Steward requests/Global permissions/2011-06

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in June 2011, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Ruy Pugliesi

Hi, folks.

As a member of the SWMT, I can be easily found on IRC in the related channels: cvn-sw, cvn-simplewikis, wikimedia-stewards. I'm used to fight against vandalism, tag nonsense / spam / out-of-scope content for quick-deletion on several projects (verify) and also ask for local/global blocks. Once I have time to patrol Wikimedia projects, I think it would be quit useful to have global rollback feature, because this permission should make countervandalism easier and faster. As you can see, I have anti-vandalism experience as administrator on Portuguese Wikipedia (verify - contribs) and mostly recent on Wikimedia Strategic Planning (verify - contribs), and as rollbacker on enwiki (verify - contribs), eswiki (verify - contribs), eswikt (verify - contribs), simplewiki (verify - contribs) and bswiki (verify - contribs).

I'm asking for gr because a lot of people have suggested me to do that in the past two months and I already have rollback/sysop permissions in a lot of wikis. So, in this way, I believe I could help a bit more having global rollbacker right, because I've have been increasingly active in cross-wiki tasks and 'undo' is almost driving me crazy. :D If someone intends to ask me any question, feel free to do that.

Thanks in advance. Ruy Pugliesi^◥ 02:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong support. User is active in global countervandalism, and has been for quite some time. He is experienced at crosswiki reverting, and I can't find any immediate concerns looking through his global contribs. His last request for this a few months ago failed in large part due to canvassing of opposers, something which I hope will not happen again. He is an obviously trusted user, and I see no reason to force him to continue to use the undo button. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looking over the users edits it appears he has done very good work. He appears to be very good at fighting crosswiki vandalism, and uses the rollback function appropriately. Alpha Quadrant ^talk 03:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support User does great work in global countervandalism. Grunny (talk) 03:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support mickit 06:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Even through the language barrier, he has done good work on bswiki and is the first user with rollback flag there (my flag was just a test). Looking at his global contributions, what should i say... he has more reverts than me and i have gr flag. So I can´t see why I shouldn´t support if the flag will be a benefit for his global work. --WizardOfOz ^talk 06:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support good luck axp_de^Hello! 07:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support. User is very active and very helpful, can be trusted with the tools. Savh^ñ 08:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support — Dawid ^talk 12:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, no cause for concern whatsoever. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support, although he is from ptwiki. :-P —DerHexer (Talk) 13:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Does great work, will do well with the flag. Also, I agree with DerHexer ;) Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Laaknor 16:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support Same as WizardOfOz --FalconL ^?! 17:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Of course. Trijnstel 20:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support No reasons not to. Courcelles 21:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Active and trusted, so no reason not to.” T_ele^s (T_{alk @ C S}) 21:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose. Since his last request, pt.wiki is still waiting for him to say what the hell he was doing with his CU flag. And since he lost it, all his job was do a few edits in any project and ask for a flag, since you got it, you drop the project and to the next one (an recent example and another one - here he only edited today, probably because that request - btw, today he discovered TW, and decided to use it, probably to have several "cross wiki edits" if someone decide to look at it). That, along with this, make believe that is a case of Editcountitis. Béria Lima ^msg 23:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Per information from a member of ombudsman committee (this was a important matter for me before i gave my support, if he misused the tool, i´m sure that there will be consequences), the case from pt.wiki is still in work, so ombudsman committee will provide the results when done to ptwiki community because of inactive arbcom there. The flag on bswiki has been granted on my insist. Beria you should also take look at deleted contributions. As editor and rollback are not big deal on bswiki (i´ve granted several editor flags for people who help fighting against vandals like gs or gr), i can´t see the sense of the mention. --WizardOfOz ^talk 23:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Ruy is very active in global countervandalism. I don't particularly care if he was misusing checkuser on ptwiki - this isn't a request for checkuser, and he couldn't have been completely abusing it otherwise he would have been desysopped and blocked. This is a request for global rollback, from an experienced and knowledgable candidate who has given us every indication that he will do well with the tools. I'd ask that you limit yourself to relevant discussion here, rather than making bold claims over the user's maturity, personality and ability. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Unable to support or oppose (comment): Ruy is desperately seeking for flags to add on his username. Last month he privatelly asked for editor (FlaggedRevs related) access on pt.wikisource. It is ok to our policies, but he has done only the required edits and never re-appeared. It ended on I removing their flag one month later[1] (it isn't a big deal, he can ask at any time to receive again that flag). I wonder if Ruy is able to help or if is only obsessive to receive all possible restricted tools. Lugusto • ※ 23:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  This user has never !voted on a SRGP request before, I suspect that this is being canvassed like the last request (please prove me wrong). Beyond that, I think that in this case it is really assuming bad faith to say that he is one of the dreaded "flag collectors". For one, they tend to display every right they have access to on a page somewhere (which is usually plainly marked), and I cannot find one for him. I can definitely see why he'd be requesting rollback rights, though - he is active in global countervandalism, and if he can't get the global flag due to people assuming bad faith and canvassing opposers, I'd request local rollback flags myself. Again, though, this comment does nothing to show that the user wouldn't handle the rights well. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't see the point of your message, Ajraddatz. Your message assumes bad faith too! Teles has sent this message on my usertalk because I, Beria and him are on a chat view so muck alike IRC channels talking about general subjects related to Portuguese projects and users. Look a time stamp, he sent the message before my first post here! Canvassing in a public chat wich includes a Ruy's friend? In my view it is not possible. Anyway, I've enought edits on this wiki to known this page... Lugusto • ※ 00:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, I didn't even notice that message. I just knew that Beria has a history of canvassing opposers, that this is the first time that you've edited this page, and that, since opposers were canvassed on the last request, they would be on this one too. That message on your talk page seems to confirm my suspicions. Also, the assuming of bad faith that you talk of is very different - you were notified of this request (no doubt with the intention of you introducing some sort of opposing evidence to it), whereas I suspected that, based on past experience and current circumstance, that this comment was canvassed. Beyond that, this is getting unrelated to the discussion at hand. If you want to comment here you are obviously free to do so, but I find it a shame that this request was canvassed, just like the last one. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sad to say that, Ajraddatz, but you are right. This request is being canvassed by Beria (cited on previous comment by 555) and I never imagine I would presence that. The votes for oppose are being requested and there is another user to be canvassed yet. 555 knows who this person is and he might want to sent him a public message instead (I prefer to believe that this user won't accept to be canvassed, since I still trust him). I sent 555 a message at 23:40. His comment here was made at 23:50. So I ask: how did I knew minutes after he comment that he would do it here? And just right after Beria's oppose?
I'm sorry to say that here, but that is the truth and I believe we have to be fair even on disagreement.” T_ele^s (T_{alk @ C S}) 00:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Others may not care about CU-abuse, but like Beria, I do. Before this has been resolved, there shouldn't be any global flag given. Seb az86556 01:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Seb az86556, if cu-abuse is not resolved any flag can be granted. --- @lestaty ^discuţie 01:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That "another user" I said above is you, Lestaty. 555 said he would request you to vote for oppose here and you did (and perhaps he really did it). Too bad to see you are agreed with this behavior considered disruptive. Your last edit here before this was an edit done at 21 april... a month ago and you came here just after Béria and 555's opposes. This edit I'm doing is something I would prefer not to be doing, but this canvassing is blatant and I won't pretend I didn't see it.” T_ele^s (T_{alk @ C S}) 03:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you think that any "oppose" vote is a disruptive action, but you can see that I dont trust in this user yet. --- @lestaty ^discuţie 10:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not "any" oppose. I have nothing to say about that vote of Seb az86556 for example and the next ones that might appear. Only those ones made by users that were selectively notified according to their opinion (en:Wikipedia:Canvassing#Votestacking). Anyway, it would be solved if Beria and 555 authorize the release of that conversation and we all would be able to have our own conclusions. So I ask Beria and 555 do you authorize the release of that conversation?” T_ele^s (T_{alk @ C S}) 22:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- Active, cross-wiki vandalism fighter. Maximillion Pegasus 01:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Plenty of crosswiki experience. No problems here. Jafeluv 11:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support - I care a lot about cu and abuse cases as I'm myself a usually quite active checkuser on two projects. But in this case it is not a steward election, but a request for a rollback flag. He really can't abuse a rollback flag, and I doubt he'd abuse it. It is only a tool to simply revert vandalism, not to see IP addresses of accounts. So, I support him as he is active across the wiki-world and fights vandalism. The (possible) CU-abuse has no real connection to this tool. Please remember that we don't elect a checkuser here, but someone who wants easily to revert vandalism. For a gr-request it is only or most important for me that the people are active across the wikis. -Barras 12:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support no biggie Mardetanha ^talk 20:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Matanya 07:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support nice countervandalism work. Good luck. -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 11:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support The Helpful One 13:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Appropriate user for Rollback rights Vibhijain 13:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Done I do not think that the claimed misuse of CU tools, which has not actually been substantiated, is an impediment for granting the GR tool to the requester. Thereby, I conclude that there is a consensus to make this user a global rollbacker. Ruslik 18:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, all. Ruy Pugliesi^◥ 00:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for WhiteWriter

I use IRC in the related channels (wikipedia-sr, wikipedia-en) quite often, so i can be found there. I also am rollbacker in en wiki (verify - contribs) and sr wiki (verify - contribs) and on commons (verify - contribs), and as you may see, also Filemover and Reviewer on en wiki and on commons. I think that it would be great to have global rollback, because countervandalism will be by far easier and faster. And, you already know, "undo" button is even slower when you once used rollback. :)

If anyone have any question, it would be a pleasure to answer. --WhiteWriter 22:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Welcome to the SWMT! While it is obvious that you are trusted to not vandalize with rollback, there is more to this group that we look for than just trust. We need to be able to see a strong history of reverting vandalism on many small wikis, so we can tell how you do past the language barrier. It really doesn't matter if you have rollback on fifty+ wikis, we still need to be able to see the experience past the language barrier in a wide variety of situations. Sorry, I'll need to be !voting not yet here. Ajraddatz (Talk) 22:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Welcome to the SWMT from me as well, just work for us a few weeks and try it again. If I were you, I would pause that now. So oppose from me for now (but no matter of trust) - Hoo man (talk) 23:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with you both. Can someone please close the request then. User Hoo will help me, regarding the rest! :) --WhiteWriter 23:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Withdrawn: fr33kman 06:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for Coekon

I have rollback and reviewer permissions in zh wikipedia about a year and activte in several wiki projects. I have confident that 98% of my edits are reasonable. I want to have this permission to against vandalism] --Coekon 23:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  not experienced Sorry but you have very little crosswiki activity let alone vandalism fighting globally. . I'd advise you join the SWMT and come back in a few months. Best, fr33kman 23:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Not enough crosswiki experience for these tools, sorry. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:07, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Recently Coekon started a RfC Requests for comment/Oppression in zh wikipedia whose spirit behind it is very un-wiki (not democracy), IMHO. -- Sameboat (talk) 01:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Not enough experience outside his home-wiki. Coekon, I hope you keep up with the vandalism combat, including on wikis where you don't speak the language, and when/if you come back here in a few weeks you can easily have this permission. Regards.” T_ele^s (T_{alk @ C S}) 04:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Thank you guys, who provided kindly advices for me. I know what I need to improve now. could any administor close my request? I am going to improve to reach the requirment and I will request again several months later--Coekon 07:41, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Not done. Feel free to re-apply after gaining some more crosswiki experience. Jafeluv 07:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for Hosiryuhosi

I was Global rollback before, but resigned. However, I request Global rollback because I want to be active as a member of SWMT again.--Hosiryuhosi 15:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Since you left in good standing, I've done it. best, Matanya 15:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Amire80

The following request is closed Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Status:    Not done

• Global user: Amire80 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Millosh suggested that i nominate myself for global sysop. I have local sysop rights for several years on en.wikipedia and he.wikipedia and recently i was appointed a sysop in he.wikisource. I speak several languages and i frequently browse various wikis in various languages to add interlanguage links and to provide technical assistance to small projects. Occasionally i also revert vandalism in them. --Amir E. Aharoni 14:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Can you please tell us why you need GS tools exactly ? -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 14:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I'm sorry, but first of all you do not need global sysop tools to put interwiki links on pages. Second, I do not see very much x-wiki countervandalism work, am I right? Please do some anti vandalism work cross wiki to get known a little (like hanging out in the #cvn-sw channel, see SWMT. Opposing for now - TBloemink 15:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Amir is helping to small projects actively. His contribution isn't quantitative, but substantial. He knows a number of languages and he is experienced Wikimedian. Thus, I think that his permissions would help him in doing that work. --Millosh 16:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. ah yes, and per millosh :)--^Ομιλία Sahim 16:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now. I see you have great language and administrative skills which are very handy to obtain the global sysop tools, however, global sysops mostly deal with small wikis, so I believe having cross-wiki vandal fighting (as noted as SWMT above) experience is must. You can start with obtaining global rollbacker tools though. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 17:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Will advice you to just go to a small wiki, and get some cross-wiki experience. :) Vibhijain 17:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose you really don't need this for adding interwikis; not much else you've done. Seb az86556 17:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, no need for the tools. I don't particularily care if you have local adminship on every Wikimedia wiki except for one, you still need to be experienced in countervandalism/maintenance in multiple languages and have a clear need for the tools. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral, I'm sure Amire80 can be trusted with GS, although I have to agree with the others that cross-wiki experience is needed. Trijnstel 18:36, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Concerns with limited x-wiki anti-vandalism experience. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: To all the people who say that i don't need global sysop privileges to edit interlanguage links: After six years and tens of thousands of edits i obviously know that. I only wrote it as one example to cross-wiki experience. I am asking for global sysop rights, because i occasionally see pages of complete vandalism or spam in tiny Wikipedias and no admins around to ask for deletion. It already happened to me that i put a speedy deletion template on spam pages in African Wikipedias and they were deleted many weeks after i did it. Often people also ask me with help editing templates, CSS or JS in protected pages in the MediaWiki namespace in their new projects and i need the permissions to be able to help them efficiently. --Amir E. Aharoni 06:02, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I am sure the situation where a placed deletion-tag that took a few days to be acted upon has happened to everyone, including everybody else who has been denied this flag. More importantly, however, your ambitions to edit templates or in Mediawiki-namespace makes it clear that you do not understand the scope of this flag: you are explicitly forbidden to use the GL-flag for any content-work; such a breach is reason for the flag's being removed. My oppose is therefore even stronger than before. Seb az86556 10:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I think some previous comments are missing the point, because Amir is very crosswiki active, although not to fight vandalism (which is not the only crosswiki activity); you can see it from this tool, his Meta edits and his foundation-l messages (although I often disagree with them :-p). His last comment helps to understand what he needs the flag for (note that the most important templates are often protected), so I suggest the opposers to reconsider their position; I'm glad that someone volunteers to do such things, where small wikis can easily get stuck if they're not helped. You obviously can't see examples of such activities on small wikis because he doesn't have the flag, but I see he does quite a lot of MediaWiki and template edits in he.wiki.[2][3] Nemo 06:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment How did you get a Bureaucrat flag (but no Administrator) on wikt:yi: without a single edit? axp_de^Hello! 07:25, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Seems common/policy there, see e.g. [4]. Nemo 07:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I was working with MediaWiki developers to fix bugs that affect right-to-left languages and there was a bug that affected the rename user screen, for which the bureaucrat privilege is needed, so a developer granted me the right. yiwiktionary is a low-traffic wiki, so some developers use it to test right-to-left issues. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I do not understand the coincidence of bug fixing and granting a very privileged user right to a user without any edit? axp_de^Hello! 11:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  How would you test renaming without the right to rename? And what's the problem with it if the community trusts the user and thinks that he won't abuse the tool? Nemo 11:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also have the same query. Vibhijain 11:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support --N KOzi^Talk 11:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Amire is a trusted user with a long-standing track record on Meta and several other wikis going back 5 years. He seems to be active on a lot of wikis, and able to understand several languages. However, I would have advised him to go in for a GR first, before asking for these but I support him regardless. Theo10011 11:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  GR and GS are not a cursus honorum, he wouldn't need GR much. Nemo 12:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Nemo he mentioned vandal reversion as one of the reason for requesting the rights above, I was going by that. Regards. Theo10011 18:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment He has contributions on 260 different projects with close to 55,000 edits. he's been on the project for over 5 years. I doubt telling him to get more cross-wiki experience is a fair position. Theo10011 11:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Don't let a high edit count fool you, most of his work is interwiki linking, and from his above comments it is clear that he does not understand the scope of the activities which he should be involved in as a global sysop. Ajraddatz (Talk) 12:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  That's your opinion about GS, and anyway it's not only about edit count (at least, I didn't check only that). Nemo 12:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  No, that's the voted upon scope. If you don't understand what the GS scope is, then I suggest that you refrain from !voting on these requests. To clarify, when doing any sort of content work (e.g. working with protected templates, almost anything with MediaWiki, etc) that require sysop tools, one should instead request temporary local adminship on SRP. Ajraddatz (Talk) 13:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  And I suggest you to consider that people can have different opinions and still be able to understand policies. Nemo 13:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose Sorry. I'm sure Amire80 will not abuse the global sysop toolkit if granted but I don't see cross-wiki maintenance and/or countervandalism work which this tools are for, therefore I'm afraid I have to oppose this request. It is just a matter of scope, nothing else. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 14:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Like Dferg, I trust Amire80 not to abuse the tool, but I don't see relevant experience to be honest and the reason for asking the right is not what the group was created for (imo). If Amire80 wants to provide technical support, they should either get local temporary admin or perhaps editinterface. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 14:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This time just a moral support for my namesake. --WizardOfOz ^talk 18:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose I'm not sure he understands the role. Joining the SWMT and showing a need for the gs toolkit would be a good idea first. Global sysops are mostly concerned with xwiki counter vandalism and with routine maintenance and providing assistance to local users. Getting to know the vandals and patterns of editing is needed. Just get three months of xwiki vandalism work and deletion tagging and then no worries at all for gs. fr33kman 17:59, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

---

Not done. No consensus to grant Amire80 the global sysop tools at this point. Jafeluv 08:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global sysop for Vituzzu

I've been a global rollbacker for 8 months and a sysop & bureaucrat on it.wiki since 2008, I'm mainly active in fighting crosswiki spam and I use to do daily patrol on It-projects (Italian language, not Information Technology ;p), I think globalsysop flag could help me in monitoring abuses on small projects. --Vituzzu 21:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, why not. - Hoo man (talk) 21:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. I've never heard of you before today (or don't remember, at any rate) but you have a strong history of crosswiki countervandalism, and I see no reason not to support. Ajraddatz (Talk) 21:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Sure. Trijnstel 21:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support fr33kman 22:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support trusted user --Melos 00:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Utmost support and total trust MoiraMoira 07:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Aye, go ahead! — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 07:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Trustworthy user, experienced with the tools and active in the crosswiki field. Jafeluv 07:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Good crosswiki activity.Vibhijain 08:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Yes. –BruTe ^talk 08:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Of course yes, fully trust Vito. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 08:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support definitely. Grunny (talk) 09:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support —DerHexer (Talk) 09:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support — D.DEU. 10:20, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support (Same as Ajraddatz) --FalconL ^?! 12:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• support (and thanks for your help with usurp) axp_de^Hello! 13:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Seems like a good idea. -- Tegel _(Talk) 18:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -Barras 21:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --WizardOfOz ^talk 20:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Of course. Active and trustworthy. So, why not? Ruy Pugliesi^◥ 01:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, per above. Savh^ñ 05:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per, well, everyone? Courcelles 22:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support, sì. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 23:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 10:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  As the discussion ended two days ago, and I am satisfied that there is a consensus here for the promotion, I will assign Vituzzu the global sysop rights. Ruslik 06:58, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you all guys! --Vituzzu 18:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global editinterface permissions

Global editinterface for Hoo man

Hello, I decided to be bold and go for permanent global editinterface. I'm an experienced Javascript and CSS user (no guru, but still pretty much, as you can see from my user scripts or my work on central notices). I'm going to use this right to fix JavaScript and CSS errors on small and mid sized wikis, where global sysop doesn't apply. I quite often come over such and let it then fix by stewards or ask for temp. global editinterface. Of course I know that I'm not allowed to do anything else then fixing such errors and may working on local administrators request (they often aren't able to do JS work at their own even though they technically could). Furthermore I think I'm trusty enough to hold this right and you can be sure that I wont abuse it. I hope that I have your trust and that I can take some heat from stewards with that, Thanks - Hoo man (talk) 15:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support It's an unusual request, but it's also from an unusually good person. I think that Hoo man has shown time and again that trust is not an issue nor is need or competence. As such I support either a permanent or long-term (1 year recurring or such) grant. fr33kman 15:49, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - For sure! I know you will make a great editinterface user! Joe Gazz84 15:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Anything hoo wants, hoo gets! very active and trusted user. Theo10011 15:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support If I could assign those rights, i would had done it right now.:) I understand the needs of small wiki and you can help in fulfilling them.Vibhijain 15:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Hoo man has already been granted temporary global editinterface twice, is more than competent when it comes to JS/CSS (and I am very jealous :P), and these rights would allow him to better help out around Wikimedia. Ajraddatz (Talk) 15:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Unusual request, yes, but Hoo does great work and will not break anything. So giving it permanently is a good idea. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 16:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support - Sure. The user is trusted and got this right already temporary to fix things. Might be better to give him this right permanently. -Barras 16:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• As Fr33kman says this is indeed an unusual request. In the past such requests were declined on sight. Moreover the editinterface right was never intended to be permanent as far as I know (it was an ad hoc global group created for an specific purpose that was later deleted, recreated and re-deleted again). In the past it gave some problems: interferences with local communities in their site's configuration pages and so on. We have currently 3 users on that group: Krinkle as a Foundation Contractor, Kaldari (non-staff account of Ryan Kaldari: staff member and system administrator) and Hannibal (Wikimedia Foundation staff member). Their rights probably will be removed once they end their contract with the Foundation. I am sure that Hoo man would act in good faith and care and try to respect the local communities but I think that giving this flag in a permanent basis would set a bad precedent in my opinion. Good user indeed but I'm not sure what to !vote here. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 17:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC) (re-edited)[reply]
  •  Oppose After further consideration I definitelly have to post a red flag here. Also «I'm going to use this right to fix JavaScript and CSS errors on small and mid sized wikis, where global sysop doesn't apply» worries me, as this task is also outside the global sysops scope... <sigh>. Not a matter of trust as I've said above. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 23:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Per almost everyone, although I can understand Dferg. Perhaps it's an idea to grant it for a year (as Fr33kman suggested)? Trijnstel 19:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  The more I think about it, the more a fixed recurring term rather than a perm term makes sense for regular oversight to occur. It's a way of getting competent members of the community involved in interface editing. fr33kman 20:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  oppose per comment by Dferg, defiantly it is not matter of trust, hoo is trustworthy Mardetanha ^talk 20:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support permanent. Not at all worried about this request. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Seems a good reason, and hoo is definately trustworthy. Stop by and fix up ScoWp, will ya? ;-) Avicennasis 20:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, but what is broken over there? There's no vector.js and no common.js, only a monobook.js which contains an object with strings which I don't know what they're used for (if used at all) - Hoo man (talk) 20:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Replied at your talk page. :) Avicennasis 21:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Aye, as always. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 07:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Does great work, trustworthy user. –BruTe ^talk 08:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It might be unusual, but he is competent and his help could be very useful for smaller projects which don´t have competent users for such tasks. --FalconL ^?! 12:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I tend to chime in with Dferg, but let's see... Question: How much of a need is there for this kind of stuff? you write "quite often"... what does that mean? daily? weekly? And how urgent is it in those cases? Seb az86556 20:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that I come across such stuff about one to two times a week, usually that can be fixed with my global sysops rights then, but not always. Furthermore after that addition I can work more often on request of local administrators or users (as I already did a few times) - Hoo man (talk) 20:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And how do you justify the request for having this flag permanently? Seb az86556 23:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's always hard to get a steward to set the flag or apply the stuff at his own from pastebin. And because there wont be any abuse from me I don't see a problem in having the flag permanent, cause it has no real downsides - Hoo man (talk) 23:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well... well... well... nope. Something's not right here. This would just create a precedent that I cannot support. Even stewards have to stand for reconfirmation periodically. Oppose permanent. You should have to come back every year or so to have it re-confirmed. Seb az86556 23:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per Trijnstel :) mickit 21:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support He is more than trustwhorty (my own experience), and as I am one of those boring users from small projects who always want something to be done, I know that this access will be benefit for his work. BTW he is the owner of the only bot with sysop flag on bswiki even through the language barriere. --WizardOfOz ^talk 21:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support for steward next year. This too, competent and trusted. Courcelles 21:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Done Taking into account that the global editinterface group has been intended to be given only temporarily, and that there are objections to giving it permanently, a reasonable compromise is to assign it for one year. After a year, Hoo man may request a renewal for another year. Ruslik 14:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good compromise, most global rights need renewal. Thanks for all supports and for everyone who gave his opinion ;) - Hoo man (talk) 14:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global IP block exemption