Requests for comment/Allowing stewards to rename users on all wikis

The following request for comments is closed. This proposal will be superseded by the impending SUL finalization process. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 21:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think we should create a new global group with permission 'renameuser' which would be given to all bureaucrats on all projects who request it, so that they can simply rename user across all projects if they requested it. Right now every user need to bother local crats on all projects in case they want to have the username changed. That is very annoying especially for the user who wants to have name changed, the interface to change username is very simple and whole namechange is a matter of 10 seconds once you check that you can rename the user, so once the bureaucrat on one project check if request is valid, they could quickly finish process everywhere. Thanks Petrb (talk) 08:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hello Peter. Actually this group already exist and is call stewards. I understand this is very annoying, and it's annoying for people who rename too. However, that's more the policy than the groups that should be changed in my opinion. Because that's not the number of people with renameuser globally that lack, that's the fact that those people are not allowed per policy to perform this kind of global renamings. I think that's more on this side that things should evolve. -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 09:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, what prevents us from changing that policy Petrb (talk) 09:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure there is enough stewards to deal with this? The number of all requests from all projects in total is rather higher Petrb (talk) 09:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you check requests at SRUC, you will see that what is really time-consuming for stewards is to check on which wikis they are allowed to rename users because there are local 'crats on it, or not. It's also really time-consuming for the user to request for renaming on every wiki and to wait for the local 'crats to do it. Seriously, if you want to make the renaming process easier, creating and voting a policy authorizing stewards to perform a renaming even if the project has local bureaucrats would be really great. As far as I know, if the name is not abusive and if the targeted username is free, it is uncontroversial to rename per author request. Allowing stewards to perform these uncontroversial changes will really make the process easier and faster for everybody. -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 10:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your Quentinv57, one would think that as we now have global tools, and global groups, that we could look to have the ability to globally rename, and the wikis can opt-in or opt-out (pick the preferred default). — billinghurst sDrewth 12:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree with quentin. I have helped out on a couple of user rename requests in the past, and local crat rename policy is the real reason this process is so time consuming and inefficient. Stewards instantly rename users on wikis with inactive crats, but chasing down crats individually for some of the larger wikis is such a pain that it needs a some re-thinking. Theo10011 (talk) 12:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The bureaucracy around renames is actually rather ridiculous. Stewards should be able to rename users on all projects. Separate user databases has caused enough damage as it is... Ajraddatz (Talk) 05:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the possibility to allow stewards to rename users also on wikis with active bureaucrats could most easily be implemented by simply contacting the bureaucrats - a quick check suggests that we have around 100 wikis with bureaucrats (not necessarily active ones), so for the remaining 700 wikis, such a change would have no effect anyway. The bureaucrats of each wiki could then say what they think of it - I think in most wikis, they will not oppose to allow stewards to do renames in their wiki too. And for those who do not respond, their inactivity would be clearly seen. --MF-W 22:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would Support the proposal in theory to allow stewards (or a new global renamer group) to perform renames even on projects with bureaucrats. After SUL was introduced I wanted to change my username, but gave up after wading through all the info about how to request one, especially since it would have involved a couple of usurpations as well. I think the main barrier would be in getting consensus from all the projects (would we need consensus from each project?). Jmajeremy (talk) 15:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify my earlier comment by saying that stewards should only perform renames when it involves a unified username. If it is only a local account and there are local 'crats, then stewards shouldn't get involved. Jmajeremy (talk) 02:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I Support stewards (no need for more groups) to be able to globally rename. This is a missing feature since SUL was introduced. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 08:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This RfC may be invalid after SUL is finalised. However, this won't necessarily mean a new user group to rename users globally will be created. but it may be needed if there is a high volume of requests. Close this RfC or not? PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it can probably be closed. The purpose of the RFC will be reached by the SUL finalization leaving nobody with renaming powers but stewards. The creation of a new user group is something that can be discussed later, if necessary. --MF-W 14:19, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]