Meta:Requests for permissions

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

Archives:
 * Archive 1 (10 August 2015 - 15 May 2016)
 * Archive 2 (15 May 2016 - 8 May 2017)
 * Archive 3 (8 May 2017 - 12 August 2018)
 * Archive 4 (12 August 2018 - )

~Squiggles~ (Wiki creator)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * No consensus to promote. -- Void  Whispers 18:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

User: ~Squiggles~ ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: I would like to contribute, and this seems like a good way to start, i would like to create wikis that have a good and valid reason.

Additional comments: Requesting this right for 4 weeks (1 month) as a trial, then if all goes well, would to obtain this permissions permanently.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1) Looks like this user only has 5 edits on Meta.  17:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) w:WP:NOTNOW. Not familiar with many of Miraheze's policies, and seems to want rights on official projects just to help out. There is plenty to do without additional permissions.  dross  (t • c • g) 17:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) I will abstain from this RfP as I believe it is not my place to vote on this particular one. Best of luck to the candidate though.  Hypercane  (  talk ) 18:27, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


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

Dross (Rollbacker)
User: Dross ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Rollbacker Reason: As I have been involved on meta for some time now, I would like to extend my capabilities with additional tools to help me in my day to day activities on meta. I have been caught in a handful of situations in which I was the only user online and ready to respond to vandalism and spam incidents. I believe that the undo function which comes with all user accounts suffices for a good majority of scenarios, but for those select situations in which the edit interface either extremely delays response or several revisions make it unreasonable to use such features, it becomes necessary to possess a tool which allows for quick, easy, and accurate reversion.

Additional comments: I'm not looking for any authority within the community, but rather an additional tool for me to continue doing the things I love to help this community. I do hope you'll consider this when presenting opinions.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions


 * 1) User is capable, well known in the community.~Squiggles~ (talk) 14:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) I know this user is capable of rollbacker rights and is already decently well known in the community. Good luck on your request.  Hypercane  (  talk ) 18:00, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) Sure why not.  18:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Gustave London (sysop)

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Unfortunately there is no support. Please do continue to be involved in working Meta however, it is appreciated. John (talk) 00:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

User: Gustave London ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason: Hello,i'm Gustave London.I would like of be sysop to help the community and combating the vandalism.The wiki is growing,and i want help the wiki.With more rights,i can help this wiki. Gustave London (talk) 17:38, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1) I don't know this user very well, but his contributions seem okay, so I don't oppose nor support this request. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 18:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) I do not feel like the user has gathered the experience to be able to fulfill the role of administrator at this time. There is also no clear indication of what they would do in the role. Reception123  (talk) ('C' ) 19:20, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) w:WP:NOTNOW know this user from another wiki, while they have good edits, they are not yet ready for the role of administrator.~Squiggles~ (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 4) w:WP:SNOWBALL  22:36, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 5) Not yet. I see lots of good translation work, and a desire to help. However, I believe this user has more to learn in ways of policy and practices before he will be ready for sysop. I say to come back in 2 months or so; in the mean time, perhaps look at other ways to help (perhaps translation admin?) .  dross  (t • c • g) 01:38, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 6) sorry WP:NOTYET --EK ● contribs 15:54, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


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

PaperClip (Wiki creator)
User: PaperClip ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: Wiki creator Reason: Hello everybody my is I am PaperClip and would like to have wiki creator rights. I can help process wiki requests faster, making it more better involvement to users and I do have user rights experience on Miraheze wikis. That's the reason why I wan't to have Wiki creator rights.

Additional comments: Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions
 * 1) without anything to comment on. :)  dross  (t • c • g) 06:58, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Reception123 (sysop)
User: Reception123 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log ) Group: sysop Reason:

Additional comments:

Other users feel free to support/oppose/abstain from this RfP but please state your reasoning below.
 * Comments/Questions