Meta:Requests for adminship

Requests and proposals Requests for adminship on Meta Archives
Shortcut:
WM:RFA
This page hosts requests for administrator access on the Meta-Wiki; for requesting administrator access on any other wiki, please see the index of request and proposal pages, where a steward can do the job if required. 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:

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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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, he or she is 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 he/she nominates themselves here.

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

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

Stanglavine

Not ending before 27 October 2021 16:57 (UTC)

Hello,

I have done some admin actions here on Meta, as allowed by Meta:Meta–steward relationship#Administrative actions on Meta. However, some situations are in a borderline point about be or not be "obvious" situations as required by that policy, so sometimes I don't feel much comfortable to do some delete or block, even being sure about it need, so I'm here to request regular adminship for this. I have sysop experience in other projects and I'm active in cross-wiki countervadalism and, in consequence, here too. Be able to do sysop regular stuff (delete, blocks and protects if need) here on Meta will be great and useful. I'm open for questions and thanks for your considerations. Regards, --stanglavine msg 16:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

  •   Support, sure. -- CptViraj (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support thank you for volunteering. — xaosflux Talk 17:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Support, no-brainer. Helpful and trustworthy, already steward, active on Meta as well. Thank you for volunteering. Sgd. —Hasley 17:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support. --Mykola7 (talk) 17:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

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

Xaosflux

Not ending before 21 October 2021 13:18 (UTC)

Hi All, since we are down to 2 'crats, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. I'm currently an admin and oversighter here, and have been a crat on enwiki for 5 years. I expect any bureaucrat actions I would take here to be of the "very boring" variety, however that is what I personally expect of bureaucrats. I think I have a good understanding of all of our policies related to this role. Thank you for your consideration, if you have any questions for me, please let me know. --— xaosflux Talk 13:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Required endorsements
  • Our current policy requires 2 existing bureaucrat endorsements, so pings of request to: @MF-Warburg: and @MarcoAurelio:. — xaosflux Talk 13:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    1. MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    2. See my comment below. --MF-W 14:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Community Feedback
24-hour window for initial objections per Meta:Bureaucrats
  • Same person? But well   Support glad to see this, happy they finally decided to run for it. Thanks for stepping up. Although votes doesn't count here right now but will like to voice my endorsement. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    fixed! — xaosflux Talk 13:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support of course. Sgd. —Hasley 13:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support, though, how much sense does it make to obtain community feedback before having the required bureaucrat endorsement? --Krd 13:54, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    Follow up on talk. — xaosflux Talk 14:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Just as a reminder about the process, since requests for bureaucratship are not so frequent currently: WM:B stipulates that candidates need to have 150 edits/log actions (after getting adminship and not including own userspace) in the last six months. As far as I can see, this is the case here. Two current bureaucrats' endorsements are also needed, as is known. In the past, these have not had a separate section, and I don't think they need to. Then, if no objections are raised in 24 hours after the self-nomination, the request can be closed as successful. -- That said, I endorse this request, Xaosflux is, in my opinion, capable for this role. --MF-W 14:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Absolutely --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Requests for CheckUser access

"Meta:Requests for checkuser" redirects here. To request checkuser information, see Meta:Requests for CheckUser information.

None currently

Requests for Oversight access

"Meta:Requests for oversight" redirects here. To request oversighting, see Meta:Oversighters#Requests.

Sotiale

Not ending before 22 October 2021 13:57 (UTC)

Hello, everyone. I would like to request oversight flag from metawiki community.

Perhaps because of my field of activity, some users used to ask me for suppressing on metawiki (if anyone doesn't know that I don't have this feature, please take this opportunity to notice!). This has been going on for a long time, not in large quantities. However, this has been trending slightly more recently. This has a cause, but it's hard to explain in detail what it is. Of course, there are recent trends too, but the main reason for requesting this tool is that I prefer to do things right away when someone asks me to.

I can't handle these things, so I explained that I can't do and have deleted the mails, but it would have been an unpleasant experience to send their sensitive information. It would be convenient for me and them to be able to do this anyway; the convenience of sending 'done' if the mail content is reviewed and processed (some users who have emailed me requests other than OS requests may know :D)

I'm already an oversighter on kowiki, and I think my activities are already well open to you. I believe that my timezone is UTC+9, which will help a bit with filling in coverage. I think I need this tool, but I well know that this is just my personal opinion and your opinions may vary. So I am here again to hear your opinions. Thank you for your consideration! --Sotiale (talk) 13:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]

  1. Support. Trusted, competent, and very active. Why not?-BRP ever 14:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  2. Support Definitely. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:30, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  3. Support: Trusted. SCP-2000 14:48, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  4.   Support JavaHurricane 15:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  5.   Support --Rschen7754 16:22, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  6.   SupportAjraddatz (talk) 16:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  7.   Support Obviously yes, thanks for your service --MdsShakil (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  8.   Support thanks for your hard work Stang 19:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  9.   Support LGTM --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  10.   Support. All looks good: trusted, has experience with the tools, knows policy, active. Meiræ 00:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  11.   Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 03:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  12.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 11:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  13.   Support Trusted user. --Aca (talk) 11:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  14.   Support Reliable and trustworthy.—Ivi104 11:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  15.   Support Trusted user. --Neptune, the Mystic 12:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  16.   Support. —— Eric LiuTalk 12:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  17.   Support. Sgd. —Hasley 12:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  18.   Support: Don't know you don't have this feature(--Jonathan5566(talk) 12:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  19.   Strong support, definitely! I believe that user Sotiale is already a great and trustful checkuser, so I do not see anything that would speak against this. --Koreanovsky (Ča–Kaj–Što?!) 14:49, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  20.   Support Of course! Vermont (talk) 15:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  21.   Support Trusted user that will help broaden the language skills of the local OS team, good answer to question below. — xaosflux Talk 03:12, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
      Question: @Sotiale: as a sitting steward and a local OS, I don't have any general concerns - but do have a a couple of questions if you have the time: (1) While our local OS team is small, I'd like to think we are generally quick and friendly with requests that come in; what do you feel is the workflow problem that is driving users to personally engage you rather than our standard process at WM:OS? (2) Some projects take a more liberal approach to applying suppression, whereas traditionally here on the meta-wiki we have more strictly acted only when supported by the global OS policy. What, if any, difference do you see in this situation and how, if any, way would it change the your use of this ability here as compared to a local project? Thank you for your feedback and for volunteering for this. — xaosflux Talk 18:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    Thanks for the good questions! (1) Personally I think, from my previous experience, the metawiki OS service is very quick and friendly. Therefore, my personal opinion is that this is not a problem with the service the team currently providing or the team itself, but rather the confusion experienced by users. I'm actually just guessing why they're sending me mail. I initially thought the reason they mailed me was because I'm a steward, but lately I've been feeling this is because I'm mainly involved in activities related to privacy, especially checkuser. The reason I think this is, because more than half of these emails come from speakers of a specific language, sometimes in their native language. Perhaps they believe I have this feature, and seem to be sending mail to the username they see often. (2) Although the global OS policy is common to all wikis, its application varies according to the culture and customs of each individual wiki. If metawiki strictly enforces the global policy, that would mean that the tool should be used in obvious cases; non-login editing of account users, sexual harassment, and doxxing(especially addresses and phone numbers). This will make a difference in assessing whether revdel can solve the problem or not, whether this must be suppressed, etc. I generally tend to treat with revdel in my local except for serious sexual insults, privacy problem, and username about serious insults to certain users (especially username to summon their family members..?), so I'll do something similar on metawiki, but depending on the precedent and the way the team has dealt with it in the past, the scope will need to be narrowed or broadened. --Sotiale (talk) 02:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  22.   Support: Trusted with multiple advanced permissions; thanks for volunteering. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
    19:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  23.   Support. --Mykola7 (talk) 22:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  24.   Support -FASTILY 01:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  25.   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  26. Was waiting to be 25th to support, but well missed that. Sigh. But better late than never right? :PCamouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:26, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  27. Sotiale 4 President! --MF-W 21:57, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  28.   SupportTeles «Talk ˱C L @ S˲» 00:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  29.   Support Trusted user in cross-wiki with have a local OS in home wiki. --Uncitoyentalk 09:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  30.   Support Sure, thanks for volunteering. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  31.   Support --20041027 𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓼𝓾talk) 14:07, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  32.   Support --Defender (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  33.   Strong support Trusted, has experience and is active. --Ferien (talk) 15:07, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  34.   Support Tol (talk | contribs) @ 18:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  35.   Support --94rain Talk 21:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  36.   Support, sure. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Requests for translation adminship

Gnom

Not ending before 18 October 2021 21:04 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to apply to become a Meta translation admin. I've been a part of the German-language Wikipedia community since 2005 and I consider myself part of the Meta community as well, although I'm definitely not among the most active users on this wiki.

I just wanted to ask a translation admin for help but then thought, "Hey, I could just do this myself." I'll probably not be doing vast amounts of translation work, but I've done a few translations here and there over the years, such as translating project pages and newsletters, and would continue to do so in the future. I commit to following the existing rules and will try not to break too much :-)

Thank you for your support. Let me know if you have any questions or if there is anything I can clarify. --Gnom (talk) 21:04, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Hello, could you please show an example of some translation markup you have added to a page to make sure you are familiar with the syntax? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
09:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Hi, I thought that this would be my job after I have been granted translation admin rights. I have been editing pages using translation markup for years and I read the documentation, so I don't think that this should be a problem. --Gnom (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Translation administrator gives you the permission to mark a page for translation – the required translation markup can be inserted by anyone. Isn't that what you'd do before asking a translation administrator to mark it? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
10:45, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
From my perspective, I would like to be able to do both, and I don't think that should be a problem. --Gnom (talk) 11:09, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Actually, Gnom, translation markup is really complex, because technical requirements are far away from our “ideal” syntax. That’s why we usually ask to translation adminship requesters to prepare a page for translation (translate tag addition) in order we check the markup and give advices to the future translation admin. Most of Meta’s pages have issues and we would like to avoid their expansion. -- Pols12 (talk) 18:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Requests for CentralNotice adminship


None currently

Requests for bot flags


None currently

See also