Stewards' noticeboard/Archives/2015-02

Admin activity rules for mk.wiki

Dear Stewards. I am a bureaucrat on mk.wiki and am writing to you reagarding the this notice about the Admin activity review. Our community has decided that it is best that we should internally (locally) determine the rights removal process and have since sucessfully voted for rights removal. The criteria are set out on this policy page and we have applied them and voted by majority. We would like to use those rules for the admin activity review from now on (this includes the aforementioned case where we have already voted for a removal). It is my duty as a bureaucrat to perform the right removal but I currently cannot do so because that option is passive (gray). Since we have opted for our own process, we would like to ask you to enable the said possibility, so taht we may proceed with the matter. Thank you and hope to hear from you soon. --B. Jankuloski (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Bureaucrats have to ask stewards to perform the removals at m:SRP. As far as the rights removal itself, we will wait for the requests from local crats. --Rschen7754 22:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bjankuloski06: Thanks for notifying the broader community that mkWP is now managing its own advanced admin review. Please add your community and the local policy page to the section linked from AAR subpage.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Global renamers — things to note

The Global Renamers page passed its first milestone of "end of Jan" so I have removed the early adopters component for existing bureaucrats to become global renamers through a simplified discussion. I have also removed the "proposed" template as it has been the accepted process.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Volapük wikipedia

Regarding this notice, it's true that the Wiki does not receive a lot of attention, but it still does need administrators with powers to deal with issues from time to time. If it's not absolutely necessary to remove those powers from me, I'm happy to continue as at present. Evertype (talk) 10:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Evertype: the purpose of the ping to community is not to remove administrators, but to alert a community of the user with advanced rights and the policy and to invite a response. You have responded and with an expressed interest, so that is sufficient for us to know that you are not missing. :-) I will make the appropriate note against our list, thanks for getting back to the stewards.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:58, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually the policy says a user should first tell the community that he wants to continue as an admin. Informing stewards then is secondary after the local discussion. --MF-W 13:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I have to agree with MF-W; it is not the stewards' role to interject our own opinion unless the community fails to respond. I have reverted the list page accordingly. --Rschen7754 06:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm happy to "alert the community", small as it is. Where do I do that? Evertype (talk) 22:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Here I think (as you already did) - except if there is some other page where discussions actually happen and not just the global notices which are spammed everywhere. --MF-W 23:42, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

xal.wikipedia

Hello! Thanks for the notification from user:Rschen7754! The local community of xal.wiki would like to handle the admin questions locally. The specific admins in question are reachable and agreed to continue their support in need. Thank you! Calmouk (talk) 16:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you please link to that discussion? As I don't see it on xal:Wikipedia:Community_Portal#IMPORTANT:_Admin_activity_review_2, it's surely somewhere else? --MF-W 23:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

nov.wikipedia

Concerning you notice - Your administrator status on the Novial Wikipedia: We've started a discussion. While the wiki isn't very active we don't want the project deleted. Please advise the level of activity required to avoid deletion and we'll try to maintain that.

Link to discussion.

The project won't be deleted. You just would lose your administrators. Stewards and global sysops could still help with any administrative tasks. However, since you're active anyway, you should inform your community that you intend to continue as an administrator and your rights will not be removed. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:22, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

ms.wiktionary's admin

I really want to keep this wikt alive and our admins for this are currently active in ms.wikipedia... I have nominated myself to get the right for becoming the new admin and got no answer. Can you do the changing user right for me? Thanks! --SNN95 (talk) 11:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

And also currently most active with me is @Malaysiaboy: --SNN95 (talk) 11:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@SNN95: Halo SNN95, tolong sertakan link pemilihan disini Steward requests/Permissions.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 11:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Aldnonymous: Sudah buat! SNN95 (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@SNN95: Saya pindahkan ke bagian administrator dikarenakan Anda meminta hak administrator/penyelia. Salam.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 06:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

PS : Sudah saya perbaiki semua. Salam.--AldNonymous^Bicara? 06:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

┌────────────────┘
Terima kasih! --SNN95 (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

RE:Admin activity Review@svnews

Local policy tells that inactive sysops can be removed after 6 months of inactivity. If "activity" includes edits or only sysop-actions is not clearly stated, but my guess is that "edits" are included in such activity. The users should be notified before removal.

BUT, I am not aware of any local active review-process, so you maybe have help them with that. The main page of the project tells: Swedish Wikinews is no longer active. See pressrummet for further information (in Swedish). Further questions can be answered at Bybrunnen at the Swedish Wikipedia.

RC the last 30 days mainly includes some user-page-maintainance, with a few exceptions. Some users on svwiki claims the activity was higher in december, probably because of the Swedish cabinet crisis then. Sweden do not have a history of frequent cabinet crises, so I do not expect that to happen very often. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 20:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

It is an interesting question: what if there technically is an inactivity policy, but nobody to make the requests on SRP or to enforce it? --Rschen7754 04:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

If there is a local policy, we should not remove rights within AAR. So, maybe we can carry out an activity review process, not as a part of the AAR but as requests/actions which would be made by an editor (not necessarily) from this wiki. Openbk (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and mark it as "not done" on AAR, but if anyone has the time to do this, they can (maybe User:Tegel since you're from svwiki at least?) --Rschen7754 06:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I will contact the last active admin/crat Ainali on his Wikipedia talk page and point him to this discussion. -- Tegel _(Talk) 13:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I was pointed here, but are not really interested in discussing policy in a project that should be closed (but cannot, due to policy). Ainali (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like the project should be pointed to the languages committee for review (@MF-Warburg: thoughts). I would also hope that the languages committee would be able to make a recommendation on whether the abandonment is akin to a resignation of those with AAR.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:09, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Ainali: You can start a proposal for closing the project. --MF-W 20:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

sp5uhe@plwiktionary

Here is a discussion of the my rights removal becouse inactivity and about general principles of right removal. Sp5uhe (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@Sp5uhe: Thank you very much. We will wait until the end of this discussion. Openbk (talk) 20:39, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Done Discussion here. Rights won't be removed. Openbk (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

2015 Steward elections results

The 2015 Steward elections have ended at 18:00 UTC.

The Election committee, after verifying the votes' conformity to the voting guidelines, is now ready to announce the new stewards:

1. Einsbor (talk · contribs)
2. Jusjih (talk · contribs)
3. Linedwell (talk · contribs)
4. MarcoAurelio (talk · contribs)
5. Pmlineditor (talk · contribs)
6. Ruy Pugliesi (talk · contribs)
7. Stryn (talk · contribs)
8. Taketa (talk · contribs)

The Election committee wishes to thank all of the candidates for their time and interest and the voters for the time spent reviewing the candidates and taking part in this important global process.

The results of the 2015 stewards confirmation will be released in the upcoming days.

For the election committee,
Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 21:26, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
—DerHexer (Talk) 21:26, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
QuiteUnusual (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
--MF-W 21:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations new stewards! PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:28, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!!!--AldNonymous^Bicara? 21:29, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations. --Uğurkent^talk 21:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)