Steward requests/Permissions/2020-03

Administrator access

User Maax@sowiki

(Hi, I'm requesting to become administrator in somali wiki thanks)Maax (talk) 08:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

  On hold until 1 March 2020 Ruslik (talk) 19:05, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-01. 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) 20:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Samral@az.wikisource

Thank you. Turkmen talk 17:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-01. 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. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Satirdan kahraman@trwikisource

This request meets all criteria. --Uğurkenttalk 14:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2020-06-04. 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. --Sotiale (talk) 15:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Kaniivel@et.wikiquote

Requesting permanent admin rights as per community discussion and vote. Kaniivel (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2020-06-06. 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. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 03:17, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Sannita@napsource

Please renew Sannita's adminship. Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 09:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

{{TempSysop|3|2020|06|05||automsg=1}} --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: I suggest setting a later expiration date. The flag was granted for 6 months last time. Chelin and Ruthven's adminship has been prolonged for 1 year--Sakretsu (炸裂) 21:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Ruthven was able to get 6 votes in favor, out of 5 are users with at least some edits at the project. Sannita got just two votes, and I find it hard to find reasons for much longer flag duration. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Sannita is a long time sysop on nap.wiki, it.wiki, wikidata, also active and clearly trusted on nap.wikisource as well. Such a short expiration date feels like a waste of time, and it doesn't make much sense for me to set the duration according to the number of votes (what about Chelin's renewed adminship which has been rightfully granted for 1 year with 3 votes in favor? :-)), but alright.--Sakretsu (炸裂) 11:41, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec and Sakretsu: Agree with Sakretsu, we need administrators on our small wiki and Sannita is the most experimented one, active since 2006 on the Neapolitan project. --Chelin (talk) 09:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-05. . Okay, convinced. Re-granted to 12m. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Ehitaja@et.wikiquote

Requesting permanent admin rights as per community discussion and vote. Kaniivel (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2020-06-06. 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. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 03:17, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't think you understand the word "permanent" the same way most English speakers do. --Ehitaja (talk) 12:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
@Ehitaja: unfortunately, the community at etwikiquote is currently not large enough for us to grant permanent adminship. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 14:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Excellent. Now, can you, please, point me to the page where such rules are described? We took the vote without previous in-depth research in which communities do count and which not so much. Wouldn't want to repeat that mistake. --Ehitaja (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
@Ehitaja: We do not have a set-in-stone policy for that, we have an usual way of dealing with such requests, which is what was followed here: the term is decided at the granting steward's discretion. The closest there is is this page, which is just a guideline and not a policy. In this case, due to it being the first request of sysopship for etwq that I could find in our archives, I decided to grant for 3 months. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 01:56, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
@Ehitaja: moreover, please avoid making any further snarky comment like the one above. Thanks.--Sakretsu (炸裂) 15:03, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Aue Nai@mnw

Aue Nai (talk) 10:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

  On hold until 10 March 2020. --Sotiale (talk) 14:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2020-09-13. 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. --Sotiale (talk) 05:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Harditaher@min.wiktionary

I'm Requesting permanent admin rights for Wiktionary Minangkabau. Harditaher (talk) 10:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

  On hold until 12 March 2020. --Sotiale (talk) 11:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
it's been 7 days and the community has unanimously agreed to grant adminship. Please advise. Muhraz (talk) 06:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-12. I've discussed this with fellow stewards, and our conclusion was that we'd prefer having more than one temporary admin before granting permanent adminship. 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. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Vit Koz@be.wikibooks

Prolong. No one against in discussion. Vit; talk 09:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  Not done I'm sorry, but this discussion is already very old. Please start a new one. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Vit Koz@be.wikiquote

Prolong. No one against in discussion. Vit; talk 09:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  Not done I'm sorry, but this discussion is already very old. Please start a new one. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

MJL@scowiki

4 days has passed since the closing date. No local crat. Minorax (talk) 06:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-18. 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. --Sotiale (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
@Minorax and Sotiale: W00t! Thank you both! :D –MJLTalk 17:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Rahmatdenas@minwiki

Community has approved a permanent adminship. Please advise. Muhraz (talk) 06:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done I see you grant IP block exemption to sysops, that's unnecessary, as sysops are exemped by just being sysop --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. The IP exemption was granted to several early Minangkabau editors as trusted users, long before this user was elected sysop. Muhraz (talk) 11:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
I referred to [1] for instance, where you granted IPBE to a current admin. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Ozymandias@ptwikisource

I would like to renew my sysop term on pt.Wikisource [2] to update and perform basic administration activities. The project was communicated in [3], because the community is too small for voting. Ozymandias (talk) 23:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

  On hold until 19 March. --Sotiale (talk) 06:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2020-09-20. 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. --Sotiale (talk) 04:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Tarawneh@arwikiversity

Hello, please grant this user sysop flag on arwikiversity for 6 months, as he supervise a project to introduce wikiversity on the Jordanian universities --Alaa :)..! 20:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 6 months to expire on 2020-09-25. Ruslik (talk) 20:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

LamiHung@szywp

See the application of Reke@szywp above.-- Reke (talk) 08:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Reke: Was there an on-wiki discussion about LamiHung's adminship? Please link it here. Putting on hold until the dicussion is provided.--Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:51, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Help found the discussion. Per comments under Reke section, I hate to help finding but since Reke is not around, I shall do it this time. @Martin Urbanec: I guess this is their discussion.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2020-07-01. 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. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Reke@szywp

Sakizaya Wikipedia have just created on November 22 2019. We wish that there can be some temporary administrators to service for the project.

  1. User:LamiHung is an active editor of szy.wp and yet she isn' a native speaker of Sakizaya language. We hope that she will be the first permanent administrator after some practice.
  2. I work for WMTW more than 5 years and support to the Sakizaya people to incubate their Wikipedia in these 3 years. I need help LamiHung in the follow days when she have some problem. If I can get the permission too, the work will be easier.

I also want to know is there any limited of the number of temporary administrators? NCCU-ALCD (the main promoter of incubating Wikipedia for all Taiwanese aborigines) hope they can assign their 1 staff to be the administrator of szy.wp too. If the person can also get the permission, it can be the seed teacher to help the other 15 peoples of Taiwanese aborigines.--Reke (talk) 08:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. You need a local discussion about your permission. Please provide a link to local discussion or start local discussion. --Sotiale (talk) 09:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Well I guess it need take some time because they discussed this by out of Wiki. I can tell them do this again on some pages and wait, however, could someone answer me about how many administrators can we apply in the first time?--Reke (talk) 13:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
It will be difficult to tell by numbers how many admins are appropriate. This is because the amount of pages and the amount of activity on an individual wiki must be considered comprehensively. However, at least the two requests you submitted, including you, can be accepted. The current request will be held until local discussion proceeds. --Sotiale (talk) 14:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
@Reke: Have you started a local discussion? Thanks much.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
This place is not a place where the actual "Request for Permission" take places; that should happen on the wiki where you are requesting permission for - because people on the wiki where you are requesting permission for knows you far better than us, and this page is actually more of "Hey! I have this RFP, please look at this and flag me!" zone. Therefore local discussion (be it form of "announcement of intention to serve as an admin" or actual "request for permission" format) is a nonnegotiable condition for any request on this page, with the exception of self-resignation.
That being said, if you are not starting a local discussion, we cannot flag you. If you don't open one in 3 or 4 days, I will close it as not done. — regards, Revi 18:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Also note that we do not accept off-wiki discussions (definition: any discussion happening outside the wiki itself, e.g. Telegram, IRC, etc etc) as a required "discussion". It must be documented on the wiki. — regards, Revi 18:54, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
@-revi and Sotiale: I sort of found the discussion, although I hate to be the one helping someone to find, but this time I did an exception. @Reke: please confirm is the discussion correct (I had link above). I will also be linking below the other applicant discussion.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
@Reke: Can you confirm. The RFA is due today as what I can read. And can you confirmed the link is correct. Thanks.--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: Thank you and the link you added is correct.--Reke (talk) 06:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

  Granted for 3 months to expire on 2020-07-01. 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. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Interface administrator access

SM7@bhwikipedia

One Month Temporary access needed to update gadgets. Nearly all such gadgets are installed by me and I have experience as well as Interface admin rights on hi.wikipedia --SM7--talk-- 05:30, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Done. --Sotiale (talk) 05:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

MJL@scowiki

4 days has passed since the closing date. No local crat. Minorax (talk) 06:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
@MJL: I haven't seen any request for IA in request field, there is no IA on scowiki. Would you please confirm? Thanks! --Sotiale (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
@Sotiale: I'd like IA to be able to make some enwiki gadgets I translated more widely available, if that's alright. –MJLTalk 17:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
@MJL:   Procedural note Per Interface administrators, you have to have 2FA enabled. Could you do that? --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: I've just enabled it for Scots Wikipedia and my phone. It's using TOTP, so I hope that's alright. –MJLTalk 21:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
  Granted for 1 year to expire on 2021-03-18. 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. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 22:04, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

B20180@thwikiquote

Hello, I nominated B20180 to be interface-admin on Thai Wikiquote. A local discussion started since 7 March 2020. I'm sure that he enabled 2FA because he is interface-admin on Thai Wikibooks and Thai Wikisource (please see CentralAuth). Best regards, Geonuch (talk) 01:53, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Done. --Sotiale (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

Vajotwo@vec.wikipedia

Given that in our Wikipedia there is only one bureaucrat who unfortunately has been absent since December 2019 and given the above discussion in favor of my appointment as a bureaucrat, I am asking to be appointed bureaucrat of the Venetian Wikipedia. I hope you can approve my request. I'm available for more information. Thank you --- Vajotwo (post) 00:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

This seems to be rather an announcement than a full election. I'm reculant to grant bureaucrat rights - a project with no bureaucrats of this size probably wouldn't be granted one. I believe it would be better if bureaucrat's duties are performed by stewards for this timebeing. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:47, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't agree with you but I respect your opinions. In this case then I leave you all the decision. But at this point it would be better to revoke the bureaucratic rights even to the only present absent from December 2019. What do you think about it? --- Vajotwo (post) 12:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
And then, honestly speaking, I don't think it is the case of having to bother you for every little thing to do on our project. If I were a bureaucrat I could take care of it personally. It would be the best thing in my opinion, both as regards the assignment of new flags to users and their revocation and for other things. --- Vajotwo (post) 20:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
In any case, I insist that you can grant me the status of bureaucrat within our project. I hope you can give me an answer in a short time. A small project should not be left without bureaucrats. I find it absurd in many ways. Thanks --- Vajotwo (post) 18:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
  Not done @Vajotwo: ciao. Tralasciando il fatto che per l'assegnazione del flag sia richiesta una regolare elezione, è così, i piccoli progetti come vec.wiki di solito si affidano agli steward per le richieste che capitano. La situazione è molto cambiata dal 2007, anno in cui fu concesso il flag al vostro primo burocrate. Qui puoi farti un'idea di quando si ritiene più o meno che una comunità sia sufficientemente grande da aver bisogno di un proprio burocrate in pianta stabile, ruolo con pochi diritti, ma purtroppo piuttosto delicati per varie ragioni. Anche se non è consuetudine degli steward rimuovere flag già concessi anni fa agli utenti di piccoli progetti, di certo oggi non ne incrementiamo il numero, anzi sarebbe meglio se voi faceste in modo di rimanere senza burocrati. Gli steward comunque sono a disposizione: per l'assegnazione di flag di admin, basta che facciate richiesta qui linkando l'elezione.--Sakretsu (炸裂) 19:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

CheckUser access

Uğurkent@tr.wikipedia

tr:Kullanıcı:Uğurkent has been elected by the Turkish Wikipedia Community (cf. discussion). Please grant CheckUser access. Mskyrider (talk) 09:52, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

  On hold pending addition to confidentiality noticeboard. Please sign confidentiality agreement. --Sotiale (talk) 10:07, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
I signed the confidentiality agreement. I'm waiting for the answer like you. --Uğurkenttalk 10:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll take care of it as soon as your name is registered in the noticeboard. --Sotiale (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
  Done @Trijnstel: and @RadiX: Please add Uğurkent to the mailing list and private wiki. Thank you! --Sotiale (talk) 15:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Done. Trijnsteltalk 21:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Oversight access

Someguy1221@en.wikipedia

For the Arbitration Committee, Katietalk 22:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done. Trijnsteltalk 22:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Removal of access

Stewart@zhwiki

Per local policy regarding inactive sysops. User:Stewart has been inactive for more than six months (since 2019-08-04) and was notified of the removal a month ago (on 2020-02-04). Please remove their sysop flag, thanks. --Tiger- (talk) 12:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I just noticed the local policy says that the removal should be confirmed and brought here by a local bureaucrat. So this request should be suspended until a local bureaucrats confirm it. Apologize for my carelessness.--Tiger- (talk) 12:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
As a local b'crat, I confirm the case listed above. Stang 12:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  Done--BRP ever 12:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Cambalachero@commons

Failed to sign within one month of notification. 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done by BRPever --DannyS712 (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Wvk@commons

Failed to sign within one month of notification. 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done by BRPever --DannyS712 (talk) 01:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Ronhjones@commons

Failed to sign within one month of notification. 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done by BRPever --DannyS712 (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

ChrisiPK@commons

Failed to sign within one month of notification. 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done by BRPever --DannyS712 (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

NativeForeigner@en.wikipedia

Please remove CheckUser access. For the Arbitration Committee, Katietalk 22:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done. Trijnsteltalk 22:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Dario (WMF)@metawiki

Please remove transwiki rights. See note at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat; transwiki rights can only be removed by stewards. Account is globally locked ("No longer works for WMF"). Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

  DoneThanks for the fish! talkcontribs 19:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Daniel Case@enwiki

Please remove the Oversight permission. Thanks. For the Arbitration Committee, Katietalk 23:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

AnnaKhrobolova (WMUA)@uawikimedia

Hi, please remove sysop flag from the user, they are no longer a press secretary. Wearing WMUA Board secretary hat, Base (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Kattenkruid@nlwiki

Kattenkruid is deceased on March 19, 2020. Wutsje (talk) 21:12, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done, condolences for the family and friends. —Thanks for the fish! talkcontribs 21:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Danny B.@skwikt

New rules for adminship were approved on January 23 in a vote linked above. Vote was 2:1 in favor plus one vote past deadline bringing the total to 3:1. One user challenged legitimacy of the whole vote (see discussion). The newly approved rules require admins to request reelection every year. Danny B. was pinged on January 23. He did not reapply for adminship during the last 30 days nor did he post any comment regarding renewal of his adminship. Per the new rules, admins who do not reapply automatically lose adminship. — Robert Važan (talk) 09:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The vote of the proposer usually is not counted. So, the result is 2:1. In addition, I find it is strange the proposer closed the discussion that he himself initiated. Ruslik (talk) 14:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: Hi Ruslik. I am starting to feel like you are the only steward here :-) Anyway, to the point... I would love to have there a community large enough to meet these standards (not counting proposer's vote; vote closed by someone else; defined voting rules; strict eligibility criteria; etc.). The community is unfortunately small and most editors do not participate in most votes and discussions (see past discussions and proposals). I sometimes get thanks on top of votes, but that probably doesn't count. If it helps, I can add that this removes admins who obtained adminship in votes with legitimacy no higher than this one - they just voted for each other with help from some socks. — Robert Važan (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
You just accused a number of long-term users of socketpuppetry without providing any evidence. However, looking at the discussion for this new policy a saw that strange things happened. The discussion was initially supposed to run for a month and should have finished on 29 December but nevertheless was not closed until 23 January, which by curious coincidence is just two days after Cetiletý pedone-marciatore voted for you. I looked at this account and discovered that it had lain dormant since April 2019 but then reactivated on 21 January, voted (among other edits) for the proposal and finally made some more edits on 22 January. After that it disappeared again but on 23 January you closed the discussion as I said above. Does not this pattern look like sock-puppetry? Ruslik (talk) 19:26, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: That's a lot of questions. Let me explain one by one. Those three "long-term users" you are talking about have less than 5 edits in skwikt mainspace and two of them have just a small number of edits globally (1 2 3). It's 1 sock and 2 cross-project invitations for canvassing by my judgement (which I have somewhat incorrectly summed as socks above). The vote about the new rules was closed on January 5 where I have also offered two weeks of extra time for people to propose tightening of voting rights. Since nobody proposed anything, I did the final close on January 23. You can see in the discussion that I transparently invited everyone showing some activity on skwikt. User "Cetiletý pedone-marciatore" doesn't appear to be a sock, judging by content of his edits and his global edit count. Nevertheless, if you suspect sock account, do a UserCheck. — Robert Važan (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Still the discussion was finally closed just as the last vote appeared. In addition, why was not the opinion of Lenka64 taken into account? He was obviously against this proposal. Ruslik (talk) 20:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
The temporal correlation with the last vote is just a consequence of this vote being encouraging. Lenka64 is a woman. Her comments regarding the proposal itself are on the negative side but still ambivalent, definitely not "obvious". She is challenging legitimacy of the whole vote instead (as mentioned above). Also, I am refraining from guessing people's voting preferences, because there would be no end to speculation if we went down that route. I have nevertheless listened to Lenka64 when she objected to the lax voting rights by adding basic voting right requirements and leaving time for her to propose her own. — Robert Važan (talk) 04:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
You can not just ignore people who challenge legitimacy of the voting itself. For all practical purposes they are against this proposal. And by the way I do not believe in improbable correlations. Based on the three arguments mentioned above I am not sure that I am going to recognize this policy as legitimate. Ruslik (talk) 05:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
I am not ignoring Lenka64. I have adjusted the proposal based on her feedback. I tried to argue with her reasonably. I have also mentioned her objections to legitimacy of the vote in the original comments for this request. It is up to you whether you interpret such objections to the vote itself as equivalent to negative vote. The problem with such interpretation is that you could as well start counting the two thanks I received for closing the vote and related updates to project pages as positive votes. As I have said, there is no end to speculation once you start guessing people's preferences. Nevertheless, this is indeed a low turnout and tight majority vote and its evaluation is up to you. Since this vote was intended to solve the problematic situation on skwikt, rejection of the vote results on meta will likely lead to my attempt to resolve the problems on skwikt via RfC. If you don't consider the vote, then at least remove sysop rights from Zdenekk2's inactive account. — Robert Važan (talk) 14:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
The rights of Zdenekk2 will be removed in due course when the time comes. Ruslik (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Zdenekk2's case is neither important nor urgent, but read Nota bene point 3 in the policy you linked. Zdenekk2 should lose adminship under both the old or the new local rules. Keeping his adminship would signal you consider both the old and the new rules illegitimate. — Robert Važan (talk) 11:31, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
Please, give me a link to the local policy. Ruslik (talk) 12:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
@Ruslik0: This is the previous version of the page about admins role, talking about 6 months inactivity period. New policy is at https://sk.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wikislovn%C3%ADk:%C5%BDiados%C5%A5_o_pr%C3%A1va_spr%C3%A1vcu. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
This is again a "may be" policy. Ruslik (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
There has been no actual policy provided with regards to the inactivity rules. Therefore not done. — regards, Revi 15:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

User JAn Dudík@skwikt

Reason is the same as for Danny B. above. — Robert Važan (talk) 09:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Same as Danny B. — regards, Revi 15:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

User Zdenekk2@skwikt

Reason is the same as for Danny B. and JAn Dudík above. In case of Zdenekk2, there is an additional reason of inactivity. Zdenekk2 made his last edit globally more than a year ago. This is a reason to lose adminship even per the old rule about 6-month inactivity that was controversial but nevertheless respected by stewards. — Robert Važan (talk) 09:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Same as Danny B. — regards, Revi 15:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Khamul1@cs.wikipedia

Please remove my administrator rights. Thanks in advance. --Khamul1 (talk) 12:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions. --Sotiale (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  Done Thank you for your service. --Sotiale (talk) 13:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Zhuyifei1999@commonswiki

Please remove all my rights on Commons. Loss of trust, confidence, and interest. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to see this.   On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions. — regards, Revi 06:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Keep 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
    No please. Elves can die for losing a will to live, I can surely leave for losing a will to stay? Though, I'm not ruling out the possibility of returning in the far future. Thanks for the moral support though. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
    Really, really sad to see this. Thanks for your hard work throughout the years. Hope that you'll come back. Minorax (talk) 08:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
    +1. Really sadden to see this. :( Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:23, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  • "If you love someone, set them free. If they come back, they're yours" This is a sad day, but I don't want to tie Zhuyifei down.   Alexis Jazz (ping me) 15:16, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Moral support for   Keep. I understand that this is self-requested de-sysop, so this will likely not matter. Could we at least extend the standard 1 day waiting period for resignation of advanced permissions to something like 7 days, as I do not see the condition of 'loss of trust' fulfilled? --Schlurcher (talk) 15:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
    Trust in the other direction --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello people, this page is not a place to signal whether you support or oppose this removal requests. Please refrain from such comments. If you have something to say, you know where to go. (their talk page) Thank you! — regards, Revi 15:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Sure, if you think the talk page is the better place to make a request for this request, please see: [4] --Schlurcher (talk) 15:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  Done Already he responded to e-mail(he did edit here), and did not require time to change his mind or think. It may be painful to ask someone who wants to leave to stay here. Thank you for your service and good luck. --Sotiale (talk) 06:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Majora@commonswiki

Please remove my sysop bit from Commons as well as my global OTRS user group. I am retiring from Wikimedia. If allowed by policy could you please lock my alternate account, User:Majora's Incarnation, as well as this account when you are finished. I won't be coming back. Thank you. Majora (talk) 20:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey Majora. I haven't said explicitly, but I need to make sure you know my retirement has barely anything to do with your post on AN/U. Don't feel guilty about it. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
I apologize to the stewards for this message as it probably doesn't belong here. I will be brief. This has very little to nothing to do with you, Zhuyifei1999 although I do appreciate you thinking about me. I firmly believe that people should be accountable for their actions. I always have. That is one of my core beliefs and forms quite a large part of my personality. That is what I have always strived for. The recent events show the complete and utter lack of accountability amongst, supposedly, some of the most trusted members of the Commons community. Ignoring requests for comment and wheel warring were enough to make me question my presence here. The responses by other administrators to sweep even attempts at accountability under the rug and away from the community is what finally broke me. I told myself a long long time ago that if Wikimedia ever became more of a hobby, if it ever affected me in a way that causes undue distress, that I would immediately step away and not look back. That day has unfortunately come. I won't be responding to any other inquires. Clean breaks are easier to accomplish after all. --Majora (talk) 22:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
  On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions --Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
  Done Thanks for your service. I have requested removal of your OTRS hat at OTRS wiki. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests

Frank Murmann@de.wikipedia

I would like to request import rights for the German Wikipedia to assist the few existing importers in fulfilling import requests by import upload. --Frank Murmann (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

What is the procedure for requesting import rights in German Wikipedia? Ruslik (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Wow, dewiki already has 13 XML importers - seems a bit heavy, is there much of a backlog at w:de:Wikipedia:Importwünsche? — xaosflux Talk 17:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
The page for XML-Upload is de:Wikipedia:Importwünsche/Importupload. There are currently mostly only two XML-importer active. Best regards, Luke081515 18:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
  Done Linked discussion sounds to be good for this privilege. Frank Murmann has already shown dewiki trusts them, because they're a sysop. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)