Open main menu
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in March 2011, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Contents

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Savh

I have been recently quite active in globally undoing vandalism, using the #cvn-sw channel. The rollback rights, which I already have on es.wikipedia, would help me very much, as it would save me much time. Thanks, Savhñ 16:44, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

  • '  Support' Joe Gazz84 16:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Yes please. Maximillion Pegasus 16:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - trusted user with enough cross-wiki experience - Hoo man (talk) 16:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support absolutely. Trustworthy user with plenty of crosswiki experience. Jafeluv 16:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Sure - useful contributor. --Herby talk thyme 16:52, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Of course. Another active and trusted user   mickit 16:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Seems to be ok. -Barras 18:44, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm surprised he hasn't gone mad without it. Very active.   Support. PeterSymonds 18:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 19:15, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Great user to collaborate with. A very dedicated vandal fighter :). Good luck with the tools! --Addihockey10 19:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support מתניה 19:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Active enough, good luck! –BruTe talk 07:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. JenVan (talk) 08:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   -- Dferg ☎ talk 10:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - About time :P Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:01, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Full support - Finally!!!! :D -- Màñü飆¹5 talk es 00:03, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   SupportDerHexer (Talk) 00:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Of course (I can't believe I almost missed this request). Trijnstel 13:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Finally! Obvious support, very active, does good work. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Why not? gr is not a big deal. This feature would be useful to him. Ruy Pugliesi 14:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • SupportDawid talk 15:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  Done - per unanimous support. -Barras 11:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Dawid Deutschland

Hello there, I would like to get GR. Since last time I have been active at SWMT (#svn-sw). I have sysop rights at Georgian Wikipedia and Georgian Wiktionary and I'd like to do anti-vandalism job faster. Thanks for your consideration! — Dawid talk 13:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Support Has been active at SWMT recently. Know him from ka-wiki, is trusted and experienced. –BruTe talk 13:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support mickit 15:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, saw him in SMWT work recently, so why not - Hoo man (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support -- I've seen him around. Maximillion Pegasus 16:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Edits look good; seems sufficiently active, so support. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 16:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Acquainted with the user from ka-wiki.--George M. 17:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support. Aparentemente não há nada de errado com as edições dele. ” Teles (Talk @ C G) 18:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - I haven't seen you around much, but a look at your global contribs shows me wrong. You have enough experience for this tool, and it really isn't a big deal. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   SupportDerHexer (Talk) 19:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 23:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • endorse if it's needed. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support --Nick1915 - all you want 11:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support please. Jon Harald Søby 14:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Neutral haven't seen him around Mardetanha talk 14:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Despite low activity, gr is not a big deal and this feature would be helpful to him. Ruy Pugliesi 16:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support There is no reason to oppose. Mjbmr Talk 16:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Màñü飆¹5 talk es 17:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Savhñ 15:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - I don't know him well, but global rollback is no big deal so why not? Trijnstel 15:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment You wrote about that "Since last time I have been active at SWMT (#svn-sw)" this infers that you have applied for global rollback before. In the interests of transparency can you kindly make a link to that prior request? Thanks fr33kman 15:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
    •   support: I've been informed by others that this is a first request. I was a support even whilst asking the above question. I just wanted to know if it was a second request. Transparency is very important to me :) fr33kman 19:37, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Warum nicht? --WizardOfOz talk 19:39, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
  Done - per unanimous support. -Barras 19:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much! — Dawid talk 08:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Gabriele449

I would like to become a global rollbacker so that I can rollback vandalism on any other wikiproject. I am already a rollbacker on the English Wikipedia.Gabriele449 00:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

  •   SNOW you need lots and lots of crosswiki experience first. See SWMT. fr33kman 00:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Clear-cut "No". Seb az86556 01:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment I would not require a lot of cross-wiki experience—rollback is not a very significant right. However, some cross-wiki experience is still necessary. Ruslik 06:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
  • No real experience even in homewiki. This edit is their only edit outside the homewiki, so it's an obvious no. Suggest they withdraw, get active in SWMT, and make a request. For that matter, reverting vandalism is possible without GR. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 07:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
      Not done. Policy requirements not met at this time. Feel free to join our SWMT if you're interested in the area. -- Dferg ☎ talk 11:04, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for The ed17

I don't do much cross-wiki work besides .en -> Commons, but being forced to use old-school reverting here was a shocker... I haven't done that in years, and I'd rather not do it again if I have to. :-) Still, I understand if my (lack of) cross-wiki experience isn't enough. Regards, Ed [talk] [en] 21:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

  • I see you are sysop @enwiki, but I don't see cross-wiki experience dealing with vandalism, so I'd say   not now. -- Màñü飆¹5 talk es 21:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Well, I just dealt with some today at the strategy wiki, if that makes a difference. Ed [talk] [en] 00:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • (Weak) Oppose, thanks for your service at strategywiki, but you haven't got enough cross-wiki experience yet. Feel free to ask again, after you gained the required experience - Hoo man (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm afraid. Concerns with limited cross-wiki experience. You do excellent work at en.wiki, but it doesn't seem like you have a real need for the tool. Sorry. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment Thanks for your assistance at strategywiki tonight, I see you were made an admin there so that'll give you rollback there at least. Personally, if I saw even just a month and a half of actions like that I'd give you full support for global rollback. As it stands people generally request it after a period of crosswiki undo reversions and often join the SWMT, which is option and not even official. Thanks again for dealing with that and look forward to working with you again. fr33kman 02:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your comments everyone, I'll withdraw this if that's okay. I didn't know if there was a minimum threshold for global rollback, but apparently there is. :-) Fr33kman, thanks for your help at the strategy wiki, and I look forward to the same. Ed [talk] [en] 06:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

  Not done, request withdrawn.--Mercy 11:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Mjbmr

I worked cross-wiki about 6 month and i am continuing it, i know the GR policy, i need this tool to revert vandalism edit by anonymous users easily, Thanks. Mjbmr Talk 21:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment: You seem to be active crosswiki, and are already entrusted with rollback rights in several projects. Do you have experience in crosswiki counter-vandalism? Jafeluv 21:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes please take a look at this Mjbmr Talk 21:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, active enough and trusted, so why not? - Hoo man (talk) 00:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 00:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC) Concerned with opposes; retracting !vote -FASTILY (TALK) 09:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Support per Hoo. mickit 08:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC) (At the time I voted, I didn't know that there were problems in the past. So I will withdraw my vote, but I won't vote against the request. mickit 12:46, 15 March 2011 (UTC))
  • Support --WizardOfOz talk 08:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Aye. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 08:15, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - activity looks good and can't see any reason why not. Grunny (talk) 10:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Support Sufficient crosswiki experience. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 11:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Changed to oppose for the reason stated by Ajraddatz and the concerns brought up by Mard and Savh. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support per above. Jafeluv 13:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Trijnstel 16:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Neutral - I've changed my mind. Trijnstel 10:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   SupportDerHexer (Talk) 16:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Ruy Pugliesi 00:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Support - Per above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 05:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I've changed to oppose based on the concerns brought up below, as well as these !votes, which look a lot like meatpuppets to me (irl or internet friends who supported this request after he asked them to look at it). Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Yes please. Jon Harald Søby 08:06, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • SupportDawid talk 09:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Although we are friends, but as the Persian wikinews is the only place that he has some more authority, his adminship behavior there, is fully affected by his personal view. He didn't even have a good interaction with other admins and has the background of personal revenge. His behavior with other users and edits done by a different view, has also been absolutely inappropriate. --SalmanParsi 09:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Support --ebraminiotalk 16:48, 13 March 2011 (UTC)--ebraminiotalk 07:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Not at all cross wiki troll , history of harassing and misusing his temp adminship in sole project which he has admin privilige leave no room to support , he unblocked himself and blocked two other admin , sorry maybe later Mardetanha talk 17:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
It seems he has been blocked due to personal attacks / misconduct, is that right? Ruy Pugliesi 18:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes and his reaction was very poor even for temp admin Mardetanha talk 18:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
In my view, actually this is not important for GR status. He is knowledgeable with GR policy, and know how to use and works with it, and that's important. Besides, using a phrase like "cross wiki troll" on a trusted Wikimedian seems more attacking to me. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 19:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
You are entitled to your opinion ,But I have always called a spade, spade Mardetanha talk 19:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support I know him enough from fa.wikinews & fa.wikipedia. he is trustable and familiar with the rules. --danghula 18:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support He is trusted and he always makes great edits. he had mistake once in fawikinews like mardetanha in fawiki.--Kasir talk 19:33, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Mjbmr is an active admin and trusted user in wiki specially in wiki fa ....in general i think he is a competent person for this access--Blue.Earth 19:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support His unbelievable progress momentum surprised admins and experienced editors in his local projects. He possess excellent technical skills and sound knowledge of GRs policies Behzad.Modares 19:57, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nearly no antivandalism edits in his global contributions. This is not a vote. Savhñ 20:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent contributier, hardworker, with great technical skills. He had great contributions in establishing Fa.Wikinews and one of main founders of this project.Arash (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm afraid; the cross-wiki-stuff is mainly creating a userpage, requesting a bot-flag, and dealing with the problems the bot had. I'm also taking Mardetanha's concerns into account. Seb az86556 02:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I saw you your contributions on projects that you have more than 5 edits. Only what I saw was edits related with bot requests (most of them) and not vandalism combat. You were asked by Jafeluv if you have crosswiki experience and you linked to this page, that shows edits unrelated with vandalism combat and reverts made in just one day in one wiki. In my opinion, the link provided is not sufficient for we to say that you have enough experience. Is there any other examples of you work?” Teles (Talk @ C G) 02:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support One of the best Wikipedians we have. Cobain 13:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Mostafazizi 22:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose I completely agree with Mard and Teles, and also didn't liked the "spam" the candidate made in IRC when he asked several people (including me) to vote here. Since he asked... here I am. Béria Lima msg 22:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
    Ah, IRC canvassing. Slightly less bad than meatpuppets, but still something which he /really/ shouldn't be doing. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Very little experience with anti-vandalism cross-wiki.Salamat msg 00:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Salman and Mardetanha are right, what they said has unfortunately happened and we can't trust on him because of this.Mirza.mashti 17:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support He has done very well in cross-wiki countervandalism. Hydriz 04:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
    • I mean, seriously — where? Am I missing something? Seb az86556 05:53, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Closing as   Not done, not consensus at this time. Feel free to apply again when you become more active. -- Màñü飆¹5 talk [es] 19:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for peoples who supported me, i will request again when i got more active. Mjbmr Talk 20:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Global rollback for Waihorace

After a month, I request it again. I am now more active on CVN (SWMT), and have about 60 cross wikis contributions on revert vandal, copyvio marking and etc. Also, at the last time I have mention that I am the sysop on zhwn & testwiki, and patroller + rollbacker on zhwp, autopatroller + rollbacker on a small wiki yuewp. I will be still active on CVN #cvn-sw channel in about 12:00 ~ 14:00 UTC and some non-busy hour. For more easy to revert vandal, I request this rights. I know that it should not be use in edit war or I may be blocked and right removed. Finally, if you have any problem on this request, feel free to ask and I will reply you as soon as possible. --Waihorace 03:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Question - I'm sorry, but I still see very little actual countervandalism activity. I have also never seen you active in the SWMT - discussing things with other users, commenting on these requests. Can you please provide me with some examples of reverts that span multiple languages, so both myself and everyone else viewing this request can get some sort of idea of how you do past the language barrier? Thanks. Ajraddatz (Talk) 04:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
    I am now on #cvn-sw. Just the time before I request, I revert on [1][2][3][4], although it just have small edit because I request a global lock account on #wikimedia-stewards and stopped the vandalism. Some of my edit is "{{Delete}}" so it may not be seen on the contribution page (It has been deleted by admin). Or may be I am only active on 12:00 ~ 14:00 for weekday and some other time on weekend so you may not see me... Finally, thank you for your question. --Waihorace 06:10, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Per examples of experience above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 13:41, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support - Seems to be fine to me. -Barras 19:56, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, why not - Hoo man (talk) 20:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 09:12, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   SupportDerHexer (Talk) 09:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support User is able to fight vandalism well but just a small note to the candidate: Please also help follow #cvn-zh-scan, thanks. Hydriz 09:32, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
    Reply OK, but seems #cvn-sw is more important so I will always be there. In non-peak hours I may on #cvn-zh-scan also (zhwikis have a number of local rollback). --Waihorace 11:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Seems to have sufficient experience with crosswiki anti-vandalism. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 11:54, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Yes please. –BruTe talk 15:45, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. No reason why not Ruy Pugliesi 15:55, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support mickit 15:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support I don't know him that well, but global rollback is no big deal and he has shown his cross-wiki experience. Trijnstel 17:30, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Aye. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 17:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment Thank you for all your support, and the vote is going to close... --Waihorace 11:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
    • so does that mean you retract or what? MoiraMoira 15:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
      Done Per unanimous consensus. Ruslik 18:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions

Temporary global sysop for Addihockey10

Greetings, I am currently active at the English Wikipedia and also Commons. I am requesting temporary global sysop rights in order to work on duplicated images at smaller Wikis, which will involve primarily deletion and changing of file names if necessary. The purpose is to clean up the smaller wikis of images that have been replaced by Wikimedia Commons images. I did this at bewiki linky and no issues happened there. I actually do not qualify for permanent GS, but after advising with a meta steward they found it fine to be able to request temporary GS for this kind of work. I originally thought of requesting temporary sysop on each individual wiki but after discussion with another user we found it easier to just request temporary Global Sysop. Thank you for your kind consideration. --Addihockey10 23:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

  •   Support, I support that request. —DerHexer (Talk) 23:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support (see below) axpdeHello! 05:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Questions - How long do you think that this will take? What wikis in specific are you planning to work on? Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
    To be brutally honest I have no idea how long this will take. I will be going down the alphabetical list of small wikis and I'll try to get them all done properly - my guess is 3 months. If I cannot get it all done in the 3 month term then a steward shall remove my rights and should I wish to continue I must re-apply for a second "term". I'm completely open to other suggestions if the community feels my above length too long. --Addihockey10 00:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
    Actually, my request for GS was based on the same argument. I am admin on commons and trying my best to delete duplicate files ... but some times commons delinker isn't able to substitute the files automatically. And it's still some work to do, so I'd even support an unlimited GS! axpdeHello! 05:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment Is there technically such a thing as a temporary global sysop? I have no issues per se with the request but does policy allow it? We wouldn't permit temporary stewards, I'd prefer permanent status being asked for instead. fr33kman 14:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
There has never been a temporary global sysop - but after consulting with a steward it was decided that temporary global sysop would be better than individually adding/removing temp. sysop flags on each and every individual small wiki. --Addihockey10 22:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Also I wouldn't qualify for permanent global sysop as I have not been a sysop for (6 months is it?) on a WMF wiki. --Addihockey10 22:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Well a steward is just the one voice, I'm just a little uncomfortable with it not being discussed first since a temporary global sysop that doesn't qualify for permanent global sysop is being given tools in a way that the community did not agree to; a standard was set. We had enough trouble getting GS through as it is. fr33kman 23:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
True - but it doesn`t take 6 months as a sysop to be temp. sysop to request temp. sysop on each individual wiki - this was suggested to make it easier for both me and the stewards instead of adding and removing rights hundreds of times. Addihockey10 23:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm also skeptical of getting yet anther exception in what appears to be some backroom-deal. Seb az86556 01:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Seb, I'd not, personally, classify this as a "back room deal". A steward was asked an opinion, the candidate was told to run for temp GS and see what happens. I AGF on both the part of the candidate and the steward he spoke to. My only real concern at this point is that the community has never approved such an entity as a temporary (ie: not qualified for GS in their own right and/or only needing it for a certain task(s)) global sysop. I equate it to asking for temporary steward, would that ever get approved? fr33kman 03:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Something has to be done to add such actions, but I don't feel a bastardisation of the concept of global sysops; which passed by a narrow margin, so I'm going to oppose based on the judgement that something better should be done for the candidate, whom I do trust. fr33kman 06:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment Your contributions on Commons are not that extensive so I would find it hard to make a judgement based on that. --Herby talk thyme 16:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I generally take care of duplicated images and copying to commons, using the File Upload Bot, although not much more, but a couple more were uploaded using that bot. However if you look at my deleted contributions on enwiki you can see I am quite experienced in dealing with duplicated images. Addihockey10 22:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I have concerns with your lack of maturity, and as an extension of that, the real reason why you are requesting these rights. Throughout the little while that I've "known" you, you've come off as a bit immature, as well as being a bit focussed on obtaining rights on various projects. Things like requesting IPBE on enwp and simplewp when you don't really need them are one example, and your request for global IPBE below is another. Then you show up here, having dealt with duplicate files on one wiki previously and having very little experience on commons, and request a 3 month term as a global sysop so that you can participate in activities which you really aren't that active in. After seeing you do things like beg for your admin flag on the ACC sandbox, and add yourself to the CVN whitelist with the summary "awesome user", these requests cause me to question your motives a bit. Are you really doing this to help out, or is it more so you can say that you've been a global sysop please don't answer this? However, because my personal intuition is not relevant, I'll stick to opposing per the fact that you don't have any real experience in this area, as well as not meeting the prerequisites. Also, saying that you aren't requesting this for bragging rights or attempting to justify your actions is not what I am wanting here - please display your good intentions in your actions, not just in words. Sorry. Ajraddatz (Talk) 03:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    Can you kindly provide some diffs? :) fr33kman 03:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    Most of the examples I've given are from the IRC, which I don't keep logs of. There is, however, his enwp rights log and his simplewp rights log, as well as the request for global IPBE two sections below this. I think that User:Gordonrox24 would remember about the whitelisting, and User:Stwalkerster about the stuff with the ACC sandbox if you wanted to confirm it with them. Ajraddatz (Talk) 04:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    There are other reasons for the IPBE - ones that I didn`t put down there but concerns my own personal safety. --Addihockey10 13:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I'm failing to see a legitimate need for the global sysop bit here. If all you want to do is cleanup duplicate media files, requesting the assistance of local sysops should be more than sufficient. -FASTILY (TALK) 03:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    While that would be ideal, it`d be more efficient if I do it myself - some projects probably only have a small handful of administrators - where they already have the job of managing the project on their own. Look at enwiki for example - we have hundreds of sysops, but that backlog doesn`t seem to be getting any smaller. No one Few people are really willing to clear it and it only gets bigger and bigger. I`m one of those few people and I`m willing to clear out the cross-wiki commons backlog. --Addihockey10 13:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
    Then you should also be willing to cooperate with those wikis, e.g. ask them for the needed permissions. Seb az86556 23:42, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
    All 582 of them? --Addihockey10 23:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Essentially, yes. Not all of the wikis have images needing cleanup, and I am sure you can get some of the local sysops there to just do it if you ask kindly. Joe Gazz84 23:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
  Not done per no consensus at this time. Sorry. PeterSymonds 02:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Global sysop for Jon Harald Søby

The following request is closed: done

Hi folks! I would like to become a global sysop to be able to help fight crosswiki abuse whenever I come across it; granted, I haven't been very active crosswiki-wise lately, but as some may know I used to be a Steward from 2006 to 2009, and have a pretty good idea of what is necessary I think. I will of course try and be more active crosswiki-wise if given access to this tool, but cannot promise any drastic change, but would help whenever I can. :-) Jon Harald Søby 08:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

  •   Give steward-rights instead ;) Laaknor 08:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Suppørt, obviously. Jafeluv 08:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Give steward-rights instead per Laaknor Mardetanha talk 08:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • yes, please --Mercy 10:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Selvfølgelig -- Dferg ☎ talk 11:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support but with the same objection as laaknor. –Juliancolton | Talk 11:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, but I would prefer steward rights as well - Hoo man (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - per above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 15:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - no objections. Trijnstel 17:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support; agree with Laaknor. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 17:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support. PeterSymonds 17:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   A favor, trusted user. Future steward, I believe... Alex Pereira falaê 17:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Aye. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 17:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Yes --Dalibor Bosits © 17:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support --Mjbmr Talk 18:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support of course. Savhñ 20:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Yep :) mickit 20:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support but restore steward rights too. :-P —DerHexer (Talk) 20:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support -- Màñü飆¹5 talk es 20:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support ;)--Ομιλία Sahim 20:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support -- Tegel (Talk) 21:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 21:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support -- Maximillion Pegasus 21:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support absolutely -- Nick1915 - all you want 21:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support we need more global sysops and as a former steward ... :) fr33kman 22:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • SupportBruTe talk 05:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Obviously return as steward would be acceptable but it would be crazy not to grant global sysop. --Herby talk thyme 16:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Give him steward! :-) LeinaD (t) 17:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support, but I do agree with the "Give steward-rights instead" idea :D Béria Lima msg 19:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Support Per all above. --WizardOfOz talk 20:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. JenVan (talk) 08:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. — Dawid talk 10:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Why need votes here :-? Memo18(contribs|talk|ro.wp(t)) 18:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
  Done per unanimous support Matanya 01:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast. Thank you Matanya and thanks all for voting. :-)) Jon Harald Søby 06:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Global sysop for Bhawani Gautam Rhk

Hi! I have been working ne wikis as the adm and contributing on other indic( languages written in Devanagari scripts e.i. Hindi, Sanskrit, Nepali, Bhojapuri). i added phonetic writing tools and other gadgets on wikis where am working as an adm. But on other wikis i had to request others to add such scripts please see this, this and this. If i get flag of global sysop i can do such work myself. I think, Vandalism can be tackled by native speakers of the particular language. Small wikis also have problem of cross wiki vandalism. For doing above i need global sysop right. thanks.-- Bhawani 02:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

  •   Comment For this purpose it is better to have editinterface rights, then you can edit the pages i MediaWiki namespace (including Common.js). Jon Harald Søby 10:39, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment there have been similar rejected requests last year; see here and here. Seb az86556 11:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  • I do not think that the global sysop flag is intended for the purposes expressed above by the requester. -- Dferg ☎ talk 12:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Sorry, but the tool was intended for other purposes. If you want to implement tools on wikis, then you may ask for a tempoary local adminship on a certain wiki instead of having this global tool. -Barras 12:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't see a need for GS. –BruTe talk 14:29, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. per above. GS is not intended to implement tools. -FASTILY (TALK) 10:12, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose What Barras and Jon Harald Soby said. GS is usually given to active crosswiki vandal fighters; editinterface or temp admin on specific wikis is better in this case. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
  •   lack of understand of the tool's usage fr33kman 01:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
      Not done per lack of consensus at this time. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Requests for global editinterface permissions

Global editinterface for Hydriz

Due to the upgrade of Wikimedia wikis to 1.17wmf1, I would like to help lighten the load of Krinkle in resolving the issues that arise due to the upgrade. I have recently helped one wiki(etwikisource) with this with the help of a Global Sysop but given the huge amount of wikis Wikimedia has, it would be better if I had Global editinterface so that I won't have to trouble the Global Sysops with all the requests. Thanks in advance for those supporting my request. --Hydriz 10:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Support, he is trusty enough and there is really a lot to do - Hoo man (talk) 10:55, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Thanks for volunteering, but I must oppose because I do not trust him with such a tool. Hydriz's attitude shows a lack of clue (in my eyes). For example, he has used his bot to do unapproved tasks, even when warned repeatedly by several users against doing so (see this). Based on his actions on wiki, and my interactions with him, I can't trust him with this tool. The request itself is valid, but my opposition is based on lack of trust. Regards, Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 11:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   Comment In case you haven't noticed, there are local sysops as well, so you won't have to "trouble" the global sysops. Seb az86556 11:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Unbelievably Strong Oppose - You cannot deny that Hydriz is making this request for the right reasons, however, quite frankly, I don't trust him with any rights locally at Simple English WP and, therefore, find it unbelievable that he has even considered applying for global rights, even with the validity of the reasoning for the request. Why? Well, for a number of reasons. As Pmlineditor has mentioned above, Hydriz continued to use his bot at Simple without approval despite being given numerous warnings to stop. As a result it is now blocked, and the user has made no attempt to appeal this, presumably meaning he sees it's perfectly legitimate (Which it is.). He also "takes over" a community area without a consensus and in clear violation of en:WP:OWN. Other diffs [5], [6], [7], [8] (And with a further follow-up to his signature [9]) and [10]. There are more, but I need to go do some coursework. In short: granting the flag is completely inappropriate and the user hasn't got the trust levels from me for it. Others may disagree, though, but I just have a bad feeling if this was to be approved. BG7 12:45, 27 February 2011
  • Oppose - Per concerns raised above over lack of trust. Ajraddatz (Talk) 15:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. concerns with judgement. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  •   no sorry trust issues really. fr33kman 02:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

  Not done per concerns raised above. --Mercy 09:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Global editinterface for Hoo man

The following request is closed: done
I granted Hoo man global editinterface for a few minutes to fix document.writes. The permission has now been removed. Just noting here for the archive. --PeterSymonds 17:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Requests for global ip block exemption permissions

Global IP block exempt for Zhxy_519

I contribute to Chinese Wikipedia and live in China now. To visit Wikimedia projects fluently, I had to use some open-proxy search softwares like Freegate. So I ask you to give me this qualify,thanks, --Zhxy 519 12:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

adds, one more reason I need this qualify is that sometimes I need to edit photos on Commons and foreign language links among wikimedia projects.--Zhxy 519 12:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, a lot of people in China need this. --Waihorace 13:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Seems uncontroversial. The user already has local ipbe at zh.wikipedia. Jafeluv 13:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support fr33kman 03:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Valid reason for request, support. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 15:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support User has a legitimate need for the tool. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Keep up the good work on the Chinese Wikipedia ;) --Addihockey10 17:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, per Waihorace. Ruy Pugliesi 14:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  Done. PeterSymonds 02:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Kuailong

When I edit Wikimedia projects other than Chinese Wikipedia, open proxies are needed because of the need to bypass the censorship of China gov.I promise that I won't use this flag improperly, Thanks. --Kuailong 14:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Support User has a valid reason to require this flag. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Valid reason for Global IPBE, support. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 09:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Valid reason, no reason to oppose. Addihockey10 14:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - Joe Gazz84 14:33, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Of course. That's a strong and valid reason. Ruy Pugliesi 18:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support mickit 18:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support--Darwinius 19:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  • This requests are not a vote nor a discussion. Don't bother supporting or opposing here, thanks. Only if there's a good reason we will be granting this permission, no matter how much the request has been supported or opposed. -- Dferg ☎ talk 22:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
  Permission granted. -- Màñü飆¹5 talk es 23:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Removal of global ip-block exemption

Please remove my global IPEXEMPT... I'm no longer requiring it. Thank you, NonvocalScream 06:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

  Done per your request. If you need it again, feel free to ask for it again in this section. --Bsadowski1 07:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Kknundy

I am a graduate student at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and hence spend most of my time logged in from within the university network. As is obvious from a project of this size, I sometimes come across linguistic/factual discrepancies, which I can then not edit due to a global IP block. I am actively involved in FOSS as well as technical writing and well understand the implications improper actions can have on accessibility of important information, but I also appreciate that inaccurate information or presentation is at least as harmful. I guarantee not to use the whitelisting for any vandalism or otherwise improper activity. You can find relevant information about me at my Wikipedia-en user page. Thanks, --Kknundy 03:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC) Kknundy

Q. What IP addresses do you use? (e-mail me privately). Your current IP address does not seem to be globally blocked as you are able to post here. Ruslik 19:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Global blocks don't apply on Meta, so being able to post here doesn't really say anything about the IP being blocked or not. Jafeluv 22:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure of the IP blocks I use. Next time I am online from within the university, I'll mail you the IP. Meanwhile 1 IP I apparently got a block for is : 143.89.107.180 Thanks, --Kknundy
This IP does not appear to be blocked. Ruslik 07:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
This gave a confirmed block yesterday: 175.159.121.21 Kknundy
Also this is blocked right now : 143.89.107.15 Kknundy
Strangely, none of those IPs appear to have been blocked globally or locally. Could you describe the block message you're getting? This is important because we need to know what kind of block you are affected by -- for example, a global IP block exemption would not allow you to bypass a local block. Jafeluv 10:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
This block message http://img.susepaste.org/95800732 has been obtained from both 143.89.225.62 and 143.89.107.15. Gateway : 143.89.231.254 and Nameserver 143.89.14.7, 143.89.14.8. Kknundy
This is related to this block. Ruslik 17:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not familiar with wiki admin practices. So I do not understand why a block for a different IP from the ones I use should affect me. From what I understand by Ruslik's link, I'm asking at the right place. If my course of action should be otherwise, i.e. I'm knocking the wrong door, please advise. Kknundy
  • No objections here to grant the flag. -Barras 16:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Valid reason for asking the flag; support. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 17:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok,   Done. Ruslik 07:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Kknundy