Steward requests/Permissions/2014-06

Administrator access

Bureaucrat access


  • Hello, I Lhiotr bureaucrat globally. Because I have a lot of free time, I know all the procedures in all projects of the Wikimedia Foundation, I read several times the page bureaucrat meta wiki., I know how to use them wisely if you will be granted me permission bureaucrat. (I ask the steward Ajraddatz answer her and Matanya,Steward or any other)--Ronel1 (talk) 17:06, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
    Hi, there are no global bureaucrats on Wikimedia. If you want to run for steward, there will be another election starting in January of 2015. See Stewards/Elections 2015 for details. Marking this as not done. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, since no global bureaucrats would love you to be a bureaucrat meta Wiki - Wikimedia. (I would suggest myself steward elections in 2015 but have no real skills and bureaucrat do have skills.) Permits every time I meet Dale then repeated request.--Ronel1 (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure, I've understood what you wrote. In any case, I'm afraid to say that you can't yet apply for bureaucratship. You need to be a sysop and after 6 months of regular adminship you'll be able to apply for bureaucratship. But first of all, you need to having been contributing actively on Meta. In your case I just see ca. 500 edits on he.wikipedia and only 4 edits here (i.e. this request). --Nastoshka (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
  Not done That is not a matter for here, they have their processes handled separately.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:44, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

CheckUser access


Teles was elected checkuser in Portuguese Wikipedia, according voting (26/02/0) (already identified). Thanks in advance. Érico Wouters msg 21:04, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. Teles is also already subscribed to the relevant lists. Ajraddatz (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Érico Wouters msg 21:09, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


DeltaQuad voluntarily relinquished access in April due to lack of time. He has requested that his rights be returned, and as he was not "under a cloud" at the time of his departure, we have no objection to allowing him to regain them. Thank you! LFaraone (talk) 16:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done - I'll add him on cu-l etc as well again. :) Trijnsteltalk 16:35, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Oversight access


I put this request here as a Meta bureaucrat. The user is identified, I hope. --MF-W 16:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I fulfill this request as a Steward, I hope. --M/ (talk) 16:06, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Removal of access


thanks, etc. --→ «« Man77 »» [de] 00:51, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done --Melos (talk) 01:12, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Johannes Rohr@de.wikipedia

I'm inactive and I don't expect this to change anymore, so I'll relinquish my sysop status. --Johannes Rohr (talk) 07:55, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

  On hold until 07:55, 4 June - QuiteUnusual (talk) 09:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  Done. Thank you for your work. Savhñ 09:00, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


Please remove my Sysop rights in Arabic Wikipedia.--ASammour (talk) 10:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

  On hold until 10:51, 6 June QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:35, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
  Done, thank you for your work. QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


Inactive sysop since 27/05/2012 --Leitoxx Work • Talk • Mail 23:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)


Inactive sysop since 22/03/2012 --Leitoxx Work • Talk • Mail 23:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello, as per this discussion result, please remove administrator status for user Ֆետայի in Armenian Wikipedia, thanks beforehand, best regards` --ERJANIK (talk) 12:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:26, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thanks. --ERJANIK (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Innocent bystander@wikidatawiki

I resign as sysop. I can no longer claim that I follow the discussions on the project, and thereby is updated in local practice and policy. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

On hold for 24 hours per standard practice — TBloemink talk 18:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
:'( Ajraddatz (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm also sad to see Innocent bystander leaving, but as in previous cases I'd like to note that the 24 h standard practice doesn't really need to be applied for Wikidata users as Wikidata's policy allows resigning administrators to reconsider their decision for the next 6 following months anyway. Regards, Vogone (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Fine by me.   Done. Please thank him/her for their work on wikidata. Trijnsteltalk 13:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Thx! Well, if/when I become active again, I'm not sure I need any sysop-tools. Very little of what I have done has been closely related to such tools. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


Request for desysoping, community distrust. --Andres (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done Referencing w:et:Special:PermanentLink/3932051#Usaldushääletus (Bioneer1) user has failed a confirmation, and will have admin rights removed as per community consensus. @Andres: Please let you community that this has been done.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:52, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Andres (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


Please remove only my bureaucrat flag (not sysop). Personal request due to a lack of time to devote to the project at the moment. Thank you! –Juliancolton | Talk 21:16, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done, thank you for your work :) Snowolf How can I help? 21:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


To be a bureaucrat or a sysop on eswiki, the local activity requirement is 50 logged actions over the last two years, and this requirement is no longer satisfied by 3coma14. Then I request you to remove his sysop and bureaucrat flags, please. Best regards, --Jmvkrecords (Intra Talk) 01:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 01:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


Please remove my sysop flag, it doesn't look like I'm going to resume my activity as sysop. Thanks. --Blacklake (talk) 08:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

  On hold until tomorrow, per standard procedure. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M7 (talk) 14:11, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Removed, thanks for your service. Ajraddatz (talk) 19:36, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

High Contrast@commonswiki

Per commons:Commons:Administrators/Requests/High Contrast (de-adminship) (policy) --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:04, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

--M/ (talk) 14:11, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


The user is inactive (the last logged action in January 2013, the last but 1 in 2011, and the last edit in 2009). Local vote was held, user was notified but didn't respond. The local policy actually requires 5+ users with 50+ edits and 1 month of experience to vote to consider vote successful but when you look at the list of active users you can ensure that it's impossible to fulfil that requirement at current state of the wiki. 2 activemost users supported the denomination. --Base (talk) 19:29, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I am crat of ukwiktionary. Our policy says that we need have at least 5 voters for successful nomination. Now we have only 3 votes there and it is not enough. So I suggest to change this to 'On hold' and wait one week more.--Anatoliy (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
I've explained about this piece of requirements. There are less active users in a month — another week of holding won't make things better. --Base (talk) 19:40, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
The user is active on Commons. You can ask him about removal there. Ruslik (talk) 18:38, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The flag in question is on Ukrainian Wiktionary not in Commons so I see no reasons to ask him elsewhere. Anyway he must have got an emain notification about my talk page notification so if he wanted he would answer. --Base (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
We want to see that there has been communication with the user, and that they have basically abandoned the community, so please do try Commons as a contact place, even if it points to their talk page at your wiki where the conversation can take place. With ten active users, I would think that a vote of 3-0 after an extension, and all attempts to communicate, would be sufficient and has an alignment with the global approach to inactive users.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I told with user via Skype. He said that he not need that status.--Anatoliy (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  Done Ruslik (talk) 19:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

The powder toy@zh.wikinews

--Ou0430 (talk) 01:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 01:54, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

GaiJin@kkwiki & GaiJinBot@kkwiki

Hereby it is requested to remove the admin as well as bureaucrat access of GaiJin & GaiJinBot on Kazakh Wikipedia due to a long-time inactivity. --Qarakesek (talk) 07:14, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Danny B.@cs.wikiversity

This is a repeated request. In the previous request, steward billinghurst asked the cs.wv community not to debate within Meta and move the debate back to cs.wv. Now the discussion doesnt continue ([1], [2], [3]) so we move the request back to stewards.

The previous request stated that 100% of active community members (counting users with 1 edit/day during the last 30 days as active, except Danny B. himself) expressed their mistrust in Danny B. and therefore the request is reasonable though three users mainly involved in other communites opposed this request. --Juandev (talk) 20:59, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

So, as I understand, nothing has changed since the previous request? Ruslik (talk) 07:15, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

By what means? The animated disussion, which was ongoing on Meta, whas not taken to cs.wv. Just a few people left some smaller coments and it ended.--Juandev (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Ended. Well, and the same should be the result here. However, the next step could be a request on Jimbos's page. Regards, -jkb- 23:23, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
You know Jimbo has absolutely no right to take any action in this case? He doesn't even hold the technical rights required to enforce any decision in this case. Ajraddatz (talk) 23:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Well, after more than 10 years here I know. Sorry to have forgotten the irony tags :-) -jkb- 14:42, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Not done - There is still no consensus to remove Danny B.'s sysop flag. Please don't request this repeatedly until we do something; only come back if consensus develops locally to remove his rights. Ajraddatz (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


I am resigning as admin on german wikipedia. Please remove my rights. Thanks --NEUROtiker (talk) 17:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

  On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. --Rschen7754 17:39, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
  Done at 06:54, 23 June 2014 by Shanmugamp7. QuiteUnusual (talk) 06:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Due to our policy, I hereby request removal of sysop access due to inactivity in the main namespace longer than one year. Vuvar1 has been notified ([4]). --PG (talk) 05:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


Due to our policy, I hereby request removal of admin access because of inactivity in the main namespace longer than one year. Random has been notified ([5]). --PG (talk) 11:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done --Rschen7754 18:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Michiel1972 has made less than 250 edits in the last year so according to the local policy his administrators privileges should be revoked. Please remove his sysop-flag. I will thank him for his work. Natuur12 (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done --Rschen7754 18:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


I request removal of sysop access due to inactivity longer than two years, as per local policy. Lacen has been notified one month prior, but he hasn't entered an e-mail address, so the notification was talk page-only. — Yerpo Eh? 09:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Inactivity policy, and notifications done as required, cross activity shows no edits since early 2012. Rights removed. Thanks for the notification, and monitoring your activities.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ilnur efende@tt.wikipedia

I request removal of sysop access of the User per his request (мине админ вазифасыннан алып атуыгызны сорыйм, discussion above) & his talk page status change. -- Frhdkazan (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

  Done Ruslik (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


Tatar Wikipedia community requests removal of sysop access of User:Derslek - he has been notified of the closure of the respective ArbCom cases.
The participant has a history of good contributions into the project (fluent in Tatar, creating/upgrading articles to Good/Selected status), but abuses Admin/Bureaucrat Status by ignoring community consensus/adopted policies, engaging in edit and wheel wars, ignoring talk page entries, intimidating others using inappropriate language, banning others when they disagree with his point of view. This contributes to ours small project loosing active users, admins and having difficulties in attracting new ones.
Appeals sponsor (a leading candidate for TatWiki ArbCom during its elections, resigned in the process) - has not provided any supporting evidence, whilst his supporter, elected chairman of TatWiki ArbCom - has resigned on June 15, without taking part in discussing available evidence.
Please also clear ban/block entries made by Derslek in the logs of other participants (including IPs) and restore pages he erased (most of them, 1/2 to ~2/3, were against consensus to keep).
P.S. In the process of the community vote, as well as our local ArbCom case, Derslek continued deletionism ignoring consensus/policies (ex. 1, 2, 3 & others) + we discovered that the User was at the same time repeatedly warned in the Russian Wikipedia for his engagement in edit warring (block log), but he's otherwise tolerated due to his adminship/bureaucratship (the latter was passed on w/out election) status in Frhdkazan (talk) 10:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC) TatWiki ArbCom member 15.04-15.10.2014

Not sure about this - according to tt:Википедия:Беренче чакырылыш югары арбитраж шурасы әгъзаларын сайлау only 4-5 people participated in the voting for the ArbCom there. --Rschen7754 17:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC) Striking, I see this was a community vote. --Rschen7754 17:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  Done but as far as your additional requests, you have active admins there; thus, that is out of stewards' remit. --Rschen7754 18:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Hello. I should to say that Frhdkazan had no right to speak on behalf of our community. So called community vote sited here (Community vote to remove adminship) is fake, which was created by one user 13.04.2014. If you want to see this, look at the history page. Attention: voting on this topic began March 30 and should be completed on April 12. The real voting page was not brought to its logical conclusion and did not come into force. Voting was stopped by initiator ( Ilnurefende – Tatwiki admin at that time) due to numerous rules violations, showed him by users. Our Supreme Arbitration Board consists of three users and cited decision was only temporary version, which was adopted by Frhdkazan without any participation of other members. The member of the Board Marat Vildanov have already cancelled this version ([6]), and references to ArbCom seems to be wrongful. So I ask to acknowledge the above statement baseless and to cancel decision. - Derslek (talk) 11:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    @Rschen7754:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    After doing a few checks of my own, I would have to agree that the vote is fraudulent, and will reverse this, with apologies to Derslek. @Frhdkazan: please do not do this again. I will also be sending an email to stewards-l, as this is the second time something like this has happened in recent months. --Rschen7754 17:26, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
    To add to the above, while this may have been a legitimate request at one point, there has been too much tampering with the page history to where I would not trust the legitimacy of the process. Please also note that as the local ArbCom was selected by 4-5 people, while it may be helpful for resolving local disputes, stewards are not likely to consider their opinion in matters of permissions. --Rschen7754 21:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I kindly disagree with the fraud claim & request closer consideration of the case by @Rschen7754:, @Billinghurst: and/or other stewards, so to clear my name and re-establish constructive working environment in TatWiki. My previous post above didn't include all the details of the case, which started in early March 2014. If below's not enough, I'll be ready to provide more details.
    • Today's action of tt:User:Marat Vildanov, quoted above by tt:User:Derslek, should not be viewed in support of his claim, but classified as an act of vandalism as an ArbComm decision cannot be reversed by its ex-member (especially if he ignored the procedure when on board, and resigned at least a week before the decision was made). tt:User:Ajdar and tt:User:Marat Vildanov, both of whom resigned from participation in the ArbComm, have themselves initiated its election during the second (March-April) vote of non-confidence for Derslek, at the same time putting pressure on the vote initiator and others to stop that procedure and pass the case thereto. Later, all three of them have stated at various stages that ArbComm should be about voting, not rigorous consideration of facts, and have undertaken steps to denigrate it.
    • The admin removal vote in question, freshly deleted by reinstituted Derslek (and thus inaccessible to regular users like me), was initiated by tt:User:Ilnur efende (our ex-burocrat/then an admin himself), who decided to change his vote in the preceding procedure (initiated by tt:User:Kitap), when personally encountering continued deletionism against consensus/wheel warring on behalf of tt:User:Derslek.
    • Derslek continued ignoring talk page discussions, community consensus, even locally adopted policies (most recent example) and otherwise intimidating TatWiki community members throughout both votes, ArbComm case proceedings, and started again once reinstitututed today (ignoring talk, warning tt:User:Qaraq with a ban/block for trying to revert it, when it was still unclear that Derslek's reinstituted as admin).
    • Below is the English summary of the key points in the local appeal case discussion (in Tatar & my Russian translation (21.4.2014)) with necessary links and explanations you might need for clarifications:
  1. Community votes in admin removal case are valid until proven otherwise, even if the procedure originator unilaterally decided to stop it/move the original discussion to his own space (this page should have the necessary history to prove votes were valid, and violation, uncorrected by other admins, was in actually interrupting the procedure once others started voting). tt:User:Ilnur efende acknowledged the fact he was acting under pressure, which was further stated in his request to resign from adminship on Derslek's talk page (then our burocrat), and subsequent leaving TatWiki (itself a serious loss, as no other admin was even trying to counter edit warring/ deletionism on the part of Derslek).
  2. Originally tt:User:Derslek accepted of the admin removal procedure - by inviting other active users to take part therein (ex. standard announcement text on the current admin/ArbComm member talk page, this counters the claim of non-confidence vote being initiated with violations).
  3. TatWiki ArbComm policy doesn't state that inactivity of some ArbComm members allows for ignoring ArbComm procedure. - Frhdkazan (talk) 22:16, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

@Frhdkazan: this is not the place for lengthy discussion. Please, resolve this within your community, and then return here when you have a decision. --Rschen7754 22:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, for further clarity, stewards do not recognize the authority of an arbitration committee that has very few people voting to support it, nor do they recognize a desysop request that took place in userspace. --Rschen7754 22:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Supporting Rschen7754's response. @Frhdkazan: if you believe that there is an issue, then the whole community is required to have the opportunity to have that discussion in a central place. Your community has elected a bureaucrat to assist in the determination of consensus, and that role should be utilised in this scenario.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I summarized Stuart comments/implications for TatWiki community at respective policy talk,current ArbComm elections talk, as well as an announcement @ Our Community portal/Village pump discussion analogue. Violations described above were committed by our unelected currently acting bureaucrat. Thanks for clarifications to both of you - our small community now received new proofs that above-quoted individuals intentionally misled us that our small ArbComm is a better place to resolve the issue than direct re-vote. -- Frhdkazan (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
    @Frhdkazan: You have no officially recognised Arbitration Committee, and with the size of your wiki, it is unlikely that an ArbCom would be agreed to at this point in time. Your community appointed Derslek to the arbitration position by whatever process you had in place in 2013. As has been expressed, stewards expect to see any discussion held about de-adminship to be in a central place where the whole community has the ability to express their opinion. We will not be accepting the direction of a small group of users who separately make any decision. This has to be a decision open to the whole community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
    A little extra. If a de-admin conversation is started, and stopped and deleted by an admin in question, please report such interference and conflict of interest to Stewards' noticeboard and it will be managed from there. Stewards are able to read and retrieve any deleted edits, if that is required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


As announced on nl-wiki. Sysops create rules for others, and neglect them theirselves. -- Edoderoo (talk) 19:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd advice to put this on hold for a while if that's possible. Trijnsteltalk 19:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh hold for a day. Ajraddatz (talk) 20:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
You can put it on hold for a year, I am not going to change my mind. We need a totally different mindset regarding sysops, one that is not driven by politics and friends, but by working among agreements. That is not possible yet, and I'm getting frustrated by all the un-cooperative things that are going on. Edoderoo (talk) 09:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  Not done, withdrawn. Trijnsteltalk 19:25, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)


My temporary sysop flag expires today - there is open confirmation RfA which is to end in monday - idk if flag shall be removed now and then perhaps regiven or be holded to the end for confirmation request - i dont mind and it's up to stews :) --Base (talk) 14:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

  On hold until 2 December 2013. Ruslik (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-06-02. Ruslik (talk) 10:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
extended Ajraddatz (talk) 05:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I would like to resquest for adminship on hawaiian Wikipedia, because there is no bureaucrat on this wiki. There is one admin, but he's inactive since 2009. I candidated here, and got one "weak support". Cheers, Mathieudu68 (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-06-09. 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. Savhñ 00:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


My temporary sysop flag expires today - there is open confirmation RfA which is to end in monday - idk if flag shall be removed now and then perhaps regiven or be holded to the end for confirmation request - i dont mind and it's up to stews :) --Base (talk) 14:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

  On hold until 2 December 2013. Ruslik (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-06-02. Ruslik (talk) 10:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
extended Ajraddatz (talk) 05:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I would like to resquest for adminship on hawaiian Wikipedia, because there is no bureaucrat on this wiki. There is one admin, but he's inactive since 2009. I candidated here, and got one "weak support". Cheers, Mathieudu68 (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-06-09. 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. Savhñ 00:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

User PICAWN@arwikinews

Hello. I was granted a three-month temporary admin status on 13 September 2012, then a six-month temporary term, which is to expire soon. I was advised to request extension a few days before expiration, which I am doing, or to hold a local election (which is not feasible due to low activity on the project, see link to inactive discussion above). Thank you. PICAWN (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

On hold until 15 June (1 week for discussion). --MF-W 03:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2014-06-15. 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. --MF-W 23:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
removed Ajraddatz (talk) 00:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Morphh

Not sure if I'm in the correct place, but the global block is preventing me from editing my talk page (on Wikipedia) and I was directed here. The global block is due to "Open proxy" and was created by User:Shizhao - set to expire April 21, 2014 or May 13, 2014 (depending on which note is correct). I don't know if this is correct or not - it may be. What I know is that I'm not using an open proxy myself. I'm away from home on 8 weeks of training and staying at a hotel. The hotel wireless in my room is what I'm using to connect to Wikipedia, but I'm unable to edit due to open proxy. So maybe they're sending everyone through an open proxy, or maybe it's a mistake. I'm wondering if I could get a ipblock-exempt, which would allow you to keep the block (unless you want to remove the block). Thanks Morphh (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 01:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

@Morphh: The correct place would be SRGP, but that's ok; I'll move this section over there when it has been dealt with. If you are just planning on editing enwiki during these 8 weeks, you can request a local exemption through email there (UTRS or something like that?). If you might edit other projects as well (such as uploading an image of your trip to commons) then I'll grant you global exemption. Please let me know which of these options works best for you. Ajraddatz (talk) 02:00, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz: It's possible I might edit the other wikimedia sites and it seems like it would be easier, so ya, if you can do a global exempt, that would be great. Thanks! Morphh (talk) 03:51, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Done for a little over 8 weeks, until 15 June 2014. Sorry for the inconvenience of being blocked. I'll move this over to the SRGP page now. Note: this request originally filed on SRG, moved from this revision. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
removed Ajraddatz (talk) 00:46, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


I have been carrying out local admin actions since being granted the rights. The community is not big enough to support a permanent admin. I would like to request that my admin rights be extended. Vinaka vakalevu. - ʈucoxn\talk 18:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Please start a new discussion and provide us a link to it. After a week with no opposes you'll be granted the rights again for a while. Trijnsteltalk 18:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I started a new discussion here, on the Fijian Wikipedia community portal. The community is extremely small and I do not expect much participation in the discussion. The delay in beginning this discussion was due to recent and ongoing travel – thanks for your patience! - ʈucoxn\talk 12:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
  until 16 Decbillinghurst sDrewth 11:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
  •   Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-06-16. 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. -- Avi (talk) 16:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
removed Ajraddatz (talk) 01:39, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


It has been about 5 days, since Rfa was opened. Since the community is small, I am not expecting any more voting. Vigyani (talk) 07:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

  on hold until 19 March  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-06-19. 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. Savhñ 19:01, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. --Vigyani (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
extended Ajraddatz (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


I have been administrator until 8 december 2013, after the status decayed. I need a right of 6 months (waiting a bigger comunity for a permanent status election). Tn4196 (talk) 12:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Please start a new discussion/election. --MF-W 16:42, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
I started a new discussion about my (and other users's) re-election, asking if there are oppositions. Now I think we can wait about a week and then we'll see. --Tn4196 (talk) 07:43, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
  on hold until 20 Decemberbillinghurst sDrewth 09:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-06-20. 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. QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. --Tn4196 (talk) 08:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


The same discussion concerned both me and Candalua. Tn4196 (talk) 08:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-06-21. Ruslik (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Xusinboy Bekchanov@uz.wiktionary

The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xusinboy Bekchanov (talk • contribs) 11:22, 21 March 2014‎ (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-06-21. 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) 19:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks --Xusinboy Bekchanov (talk) 03:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC).
removed. Matanya (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


Please grant permanent administrator access on Spanish Wikiversity. Thanks in advanced. Leitoxx 13:43, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

With only five users supporting your candidacy, I'm not sure that permanent adminship is warranted. I'd like to see at least around ten votes for that to happen. Would 6 month temporary adminship suit your purposes, after which we could look at indefinite access? Ajraddatz (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
@Ajraddatz: i'm not sure that can have more of 10 votes, in es.wikiveristy haven't a lot of actives editors. See. Sorry if my English is incomprehensible :). I'm not a nativer or advancer speaker of English, only intermediate. Ajraddatz, could you answered in Spanish or Portuguese?. Spanish is my idiom native (Spanish) A que se refiere usted con «after which we could look at indefinite access». Thanks you Leitoxx 16:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Not a problem; your English is much better than my Spanish! I mean you could start another vote in 6 months, and I could grant permanent administrator access then. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:55, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks in advanced Leitoxx 16:57, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-11-25. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:59, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
removed after CU abuse of multiple accounts was found. --Rschen7754 19:50, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests


Hi! I am admin and importer at – Some days, to do the import job, it's necessary to use a noratelimit-permission for importing articles of more than 1.000 versions or of higher bitrates. So is it possible to get a noratelimit-permission please? I will use it very restricted and only if it is really necessary. Thank you very much indeed, -- Doc Taxon (talk) 12:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

As an administrator you do have the noratelimit right. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
See w:de:Special:ListGroupRights  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Note that one often gets errors when trying to import pages with lots of revisions ("Import failed: Could not open import file" in English). This error is not based on a rate limit but rather as a performance saving measure within the software. However, I'm not sure if there's a way to fix it other than importing an XML file using the maintenance script. Regards, Ajraddatz (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)