Steward requests/Global permissions/2018-03

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Akhiljaxxn

Not ending before 14 March 2018 12:53 UTC

Hi, I'd like to request global rollback to help in crosswiki vandal-whacking. I'm an admin on Malayalam wiki so I'm very familiar with the rollback tool and know when to use it and when not to. I'm also an active vandal fighter in the english wiki,hope having global rollback makes matters much more easy work wise.--Akhiljaxxn (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  • Oppose, sorry, cross-wiki activity is very low less than 50 wikis doesn't convince me. Also, I've reviewed this user's edits in the wikis that edited, and none of them (except en/ml wikis) have activity related to cross-wiki vandalism fighting. --Stïnger (会話) 13:03, 9 March 2018 (UTC).[]
  •   Oppose, as lack of crosswiki contributions. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 11:45, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose Few anti-vandal cross-wiki contributions. —AlvaroMolina ( - ) 16:51, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  • No thanks, it's you who got reverted here and here. Also your creation of Jackson family was a direct copy from the enwiki article and you didn't even tell it anywhere. Stryn (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose Low crosswiki activity. Esteban16 (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose No demonstrated need. Nihlus 09:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Not done, no consensus --Alaa :)..! 17:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for Micael D.

Micael D. (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Micael D., Why do you use VPN for editing? — regards, Revi 11:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]
-revi Personal reasons. Micael D. (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]
The user has emailed me about this. He is using a VPN service for privacy and security reasons, and some IP addresses are eventually under global blocks. RadiX 14:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global IP block exempt for yangke19941112

Hi, I cannot join Counter-Vandalism Unit but due to global block. Can I take temporary global IP block exempt? --Yangke19941112 (talk) 11:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Not done you don't seem to be caught by any global block. --Vituzzu (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global IP block exempt for Psm

Looks like some NordVPN IP blocks are blocked globally. I use NordVPN for "simple & legitimate" purposes, i.e. just to provide basic privacy when connecting on the internet while travelling or across dubious public wifi networks. However I'm not travelling online anonymously, I'm properly logged in on my global wikipedia account. Looks like only recourse is to either not contribute, or request a global permission to be exempt from blocks. The latter would obviously apply only if I'm logged in, thus, would solve the issue. Thx. --Psm (talk) 00:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done Ruslik (talk) 08:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global IP block exempt for Kailash29792

Changing my PC settings to "no proxy" didn't work. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done, until 24 December 2018. Trijnsteltalk 09:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global IP block exempt for YBot

The service provider hosting the source code for YBot uses the IP address in the block 173.254.28.*. Could you please handle this? Thanks and regards. --Superyetkin (talk) 11:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done --Alaa :)..! 12:40, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for TonyBallioni

Not ending before 11 March 2018 16:25 UTC

I've been doing more work on request for unblock on the English Wikipedia, and one of the most frequent unblock requests that show up are based on username blocks. Currently, I skip them completely because I don't have the ability to rename, and having this right would help cut down on the backlog there. I'm not the most active on cross-wiki things, but I've been getting more involved in meta, and have some activity on Commons helping with copyright when there are cross-wiki copyright issues. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:25, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]

  •   Support Trusted User on English Wikipedia. No Concerns. —AlvaroMolina ( - ) 16:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support trusted user with a valid need for the tool - TNT 22:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Of course. hiàn 22:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Trusts on you. SA 13 Bro (talk) 22:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Comment, unblock requests should NOT (and not a free pass) enable additional tools, especially the global rename tools. Other admins (especially those based on wikis not enwiki) people have been denied due to "lack of experience". Tony needs to demonstrate experience with the rename process BEFORE receiving the rename tool. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Per TNT. Trusted user. Valid use of the renaming tool. --Majora (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Tony has experience with the unblocking process on enwiki, which is a valid use for these permissions. As with all candidates who don't have much cross-wiki experience, I recommend that you start off just handling requests on enwiki, and then branch out as you gain more experience. – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Rschen7754 23:12, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support While I understand's concerns (And in fact I do agree that simply answering username unblock requests is and should not be a free pass to getting global rename), I am far more concerned with the trustworthiness of the candidate when determining whether or not to grant global rename, since this is a position that requires a serious level of trust not to break the servers. TonyBallioni has OTRS and sysop access on the English Wikipedia (adminship is not easy to get there, trust me), which already wins more than half the battle for me. The other part that pulls me to support are my interactions with him, particularly off-wiki interactions. I trust TonyBallioni. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Eurodyne (talk) 23:58, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support trustworthy user. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  • Fine by me. Trusted. --Stïnger (会話) 00:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC).[]
  •   Question: @TonyBallioni: Can you provide some examples where you skipped an unblock request because of a renaming issue or where you had to wait for a long period of time? Do you have any examples where you unblocked someone and directed them to w:en:WP:CHUS to make a request to be renamed? I'm not seeing a demonstrated need nor am I fond of the idea of just handing over global renamer rights to any administrator who says "they want to handle username unblock requests" on their wiki. Thanks. Nihlus 09:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
    • No, as I don’t keep a record of unblock requests I don’t even look at. If you aren’t familiar with how en:CAT:RFU looks, there is a sortable table with a note on the far side as to if it’s a username block. I see username block, I don’t even look. As to your and the IP’s point about knowledge and experience, I’m relatively familiar with how the process works, but never worked in the clerking area as there typically isn’t a need as there are plenty of volunteers and the culture on tends to discourage self-appointed clerks in areas where there are competent people who have the right: might not be the case at renames, but it’s common enough elsewhere that I wouldn’t do it because I trust the people who work our renaming desk, and think they are smart enough to handle the process on their own and with the existing group of volunteer clerks that my presence as a non-renamer wouldn’t do much at all.

      This is also a relatively common request for en admins who work in the unblock area: I can think of at least three who requested the permission for this reason. It’s useful, and per Ajraddatz’s point, I have no intent of diving in headfirst into handling complicated requests. It’d be a pretty straightforward use for changing users with less than 100 edits from usernames like Poooooop and XYZMARKETING to things that comply with the username policy. I don’t think that should be an automatic grant of the rights, but I think it’s a valid need and I don’t think you’re likely to see me breaking the server by renaming someone with 200,000 edits or of creating copyright issues by handling usurps of accounts with substantial contributions. I know my own limits and the limits of the tool, and would defer anything I wasn’t familiar with to people more experienced than me. TonyBallioni (talk) 10:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]

      • I'm aware of how it works, so much so that I know that blocks will appear there even if the user has been renamed, so you shouldn't really be skipping them for that reason alone. There is a very high chance that you believing username blocks are "one of the most frequent unblock requests that show up" is wrong because it's possible that they have already been taken care of (you admit that you skip them so it's apparent you haven't checked to see if they have been renamed by that point). A lot of the time, more information is needed from the user before they are unblocked, so the unblock request might sit there for a couple days. Additionally, you not having renamer rights is hardly a barrier to these users getting unblocked. I'm sorry, "it's useful" is a weak argument that can really be applied to anything without really meaning anything, and your comments here tell me you want rather than need the rights and that you aren't really familiar with the process. Nihlus 10:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
        • To be perfectly blunt, this reads as you trying to make a point because I denied you a permission on where I felt you didn’t meet the granting criteria and didn’t have a particularly strong need to overcome it, and where you then got very mad over it twice. I’m very familiar with how the process works: I see the requests if I’m the blocking admin or if for some other reason I come across the talk page, which happens somewhat frequently as I work regularly with newly created pages. I’ve had to contact a renamer a few times to deal with obvious good faith users who need a rename, and I see users who need to be renamed after a spam user block. I typically don’t handle these new requests if they are softblocks because I think that is better for someone to do all at one time to make it easier for the editor. My reference to skipping is that for the newer ones it’s clear that a renamer hasn’t touched it yet and for the older ones, it’s normally equally clear that another admin is in the process of setting unblock conditions. I won’t be angry if I don’t get this, as it’s literally just my volunteering to make one aspect of the process work more smoothly. If people feel that’s not a good enough reason, I’m fine. TonyBallioni (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose No demonstrated need in addition to uncalled for aspersions above. You have no renaming experience, little UAA experience, almost no RFCN experience and you should not be given the tools simply because you have sysop rights on one project as there is no current way to restrict those rights to a single project. Nihlus 11:11, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
    • That's fine, you're entitled to your view here, and I won't try to convince you otherwise, but so people don't think I'm casting aspersions without evidence, here is the background I referenced above: denied request, other admins user talk, ~ 2 months later on my user talk. TonyBallioni (talk) 11:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
      • I have no axe to grind and would oppose any other administrator doing the same thing that you are doing now, so, yes, you are casting false aspersions, and I will ask that you stop. Nihlus 11:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
        • Tony, no need to accuse Nihlus of anything. Anyone is free to voice their opinions here, and the community (and closing steward) can consider how good the rationale is. Nihlus, if you have a negative history with another editor, best to not draw too much attention at one of their requests for permissions. You're free to whatever opinion you want, but your purpose here could have been accomplished with a two-sentence oppose comment rather than a question and follow-up. Now let's let the rest of the community review this request :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Sure. My name is not dave (talk) 14:24, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Question: Do you intend (or at least consider a possibility) to use the bit to handle other type of requests such as those on WP:CHUS or on meta or on the queue once you become more familiar and confident with the procedure and the tool? Is there something that you would like to "avoid touching"? --Kostas20142 (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[]
    • @Kostas20142: I'm always open to helping once I get more comfortable with things, like ajr pointed out. The global renamers guidelines, however, actually foresees global renamers focusing on their home wiki (and explicitly states that), and that is what I will likely do. If there is a need or backlog at CHUS, I'd be more than willing to help out, but it would not be the focus of my work on-wiki, but rather a way I can help out the community when I am able and there is a need. Additionally, using the ability the way that I'll most likely be using it does impact CHUS and the meta feeds, and the queue in that it lightens the load by allowing the direct rename by a local admin who is familiar with the particular situation by the user: decreasing the global workload, and allowing a user to get back to editing quickly. I'd probably stay away from usurps for a while: I'm familiar with the guidelines there and the copyright implications, but I think that's best left to people who are much more familiar with the process than I will be if I eventually get the renamer bit. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:27, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support I trust Tony not to break the server or do something stupid (intentionally or not). Also I find his response to my question satisfying. The fact that his rationale is not per se a reason to get global rename permissions is not sufficient, is not a reason for me to oppose. --Kostas20142 (talk) 16:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 15:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 15:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support -Hasivetalk • 15:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support I've worked with Tony extensively and have absolutely no concerns when it comes to their potential behaviour when undertaking global renamings. They strike me as someone who is adept at following the rules laid out for global renamers, but more importantly, understands the rationale for such rules existing and, for example, will be able to appropriately explain to users why their requests do not meet the rules, or why technical limitations/issues may impact on renaming requests. I'm confident their work will be of the highest order, demonstrating competency and composure. Nick (talk) 16:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support, I support Tony Ballioni's request because he follows rules and is rather cautious. --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 18:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   SupportDoRD talk 19:15, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  • SupportTulsi Bhagat (talk) 03:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support No concerns. Jon Kolbert (talk) 04:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Trusted User.--Faisal talk 06:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support because he is a trusted user and has a valid reason for the permission. Green Giant (talk) 08:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Why not? Tony is a trusted member of the English Wikipedia community. I don't see any reason to think they would abuse the tool. Wikicology (talk) 15:53, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Vermont (talk) 16:03, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Tony has excellent judgement. Premeditated Chaos (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support -FASTILY 08:58, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Tony's experience is commensurate to the requested permissions. Being active at the UAA desk, and knowing the number of soft blocked users requesting a name change, I understand Tony's perspective quite well. Lourdes 02:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Trijnsteltalk 14:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Tony has the relevant experience. The sole oppose doesn't sway me. --Cameron11598 (talk) 22:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support We get a lot of unblock requests at which involve renaming, and having more trusted admins who can do it will be a help - and TonyBallioni is one of the most capable and trustworthy we have. It will also take pressure off the global rename queues too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:52, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support--Akhiljaxxn (talk) 13:14, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]
      Done Ruslik (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global rename for Avraham

Not ending before 20 March 2018 15:05 UTC

I am stepping down as a steward and have given back pretty much all advanced permissions I have held. However, I do intend to remain partially active on EnWiki, and as an EnWiki bureaucrat, being able to rename would be useful. Since I will no longer have that ability as a steward, I am requesting global rename rights. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  •   Support obviously!   - TNT 15:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support sure. — xaosflux Talk 15:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
    Regarding the 'need' comments before, I've seen a lot of people go in to and out of retirement over the years. I'm confident that Avraham can properly use this permission, and they say they want to continue to help this way so I'm in support in general; if it gets unused inactivity cleanup can come around eventually. — xaosflux Talk 12:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Neutral, if you would have not been a steward but a global renamer you would have lost the global renamer flag due to inactivity (no renames within a year). But I do hope you will use it if granted. Stryn (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
    • Correct. I have less time, which is why I've stepped down as a steward, Commons admin, Commons OS, Enwiki CU, Enwiki OS, OTRS volunteer, and Meta Admin. I intend to be sufficiently (perhaps minimally, but sufficiently) active as an EnWiki 'crat. So I will make time to perform at least the necessary renames to maintain that. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support obviously. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   SupportAjraddatz (talk) 15:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  • Yes. --Stïnger (会話) 16:20, 6 March 2018 (UTC).[]
  •   Support Why not? Wikicology (talk) 18:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   SupportGreen Giant (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support though there should probably be a discussion about stewards who wish to keep some of the global permissions (GR, GS too) after they resign uncontroversially. --Rschen7754 19:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 20:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Per the comments by various established editors above. Lourdes 03:03, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support. RadiX 03:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support.--HakanIST (talk) 06:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Neutral Another case of a current lack of need. I'm not opposing since you have used the right before, but I am entirely unimpressed with the reasons you would like to have the rights after not using them for over a year. Nihlus 07:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Trijnsteltalk 14:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Cameron11598 (talk) 22:06, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Weak support In terms of whether or not I trust the user, the fact that this user is a steward gets an automatic thumbs up from me. I concur with Stryn and would like to see this permission being put to actual use if it is granted, and not kept as a "retirement gift" of sorts like I feel rollback is sometimes on the English Wikipedia after an administrator steps down. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 22:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Obviously trustworthy - if you didn't screw it up as a steward, you're not going to screw it up now ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Eurodyne (talk) 01:47, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   SupportAlvaroMolina ( - ) 02:25, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support -FASTILY 01:44, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support Esteban16 (talk) 19:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Weak support: I agree with K6ka, as Stryn has stated at above. SA 13 Bro (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support--Rufet Turkmen | talk 05:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Buggia 08:27, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support --Kostas20142 (talk) 12:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[]
Done. General consensus is to grant. — regards, Revi 15:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global rename for Los Vegas

Not ending before 7 April 2018 18:52 UTC

--Los Vegas (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  •   Oppose No. No experience. No reason. Blocked on itwiki for block evasion. --Majora (talk) 19:11, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose Indefinite block on home wiki for block evasion and seems the user has no clue on what they're actually requesting. Also, I think may be the user want their account be renamed and made the request in this wrong venue. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:57, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose User is indefinite blocked on Italian Wikipedia for block evasion. —AlvaroMolina ( - ) 22:10, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  • Please provide a reason about why do you need global-rename rights. Things like the block on itwiki or lack of experience in renaming-related areas is also not helpful. --Stïnger (会話) 00:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC).[]
  • Instant   Oppose: no nomination statement (which suggests that you have no idea what you've just applied for) and the block on itwiki completely shatters the trust needed for such a position. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 01:53, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Comment @Los Vegas: Is it Username change request or you ask to take Global renamer permission? --Alaa :)..! 06:34, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@علاء: I ask to take Global renamer permission, because i'd like to help, in my small way. --Los Vegas (talk) 08:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
So   Oppose 1,262 edits & your block log not convincing at all also --Alaa :)..! 13:48, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose Per the itwiki block and the rationale given there "Block evasion: Like the previous account, wrong patrolling, incorrect "advice" to other editors, repeatedly warned, keeps doing it". As well as k6ka's concern about the lack of a motivation statement. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:44, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Strong oppose The user is blocked indefinitely on home wiki for block evasion, so I cannot trust them with this permission --Kostas20142 (talk) 10:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose outside homewiki block, only has activity on one smaller project, no introductory statement as to what they will use this for. — xaosflux Talk 15:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose per k6ka. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose. No, certainly not while indefinitely blocked on their home Wikipedia (especially with that reason). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose, lack of experience. Person gives off weak English skills (a big no-no), and block on itwiki.--Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 12:29, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Not done Closed as not done. No sense of continuing as the result is clear. Stryn (talk) 14:12, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Requests for other global permissions

Global "apihighlimit" for JarBot

Tracked in Phabricator:
task T188846 invalid

for some reason a lot of time i get limit API warning, my bot has bot flag on projects that i work in. is there any chance to get Global "apihighlimit", it well help me a lot, thanks, --جار الله (talk) 14:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]

This is userright is already included in all local bot groups. Ruslik (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@Ruslik0: I know but when i use api between projects i get limit API warning. these errors make my work difficult (Too many values supplied for parameter "titles". The limit is 50.) I believe if the bot have bot flag the limit is 500 some time 5000.

When I run the code on my device I do not get this warning only at tools server i get this warning.--جار الله (talk) 23:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]

If you are having an unexpected technical error, getting it resolved by reporting a bug and getting it fixed would be preferable to trying to bypass it. One thing I can think of - are you failing to authenticate and then running without being logged in (in which an account-level flag won't help anyway). — xaosflux Talk 01:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@Xaosflux: Actually the bot is loggen and even with this warning the bot is editing, i create task in for the bug but as you know fixing bug take a lot of time and my bot running 24/7 and i need to pass this bug to continue my work and when the bug is fixed you can removal the permission.--جار الله (talk) 02:35, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
Are you running pywikibot? There have been several of these fixed recently and appear to be bugs in the client, not the server. — xaosflux Talk 02:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@Xaosflux: Yes i'm running pywikibot.--جار الله (talk) 02:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
See updated links and ping I added to your phab ticket. — xaosflux Talk 02:43, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@Xaosflux: Thank you, i replied there and i hope the bug are fixed quickly.--جار الله (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  Not done Based on جار الله (talk · contribs) comment on phabricator task --Alaa :)..! 04:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for AntiCompositeNumber

Thanks, --Krd 05:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 06:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]

remove global OTRS member for Максим Підліснюк

Thanks, --Krd 07:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 07:30, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]

remove global OTRS member for Coren

Thanks, --Krd 07:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 07:30, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Global interface editor for Nirmos

Back in 2012, URLs in the MediaWiki namespace were globally altered to become protocol-relative. Protocol-relative, in this case, means URLs that start with neither http nor https. sv:Special:Diff/15652298 is an example of such an edit. This was done in preparation for the switch from http to https, which was finalized on June 12, 2015. This probably made sense back in 2012. It allowed for a smooth transition from http to https.

Now, however, protocol-relative URLs are considered an anti-pattern and bad practice with regard to security, performance, and other features.123 Also, with the ongoing deployment of TemplateStyles, it has become clear that TemplateStyles on WMF wikis currently only allows https URLs. In combination with the aforementioned bot run, this makes for a frustrating and confusing experience for an admin trying to move styles from the MediaWiki namespace to the Template namespace, which is the whole point of TemplateStyles.

To save other admins from the frustration and confusion that I've already run in to, I'd like to alter these protocol-relative URLs to explicitly use https, as discussed in phab:T188760. So, the scope of this task is:

  1. All WMF wikis, and
  2. only pages in the MediaWiki namespace, and
  3. only CSS pages, and
  4. only replacements like //upload.wikimedia.org

Nirmos (talk) 02:44, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  •   Oppose Sorry Nirmos, but you have a bad history of requesting this same access repeatedly for odd edge cases that aren't really demonstrating a pressing need. Prior rejections in April 2016, June 2016, November 2016, and May 2017 don't make me very comfortable with you doing this. — xaosflux Talk 03:49, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose per Xaosflux, and also "All WMF wikis" shows little intent to tread carefully on large wikis or any wiki with administrators. --Rschen7754 03:58, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose The user has not demonstrated sufficient experience or confidence for this permission. What it indicates Xaosflux and Rschen7754 is also worrisome. —AlvaroMolina ( - )
  •   Oppose Per the above and prior requests. Nihlus 02:24, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Support. I don't know how you feel about the oppose comment above but I hope you are fine. I think you need to demonstrate the need for this tool and apply again after more years of experience. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose TonyBallioni (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose per Xaosflux --Cameron11598 (talk) 22:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  Not done, no consensus. Matiia (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[]

oathauth-enable for Lars.Dormans

I would like to be able to enable 2FA for my account, thanks, --Lars

@Lars.Dormans: have you read Help:Two-factor authentication (especially the parts about scratch codes)? - TNT 21:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]
@There'sNoTime: Yes i have —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lars.Dormans (talk)
  Done @Lars.Dormans: I've set oathauth-tester on your account. Please keep your scratch codes in a safe place, as you may need them - TNT 22:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for Ganímedes

Thanks, --Ruthven (talk) 09:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

done. — regards, Revi 09:42, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for НоуФрост

Thanks, --Krd 20:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done --Alaa :)..! 20:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]

remove global OTRS member for Seb26

Thanks, --Krd 12:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done --rxy (talk) 12:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for Zoranzoki21

I'd like to contribute to this field as well. Thanks, Zoranzoki21 (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Not done please apply a request on OTRS/Volunteering --Alaa :)..! 20:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[]

remove global OTRS member for Taketa

Thanks, --Krd 09:38, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

done--rxy (talk) 09:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for Lutheraner

Thanks, --Krd 06:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Done. – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[]

add global OTRS member for Taketa

Thanks, --Krd 06:46, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Please re-add. Thx. --Krd 06:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[]
  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 06:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[]

Add oathauth-tester for Sau226

I'd like to have the 2FA permission set up for my account. I understand that if I lose scratch codes I will be locked out of my account and I also agree to back up the secret key, QR codes and scratch codes. In a worst case scenario I can use a PGP key in my possession to go and verify my ID for it to be disabled. Thanks --Sau226 (talk) 08:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[]

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[]