Meta:Requests for limited adminship/Romaine

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Romaine

Romaine (talk • contribs • deleted user contributions • logs • block log • abuse log • CentralAuth • stalktoy) Bureaucrats: user rights management.

Not ending before 1 December 2021 22:12 (UTC)

I am requesting temporarily admin rights for Meta. WMF has decided to move the full contents of Outreach Wiki to Meta, including the newsletters for GLAM and Education and other pages. Already some pages have been re-created by WMF on Meta without using the import function, while that should have been used to ensure the full history is preserved. To properly import those pages with full history, I request temporarily admin rights on Meta to import and merge the history of pages. WMF has scheduled that the migration is completed by the end of December 2021, so I expect to be ready with fixing the issues within a 3 months time period. Romaine (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support trusted user, valid use case --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:08, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The use-case described in the request is fine with me. However, I think it should be expanded to not include only history merges, but also importing (see my SRP comment for details). (Un)deletions (related to the task) will also likely be useful. In another words, the approved use-case should IMO let Romaine to use adminship in any way that's directly relevant to the migration. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:29, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support valid use case. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:26, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support has a need for LA. SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 07:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Just grant full sysopship, I think they as a CNA should justify the trust already. I am just lazy to cross reply at Babel or Outreach but am a little puzzled here. Are only the newsletters coming here or the entire outreach wiki, if it's the latter I think meta sysops we can be overstretched with the load here. I think outreach also suffers for spam here and there and outreach can handle due to the additional rights holders there as well as it's a GSwiki, meta isn't and I don't think all the outreach sysops if RFA here might pass. We need more LAs then to manage. I will Support a LA based on outreach based content here indefinitely, as opposed as the 1 month convention for LA typically. The grant will be subject to yearly signing on Oct confirmation runs, like the other indef LAs we granted. @Romaine: Are you okay for this or rather would you just run for full adminship, either I will glad to support. I think for further merges into meta for other projects, it will be better if advanced notice could be given, this seems very rushed. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC) Edited to strike out oppose just in case someone mistake it as a real oppose. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Camouflaged Mirage, What I understood from WMF is that all the content from Outreach is migrated to Meta, and then Outreach Wiki is going to be closed. As I am now admin on Outreach, I am fine to move the admin rights to Meta. I am not someone who is constantly patrolling the changes, but at average I am about every week on Meta and can have a quick look if things can be done. I do not know how high the activity standards are on Meta to make me qualify, but temporarily or full time I do not mind. As I have time this week, and a busy period is coming later his month, I hope I can start this week with the work I requested temporarily admin rights for. I suspect for the full admin rights a separate procedure is needed, so I think it is better for now to complete the procedure for temporarily admin rights. Romaine (talk) 21:41, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Just to clarify here from the WMF side, we have not decided to move the full contents of Outreach wiki to Meta. Just the existing pages for the GLAM and Education newsletter (announcements 1, 2) Romaine's assistance is needed (and more than welcome!) to help with this endeavor. If there is a miscommunications somewhere, please point me to it and I'll clarify. Chris Koerner (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  @Romaine Noted. I should be clearer, sorry. The LA system here is 1 month by default. I support the grant to be longer like say indefinite (subject to yearly signing that you want to keep the LA tools). If you think 3 months is sufficient, I am happy to support also. This is just that you understand the possibilities of duration of grant. For crats, I am okay for the use case to include anything related to Outreach which can include the blocking of vandals related to that page. So I think this isn't too much different from what a full sysop can do so I suggested just granting the full sysopship as an option. Thanks also @CKoerner (WMF) for your helpful inputs. Indeed it will be better for not the entire Outreach to be moved here, as the admin load will be higher than what it is now. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Miscommunications?
  A few weeks ago we had a meeting, Chris included, in what I asked if it is the plan to move only the newsletters or also the other contents, and then the answer was very clear: in the first two phases the Education newsletter and the GLAM newsletter are moved, followed by the phase in what the rest of the contents is migrated from Outreach to Meta.
  
  An imported thing we talked about in that meeting is what is needed after having moved everything from Outreach wiki to Meta. To be precise: that the full domain of outreach.wikimedia.org becomes a redirect to Meta, like en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Knowledge is a redirect to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge. Chris agreed on this matter!
  
  Last week I had another meeting with a colleague of Chris in what I asked who is coordinating the move of the rest of the contents from Outreach to Meta (after the newsletters), and I got a clear answer to that!
  
  Over the past weeks various e-mails have been sent and two meetings have taken place, in all of these no denial/contradiction was given as reply to the perspective that everything would be moved to Meta. In the e-mail Chris sent to me yesterday, he indicated this as well, but (for the first time) instead of shortly after each other with some months in between. So the "decision" has not been made, but the "decision" already has been made. Romaine (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  This is very confusing. We need to be clear what are the exact pages from outreach that needs to be imported here. I suggest the crats put this On hold till there can be more clarity which there seems to be conflicting scope of the pages presented by WMF and the requestor. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:14, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  The way I see it, from the discussions above, it looks lear that for now at least the GLAM and Education newsletters will be moved to Meta. If @Romaine would like to start migrating those and put the rest of the Outreach Wiki migration on hold, pending further discussions, I think we could grant this. But I have no issues to put this entire request on hold for a while so they all can discuss and clarify what exactly will be moved, and when. CC @MF-Warburg & @Xaosflux. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Oh, we had an edit conflict here. As I see it, the task is necessary and Romaine's request is justified. Clarifications about the future of Outreachwiki are a related issue, but from my point of view do not hinder the granting of the rights at all. --MF-W 11:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done with an expiry of 3 months. Thanks to Romaine for helping to deal with this issue. Very sad to hear that pages are being imported without the history, when the florid talking points at Meta:Babel#This_Month_in_GLAM_newsletter_migration_from_Outreach_to_Meta suggested all will be so great because staff is so excited. – The limit for the "limited adminship" should be as requested: to import and merge histories. --MF-W 10:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above request page is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Comments about this page should be made in Meta:Babel or Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat.