Meta:Requests for permissions

Add topic
From Miraheze Meta, Miraheze's central coordination wiki
(Redirected from Meta:RfP)
Requests for local permissions
Shortcuts:
RfP,
RFP

Welcome! On this page, you can request permissions that can be granted on this wiki such as...

For permissions on another wiki, please start a discussion over there.

Notes:

  • Non-advanced permissions such as autopatrolled or confirmed can be requested on Meta:Administrators' noticeboard.
  • Although anonymous users may express their opinions, logging out to leave additional comments or otherwise abusing multiple accounts (including IP addresses), is not allowed.
  • Remember to update Meta:RecentChanges/Requests with a link to your request.
Click the appropriate button below to request permissions

Administrator Bureaucrat Bot Wiki creator

Archives of Requests for permissions [e]   


BrandonWM (Administrator)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Unsuccessful; de facto withdrawn by user's departure from the project. -- Void Whispers 22:06, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BrandonWM (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Administrator
Reason: Given the current turmoil on Miraheze, this is an emergency request, and I am currently one of the two most active and trusted volunteers on Miraheze with no Meta roles. I was formerly a global interwiki administrator and Meta patroller on Miraheze, and I have 3 years of experience working with this project. I've been wanting to request this role for quite a while now in order to more productively contribute to the Miraheze community, and it seems a good opportunity has arisen. Happy to answer questions/concerns. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 02:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Questions for candidate[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Strongest oppose for sysop, as the reasoning behind this request is weak, and based on the fact Miraheze is potentially shutting down. Seems to be only interested in using this strange time to collect hats. Furthermore, considering the user’s global history, I am not confident they would be able to fill the role without any prior biases controlling their actions. Zppix (Meta | talk to me) 19:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Zppix: Not sure where it came from that I was attempting to collect hats. If that was my goal, I'd be going for global sysop or steward. I'm going for Meta sysop as I believe I can use it to help the community, especially while all this is chaotic. Being able to rollback/patrol edits and block users if needed, while currently there are only two other Meta admins, and both involved in Miraheze succession talks, which heavily impedes their ability to respond to such actions in a timely manner. Given my 3 years of experience here, and the conditions that these are, I believe this should be a qualifier. As for being biased, being biased against whom, exactly? I've disagreed with a great number of users in the past, but as far as I know, all but one of those disagreements (the one I mention is globally banned, currently) have been resolved amicably and respectfully. I can't think of one user I would be biased against. Are there users I get along with more, and some I get along with less? Of course. But that wouldn't impact my ability to execute the necessary roles. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 19:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Support To be honest, I still have much to learn about the different roles. But having a Meta dedicated GS feels like a good idea. Also, I much like the idea of seeing BrandonMW participating. --- Imamy (talk) 03:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Comment: I see the title is (Administrator) but Zppix states sysop. Are they the same thing? --- Imamy (talk) 03:16, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Imamy: Yes, they are. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 03:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3.  Strongest support BrandomWM is okay with being an Administrator. I support. --Hey Türkiye Message? 06:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4.  Strongest support We are definitely in need of another Meta administrator. UltraOwen (talk) 20:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Oppose. I've had only low amount of trust in you and i lost it entirely recently.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 20:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @MrJaroslavik: Pardon, but how did I lose your trust? I don't recall any interactions we've had lately, so I'm not sure what I could've done. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 21:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6.  Oppose for several reasons. For one thing, their voluntary two-way Meta Wiki interaction ban with Cocopuff2018 remains in place, as far as I'm aware, unless both parties to the IBAN have requested it be removed. They've been reasonably amicable with each other, but I wouldn't be comfortable granting one user tools that include user control tools. As well, given that previous Meta administrators, including myself and, more recently, Agent Isai, have had to warn them or provide them guidance in terms of Meta Wiki's policies, conventions and the like, I have a relatively low degree of confidence in their use of the toolset without their actions needing to be reverted or requiring discussion at Meta:Administrators' noticeboard. Finally, this does feel like a bit of a 'power grab' in a time of uncertainty, particularly when they've committed to joining Miraheze's natural successor wiki farm, WikiFarm. Dmehus (talk) 01:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Dmehus: My IBAN with Cocopuff2018 has been removed per a previous discussion at AN, though now that you have noted it I had forgotten it still exists. So to clarify, that is no longer in effect. Second, which of my actions have required clarification by Meta administrators recently? Most of the actions I’ve taken have all been fine, I cannot remember a time within the past month or two that it’s required a warning. Third, I, along with users such as Agent and NotAracham, have joined WikiTide, but I will note that they also retain their user rights. Tali64 also has a global sysop request while joining WikiTide, so I wouldn’t characterize it as a “power grab” in any manner and would advise you to see my response to Zppix’s oppose.
    Hope that helps, happy to answer any clarifying questions needed. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 01:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7.  Strongest oppose Hat collecting --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 22:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8.  Weak oppose BrandonWM can help as sysop, but I don't think he's ready yet. AlPaD (talk) 14:42, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9.  Strong support I have never had any problems with this User, and if they are one of the most trusted Users here, they should be given permissions. Commetia/Kazakhar (talk/Contact) 20:22, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Glossary[edit source]

Term Definition Related Information
IBAN Interaction ban w:WP:IBAN

Zppix (Bureaucrat)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Successful -- Void Whispers 21:28, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zppix (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Bureaucrat
Reason: I am running for Bureaucrat because due to the volunteer shortage we have within Miraheze as a whole at the moment, it has left Meta without any bureaucrats, and by doing so has introduced issues with local Meta governance, such as the inability to enact community requested changes to Meta itself, such as enabling extensions, changing user rights within user groups at the request of the community, most notably the inability for anyone to action on groups having ability to do actions that they otherwise should not be able to, such as changing content models on pages disruptively, and finally the inability for Meta to handle their own administrator appointments locally. I believe as a wiki that is the forefront of the Miraheze project as a whole we should be setting an example for the global community, and by having this significant gap in local governance we are not setting a great example for other wikis within the community. Furthermore, considering there are only 2 active stewards for the entire Miraheze community, it is not fair to expect them to also take on the duty of handling the local governance of Meta. Some background information on myself, I'm Zppix, I've been apart of the Miraheze community for 6 years, over those 6 years, I've held various global and local permissions, including wikicreator (since 2017), formally held a position as a Global Sysop within CVT, formally ran a global Proxybot that enforced the No open proxy policy (around 2018 until approx 2020), former MediaWiki Administrator within SRE, former SSL Admin within SRE, current Meta sysop (since 2019), I am also one of the users involved in the effort to keep Miraheze up and running, I am a consul on the Public Test Wiki (since 2019), and a bureaucrat and sysop on Miraheze's Developer Wiki. Outside of Miraheze, I hold rollback, pending changes reviewer, page mover, and new page reviewer rights on English Wikipedia, and autopatrolled on Wikimedia Commons, and Wikimedia's Meta-Wiki. I am the former Project Lead (later on rejoining as the Ethics Advisor) and founder of what became known as FOSSBots, I also have done volunteer technical contributions to both Wikimedia (see MediaWiki's credits) and Miraheze. Outside of any wikis, I am an executive assistant to the executive director for a non-profit organization, and an assistant front-end supervisor in retail. Thank you for consideration.

Questions for candidate[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Support Trusted. Meta needs bureaucrats. Zppix is currently the most active administrator at Meta. It is good for the Meta community that he will be a bureaucrat. --1108-Kiju/Talk 09:14, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Support Zppix has been a part of the Miraheze community for a long time, and I have no doubt that he'll do well as a bureaucrat. Tali64³ (talk) 17:52, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3.  Support Zppix has the experience and longevity to make a good bureaucrat fro Meta. The role also seems to fit his role in keeping Miraheze afloat. Jph2 (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4.  Support Per above. AlPaD (talk) 06:19, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5.  Strongest support I put my absolute trust that Zppix will do absolutely excellent as a wiki bureaucrat. -- Bukkit[cetacean needed] 12:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6.  Strong support Redmin Contributions CentralAuth (talk) 12:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7.  Strongest support Trusted, very helpful. Legroom (talk) 08:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8.  Support Meta needs a bureaucrat. And, Zppix has already done much to keep Miraheze together.
    --- Imamy (talk) 03:13, 9 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9.  Strongest support Zppix is active in the Miraheze community,support Zppix as the bureaucrat of Miraheze. --Honglan233 (talk) 11:51, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10.  Support --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  01:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11.  Support as a need for further functionaries exists, and Zppix intends to head this platform in the long term. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 16:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Jph2 (Wiki creator)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Successful -- Void Whispers 21:34, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jph2 (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator
Reason: Since the spring exodus of volunteer staff from Miraheze, I've considered how I could volunteer to help out. I don't really have the technical expertise for a role like steward but I could be a wiki creator. I didn't put my name forward until now since some previous nominations by others were opposed for a general feeling of not needing more wiki creators at the time. However, Miraheze's future is a little more stable and we continue to accept wiki requests. Having learned no new wiki requests have been acted on for over a week, it appears there is a need for more than 4 wiki creators. And even when prolific creators like Tali643 become active again, I'd be happy to help keep the workload manageable. I also think it just makes sense to have some depth on the bench where we can.

Questions for candidate[edit source]

  1. Hi, please tell us how you would review these requests:
  • Database name: infopediawiki Private: No Description: "We will make pages with information about anything that people pay us to write about."
  • Database name: ruukwarwiki Private: No Description: "This wiki will have information about the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War. It will allow everyone to edit the wiki however they want without anyone moderating the content."
  • Database name: 2021fileswiki Private: No Description: "We will use this wiki to host files for our other wikis hosted on Miraheze."
  • Database name: pythonmirahezewiki Private: No Description: "This wiki will document the Python programming language."

Thank you. Redmin Contributions CentralAuth (talk) 10:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here are my responses for these wiki requests:
  • Infopediawiki: Declined Miraheze does not accept commercial wikis (Content Policy item 1)
  • Ruukwarwiki: Declined Miraheze requires some type of oversight over a wiki (Content Policy item 4) to ensure the wiki is fairly balanced (Content Policy item 3)
  • 2021fileswiki: On hold I would request more information, such as the names of the other wikis and whether this wiki will have any other information besides just the files. I would point out Miraheze does not host file sharing sites and suggest if the other wikis are already interwikied they could just upload the images to the most appropriate one and then link to them there if they're needed on other wikis. And thanks for thinking about conserving Miraheze's limited storage.
  • pythonmirahezewiki: On hold There is already an English language wiki on Python (Pytonia) but it is private. I would encourage the requester to see if they could join that wiki first.
Jph2 (talk) 14:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with regards to infopediawiki and ruukwarwiki but 2021fileswiki can be approved since we do allow "Commons-type wikis" that host images for multiple Miraheze wikis so I would suggest you check if the requester is a bureaucrat on wikis that seem related to the wiki being requested. For pythonmirahezewiki, I see you have put in the effort to check if there was already a wiki about Python, which is really appreciated. I do think, however, that it should be declined due to the subdomain containing "miraheze" which may suggest an official association with Miraheze Limited. I also do not think that we should force them to check with the members of the original wiki since it is private which makes the process harder. I suggest you ask others if you encounter confusing requests should you become a Wiki Creator. Redmin Contributions CentralAuth (talk) 16:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. I did have a concern about miraheze in the "pythonmirahezewiki" name and probably should have noted that. They probably shouldn't use just "pythonwiki" since Python is a registered trademark and their wiki name shouldn't imply an official association there, either. Jph2 (talk) 17:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Support Pppery (talk) 23:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Support Zero problems/concerns with this user/request. So, why not? --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  01:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3.  Support Per above, and since there's a need for more wiki creators. SevenSpheres (talk) 01:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4.  Support Seeing the answers to questions for candidate, I have no concerns. And we need more Wiki Creators c: 17:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
  5.  Support I don't see any concern in the candidate's answer. I think s/he will do well. --1108-Kiju/Talk 11:09, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Redmin (Wiki Creator)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Successful -- Void Whispers 21:34, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redmin (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki Creator
Reason: I previously served in this role but resigned due to drama as we had enough Wiki Creators to carry on without me. And Miraheze was indeed able to keep its great response time up. That, however, is no longer the case as at the time of writing this, we have a backlog going back almost a week which is a far cry from the one we had not too long ago. This seems to have been caused by and too much reliance on a single WC who understandably had to step away for whatever reason and whose workload has been increased due to volunteers leaving a few months ago. I would like to step in to fill the void and while I cannot promise going back to my previous activity level, I will try my best to review wiki requests within a reasonable period of time. I am well aware that there have been updates to the Content Policy since I last had this role and have made sure to read it. Thank you. Redmin Contributions CentralAuth (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Questions for candidate[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Support There's a need for more wiki creators due to Tali64³'s recent inactivity, and Redmin has past experience in this role. SevenSpheres (talk) 17:49, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Support Redmin has previous experience as a wiki creator and should be allowed to step back into that role. Jph2 (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3.  Support Pppery (talk) 23:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4.  Support Experienced, one of the few dedicated long-term users we have left, previously a good WC, so, why not? --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  01:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5.  Support With the current need for more Wiki Creators it's great to have someone willing to contribute and help. Especially that Redmin has experience with the role. 10:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
  6.  Support obviously Legroom (talk) 10:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7.  Support experienced, trusted --1108-Kiju/Talk 15:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Edibleflowers (Bureaucrat)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 Request withdrawn by OP in this diff. Tali64³ (talk | contributions) 15:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edibleflowers (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Bureaucrat
Reason:

Questions for candidate[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Oppose User registered only 24 hours ago, their only edit on Meta is this permission request, and they don't meet the requirements to be a bureaucrat (according to the the official Meta policy page, a user must be a Meta administrator before they can become a bureaucrat). You can still help out on Meta without any advanced permissions; once you have a good amount of experience, you can apply for other roles (such as patroller). Tali64³ (talk | contributions) 15:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Oppose for exactly the same reasons as Tali643 stated. Jph2 (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Segugio (Administrator)[edit source]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 Not done, unsuccessful request per consensus. Zppix (Meta | talk to me) 12:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Segugio (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Administrator
Reason:
Voglio migliorare la wiki con nuove pagine e collegamenti

Questions for candidate[edit source]

Discussion[edit source]

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

  1.  Neutral idk, maybe? not sure whether to support this request. OrangeStar (talk) 17:32, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2.  Oppose I don't think meta really needs new pages or links as implied in the stated reason. Also, Segugio's account is only 34 days old. I think they probably need more time with the project before taking on a role like meta administrator. – Jph2 (talk) 20:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3.  Oppose Per above. AlPaD (talk) 07:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://meta.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=350595"