Steward requests/Global permissions/2017-09

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Asaf (WMF)

Rationale: I work in many wikis, and every now and then encounter vandalism (especially on old pages I still watch), like this, where the rollback function would be useful. I am a longtime trusted user and staffer, and I humbly suggest there is zero risk in giving me the rollback tool so I can rollback vandalism when I encounter it, even though I'm not proactively patrolling most wikis. Also see this discussion. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Not ending before 11 September 2017 14:57 UTC
  • Do you have a community account in addition to a WMF one? Ruslik (talk) 18:42, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
    Certainly. This is it. Also linked from the first line under About me on my staff account. Ijon (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
    I think you should request global rollback for your volunteer account. We are not in business here assigning permissions to staff accounts. If you want it for your staff account, you should ask someone in WMF. Ruslik (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I was under the impression that staff were supposed to keep non-work-related edits to articles to volunteer accounts, including reverting vandalism. Is that correct? --Rschen7754 00:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
    yes, that is correct. I suppose the global rollback tool would be useful to me in both accounts. The example diff above is on an old grant page, which I watch in my staff capacity, so I think rolling back the vandalism would have been fine under my staff account. I may well encounter random vandalism (say on article space) on some wiki I visit in the course of my work that would be more appropriately reverted through my volunteer account. I am happy to request separately under my volunteer account as well. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 18:59, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose little to zero reverting of vandalism on smaller wiki's under the volunteer account. Not on the staff account either. Policy states the following: For consideration, users must be demonstrably active in cross-wiki countervandalism or anti-spam activities (for example, as active members of the Small Wiki Monitoring Team) and make heavy use of revert on many wikis. These criteria are certainly not met. Natuur12 (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
    This is somewhat unusual case. We can make an exception. Ruslik (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
    Well, my reading of this criterion is that if the user has a record (for example, documented by diffs) of reverting vandalism on multiple small projects, like it seems to be the case here, they are eligible for a global rollback. I was given global rollback even though I have never been a member of the Small Wiki Monitoring Team, and I am only active on five small projects. I actually became one of the first global rollbackers, and the policies and their implementation stayed the same.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Given rationale applies to many users, but is still out of scope of global rollback. Sorry. --Krd 10:40, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't think staff accounts should be given community rights, period. Staff should go through the appropriate WMF channels to get whatever permissions they need to edit, and those channels should be separate from our community processes. I don't mind giving out global rollback more liberally, but am uncomfortable giving it to a staff account and to someone who isn't active in cross-wiki countervandalism of some small sort at least. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I do not see any significant revert and there is a low cross-wiki activity. If the flag is required for work reasons with WMF then it should be requested not here but with official WMF channels (given that staff in addition to stewards can assign the flag). --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 17:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Above. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 22:13, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose, mostly per Ajraddatz. Low activity in cross-wiki countervandalism. I will prefer that you must use your original account and have sufficient cross-wiki activity reverting vandalism/spam on many wikis, per the policy. But if your request is for staff-related works/tasks, I should have an exception. Following and reading the link you've added in your request, I think that Meta doesn't have a rollbacker permission, but there is a current discussion about adding a local permission on Meta. --Ks-M9 [disc.] 12:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC).
    Just for clarity, that RfC was inspired by this nomination and preceeding discussion linked by Asaf, it was not there when the nomination started.. --Base (talk) 14:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  Not done, no consensus. Matiia (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for Sf46

Hi, I got this message recently, please unlock: Your IP address is in a range which has been blocked on all wikis.

The block was made by Vituzzu ( The reason given is Open proxy: i.e.

   Start of block: 13:54, 30 April 2013
   Expiration of block: 13:54, 30 April 2018

You can contact Vituzzu to discuss the block. You cannot use the "Email this user" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is, and the blocked range is Please include all above details in any queries you make.

Sf46 (talk) 04:57, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sf46: I have added the global IP block exempt right to your account so that you are now able to edit everywhere. @Vituzzu: Would you please take a look at the block settings? Perhaps it could be restricted to anon. users only. Thanks. RadiX 05:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

-Thanks. Sf46 (talk) 05:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for TemTem

Hello, I would like to use Tor while editing Wikimedia wikis, but it seems Wikimedia blocks all Tor exit nodes. I have to use Tor because the country where I live in, the Philippines, is under a "War on Drugs". Martial law is also declared in Mindanao, and still in effect. I am concerned that my government will take hard measures like spying on Filipino citizens and collaborating with the NSA. That's why I am using Tor to prepare if this happens. Thanks, --TemTem (talk) 00:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Is this your first account? Ruslik (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes. TemTem (talk) 09:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Is this a joke? I have been waiting for like four days and I still have no response? You don't trust me, fine, then I will gain your trust. by editing without tor. but remove the "If a Tor exception is granted to you and you don't have an account yet, the steward will also create one for you and you'll receive a temporary password to your email address" at "No open proxies", it seems its just a fantasy. TemTem (talk) 10:49, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  Done Four days is not a long time. Ruslik (talk) 11:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
um, please forget what i said above. why? I can't create a local account at enwiki... I am under the range, the IP address I used for this is Guess this is a very valid rationale, right? TemTem (talk) 11:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
and thanks for the Global IP block btw TemTem (talk) 11:23, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Avatar9n

Currently all wikipedias are blocked in Turkey and i can't edit wikipedia without using VPNs. I want ip block exemption for English wikipedia, not necessarily a global permission. I use this account to edit wikipedia, thanks. - Avatar9n (talk) 16:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 17:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for ArdiPras95

I often edit Wikipedia from mobile devices, so I want IP block exemption for ENWP and IDWP, not necessarily a global permission, thanks, --ArdiPras95 (talk) 21:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:15, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for Dweller

Not ending before 4 September 2017 10:04 UTC

I'm an active en: user, editor and oversighter. More relevantly, I have been a bureaucrat there for some years. I performed several hundred renames there before the rename tool changed. I like helping Wikipedians and I'd like the ability to do so in this way, too. In terms of meta work, I spent nearly two years as a member of the Ombudsman commission, but I am mostly to be found on en:. I am good with policy and understand the GRP. --Dweller (talk) 10:04, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support - No concerns, healthy experience in renaming users and ample evidence of trust in other areas. Nick (talk) 10:49, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlvaro Molina ( - ) 00:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlex Shih (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 23:17, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportFerdous • 13:49, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Trusted user, with significant experience in renames --Kostas20142 (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 16:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support User is an oversighter? Very nearly an automatic support for me, since global rename is largely a position of trust, and if you can be trusted with oversight, you can be trusted with global rename. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 02:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 14:01, 26 August 2017 (UTC)   Weak support because there's no cross-wiki activity --Alaa :)..! 20:28, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
  • +1 —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:57, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - No concerns, trusted user. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Sounds good! Mahir256 (talk) 03:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 12:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support No concerns. Ks0stm (TCGE) 17:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
      Done Ruslik (talk) 20:04, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Global rename for Yamla

Not ending before 23 September 2017 13:50 UTC

Hello! I am an administrator on and very regularly patrol's requests for unblock. Some of these end up requesting a username change. In that case, I can unblock and require they file a request to change their username, but this is an extra step for users to jump through. It's particularly frustrating when users forget to file for a username change and then end up being reblocked; a bad experience, particularly if they are a new user and made an innocent mistake. If given the permissions, I would be quite happy to help out with the global rename queue if that would be helpful. I have read and understand the Global rename policy. --Yamla (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support. We get a lot of rename/unblock requests at, and it's much easier for the blocked user (and helps keep the global rename queue down) if we can do the two in one - being unblocked, then told to go request rename somewhere else (when we have already checked the requested name, so we know it's fine) with the risk of being reblocked if they don't do it quickly enough, really doesn't make it easy for them. And Yamla is a very experienced and trusted admin working on unblock requests. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Extremely active on enwp reviewing unblock requests, and a very trusted user to boot -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 16:03, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user and very active on --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 17:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support one of the most active admins on the unblock front. This would be helpful for us. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlvaro Molina ( - ) 22:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Support, seems to be a good reason to request it. No concerns here. --Ks-M9 [disc.] 22:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC).
  •   Strong support, strong rationale, coming from one of the most active admins of, on unblocks, very trusted, so i see no problem granting this permission. I am sure they will help at global queue at some point as well. --Kostas20142 (talk) 09:39, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support there's no cross-wiki activity! --Alaa :)..! 12:20, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Competent candidate with a use for the tools. – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:55, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 05:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support there's no cross-wiki activity! Only edit in 6 different wikis. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 04:56, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support While I have not interacted with this editor much in the past, they seem sensible and trustworthy enough to use the global rename tool. It is more of a position of trust and knowing how the tool works; cross-wiki activity doesn't really do much to prepare one for global rename and I still don't get why people still bring it out at almost every global rename nomination. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
    Agreed. Cross-wiki activity may be needed when people want to be involved with the global queue, but for these types of requests where the user is active on one wiki it shouldn't be a requirement. Renaming isn't hard; if users want to expand their activity after getting experience in the area they are familiar with then that's no problem either. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Boing! & k6ka. Ks0stm (TCGE) 22:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 05:41, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  Done Ruslik (talk) 17:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Requests for other global permissions

remove global OTRS member for Wikitanvir

Thx. --Krd 10:31, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 10:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Panyd

Thx. --Krd 09:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 09:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Kh80

Thx. --Krd 11:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 11:39, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for KrakatoaKatie

Thx. --Krd 14:55, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 17:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Guanaco

Thx. --Krd 12:19, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 13:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Primefac

Thx. --Krd 10:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. RadiX 11:07, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for RadiX

Thx. --Krd 12:02, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 13:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for DarwIn

Thx. --Krd 09:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 09:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for DarwIn

(sic) Thx. --Krd 13:07, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. RadiX 13:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Anthere

Thx. --Krd 07:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Rrburke

Thx. --Krd 07:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Kaldari

Thx. --Krd 07:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 08:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Rubin16

Thx. --Krd 11:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

  DoneMarcoAurelio (talk) 11:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Access to 2FA for Suaveness

In recent months, I've received lots of LOGIN FAILED notification. Though I've changed the password, I think it would be safer if I enable the 2FA. Hope that I could have this access. Thanks! --Suaveness (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. @Suaveness: please remember to keep your scratch codes in a secure place; many users lose them and get locked out of their account without them. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! --Suaveness (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Ra'ike

Thx. --Krd 08:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 09:58, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Beria

Thx. --Krd 04:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

  Done--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 05:03, 21 September 2017 (UTC)