Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Meta:Requests for adminship

(Redirected from Meta:Requests for limited adminship)
Shortcut:
WM:RFA
This page hosts requests for administrator access on the Meta-Wiki; for requesting administrator access on any other wiki, please find the appropriate venue on the index of request and proposal pages. Bureaucrat, checkuser, oversight and bot requests are also made here. Before making a request here, please see the administrator policy.

Most requests should be listed here for at least seven days; bureaucrats should only close after the minimum time foreseen in the relevant policy. Discussions are not closed early. Adminship will be granted by a support ratio of at least 75%. If a request hasn't been addressed by a bureaucrat after a lengthy period of time, please leave a note at Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat. Requests may be extended, or put on hold by bureaucrats, pending decision or finding of consensus.

Requests for temporary adminship and bot requests may be less formal and often go for a shorter duration if consensus becomes clear after only a few days of discussion.

All editors with an account on Meta, at least one active account on any Wikimedia project, and a link between the two, may participate in any request and give their opinion of the candidate. However, more active Meta editors' opinions may be given additional weight in controversial cases.

See below for information on prerequisites on submitting a request, and how to add a nomination.

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Participate:

This box: view · talk · edit

Information

Note that this page is for access on Meta only. See the permission request to stewards page for adminship/deadminship requests on other projects.

Regular adminship

  1. Before requesting admin access, please check the policy for requesting adminship.
  2. Use the box below, insert your username:

  3. Place a request on this page, by transcluding the subpage, for example {{Meta:Requests for adminship/Username}}. Please put the newest request on the top. Bear in mind that even if you do meet the criteria above this does not mean that the community will automatically approve a request.
  4. Please note, past administrators who have given up their rights must meet all criteria at the time of the new request. There is no separate process for reinstating past administrators.

Please note: Ill-considered nominations for adminship can be draining and deflating to both the community and the candidate. Any successful candidate will need to be able to demonstrate sufficient experience within the Wikimedia community, in addition to a familiarity with Meta-Wiki. If a candidate is not already a local administrator or holder of advanced permissions on a Wikimedia content project, they are less likely to pass a request for adminship here at Meta-Wiki.

Bureaucratship

Add your request below under the bureaucratship section. Please note:

  • Only active administrators can become bureaucrats, and only after at least 6 months of regular adminship.
  • User is endorsed by two current bureaucrats after they nominate themselves here.

If you fail any of these requirements, you will not be assigned the bureaucrat flag. For more information see the Meta bureaucrat page.

Other access

For these types of access, create a subpage just as you would for regular adminship and add it to the appropriate section of this page.


  • Limited adminship: If you need sysop access for a particular reason (such as ability to edit protected pages), you may request limited adminship on Meta. If granted, the user understands that they will only be allowed to use the tools for the tasks they were approved, and not doing so will be grounds for immediate removal. Temporary sysop access will normally be valid for one month unless requested and granted otherwise.


  • CheckUser: please read the CheckUser policy and add your request below under the checkuser section, in the same way as an admin request.

  • Oversight: please read the Oversight policy and add your request below under the oversight section, in the same way as an admin request.



For these types of access, just ask on Meta request for help from a sysop or bureaucrat page:

Requests for global renamer permissions are handled at global permission requests to stewards page.

WMF Office Staff and Contractors

  • If you are an WMF Official or Contractor and need rights on Meta-Wiki to perform your duties the process is different. Please have a look at the WMF staff userrights policy on Office wiki[restricted access] and follow the procedure described there. If in doubt, please contact Trust and Safety; or send an email to ca wikimedia org.(source)

Requests for regular adminship

Leaderboard (3)

Not ending before 12 July 2024 05:30 (UTC)

So that I can delete pages myself rather than continuously tagging through TwinkleGlobal (according to XTools, about 430 edits or so of mine have been deleted!). The community may think that they don't need another admin, which I understand and respect though.

Disclosure: I've applied for this (or limited adminship) before and didn't get it in all but one time - this was mostly because of techincal errors (abusefilters; the first time because I was a newbie and did not use it properly when I did have limited adminship, second because the community decided another role was better, and third because its use was inappropriate for what I was trying to do). I've since continued to maintain filters with no issues as far as I'm aware; however, if the community thinks that this is too risky, I can commit to limited adminship only to deleted pages.

--Leaderboard (talk) 05:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1.   Support No concerns --Ameisenigel (talk) 07:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 07:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support - it might be worth linking to past RfAs/RfLAs here for clarity/simplicity. The concerns on your last full RfA were a lack of collaboration and being argumentative; I don't think those are still concerns with your work. Use for the tools and trustworthiness are enough for me to support, but I do note the relatively high number of requests for permissions, both Meta-specific and at SRGP over the years, for relatively arcane/specific reasons that have tended to be rejected or questioned by the community. – Ajraddatz (talk) 10:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support Trusted; holds sysop perms on 1 medium-sized content wiki + mediawiki.org. --SHB2000 (t • c) 11:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support. @Ajraddatz: The links are Meta:Requests for adminship/Leaderboard, Meta:Requests for adminship/Leaderboard 2, Meta:Requests for limited adminship/Leaderboard and Meta:Requests for limited adminship/Leaderboard (2).--Jusjih (talk) 13:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Support LGTM, and per SHB2000 EPIC (talk) 14:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support No objections from me too. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support Reasonable. No issues this time. --Stïnger （会話） 17:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]
  9.   Support Trusted user – DreamRimmer (talk) 07:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support —MdsShakil (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support --Alaa :)..! 17:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Discussion

  •   Comment noting Ajraddatz's comment. I would have said some of your previous attempts have run into you being cavalier. Remember that the tools of the role of an admininstrator are solely to implement the consensus of the community, not to implement one's own opinion, nor to pursue a cause. With admining if uncertain, seek further opinion from the general community, or the community of fellows; if nothing else it teaches how to listen and to ask questions. It both teaches us patience and tests our patience. C'est la vie.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for limited adminship

None currently

Requests for interface adminship

Please see Meta:Interface administrators before applying. Regular administrators may apply directly at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.
None currently

Requests for bureaucratship

None currently

Requests for CheckUser access

"Meta:Requests for checkuser" redirects here. To request checkuser information, see Meta:Requests for CheckUser information.
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

EPIC

Not ending before 5 July 2024 23:14 (UTC)

I would like to apply for CheckUser access here at Meta, after also having been met with voices to candidate.

You may already know me, I am EPIC, a steward and an administrator at Meta-Wiki, Wikidata and the Swedish Wikipedia (although, in this past month most of my activity has been at focused at the first-named). I've been one of the most active stewards this year, having made over 24,000 steward actions at the time of this request, and I plan to remain this active throughout the year if nothing changes until then.

In my steward role, I frequently encounter cases of LTA/spambot abuse. Since I am a steward I have CheckUser access at loginwiki, which I heavily use, but a lot of the time multiple cases require performing checks on Meta, either because LWCU is not possible or not sufficient. As such, I've sometimes already asked some fellow stewards who are also Meta CUs to perform checks, but out of Meta-Wiki's seven checkusers, three are more active in CUing, and out of those three, only one is located in my time coverage. As a result, I am sometimes not able to reach them when needed. As I'm already one of the most active users in this area of work, active on IRC and located in a stable time zone (UTC+1/UTC+2) which makes me quickly reachable at most hours of the day, CheckUser access here at Meta would be of great use, not only to me but also to the rest of the community.

Additionally, I would like to help out at RfCU; while requests there are not too frequent, it is an area within which I feel comfortable and have experience in.

For transparency, in my Meta RfA, I got some concerns that due to my activity and the amount of work I did, I would make myself prone to making mistakes and possibly burn myself out. In the months after that RfA, I have tried keeping my usage of admin rights here as neutral as possible (hopefully I have succeeded with that), and I feel that I have improved and gained more experience since that RfA, and that I have taken the concerns into account and learned from them. I do not act when unsure without consulting with others, I have not made any major mistakes in the past few months, and also do not feel that I have burned myself out, despite high activity levels in the past couple of months.

If you want something to indicate how active I would be in this role, I will refer to my CheckUser statistics at loginwiki, where I have been one of the most active users of LWCU throughout this year, as well as the steward with the highest amount of monthly loginwiki checks in April and May. Additionally, as a steward I already have full access to the CheckUser log and can currently perform checks here in emergencies.

In short; with my activity throughout the past couple of months, existing experience with CU as well my availability and coverage, I believe that the community could benefit from having me as a CU, so I will leave the decision up to you whether I have your trust for this role. As a steward, I have also already signed the confidentiality agreement. Lastly, in case of any questions or concerns, just feel free to bring it up here and I will answer it as thoroughly as I can. Thank you, EPIC (talk) 23:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two more separate notes:
  1. I am currently abroad and might not have as much time for steward duties at the moment, but will once again increase my activity once back home.
  2. A current Meta CU has stated that they are fine with me joining the team should this be successful.
EPIC (talk) 23:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support
  1.   Support I realise that some may say this request is TOOSOON, but I disagree (though I don't think anyone who thinks that way is wrong; I just don't feel the same way) – they have the knowledge, expertise and are trusted, so I don't see why not if they're willing to help out. --SHB2000 (t • c) 23:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 23:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support following the answer to my question. Experienced, active, trusted, competent, all-around brilliant editor. --Ferien (talk) 23:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Strong support EPIC is a highly-trusted user. Zero doubts about him. --Stïnger （会話） 00:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]
  5.   Support only due to how restrictive Meta:MSR is; otherwise, I would much prefer MSR be modified to allow you to do this work without asking for CU. Leaderboard (talk) 05:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   Strong support --Count Count (talk) 05:31, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support altough I do not know what a "stable time zone" is --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ameisenigel, I would interpret that as someone who doesn't move about time zones often. --Ferien (talk) 21:28, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would interpret it this way too. --SHB2000 (t • c) 00:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  8.   Support AramilFeraxa (Talk) 16:47, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support Thought EPIC was about to be checkusered, not to get him checkuser rights :P Fine with the latter as well.--A09|(pogovor) 21:33, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support This user has shown themselves to be trustworthy many times and their stewardship shows to me that this user understands the relevant policies related to Non-public info.-FusionSub (talk) 22:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  11. He is EPIC, his performance is quite good and beyond doubt. i   Support you.
    🍃Zulf🍃talk 23:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  12.   Support --Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 04:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Johannnes89 (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  14.   Support – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  15.   Support Good work. Please remember to "keep calm and have a $drink_of_your_choise" whenever you deem necessary. Ciao, M/ (talk) 20:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  16.   Support SkrzydlatyMuflon (talk) 00:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  17.   Support trusted user Wooze★ 00:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  18.   Support Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 00:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  19.   Support -- EN-Jungwon 01:16, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  20.   Support —MdsShakil (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  21.   Support No worries about granting these rights to EPIC. Ternera (talk) 00:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  22.   Support As long as you know when to step back and take a breather. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 02:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  23.   Support. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 05:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  24.   Support --TenWhile6 12:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  25.   Support -Lionel Cristiano (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  26.   Support — Elton (talk) 14:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  27.   Support --V0lkanic (talk) 13:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  28.   Support —≈ MS Sakib  «TalK» 20:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  29.   Strong support. Codename Noreste 🤔 Talk 00:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  30.   Support Jianhui67 talk★contribs 17:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1.   Oppose per Special:Diff/27060392 counting the votes incorrectly as 7-2-1 while the correct count would be 7-3-1. Please be even more careful next time while already being a steward and an admin here.--Jusjih (talk) 14:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I responded here. In other words I think it was a simple mistake (which any steward/admin here could have made). EPIC (talk) 14:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We are human and we will make mistakes. As EPIC only made a small and simple mistake, it is unreasonable to oppose. Thanks. SCP-2000 17:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a significant error that would imply EPIC's incompetence to have checkuser permissions. A09|(pogovor) 20:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
Comments
  • Hi, thank you for running! About a month and a half ago, you resigned all your advanced rights, before withdrawing the resignation later on. I don't want to be too nosey in something that ultimately doesn't affect me, but I would like to ask why you submitted the resignation and what changed to make you withdraw it, and perhaps whether any changes have happened since then, in order to keep your workflow sustainable and ensure you don't burn out. --Ferien (talk) 23:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Ferien! Thanks for your great question; I simply had a lot going on behind the scenes which I felt was affecting me and my work negatively. I didn't see myself suitable because of that which is why I did not want to continue. I later decided to stay on because after all, I do like working on Wikimedia (and I still find it a good hobby) and I also got some voices off-wiki wanting me to continue.
    Since then I have calmed my work down a tiny bit (although still continued being quite active here), but I intend to keep up roughly in the same level in the future, if nothing else drastically changes until then, which I hope not. In short; I do promise to stay consistently active in the role, and if I find that I can't keep up that promise and am not going to be active in the role in the near future I would be considering uncontroversially resigning instead, since I don't want rights I do not have use for.
    Hope that is enough of a satisfying answer; feel free to inquire otherwise. EPIC (talk) 23:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I get that completely. Glad to see you still around :) --Ferien (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With the support threshold and minimum number of votes surpassing the requirements in WM:CU, this request is successfully closed. Welcome to the team. — xaosflux Talk 10:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for Oversight access

"Meta:Requests for oversight" redirects here. To request oversighting, see Meta:Oversighters#Requests.
None currently

Requests for translation adminship

Geertivp

--Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) 06:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See @Pppery’s edits on your page: your content were not properly segmented. I understand you need your edits to be quickly marked, but we want translators can simply translate short units with a low knowledge of wikitext. That’s why we have Internationalization guidelines your edits should comply with, as I explained you. -- Pols12 (talk) 18:38, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks @Pols12, I am continuously improving my "translation" skills. --Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) 18:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for CentralNotice adminship

None currently

Requests for bot flags

None currently

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_adminship&oldid=27072457#Requests_for_limited_adminship"