Steward requests/Global permissions/2019-06

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in June 2019, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Turkmen

Not ending before 30 May 2019 22:36 UTC

Hi, I'm active in many projects. I know or understand many of the Turkic languages (sometimes global rollbackers get revert edits without understand). I spend 5 hours a day and more on Wikimedia projects. In this regard, this right can be more than I have. Note that, as we all know, this right does not have so much opportunities. It just helps fight with vandalism. I ask you to vote for my my work.

Finally, I thank all of you for participating in my voting.--Turkmen ^talk 22:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support -- Catherine Laurence 08:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 13:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Many reasons, starting with controversy relating to the azwiki RfC. Some comments he made there and actions being questioned are reminiscent of his unfounded accusation in his first Global Rollback request, which he failed to link here, that Alaa had opposed him for nationalistic reasons. ([1]) In that request, there is another problem similar to that which we have now. Turkmen is active on no projects other than those dozen or so which he edits actively, and on all but two (azwikibooks and azwikiquote) he has rollback, sysop, or similar permissions. I see no need for global rollback permissions; simply request them locally. There is also his Global Rename request, where he engaged in revenge voting, lying about his previous comments to Alaa, likely canvassing of azwiki users (as with the previous global rollback request), and general issues in responding to criticism. I cannot support this user for these rights. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 14:10, 26 May 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Neutral/ Weak Oppose Considering that it seems they intend to use it on mostly Turkish projects (from their request), I am inclined to support. However, as Global Rollback is a truly global permission that applies on all Wikimedia projects, I am not sure that they will use it responsibly on projets where they do not speak the language as they have very few edits on wikis outside the few they edit semi-regularly. Vermont (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support -J. Ansari Talk 14:38, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose I don't think he is the cause of a lot of the azwiki problems, but I share some of Vermont's other concerns. --Rschen7754 15:46, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose I inquired about the concerns of Vermont and I see it as he and the last candidature. The activity has not changed since then. The right should be used mainly in foreign projects. I also can not imagine that this user will use the right mainly in foreign projects.--WikiBayer 👤💬 15:53, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral/ Oppose i don't have a idea of the contributor but i don't see many small wiki edit. Regards Tomybrz Bip Bip 16:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral Weak support The pros are the candidate have sysop / rollback permission in different wikis, which makes me belief they have competency in reverting. However, there are concerns such as I really find very little recent reverts across wikis that are not your homewikis or are in language you are not a native speaker of. For many of such wikis, the contributions are image releated, such as adding pictures or Global Replacing. The azwiki issues doesn't concern me that much, only the RD are problematic in some sense. Vermont concerns also hold some ground and not too long have passed. I will hope you continue to patrol the smaller wikis and reapply in a few months. Thanks for all the contribution to Wikimedia, especially for the az projects. --Cohaf (talk) 16:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC). Should be able to weak support him. --Cohaf (talk) 17:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral largely per Cohaf's reasoning. Having sysop perms on multiple wikis is a plus but I do have some reservations based on Vermont's opposition. Hiàn (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I trust Turkmen and seeing that he has spend long time in a lot of WikiProjects. This right will help him to fight with vandalism strongly. Sincerely --eldarado ^✉ 18:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support not a big deal. Trusted enough. Global perms are not a clique of friends, but rather tools to help people who have legitimate uses for them. While Turkmen might have some issues, I have seen nothing that would lead me to believe that granting global rollback would actually harm any Wikimedia project, and I suspect it may help some. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a clique of friends, but they need to be able to communicate and work effectively with administrators on other wikis. It is not good to have a global rollbacker who keeps running into trouble on various wikis because of their communication. --Rschen7754 18:18, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, I agree with that, but I also think the odds of him abusing it on projects where he isn't already trusted is next to zero based off of his central auth. I'm not particularly convinced by the just use local rights bit because he appears to be trusted in the language groups he works in and I don't like the recent trend of defining cross-project as effectively meaning cross-language. It looks like it'll be used on multiple wikis in communities where he has trust, which for me is enough. If on the odd chance he decides to use it to edit war on it.wiki or de.wiki, I'm confident he'll be blocked and stewards can look at removing. I don't think that will happen, however. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support not a perfect candidate, but it's only global rollback. From what I've seen they are capable of reverting vandalism across language barriers (and indeed seem quite comfortable interacting in a number of languages). – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose I am not ok with this user having rollback rights on additional wikis until the AZ.wiki issues get resolved. They seem like a swell person, but the NPOV stuff concerns me. There's nothing wrong with waiting a month or two for this whole thing to blow over. :) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:12, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @MJL: Please could you explain what you mean with "a swell person"?. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ammarpad: My apologies, swell here means great. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. –Ammarpad (talk) 22:06, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Neutral I've changed my mind about this. Bad timing doesn't seem like a good reason to oppose. They're a good admin from what I know. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 20:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Enough experience across wikis. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support very trusted user on Azerbaijani Wikipedia, also enough users trust him on neutral POV and not violating the rules on meta. --► Sincerely: A¥×aᚢ Zaÿïþzaþ€ ⚔ (hail sithis!) 18:02, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Mistakes happen to all when we start, the main thing is to comprehend them and not to repeat again. I suppose that during the work Turkmen interpreted their mistakes and continued to work constructively for the benefit of the WM projects. I hope. Kindly, --Mehman 97 19:46, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Hello everyone. I am former admin in Azerbaijani wikipedia. I know Turkmen from the various sites of Wikimedia in the last 3 years and I know that he is a very hardworking person. He has been using wiki technology very well and he has always had great respect and success in local wikipedia with his neutral position. I think it's great success to be involved in different projects and spend time for each. We trust him as a community.--Baskervill (talk) 03:00, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak support, from their nomination statement, I get the feel that they will use the right responsibly and will not use it in Wikis where they do not know the language.  — FR 09:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Nicat49 (talk) 22:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak support largely per Ajraddatz and Tony. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 05:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Thank you all. :)--Turkmen ^talk 22:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Ajr and Tony. —Thanks for the fish! ^{talk•contribs} 16:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Already Sysop on multiple projects, so can be trusted with rollback allover. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support for essentially the same reasons as TonyBallioni. And global rollback isn't that big a deal, really. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:10, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--David1010 (talk) 05:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done taking into account that Vermont struck their concerns, which made a number of other participants to oppose, and hoping that Turkmen will use rollback responsibly. Ruslik (talk) 08:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.--Turkmen ^talk 11:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for NewDataB

Not ending before 5 June 2019 15:28 UTC

I'm NewDataB, I regularly patrol edits on small wikis. I have rollback experience on diferent projects look. --NewDataB (talk) 15:28, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral. While I see you have rollback experiences on various projects, you don't seem to counter-vandalism beyond projects which you have rollback permissions in. I notice that a large amount of your edits on other wikis are adding pictures or updating name or correcting links etc, good editorial stuff but not in countervandalism. However, you are trusted in several wikis and since GR isn't a big deal, I am not going to oppose. Thanks for contributions to Wikimedia. --Cohaf (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)ammended--Cohaf (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral (by Cohaf) At the moment neutral, I support you 1 or 2 later months with active work for SWMT--WikiBayer 👤💬 16:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't see much patrolling of edits on small wikis. Could you link a few examples? Thanks, Vermont (talk) 16:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

wikibook-es, wikiversity-es, wikipedia-ca, wiktionary-en, wiktionary es--NewDataB (talk) 16:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support a random clicking of projects in their CA proves Cohaf’s concerns to be factually incorrect. A user with 38,000 global edits who knows what vandalism is, is active on many projects, and is asking for this in good faith? Of course they can get it and the concerns raised here further raise my existing concerns that global permissions is being viewed too much as a club rather than as tools to help. This is a textbook case of where the permission would be useful. The only thing that separates them from some other candidates is they aren’t active in meta circles, which should have no bearing on this request. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also did a random clicking on like 123456. So TonyBallioni I really did random clicked and sort of found wikis they did not do countervandalism in. I am not really factually wrong but yes, they did countervandalism in some other wikis (en/es/ca). --Cohaf (talk) 16:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cohaf, you are factually wrong. You did a random sample, and you sampled the wikis where they didn’t do anti-vandal work. That just means you took a bad sample. Not necessarily your fault, it’s one of the inherent limitations of non-statistical sampling, but now that it’s been pointed out that your comment is incorrect it’s probably worth revisiting your concerns. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • TonyBallioni I get your point. We are both not wrong. I am seeing they edited 100 projects, so I visited some to check quality of reverts. When I see such contribution, it makes me hesitate. I will note some of the wikis they have reverted quite a time ago. I didn't check stewardy. On a closer look, yes, I am a little over categorical, will strike off some parts of comments. I will  Support this . Per rights are to a club, I already said GR is not a big deal and I really seen this user around. I seen their good work in pictures. --Cohaf (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Tony, and also the good crosswikiness. The permissions they retain on multiple wikis are a good recognition of their antivandalism work, which means they will make good use of the global permission. —Thanks for the fish! ^{talk•contribs} 16:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support looking through their recent xwiki contribs shows a fair amount of recent counter-vandalism experience. I've checked a bunch of reverts, and they all look good to me. Looks like the user has a use for the rights and the competence to use them well. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Trusted user, experienced in counter-vandalism, and could use the right. Vermont (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Turkmen ^talk 18:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support. Experienced and competent, and I see no reasons for doubt. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 01:05, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 06:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Esteban16 (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support  — FR 08:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --eldarado ^✉ 09:42, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support There is absolutely nothing to complain about this application. --Eihel (talk) 09:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Trusted with sufficient experience -- Taketa (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support sitrep : nothing to report : ok. Tomybrz Bip Bip 19:41, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Tks4Fish and Ajraddatz. I see fair amount of reverts.--BRP ^ever 23:12, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support. Hiàn (talk) 23:43, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Di^Mon₂₇₁₁ 18:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, clear consensus. Trijnstel_talk 21:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --NewDataB (talk) 08:27, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for LightandDark2000

Not ending before 23:46, 29 June 2019 UTC

Hello. I am LightandDark2000 (also known as BlueHypercane761 on Wikimedia Commons). I'm an experienced editor primarily active on en.wiki and Commons, though I do visit other Wikimedia Project sites occasionally, usually when I'm updating data cross-wiki, or when I'm dealing with cross-wiki vandals and trolls. I'm requesting Global Rollbacker rights because I wish to fight cross-wiki vandalism much more effectively and faster than I can right now. Right now, I have to deal with opening up the vandalized diffs on non-English Wikimedia sites, clicking the undo button, and then publishing my changes (and sometimes leaving an edit summary), in order to actually revert cross-wiki vandalism. This is very inefficient, especially when the vandalism involves an LTA who is actively disrupting the said project, and this drawback seriously hampers my ability to fight vandalism. Additionally, on some Wikimedia sites (such as Wikiversity), I am completely unable to revert vandalism at all, due to edit filters that prevent reverts by new editors. In the past year alone, I've had to deal with cross-wiki vandalism on more than 10 Wikimedia Project sites (mostly Commons and es.wiki), and I expect this trend to continue in the future as I continue to fight cross-wiki LTAs and trolls; however, I have experienced more difficulty reverting vandalism on some sites, due to the issues mentioned earlier. I can recognize obvious vandalism on different Wikimedia Projects, and if there is an edit that I cannot distinguish from vandalism, I tend to leave it alone. Regarding this Global right, I would like to say that I've been fighting cross-wiki vandalism for close to 2 years now (mostly in the last year), and I have responsibly used the Rollbacker tools on en.wiki for more than a year. I have read the policies on Global Rollback and I understand the responsibilities associated with using the tools. If I am granted Global Rollback rights, I promise never to abuse the tools for my own purposes or to further an edit war; I plan to use the tools to become a more effective anti-vandal user on the various Wikimedia Projects. Thank you for your consideration. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 23:46, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I recommend you create a global userpage; it's important for local wikis to be able to contact you if necessary. In regard to your request, though it is definite you've engaged in a lot of LTA reporting, I see quite infrequent use of undo and very few edits outside of enwiki and metawiki. Why is this so? Vermont (talk) 00:11, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my userpage, I would prefer that other users see my en.wiki userpage in order to learn more about me (or to contact me). This is especially because en.wiki is my home wiki, and if I were to create a personalized userpage here on Meta, it would be very similar to the one I have on en.wiki (unless I choose to create a simplified, watered-down version). This is why my Meta signature (and my signature on some other multi-language sites) all link back to my userpage on en.wiki. I hope that this isn't an issue. Anyhow, I may consider creating a simple userpage on Meta in the near future. On other wikis, the reverts don't seem to come that often (because I usually don't frequent most foreign language wikis); however, my cross-wiki reverts have been ramping up in the past year, due to my increased cross-wiki involvement (most notably seen on es.wiki), and I expect my cross-wiki activities to continue in the near future, due to my cross-wiki anti-vandalism campaign. The low count (on foreign language wikis) is also partially due to me avoiding reverting edits that I can't clearly distinguish from obvious vandalism. The low count can probably be attributed to the fact that my cross-wiki involvement on the foreign language wikis largely began last year, but I expect more activity on some of those sites in the near future, since several of the LTAs I'm dealing with seem to love targeting those sites. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now set up a Global userpage on Meta. Users should still see my main userpage on en.wiki (linked) if they wish to learn more about me. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• You have been repeatedly blocked on enwiki: [2] The blocks are a few years old and I do not necessarily see them as disqualifying, but I would like to hear from you why you believe that you were blocked and what is different now. --Rschen7754 00:23, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The blocks on en.wiki several years ago were mainly due to one of 2 reasons: 1) Obsessive sock tagging (mostly due to my desire to have everything done the same way), and 2) Edit-Warring. For the first item, I no longer obsessively tag, since I now know that doing so is disruptive, especially after my recent experiences have shown me that some LTA socks are just better off not being tagged at all. For the second item, this was mostly due to bad judgement on some articles related to the Syrian Civil War. I have tried very hard to avoid the same behavior since then (including taking some temporary breaks and avoiding the said pages when necessary), and I believe that I have avoided any blockable offenses since my last one in November 2015. Now, I am much more cautious on getting into content disputes and making potentially disruptive edits; for the most part, I have matured significantly in the past several years, and I would like to say that I'm not the kind of person who would engage in those behaviors again. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now. On small-medium projects without local administrations to give rollback, you only have a few dozen undos, spread out over more than a year. on projects that are large and have their own rollback procedures (eswiki and wikidata, in your case), you have about a hundred or so each. I think it's best for you to continue using undo for the time being until you've gained more experience making reverts on wikis where you dont speak the language, and requesting rollback on those two wikis where you seem to nearly exclusively use undo. Per the global rollback page, global rollbackers "must be demonstrably active in cross-wiki countervandalism or anti-spam activities". Considering your present activity level, undo should be perfectly okay. On most wikis, simply having a registered account for a few days will prevent you from needing to complete CAPTCHA's and being stopped by most filters. Thank you for volunteering, Vermont (talk) 01:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I thank you for your level of countervandalism. I appreciate the work you had done on SRG. I think the number of undo you did is very close or more than mine. However, these are concentrated in a few wikis which local rollback tools are available. If we are speaking on crosswiki edits, I am seeing a weak crosswiki matrix. As of wikiversity needing CAPTCHA, irrc only en needs that and you have confirm rights, to prevent such situation, do use Krinkle global SUL, it's a very helpful tool to create accounts across all WMF wikis which will then help to skip in most. As of behavioural blocks, I feel they are old and they had matured slightly, although their talk page archiving vs deletion here on meta is still an issue in the last year. For meta global user page, thanks for having one and I hope the signature on meta points to that not into en here. I feel they are competent in rollback, just didn't have enough crosswiki experience for me to be confident that they can use the tool in language they dont understand. Keep up the good work and come back in 2-3 months. Regrettable  Oppose.--Cohaf (talk) 06:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose per Vermont and Cohaf.--Turkmen ^talk 09:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral (unless something swings the needle either way). I trust LightandDark2000 and I'm certain they won't abuse the tools but I'm just not seeing enough cross-wiki experience to merit these rights. Hiàn (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I was under the impression that they were already a GR having seen them on multiple occasions at SRG asking for locks of LTAs. I personally see no reason for them to use the right improperly.  — FR 07:40, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• per Hiàn  Wait and do more cross-wiki patrol on #cvn-sw. Sincerelly. —Eihel (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral Your edit matrix is weak, but no other concerns. Leaderboard (talk) 17:44, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral I don't see the blocks as a concern, but I am concerned by the low number of reverts on small wikis. Would reconsider with more experience. --Rschen7754 18:21, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose--WikiBayer 👤💬 18:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 12:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done; While I appreciate your hard work, the consensus here is not in favor of granting your access now. I'd encourage you to apply later, as other suggested. — regards, Revi 02:29, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for Rohini

I need to always mask my IP address for reasons of my personal security and privacy. However, I am unable to make contributions to Wikimedia projects when I am logged in and accessing the Internet via an IP that happens to be blocked. I would greatly appreciate it if I were granted an exemption, so that I may continue to contribute to Wikimedia projects. I do not have any other account on Wikimedia projects. I have never been blocked from editing any project, with the sole exception of a temporary block on Mr-Wikipedia, which was later established to be in violation of the wiki's policies. Thanks, --Rohini (talk) 02:28, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for viztor

I've been on Wikipedia for several years and has becoming more and more actively in editing, I couldn't help but notice sometimes the proxy I use fell into the block range. For my continued participation, ip block exemption would be essential. I've also had several thousands edits combined globally, and am with clean track record and have no behavior guideline violation wherever, thanks, Viztor (talk) 11:19, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for ZI Jony

I would like to request Global IP Block Exemption for my account. I'm active on several wikis, My IP address has been range blocked on all wikis with expiry of block: 16:58, 30 January 2023. There’s steward respond team ticket Ticket#2019060910002168 also for this. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 15:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's no IP address globally blocked with an expiration time in 2023 in the last two weeks or so, and you edited the English Wikipedia yesterday. Is it a global or local rangeblock? Thanks, Vermont (talk) 21:09, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the message "Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis.", that I got when trying to edit, I tried on enwiki, bnwiki and wikidata. The block was made by Vituzzu (S) (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is hosting service with open proxies. Recently due to Internet service providers rotate I'm using open proxy, when I started open proxy it’s happened. However, I would greatly appreciate it if I were granted global ip block exemption to continue contribute on Wikimedia projects. Will be requested to remove once not required. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, you're using open proxies. That makes more sense. Thanks, Vermont (talk) 12:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user has contacted me, a Wikidata administrator, off-wiki about being granted IPBE on Wikidata, which I'm hesitant to do in the absence of an on-wiki record of such a request. Since this user has been trusted with several permissions (including rollback, property creation, and translation administration) on that site, I still find it appropriate to express my support for this user's global IPBE request, even though that may not necessarily equate to the request being resolved more quickly. Mahir256 (talk) 05:56, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done - obviously not the target of the block. – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:10, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for WAN233

I am from PRC and I have to use VPN to edit Wikimedia sites. thanks, --WAN233 (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for AKS471883

<IP Unblock in all languages Wikipedia>, thanks, --AKS471883 (talk)

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for LaundryPizza03

I live in an area of Texas near a globally blocked IP range, 2600:387:A:19:0:0:0:0/64, so sometimes I am blocked from editing when I travel from my town to some nearby town, for example to go to Texas A&M. I am active on the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. thanks, --LaundryPizza03 (talk) 20:47, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done until 23 August 2019. Ruslik (talk) 20:28, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for 佛壁灯

Requesting global IP unblock due to heavily censored environment, thanks. 佛壁灯 (talk) 11:39, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:27, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for Newslinger

Hello. I am requesting global IP block exemption to contribute to Wikimedia projects (including Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons) through VPN services on unsecured wireless networks. My account is currently subject to local IP block exemption on the English Wikipedia. I use a strong password and two-factor authentication to minimize the chance of my account being compromised. Thanks for your consideration. — Newslinger talk 08:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Newslinger is a great enwiki user, and I highly recommending granting this request as to it will allow them to contribute to more projects in the same positive manner I've seen on enwiki! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:23, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global rename permissions

Requests for 2 Factor Auth tester permissions

2FA for Nbkx1t3

I enable 2FA on every account where's it is possible. I would like to request that 2FA be enabled for my account. Thank You, Nbkx1t3. 14:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the help docs? — regards, Revi 02:19, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the help page and apply again. — regards, Revi 22:05, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for M/

Hi, I'd like to have the OATH enabled: even if I am no longer a Steward/Sysop, I am still a member of WMI Chapter, in charge of some domain maintaining and editing Wikipedia pages. I've read the documentation and I will take care of the scratch codes. Thanks, --M/ (talk) 22:44, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 09:46, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, --M/ (talk) 12:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Redactyll

I would appreciate it if I was added to the OATH permissions group. I am receiving notices that my account is being subject to a large amount of incorrect password attempts, for example how this morning I found myself with a notice that there were over 100 failed attempts to log into my account. I've read all documentation, and I will take full responsibility in managing access to the account. Redactyll (talk) 17:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruslik0: The permission wasn't added. I checked my global permissions, and I only have global IPBE, as well as not being able to turn it on. Is it possible you could fix this? Redactyll (talk) 02:44, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marked it back as "in progress", you do not seem to have "oauth-tester" afterall. --QEDK (talk 桜 enwiki) 07:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually done. — regards, Revi 07:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Ramjit Tudu

Hi, Iam going to apply for Interface administrator which need 2FA. Your help regarding this will be appreciated, thanks, --Ramjit Tudu (talk) 05:41, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 12:15, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --Ramjit Tudu (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for HelmsC1978

I would like 2FA enabled for my account to secure it better...and to make 1Password happier as well. I have read up on 2FA., thanks, --HelmsC1978 (talk) 03:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:52, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Mathglot

Requesting 2FA, per recommendation at w:WP:Edit filter#Have a strong password. I just created my first edit filter. Thanks, --Mathglot (talk) 02:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Blucose

<Hi, I'd like to have the OATH enabled. It should be available to all editors>, thanks, --Blucose (talk) 17:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read 2FA. Ruslik (talk) 20:34, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closing as not done per non-response. They are free to resubmit the request after they have read help docs. — regards, Revi 02:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Section 8

Hi there, I'd like to enable 2FA on my account for additional security. I'm aware how 2FA works, thanks! --Section 8 (talk) 13:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please login when leaving a request. Stryn (talk) 10:29, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, how about now? --Section 8 (talk) 13:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By saying "I'm aware how 2FA works" I assume you have read Help:2FA. Done. — regards, Revi 02:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for san7890

I would like 2FA to be enabled on my account, I already have multiple accounts under 2FA and understand all of the risks and benefits, thanks, --San7890 (talk) 02:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"understand all of the risks and benefits" - I am assuming you have read the docs. Done. — regards, Revi 02:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Chaosphere

Hi, I'm requesting 2FA access for my account. I have read the relevant docs and understand how authenticating and recovery codes work. Thanks. --Chaosphere (talk) 04:21, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"I have read the relevant docs", I'm assuming you have read Help:2FA. Done. Linedwell ^[talk] 06:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Encylopaulia

Please enable 2FA for my account. I have read the documentation Help:2FA, and have many accounts with OTP 2FA, thanks, Encylopaulia (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Leijurv

I would like 2FA to increase my account security. I have read Help:2FA and have it elsewhere. Leijurv (talk) 03:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Kostas20142

Hello! I would like to be granted 2FA access in order to increase my account security and since it is also linked to a sensitive application (due to private data and more), English Wikipedia Account Creation Assistance Tool. I have read and fully understood Help:2FA and the potential risks if instructions are not followed. Thanks in advance, Kostas20142 (talk) 12:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kostas20142: - How will be one able to access ACC private data, even if one breaches your account? IIRC, ACC interface (like OTRS) requires seperate log-in and isn't linked with SUL by OAUTH. Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 16:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: I am not requesting it solely for this but for account security in general. Coming to your question, the application is in linked applications and has occasionally prompted me to wikipedia login when accessing it. (as a security precaution I am de-authorizing the application when I am logging off from both accounts). Kostas20142 (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: fixing ping Kostas20142 (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have nothing against your request. It links to check the blocked-status and rights (from what I see) but I don't see how anyone who has succesflly breached your wiki-account but does not know ACC credentials would be able to read private data. Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 16:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: He cannot. Only if he actually breaches the ACC and the wiki account can. This is quite extreme actually as a scenario but want to be sure. But I wouldn't really like to see anyone using pagemover or accountcreator rights either in case of a potential breach, both would be bad. (Although I am using a strong password in both accounts). --Kostas20142 (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:18, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for RainFall

—RainFall 09:34, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Wintercoast

Requesting 2FA for strengthening my account security. I have read the Help:Two-factor authentication page. Thank you.

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:03, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Jimk4003

Requesting 2FA for additional account security. Have read the help page, and understand the risks. Thank you.

Done Ruslik (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting 2FA for Fyreous

Requesting to be enabled for 2FA on my account, I understand how it works and the risks involved. Thanks! --Fyreous (talk) 00:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting 2FA for Martin Urbanec

I would like to be added as 2FA tester. I use 2FA using my volunteer account (which has 2FA by default, since it's privileged), and would like to enjoy 2FA auth with my WMF account as well. Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (WMF) (talk) 16:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for PiotrekD

I find my Wikimedia account one of the most important web accounts I have, so I ask for 2FA to increase its security. I have read the mentioned help page. Regards, PiotrekD (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:25, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. PiotrekD (talk) 20:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for hkletti

< I ask for 2FA to increase security. I have read the mentioned help page. Regards,>, thanks, --~~~~

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for Meaie

<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --Meaie (talk) 15:21, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:35, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA for Homotechsual

Requesting 2FA for account security thanks, --Homotechsual (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Help:2FA? — regards, Revi 02:39, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done; account is too new (4 edits globally) to assume they'll understand how Wikimedia 2FA works, thus the risks of getting locked out of it are considerable. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:27, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2FA Tester for William2001

I spend a significant amount of time on Wikipedia projects (mostly en.wiki), and it seems to me that Wikipedia is the only major website for which I do not have 2FA enabled. I also have rollback and pending-changes reviewer permission, so a malicious hacker can do some serious damage with my account. I have read the help page. Thank you. --William2001 (talk) 16:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ruslik (talk) 17:51, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for other global permissions

add global OTRS member for Mike Peel

Thanks, --Krd 06:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 07:05, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for BU Rob13

Thanks, --Krd 06:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Stryn (talk) 07:32, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for BRPever

Thanks, --Krd 06:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Linedwell ^[talk] 07:03, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for Rjd0060

Thanks, --Krd 05:15, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 05:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

add global OTRS member for Krdbot

Thanks, --Krd 05:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 05:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Add global OTRS member for Htm

Thanks, --Ruthven (msg) 21:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Matiia (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for Redlinux

Thanks, --Krd 07:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Stryn (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

remove global OTRS member for TZivyA

Thanks, --Krd 07:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Stryn (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Global rollback for User:2real4ufn

I would like to request a global unblock on my account - 2real4ufn, there are pages that are not updated regularly and I would like to provide the update, but I am currently unable to do any editing of any sort. I ask that the block be lifted.

• Global rollback or global unblock? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Which ever one gets me to have the ability to do edits and publish pages. I think that would be global unblock. --2real4ufn.

  @2real4ufn: Given that you can edit on Meta, and that you only edit the English Wikipedia, it looks more appropriate to me if you followed the steps stated at w:Wikipedia:IP block exemption and requested a local IP block exemption to the English Wikipedia administrators through the Unblock Ticket Request System via https://utrs.wmflabs.org/. Thank you, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:06, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]