Talk:Global renamers/Archives/2015
 | Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2015, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index. |
Technical question re. identifying global renamers in an abuse filter
I've modified the en.wikibooks abuse filter that prevents new users moving pages in order to allow Stewards to perform page moves as part of a global rename. This is easy because the abuse filter can read the Steward's membership of a global group. Anyone know how I do this for a Global Renamer as this is implemented via a Meta local group so I'm not sure how to detect it on a different project? Thanks QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:27, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Global renamers only do *global* renames so it doesn't matter for them anyway (as filters are being bypassed for global renames). - Hoo man (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- While stewards also do local usurpations which do not automatically bypass the filters and thus should be exempted by them. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Doh. Of course; thanks. Okay, well then I am sorted - thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- QuiteUnusual, thanks a lot for that. I'm not an experienced abusefilter editor, and when I asked on zhwiki whether their filter could be adapted, I was told abusefilters don't recognize global groups. I should have asked here, possibly. :) Savhñ 13:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- 'global_user_groups' can actually be used to detect the global groups a user is in but as global renamer is configured as a local Meta-wiki group, it can't be used in this case. Glaisher (talk) 15:52, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- QuiteUnusual, thanks a lot for that. I'm not an experienced abusefilter editor, and when I asked on zhwiki whether their filter could be adapted, I was told abusefilters don't recognize global groups. I should have asked here, possibly. :) Savhñ 13:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Doh. Of course; thanks. Okay, well then I am sorted - thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- While stewards also do local usurpations which do not automatically bypass the filters and thus should be exempted by them. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Removed the early adopters exemption from the process
Feb 2015 has been reached, so I have removed the following section from the policy. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
===Special nomination provisions until end of January 2015===
For the commencement of this process after the local renameuser right is removed from bureaucrats, bureaucrats who are experienced with the rename rights can request membership in this group on Steward requests/Global permissions. If no objections are raised in 3 days after someone nominated themself at SRGP, they will be made a global renamer. If objections are raised, a short discussion should ensue, at which point after 48 hours an uninvolved steward will close it and analyse whether consensus believes the concerns are valid or not. If the concerns are considered valid, the candidate must nominate themself via the standard process, or the steward can convert the special nomination to be a standard nomination.
Removed {{proposed}}
The Wikimedia document has been operational for months and without complaint. As we have just passed the first milestone, I have promoted this to a fully active document. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)