Jump to content

Steward requests/Permissions/2013-07

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests | Permissions
Latest comment: 11 years ago by MBisanz in topic Removal of access

Administrator access

Latest comment: 11 years ago16 comments9 people in discussion

GabTHAT@ace.wikipedia

Status:    Not done

Acehnese Wikipedia is local community, but there is no administrator. I want to be as an administrator, please grant me as administrator. Thanks in advance. GabTHAT (talk) 07:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment This was set on hold by the requestor, which seems appropriate per the other acewiki requests. --MF-W 13:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Not done as there is high suspicion of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry from the voters and possibly the candidates. In light of the recent sockpuppet abuse from Si Gam on acewiki, we cannot grant the sysop bit to any of these users. Elfix 21:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Do you have a proof? -- Si Gam (talk) 18:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
We performed IP checks onto the voters and the candidates since we already suspected sockpuppet abuse. The results make us think we definitely should not grant the sysop accesses, especially knowing what happened on this wiki two months ago. Elfix 18:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Which accounts? And which problem that happened 2 months ago? -- Si Gam (talk) 11:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
How can you prove that in our request there is a thing that must be suspected?-- Ayie7791 (talk) 02:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
CheckUser. --MF-W 17:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Salvador_alc@mx.wikimedia

Status:    Done

I'm requesting this permission for an official Wikimedia Chapter page. We have a lack of active administrators there and they are needed for reactivate the page and change access permissions for those who become chapter members. I'm board member and others admins [1] agree with this request. I hope this is the correct page for this sort of submission. Thank you Salvador (WMMX) (talk) 05:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to make the local bureaucrats fulfill this request? --MF-W 13:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Only one is active, but is possible. I will tell him. Salvador (WMMX) (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Supporting this request. Regards, --ProtoplasmaKid (WM-MX) (talk) 21:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Done --MF-W 21:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Region190@bxr.wikipedia

Status:    Not done

I request the permission of temporary sysop (for 6 months)--Region190 (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done No consensus. Ruslik (talk) 19:22, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Why? 66,67% pro. This vandals Soul Train and Дядя Фред don't want development of Buryat Wikipedia and write about my violation in RUSSIAN Wikipedia!! And as far as I know one from the other independent. There were not links to my violations in Buryat Wikipedia, and only called them in schoolboy and Buryat nationalist.--Region190 (talk) 04:04, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

CheckUser access

Latest comment: 11 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

INeverCry@commonswiki

Status:    Done

INeverCry is elected as CU on Commons. The RfCU was closed by bureaucrat Russavia. Putting it  On hold since INeverCry is not yet identified. Trijnsteltalk 10:54, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

This candidacy is a close call (60:16 fails the 80 percent margin). As Trijnstel was heavily involved in support of this candidacy, I request that a different stewart handles this case. Thanks, Stefan64 (talk) 16:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Trijnstel may not handle this request because Commons is (one of) her homewiki(s). She merely brought the request here. --MF-W 16:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Exactly. And Stefan64, you forgot to mention "subject to the normal bureaucrat discretion" & they decided it's a succesfull request. Trijnsteltalk 16:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
"Putting it on hold" is a steward's task, not normally done by someone who makes a request here. And yeah, bureaucrat discretion. Good that commons:user:Russavia is banned only on english wikipedia but not on commons. Stefan64 (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
It may indeed be typically done by stewards, but is not reserved to them as it imposes no change on the status quo. See e.g. the section above for GabTHAT@acewiki where a non-steward marked his own request as on hold.
This request is done; the support ratio meets the checkuser policy and apparently the 80% mentioned on Commons are not an absolute minimum required by local policy. --MF-W 00:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Btw the "putting on hold" cannot affect final decision at all, so, again, Trijnstel did anything than a simple "FYI" to her colleagues. --Vituzzu (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Damzow@hewiki

Status:    Done

Second election (35/1/0 → 97,2%) as the first one wasn't compatible with the global CU policy (< 25 votes). Done. Trijnsteltalk 14:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Oversight access

Removal of access

Latest comment: 11 years ago91 comments38 people in discussion

Matheus Sousa@pt-br.wikipedia

Status:    Not done

(your remarks)muitos artigos da wiki portugues estão em sutaques muito diferentes muits gente não entende ai se criarem esta wiki coloco na versão portugues brasil que tem o total de 200milhões de falantes agradeçoPlease macker crat for wiki PorfavorMatheus Sousa (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, what is your request? You have no rights that could be removed. This is not the place to complain about the degree of the usage of Brazilian Portuguese on pt.wikipedia. --MF-W 23:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Note: I now locked this user because of this and this. --MF-W 00:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Bean49@hu.wikipedia

Status:    Done

You could replace with trusted rights because of flagged revisions. Regards, --Bean49 (talk) 10:53, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bean49, you should ask your local bureaucrats to give you the 'trusted' flag instead. If that's ok, I'll remove your sysop bit in a short while. --Bencmq (talk) 02:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
It's ok. --Bean49 (talk) 08:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Done --Bencmq (talk) 13:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, --Bean49 (talk) 15:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

דורית@he.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove my sysop rights. Thanks, דורית (talk) 08:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Done, thank you for your service as an administrator and bureaucrat. --Bencmq (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Bencmq. דורית (talk) 11:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

quatar@it.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Request for removal of my sysop flag. I've not been using it for months and I don't plan to use it in the near future. On it.wiki we have the removal by inactivity rule after 6 months: I'm just shortening the terms. Quatar (talk) 09:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Done -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Spanish Wiktionary

Korocotta@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Sysop, que no usa los botones desde hace más de 8 años.Por favor solicito que retiren esos permisos. --Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Translation: "Inactive administrator for more than eight years. I request that the user be desysopped." —translated by -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:40, 3 July 2013 (UTC).
Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Please point to a local consensus on the rights removal. --MF-W 11:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
If no vote has been opened, I would advise you to open one for removing the sysop rights of every account you listed here. You can also use the same vote to create a local inactivity policy, which would make the life easier in the future. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
es.wiktionary agreed to abide by Admin activity review (see here for the agreement made into policy), so that constitutes their inactivity policy. They should follow the procedure of that page IMHO. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:40, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
The first sentence of that section states that the Spanish Wiktionary doesn't have an official inactivity policy. LlamaAl (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
That's contradictory:
  1. They title the quoted section as Policy.
  2. In the first para they say they do not have an inactivity policy for, subsequently, say that they accept Admin activity review ("pero acepta acogerse a la política de Wiki-Media en general").
So IMHO they do have an inactivity policy, the Meta one, which is no less policy than if it were created locally. After all they voted and agreed to abide by the meta one. AAR is apparently in the final phase of writting so we could soon start the process, hopefully. As for this requests, perhaps they should not be processed until AAR has gone live? -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
MarcoAurelio is correct. So, es.wiktionary has no individual policy by itself, but abides by the rules adopted by Meta. That is in itself a policy, so it is not a contradiction. Whatever policy Meta ends up adopting, that's our policy. Why does Wiktionary.es not enforce an inactivity policy of its own? Because it does not have enough active users willing to do it. It is a small community, which mostly focuses on creating and maintaining main entries, not dealing with policy. See activity in the Café there. For our final decision, see: this, For our discussions of the matter (in Spanish), see this. --Edgefield (talk) 03:30, 14 July 2013 (UTC) (admin in es.Wikctionary)
Pybalo@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than eight years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
ManuelGR@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than seven years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Ppfk@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than seven years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Javier Carro@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than six years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Polyglot@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than four years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Piolinfax@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than two years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Rrmsjp@es.wiktionary
Status:    Not done

Inactive administrator for more than two years. I request that the user be desysopped.--Leitoxx (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment Comment. There is no inactivity policy on the Spanish Wiktionary. LlamaAl (talk) 01:12, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm closing this as Not done for now. While it is true that the project agreed to use Admin activity review and only that, the policy does not simply decrees an automatic removal of permissions, but a procedure that must be followed which has not been done here (notifications to community and to those right holders who risk loosing their rights). The admin inactivity round will start soon globally (hopefully) and we will take care of all inactive folks in one strike. Any steward should feel free to reopen this should (s)he feels it is not the correct decision. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Tomerbot@he.wikiquote

Status:    Done

This user isn't active for almost 4 years. I am the active local 'crat in he.wikiquote, and started a process to remove sysop rights from users who aren't active. The community is very small and not very active, so I can't see why to bother them with a vote. I can ask the other 'crat to express here his opinion if this is necessary.

Another thing: the purpose of this account was to be a bot. I already removed the bot flag since it wasn't active for the last few years. Broccoli • talk page 22:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Done because it was an inactive bot. Ruslik (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Broccoli • talk page 23:06, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Rotemliss@he.wiktionary

Status:    Done

Please remove my sysop rights. --– rotemliss – Talk 06:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Matanya (talk) 23:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Polish Wikiquote

Danielm@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Kaariokaa@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Matt@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
MatthiasGor@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Meteor2017@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Pickett@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Pimke@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Slawojar@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
TOR@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Trivelt@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done
Tsca@pl.wikiquote
Status:    Done

Please remove the inactive users from administrator flags. Mrnr84201 (talk) 11:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 01:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

MABot@eswikibooks

Status:    Done

I'm the operator. The need for the sysop flag has ended. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 14:19, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Fæ@ukwikimedia

Status:    Done

Former WMUK board member, please remove bureaucrats rights only. Thanks -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Abiyoyo@ruwikipedia

Status:    Not done

Please, remove sysop flag. Reason: retired. Thanx.--Abiyoyo (talk) 12:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

To the stewards: please wait a while, as his deadminship is being discussed by the AC. If the arbiters decide in favour of desysop, then the bureaucrats of ruwiki can carry it out. Regarding the desysop at his request, I suppose we should let him think a little time to measure up all consequences, maybe a couple of days. --David (talk) 19:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I would like to ask stewards to process this request in regular fashion. Deliberations in ArbCom was never a reason to deny voluntarial desysop because ArbCom can always decide whatever user can return his flag throughout regular procedure or he need to wait for some time as desysoped user. Moreover, Abiyoyo really needs to cool down: just look at his block-log: he was blocked, than unblock himself with rude comment, make some edits, block himself indefinitely and apply here. I think it would be best to carry his request ASAP.--176.37.55.83 20:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
If cooling down is the aim, then postponing the fulfilment of his request might be the most rational act in this case. IMO, Abiyoyo should wait until the decision for his case is made and see if possible sanctions (surely in case if he would not be deadminshipped) are convenient for him. Not to say I'm defending whomever, but hasty actions are never for the better. --Niklem (talk) 20:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
You are right. Let me wait for the sentence. That would be even more worthy. Aliquando tamen, etiam si certa mors instabit et destinatum sibi supplicium sciet, non commodabit poenae suae manum: sibi commodaret. Stultitia est timore mortis mori: venit qui occidat, exspecta. Quid occupas? quare suscipis alienae crudelitatis procurationem? utrum invides carnifici tuo an parcis? Socrates potuit abstinentia finire vitam et inedia potius quam veneno mori; triginta tamen dies in carcere et in exspectatione mortis exegit, non hoc animo tamquam omnia fieri possent, tamquam multas spes tam longum tempus reciperet, sed ut praeberet se legibus, ut fruendum amicis extremum Socraten daret. Quid erat stultius quam mortem contemnere, venenum timere? -- Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, LXX.--Abiyoyo (talk) 21:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

This request is on hold, per standard practice for resignations, until at least 12:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC). --MF-W 01:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I revoke my reuest according to a reason stated above in 21:43, 16 July 2013 post. Once again sorry for inconvinience.--Abiyoyo (talk) 10:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done then. --MF-W 14:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

User jomegat@en.wikibooks

Status:    Done

I have been an admin at en.Wikibooks for a pretty long time, but it has been months since I have been active there. I still pop in from time to time, but not to perform admin functions. It would probably be better to lay aside my sysop rights until the time comes (if it comes at all) that I can return to active duty. --Jomegat (talk) 00:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Thanks for your admin work in 6 years! --MF-W 12:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

User cvmontuy@es.wiktionary

Status:    Done

I have no longer the time to be a sysop or burocrat, pelase revoke my sysop and bourocrat flags. --Cvmontuy (talk) 04:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Thank you for all your works. ✒ Bennylin 12:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Liangent@zh.wikisource

Status:    Done

Liangent's permission should be only one month, it had already expired. --Zhxy 519 (talk) 15:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

done --MF-W 12:03, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Lavallen@sv.wikisource

Status:    Done

Thanks! --Lavallen 08:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I presume you are requesting the removal of your admin rights - please confirm. Meanwhile, on hold for 24 hours. QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Since I am not a crat, that is normally the only right you are supposed to remove from meta! I added mywelf as autopatroller only a few minutes before I added this request. The autopatroller-right will provide all the tools I need at the activity-level I am today. -- Lavallen 10:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I know what we're supposed to do, but I didn't want to guess what you were asking for and then get it wrong! Thanks for confirming QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. Many thanks for your work as an administrator QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:36, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Јованвб@sh.wikipedia

Status:    Done

It's been a month since the vote. --Kolega2357 (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Ђорђе Д. Божовић@sh.wikipedia

Status:    Done

It's been a month since the vote. --Kolega2357 (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Bonzo@sh.wikipedia

Status:    Done

It's been a month since the vote. --Kolega2357 (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Done.—Teles «Talk to me ˱@ L C S˲» 23:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

FrankyLeRoutier@fr.Wikiversity

Status:    Done

Bonjour, j'estime que je n'ai plus la confiance de la communauté pour conserver ce statut. Merci. --FrankyLeRoutier (talk) 21:51, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Fait --MF-W 02:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Emperyan@tr.wikimedia

Status:    Done

--Emperyan-message/ileti-WMTR 14:11, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Done I am presuming that this is both the bureaucrat and administrator roles. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Emperyan@tr.wikinews

Status:    Done

--Emperyan-message/ileti-WMTR 14:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your time and efforts, good luck. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Erwin@nl.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove my bureaucrat and sysop rights. --Erwin (talk) 19:32, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Thanks for your efforts in that space, and the tools that you have been maintaining. I hope that we are not going to be losing you completely. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Janneman@dewiki

Status:    Done

Regards. --IusticiaBY (talk) 00:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. -Barras talk 10:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Wizardman@en.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I'm requesting removal of the oversight tool at enwiki. I rarely use oversight to begin with, and I'm dialing down my activity, so having it does not seem necessary, especially since I haven't been an Arb for years. --Wizardman (talk) 16:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Done thanks for your efforts and diligence in that role. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Mike Peel@ukwikimedia

Status:    Done

Former WMUK board member, please remove bureaucrats rights only. Thanks -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 09:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Done MBisanz talk 10:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)

Latest comment: 11 years ago53 comments21 people in discussion

Comp1089@kv.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hello. Today I received a note from Avraham saying that my temporary administrator access at kv.wikipedia is going to expire soon. I'd like to prolong it. Comp1089 (talk) 07:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

 On hold until 27th June. Bencmq (talk) 08:43, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-07-01. 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. -- Trijnsteltalk 10:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 21:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Steinsplitter@global

Status:    Done

In order to help with replacing files (due to CommonsDelinker being down) on small wikis. Temporary for two weeks. Expires on 1 July. Trijnsteltalk 20:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 21:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Zache@fiwikinews

Status:    Done

The community approved his adminship in late 2011. There was 3 votes for and none against. — str4nd ⇌ 17:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Done for one year. MBisanz talk 01:28, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Removed -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

MIKHEIL@ka.wikiquote

Status:    Done
Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-07-02. -- Jusjih (talk) 09:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! —Mikheil Talk 09:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Removed -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Tranminh360@vi.wikisource

Status:    Done

Currently we have 3 permanent sysops but are no longer active, Tranminh360 is a user that has been very active over the last 3 years and significantly contribute to the Wikisource project of Vietnamese community. We want him to be our permanent sysop not temporary one.Trongphu (talk) 04:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I understand how you feel but I do not think that there's enough support for a permanent sysop in that election. Snowolf How can I help? 12:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-07-02. 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. -- Snowolf How can I help? 12:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

You know it's annoying that he has to keep coming back here every 6 months to prolong his adminship? How many votes does he need to become a permanent sysop? This user from last year only got 8 votes and still became permanent sysop at vi.wikisource.Trongphu (talk) 21:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Honestly, each steward uses a slightly different metric. Personally, I go for temporary for everything below 5 supports from active community members on the specific project. This is however a ballpark figure, and there's not an exact yardstick, I'm afraid. Sorry. Snowolf How can I help? 21:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Doesn't seem fair to me. (I only has "3 votes" that made me become sysop of vi.wiktionary, well mainly because I'm a trusted user with great contribution from vi.Wikipedia) He got 10 votes now compare to 8 votes from User Mxn who became permanent sysop. PLease explain this? 10 votes obviously bigger than 8. Why can't he become a permanent sysop? Seriously, he as more contribution than all of the current 3 permanent sysops combined. I can't think of someone he deserves it more than him. I believe he will continue to take care of the project for at least few years from now according to his contribution over the last 3 years. So is that mean over the next few years, he just have to come back here and ask to prolong his adminship every 6 months? That's ridiculous. And are you trying to make a point that those votes are not from active users? Well that was the same deal with a person with 8 votes. Plus let me make a point here, Tranminh360 is pretty much the active loner on Wikisource. All the users that voted for him "all come from Wikipedia with significant contribution there", you can check it! It's not like some random newly users that cast the votes. They were all asked to vote for him and they all knew him somewhat through Wikipedia and trusted him and wanted him to be sysop. That's 10 votes from 10 active users from Vietnamese Wikipedia, many have thousands of edits. In Vietnamese community, we consider ourselves as 1 unit. So that's mean users from Wikipedia are just as same as users from Wikisource, Wiktionary, Wikibook... Personally I think temporary is stupid (no offend intended, if you trust him to become sysop then why only trust him for 6 months?). You should not judge on how many users are there in the community (it's irrelevant to whether or not he can be a good sysop) but you should judge on how great the contribution of an user (merit system always the best). You may argue a sysop is not needed for such a small project like vi.wikisource but as long as there is someone willing to work on it then I think sysop tools will always be needed sometimes. Why can't he just rely on global sysop or steward to do it? Simply answer is that in Vietnamese, we like to work by our own effort without relying on outsiders (doesn't mean we don't like to cooperate with outsiders). That is an old strong tradition. Sorry this rather looks like a long boring lecture, but I think I really disagree over your policy on sysop and trying to express my opinion. I'm not saying that my opinion is the best.Trongphu (talk) 04:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
To further proving my point here is another example, look at Farewell@vi.wikiquote, with only 2 votes from non-active users at vi.wikiquote. I guess other steward value merit more than you (no offend intended).Trongphu (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Bringing up an even older example is silly (and no steward would promote that user permanently today), if you want we can bring up examples for even before where no community vote or consensus was enough to grant permanent adminship at a steward's discretion :P Temporary adminship simply means that a user has to drop a note to the community every now and again and notify us that he's still active. No big deal. It's there to ensure that people are still active and retain the confidence of the community. You seem to be under this assumption that a temporary sysop is not 'trusted'. He is trusted, whether he is temporary or permanent is merely a judgement on the community's size. And while it's great that according to you there's great cooperation between the Vietnamese sister projects, each project has its own active userbase, and activity on project X doesn't make us one expert on project Y's internal matters. So no, with my meter, the promotion to permanent done in 2011 was perfect, just as the one to temporary right now has been. It's likely that at the next reconfirmation it will be extended to a yearly one anyway given the level of involvement. Snowolf How can I help? 10:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Well so is that mean he will never become permanent sysop even after many years from now? I don't think there should be a correlation between community size and lifespan of adminship, there aren't related issues. The matter that if he will still be active in the future or not can't simply be solve by granting temporary sysop. Permanent sysop or temporary sysop both have the right to stop being active whenever they want or maybe something happened in their real life so they have to stop doing it. You're right that each project has its own userbase but activity on all projects are pretty much the same thing (there is a little difference but not significant). I brought up some examples 2010 and 2011 because I don't think adminship policy has changed since 2010 (I do know sysops were super easy to get back in 2005 to 2007). Well you maybe right that stewards are being "more" picky over time (is that a good thing? Maybe yes or maybe not...). Just to be clear on something, there isn't a great cooperation between Vietnamese sister projects but user of each project does care about each others. We will involve in any sister project when there is something important like Rfa, issues and so on... Last question, what was perfect about the example of 2011 permanent sysop? To your definition of perfect then this one is even more perfect! (By the way, the votes have increased to 14, he can get a lot more votes if necessary. I can always call in more active users from vi.wikipedia. Everyone in Vietnamese Wikipedia as the whole simply just want him to be our permanent sysop.) Trongphu (talk) 22:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm guessing this discussion is not going anywhere. You are just too adamant on your belief on temporary sysop. I'm still think it is a bad idea to even have such a temporary sysop. We can agree to disagree then. Since you're steward and I'm not anywhere close to that so obviously you have more power so of course things will be the way you want it. User Tranminh360 seems being satisfy with being temporary sysop. I guess there is no reason for me to discussion here anymore but after all I feel like it is unfair for him. After all you haven't clearly explained to me the difference between 2011 permanent sysop and 2012 temporary sysop (the 2012 is obviously better in votes, why is it that 2012 ended up temporary?). Enjoy being steward sir!Trongphu (talk) 05:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The 2011 had more votes from active local users than the 2012 one :) Snowolf How can I help? 12:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Removed -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Viswaprabha@sa.wiktionary.org

Status:    Done

Please note that sa.wiktionary needs some housekeeping and at present, there are no administers for this project. I have been proposed and supported by the few active users there. Thank you. ViswaPrabha (വിശ്വപ്രഭ) (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Done Granted for 4 months to expire on 2013-07-02. To prolong your adminship, please come back a few days before the status expires to hold another local election. --MF-W 14:59, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Danish47@pnbwikipedia

Status:    Done

Hello, I have been working on Punjabi Wikipedia for almost 3 years. I also became a temporary admin for three months. I have started most pages on this wikipedia and I have also maintained a regular presence on this wikipedia. I have also contributed towards other projects of this language; wikiquote and wiktionary. Now I am requesting here for permanent adminiship on Punjabi Wikipedia. Thankyou Danish47 (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-07-03. I'm not sure if the community is large enough to give you permanent adminrights. As Khalid Mahmood (the only other admin) does have them though, I granted you them for the period of 1 year. Please come back then and maybe after 1 year the community has grown for permanent rights. -- Trijnsteltalk 10:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
removed by MA. Matanya (talk) 10:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Global editinterface for 99of9

Status:    Done

Note to the steward who will remove the rights : Please see Steward requests/Global permissions/2012-07#Global editinterface for 99of9. Trijnsteltalk 15:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

extended until 9 July 2014. Ruslik (talk) 16:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Etienfr@ast.wiktionary

Status:    Done

Posting request on user's behalf. On hold until the 10th April. Malafaya (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

In these circumstances we can only grant temporal sysop access (for three months). Ruslik (talk) 17:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I warned the user about that probability, and that he would have to renew it eventually. Can it be done then? Thank you, Malafaya (talk) 19:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-07-11. 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 22:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!!--Etienfr (talk) 09:49, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
removed Matanya (talk) 11:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Global editinterface for Jack Phoenix

Status:    Done

Note to the steward who will remove the rights : Please see Steward requests/Global permissions/2012-07#Global editinterface for Jack Phoenix. Trijnsteltalk 22:16, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Extended for 1 year through 2014-07-14 [3].--Jusjih (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

محمد الجداوي@ar.wiktionary

Status:    Done

Hello. I was granted a temporary access that will end in 15 July. I demand extension of my adminship.M.Gedawy Talk 06:04, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

 On hold until 18 July. Trijnsteltalk 15:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Please note that my username has changed to "Avocato".--Avocato (talk) 17:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
User Avocato currently does have sysop rights on ar.wiktionary. Pundit (talk) 18:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
@Pundit: Correct, he got that in January for 6 months. Now he asks for an extension. Trijnsteltalk 21:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing it out. Since it is a non-technical request, and since I don't speak the language, I'd rather refer this case to more experienced stewards. Pundit (talk) 22:32, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-07-19. 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. -- Trijnsteltalk 21:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.--Avocato (talk) 05:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 04:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Mahdiz@fa.wiktionary

Status:    Done

Per above discussion I would like to request six month temporary (which could be extended upon the request) adminship for the user Mardetanha talk 15:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-07-21. --Bencmq (talk) 08:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 10:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


Miscellaneous requests
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions/2013-07&oldid=24877454"