Requests for Comment/Opt in Miraheze Login to Global Sysop administration

Note: This RfC only affects Miraheze Login wiki and does not apply globally.

Introduction
Miraheze Login wiki is a unique local wiki in that it is only used for hosting global user pages, so it doesn't have any local administrators (see Special:ListAdmins on Miraheze Login wiki). As well, we only have one Global Sysop in Reception123 and four Stewards (list), two of which are also system administrators and have myriad other technical tasks to oversee. I'm not sure where consensus was established to opt out Miraheze Login wiki from Global Sysop and CVT administration, but perhaps the thinking was that since it was related to Miraheze Meta wiki (that is, this wiki), it, too, should be opted out. We probably do need more Global Sysops, and I think the requirement to have at least ten users voice support is complicating that effort, particularly since we do have a mechanism by which their global sysop user right can be revoked by the community, so I'm going to work on a separate RfC for that later; however, in the meantime, I think that it's reasonable to request that Miraheze Login wiki be opted in to Global Sysop administration, so as to allow Reception123, who is fairly active, as an additional user that can respond to user errors on Miraheze Login wiki. As well, as additional Global Sysops are added, they can help out as well.

Additionally, since Miraheze Meta is so closely related to Miraheze Login, upon request at the Stewards' noticeboard or the Administrators' noticeboard, any Miraheze Meta local administrator can request that either a Steward or Miraheze Meta bureaucrat add them to the "administrators" user group on the Miraheze Login wiki. Likewise, any Miraheze Meta bureaucrat can request that a Steward add them to the "bureaucrats" user group on Miraheze Login wiki.

To prevent the entire proposal from being defeated due to users disagreeing, potentially, with one element, the proposal has been split into three proposals, each of which need to be voted on.

Note: Each proposal may be closed separately and not as one combined close, if desired.

Proposal #1: Opting Miraheze Login wiki into Global Sysop administration
That Miraheze Login wiki (loginwiki) be opted in to Global Sysop administration, to respond to Miraheze Login wiki users' issues on a local wiki that has no local administrators, alleviating the workload pressure on the limited number of Stewards and system administrators.

Support

 * As proposer. Dmehus (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Mute. It's status quo. The wiki is sysadmin maintained and the current GS is a sysadmin. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  20:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I realize that the current Global Sysop is also a system administrator, and that's great, but since we have a Global Sysop program, there will be other Global Sysops who are not system administrators. It seems reasonable that, on "loginwiki" which has no local administrators, we'd want to either (a) opt "loginwiki" into the Global Sysop administration program or (b) establish a process by which local administrators and/or bureaucrats are appointed on "loginwiki". We could also establish a local administrator policy on "loginwiki," but I thought since Login and Meta coordinate so tightly, that it makes sense to allow the Meta administrators and bureaucrats (including future administrators and bureaucrats) to request local administrator or bureaucrat rights, to help with any administration on that wiki. Dmehus (talk) 21:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not need at this time. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments

 * Miraheze Login is not opted out of Global Sysops. Therefore, whether this proposal passes or fails does not change reality as Global Sysops already have access to their tools on Login Wiki. John (talk) 22:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's great news. Are you able to remove "loginwiki" from Special:WikiSets/1, which seems to indicate that "loginwiki" is specifically excluded from Global Sysop administration. Since that's the case, proposals 2 and 3 are moot and, really, were secondary proposals to my main concern, which was that I thought Global Sysops should be able to assist with the administrative tasks on Miraheze Login Wiki (since it has no local administrators). Dmehus (talk) 23:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * As per my message, Login Wiki isn’t opted out. Therefore, there is nothing to do here. Only 4 wikis are opted out, none of which are Login Wiki. John (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I had another look, and perhaps because the list of wikis is so large, I didn't see the text that reads, "Wikis not included above:", which would seem to suggest that those wikis listed are the ones that part of Global Sysop administration. Thus, the ones that have opted out, specifically, are the ones that are listed in the log below as being removed from the list. Do I have that right? If that's the case, then I'll withdraw this request and close this RfC. Thanks again for your reply! Dmehus (talk) 02:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal #2: Miraheze Meta administrators may request similar access to Miraheze Login wiki at the applicable noticeboard(s)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

for now per the discussion with on my talk page and per the discussion with John. Dmehus (talk) 23:51, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

That any existing Miraheze Meta administrator may request similar access that they hold on Miraheze Meta wiki to Miraheze Login wiki, which has no local administrators, at either the Stewards' noticeboard and, if Proposal # 3 passes, that a Metaheze Meta bureaucrat may also grant them access via the Meta Administrators' noticeboard.

Support

 * As proposer. Dmehus (talk) 19:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Isn't this already the case? Pppery (talk) 20:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * No, see the Special:WikiSets/1 which specifies "loginwiki" as being opted out of Global Sysop administration. I can't find where the consensus opted "loginwiki" out of Global Sysops, so I assumed it was because "loginwiki" and "metawiki" are coordinated together. Thus, my reason for proposals #2 and #3 as well. Global Sysops can't operate on wikis which have opted out, whereas Stewards can, and we only have two Stewards who aren't also system administrators/staff volunteers (who, presumably, have a lot of other technical, operational, financial, and/or system administrator type tasks to perform). Hope that clarifies. Dmehus (talk) 20:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing that. Pppery (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's kind of confusing as to how it's worded, but I read, under the "type" parameter where it says, "Opt-out based (includes all wikis except specified)," and then lists "loginwiki" that "loginwiki" is opted out of Global Sysop, no? Dmehus (talk) 21:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * I don't see the point of this, given it only affects two people, one of whom is inactive. Pppery (talk) 20:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I realize there's only two local Meta administrators, but since there's cross-coordination between Miraheze Login and Miraheze Meta and, indeed, because Miraheze Login has no local policies that specify how local administrators are to be appointed, it seemed like any local Miraheze Login policy proposal changes or new proposed policies are required to be posted at Miraheze Meta. While there may only be two non-system administrator and non-steward local administrators that this would effect now, this is more about putting in place the procedural framework by which local administrators on Miraheze Login are appointed. Passing proposals # 2 and 3 would establish the policy for the appointment of local Miraheze Login administrators. Failing to pass proposals # 2 and 3, we'll still need to establish a local policy for Miraheze Login, whether here or on Miraheze Login, that outlines how local administrators are appointed. Dmehus (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)


 * no need. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  20:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. I do think we ultimately need to decide whether the Miraheze Meta wiki is to handle discussion of proposed policies for Miraheze Login wiki or whether those proposed policies should be discussed at Miraheze Login wiki. See the Discussion below. Since "loginwiki" is opted out of Global Sysop administration, we really only have two non-system administrator stewards to respond to issues that arise on that wiki. Miraheze Commons, too, does have at least one local Miraheze administrator to respond to maintenance-related tasks and issues from users on that week. Login wiki isn't meant to have a lot of activity, but I realize the demands on stewards time, so it seems like we may want to have at least a couple local administrators there. Dmehus (talk) 21:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Login wiki is separate but most of the meta admin team have access to make changes via GlobalRights. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I realize that, but if it is separate, where are local policies for Login wiki discussed (here or there; if there, should we create a noticeboard there?), and do you happen to know if there was a discussion somewhere that confirmed it had opted out of Global Sysop? Also, I don't see you listed as a system administrator anymore, but you've been around here along time and you're responsive to requests on Meta. Why don't you run for Steward? I'd strongly support your candidacy, as I do think we could use a couple more experienced stewards to respond to requests on wikis with no local administrators (like "loginwiki"). Dmehus (talk) 21:26, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't need to be in global sysop because it would be utterly moot! You're missing the point. if there was an actual need, we'd have done it. An RfC on meta wont change the situation. Policy is enacted by those in charge of the wiki, which is sysadmins. No discussion is needed. I have considered multiple rights pathways, steward will not be now. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Abstain

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Proposal #3: Miraheze Meta bureaucrats may request similar access to Miraheze Login wiki at the Stewards' noticeboard

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

for now, per discussion with on my talk page. I do think we may need to refine the wording of our existing policies, but in future, I'll propose my ideas with respect to Login wiki and questions re: Login and Meta wiki cross-coordination to the Stewards and System Administrators on Discord and/or IRC. Dmehus (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

That any existing Miraheze Meta bureaucrat may request similar access that they hold on Miraheze Meta wiki to Miraheze Login wiki, which has no local bureaucrats, at the Stewards' noticeboard.

Support

 * As proposer. Dmehus (talk) 19:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * This is only meaningful if Proposal 2 (which I oppose) passes, and in any case only affects one person. Pppery (talk) 20:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Mute, they already have authorisation to act on loginwiki through other roles. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  20:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I realize that, currently, but that's because the Meta bureaucrats are also global stewards or system administrators. It's conceivable that we may want to formalize a local bureaucrat appointment process policy, as our policies do make reference to bureaucrat functions. While this is moot at present, this is about establishing the policy for the future, if and when non-steward bureaucrats are appointed.
 * We have a formal policy, there's no expectation that group will be expanded soon. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Abstain

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Discussion on potential alternatives
, et al., if none of these proposals are adopted, there is still a need, I think, to formalize a local policy on Miraheze Login wiki that describes the process by which local administrators and bureaucrats, who are not also stewards or system administrators, be appointed. Since that wiki has no noticeboards or policies, really, should we (a) create a noticeboard and/or policies there or (b) discuss proposed local policies for Login wiki here on Meta? Dmehus (talk) 21:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Loginwiki is a technical wiki maintained by Sysadmins with the support of Stewards. The wiki is to host Global UserPages in line with the Content Policy. Issues can be taken up on SN. There is no need for policy for the sake of policy. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:21, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I do think we could better clarify where policies for Login wiki are discussed, though. I agree we don't need to create a new policy if we already have one; we may need to refine the existing policy(ies), though. We only have two non-system administrator stewards, and if these proposals are defeated, I do think someone like you should run for Steward. You're responsive to requests and have the technical aptitude and competence to resolve any issues there. Dmehus (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * There's no need for more policy yet. We will come to that hurdle when it's actually useful. As said above, my plans for advanced rights haven't been fully decided. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  22:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)