Steward requests/Permissions/2013-10

Administrator access

संजीव कुमार@hi.wikipedia

User has unanimous support.--Bill william compton (talk) 16:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done --MF-W 21:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Already a temp admin. User has unanimous support (ignoring troll vote). Please make permanent admin if possible. PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done permanently. In my opinion the number of supporters and especially all of their activity suffices to justify permanent adminship. --MF-W 12:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


User has unanimous support. Note that the one opposing user later withdrew the oppose. --Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 04:15, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

User Lilitik22@hywikipedia

User had unanimous support in the voting. vacio 11:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

आशीष भटनागर

Ashish Bhatnagar talk 06:43, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you not aware that your bureaucrat rights were removed because of this? --MF-W 19:41, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I would not say that I was not known but not confirmed if it was a mistake as the points stated for removal seems not covering me, Anyways I had stated the present consensus and further Hi wikipedia is seriously lacking a crat. So I reiterate the request. --Ashish Bhatnagar talk 03:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
What is the status of this request?☆★Sanjeev Kumar (talk) 05:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Not granted. Based on the previous case. Any bureaucrat-specific request can be requested via stewards. Bennylin 13:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

CheckUser access


Please give Drahreg01 the CU rights. The identification will follow, you can set this request on hold for now. Congratulations to Drahreg01 for the election! Geitost diskusjon 10:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  On hold pending identification. Trijnsteltalk 10:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I sent a mail with a photography of my Identity card yesterday afternoon. --Drahreg01 (talk) 14:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

We will give you the rights once it's documented on Identification noticeboard. Could you please also reply to the email I send yesterday? Trijnsteltalk 18:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Done. Kindest regards. --Drahreg01 (talk) 19:42, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Will wait until the WMF acknowledge the identity provided. Bennylin 15:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done as the user has identified :) Snowolf How can I help? 03:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


Please give Theghaz the CU rights. The identification will follow, you can set this request on hold for now. Congratulations to Theghaz for the election! Geitost diskusjon 10:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  On hold pending identification. Trijnsteltalk 10:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
  Done (ID received). Trijnsteltalk 20:33, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


Arbitration Committee (I am the member of it) approved to grant checkuser flag to OneLittleMouse, we told him to send to you identification information - just waiting for it rubin16 (talk) 16:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold pending identification. Trijnsteltalk 16:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
diff rubin16 (talk) 04:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done (I'll also do the other stuff, the wiki/list/irc etc). Trijnsteltalk 13:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Oversight access

Removal of access


According to the local policy, the inactive sysops and bureaucrats for 2 or more years (with less than 50 administrative actions) will be removed from their flags. BetoCG (talk) 23:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

  DonePlease thank Mushii for his/her work. -- Avi (talk) 15:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


Inactivity, local policy. Does not appear to have made 10 administrator actions in the last six months. --Delsion23 (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Also for the other two requests, I found out myself that they have made less than 10 admin actions etc. --MF-W 20:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


Inactivity, local policy. Does not appear to have made 10 administrator actions in the last six months. --Delsion23 (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 20:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


Inactivity, local policy. Does not appear to have made 10 administrator actions in the last six months. --Delsion23 (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 20:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


...Aurora... (talk) 03:54, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

From what I read in the talk pages there's seem to be a conflict between bureaucrats and that user, which led you (a ms.wp 'crat) to put the request here. Since it was a personal request by the user, and ms.wp 'crat posted it here, I've carried out the request. Bennylin 13:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


This +sysop does not have the support of the local community (no RfA) and on IRC, several users are outraged about it, especially given that this user was blocked yesterday. As a local 'crat, I thus request this to be reverted, as local 'crats cannot desysop on this wiki.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:27, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

For perspective, bureaucrats can grant sysop rights ad-hoc on this wiki, without a RfA; one chose to do so, which is how this happened. I'm obviously involved in the matter, but I would have to agree that this was a controversial choice for sysop. --Rschen7754 05:32, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
It might be useful to wait for a comment from the 'crat who granted the rights. Snowolf How can I help? 05:34, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Concur; this user was blocked for 24 hours and warned for continued uncivil behavior on the wiki. His being granted +sysop is out of bound and frankly outrageous. The fact that MzMcbride's reasoning amounts to "help out with documentation" - which does not require +sysop - is laughable. --Jorm (WMF) (talk) 05:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Who's MzMcbride? --MZMcBride (talk) 05:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
I would think that there would be more interesting things to discuss than proper capitalization of your username, MZ. These gentlemen have come here to ask for the reversal of a 'crat action you've taken. Your input on the matter would be appreciated. Snowolf How can I help? 05:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
My talk page is here: mw:User talk:MZMcBride. I'm sure all of these users first posted there prior to posting here. That would only be reasonable, right? To be clear: my action was not a mistake and I'm not asking for it to be reversed. This is a local community issue (sort of) and, as far as I'm aware, the stewards do not get involved in such matters. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Jasper Deng is a long-time user here. I would think he would know that this request can't be fulfilled by stewards. I'm not sure what the point of filing it is/was. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

No. I would consider this action on behalf of myself, a local bureaucrat. The point is, this was so out-of-line that on behalf of the local community, it should be reverted.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Err, you seem to be taking a pretty strong stand here. Yet you haven't disclosed that you're involved (read: not considered impartial with respect to) this user. This is troubling. :-/ --MZMcBride (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I think at this stage, this matter warrants local discussion before any actions are taken by us. While I understand the concerns brought up, which are entirely reasonable, the user has not make any admin actions as far as I understand it, and it seems unlikely that it be problematic for the matter to be put on hold while a local discussion is held to properly consult's community and hear their opinion on the matter. This to me seems the most efficient way to solve the issues brought up here. Is that feasible? Snowolf How can I help? 05:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Why? There's no real reason to wait for community consensus either before desysoping, because the sysoping was originally performed in absence of community consensus. And also it says pretty clearly at the top of mw:Project:Requests: "unlike most Wikimedia sites, this site is controlled by the MediaWiki developers, not its own community.". --Krenair (talkcontribs) 16:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Jasper asked me to take a look at this as an uninvolved bureaucrat (I also discussed the matter a bit with MZMcBride). I agree that the sysopping was inappropriate and should be reverted. It seems a bit strange to insist that community consensus is required to -sysop when the +sysop was done in the absence of any consensus. Still, if the stewards feel that a consensus is required, I'm sure one can be shown. Emufarmers (talk) 06:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

"For perspective, bureaucrats can grant sysop rights ad-hoc on this wiki, without a RfA; one chose to do so, which is how this happened." While you've established that you feel it was inappropriate and should be reverted, you didn't provide any reason or rationale. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
I am arguably involved in this issue and am a mediawikiwiki bureaucrat. But I'm also a developer. Assuming MZMcBride knew about Fram's edits and the resulting arguments (and to be honest there's no excuse not to check before +sysoping someone), it's clear that he should know that this sysoping is entirely controversial and should never have happened without a normal RfA (it's really not a standard 'nobody seems to have any big issues with this user and I'm convinced' situation where we could normally simply +sysop - that much is clear purely from looking at Fram's contribution history). I don't know what Fram did to convince MZMcBride that this was okay, but it's not. Not just based on the fact that the user was blocked, but the circumstances around it including the arguments on mw:User talk:Fram. We should seriously consider removing MZMcBride's bureaucrat flag as well as definitely removing Fram's sysop flag. --Krenair (talkcontribs) 16:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion at mw:User talk:Fram#Your edits to VisualEditor, although has no centralized discussion location. mw:Project:Current issues.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Direct link: mw:Thread:Project:Current issues/User:MZMcBride and sysopping of User:Fram (sorry, I had included the link in the message above without changing its appearance but it seems that's not appreciated). --Nemo 07:05, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, local bcrat here (it's said I'm involved because I gave MZMcBride his bcrat flag, but I don't think that's true). This whole situation is insane. I think we should revoke everyone's +sysop and +bcrat who's involved in this kerfuffle--that's including all the sniping and batshit behavior from people on the current issues page--and hand out some blocks as well. Everyone could use a time out. This is stupid stupid stupid and goes against the only real policy we have on use some freaking common sense. ^demon (talk) 17:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
  •   Not done - No matter how Fram managed to get admin rights on, stewards will only act when there is either current and blatant abuse of the tools happening by the user in question (emergency desysop) or when we are shown local consensus by the community to remove the rights. I currently see nothing of that. SRP is furthermore not the right page to have a discussion about that matter. Please find a place on to discuss this matter and come back here if/when you got a consensus and need a steward for possible flag-removal. Thanks, -Barras talk 18:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my bureaucrat and admin status on the three above wikis, per my own request, as I will no longer be editing. There is no local capacity on these wikis to remove bureaucrat flags. --Peter Talk 18:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I recommend this be put on hold for the standard 24 hours. --Rschen7754 19:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  On hold until at least 2 Oct, 18:56 UTC. --MF-W 19:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Btw you are also an importer on en.wy. I assume you want to resign from that as well. --MF-W 19:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, sorry, please also remove my importer flag. --Peter Talk 19:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done - I've removed all rights now. Thanks for your services. -Barras talk 13:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove both his sysop and bureaucrat rights. With kind regards, Kippenvlees1 (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I moved the request to the removal of access section. I second the request as per local guidelines. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 17:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:45, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


With thanks to NuclearWarfare for his contributions to the project. Risker (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

According to the announcement, that is CU and OS. --Rschen7754 16:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done. --MF-W 20:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Please remove his sysop rights. After being notified about the yearly moderatorconfirmation user has indicated he does not wish to participate in the confirmation. -- Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

This user has not made it clear that he wants his rights to be revoked (his comment is vague). Dolledre was suggested to do a request for removal here. His reaction was that his initial comment was misread, therefor it doesn't seem correct to remove his rights per this request. Mvg, Basvb (talk) 11:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I suggest putting this request on hold until Dolledre confirms that he wishes his admin privileges to be removed. Mathonius (talk) 11:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, I'm the coördinator of the yearly moderatorconfirmation and he did not specificly stated that he is not ellectable for another year. His right's shouldn't be removed untill he says that he isn't ellectable. --Natuur12 (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately comprehensive reading has lost the local discussion to inertia. Local consensus as of the moment is to hold this request until Dolledre states in layman's terms that yes means yes. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I've put it   On hold. Dolledre said yesterday to me on IRC that he wished to reply on Saturday. Let's give him the chance then. Trijnsteltalk 20:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear stewards, please be so kind to remove my sysop bit on the Dutch Wikipedia as soon as possible. I'm not using it at the moment. Sorry for the prior "confusion". Kind regards Dries Declercq aka Dolledre. Dolledre (talk) 20:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Done, thanks for your services! -Barras talk 20:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


I'm asking for the removal of my sysop rights due to my inactivity. --Gabriel Yuji (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

On hold for 24 hours QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:50, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done --MF-W 10:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove checkuser and sysop from my account at Commons. Due to ongoing health issues, and being burned out on deletions and the rest, I've decided to move on. Thanks. INeverCry 06:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

On hold for 24 hours QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:49, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:-( I'm sad that you decided to retire, but your health is of course the most important thing, above all. Take care. Trijnsteltalk 20:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  Get well soon. Good luck, we hope you in Commons. --Alan (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
+1, Thanks for everything --Steinsplitter (talk) 20:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  --Rschen7754 20:49, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  - How sad. We lost you on English Wikipedia and that was quite a blow, but this hurts. Good luck in real life though. WorldTraveller101 (talkcontribs) 12:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
It would be nice if further messages to him could be made on his commons talk page, not here. --MF-W 12:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done with thanks for your service and best wishes for your health. --MF-W 09:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Beany did not make enough edits in the past 12 months and per policy is not active enough to be a sysop anymore. Please remove his sysop rights. Best regards, — TBloemink talk 18:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done - Please thank them for their work. -Barras talk 20:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Own confirmation that he has thought this over for the last few weeks. --MagnusA (talk) 19:41, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done, please thank them for their work. QuiteUnusual (talk) 20:42, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my sysop flag on Thanks,--Sandrobt (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf How can I help? 16:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done, thank you for your work at QuiteUnusual (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


Per local policy on permission removals because of inactivity.

This editor is only just inactive per the policy so agree should be removed. However, it would be preferable to contact the editor as a courtesy, especially as the inactivity policy was only introduced two weeks ago. QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
  Done, QuiteUnusual (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
This editor is also a bureaucrat. I believe your inactivity policy means both rights should be removed - please confirm QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
As the bureaucrat is add-on to the admin rights, yes, both should be removed. Thanks for care.
Danny B. 17:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
  Done, thanks QuiteUnusual (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Danny B. 23:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

  Done QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


No edits since 2013-03-13, no logged actions since 2012-07-01 and user notified 2013-09-12. Please remove sysop flag. Regards, Christian Giersing (talk) 10:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


Has not been active since 5 October 2012 and after inactivity notification on 14 July 2013. Please remove sysop flag. Regards, IW 17:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Please remove Caulfield's sysop access because of six months of inactivity as sysop. log policy. Thanks. --Harlock81 (talk) 23:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold pending fixing of bugzilla:54876 so that I can verify the inactivity thru access to the logs. Snowolf How can I help? 18:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
It seems like the API still works: [2] --MF-W 14:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done Confirmed via API. MBisanz talk 01:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


not used since 2009 --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

No longer needed. Multichill (talk) 17:12, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  done --MF-W 19:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

איתי פרץ@he.wikipedia

Please remove my administrator rights. --איתי פרץ (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold for 24 hours per normal policy. QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done, thank you for your work. QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


It takes too much time from me. George Talk 10:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold for 24 hours per normal practice QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:46, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done Thanks for your work. Matanya (talk) 07:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Andre Engels@nl.wikipedia

Given that being a moderator at Dutch Wikipedia means taking responsibilities far beyond what I am able to do (for example, both agreeing with and avoiding an action by another moderator even before they have done it), I hereby request that this heavy weight is taken off me. - Andre Engels (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

  • I'd like to request to wait a few days with honouring this request. Currently, shit is hitting the fan on nl.wikipedia because of some nasty conflicts between moderators and between moderators and non-moderators. However, Andre has played no role at all in these conflicts and he is just an "innocent bystander". I can fully understand his frustration - I feel the same - but sincerely hope that within a day or two things are somewhat back to normal. Please give Andre a few days to reflect; he's a valued collegue and it would be a loss if he were to hand in his admin rights. CaAl (talk) 07:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
    • I guess I have a somewhat too strongly sense of responsibility in this kind of matter. And as it will be hard to change me or change Wikipedia, this does feel like the better solution. But if you do want to wait a few days, be my guest. I promise I won't go into an admin abuse spree in the meantime. - Andre Engels (talk) 08:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
      • After what's happening now, I don't need time to think any more. Please remove my admin rights as soon as possible. I prefer my right to have my own opinion to admin rights. - Andre Engels (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. Thanks for your contributions and efforts up till now. (I assume only the admin flag that you wish to be removed.) Bennylin 14:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Due to our policy, I hereby request removal of sysop access due to inactivity in the main namespace longer than one year. Gardomir has been notified two weeks earlier ([3]). Tar Lócesilion|queta! 08:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, has he also been e-mailed per your policy? --MF-W 21:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I've sent him an email. Openbk (talk) 22:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done --MF-W 22:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


I request removal of sysop access due to inactivity longer than two years, as per local policy. Jambornik has been notified one month prior, but he hasn't entered an e-mail address, so the notification was talk page-only. — Yerpo Eh? 19:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. Snowolf How can I help? 19:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


I ask to remove sysop flag on skwiki for Chiak. Reason: per local rule: he does not have sysop edit for last 4 months. Vasiľ (talk) 07:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. Please inform him. -- Mentifisto 07:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my Checkuser access at en.wikinews. I don't have time for that commitment. Thank you. ---- Cirt (talk) 15:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Thanks for the time that you have committed to enwikinews and the WMF. Good luck and have fun with the return of RL. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 09:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

User Adrian@skwiki

I ask to remove sysop a bureaucrat flag on skwiki for Adrian. Reason: per local rule: he does not have sysop edit for last 4 months. Vasiľ (talk) 09:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. -- Mentifisto 16:32, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my sysop access from nl.wikipedia. Due to a series of incidents I do not wish to take responsibilities as an admin on nl-wiki anymore. Lymantria (talk) 07:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Please, put my request on hold for the time being pending developments and giving thoughts on the comments given by steward Trijnstel and admin CaAl on the dutch admin mailing list. I may have put my request here too much in the heat and emotion of the moment and want to give it thoughts for another day or two. Lymantria (talk) 09:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Sure.   On hold for as long as you feel necessary. :) Trijnsteltalk 10:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
I have given thoughts on the comments Trijnstel and CaAl gave as mentioned above and to the comments I have received since this request by quite a few wikipedia-nl users. They convinced me that I should not give up my sysop access, so I hereby withdraw my request. Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 07:12, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  Not done. Thanks! /me is relieved Trijnsteltalk 20:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my sysop and bureaucrat flag on barwiki. --Holder (talk) 13:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

  On hold for a day in case you change your mind. -- Mentifisto 16:32, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done removing both flags.--Jusjih (talk) 23:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my 'cratflag (not my adminflag) Regards, — YourEyesOnly (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done and thanks for your help the past five years as a dewp bureaucrat. Trijnsteltalk 20:28, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


Please remove my my adminflag. Thanks, Yeshurun (ישרון) 14:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your time and effort as an administrator. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


I see the ru-wiki community is very prejudiced against me. Under existing conditions I must resign as admin. --Gruznov (talk) 09:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Why do not you ask your own bureaucrats? Ruslik (talk) 11:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Because last time I did it on Meta-Wiki. --Gruznov (talk) 17:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I have removed flags locally rubin16 (talk) 06:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Marking as not done as this has been handled locally. -Barras talk 10:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


According to the rules regarding adminship on nl-wiki as can be found here Grmbl76 has not received the needed support of 75% of votes needed to keep his admin rights. I therefor ask as the voting coordinator of this desysop procedure as can be found here that his sysop access will be removed. --JurgenNL (talk) 10:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. -- Mentifisto 12:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry@en.wikipedia

I am not making much use of the OS tool at this point in time - work is especially stressful at the moment, and I can't get to requests fast enough to action them. I would therefore like my oversight flag to be removed for the time being, until I have more time to spare. --Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 20:17, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done - thanks for your past work in this area! -- Mentifisto 21:23, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


Hej Stewards, I herewith request removing the checkuser flag from my account for personal reasons: during last year my professional occupation increased unexpectedly and there are no current signs that this will change in the near future. For in de.wp new skilled CU's had been elected recently I think it's ok - bearing in mind that every idling CU would be one too much. Thank you. --Rax (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC) (will you please ignore my broken english)

  Done, and thanks for your past work! -- Mentifisto 03:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton@brwikimedia

During a week, community members discussed the removal of sysopship and the opinion is unanimous that it should be removed due to misuse and repeated behavior that doesn't fit with what is expected for a sysop (i.e. insulting, agressive, etc). Local page doesn't mention any specific policy for removing rights. Thanks.--—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 00:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Rastrelli F@kawikiquote

Inactive since November 2012. Discussion was held 4 months ago and we could remove his status before, but well. –BruTe talk 19:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done as the administrator is inactive Elfix 19:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)


According to the local rules, administrators on the Dutch Wikipedia are required to have at least a 75% support rate. A desysop procedure against MADe (see here) resulted in him having a support rate of only 68,47%. Please remove his sysop access accordingly. Mathonius (talk) 16:39, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done - QuiteUnusual (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)


Anatoliy (talk) 10:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-03. --MF-W 23:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
removed--Jusjih (talk) 06:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)


Anatoliy (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-03. --MF-W 23:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
removed--Jusjih (talk) 06:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I humbly request permanent adminship on the Northen Sotho Wikipedia. The related discussion was started on September 17. The community is very small, but active users have voiced thier views on the discussion page. Mohau Talk 08:14, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-09-26. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
removed Matanya (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Érico Júnior Wouters@pt.wikinews

According with the local election (4/0/0). Thanks in advance. Érico Wouters msg 03:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-09-28. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 05:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 13:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Dear sir; I nominated User:Sasakubo1717 to be an admin in local community already. He have good experience in th.wikibook and th.wikiquote before. And I think he also will be good admin in this project too. We need him to cooperative for create growth in that project. Your regards. --B20180 (talk) 11:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

on hold until 3 October — billinghurst sDrewth 15:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me sir; This day is 5 October. But this still no appoint from meta. --B20180 (talk) 06:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-10-05. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- Trijnsteltalk 20:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Note that I also removed the temporary admin rights of Ponpan; he never used it either btw. Trijnsteltalk 20:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much --Sasakubo1717 (talk) 22:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 13:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


requesting a extention of my administrator status (25 December 2012 --> 25 march 2013) for maintaining pcd.wikipedia. Geoleplubo (talk) 22:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you put a local notice? I can see just a request made on Jan 11. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I ask for a vote on december 15 and the community is about the same... It is necessary to do a new vote ? What is a local notice ? thanks Geoleplubo (talk) 01:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
This means that you would inform on the wiki that the temporary status expired and that you wish to renew it. --MF-W 16:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I put a local notice on w:pcd:Wikipédia:Adménistrateu; Geoleplubo (talk) 21:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
  On hold until 7 April. Ruslik (talk) 06:26, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-7. Ruslik (talk) 08:56, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 18:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


My temporary adminship has expired. I need permanent access now. Votes for are under Разы дæн in the request page. Bouron (talk) 05:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

On the basis of this vote I can only extend your temporal access. Ruslik (talk) 07:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. What's wrong with this vote? --Bouron (talk) 07:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
If you mean the number of votes, then you should know that Ossetian Wikipedia have only 3-4 active users, including me.--Bouron (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
If there are only so few active users then the project does not need permanent administrators. I can extend your sysop access for 6 months. Ruslik (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Could you please provide a link to the policy stating that? As I can see on the top of this section, for permanent sysopship one need to provide a link to the local community approval. I do have local community approval with 100% support. So where the rule about few active users came from? Also please consider stewards policy which says "Stewards should not override consensus, such as whether or not a user should be given a particular user right". In addition let's take a look at the page about Stewards. It says "They [stewards] are tasked with technical implementation of community consensus". So I still think you should give me permanent access, because oswiki doesn't have own bureaucrat to implement community consensus.--Bouron (talk) 19:45, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Dear Ruslik, as a permanent administrator of the Ossetian Wikipedia I would like to speed up the process of providing Bouron with a permanent access. Could you please specify is there any problem with that? All our active contributors said that they are "pro". Bouron can contribute with an advanced level of the Ossetian language, that is why he needs permanent access in order to improve all pages, templates and articles in Ossetian Wikipedia. Thank you for your comments. Taamu (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
  Comment You quote this: "Stewards should not override consensus, such as whether or not a user should be given a particular user right" as indicating a Steward must grant the right. However, this sentence has a fuller meaning. The Steward is acting as the Bureaucrat for the project and is required to determine whether consensus has been achieved first. Determination of consensus would usually include assessing whether the number of votes in support, the users who voted, the size of the community, etc., is adequate to show consensus. Three votes in support might not be considered adequate to show this consensus clearly (depending on the other factors). QuiteUnusual (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Four days left since I posted a link to the vote. Why stewards are determining consensus so unusually long?--Bouron (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-08. -- Vituzzu (talk) 18:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

removed --MF-W 18:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


Please extend the duration of of my adminship at dv.wikt. SR/AT#Ushau97@dv.wiktionary. Ushau97 talk 13:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

On hold for a week until 9 April. --MF-W 14:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-09. --Bencmq (talk) 13:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

removed (user had already resigned in May) --MF-W 19:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


Please give me sysop flag. There's no active bureaucrat.
- Sarrus (ct) 17:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2013-10-12. -- PeterSymonds (talk) 19:29, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


Requesting permanent sysopship again, Savh confirmed that he was not oposing. Regards. Gusta (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Best regards! Gusta (talk) 17:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
This is a lie! The consensus was not reached, and several who supported him were meat puppets, if he wants the flag, he will have to reopen the discussion, we not vote to choose things there. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 06:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This is so not consensus that he did not warn the community that he made ​​the request here. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 06:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I already rejected the request here basing my judgement not on templates but on the discussion (surprise, surprise, I can understand Portuguese!). Btw I see a strong bad faith in waiting until the bot has archived the older request before opening the new one. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, i thought you hadn't seen Savh's comment. You said that he was clearing opposing and they he came and said that was not, you said nothing about it. I thought you would revert me if i changed the template so the bot does not archived it. It's there, i linked the Sahvs comment so Ruslik could see the old request. Gusta (talk) 21:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't have meat puppets. Zoldyick is active and came from Wikipedia long time before. Érico is a global sysop, already had edited there. Matheus came for the sysopship. I warned the community Gusta (talk) 21:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Frankly I can confirm my original evaluation, I must underline, again, I didn't evaluate anything than *arguments* within comments. Furthermore the project is definitely too small for granting any permanent adminship. Anyway, since another steward has judged there's a sufficient background for an adminship I think a the best deal is a temporary one, I'd tend for 3 months by now. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Just a correction, Texugo already has permanent it. If you want to give temporary no problem. Gusta (talk) 22:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-13. , granting for 6 months voy:pt:Special:PermanentLink/71713billinghurst sDrewth 08:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:39, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


Granted temporary editinterface rights for one year per the discussion on SRGP. Expires 14 October 2013. Ruslik (talk) 09:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

removed--Jusjih (talk) 04:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Giromin Cangiaxo@lijwiki

Tnx, Dragonòt (talk) 13:25, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-16. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks.
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Temporary adminship. PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-10-30. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. Been around for 4 years, so six months seems a good starting point QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

extended permanently ([7]) --MF-W 12:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


There is no Administrators or Bureucrats in Esperanto Wikinews, so I start a local request for candidate myself. The Community voted along 1 week. There is work to do, delete and protect articles. Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 07:07, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

With no other administrators and this level of support, we would only grant temporary adminiship for now QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I've no problem with that. I can work with a temporary adminiship. --Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-10-31. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. Ruslik (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
extended for six months - see diff QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests

Jan Ainali (WMSE)@svwiki

Ainali requests to be Account creator, as far as I understand permanently, i.e. until inactivity or own request. Ainali is a very well trusted user, former sysop (he resigned after the incident in France) and is staff in the wmse-chapter. He needs this tool for workshops and education. -- Lavallen 14:57, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done. Bennylin 16:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Axel Pettersson (WMSE)@svwiki

Pettersson requests to be permanent account creator on svwiki (i.e. until inactivity or own request). Pettersson is wellknown user on svwiki, our former press contact and is today staff on wmse. He needs this tool for workshops and education. -- Lavallen 16:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


— The preceding unsigned comment was added by MohandesWiki (talk) 10:49, 11 October 2013 UTC (UTC) [8]

Hi. What is your request? --MF-W 12:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  Not done as no rights were requested. Snowolf How can I help? 17:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-01-20.   Done by Vituzzu following request by Foundation. While not usual for global rights to be added at SRP recording here as temporary rights that will be reviewed and renewed following discussion with WMF if continuation is required. — billinghurst sDrewth 04:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Note: It was already removed on 25 October per WMF request. --MF-W 15:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


After the debate hold on the local pub, I ask the import right for me and for FrankyLeRoutier (request below). This discussion: show the need of importer on french wikivoyage.--Adehertogh (talk) 10:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Reading your discussions, I think it might be better if you request on Bugzilla that specific wikis will be set up as import source for fr.wikivoyage (e.g. other language versions of Wikivoyage + other French projects). That way, every administrator will be able to import using fr:voy:Special:Import. --MF-W 10:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Much preferable to have the transwiki import set up, and then it is available for all administrators. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


Same reasons than adehertogh@fr.wikivoyage request.--Adehertogh (talk) 10:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

not done, transwiki import suggested (as above) — billinghurst sDrewth 11:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments Ukraine@commonswiki

I am requesting account creator rights on Commons that can be assigned by stewards only.

As one of WLM organisers in Ukraine I am going to email the WLM winners from Sunday on. We expect to contact approx. 50 users (27 regional winners, 2 national nominations of 10 users each and 5 special nominations of, most likely, 3 users each, with probably some users getting more than one prize and thus just one email), and it would be great to contact them quickly. However, email limits would affect this, thus I need account creator rights to be able to send all emails in one day.

commons:User:Wiki Loves Monuments Ukraine is my alternate account (diff) that is used only for contacting WLM winners — NickK (talk) 23:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

  Done for two weeks until 9 November 2013. Ruslik (talk) 17:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiAnika@wikimedia commons

I am requesting account creator rights on Commons that can be assigned by stewards only.

As one of WLM/WikiCon organisers in Germany I am going to email the WLM winners from Sunday on, to invite them to the WikiCon in Karlsruhe, 22 - 24 November. There are about 60 users. Not all of them do have an account on wikipedia. It would be great to contact them quickly, because we do need quick answers - hotel registrations are due on Friday! Email limits would slow us down badly, thus I need account creator rights to be able to send all emails in one day.--WikiAnika (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Done, assigned for one month or when you're done. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 16:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)