gestartet werden um es auf dewp lokal zu ermöglichen. Siehe Vogone.--Steinsplitter (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Could anybody please translate the last three messages into English for greater understanding by voters and readers? Thank you in advance. Tokvo (talk) 00:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

This is about evaluating possibilities of granting the suppressredirect right to local groups on dewiki. --MF-W 00:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Oppose Not in the scope of the permission, per different users above. Ovkot | Replying messages here 01:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose per above --cyrfaw (talk) 12:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Oppose out of scope.--Steinsplitter (talk) 17:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done There is no consensus. --MF-W 18:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Because of the Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China and Great Firewall of China, I can't access to Wikimedia Projects some page directly, so I need to use proxy to edit the Wikimedia Projects. Also ,the foundation decided force log-in on https([1]) and the https of wikipedia in China has been blocked.I need the permission of Global IP block exempt reasonably.

I have 30,449 edits in zhwp and hava local IP exempt in zhwp. --Cwek (talk) 06:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not have any objections. Ruslik (talk) 08:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 13:01, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Because of the Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China and Great Firewall of China, I can't access to Wikimedia Projects some page directly, so I need to use proxy to edit the Wikimedia Projects.--Makivan1733 (talk) 06:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

You would be better to ask first for a local permission on the zh-yue wiki. Ruslik (talk) 06:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Kegns is looking into possible abuse. --Bencmq (talk) 17:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Due to internet censorship in China, many wikimedia project sites are blocked. I can use proxies to access some sites, but usually I cannot edit because IP is blocked. I currently had 5493 edits and IP exemption on Chinese wp. I want to participate more in other wikimedia projects, so I'd like to request a global IP exemption.--朝鲜的轮子 (talk) 02:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 12:25, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Because of the Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China and Great Firewall of China, I can't access to Wikimedia Projects some page directly, so I need to use proxy to edit the Wikimedia Projects.Chaosconst (talk) 07:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not have any objections despite the limited number of edits. Ruslik (talk) 12:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 17:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stewards,

(I'm sysop on wp:fr)

It appears that i cannot use my account over my IP address (in 91.121.0.0/16) (explanation: Open proxy: + spam from 91.121.244.232) for edition on several wikis, including Commons and Wikidata. I use this IP address as a squid server, through a SSH tunnel to avoid different restrictions from my work places or public access points. It also increases the security of my personnal informations in several cases of use.

Like i'm the owner and only maintener of the server, there is no risk of spam or abuse from this IP address.

FYI, I've already asked for a exemption here and the initial block was changed. But another user had reblocked the range...

Kindly regards, --Creasy (talk) 14:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

fait --MF-W 17:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

ChrStein uses a VPN service when online for privacy and security reasons but cannot edit Wikipedia due to some of the used IPs being globally blocked as open proxies. He therefore requested being exempted from IP blocks via OTRS (ticket:2013082310012441). He has +50 contributions on dewiki (though he might also wish to edit other Wikis which is why I am putting this here). Thanks in advance, — Pajz (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Please move the ticket to the stewards queue. --MF-W 21:17, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

ticket:2013082310013976, — Pajz (talk) 23:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 18:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello - I use "teksavvy" for internet and have done so for a long time. Apparently it was blocked for being a "leaky ISP". I have a longish edit history with en.wiki and would really appreciate being exempted from the IP blocks. Thanks, --M.thoriyan (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Since 99% of your edits are on enwiki, I recommend you seek a local IP block exempt. --MF-W 20:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

A local IPBE was granted. --MF-W 01:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Since you do not even have a global account at the moment (visit en:Special:MergeAccount to get that), it's not possible to give you a global IP block exemption. Please see en:WP:IPEC for information about getting a local one on the English Wikipedia (if you also want to edit other projects, a global one can be considered when you got a global account). --MF-W 01:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

A local IPBE was granted. --MF-W 02:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I have been working on a project in collaboration with Translators Without Borders to translate high quality, top importance medical articles from English to as many other languages as possible. We have currently translated 2.2 million words into about 50 languages. While I would prefer to have local Wikipedian's add the content in question and am recruiting people for the languages for which we do not have people, I have been adding some of the article myself. CAPTCHA gets in the way. An overview of the project is here. Our progress is here. Many thanks for the consideration. Rumor is this can be done. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support - Looks like a fantastic project. Shouldn't be a problem to remove a technical constraint for an obviously trusted user. Ajraddatz (Talk) 03:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
• Strong support - Trusted, very well-known editor. I can't imagine this being a problem. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

  Done It does not seem to be a controversial request. Ruslik (talk) 03:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2013-08&oldid=19957563"

Categories:

• Talk archives
• Steward requests archive/Global permissions

Hidden category:

• Noindexed pages