Open main menu
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created on 01 July 2019, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Contents

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for 94rain

Not ending before 7 July 2019 15:27 UTC

Hello everyone. I've been actively involved in crosswiki counter-vandalism for a few months. I would like to apply for this permission to facilitate my work. I am not really interested in the rollback botton itself as scripts like Twinkle has already been of great help. However I do really want to use SWViewer, which would make it much more convenient for me to see diffs. I do not expect to see persistent vandalism, but if they do happen, mass rollback would be quite helpful. I believe I can use this permission wisely, especially when I am not familiar with the project language or when I am not sure. Questions are welcome. Thank you for your attention. -- 94rain Talk 15:27, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support Definitely. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:31, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user and experienced in counter-vandalism.--Turkmen talk 15:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose (weak oppose, at that) I want to first start by saying that I am impressed with your stats and editing but I get a general unease about relatively new accounts asking for global rights, which GR is pretty much the only truly global right. I would probably support this down the road if you applied again but having rollback on two projects, one for 6 months and the other for 4 is a bit too short for my taste and I would oppose anyone locally who requested a right just so that they could utilize what I'd consider to be another "high powered" tool, especially given the nuance of different languages that often make valid edits appear like vandalism. Basically tl;dr stats are impressive but I'd like to see more experience first. Praxidicae (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support My fault, I asked them to apply twice for this as I find them quite ready for the right (latest these few days). I see good stats, I see competent reverts. I don't think they will misuse the tool. I remember our newest GR ever given is for an account for 9 months old. I think they are not that far off. I notice them at my homewiki, they did an excellent job doing reverts. Then when I am doing crosswiki work, I see them in the RC whenever I am there. I will say that the rationale is a little wonky, I won't personally ask for GR just to use SWViewer per say. I will say they have rollback in one more project (zhwikiversity have rollback bundled in patroller) and I am the sysop who granted it and I didn't notice abuse. Overall I think there will be a net positive for them having this tool. --Cohaf (talk) 15:55, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Seen some good reverts from them; active and competent. Hiàn (talk) 21:56, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, xp is presented by stats. I'm clear with that. --Super Wang hates PC You hate, too? 00:07, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I have seen some good reverts from them and I am convinced that they will make good use of the tool. I understand the concern mentioned above but I am inclined towards   Support. keep up the good work!--BRP ever 01:01, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - Can be trusted with GR. Good candidate. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 03:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support 11 months might be a concern for steward or even GS, but not GR. --Rschen7754 03:43, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Their work is good so account age isn't a big issue. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:47, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user.-- CreampieGolden State Finals Champion 06:18, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Enough cross-wiki experience, for me. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support experienced in cross-wiki patrolling, trusted user --DannyS712 (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support good work --WikiBayer 👤💬 16:16, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 05:43, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I don't see the problem with rapid promotion if the user deserves it. Leaderboard (talk) 07:41, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done - clear consensus to promote, thanks for volunteering. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Soul Train

Hello. My name is Oleg, I'm requesting to grant me global sysop rights. My home project is Russian Wikipedia, but since the beginning of 2010s, I've also been helping the Wikipedia editions in the languages of the peoples of Russia. I am sysop in Wikimedia RU site, in the Lezgi and Bashkir Wikipedias (Interface admin in the last two). I also active in the Commons, Russian Wikinews, Meta, translating the Wikimania site.

Last year, during Wikimania in Cape Town, I talked about the opportunity to nominate myself as a global administrator, and received support from many people, including the steward and the global sysop. I would like to concentrate my activity around Wikipedia editions in the languages of Russia, but I am open to other projects. I'm already engaged in supporting these projects as a member of the Wikimedia RU.

As for technical moments... Yes, I enabled 2FA. As I wrote above, I am the Interface admin in two projects. I have experience in creating of websites, including wikis (for example, I created the Russian-language web-encyclopedia of Uruguayan football). I hope for your support.

Upd. I was asked to write about my main achievements in the Wikimedia movement.

Hidden block

  1. Russian Wikipedia.
    One of the founders of the contest “Articles of the Year” (2010).
    Founder and organizer of the contest “Article of the Year of the Football project” (2014).
    More than 1,200 articles created, including 3 “Featured” and 3 “Good” articles.
  2. Lezgi Wikipedia.
    Second user by the activity in the history of the section. Introduced a number of rules, gadgets, templates, held two article contests with the support of the "Lezgi Luvar Foundation" and the "Wikimedia RU".
  3. Bashkir Wikipedia.
    Introduced gadgets, helped to fix some technical issues (I did it myself or wrote applications to Bugzilla)
  4. Buryat Wikipedia.
    Buryat Wikipedia was under the threat of closure. For several months, I searched native speakers on the different forums. I deleted the garbage content, saved Buryat Wikipedia from the threat of being seized by vandals. And I voluntarily refused the status of administrator when the native speaker came to the section. He still project sysop. Can I consider my activity successful? Yes.
  5. Chechen Wikipedia.
    I think the total restoration of the Wikimedia Foundation rules is an ample example.
    Of course, I also helped participants from other Wikipedia editions. It's hard to remember everything.
  6. Offline activity
    I participated in Wikimanias 2017, 2018, Wikimedia Summit 2019 and will participate in Wikimania 2019. Here is my Report on Wikimania 2018. And here is Video-greetings of Wikimedians of Russian Federation to Wikimania Cape Town participants that I produced.
    I was co-organizer of the First Dagestan Wiki-seminar 2017 in Derbent.
    I made a report at the Dagestan State Pedagogical University about Lezgi Wikipedia.
    As an employee of the Bauman Moscow State Technical University, I conducted several seminars with students on Wikipedia editing and using of wiki-projects/wiki-engine in their future career.
    About 30 articles were published in the Russian media (as well as on the websites of universities in the cities of Yoshkar-Ola, Kazan, Makhachkala, Moscow), with materials about my wiki-activity or articles with my opinion as an expert.
    Since 2017, I am the member of the Wikimedia RU.
Not ending before 29 June 2019 14:39 UTC
  •   Support. Soul Train is a major supporter of wikis in small languages, especially minorized languages of Russia, and I trust him to use the permissions in these wikis responsibly and helpfully. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. I agree with Amir. --Takhirgeran Umar (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. I agree with Amir and Takhirgeran Umar.--Саид Мисарбиев (talk) 06:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Hmm. Global sysop is limited flag: GS not might change user rights, not might doing any actions if wiki out of scope. Maybe is better receive local flags?—Iluvatar (talk) 15:04, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    I don't think it is right to receive sysop status in ~30 sections (10% of the total number of Wikipedia editions). If we talk about the search of new participants, I cannot know in which WP edition there will be success and where urgent technical assistance may be needed.--Soul Train (talk) 15:20, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support a worthy candidate for global administrators --Аҡҡашҡа (talk) 23:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Highly appreciate Soul Train's effort and contribution to Wikipedia, he is a passionate memeber of the global wiki community, committed to the idea of boundless access to knowledge. I'm sure his appointment will be in favour of Wiki. User from Dag (talk) 15:06, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • What wikis do you want to use global sysop rights on? It seems to me like you're focusing on a small amount of specific projects, so it may be better to request rights locally. Vermont (talk) 15:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    Russia have ~30 Wikipedia editions (excluding Russian Wikipedia, of course), 14 another projects, and dozens projects at the Wikimedia Incubator. Well, I think its not very good idea to be administrator in 45 projects, including ~29 Wikipedias :) And "I am open to other projects".--Soul Train (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose if the nominee wants to use the permissions for non-technical/trivial reasons. Given recent efforts to combat NNPOV in small communities, I have concerns with giving these permissions to a person that had a history of pushing his POV with sysop tools in small wikis and seems to harbour the same views to this day. stjn[ru] 15:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    We have a community that has decided to use exactly this map. As for political views, for example, here I did not change anything, even if it hurts me :). We have excellent relations with the author, despite his great love for Ukraine. Here is template that I created. As you see, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Kosovo - all included in the list of "states with limited recognition" («Инкарвал гьукуматар»). South Ossetia - «инкарвал гьукумат я» ("state with limited recognition"), further in the text - recognition by 5 UN states, and the point of view of Georgia. I'm not native speaker, but as I can, I include exactly this info when I created the stub. Same situation with Abkhazia, but, as I understood, this info was later deleted from the article by another admin because of bad gramatics. These are two examples of regions that Russia unconditionally considers to be independent states. But it does not prevent me from being neutral.--Soul Train (talk) 15:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    Well, and we have the movement in which neutral point of view must be upheld. You, on the other hand, returned the template to non-neutral state and protected it to sysop-level protection indefinitely (did you mistake me for a vandal then?). In fact, if we go to similar contentious topics, one biased article created by you was instantly indefinitely protected from anonymous edits, in other one you have reverted an NPOV-based edit by an anonymous editor and protected the article indefinitely. This is a clear pattern that should disqualify you from holding any sensitive permissions in wikis with Russia-based community, at least until you stop considering this a normal way of running a wiki. stjn[ru] 16:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    I was wrong with the case of Crimea, thank for your attention. I switched the protection to autoconfirmed level now. It is very sad that I made a mistake with the protection to the level of administrator, because we have the native speaker of Ukrainian (and also citizen of this country), who could develop this article as he done it with Kiev (user Mugerganets). As for Sevastopol, it was protected to autoconfirmed level. Every autoconfirmed user could edit it (including you and Mugerganets), but do nothing. You can blame as editor, but its my point of view. Articles about Crimea and Sevastopol also protected in Russian Wikipedia, in English Wikipedia and so on. I repeat, Crimea protection to sysop level was my mistake. But not the fact of protection itself. And another state. I am 2nd most active user of Lezgi Wikipedia. This project can be considered my main project along with Russian Wikipedia. Do you really think that I want to receive the status of a global administrator only in order to run and hang up maps of Russia with Crimea in all editions? Or do you just want to hurt me because of the inconsistencies of political views and conflicts in the Russian Wikipedia? Come on, together we restored order in the Chechen Wikipedia, and you know perfectly well that I like to help the sections of Wikipedia in the languages of the peoples of Russia. And I am guided only by the opinion of the community. Where are the community members (native speakers) who were unhappy with my actions at the Lezgin Wikipedia? Or did I do something wrong in the Bashkir Wikipedia?--Soul Train (talk) 17:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    Lowering the indefinite protection in those articles does not refute my concerns in any way. Articles in other wikis get protected due to persistent vandalism in those wikis, not due to your wishes to protect your biased descriptions of Russia. I think your nomination and subsequent responses were extremely vague in regards as to how you will use global sysop status, so I had to voice my concerns in areas where I had to co-operate with you. The fact that I had participated with you in NPOV efforts in Chechen Wikipedia (or, as you call it, ‘complete and absolute victory over [Chechen] separatists’) only shows that I am consistent in wishing NPOV upheld across Wikimedia movement. stjn[ru] 17:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Their personal views do not matter as long as they do not use their administrator capabilities to enforce them. They're an admin on multiple projects, and considering the amount of wikis they help out on that are GS wikis, I don't see an issue in granting this userright. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    • If they haven’t used their administrator capabilities to enforce their personal views, I wouldn’t have commented. stjn[ru] 16:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
      •   Oppose as it seems evident that Soul Train has used administrator permissions to enforce their political views in the past, and even recently. As such, it is not wise to grant global sysop permissions to them, as they would be able to use those rights to enforce their standpoint on wikis where people are less likely to notice. I am conflicted on this, as there is evidence for both sides, but someone who protects a page creation that definitively states Crimea is part of Russia (one example of a few issues linked above) is not someone I can support for global sysop, lest they do that in more places. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
        Did I remove edits which describe the whole situation with the Crimea in the article about Ukraine? No. Did I removed from the preamble the phrase "Чилерин майдан — 603 628 (Крым кваз) / 576 683 (Крым авачир) км²" (Territory is 603.628 sq km (with Crimea) / 576.683 sq km (without Crimea))? No. So what? May be we should delete all the articles with the links to National Geographic for their mapping statements (According to National Geographic's long-standing cartographic policy, while a map "strives to be apolitical," the Society's policy "is one of portraying the world from a de facto point of view; that is, to portray to the best of our judgment the current reality.") [1]?--Soul Train (talk) 17:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Does this article mention that Sevastopol is part of a contested region, and not just part of the Russian Federation? Vermont (talk) 20:54, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Every native speaker could edit the article. I remind that I am also an administrator on the Bashkir Wikipedia. And this article was written in a different way. I wrote the stub at Lezgi WP as I can, nobody wanted to develop it, unfortunately. On the example of Ukraine, I have already shown that I tolerate to other points of view.--Soul Train (talk) 22:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
The article on ba-wikipedia is significantly more neutral, in that it actually recognizes that Sevastopol is claimed both by the Russian Federation and Ukraine. The article you wrote, which you recently protected from editing, does not. Vermont (talk) 22:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Nobody protected this article from editing. It was protected to autoconfirmed users, not to sysops. Almost every registered user can edit it. Same protection exists in the Russian, German, English, Italian (...) WP editions. In the Ukrainian WP we see the same protection, but with the version without disputed status - the city indicated only as Ukrainian (ignoring the actual and de facto state of things). User Stjn came up with a non-existent problem.--Soul Train (talk) 23:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
You didn't answer my earlier question. Does the Sevastopol article on lezwiki that you made and fully protected (which you claim in the last message you didn't) immediately after creation (and left protected until last October, when you changed it to autoconfirmed) mention that Sevastopol is not an undisputed territory of the Russian Federation, and is contested? If the Ukrainian Wikipedia says it's undisputed and under the control of Ukraine, that's a NPOV problem that should be addressed. It is not a justification by which you can enforce your POV with administrator tools on other projects. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 01:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
We are talking about some episodes that were almost 4.5 years ago - it was another life for me. And we talking about the project where almost all active contributors at the same time are sysops. Please, do not equalise Lezgi WP with English or Russian ones. If this protecting was a problem for some community member (I suppose, only for one of them), he could write about it on TP, in VK, Facebook, call me or send me sms or message in WhatsApp. Community decision is important thing to me. This is my last comment about Crimea and those "horror story" with protection.--Soul Train (talk) 02:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. Not a particularly bad editor but Stjn and Vermont make some very compelling points. Hiàn (talk) 16:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong support I support Soul Train because he is very experienced, he helped to develop Wikipedia as Bashkir and Lezgin Wikipedia. I don't see any problem, he can help the other future projects.--Reda Kerbouche (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Oleg is an active Wikipedian and Wikimedian, who makes a huge contribution to the development of Wikimedia projects on different languages. Until today, I have not seen serious problems in his work, all the more I have not seen that he would deal with political topics and speculate on the basis of political view. And finally, there is always the opportunity to correct their mistakes, if of course they are. Best, --Mehman 97 17:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose over the POV concerns. --Rschen7754 17:54, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support: At the recent meeting of the Wikimedia RU, we discussed the inadmissibility of using wiki projects in political interests and moral code of conduct for members of Wikimedia RU. Soul Train warmly supported these principles of Wikimedia and agreed with this. I think all doubts should disappear: if violations appear, the sysop flag will be immediately removed. Everyone understands this, right? w:en:Wikipedia:Assume good faith. And Soul Train's contribution to the Wikimedia movement is very serious and active. For example, Soul Train participates in the organization of the new global contest Wiki Loves the Caucasus. — Niklitov (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    • The problem is that it is hard to monitor the use of the GS tool over 500-600 projects. --Rschen7754 19:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
      • I can not find a problem about User:Soul Train: his sysop flags are saved in other wiki projects. — Niklitov (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment In the event this passes, I stress to Soul Train that Global Sysop permissions are only to be used for antivandalism and routine maintenance. This means you cannot protect articles you've written (or any unless it's being vandalized), block editors who are not vandalizing, use the tools to enforce a version of an article, or anything that is not strictly antivandalism or routine maintenance. Vermont (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    Yes, of course.--Soul Train (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support An active Wikimedian and Wikipedian in different projects and different laguages. Carlos yo (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Global sysopsery is not about being an editorial participant, that would be normal community participation. We simply fill-in, in the absence of admins, predominantly anti-spam, anti-vandalism, and some speedy deletions. Very occasionally we may implement a community consensus deletion, though they are not often. Be well aware of any biases that may creep in and steer well away, that would be where you would leave or refer to another.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    Exactly.--Soul Train (talk) 02:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Withdraw Tomybrz Bip Bip 09:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
    Oh, yeah, but many of them are very active users of Wikipedia editions on the languages of Russian Federation, but you "don't know" about existing of those editions, as I understood ;)--Soul Train (talk) 20:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 13:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, not eligible for GS. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 18:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    Why?--Soul Train (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    To be active more, you active 5/6 GS wiki, remain all are non-GS wiki. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 15:08, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I support a worthy specialist--ZUFAr (talk) 18:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, I am grateful for all the work and care. Amikeco (talk) 19:34, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support global sysop is an exceedingly small deal: it is technically limited to a set number of wikis, and the scope is even more limited behaviourally. In other words, it’s really hard to do harm that can’t be easily undone with it. He is trusted in the communities where he wishes to use the rights, and there is a need there. We should not be in the business of second guessing local projects on who is trusted to work on those projects. There is a need, and we have someone trusted to fill the need volunteering. We shouldn’t be opposing this. We should be thanking him for volunteering.

    In terms of the opposes, the NPOV issues highlighted were in 2014 and 2015. I was a completely different person then than I am now, and I suspect many of the opposers were too. Unless there is evidence of current abuse of tools that show an inherent compatibility issue with these. I see no reason to oppose for mistakes 4-5 years ago.

    Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Tomybrz gives perhaps the best reason to support of anyone here: Soul Train is not active on meta for anti-vandal stuff or in SWMT. He’s actually out improving projects that he’s familiar with and helping us to achieve our goal as a movement of spreading knowledge, not playing a video game with vandals. These are the type of people we should want more involved in global tasks, and that they are starting to volunteer more now can only be described as a good thing. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: "global sysop is an exceedingly small deal: it is technically limited to a set number of wikis, and the scope is even more limited behaviourally. In other words, it’s really hard to do harm that can’t be easily undone with it." This is not true. There are hundreds of small wikis and some of them don't have any active sysop. It is hard to notice any harm if it is ever done and no one may notice it for it to be undone as sysop ability on that wiki is limited to stewards and other GSes. (Talking only about the permission, not about the user)--BRP ever 23:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I understand your point about the highlighted issues being from a while ago, and I should have taken that into account in my oppose above. However, I do not understand why you seem to think global sysop should be given out like candy. It's a right that should only be given to users who are highly trusted to use administrator tools on the majority of public WMF projects. I will also note that global sysop permissions are not given to edit wikis you're familiar with: that is what local administrator permissions are for; although, considering the amount of wikis Soul Train contributes on, it may be beneficial. Reading the comments above since my last addition here, as well as the support from multiple editors I trust, I'm inclined to   Weak support as global sysop permissions would allow them to maintain and prevent abuse on the various languages they focus their contributing at, provided they recognize the limited nature of global sysops scope and that they are still limited by those on projects where they're content editors. (it's better to simply request local adminship imo) Vermont (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Because the odds of a global sysop who is competent enough to be a sysop on multiple small projects and who has rollbacker or the like on a major project causing actual damage is next to non-existent. The most dangerous part of the sysop tools is the damage they can do to communities, not the technical aspects. A user with a limited focus who knows the languages they are dealing with is unlikely to expand to projects and languages they are not familiar with. This makes giving these type of people GS significantly less of a risk than giving someone who is a prolific SWMT GS. I'm aware of all the hypothetical technical possibilities here, but from a functional perspective, global sysop has a relatively low-risk to high-reward ratio. We need to stop thinking about every potential bad thing a user can do and focus on what is likely to happen. For most GS applications, the theoretical negatives that could happen have a fairly low chance of actually happening. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak support per TonyBallioni. I agree with 1997kB. Changing to   Oppose due to canvassing concerns. --BRP ever 02:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose due to POV pushing.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:59, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --З. ӘЙЛЕ (talk) 04:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Таңһылыу (talk) 09:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Guram52 (talk) 05:53, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -J. Ansari Talk 05:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Һәҙиә (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Хаят Йосопова1 (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per TonyBallioni--Turkmen talk 10:50, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Юлдашева Луиза (talk) 16:27, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good day! this is a technical flag that does not apply to large partitions. Simply brush your garbage in those sections, where there is no active of the staff. Oleg will be happy to help them!--Erzianj jurnalist (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Could you please explain the canvassing on going here? Matiia (talk) 20:50, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Could you please explain the reason why you are call the voting and support of active users of Wikimedia projects as "canvassing"?--Soul Train (talk) 01:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
A bunch of users from projects you edit came here to !vote on your request. Many of them have few edits on meta, and it's unlikely they'd notice this request were they not informed of it by someone by offwiki means. Vermont (talk) 01:40, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Is this request for Meta adminship, or global adminship? And what is wrong if user want support his colleague? --Soul Train (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There's no wrong, ofc. The issue is when you ask other users to support you, that's not a thing we like. This situation is very strange and that's because I asked you to explain. Matiia (talk) 02:05, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
I know what is canvassing. I do not send any massive emails, I do not even wrote about this discussion in social networks (Facebook, VK, Twitter) - my last posts were about Copa America and new single of Scooter. Well, this request is not surprise for Russian communities, I think. Because for the last years I independently asked many times to make this request. I was afraid, I wasn't sure, but many people told me - "we will support you, just do it", and I finally done. And what I see? Some strange accusations?--Soul Train (talk) 02:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
@Soul Train: If you could explain what you did, rather than saying what you did not do, that would be helpful to me to understand the context.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
I wrote 4 or 5 messages to those people with whom we previously discussed this opportunity, that I finally opened this request. In neutral manner, without asking to support me. Maybe someone additionally spread this news, but I did not. As wrote here in the section "Appropriate notification", if I would place a message in Bashkir Wikipedia's Village pump, I think that you would see here not 5-6 users from Ba-Wiki, but 20-21 supports. Because it is very strong community, I proud to be Administrator there. I proud of their support.---Soul Train (talk) 14:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There's no issue with it when it comes to SRGP discussion policy, although some !voters may not like it. Also, stewards tend to ignore unreasoned or canvassed !votes when reviewing a global rights request, so it isn't particularly beneficial. Vermont (talk) 02:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I was about to support in start as this right can benefit all those project they mentioned but opposing due to canvassing concerns. If user can't be transperant about their request, how you can expect them to be transparent about their actions. Additionally POV concerns, which I don't want to see in a GS. Thanks! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    What should I say to the Universe now: “Please, people, STOP VOTING FOR ME”? Are you serious?--Soul Train (talk) 05:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Hello. I was watching for discussion for 2 days and just don't believe my eyes. We have different opinions with Oleg in politics. But it was never a problem in Lezgi Wikipedia! Soul Train never reverted my edits in polit. manner. We have discussion about the system of transcription/transliteration from foreign languages to Lezgi. Oleg is for reliable sources, I think many of them are too old for using. I even wrote the article about it in the site of Federal Lezgian National and Cultural Autonomy. But this is absolutely scientific, linguistic discuss, without using admin rights. As for Sevastopol, I even didn't see this article, but I'm sure that if I see, Oleg imidiately change the protection (he said that he was wrong with protection to admin level). It was long time ago, may be in this moment I also was admin, I don't remember. So it was no problem for our community. And I fully   Support Soul Train in this nomination, I don't care about if call me some canvassed user.--Mugerganets (talk) 13:29, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose due to the obvious canvassing going on here, with even an IP supporting. This, coupled with the POV concerns makes me uneasy with the editor acquiring the permission. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    Awesome first statement. And a great second statement, considering what Lezgi native user with pro-Ukrainian views wrote right before your message.--Soul Train (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose and very strongly at that. I wasn't as swayed by the canvassing arguments to oppose, or even all the other nonsense and I was leaning toward a weak support but the candidates response just above mine to Tks4Fish is pretty abhorrent. If you're not prepared for valid constructive criticism and are going to meet every piece of opposition by bludgeoning them to death, you don't have the temperament to work in a variety of local communities whose policies and environment may not mirror that of your home wiki (or elsewhere.) Basically tl;dr bludgeoning your opposition at every opportunity isn't a good thing and working cross wiki requires level headedness that I certainly do not see here. Praxidicae (talk) 15:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    "constructive criticism" is mentioning IP voting in the case where the user obviously forgot to log in? OK.--Soul Train (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for proving my point. Praxidicae (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per lack of experience will give weak oppose but then issues brought out by Praxidicae, Tks4Fish, 1997Kb are what makes it firm. The "canvassing" isn't proven but the way this vote is conducted doesn't impress. --Cohaf (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose  Neutral The last few replies made by Soul Train to the oppose !votes doesn't really inspire confidence in me.  — FR 15:42, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Makes a lot of useful for small Wikipedias in the languages of the peoples of Russia. JukoFF (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per 1997kB. Given the circumstances I was neutral, but the candidate's overall behavior and replies posted here are decisive for me as well--Sakretsu (炸裂) 17:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I've changed my standpoint 3 times now, however this is where I now remain. Due to canvassing concerns, inability to take criticism, ru-wikimedia mailing list messages including cursing and insults, and a very extensive ruwiki block log with recent blocks as well as past ones for a variety of reasons, I oppose. Their behavior is not indicative of the professionalism and trustworthiness necessary in global sysop work, and thus I cannot continue to endorse their request. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 21:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose mostly due to recent behavioral blocks on home wiki, and confrontational tone in this discussion. — xaosflux Talk 23:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Most global sysops are involved with the SWMT, but I am not opposed to allowing people active in maintenance on a smaller sub-set of wikis to help out. I am not incredibly concerned with either the canvassing: smaller projects tend to be a tighter-knit community than larger ones, so word gets around. The closing steward will weight the votes from people not active in cross-wiki work accordingly. But for future reference, Soul Train, on Meta advertizing requests for permissions, particularly to a specific group of people, is generally discouraged. There are a few valid concerns, such as the snippy responses and past POV issues, but overall I think that the candidate is competent enough to understand the global sysops scope and use the tools appropriately.   SupportAjraddatz (talk) 00:25, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, I am supporting due to quite impressive crosswiki activity and matrix, I don't particularly care about the POV concern from more than 3 years ago, that's quite a long time for people to change, and about the tone of this user use here is absolutely fine for me, in fact, its a bit funny for me. If we are talking about tone to be used for conversation, I think there are some of us here are actually worse than soul train. In any case 0.72 theil index is pretty respectable for user that focused on Russian language family project, and I support this request for GS.--AldnonymousBicara? 01:30, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
    Thank for your support. Just little   Comment about this. I don't think that Russian language projects (such as Russian Wikinews, Ru Wikivoyage, Ru Wiktionary etc.) needs in additional assistance from a GAs - they mostly have they own sysops and smaller or larger communities. My scope of work is different - Wikipedia editions on the indigenous/regional languages of Russia. There are 37 official languages in Russian republics (subjects of the Federation) and more than 15 languages with official status. The languages of Russia belong to 14 language families (more than 150 languages spoken overall). We have about 30 Wikipedia editions in the languages of eight families. As you can see in this map, Russia can be called one of the most difficult countries in terms of linguistic diversity. Unfortunately, many languages are endangered. Wikipedia is one of the tools that really help preserve and develop such small languages. We have a section in Veps language. There are a little more than 6 thousand Vepsians, and only half of them can speak in Veps language. Main contributors in Vepsian Wikipedia are linguists from St. Petersburg and Petrozavodsk. In Dagestan, there are many languages spoken in only one or several villages. I'm trying to look for native speakers offline. I regard this as my mission to preserve and support languages. I cannot know all these languages, but I can provide technical assistance to those native speakers who want to develop their endangered languages with the help of Wikipedia. I plan to travel (I don’t hope for financial assistance from the WMF, by the way) to several regions, such as Dagestan or Kalmykia (the only European region with a dominant Buddhist population) in the near future, try to find native speakers, and tell them about the opportunities that wiki-projects provide. And I will continue this work until I have enough strength. Regardless of the results of this request.--Soul Train (talk) 13:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
    Although I have my reservations (hence, my oppose), the above shows that this user have a heart for WMF Projects and I really am impressed with their passion for outreach. I hope that no matter the outcome, don't be disheartened and continue the good work for these noble causes Soul Train. I just feel that this tool may not be the best for these aims. Thanks much. --Cohaf (talk) 13:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, has experience, i met him at Cape Town ( Wikimania). --Great11 (talk) 21:55, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose, as per 1997kb and many others, I also share the concerns with xaosflux such a long list/trend of behavioral blocks definitely raises questions, they might have sysop flag at many small projects, but issues with NPOV + persistent behavioral blocks + AND not to say but answers/replies given to opposing votes here. All together forces me to not support this request. thanks QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 07:54, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Simba16 (talk) 06:39, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong oppose. While I'm sure the candidate has a lot of great edits on many wikis, I can't look past the behavioral issues brought up before in this discussion, and the fact that these issues are extremely recent are, to put it lightly, worrying at best. I would expect the candidate to go at least 6 months without behavioral blocks before I could support the candidate for this particular permission. (And the somewhat aggressive responses to oppose votes makes me lean much farther away from a support) EggRoll97 (talk) 16:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose (Discussion) --WikiBayer 👤💬 16:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I want to register my thoughts on this discussion so far. I have 7 points to give. (1) The canvassing is a non-issue to me because in general we probably should hear from the local users who are most familiar with the user requesting global rights. Soul Train has said his notifications were neutral, and I am content to take their word for it. (2) Going against Soul Train are emails like mailarchive:wikimedia-ru/2018-April/004494.html. I sincerely hope they are not always that rude. (3) Further, while on en.wiki I generally certify that being admin is not a big deal, I don't feel the same for global sysops. There's a lot less accountability for smaller wikis, and things aren't constantly as reviewed as en.wikisource or en.wikipedia. If a global admin abuses their tools in a subtle manner, it can be harder to deal with them in the short term (RFC's take time and there is no other way to remove an active global sysop). (4) As for the applicant's combativeness in this thread, I imagine more than some of it has to do with w:language barrier. That said, it does not reflect well on either Soul Train nor his wikis. I would've hoped he has set a better example and be more careful with his words. (5) I can't believe people aren't talking about Soul Train's legendary achievement. Nobody has even mentioned he took down a cabal of toxic admins/crats. Major props there. (6) Yet... as stjn pointed out... he's not been a complete angel with his own use of the tools on his home wiki. Were it not for this next point, I'd have voted oppose on this count alone. (7) Soul Train seems to deeply care about endangered language wikis. Looking at how he describes his experience with bxr.wiki is evidence enough alone. Oh and the way he wrote about Vepsian Wikipedia brings real tears to my eyes (not exaggerating; it's seriously beautiful). If it wasn't for my third point, I'd be Soul Train's biggest defender right now. Taken together, however, I have to say I'm neutral even though I do lean support. Kindest Regards, –MJLTalk 04:51, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Wait is the best compromise. Come back later, by applying in the rules and going on #cvn-sw. Per ZI Jony, the editions on SW are light. Cordially. --Eihel (talk) 13:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I see two things here. One is the POV/canvassing issues - which seem to be old news. The other is his conduct here, and I'm inclined, with his history, to think that this is because of his interest in convincing the public that he's ready for GS, and I would give him the benefit of doubt in this case. And the only other thing that I note is his weak edit matrix. Leaderboard (talk) 17:44, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
    Could you please explain what is the edit matrix?--Soul Train (talk) 14:29, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
    @Soul Train: Initially (2004), this is the name given to the list of all Wikimedia sites including communities, technical sites, chapters, all projects as well as all ephemeral sites and sites of the Foundation. Such a list can be consulted on Special:SiteMatrix. Currently, when we talk about a person's editing matrix, we are talking about his participation on these different wikis. —Eihel (talk) 23:12, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Global Sysop is just a tool to help small wikis, and Oleg has ability and passion to do this. And I don't see any risk that he could misuse or otherwise non-appropriately use this tool. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 21:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support for candidate's activity. Соколрус (talk) 11:52, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, I believe it wll be usefull for small wikipedies. Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 13:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  Not done, No clear consensus to grant this permission at this point of time. Please feel free to reapply later. --Shanmugamp7 (talk) 06:49, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
(PS: As Cohaf rightly mentioned, appreciate your hardwork and passion towards Wikimedia projects, Please do not feel demotivated because of this outcome.) 

Global sysop for Turkmen

Not ending before 11 July 2019 21:11 UTC

Hello. I'am a global rollbacker, and a sysop on three Azerbaijani Wikiprojects (Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikisource) and Turkmen Wikipedia.

Sometimes after reverting vandal edits and add the "delete" template vandals don't stop vandalizing. They remove the "delete" template from the page, continue vandalizing, or create unnecessary pages. I think this right will be effective for me to combat such edits carried out by users/IPs in Wikipedias with inactive sysops, or for someone who is not a sysop.

Thanks--Turkmen talk 21:11, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support temporary sysops on several wikis. -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 22:45, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
  • You've been a global rollbacker for less than a month. I'd like to see more experience in dealing with xwiki vandalism, although I see you've been doing quite a bit of it and are trusted as a sysop on multiple projects. Could you give a few examples of where global sysop would have helped you? Thanks for volunteering, Vermont (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
    Hello dear @Vermont:. For example, when I revert an IP's edits, that IP will still continue to vandalise. At that time, the local administrator was not active. There is a delete template, but it has been removed.--Turkmen talk 23:40, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello Turkmen, I think you can report such cases to Global sysops who are active on IRC or in SRM page. These issues are common during crosswiki patrol especially while dealing with LTAs.--BRP ever 11:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support At the time of my vote, he is op on 6 wikis and rb on so many others. I bet that he will know how untangle on other wikis and in other languages. Whole confidence on an obvious application, quite simply. Salam əleykum. —Eihel (talk) 00:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -J. Ansari Talk 04:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Weak support. Turkmen is doing fine as a Global Rollbacker and did not have much experience yet. I don't see a real demonstrated need for the tool (the example quoted of continual vandalism is something many GR, including me faced). In addition, the tenure as a GR is extremely short as well as I don't see very active crosswiki vandalism combating (as compared to the rest of the GS when they stand for candidacy). However, his multiple temporary permissions which he didn't abuse them is a sign that more tools to them will not be a harm. As what I said in my GR application, I believe candidates who know the tool shouldn't be denied based on a weak index / matrix. This is what leaned me to support rather than remains on the fence. A caveat for them, GS is a very powerful tool (and my homewiki is a GS wiki so I am very concerned) so please use it judiciously. All the best. --Cohaf (talk) 06:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
    • @Turkmen: Why do you mark 12 as vandalism, they are IMO test edit. Can I also know why this is tagged as delete without any reason. Thank you. --Cohaf (talk) 13:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
    • Also, why do you think this is vandalism?--BRP ever 14:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
"IMO test edit" is trashing the wikis in a way. Especially the wikis with less sysop activity, or no sysops at all. Users or IPs can test their acitivity on wikis' general draft pages or test wikis. Be sure that, from my adminship experience, I know that they ask about it, or search themselves. Edits like these are only vandalistic in nature. The article that I deleted without explanation was an article that was written in English language, in Uzbek Wikipedia. Thus, I added the "Delete" template without any explanation. Sometimes, while looking at wikis with SW Viewer, I'am alone and because of that, to not have anything pass by without my review, I edit oftenly. And this is why I added that template fast, and closed my tab. I can understand and speak the Uzbek language. I probably look at the last changes page of that wiki daily. This is why I can be active more comfortably in Uzbek Wikipedia, rather than other Wikipedia projects.--Turkmen talk 14:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
For English articles, somewiki like zh will allow for 14 days to translate or else deletion, so I am a little puzzled. I now know it is a wiki you understood the language, it's better then. I don't think they are truly vandalism but they aren't useful, this I agree. Thanks Turkmen for explaining. I think I am more reassured now. Fair explanation given. --Cohaf (talk) 15:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Dear @Cohaf:, thank you. :)--Turkmen talk 15:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Cohaf and others. --KMB-ATENU139 Talk) 11:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I am not sure if the user has the required amount of crosswiki experience, I suggest waiting for 2-3 months and re-requesting the right. Plus the recent mediawiki RFA makes me lean towards   Oppose. Thanks--BRP ever 11:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 12:32, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user. Kindly, --Mehman 97 19:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--NewDataB (talk) 20:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Why not? -- Catherine Laurence 00:50, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Soul Train (talk) 11:09, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:44, 3 July 2019 (UTC) Hey Turkmen, IMHO this at hiwiki wasn't vandalism. My suggestion is that please do quality patrolling instead of quantity and be careful in tagging. Apart from that you doing great work and I still support you for that. Good luck! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:29, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAs Cohaf above.-- CreampieGolden State Finals Champion 06:40, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Turkmen is active and trusted wikipedia user and he has experience as a sysop in our wikiprocejts. --eldarado 07:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Hmm, I think it's too much soon, most of the activity is very recent. I also don't agree with tagging an empty page as vandalism, but this is relative and it depends the criterion of the user. Matiia (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I don't think that you're one of the bad admins at azwiki, but this was not very good. --Rschen7754 18:24, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I think that this might be a bit too soon. If you are elected, please go slow at first, make sure you adhere to the GS scope (routine maintenance and counter-vandalism, not on wikis with active admins) and ask questions! – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:24, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose too early--DiMon2711 16:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I've supported I think most of your previous global rights requests, but I'm agreeing with the above that this is probably too early. I'd look forward to supporting in 3-6 months. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi @TonyBallioni: and @Ajraddatz:. First of all, thank you for your attention. But I think there is no need to worry. When I was nominated for this right, I understood the seriousness of the law. That is, I know that the wrong actions can create problems for me in the future. However, when I get new rights in a project, I look at the behavior of other administrators and users and practice it. I actively participate in projects such as Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wiktionary, Wikisource and Wikinews (Azerbaijan Wikinews now in Incubator). That is, I know about many projects. I think the number of global administrators is small. Some are not active at all. This weakens the effective fight against vandalism. I think that if I become a global administrator, I can more effectively deal with users and IP addresses who continue their vandalism. In this way, I can reduce the burden of global administrators and global rolbackers. I can do it. Kind regards, :) Turkmen talk 19:57, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
I do think that a few more months of cross-wiki work would be beneficial so you could learn more about the way things are done outside the azwiki community. I've noticed a few times recently when you've said/done things that, while being normal on your home project, are frowned upon here. That said, I am fairly confident that you'll be able to use the sysop tools properly and won't abuse them, so I am not opposing. – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Ajraddatz sums up my views fairly well, but I also don’t really see the point in neutral votes/comments. If this passes, I’ll be very happy for you, and if it doesn’t, I expect I’ll support again in a few months, but I do think a few months more experience would help you :) TonyBallioni (talk) 15:45, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Zi Jony --DannyS712 (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I agree with Matiia and Ajraddatz. I appreciate his work and enthusiasm, but I think this is a bit too soon. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 15:27, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral. Agreed that it's a bit too soon but I can't find any other compelling reason to oppose at this moment. Hiàn (talk) 15:38, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Cohaf. --NMW03 (talk) 19:28, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:19, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Rschen. Yikes. Praxidicae (talk) 19:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Around three months more as a GR and I will gladly support.  — FR 10:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
  Not done No consensus. The nomination seems to be premature. Ruslik (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Global sysop for BRPever

The following request is closed.
Not ending before 15 July 2019 13:50 UTC

Hello everyone, I am BRPever. I am an SWMT patroller active in crosswiki anti-vandalism and anti-spam works. These tools will help me in dealing with vandalism and spam on small wikis. I can also read Devanagari and have basic knowledge of many languages written in it. Thank you!--BRP ever 13:50, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Strong support They are one of the most collaborative editors I have ever work with in this project, so I am very confident in their ability to communicate decisions with other users if their actions are doubted. They are quite active in IRC and we certainly needs more people that are active in IRC. In addition, their competency of the tool cannot be doubted as they have +sysop in Simplewiki / wikidata. In addition, solid crosswiki work seen by all the patrolling and crosswiki deletion requests. They know languages that can be an asset to GS team as few or none know those languages in the nom statement. Isn't this a candidate that the community can wholeheartedly endorse? I am quietly confident of it. --Cohaf (talk) 13:56, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strongest Possible Support He has a strong track record of crosswiki contributions and has been instrumental in removing and preventing vandalism on small wikis. I have no doubt BRPever would use global sysop permissions responsibly to help cleanup vandalism on wikis with few/no local patrollers. Vermont (talk) 14:00, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely yes! Amazing editor with solid experience. They will be great addition. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:13, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support sysop on a large project (Wikidata) that is active cross-wiki. Should be granted on request for stuff like this. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per discussion--Turkmen talk 15:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support GMGtalk 16:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trustworthy user. They would be a great addition. Esteban16 (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 17:28, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Full support. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 03:13, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Rschen7754 03:58, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trustworthy user.--Biplab Anand (Talk) 09:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:08, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ofcourse. Very active and experienced. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 12:20, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Stryn (talk) 12:38, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--NewDataB (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support .--HakanIST (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support They can be trusted with this right. Sincerely, Masum Reza 21:15, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. Clear and obvious use for the tool, more than competent for the job. Hiàn (talk) 21:55, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ---WikiBayer 👤💬 17:14, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 17:16, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -FASTILY 05:44, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Mahir256 (talk) 05:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Strong supportEihel (talk) 06:42, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support no reason to oppose —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:41, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trustworthy user. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 07:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Thought I already did this. Praxidicae (talk) 13:45, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 14:22, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support no problem supporting this.-- CreampieGolden State Finals Champion 15:11, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--DiMon2711 16:49, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --DannyS712 (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Mehman 97 19:40, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:20, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 10:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --*Youngjin (talk) 00:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Obviously.  — FR 10:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Whoa! Rights going in safe hands-- Sandeep Raut (talk) 12:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

  DoneMarcoAurelio (talk) 14:46, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for حسیب احمد

Hello, My name is Haseeb Ahmed. I am an active user on Urdu Wikipedia. See my contributions. I am a Rollbacker and pagemover on Urdu wiki. I am editing Urdu wiki very fine with this IP but I can't contribute on English wiki & Wiki Commons (with this IP). An english wiki admin (User:DMacks) blocked on my IP. The block started in 2017, and will end in 2021. Please help me guys, thanks, -- حسیب احمد (talk) 14:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

  Not done As this is a local block, please, ask for a local IP block exemption. Ruslik (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Rowingbohe

Hello, I'm Rowingbohe and I'm from Mainland China. I'm editing in zhwiki, zhwikivoyage and commonswiki(and so on). Because of GFW, I have to use open proxies and some of them were blocked. I'm writing to get this permission, and I promise not to abuse this permission. I hope you can allow. Best wishes, Rowingbohe♬ (Talk/zhwiki) 04:51, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Brror

Hi, I live in P.R.China and have to use proxies to edit due to GFW. My current IP address is globally blocked so I need a global exemption. Thanks.--Brror (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:42, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Bezgin Gezgin

Hello, I'm from Turkey. Wikipedia has been blocked since April 29, 2017 in Turkey. I use VPN for editing but Wikipedia sometimes blocks my IP address. I want to exempt from IP address blocks. Thanks. --Bezgin Gezgin (talk) 22:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Huangdan2060

Hello, I'm Huangdan2060. I'm from China, Wikipedia has been blocked a few months ago, now I can only use VPN editing, but the IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider. Thanks. --Huangdan2060 (talk) 08:37, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:16, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for KOP-SEE

Affected by the Internet block in Mainland china, I need to use a proxy to access and edit Wikipedia. Thanks, --KOP-SEE (talk) 08:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for US National Archives bot

My upload bot, which has uploaded tens of thousands of files to Wikimedia Commons in recent weeks, has been unable to edit due to a recent global block on 52.200.0.0/16 (Amazon AWS servers). The bot has a legitimate need to use the AWS server in order to operate continuously from the cloud, and if this is going to be a long-term block, it looks like it will need a gIPBE to continue editing. Thanks! Dominic (talk) 14:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for User:Masumrezarock100

When I use public Wi-Fi connection, I switch to VPN to protect my network and my device. Earlier today, I when I tried to edit Wikipedia, I found this. I would ask on English Wikipedia, since I am most active there, but this block blocks me globally. I edit other projects such as test-wiki, commons. I've secured my account with 2FA, so I doubt it would be compromised. I've read the help page.

Your IP address is in a range which has been blocked on all wikis. The block was made by Vituzzu (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is hosting service with open proxies such as 45.77.16.78. * Start of block: 02:40, November 4, 2017 * Expiration of block: 02:40, November 4, 2022 You can contact Vituzzu to discuss the block. You cannot use the "Email this user" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is 45.77.128.213, and the blocked range is 45.77.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make.

Thanks, --Sincerely, Masum Reza 06:37, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for User:Lappspira

Because of the country I am living in I need to use VPN to protect my self. I am a legitimate editor who usually but not always use English Wikipedia. The continuation of my editing depends on the ability to continue editing anonimously.Lappspira (talk) 10:51, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Currently I get the following message:

Editing from your IP address range (XXX) has been blocked (disabled) on all Wikimedia wikis until XXX by Bsadowski1 (meta.wikimedia.org) for the following reason: Open proxy: Abused web host / VPS

I hope we can soon solve this problem. Lappspira (talk) 10:51, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for 橙子木

Per user meta talkpage, caught by global block as they are in GFW, thanks, --Cohaf (talk) 07:32, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 07:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Nazmifr

The VPNs I use on a regular basis prevent me to edit pages, I'd be really keen to have this exemption, thanks for any help, --Nazmifr (talk) 12:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Springee

I use the Opera browser on my smart phone and desktop computer. As part of the Opera lite browser (a version that limits mobile data usage) the traffic goes through Opera servers. One is 107.167.105.248. This IP address has been globally blocked and now I can't edit from my phone when using the Opera-lite browser. I assume this block will affect many Opera-lite browser users, not just myself. I'm not sure of the best way to post this request so I will start with an individual request. thanks, Springee (talk) 13:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for NeechalBOT

This is the BOT account which runs in Google server across various projects and various tasks so far. Due to global google IP blocks, this BOT activities are being also blocked on various time past. So I would like to seek Global IP block exemption for this account to bypass any IP level restrictions. --Neechalkaran (talk) 14:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done. Just letting you know that the Toolforge is there for you without the need for GIPBE. — regards, Revi 19:13, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Hiàn

I'll be editing + uploading files abroad until roughly the 17th of August via a VPN so a temporary global IPBE until then would be much appreciated. --Hiàn (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

  Granted for 1 month to expire on 2019-08-29. — regards, Revi 19:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for Martin Urbanec

Not ending before 29 July 2019 00:41 UTC

Hello, I'm Martin Urbanec and I would like to serve Wikimedia movement as a global renamer. I'm mainly active on cswiki (where I serve as an admin, bureaucrat, checkuser and former arbitrator), but from time to time I also try to patrol globally as a member of SWMT. I also work on site configuration changes requests on Phabricator, see phab:p/Urbanecm. I think I understand the Global rename policy, and of course I'm willing to ask questions if I don't understand something. I plan to mostly help patrolling Czech request page, but of course I'd like to help with the global queue as well. Feel free to ask me questions, if you want to know anything. Thank you for considering granting me global renamer rights. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 00:41, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Previous request: Steward_requests/Global_permissions/2016-10#Global_rename_for_Martin_Urbanec --Martin Urbanec (talk) 00:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support. Active and more than qualified. No issues. Hiàn (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Rschen7754 00:45, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--BRP ever 01:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --DannyS712 (talk) 01:22, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support admin on multiple projects and a checkuser. Should be granted on request without much other explanation needed. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 01:56, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 04:46, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Possible strongest support - Don't need to check/verify this user. He is trusted and excellent candidate. I mean it.   Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 05:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Previous request failed due to a lack of crosswiki activity, which is now sufficient. They are trusted with advanced permissions on-wiki and active on phab. Thank you for stepping out to help with renaming.--94rain Talk 05:26, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I thought they are one already. Support obviously. I see they have good judgement skills .--Cohaf (talk) 05:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportAmmarpad (talk) 08:49, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. Stryn (talk) 09:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Turkmen talk 10:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 10:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Vermont (talk) 12:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 21:38, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support--NewDataB (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per TonyBallioni. Sincerely, Masum Reza 22:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 08:01, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support.--HakanIST (talk) 08:30, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 08:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support why not? :-) We could make a good use of an additional active and trusted renamer from cs.wiki--Sakretsu (炸裂) 10:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I think this user could get the right after seeing his contribs.--Hamish 20:07, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   SupportEihel (talk) 21:18, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 08:04, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Fine. The previous refusal was dubious in itself, and he looks like a good person. Leaderboard (talk) 08:46, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user. No concerns. Rafael (stanglavine) msg 14:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support for obvious reasons.  — FR 14:19, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user. No concerns. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 01:54, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support seems fine. — xaosflux Talk 12:47, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Trusted user!— Arash 09:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Done. Matiia (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Requests for 2 Factor Auth tester permissions

2FA Tester for Sofakinbd

<Add an explanation here>I would like to have 2FA protection on my Wikipedia account, thanks, --Sofakinbd (talk) 04:06, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Have you read and do you understand Help:2FA ? Linedwell [talk] 05:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
I have and I do. I use 1Password the password management app. It has a TOTP module built in. That is what I would like to use after being granted the option. Prior to that I used Authy to manage all my TOTP across accounts and devices.
Thank you,
Sofa
  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much Ruslik. Good to go here.

- Sofa

2FA Tester for Lisbeth

I have read the help page, and i'm sure want 2FA, thanks, --Uuuyyttu (talk) 04:17, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for nCelti

Hi, I am in the process of enabling 2FA across all possible accounts as I audit my online presence. I have read the help page; I use 2FA in many other places and am fully aware of the risks. Thanks, --NCelti (talk) 02:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 16:56, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for The Obento Musubi

I would like to have additional security on my account. I have read the help page and regularly use 2FA on accounts that enable it. Thanks, --The Obento Musubi (talk) 22:16, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Done--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 03:45, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Morphdog

I would like to have access to two factor authentication on my account. I have read the help page and use 2FA on other sites that support it. Thanks, --Morphdog (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 02:36, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Screenname27

I would like to enable 2FA. I have read the help page, thanks, Screenname27 --Screenname27 (talk) 15:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Realitym

I was doing a sweep of my accounts enabling 2FA and realized that the Wiki offers it and thought I would like to enable it here as well. I have read the Help page and everything seems pretty straightforward from there, thanks, --Realitym (talk) 06:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for AreYouConfused2

I try to add 2FA to all new accounts and would like to incorporate it here, too. Thanks, --AreYouConfused2

@AreYouConfused2: Have you read the help page? Jon Kolbert (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
@Jon Kolbert: Yes, my apologies for not including that. AreYouConfused2
  Done Ruslik (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Montenal

Read the help page, and I'd be happy to use 2FA on Wiki* pages as well, thank you! --

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Craynon

Hi there! I've read the help pages and would like to enable 2FA to bring the security of Wikipedia account in line with my other accounts. Whilst I use a password manager, Wikipedia is currently the exception to my 2FA rule!

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:37, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Mainframe-Aaron

I have read the help page about the two factor authentication, thanks, --Mainframe-Aaron (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 20:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Navjotjsingh

Been using 2FA on all other sites as well. I have read the details here and would very much like to use 2FA here. Thanks. --Navjotjsingh (talk) 09:18, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 14:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for greew

I'm using 2FA everywhere possible and would like to use it here as well. I've read the help page :) - thanks, --Greew (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 14:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for MrClog

I would like to be able to further protect my account. I have used 2FA at other sites as well. In addition, my account has certain permissions at en.wiki that may cause someone to want to hack me, and better be sure. I have read the instructions and will keep the 10 backup codes at a safe place. Thanks, --MrClog (talk) 14:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 14:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for Civ2boss

I use 2FA anywhere I can as best practices and would love to do it here too and yep I've read the help page already, thanks, --Civ2boss (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for StudiesWorld

I use it elsewhere and have no reason not to use it here. I didn't realize that you could request it directly until now, at which point I read the help page, thanks, --StudiesWorld (talk) 12:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Jon Kolbert (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

2FA Tester for MrJaroslavik

Hi. I have read the help page, and i'm sure want 2FA, thanks, --MrJaroslavik (talk) 12:50, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Requests for other global permissions

remove global OTRS member for Dan Koehl

Thanks, --Krd 12:09, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 12:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Add global OTRS member for Catherine Laurence

Thanks, Ruthven (msg) 15:12, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Add global OTRS member for Satdeep Gill

Thanks, --Ruthven (msg) 12:20, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Catherine Laurence

Thanks, --Krd 15:15, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Krd:   Already done. Stryn (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Satdeep Gill

Thanks, --Krd 15:06, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

  Already done.--HakanIST (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Steven Crossin

Thanks, --Krd 06:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 06:42, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Global abuse filter helper for Praxidicae

Not ending before 11 July 2019 13:35 UTC

Hi everyone, I'm requesting global abuse filter helper to assist in my normal activities as a global sysop. I have held abuse filter helper for over a year on enwiki and I often request details and changes to filters globally. I primarily utilize them for tracking abuse and spam and think it would be immensely helpful. Praxidicae (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support Experienced with reasonable reason --Alaa :)..! 13:40, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Praxidicae is more than sufficiently experienced in this field, is trustworthy, and could use the tools to benefit Wikimedia projects. Vermont (talk) 13:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Has a clear need and experience. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question: @Praxidicae: I was just about to hit support, when I noticed that while you may "have held" this at enwiki as you list above, you left off the part about how this access was just recently revoked from your account there per some sort of "private" reason. Can you further explain this? — xaosflux Talk 13:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: Sure. I asked for them to be removed because I am taking an indefinite leave on enwiki because of all the recent drama. I realized after my request to remove them I should have kept EFH there (and plan to request it back) because it's useful to me globally as well, but the tl;dr is really what I said above. Praxidicae (talk) 13:57, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
I can confirm this was why the removal was requested. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:07, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
(Edit conflict.) @Praxidicae: thank you for the reply, in the trust-but-verify mantra I did contact the admin that processed your removal, who has confirmed it was a self-request. This access will "work" on enwiki as it is truly global, though if you resume regular contributions there you may want to pick back up the local group. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 14:09, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Rhododendrites

Thanks, --Krd 17:46, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

  Done.--HakanIST (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Killiondude

Thanks, --Krd 15:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Done. Stryn (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Add global OTRS member for MrJaroslavik

Hi, I want to help with handling OTRS emails, thanks —— MrJaroslavik (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

This is not how it works. See OTRS/Volunteering. — regards, Revi 21:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)