Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

==== 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

now ready to take admin rights in orwiki --Srikant Kedia 11:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold until 9 April. Trijnstel_talk 17:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Passed 5-0. Will expire in one year. MBisanz ^talk 16:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I ask for expanding administrator rights on my account. Current administrator is inactive for a long time. Maintenance work is needed. I make usually contributions there. I'm also an administrator at eu.wikipedia. - Joxemai (talk) 08:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for a week, until April the 11th, to allow for the community to comment :) Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 08:44, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary adminship expiring on 11th, requesting to grant permanent adminship --Subhashish Panigrahi (talk) 08:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please open a new RFA on your project. Permanent adminship will be granted if there are enough active users. Bencmq (talk) 08:31, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold until 16th April. Bencmq (talk) 08:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steward requests/Permissions/Crat-header

Steward requests/Permissions/CU-header

M:RFH and User talk:DerHexer. User was already an oversighter link. Uncontroversial re-granting. --Barras talk 15:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -Barras talk 15:14, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Typo fixed, and welcome back DerHexer! The Helpful One 16:47, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing anything in the policy about the edits per 6 months, only about the one year thing. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 07:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done --FiliP ██ 07:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To answer Snowolf - usual Wikibooks policy stuff - this isn't Wikipedia so you can't expect precision!

The two relevant sections from the policy page are in two separate paragraphs:

"Sysops who do not meet any activity expectations (detailed below), or those who break policy, or those who abuse their powers, can be nominated for de-adminship at the Wikibooks:Requests for permissions page."

"Administrators are expected to be active (see Sysop activity on Wikibooks). There are no hard and fast definitions on what it means to be "active" but a good guideline is to have at least 20 edits in the last year and 1 edit within the past month. Even this might not be enough, if administrator privileges have not been used (or not been used correctly) within the past year."

The reasonable interpretation of that is that inactivity is a combination of 20 edits in the last year AND 1 edit within the last month AND some use of the sysop bit in the last year.

Me, I don't care that much and have no problem letting Swift keep the bit forever. However, after a couple of emails and no response to the talk page I'm following normal practice of de-privileging accounts that may be at future risk of compromise due to an inactive owner. Cheers QU ^TalkQu 07:33, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, the policy mandates automatic desysoppal without notification and need for consensus only for accounts completely inactive for one full year, which, with 11 edits during the past year, Swift is not. Now he's clearly inactive, hasn't used the tools in forever, etc., but my impression was that there was a requirement for consensus to remove for inactivity without the automatic clause ("Sysops who are especially inactive, specifically for at least one year or longer, can be removed without a consensus discussion."), which a simple notice by yourself without anybody else commenting on it clearly cannot fullfill. That said, as Dungodung clearly interprets the policy differently and has performed a desysop, it's a mute issue. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 07:41, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do think it is important actually. The smaller projects (and I'm sure this is generally true) haven't spent years and hundreds of editors contributions to writing policies that would stand up in a court of law. For this reason you do have to rely somewhat on previous interpretation of the policy instead of trying to create a new interpretation every time. In this case (and I got bored at three) you can see previous de-sysops one (...while this user was active as recently as September, they have made less than 20 edits in the past year and not used the tools in a year, fulfilling both definitions of inactivity according to the policy) and two (...the below administrators / bureaucrats have been inactive for one year or longer besides a few spare edits.) and three (...'Fewer than 20 edits in the last year, no edit in the last month. Admin tools used only once in the past year) as examples of previous application of the same policy. Two of these had one "supporter" only by the way which was me. It's pretty normal for nobody to oppose or support an inactivity de-sysop. Incidentally, we're probably going to need to tighten up a load of the policy wordings at WB simply because this issue of "intepretation" keeps coming up. Cheers QU ^TalkQu 08:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pursuant to the English Wikipedia ArbCom's procedures for the emergency removal of permissions, please desysop this editor on en.wikipedia. I will ask one of my two concurring colleagues to visit here to verify this request. For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 15:38, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will wait a few moments to see if a non-enwiki steward is around. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 15:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming as another arbitrator; please note that I have emailed an apparently active bureaucrat and this may be taken care of shortly. Hersfold non-admin (talk) 15:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -Barras talk 15:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Removal_of_permissions Level I procedures the Committee are asking for an emergency desysop of User:Centrx on the English Wikipedia. The Committee can be emailed on arbcom-llistswikimediaorg for confirmation. SilkTork (talk) 15:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming SilkTork's request. We're just doing the paperwork now and will be posting on the Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard in the near future. Thank you. Risker (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Barras, thanks for handling this so promptly. AGK [•] 12:28, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, remove bureaucrat access. This user was elected in April 2011 for a one year term, which expired today.‴ T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 00:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Mentifisto 01:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, remove bureaucrat access. This user was elected in April 2011 for a one year term, which expired today.‴ T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 00:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Mentifisto 01:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, remove bureaucrat access. This user was elected in April 2011 for a one year term, which expired today.‴ T_ele^s (T _{@ L C S}) 00:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Mentifisto 01:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He left korean wikipedia and gave up his sysop access. (오늘 부로 저의 관리자 권한을 포기하며) --Skrewbar (talk) 05:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold for 24 hours, to allow for the user to reconsider his decision should he decide to do so. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 05:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it would be best if the user himself confirms that he wishes to give up their sysop flag. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 05:03, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop this request. There isn't any talk of his flag removal. Kowiki community must follow 'guideline'. Removal of sysop flag can't be done by personal request. ko:위키백과:관리자 권한 회수 --Park4223 _(TALK) 15:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if kowiki's sysop wants to give up his flag, he must request to steward himself. If other user wants to remove his flag, we must talk at least 1 week and we vote. This is not right request. Please stop. Best regards --Park4223 _(TALK) 16:19, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He want to give up his flag. (메타에 요청해서 관리자 권한 회수하시고, 뭐 이 계정에 시험삼아 차단하고 싶으시면 차단도 하세요. 더 이상 한국어 위키백과에 미련 없습니다.)

Request meta and removing my sysop flag, and if you want block me, do block. I don't have any feelings left for korean wikipedia.

Please remove his flag. Best regards--22:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done Sorry but none of us can understand Korean, without a confirmation from RedMosQ himself I think it's better to avoid any removal. --Vituzzu (talk) 23:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove import access as the bot is not active since 2008. A notification is posted in the village pump. --Ciphers (talk) 05:06, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Daniel Mayer (mav) (talk) 22:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steward requests/Permissions/Misc-header

I would like en:Template:Coord and all its sub-templates to be imported on chy.w. Thanks you, I may have other imports to do in the near future, so if there is a way to give me import rights so I can use the Special:Import page, please do so. I have use this tool before on another wiki and there is no local administrator or bureaucrat. Amqui (talk) 00:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please make a local announcement. Bencmq (talk) 01:29, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sure I will, but I doubt anybody has the Community Portal in their watchlist since it's still a red link. Amqui (talk) 01:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There it is : [1]. I've put the link now since I'm not sure how long it should be there for that type of request. Amqui (talk) 01:45, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steward requests/Permissions/Footer