Steward requests/Global permissions/2019-01

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for PlyrStar93

Not ending before 1 January 2019 02:44 UTC

Hi everyone, I have been reverting vandalism at multiple Wikimedia projects for quite some time. Throughout the process I have gained experience in removing vandalism made in various languages (even if I don't speak them), and monitor recent changes feed for small wikis to find problematic edits when I have the time. Up until now I use the undo function which can be slow and inefficient if vandalism is made in multiple consecutive edits or in a large number of pages. Furthermore, my edits get disallowed by abuse filter false positive occasionally, making it impossible for me to revert vandalism in such cases. Rollback should overcome these difficulties. I already have access to the rollback tool in several projects so I am familiar with how to use it. I wish to have this tool activated on my account globally to fight vandalism in a more productive way. Meanwhile, should some mass vandalism occur, I will have the ability to mark my rollbacks as bot edits so as to not flood recent changes. Thanks! -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 02:44, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlvaroMolina ( - ) 02:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great xwiki work, responsible, and a prolifically helpful editor. Vermont (talk) 02:52, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support how this has not happen sooner continues to boggle my mind ;-) Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 03:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support.Clearly qualified, thanks for your crosswiki work.--Cohaf (talk) 05:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good anti-vandalism work. Leaderboard (talk) 05:48, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Sure. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:20, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Eurodyne (talk) 08:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support This guy has been a Wikipedian for as long as I have, and he's now a global rollbacker candidate while I'm merely nobody (XD) --Super Wang on zhwiki (Share your opinions) 09:16, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support.--HakanIST (talk) 10:55, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I'm fairly sure Plyr will be able to put it to good use. Saederup92 (talk) 11:02, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Schniggendiller (talk) 11:30, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support. The more globally assigned rollbackers we've, the better we move forward. Have seen your cross-wiki contributions to revert vandalism, even if you haven't thoroughly polished that language. I must say, quite impressed. I'd say immediately instate the rights, 'cause I've observed, a lot of cross-wiki abuse and vandalism, either via Sockpuppetry methods or, in a unknown third-party dialect. This'll be a great opportunity, needing more global anti-vandal reverters is a precious asset to the whole Community and, the Wikimedias' project itself. Thanks for your contributions, User:PlyrStar93. Rekonedth (talk) 12:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support absolutely --Defender (talk) 20:18, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:35, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support and I think this request is long overdue. :P Hiàn (talk) 04:17, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support No brainer. Plyrstar93 has been been consistent in dealing with disruption across wikis, time to make their work easier. –Ammarpad (talk) 04:24, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Of course Irwin talk2me 18:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely. Operator873 (talk) 18:23, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Turkmen talk 23:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very active user on xwiki stuff. Esteban16 (talk) 23:19, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  Done, Linedwell [talk] 09:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, happy New Year! -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 16:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Global rollback for J ansari

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Not ending before 7 January 2019 13:50 UTC

Hello, I'm J ansari , a member of SWMT and every day active in the fighting cross-wiki spam/vandalism. I have experience reverting vandalism using rollback button and RTRC tool in the wikis where I already have it. I usually patrol In recent change and sometimes to remove vandalism I have to undo multiple changes made by the same user, so rollback would greatly help in this and overall, which will also save time as well as increase my ablity to do more for project. Thank you! -J. Ansari Talk 13:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

You have edits on 32 wikis, and only on 11 of which you have edits in the last month. These are the hi-wikis and larger wikis like commons, meta, en, and wikidata. Checking your xwiki edits, I see little to no evidence of you doing SWMT work. Thus, I am currently leaning oppose, but would like to hear your response prior to a !vote. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 14:13, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Per Vermont for now.--Cohaf (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I see too little xwiki work. Most of your reverts are on Hindi-language projects, and it would be better if candidates make reverts on wikis in many languages. Esteban16 (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per my comment above to which they have not responded. Vermont (talk) 19:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. Not replied while still editing elsewhere. In addition, crosswiki activity is lacking.--Cohaf (talk) 22:30, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Insufficient cross-wiki experience. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

  Not done - early comments suggest that the candidate is too new to request these permissions --Alaa :)..! 11:55, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Global rollback for EVinente

The following request is closed: Withdrawn by user. Trijnsteltalk 12:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC) Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Not ending before 3 February 2019 21:51 UTC

Hi folks. I'm currently sysop, checkuser and oversighter at, but sometimes I edit on other wikis reverting vandalisms and cross-wiki abuse, as you can see at my global contributions. So, I request this permission to help in other wikis to fight against vandalism. Questions are welcome. Cheers. EVinente (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I apologize; I am not able to find the xwiki anti-vandalism in your global contributions that you refer to. Can you give a few examples? Thanks, Vermont (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Vermont:, sure, in,, meta, for example. EVinente (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Those are 3 large wikis with their own local policies and procedures for requesting rollback; global rollback is usually used for small-wiki anti-vandalism. Vermont (talk) 22:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
No opinion on this request, but per Vermont's point, I've gone ahead and given you rollback on TonyBallioni (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Vermont:, you’re right. I think that I must have more experience on small wikis. Thank you by your comment. And @TonyBallioni:, thanks for the permission. EVinente (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
For global rollback, I think you should demonstrate your ability to revert vandalism or spam in a relatively large number of wikis, especially the ones with languages you are not familiar with. In addition you should show that you can do it consistently instead of just a few days. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 23:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
EVinente, then your last comment means that you're withdrawing this request? No offense, it just gave me that impression. Esteban16 (talk) 23:22, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
For meta sake, I also recommending the closing steward (if is also a meta sysop) to grant patroller rights. This is a clearly competent user with demonstrated need. As for this request, I think Global Rollback is not the correct tool but thanks for all your works combating vandalism xwiki. --Cohaf (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
@Esteban16:, yes, you're right. I just forgot to ask to a steward to close this. Thanks @Cohaf:, I'll take more experience with xwiki vandalism combat to made another request when I'm reach that. @Trijnstel, MarcoAurelio, and Tegel: or other , please give a hand with that. Thanks to everyone. EVinente (talk) 11:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 09:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Insufficient cross-wiki contributions. As others said, I think you are better off having rollback individually at each project. Leaderboard (talk) 10:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Request withdrawn. I'll grant patroller rights on Meta for them. Trijnsteltalk 12:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Atcovi

Not ending before 30 January 2019 00:27 UTC

Hello. I'm Atcovi and I'm requesting the community to grant me global sysop rights. I've been an active member in the battle against cross-wiki vandalism for a while now (being a global rollbacker for a few years now), and I've come across a couple of things in which I'd like to personally help out without having to nag a global sysop in the IRC chatroom (Special:ShortPages on several wikis with no active admins, for example).

I'm already a sysop on the English Wikibooks and MediaWiki while being a curator on the English Wikiversity -- so I have experience in dealing with the sysop kit. Thanks. EDIT: Per request of one of the users below, I will link to my previous request for global sysopship, which can be found here. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 00:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support Atcovi has sysop experience on multiple projects, as well as a long history of xwiki anti-vandalism work. They would be a great asset to Wikimedia with global sysop permissions. Vermont (talk) 01:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. From my interactions with them at enwikibooks, they are very willing to communicate and help newer users. Also, they are able to keep their cool even when faced with difficult situations. Adequate crosswiki work, good use of sysop toolkit. Strong Support.--Cohaf (talk) 01:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. I see Atcovi has extensive experience in both being sysop and working cross-wiki. Being a global sysop would be extremely helpful for them to deal with vandalism and spam. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 02:01, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Sure, no issues and this would normally be a full short support. While I support this, I do want to note that I don't like rhetoric like "the battle against cross-wiki vandalism." It has too much of the tone of Wikimedia the Video Game® to it, which is not language I personally like to see people using when they are requesting advanced permissions and I generally believe to be harmful to individual projects and globally. That being said, I've seen nothing but positive contributions from this contributor, and my idiosyncratic views on vandalism related issues are not enough to cause me to oppose. I did want to raise the concern though, and I'm sure Atcovi will take it on board. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the childish statement - although a native speaker, I can find it difficult at times to convey certain views/thoughts in a proper and formal tone. Will keep that in mind in the future. Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 02:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Atcovi, no need to apologize, though, your quick response did get me to up it to a regular support ;-). I was just raising it because its something I've seen with other users (not you) and I personally have second thoughts whenever someone is going for advanced permissions and talks that way. You've addressed it, so all is good on my end :) TonyBallioni (talk) 02:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Hiàn (talk) 04:31, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 04:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I've worked with him as a admin at Wikibooks and MediaWiki, and I am confident that he'll do well as a GS. But please link to your previous requests. Leaderboard (talk) 06:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Very experienced user. Esteban16 (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support No concerns. Nihlus 21:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - trustworthy, helpful and experienced user. Green Giant (talk) 21:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support full support. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 14:39, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - a productive and trustworthy member of SWMT. Shows need for the tools. SITH (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support sure. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 09:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- I see no reason not to. -- Dolotta (talk) 22:45, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlvaroMolina ( - ) 05:08, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Turkmen talk 01:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Good. Keep up the good work. --Stïnger (会話) 02:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC).
  •   Support--Veracious (talk) 04:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support No concerns. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 17:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support keep up the good work. Defender (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support trusted editor. Tropicalkitty (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Despite a slight recent dissention, Atcovi, I paraphrase George C.: What else ? --Eihel (talk) 20:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 16:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -J. Ansari Talk 03:06, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done - clear consensus to promote. Thanks for volunteering! – Ajraddatz (talk) 03:11, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for 39sakura

I live in mainland China.Due to GFW by Chinese government,I have to use VPN to access and edit Wikipedia.I have local IPBE at zhwiki.I translate enwiki,frwiki and jawiki articles into Chinese.But my current IP address( is globally blocked by Vituzzu so I can't add interlanguage links to wikidata.Could you grant me global IPBE?Thanks, --39sakura (talk) 01:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 14:18, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Mfko

I live in an apartment complex with Internet service provided by an ISP that is currently subject to a global IP block, I would like to be able to edit on enwiki from home, thanks, --Mfko (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exemption request

Status:    Not done

Hello, I would like to use Tor for privacy reasons, please. 2A03:E600:100:0:0:0:0:13 18:18, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

What is your account? Vermont (talk) 18:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
(ec)Please request it via an account. Permissions cannot be given to unregistered users due to technical issues. Sorry.--Cohaf (talk) 18:27, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  Not done; permissions cannot be granted to IP addresses. You need to request this permission via a registered user account. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 00:18, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Helmy oved

My IP address is in this same range (2607:FB90:0:0:0:0:0:0/32) that is blocked right now (when I'm writing this), and I can,t edit in any wiki, except for Commons and Meta. I've been having problems since last month for the same reason and I would like to continue editing without worrying every time an IP of that range is blocked here, thanks, --Helmy oved 23:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Vercelas

Due to the controversy generated yesterday by the presidency of Venezuela, the blocking of access to Wikipedia in that country has been reported (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Personally I can open the majority of the Wikimedia projects, except Wikipedia and others (of any language), which leads to believe that access to Wikipedia has been restricted to Venezuela. I can open Wikipedia et al with proxies, but these are usually blocked and I cannot edit. Therefore, I request to consider the application of this flag for me. Thanks, --Vercelas (quæstiones?) 15:47, 12 January 2019 (UTC) PD: this block was «confirmed». — Vercelas (quæstiones?) 03:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Also, I can see this:

09:23, 26 September 2015: Billinghurst ( globally blocked (expires on 10 February 2020 at 18:10, anonymous only) (edits · IP check · whois) (Open proxy: hosting on OVH + spam from; softened m:Special:PermanentLink/13810433 — Vercelas (quæstiones?) 16:57, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

The global block you mentioned is softened, in other words only affects anonymous users and you should be able to edit from the range when you are logged in. However, it may be subject to blocks imposed at local projects which may be hard blocks preventing logged-in users from editing in those projects. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 03:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your answer. Due to the slow speed of the local internet, the proxy usually fails constantly and it is necessary to change it for another one that is stable; in many cases these are usually blocked globally, sometimes for anonymous users like this case, other times it includes registered users, which prevents editing not only in the —until blocked— Wikipedia, but in all Wikimedia. The IP that I tried to use is blocked and says: «10:42, 21 July 2015: Vituzzu( globally blocked (expires on 21 July 2020 at 10:42) (edits · IP check ·whois) (leaky colo + open proxy at» Greetings, — Vercelas (quæstiones?) 17:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Listo. Favor notar que esto solo servirá para bloqueos globales, si te ves afectado por uno local (puede ocurrir al usar proxies), tendrá que ser solucionado localmente. Matiia (talk) 03:31, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Bradford

I'm here for the same problem of the user Vercelas. Although in the English Wikipedia I have already been added an exeception. --Bradford (talk) 02:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Listo. Favor notar que esto solo servirá para bloqueos globales, si te ves afectado por uno local (puede ocurrir al usar proxies), tendrá que ser solucionado localmente. Matiia (talk) 03:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Evilninja

Hi. Sometimes I use the internet via a VPN for various reasons but then I cannot edit Wikipedia sites (en, de, commons). I'm a very infrequent contributer, but nonetheless would like to request an excemption from the IP block, if possible. Thanks! -- Evilninja (talk) 05:47, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Meltdown627

Hi. I'm a frequent contributor to Wikipedia, especially for the Texas state highway system and Aeroflot accident pages, but my IP address is part of the range of addresses blocked in 2018. I would like to request an exemption from the IP block. I have done nothing wrong to deserve this block. Thanks! -- Meltdown627 (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Arystanbek

Hello. You've blocked on WP. Can you please give me global IP block exemption which will enable me to continue editing? Please see this screenshot:

I was requested global unblock, but not done, thanks. --Arystanbek (talk) 05:26, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done --Alaa :)..! 16:08, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for Sakretsu

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Not ending before 14 January 2019 20:20 UTC

I would like to help Italian global renamers handle the requests coming from Since, being a sysop there, I keep an eye on new users and the names they choose (reports included), I'm well acquainted with our local policies about inappropriate usernames, some of which I personally ask the owners to change. Unfortunately, now and then it happens that I see wrong renames being approved, resulting in a loss of time for everybody involved. By checking recent logs, I can already notice several mistakes, like

  • 48739: an inappropriate username basically left unchanged;
  • 48723: a regular username turned into an inappropriate one;
  • 48686: someone involuntarily received assistance to mock the sysop who contacted them (besides that, it is forbidden to choose on purpose a username similar to a project admin's).

What strikes me most is the pace at which requests are being processed, namely, only a few hours. While I feel like more trusted Italian volunteers are needed, I also hope this message will raise awareness of the necessity of waiting at least a couple of days to give native speakers the opportunity to provide a better service in their own language. After all, it seems to me there is no reason to hurry. Besides Italian, among the languages I know, some knowledge of Japanese could come in handy for dealing with requests from users, but at the moment I cannot guarantee anything since such task would take further time and consideration. Feel free to ask me any questions and... have a good year :-)--Sakretsu (talk) 20:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Thanks for volunteering, however, you gave the Special:GlobalRenameQueue requests link which no one could see except Global Renamers, Stewards and WMF T&S. It will be good if you gave some hint of the usernames involved and reasons why in your opinion the new usernames are inappropriate, and what mockery was involved. Are there local blocks in place? I am very puzzled about your request. Are the wrong renames approved by renamers active on itwiki, or are they on the global queues. In addition, I am very uncertain what you meant by "provide a better service in their own language". Accounts are global and renamers sometimes will run into problems in local wikis, which they have no way to prevent (one cannot expect a GR to know all the UAA rules on every WMF wiki). I expect clarifications. Thanks and have a blessed new year. --Cohaf (talk) 20:30, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support sysop and interface administrator on a major project. This is a no-brainer. Don't particularly see why the questions above matter. Renaming is best handled by people familiar with the standards on the projects they are on. There is no global username policy, and one is extremely unlikely to be adopted anytime soon (and I'd oppose it if it were proposed). Adding an Italian speaker to aid in this will be extremely helpful. Given the change on the local projects and that local projects still have ultimate control over username policy, this is nothing but a positive. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
    • @TonyBallioni:I know it's a no-brainer but I just have my doubts about the above application, trust isn't an issue here. I am happy to support wholeheartedly but the above "I also hope this message will raise awareness of the necessity of waiting at least a couple of days to give native speakers the opportunity to provide a better service in their own language." seems like an RFC rather than an application. --Cohaf (talk) 21:04, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
      • My point is that the application raises great points: if a renamer isn’t familiar with a project and the rename is something that could be questionable (mainly vanishing and corporate names), it is generally better to let someone who is familiar with the context of the local project handle it. This is one of the oddities of SUL: because of it, renaming is handled globally, but we also believe people who work in the trenches know best what works with the culture and policy of their projects. Praxidicae has brought up to me situations where people renamed recently without context and there was at least one high profile one recently that I’m personally aware of. Raising the issue of “if you’re not sure what’s going on and it may be controversial, wait.” is important, and I’m glad this request does it. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
        • @TonyBallioni:.Exactly, the point of waiting for someone that is familiar with local policies is a good point. Recall the recent SRUC case I pointed out during TSD application which can be totally avoided if a Chinese GR handled it. What I am puzzled are the diffs (I can't see them). It's similar to a DRV where the page is deleted and non-admins are asked to discuss about it. I know some are confidential, but at least give a generic context. I am also concerned about what the wrong remames are and what are potential ways to reduce these wrongs and who exactly does this? Are the accounts homewiki itwiki or are they just an low/no edit local attached accounts? Who did those renames? I am fully with you to prevent another high profile one we have recently by understanding local sanctions / discussion better. (I knew it as I asked for closure of 2 RFC regarding that user at SN). That's all, no reason to oppose or what.--Cohaf (talk) 21:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
          • They were corporate renames in violation of policy. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
          • @TonyBallioni:What about 48686? "someone involuntarily received assistance"-->What does this mean? Thanks for explaning.--Cohaf (talk) 21:30, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
            • It was also a corporate rename to something that I would consider normal on, but apparently wasn't on The account was blocked there and had zero edits. I'm not sure what the issue was, but I trust that a local sysop knows their policy better than I do. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support User is a sysop at itwiki, seems trustworthy with the tool. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 20:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support No issues, all the best! --Cohaf (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Tony. Hiàn (talk) 23:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support for the application. However, his request raises greater questions on the username policy which are currently project-specific; this may be the time (though impractical) to probably consider framing a set of well-defined global rules for renamers to use which will cover every project. Leaderboard (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support No concerns. I'd like to know (from Céréales Killer and Editor D.S) why those requests were processed as well. Renames are not a race and should be handled with care now more than ever. Nihlus 21:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Nihlus, when opening a rename request I analyze the following points:
  • The reason for the renaming
  • if the name chosen is not in use;
  • If the user is blocked by vandalism or sockpuppet
  • if it is valid (through the Username validator)
  • If it is not similar to an existing one (through a Global user search).
I always use caution when analyzing an order.
When I checked these items I found no problem that showed that renaming should not be done. I was informed by another renoemador that when the applicant is blocked by improper name the renaming can be done. By the way, I still can not understand correctly what went wrong in this renaming. Could you explain me better? --Editor D.S (talk)  23:15, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Editor D.S, I'm not sure, but I do know that has one of the strongest policies on corporate usernames, and it likely has to do with with that. This is one of the reasons that I am so supportive of getting local sysops this user right, users who are familiar with local policies are best to assess whether the new name meets local policies. I generally decline to rename on projects other than when their is a local username block, as I am not familiar with policies there. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Probably, that's true. We do have a strong policy on corporate names, and in fact they are not tolerated and get instantly blocked until rename. However, while the other two requests were clearly wrong, this case is a little bit more complicated. On there is a long-time vandal who seeks attention and picks inappropriate usernames of any kind, even for the sole purpose of insulting sysops or passing himself off as one of them. That is why username policy specifies no names resembling sysop names are allowed. Usually, the name "Bradipo felice", though singular, would be given the benefit of the doubt, but since previously the user got notified and blocked due to corporate name by the sysop Bradipo lento, his request should have been denied as a deliberate violation of our local name policy which he should have read. Probably the user is always that vandal, but anyway we never take anything for granted and just keep accounts like this blocked for "inappropriate name" until a proper rename. Obviously, I can't really blame anyone for being unaware of such details, though it is precisely for this reason that I believe letting renamers handle the requests coming from their home wiki is for the best. Hope this clarifies your doubts.--Sakretsu (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Wow, this Username Policy is really very strict. --Cohaf (talk) 01:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Sysop and interface administrator on a major project. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support User was able to convey me confidence. --Editor D.S (talk)  22:24, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Vituzzu (talk) 19:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Turkmen talk 12:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAlvaroMolina ( - ) 04:30, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 02:39, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Melos (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user, and the arguments convince me that Wikimedia has a net positive to gain from making this user a global renamer. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:23, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done, nihil obstat. Trijnsteltalk 20:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Global rename for EniPort

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Not ending before 23 January 2019 19:14 UTC

I would like to ask a Global Renamer permission for my account. I have been an editor of Wikipedia since 2011; I am a bureaucrat, an OTRS member and member of the Arbitration Committee in the Hungarian Project.

There are only two GRs in the Hungarian Project who are not always available: as I am active on Wikipedia on a daily basis, I would be happy to help them with their duties. I have read and understood the global and local rename policy too. Thank you for all the supports in advance. - EniPort (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 10:02, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support apparently trusted user where them having this permission would serve to benefit a local project. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:19, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • {{s}}. Being an editor of Wikipedia since 2011, a bureaucrat, an OTRS member and member of the Arbitration Committee in the Hungarian Project, is plenty good enough for me - and it looks like the Hungarian Wikipedia could do with the extra help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
    Provisionally suspend my !vote based on the username issue detailed below - I think we need an explanation from the candidate. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    Happy with the explanation that username is in line with policy, and nobody is suggesting any COI or PAID editing. All good. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    I'm switching to   Oppose due to the naming dispute that's going on below, with a admin disputing the candidate's understanding of and adherence to naming policy. I can't tell who is right, but I can't support global renamer while the dispute exists. Sort it out and get a consensus at and then come back and ask again. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • {{s}}Per Boing! and Tony.--Cohaf (talk) 15:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Stricken per below developments, will rethink again.--Cohaf (talk) 11:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • 'crat without sysop? Would be nice if you explain that; as far as I remember, 'crat is not a superset of sysop. Thanks. Leaderboard (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
    • In hrwiki, crats can remove crats and sysop. I think they add sysop when needed and after that remove it when there isn't a need? --Cohaf (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@Leaderboard: In the Hungarian project, the duties of the sysops and the crats are completely different, being an administrator is not a condition of being a bureaucrat. At present, out of the 8 bureaucrats, only 5 are administrators too. - EniPort (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 18:43, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • {{s}} Vermont (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2019 (UTC) Striking due to objections raised below. Vermont (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 07:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Turkmen talk 22:51, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support While still confused with the 'crat policies, I see no reason to oppose this request. Leaderboard (talk) 08:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support As a Hungarian-speaking GR. Bencemac (talk) 15:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • {{s}}. Hiàn (talk) 19:34, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
    Striking in light of comments below. Hiàn (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
  • {{s}} Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
    Striking due to concerns below. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Former huwiki sysop, huwiki arbcom member, huwiki checkuser, OTRS operator with 10 year huwiki edit history here. I know EniPort and have no objection to him becoming a global renamer if that's what his heart desires. However, I'm puzzled by the "There are only two GRs in the Hungarian Project who are not always available" justification. I am not aware of any need in the huwiki community for more Hungarian-speaking global renamers. I haven't seen any discussions on huwiki about delays caused by not having enough local global renamers (even the phrase itself sounds a bit silly). In fact I have a sense that most regular huwiki editors are unaware of EniPort's application, and would be surprised to hear that he is volunteering to help the Hungarian project with a need that probably doesn't exist. So while I do not object to EniPort becoming a GR, let's not pretend it is for the benefit of the huwiki community. The huwiki community isn't even aware that he is stepping forward here. Malatinszky (talk) 05:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Nihlus: There are only two GRs on huwiki, but the reason for my application is not because anyone would be unsatisfied regarding their work.
The renaming requests are run on the bureaucrats' noticeboard. Recently, out of the eight bureaucrats, I am the most active (this year I have closed all the requests so far), hence it would be straight forward for me to deal with the GR requests too, but I cannot do this without permission.
The only currently active GR supports my application (the other has not been active since 19 December).--EniPort (talk) 20:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment EniPort writes above that they have read and understood the global and local rename policy. It is a real pity that they do not observe the username policy of their homewiki which clearly does not allow usernames of companies, organizations, etc. The person behind the username is clearly and provably closely affiliated with the company of the same name. This had been the topic of several discussions in huwiki, however EniPort failed to comply. As long as they do not request renaming themselves I strongly   Oppose Csigabi (talk) 09:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
    • @Csigabi:. Care to explain why they aren't blocked for username violations? And can we have more background information about this? Thanks for raising the issue now.--Cohaf (talk) 10:04, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
I am also puzzled why the community of huwiki did not take a stronger standpoint on this issue, and the administrators, inlcuding myself, did not enforce compliance with the current policy. One reason could have been that we tried to solve the issue with the user name of our bureaucrat in a friendly way. The case became public with a huwiki article on the company EniPort (with the same capitalization) obviously created as a provocation right in the middle of our Arbcom elections where user EniPort had been a candidate (the article has been deleted since). The article mentioned his IRL name, which some found inappropriate, though these information can be found on various public websites. Csigabi (talk) 11:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for giving some more information. I'm not sure about the full veracity of this account and can't straight oppose but will rescue myself from this vote. It will also be good to hear from the candidate, so pinging them @EniPort:.--Cohaf (talk) 11:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
To give you some more detail/corroboration:
  • In 2010 the huwiki community voted to institute an unequivocal prohibition on usernames that are also company names or names of political parties.
  • EniPort is the name of a small business providing IT services.
  • EniPort has never written about the company on Wikipedia.
  • EniPort (the person) has stated that he no longer is affiliated with that company.
  • On LinkedIn there is a public professional profile of a person who identifies himself as the founder of the EniPort company, and mentions that he performs volunteer work for the Wikimedia foundation as an OTRS volunteer and an ArbCom member, and also as a contributor since 2011.
  • That same person was featured on the EniPort company website until the last ArbCom election, at which point the mention was abruptly removed.
  • Publicly available online records about the company mention two individuals with the same last name as the person in the LinkedIn profile as company officers.
  • I am purposely not including links because the last time I did (in the discussion around the last huwiki ArbCom elections), I was accused of a data protection violation by "establishing links between previously unlinked pieces of public information."
My personal assessment is that EniPort is in fact affiliated with the EniPort company, and it is not a coincidence that the names match. As a result, he is technically violating the prohibition on company-affiliated usernames. At the same time he is not using his position to promote his company, and I am mystified as to why he doesn't simply change his username to make the controversy go away. I am also a bit troubled by the fact that he claims not to be affiliated with the company when he clearly is. To me the lack of veracity is more of a problem than the relatively trivial technical violation. Malatinszky (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cohaf: it is pretty unfortunate that this seemingly personal topic has been resurrected yet again and brought here. There has been a pretty ugly and very personal discussion about this (and I try to avoid using "personal attack", which may or may not be appropriate) on huwp, and summary -- by yours truly -- would be that EniPort have been using his nickname for a long time, and he also have used the same nickname for various things, including naming his own (ex?) company, and as far as I know he never have been utilised or mentioned this anywhere in Wikipedia, and years later someone thought that the relevant guideline exists because it is forbidden to use a name which is the same as a company name, and not because we want to ensure that an account is used by a single person and it's not used for advertisement (which is followed in this case). I believe it must have been a point of view based on some (unknown to me) personal affair between them; all I see is that it was baseless, unjustified and very unnecessary. (Also I find it absolutely weird to suggest someone to change his nickname which have been in use for a long time.) But, to have it noted, I do not want to start a debate here since I do not think there's anything to debate. Also I do not want to mark any opinion about the permission request (though I've been known for my liberal attitude about flags, which would make me support anyone unless there's a problem with him/her, which here wouldn't be the case). I was kindly asked to read this and this all this has been my personal reaction and summary. Thanks for reading. :-) --grin 14:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Grin:. Read with thanks, will want to hear from them first before committing. Thanks for input.--Cohaf (talk) 14:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@Boing! said Zebedee and Cohaf: The quoted policy does not restrict private editors' usernames (nor does it mention it), it states that if a company or a party wants to register onto Wikipedia, it may not use the same name of the company or party it represents. The exact translation of the policy is: "Neither companies nor parties can have usernames that contains or explicitly refers to their own name." (the introduction to the vote was "Several companies and parties edit / would like to edit Wikipedia with usernames identifying their own name").
I registered as a private editor using the same nickname I have used for several decades: I do not represent any company with my edits, this is supported by others.
There are many editors on the Hungarian Wikipedia whose username is contained in a company's name, there is nothing against this. It is however, not possible to examine whether an editor has connections to a company or not (owner, family, employee etc.); as linking usernames to individuals ("unauthorised reversal of pseudonymisation") amounts to "personal data breaches" under the GDPR regulations.EniPort (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, that's good enough for me. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
@EniPort:. Thanks for your explanation. This is also good enough for me. However, I am still a little concerned about what the local community may think of your renames and potential issues, hope you can sort it out. {{s|weak support}}. Thanks for willingness to serve.--Cohaf (talk) 00:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)Abstaining. Way too much issues but will not oppose. In a way forward, it might be better for the homewiki of the applicant to be notified, this we then can have a more informed view other than yes, yes he is a sysop, CU, OTRS and etc. Thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 02:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Malatinszky. No demonstrated need for the tools. Nihlus 21:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Based on his/her previous activities and what I have seen, he/she does not have my trust. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 10:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I can't help but notice that some of you are struggling with finding the gender-appropriate personal pronoun for the nominee: some are referring to EniPort as "he/she," others as "they." Let me point out that, according to his user page on huwiki, EniPort is male, and so "he/him/his" are the appropriate way to refer to him. This has, of course, no impact on his qualifications to be a GR. I hope this is helpful. --Malatinszky (talk) 13:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment you cannot be careful enough these days with these GDPR threats around. Csigabi (talk) 13:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user.Pórokhov (talk) 16:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I am a sysop, checkuser and OTRS volunteer on huwiki. I've been contributing for ten years. I oppose the nomination per Csigabi and Malatinszky. First, I see no indication that the huwiki community has a need for another GR, nor has this nomination been mentioned on any of the forums on huwiki, the community supposedly being helped by it. Secondly, I find it particularly strange that EniPort claims to know local and global renaming policies, even as he grossly misinterprets the huwiki directive on usernames on this page and elsewhere. I can't understand why he has such trouble addressing the issue about his own username correctly. Had he acknowledged that his nick does not comply with huwiki policy, and then explained that he is emotionally attached to it and would like to keep using it, I'm sure the community would have granted him a waiver because he clearly has no promotional purposes. Instead, he insists on misinterpreting the username policy of the Hungarian Wikipedia, and calls any attempt to associate his username with his business a "data protection incident" and a "violation of GDPR." I find this behaviour unacceptable. --Pallerti Rabbit Hole 21:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Per Above. —AlvaroMolina ( - ) 05:13, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I am the (already mentioned) second Hungarian GR, and I was indeed mainly inactive in the previous weeks. I know EniPort online and personally for many years. I know that he wants the best for the project and he is strongly dedicated to the Wikimedia movement. Though I understand his emotional connection to his long-time used nickname, I agree with the opposers that he did not handle the problem with his own username properly when this topic raised up last year. This issue have not been resolved yet, divides the community and unfortunately comes up again and again (like here). However, I   Support his nomination, because I trust him, and he enjoys my confident that he will never misuse the tool and will always help the project with his activity as global renamer. Samat (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral, per the concerns raised above, and the comment directly above this one, from one of the renamers of huwiki. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong oppose per the events described by Malatinszky, Csigabi, and Pallerti, which have been obfuscated by Eniport ("It is however, not possible to examine whether an editor has connections to a company or not [...] as linking usernames to individuals [...] amounts to "personal data breaches" under the GDPR regulations.") but not disputed. Violating policies under the cover of privacy concerns is unacceptable. — Newslinger talk 13:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

  • We find that there's no consensus to promote at this time. Sorry. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Requests for other global permissions

2FA for Geraldo Perez

I have 2FA for most of my other online accounts and would like this for Wikipedia as well for the extra security, thanks, --Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

  Done, Linedwell [talk] 09:02, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

2FA for RegistryKey

Used to having 2FA on just about everything, would like to have it here too as a security measure. Additionally if I ever get elevated rights here, it's one less thing I have to set up later on, thanks, --RegistryKey (talk) 05:58, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done - please read w:WP:Simple 2FA and remember to save your scratch codes. – Ajraddatz (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for 1989

Thanks, --Krd 10:49, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 11:33, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Global interface editor for billinghurst

Not ending before 7 January 2019 22:04 UTC
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 22:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think this is a permission that requires voting? Can someone clarify?--Cohaf (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
    • For me this is a no-brainer, but the policy says: "discussion should last no less than five days; if there is consensus and the criteria from the scope are fulfilled, the permission will be granted by a steward". So yes, this requires voting. I'll add an end date to this request. Trijnsteltalk 22:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
      • I see, thanks!--Cohaf (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I support (almost) everything Billinghurst requests. Trijnsteltalk 22:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportNo brainer, hope you also take a look at zhwikiversity interface also. =P.--Cohaf (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
    I am happy to take requests, and the SWMT team is most likely to see those that are embedded in the local language.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:16, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
    Thanks for the help in advance. =P.--Cohaf (talk) 06:25, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
    Except it doesn't need any general work, the only options that are in Chinese alone are specific to the wiki. It is possible to move them so that multilingual tags could be added, though that is a wiki's discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:51, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
    Noted with much thanks.--Cohaf (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user with a valid use-case. — xaosflux Talk 23:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely. Nihlus 23:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Trijnstel. Vermont (talk) 00:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 00:17, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:03, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -★- PlyrStar93 Message me. 02:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -J. Ansari Talk 02:46, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support TonyBallioni (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support sure.--HakanIST (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Sure thing Saederup92 (talk) 07:37, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 11:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 11:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Vituzzu (talk) 19:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely -- Enfcer (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--Turkmen talk 12:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user. --Editor D.S (talk)  21:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support thanks for volunteering. Legoktm (talk) 03:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, of course. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:07, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2020-01-07. Per policy you should file another request before your access expires to retain it for another year. RadiX 00:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

2FA for StraussInTheHouse

I'm an a very active editor at English Wikipedia and one of the areas I work in is Articles for Creation submissions. As I explained at en:Special:Permalink/877844992#Self-promotion, I was recently contacted by somebody who offered me money to accept drafts. I declined and have forwarded the email to the functionary team. This, along with the recent increased emphasis on account security, makes me want to ensure that such people couldn't gain access to my account in order to accept their drafts. I'm fully aware of the technical hassle it could cause but I'd prefer to be on the safe side. I have read and understand H:2FA. Thanks, --StraussInTheHouse (talk) 18:02, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

StraussInTheHouse:   Done, best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

oauth-tester for LeoDE

I'd like to use 2FA as I do with all accounts I own. Having drawbacks due to testing is no problem for me. Have a great day, --LeoDE (talk) 00:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@LeoDE: Security check: have you read and understand H:2FA and w:WP:Simple 2FA? Best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
@MarcoAurelio: Yes. Was the german Version but I expect them to have the same content ;) --LeoDE (talk) 22:47, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
So   Done --Alaa :)..! 15:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

oauth-tester for Neechalkaran

Hi, I understand the H:2FA and its technical hassle. To obtain the Interface admin access, I need oauth-tester enabled. Kindly provide 2FA for my account. Thanks, --Neechalkaran (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for عمرو

Thanks, --Krd 08:12, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 08:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Edmenb

Thanks, --Krd 08:12, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 08:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

CAPTCHA exemptions for Wildly boy

Sometimes I just want to help another project to filling reference.But I have to enter captcha because I'm not autoconfirmed user.I think that the captcha is annoying and it interferes with my normal editing。So I request this right to avoid this.Thanks, --Wildly boy (talk) 01:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose.Lack of sufficient crosswiki work to merit global exemptions.--Cohaf (talk) 02:10, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Why would CAPTCHA exemptions require crosswiki work? It's purpose is to stop spambots, and it's evident this user isn't a spambot. Vermont (talk) 03:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I am concerned about the need of this right at all, I am not seeing enough to warrant global rights, just local confirmed rights are usually more than enough. I am not seeing any need of the right. They are already exempted from where they are editing from except from enwiki which 4 more should be enough.--Cohaf (talk) 03:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Just to add, having reviewed all the not spambot precedents, they all have made many edits to multiple projects and many of them need clearing the captcha. But not in this case. They may pass the not a robot test, but there isn't a demonstrated need, maybe an explanation of what references need to be fixed may be better. Retracting my oppose though.--Cohaf (talk) 04:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I not only met this question in enwp.In jawp I also was asked to enter the captcha but there not abuse filter for this.Wildly boy (talk) 05:16, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I see. However, it seems from your response is an abuse filter which prevents you from entering the link? Can I clarify is it correct, if so a request should be made to local sysop to allow you edit through the filter. --Cohaf (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
In jawp just need 10 edits and create after ten days will be autoconfirmed.So request the confirmed is too hard.And I don't understand japanese so I can't finish 10 edits in this project.Now when I patrol new page in zhwp and new item in wikidata I will check if the references have been filled for this page in another project.I don't think it is sensible to request for confirmed to avoid the captcha in another project.So I want to request this global permission to aviod the captcha for another project.Wildly boy (talk) 08:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
So it's now just for one project jawiki you need to fix references but you are not familiar with the language, hence cannot make 10 edits and wait for 10 days? I am wondering if you are not familiar with the language and can't edit can you insert a reference there comfortably? Are you inserting references for other projects also? Seriously this right IMHO is definitely not a big deal, only counters spambots, and I'm not against granting. What puzzles me is the reason which I can't reckon with, can't you just enter the captcha 10 times since is just one single project? Any additional issues such as the captcha is tok hard to read on some wikis or device issues?--Cohaf (talk) 08:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
No just a project.Like this edit was also asked to enter the captcha.I don't think that enter the captcha because I was finishing edit like this is comfortable in all projects.Wildly boy (talk) 12:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Why are you adding dates to mark dead references in English where the entire page in Spanish Wikipedia has their dates in Spanish. I don't think it's compliant to their local MOS? And now it's not a link entering that prompt a captcha, but just general editing. The spambot arguments doesn't augur well for this case. There must be another reason why Spanish Wikipedia requires captcha for it. In addition, your edit causes errors to the references and a Google translate states incorrect use of dead link template that is highlighted in red. I had reverted now (captcha needed also) and it seems your editing with the script is causing problems and you didn't check it afterwards. Also, the edit was made after my question not before. --Cohaf (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Have you considered to use User:Krinkle/Tools/Global SUL? It'll allow you to create an account on every project and after a few days, you'll be autoconfirmed on most of them (except the few ones where you have to make x edits) Matiia (talk) 03:50, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks your advice,I will try it.Wildly boy (talk) 04:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Global SUL is the means to get a presence on that many wikis. It won't get you through all the wikis, as some have a time AND edit count, however the edit count is a minimal number of wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:27, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Comment:The applicant has leave messages to 2 different stewards MarcoAurelio and علاء to grant this right. In the days when this request started till now, the applicant didn't make any substantiate edits (of adding references) to other wikis. If they can take the effort to keep on making edits on meta (including to their userpage as well as here), I really can't see whats too hard to enter CAPTCHA. In my SMWT patrols, many even larger wikis doesn't need them. I really see no basis for this right, though it is not a big deal, it's just a lack of demonstrated need coupled with the fact that they are making errrors with their edits as pointed out above (which I think it's what the captcha intended to do). Stewards had more than enough work to do and to bug 2 of them for this is really unacceptable.   Oppose.--Cohaf (talk) 04:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
    • I can't make a big edit in the other project for academic reasons,and this request has been going on for nearly a week.So I remind on the talk page of other stewards.And please you explain that since I made this request, you have been maliciously speculating on my behavior.Thanks.Wildly boy (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      @Wildly boy: Where are you having issues editing? Have you checked your user status at that/those wiki/s?

      The granting of this right is only given where there is a demonstrated need, remembering that it is a protective layer to abuse. While we should assume good faith, we should question any person's requests to rights allocation where it is out of the normal and it would be needed to be justified to administrators querying its allocation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

      If you don't know how to check your rights, go to Special:UserRights/Wildly boy on the wiki in question.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:47, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      From my looking at Special:centralauth/Wildly boy you only did numbers of these in the past few days, so you would not be out of tha "autoconfirm" period. So until that implicit right is applied (as can be seen at w:ba:Special:UserRights/Wildly boy) you will continue to get captcha request. Should progressively resolve for those remaining wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:05, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      My winter holiday's plan is help another wiki repair refercenes.But when I test this plan in enwiki I was asked to enter the captcha.I think this is annoying when I start my plan and the image of captcha too fuzzy to identify it.In irc a user introduced to me this permission can help me avoid the captcha.So I requested this right.I checked my permissions on other wiki just now,in some small projects I am autoconfirmed but in another projects I still not autoconfirmed now.So I may still need this right now.Thanks.Wildly boy (talk) 05:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      You were challenged for a captcha at enWP as they have a stronger AutoConfirm check, and you hadn't surpassed their edit count, so that isn't surprising.

      While we have your attention, your default edit summary is problematic for the third party editing software. I think that you should be looking to address that matter before progressing. Having that default edit summary will upset people, and likely to lead to complaints.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

      @Wildly boy: As was explained earlier there are two components that require captcha, the age of the account and the number of edits. Your creating accounts will have them pass that time factor in the next few days. The edit count default will be passed automatically for many of these wikis, though some have a higher limit (about 30 wikis). It generally would not be appropriate for stewards to override a locally derived consensus that set such a limit, so I simply think that you need to manually achieve such a status as the rest of us do ... "by editing" normally, and just do it in the one session.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
      Recommendation to stewards. I recommend that you close this as redundant. The user's AutoConfirmAge is occurring normally when your account passes the allotted time. The cases where they are short on the AutoConfirmCount is at wikis that have set a higher criteria and it would be unusual for stewards to override a wiki's consensus determined increase.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

  Not done The request does not succeed. --MF-W 23:48, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

oathauth-tester for ArneBr

Please add me to the oathauth-tester group, so i can secure my account further, thanks, --ArneBr (talk) 11:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done - please read Help:Two-factor authentication and don't forget to save your scratch codes. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

oathauth-tester for Sunmist

I would like to use 2FA to secure my account. I have read Help:Two-factor authentication, and understand how to use it. Thanks. --Sunmist (talk) 10:48, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done; best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:52, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

oathauth-tester for Daryl Kang

Please add me to the oathauth-tester group, I would like to use 2FA to secure my account, thanks, --Daryl Kang (talk) 16:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Have you read Help:Two-factor authentication? Ruslik (talk) 20:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I've read Help:Two-factor authentication and understand how to use it. Please add me, thanks, Daryl Kang (talk) 03:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Alex Shih

Thanks, --Krd 11:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

OAUTH for Cysioland

Hi, I'm an editor on Polish Wikipedia, and thus it'd be nice for my account to be additionally protected --Cysioland - Talk with me 18:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 19:44, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

oathauth-tester / 2FA for Pixelfire

Hi, I want do use 2FA wherever possible, thanks, --Pixelfire (talk) 20:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 19:44, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Storkk

Thanks, --Krd 10:54, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:32, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Add global oathauth-tester member for scheinem

I've fully read and understood H:2FA. Thanks, --Scheinem (talk) 21:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Support: A 2-global-edit account is totally going to be a hacking target. :) ToBeFree (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
No need for sarcastic comments here, thanks.
  Not done - this permission is not needed for your account. If you want to practice good account security, please choose a unique password. – Ajraddatz (talk) 22:22, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Add global OTRS member for BRPever

Thanks, --Ruthven (msg) 08:16, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 11:29, 29 January 2019 (UTC)