Requests for comment/Tulsi advanced permissions and UPE

This is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.

In this thread on, there is clear agreement that Tulsi did not adequately respond to charges regarding paid editing and use of advanced permission when raised at in 2020. While that thread resulted in his loss of global sysop and global rollback, he still holds sysop privileges on meta, Commons,, mediawiki, and autopatrolled on and (although I'm not sure there's any potential for abuse of that last one), in addition to holding WMF roles that I believe are outside the scope of meta-wiki. It is not clear why any of this has continued given his lack of accountability around paid editing on, specifically including his abuse of privileges there. While I could see stewards declining to act on permissions granted on projects with active administrators, at a minimum sysop seems like it should be a given to remove at this time. signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are specific processes for rights removal; at Meta it would be a request for de-adminship. However, I am not seeing any recent issues with Tulsi's contributions - has there been anything problematic within the last year? I understand that is after 2020 but still seems relevant - I can't follow on the enwiki thread how exactly he ties into the current drama other than past affiliations. – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be worth bringing it up on every project that Tulsi is an admin on. On Commons, this first requires an c:COM:ANU discussion. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 06:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000 Yes, I started. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And is unlikely to go anywhere because Tulsi has not violated any policies on Commons. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 00:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill a few responses wearing my various hats
Also noting for the record that the discussion on commons was closed without action, see c:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 112#Should I nominate User:Tulsi for removal of adminship?
--DannyS712 (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually @DannyS712: community-based de-adminship has been done on this before; see Meta:Requests_for_adminship/Nemo_bis_(removal). Leaderboard (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment Meta does actually allow de-adminship requests and have had them in the past (see for example Meta:Requests for adminship/Nemo bis (removal) - just that there is no clear policy governing how they are supposed to take place (which was the reason for the bureaucrat discussion in the above linked request). EPIC (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Leaderboard got to it before me. EPIC (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]