Meta:Requests for permissions

Requests for Permissions This page is for requesting permissions that can be granted on this wiki. For rights that don't add advanced permissions (like autopatrolled and confirmed) please just leave a note on Meta:Administrators' noticeboard. For rights on another wiki, please take up the matter with the local community. Here you can leave requests for the following permissions. The community will discuss your request and then a bureaucrat or Steward will close the request, granting rights upon closure of successful requests. Administrator Bot flag Bureaucrat Wiki creator Notes: In most cases, Rights may only be granted after a request lasted for at least 7 days, and no less than 70% of the votes (only support and oppose are votes) are support votes. Some permissions have their own criteria. Although anonymous users may express their opinions, logging out to leave additional comments or otherwise abusing multiple accounts (including IP addresses), is not allowed. CheckUser and Oversight rights will not be granted except under exceptional circumstances. Please leave a note on the Stewards' noticeboard if you would like more information. 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]
Archive 1 – until 15 May 2016 Archive 2 – until 8 May 2017 Archive 3 – until 12 August 2018 Archive 4 – until 23 February 2020 Archive 5 – until 22 October 2020 Archive 6 – until 17 April 2021 Archive 7 – until 12 November 2021 Archive 8 – until 21 February 2022 Archive 9 – until 12 October 2022 Archive 10 – until 2 December 2022 Archive 11 – current

Tali64³ (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. Most of the neutrals lean towards opposition thus meaning that this request does not have the support required. The requestor is encouraged to reach out to current wiki creators to 'learn the ropes' better before re-requesting the permission in the future. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 06:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Tali64³ (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator
Reason: Recently, I've noticed an influx of unhandled wiki requests in Special:RequestWikiQueue. At the time I am writing this, there are 64 unhandled wiki requests, enough to fill two pages, with some going back several months. Miraheze currently only has 10 wiki creators (7 if you count those that have actually created wikis in the past 3 months, but discount Raidarr, who will not be available after a few days). I've been on Miraheze for over 3 years at the time of writing and have made over 8,000 global edits (including on wikis that are currently lost to db141). I have a pretty good understanding of the Content Policy and have written the guide to writing wiki requests, which outlines what will and will not be approved when describing wiki requests, so I feel that I am qualified for this role.

Questions for candidate

Here are some wiki requests for you to answer. OrangeStar (talk) 18:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

1. Database name: daowiki Name: DAOWiki Private: No Comment: We are a group of entrepreneurs and we want to make a wiki about decentralized governance, the future of project governance in the Internet.
2. Database name: qualitipediawiki Name: Qualitipedia Meta Private: No Comment: It's unfair that this wiki was closed, I didn't even get the chance to participate in the vote. Reopen or I'll leave Miraheze forever!!!!!!!!!!
3. Database name: poltruthwiki Name: TruthWiki Private: No Comment: A hand-picked collection of threads from /pol/ that expose the truth of this world.
4. Database name: allywiki Name: Ally Exposed Private: No Comment: An expose of the hypocritical wokes.
5. Database name: fourteenwiki Name: 1488 Private: No Comment: For us.
6. Database name: diywiki Name: DIY Private: No Comment: A collection of some DIY projects I've done. Will also contain instructions on how I made them.
7. Database name: librewiki Name: Libre Wikipedia Private: No Comment: We're a group of people tired of the dictatorship of Wikipedia admins, so we will fork the English Wikipedia and allow it to run in the basis of freedom, without fascistic admins.
8. Database name: worstuserswiki Name: Worst Users Wiki Private: No Comment: A wiki for the worst users in all wikis.

1. I would probably hold this request for more information. The request doesn't explain what the scope (the range of content the wiki will host) is. Additionally, the legal status of DAOs is unclear, but from what I've researched, they're not illegal anywhere.

   I would've declined it as a scammy wiki (I mean, would we host a wiki for Nigerian princes?). "We are a group of entrepreneurs" + crypto stuff just screams scammer to me, but I don't have any problems with your approach. I would also like to note that I based this question on a recent request that was declined following a private conversation between wiki creators apparently, see Special:RequestWikiQueue/28638. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

2. I would decline this as a CP 5 violation (no toxic communities). Additionally, qualitipediawiki is already taken.

   No issues. You could also decline it because it was closed by the local community. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

3. Decline as another CP 5 violation. 4chan is infamous for the trolls it harbors.

   No issues. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

4. I'm leaning towards declining this request as a CP 3 violation (no hate wikis). However, there's not enough information to decide for sure.

   Would've declined it instantly, but no problems with your approach. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

5. I would hold this request for more elaboration. I could also decline it as a CP 3 violation, given that "1488" is a Nazi symbol, but it's not clear if the wiki will be simply for documenting the Nazi party or if it will host Nazi propaganda (the request suggests the latter).

   Would've declined it instantly, there's also really nothing to clarify here in my opinion, someone looking to start a wiki documenting nazis would know better that using that wiki name + that comment. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

6. I would probably approve this, but I would ask the requester to change the name and subdomain first, as "diy.miraheze.org" would probably be too generic.

   Partly agree, don't really see any issues with the subdomain. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

   "diy.miraheze.org" suggests that the wiki will be about DIY projects in general, which this request is clearly not. The requester is asking for a wiki documenting their DIY projects only, so "mydiyprojects.miraheze.org" would be a better subdomain for this request. Tali64³ (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

   Changed my mind, you're right. OrangeStar (talk) 20:20, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

7. I would decline this as a CP 11 violation (no wiki forks).

   Agree. CP 4 is also a concern here. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

8. I would decline this as a CP 3 violation. Wikis focusing on bad Internet users have caused lots of problems in the past.

   I agree. This is also a kinda reception wiki. OrangeStar (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Tali64³ (talk) 19:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

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

---

1. Requests aren't being handled because there's no one to, it's just because of the db141 issue that occurred once again. See Tech:SRE noticeboard. All wiki creations are held off until further notice but we are very aware of the queue. Also note that a lot of requests are people who re-requested a wiki on db141 and when they do that, we get a database error trying to view the request so those requests are stuck in a limbo that we can't do anything about, only a sysadmin can manually decline them. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 15:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

   Oh, okay. I still feel like Miraheze could benefit from more wiki creators, though. Tali64³ (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

2. Support Current tech issues notwithstanding, I still believe that we need more wiki creators, and I trust Tali's experience and judgment in this regard. Sario528 (talk) 16:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
3.  Neutral Prior to the recent bout of incidents, wiki request queue time was already much improved over historical trend, requests were getting actions taken within hours of filing (with exceptions for iffy requests that required group attention), so I'm not sold on the argument that more WC volunteers are urgently needed. Remaining neutral though until test questions are asked + answered.
   Weak oppose changing vote given concerns raised by others + review of history --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
4. I'm leaning  Neutral as I'm unconvinced in the realms of judgement and observation, both crucial to being an effective wiki creator. I don't think you're a risk per se and could probably do fine with coaching and communication with active volunteers; I won't be terribly concerned if your request passes even though I cannot offer an affirming vote. The linked article stands out as being overwhelmingly not written by experienced wiki creators; for the most part I think the spirit is okay but the article is bloated beyond efficient reading. In other words, not a credential. As noted, the open requests are a symptom of current issues. This is where communication/observation are essential talents; they are far more effective if they make an effort of linking up with SRE/Stewards proactively, as to know what is going on and what may affect their role. The wiki creators who don't do this are usually absent noticeably weaker in their roles. I do affirm the observation that we have few acting wiki creators: I will be resigning very soon, unable to perform any service for Miraheze for some time. That leaves NotAracham, DarkMatterMan, and Agent typically handling the bulk of requests at a given time. Everyone else is a supplement at best. There is a market for competent wiki creators to slim this field. The problem is that we have many wiki creators on paper; few stick around and some of those who do have issues actually following what I already stated, and so either create more work or hardly make a difference. In practice it is at most 1-2 wiki creators acting at a given time, with maybe 1-2 advising/observing in that time. This is why I would like to settle for a confident plus, and not a murky 'could be okay' candidate. It's easy to get okay fluff candidates but seemingly very difficult to get ones who truly deal with the process. This request is superficial and based on errors; ideally, more should be expected for this to pass. Perhaps adequate answers to scenarios would help or more meaningful observations in replies/the request would help. --Raidarr (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
5. I don't really know here, I don't see any immediate issues regarding the questions I gave them (others feel free to ask them more, but keep in mind they already answered eight, don't bombard them with a trillion requests), but still I can't comfortably support this. It may just be a case that the user is more active on other wikis rather than on Meta, or that I'm still a newbie around here, but I just don't know enough about this user to support this request. Please see User:OrangeStar/On edit counts and roles to understand more about what I look for in these requests, it may help explain where I'm coming from. OrangeStar (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

   As mentioned in my reasoning for this request, I've made over 8,000 contributions to Miraheze, 368 of which are on Meta. I check Meta every day, but only contribute when I can give good advice to someone that needs help. Tali64³ (talk) 20:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

   Your first part misses what OS made explicit in his linked page: edits are not created equal (a point which summarizes both of his sections really). If mere edit count was enough others like DMM would be a Steward by now. For your part I think you are one of the more relatively positive forces on Meta, but have a ways to go in learning and involving yourself in the ways necessary to be suitable in this role, such as more genuine meta/global participation. --Raidarr (talk) 13:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

6.  Neutral I can't really think of any major reason to oppose this request, but I will agree with the others here. --Blad (talk • contribs • global) 13:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
7. Weak oppose In agreement with the other comments above my main concern would be that it does not seem certain that if the candidate were to be accepted he/she would be active on Meta and not mostly other wikis. --DeeM28 (talk) 07:50, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

   I'm actually starting to increase my activity on Meta, but thank you for expressing your concerns with that. Tali64³ (talk) 16:59, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

8.  Neutral I'm not convinced fully with regards to judgement calls, as Raidarr pointed out. However, I have noted the consistent activity on Meta and general helpfulness with the community, so I can't bring myself to oppose this. If this RfP does not succeed, I think the user could benefit from learning a bit more about the wiki creator position and familiarizing themselves a bit better with the Content Policy. That being said, I wish them all the best. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 08:27, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
9. Oppose per DeeM28 --小美粉粉 (T - C - S) 1004065811 bytes of data NOTE: Do not {{ping}} me! 14:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
10. Support Per his/her action in usual(helping,etc).Seems a user who is worth becoming wc. by Buel ·Talk·e-mail 23:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
11. Support From what I have seen they seem good to me. Seems to like helping out. --Godric (talk) 06:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

---

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

Farmer Cars (Wiki creator)

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

Speedy closing as unsuccessful per WP:SNOW and also per Meta:UCP. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 23:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Farmer Cars (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator
Reason: Want to be an wiki creator due to wanting to be one.

Discussion

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

---

• Strongest oppose with the request reason alone being one reason, beyond today I have never heard of this user. Zppix (Meta | talk to me) 19:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
• Strongest oppose There's no reason to support. by Buel ·Talk·e-mail 19:29, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose According to your CentralAuth, you've only been on Miraheze for two weeks and have only made 27 edits. Additionally, the need for wiki creators isn't that high, seeing as how requests are handled within hours, something that was pointed out in my request for wiki creator above. Tali64³ (talk) 22:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

  Something I forgot to add is that simply wanting to be a wiki creator is not sufficient enough to actually become one. Tali64³ (talk) 22:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

• Strongest oppose per above --Blad (talk • contribs • global) 22:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose Per Tali64³. You have been on Miraheze for only 2 weeks and your reason to become a wiki creator is pretty weak. Switzerland (talk༆) 22:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

---

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

Elijah Wilder (Wiki creator)

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

With this request being your only edit on Meta, this request has no chance to succeed. If you would like to request a wiki please see this page. Otherwise, much more experience and time spent at Miraheze is necessary in order to apply for wikicreator.  Unsuccessful. Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Elijah Wilder (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator
Reason: I would love to help out people but managing their requests. It sounds like a fun role and I can help the other wikicreators with it too!

Discussion

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

---

---

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

Justman (Wiki creator, Translation administrator)

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

 CLOSE: Closing this request per Meta:UCP. As stated below, the account is not even a day old (and has less than 200 edits) and is requesting advanced permissions like wiki creator and translation administrator, which aren't given to many users. This request has absolutely no chance of succeeding. As such, this request is closed. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 23:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Justman (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator, Translation administrator
Reason: Hello, lovely community 🙂 i would love to be a wiki creator and translation administrator, as i love translating and releasing pages to translations (the latter would be so if i could 😅). Also, i can pretty much imagine manage Wiki applications...

Discussion

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

---

1. I love your eagerness and strength, but from what I can tell, your account is only 72 minutes ago as of this writing and most importantly, we have processes that we use to appoint/vote for Wiki creators. Translation administrator role can be granted by a sysop according to their discretion. So why don't you calm down, get involved, feel at home and request later on when it's appropriate enough? --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  20:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

One have to remember that i lost my main account, this is my 2nd acc. Justman (talk) 20:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Justman What was your original account? --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  20:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Justman10000 Justman (talk) 21:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Although there's currently no CA for the account, yet, the account looks like one that is fairly new too. --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  21:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

My main account? Justman (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah. --  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  21:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

My main account has existed for 2 months... Justman (talk) 21:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

You're right. Ugochimobi messed up the link to your main account's CA he provided; this is the correct one. Tali64³ (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes Justman (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

As I said, even though even my main account has only been around for a short time... I would still like to be Wiki creator and Translation administrator Justman (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Strongest oppose This user has only a little exprrience.Not trusted yet. by Buehl106 ·Talk·e-mail 23:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

---

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

Tali64³ (Wiki creator)

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

There exists consensus to promote with admonishment from voters to seek peer review when unsure. Congratulations! Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 03:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

---

Tali64³ (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Wiki creator
Reason: Since my last request for wiki creator was based on a database issue causing wiki creation to be put on hold, I have a different reason for making this request. Most wiki creations right now are being done by only one wiki creator: NotAracham. While NotAracham has done a great job with clearing out the wiki requests queue, the fact that Miraheze's wiki creation system currently relies mostly on only one person is a problem. For example, if NotAracham decided to take a wikibreak or had personal issues that kept him away from Miraheze, then wiki creations would be significantly slower as a result. Most wiki creators right now also have other roles within Miraheze, even the two most active wiki creators beside NotAracham, DarkMatterMan4500 (CVT) and Agent Isai (SRE and Steward).

If you don't know me, then hello! I'm Tali64³, and I usually help others on Meta whenever I can. I have nearly 9,500 global edits on Miraheze and have had my account since September 2019. I've written the guide to writing wiki requests and have a good understanding of the Content Policy. I've read the wiki creators' guide, so I know what to do if I become a wiki creator.

Wiki requests currently take from a few minutes to a few hours (up to a day or more in some cases) to be handled, which may cause some users to choose other platforms that allow for fast wiki creation. My goal as a wiki creator is to bring down handling times to around 5 to 15 minutes whenever I can, so users who want wikis on Miraheze won't have to wait long. Additionally, some wiki requests that are put on hold never get approved even when the users who made the requests fixes the issues with them. I hope to fix this issue as much as I can as well.

Even if this request isn't successful, thank you for considering me.

Questions for candidate

1. What is your belief that the wiki creation "largely relies on a single person" based on? I would have opposed NotAracham's wiki creator request had I been around for it, not because of them but to avoid repeats of the Dmehus issue (ironically, even though my account is older than Dmehus's, I got wiki creator from a nomination from them). Even if NotAracham might check requests regularly (sometimes even just a few minutes before someone else), I don't see any evidence that they would be much slower without them. Naleksuh (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I don't see how the comparison with Dmehus is pertinent and seeing as you've mentioned it before, I'd be curious if you'd explain what "the Dmehus issue" in this case is. Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   If you look in the farmer log, most wiki requests are currently handled by NotAracham, with only a few being handled by other wiki creators, including yourself. Most active wiki creators (including NotAracham) have other responsibilities related to Miraheze, but in NotAracham's case, the only other role he has on Miraheze is global interwiki administrator, which doesn't require a lot of time each day to do well. I've heard that he was a moderator in Miraheze's Discord, but since I don't use that platform, I don't know if he still is. Tali64³ (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   ​ I'm really not sure how this is an issue. Tali64 has had their account for over 3 years. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 17:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I never said it was an issue. I said was concerned about the statement that it "mostly relies on a single person". Naleksuh (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   See my reply above. Tali64³ (talk) 17:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Setting aside the continued comparisons of my tenure/grant date to another user, I agree that 'me handling a lot of requests' isn't sufficient rationale.

   There isn't a set SLA for wiki requests (though we aim for a few hours at most) and recent events where requests have taken days for WC action are a result of MH technical issues, not WC dereliction. That said, I'll reserve my support/oppose based on requester answers.

   --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I've already left my answers to the questions Reception123 left below. Tali64³ (talk) 18:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I just added a few more Qs w/ some extra nuances. :)

   --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Responded to those as well. Tali64³ (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

2. A wiki (terriblehousedesignswiki) with the description: "A wiki about terrible house designs which lists good and bad qualities of houses" is requested. What would you do and why? Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I would decline this as a reception wiki, the creation of which has been prohibited per this RfC. Tali64³ (talk) 17:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

3. A wiki (mattsnoteswiki) with the description: "A private wiki for some personal notes" is requested. What would you do and why? Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   While this wiki request doesn't have enough information to be accepted if it were a public wiki, this would be a private wiki, which are held to a lower standard. I would probably ask for more information to be on the safe side. Tali64³ (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   That's fine. If it's a private wiki that's clearly personal I'd probably approve even if a bit vague, but asking for more information never hurts either if you feel uncomfortable approving. Reception123 (talk) (C) 18:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

4. A wiki (russiaukrainewarwiki) with the description: "A wiki about the war Russia started in 2022 against Ukraine describing the main battles and events" is requested. What would you do and why? Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   I would ask the requestor for more information. The scope of the wiki is not clear enough for this request to be accepted. Tali64³ (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

5. A wiki (jackvilleneighbourhoodwiki) with the description: "A wiki with information about each resident of Jackville Neighbourhood" is requested. What would you do and why? Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Decline this as a Content Policy violation. The wiki, if accepted, would likely violate provision 3 of the policy (high potential for rumors and hate) and provision 10 (the wiki would likely create problems such as conflicts between the residents of the neighborhood, and there are privacy concerns here as well). Tali64³ (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   For clause 3 that's probably the right approach, though if they clarified what kind of information would be posted it might be able to be approved. Regarding Clause 10, it says "make it difficult for other wikis so it wouldn't apply to conflicts between neighbors. And also, as a general rule due to the broad and vague nature of clause 10 it shouldn't be invoked too readily. Reception123 (talk) (C) 18:08, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Some residents of the neigborhood may decide to create accounts on Miraheze to vandalize the wiki with false information about their neighbors, causing the conflict to spill over to Miraheze and ultimately creating more work for Stewards/CVT. Tali64³ (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

6. A wiki (encyclopedianarchywiki) with the description: "A wiki where people can write whatever they want with no specific rules, for fun!" is requested. What would you do and why? Reception123 (talk) (C) 17:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Decline as another Content Policy violation, specifically provision 4 (no anarchy wikis). Tali64³ (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Some additional questions for you, a heads-up that these are not intentionally trick questions, but are designed to understand the rationale for how you would proceed

1. A wiki (simplesandboxwiki) with the description: "Wikipedia is too hard! I want to take wikipedia's articles, but make them simple!" is requested. What would you do and why? --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
2. A wiki (countrycubewiki) with the description: "Squiggly mouse drawings for all my friends, so we can document the funny countries and funny peoplethings with no mean mods telling us that we're making bad stuff!" is requested. What would you do and why? --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
3. A wiki (fauciwiki) with the description: "To document every facet of the life of Dr. Anthony Fauci, things like where he went to medical school and the people he talks to." is requested. What would you do and why? --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
4. A wiki (dustwiki) with the description: "Dust is made of fine particles of solid matter.[1] On Earth, it generally consists of particles in the atmosphere that come from various sources such as soil lifted by wind (an aeolian process), volcanic eruptions, and pollution." is requested. What would you do and why? --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
5. A wiki (mirahezehelpwiki) set to private with the description: "A wiki to document my helpful friend group and the cool stuff they get up to." is requested. What would you do and why? --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   1. I would decline this per provision 11 of the Content Policy (no wiki forks, Miraheze or Wikimedia).
   2. I would probably ask the requestor what they mean by "mean mods". Then, depending on their answer, I would either tell them to resolve the issue locally or, if impossible, bring it to the Stewards' noticeboard. I would probably put the wiki request on hold during this time.
   3. I would probably approve this request. Whenever wiki requests document people, you have to keep in mind provision 3 of the Content Policy (hate wikis are not allowed). However, the wiki appears to be simply documenting Fauci in an encyclopedic manner.
   4. I would ask the requestor for more information. Although the request has plenty of information about its subject, it has zero information about the wiki itself would contain. This request appears to be entirely copied text from Wikipedia, so I could also decline as a troll request; however, I would assume good faith (the requestor may have thought that copying text from Wikipedia would adequately describe the wiki they wanted) and ask for more info.
   5. I would ask the requestor to change the subdomain of the wiki. "mirahezehelp" implies that the wiki is associated with Miraheze when it's not.

   Tali64³ (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   1. Great stuff, also worth noting that the requested subdomain is in use, though the interface would let you know that. Additionally, this example user's comments suggest inexperience and they are requesting a wiki with a massive scope. While not strict policy, if this was approvable it would be worth asking clarifying questions on exact scope and if they already had fellow contributors lined up to assist.
   2. This one definitely needs follow up questions, as it's potentially a fork in intent if not in name. It's also worth noting that this genre of wiki sometimes trade in unflattering-bordering-on-racist stereotypes of countries/ethnicities, the "bad stuff" they want to do might fall afoul of other content policy beyond the 'no forks' rule.
   3. Biographical wikis generally need extra scrutiny, agreed. An additional point: "every facet of his life" and "the people he talks to" should flag this for further scrutiny given the unfortunately-controversial status of this person in some US political circles.
   4. 100% agreed, passion and a thorough definition borrowed from wikipedia aren't a substitute for explaining actual scope and intent of the wiki. :)
   5. Agreed. While the description itself is vague, it's a private wiki so the only sticking point is the chosen subdomain.

   Thanks for providing your answers!

   Worth knowing: we have an active wiki-creator chat on Discord/IRC where fellow WCs are more than happy to give a second look on requests and provide guidance. This was invaluable to me starting out and I highly recommend joining should you be approved.

   --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 19:50, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

6. Do you see yourself as active in the foreseeable future? Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 19:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Yes. I don't see anything that will hinder my activity for a long time. Tali64³ (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

7. Below are a few wiki requests which I'd like your opinion on. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 19:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

   Wiki name: "Polandball Wiki Users" Wiki database name: "pbwuserswiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Wiki documents all users within the Polandball Wiki community, their accomplishments, goals, controversy, and history"

   Wiki name: "My notes" Wiki database name: "948934wiki" Visibility: Private Description: "Private notes for myself"

   Wiki name: "Final Fantasy Wiki" Wiki database name: "subdomainwiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Final Fantasy is a game franchise created by Hironobu Sakaguchi and developed and owned by Square Enix. We want to make a new wiki about this on Miraheze because we see you offer great service. Thank you for reading!"

   Wiki name: "Polcompball Reloaded" Wiki database name: "polcompballreloadedwiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Polcompball Reloaded will be a spin-off of Polcompball which will allow for more self-insert OCs and less left propaganda that's inundating the wiki. We'll let users make their own ideology balls and won't restrict them as much as PCB and PCBA do."

   Wiki name: "Grand Grimoire Wiki" Wiki database name: "grandgrimoirewiki" Visibility: Public Description: "OC group. We saw your service and we would love to have a wiki on it. You offer a lot more flexibility than other wiki hosts so we chose you over other hosts like Fandom from where we come from. We like that your host lets us choose who can edit, our old wiki has lots of spam and that doesn't let us edit in peace. Hope you approve ~"

   Wiki name: "Minecraft Mods" Wiki database name: "mcmodswiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Documenting Minecraft mods, both client and server plugins, in an encyclopedic manner"

   Wiki name: "Научная вики" Wiki database name: "sciencewiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Научная вики будет посвящена только научным темам, полученным из официальных источников в академических кругах."

   Wiki name: "Everyone Wiki" Wiki database name: "everyonewiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Wikipedia but without the notability requirements"

   Wiki name: "Jessica's Great Eurovision Song Contest" Wiki database name: "jgescwiki" Visibility: Public Description: "I want to keep track of my own Eurovision-like song contest. This wiki will be used just by me and a few other people."

   Wiki name: "Super Smash Bros Wiki" Wiki database name: "smashbroswiki" Visibility: Public Description: "Super Smash Bros is a game made by Nintendo. I want to document every aspect of it, from it's pre-release history to its newest DLC fighters."

   Wiki name: "4chan /b/ general" Wiki database name: "4chanbgenwiki" Visibility: Public Description: "/b/ is a random place and we thought it would be funny if we made a wiki documenting everything they've ever done, classic regulars, and others."

1. I would decline this as a Content Policy violation. The wiki will likely violate provision 3 of the Content Policy (no hate wikis), and provision 5 (no toxic wikis) is an issue as well.
2. I would ask the requestor why they chose the subdomain they did. The request also doesn't have enough information to determine if it'll violate the Content Policy or not, so I would ask for more information.
3. I would decline this request because there's already a wiki documenting Final Fantasy. Even if there weren't, the subdomain is invalid (wikis cannot have a subdomain of subdomain.miraheze.org).
4. I'm leaning toward declining this. Provision 11 of the Content Policy (no wiki forks) might be an issue here, and the wiki may violate provision 5 (no toxic wikis).
5. I would ask for more information. Even though this request has plenty of information, that information is not related to the wiki itself.
6. I would also ask for more information. There's not enough information about the scope of the wiki.
7. (Translation: "The science wiki will only focus on scientific topics sourced from official sources in academia.") I would ask for more information. Additionally, the subdomain is an issue here (scienceru.miraheze.org is a better subdomain for this wiki)
8. Decline because there are several Wikipedia clones on Miraheze and ask the requestor to contribute to them instead.
9. Probably approve, there's no issues with the request, although information is somewhat lacking.
10. Decline because there's already a wiki about Smash Bros. at that subdomain and ask the requestor to contribute to that wiki instead.
11. Decline per provision 5 of the Content Policy (no toxic wikis).

Tali64³ (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Just a pointer about the Final Fantasy Wiki: I disagree with the rationale for the Final Fantasy wiki. There is no policy disallowing approving a wiki even if a wiki for it exists elsewhere. It is good to keep this in mind as else, we'd be declining tons of wikis under the guise that they exist elsewhere such as on Fandom, ShoutWiki, etc. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 04:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Minor point of order, https://ffwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page is a valid wiki under miraheze hosting that would trigger content policy considerations, but the wiki linked in rationale is external. For future reference, https://wikistats.wmcloud.org/display.php?t=mh is a great resource for finding these outliers.

--NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 06:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Agent Isai: If you scroll down to the bottom of Square Enix Wiki's main page, you'll see a "Hosted by Miraheze" label. However, the existence of the wiki NotAracham mentioned would also be sufficient grounds for declining. Tali64³ (talk) 12:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

1. You were recently involved in a dispute on the Stewards' noticeboard regarding the content on your wiki, specifically the fact that your wiki hosted a number of pornographic elements which because cause of concern for the anonymous IP editor. Subsequently, you announced your wiki was moving off Miraheze via a sitenotice and published a notice about the situation. While you did initially resolve the dispute on the Stewards' noticeboard, during the dispute, you chose to go ahead with moving your wiki off Miraheze. While this itself is not an issue, the fact that this was done in order to evade scrutiny (arguably while under the cloud) before the dispute had been settled properly (as it was later on) is concerning. As a wiki creator, you are held to a higher standard of conduct under the Volunteer Conduct Policy and Miraheze Spaces Code of Conduct. Tell me now, if you were involved in a dispute where one of your actions was flagged for review on the Stewards' noticeboard, how would you react? Would you attempt to evade scrutiny, act in manners consistent with WP:CLOUD, or something else?
2. Should your behavior fall below that which is expected of a wiki creator, would you resign in order to uphold the integrity of the position? Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 04:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

   Agent Isai To better articulate this question, I believe a fairer, more direct question would be, If warned by a Steward more than once regarding severely questionable wiki approvals, would you agree to either (a) resign your position, if asked by a Steward, or offer to resign, in order to uphold the position's integrity, or to (b) not contest any Steward removing your permission, as allowed by the policy? Dmehus (talk) 05:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

3. What are your views on creating wikis for yourself? Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 04:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
4. If confronted with a conflict-of-interest, how would you deal with it? Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 04:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

1. I had actually been planning to move to independent hosting before that dispute happened, but it caused me to make the announcement. I was concerned that a Steward would start monitoring the content of my wiki or put a warning about NSFW content, even though my wiki's purpose is not solely for that type of content. I eventually gave up with the move and decided to stick with Miraheze. My intention was not to evade scrutiny, but I would not attempt to evade scrutiny if elected wiki creator.
2. In the case that my behavior falls below the standards of a wiki creator, I would offer to resign my position.
3. I would make a request like any other user and let another wiki creator approve it.
4. I would let someone else deal with the situation.

Tali64³ (talk) 12:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

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

Support

1. Weak support After reviewing both rationale in this round of answers to questions and the candidate's meta presence, I have been sufficiently swayed from my previous weak oppose on the last request for permissions. While a few answers give me pause, I have confidence that the candidate can be successful in the role if they leverage the combined knowledge of the broader WC team on potential grey areas. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 02:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
2. Weak support per largely the same analysis as NotAracham. The response to the first question indeed puzzled me, for a couple reasons. Firstly because I haven't been that active as a wiki creator specifically of late and, two, because I don't necessarily see a problem with one wiki creator handling most the wiki requests. That being said, that's always a reason to encourage more competent and knowledgeable wiki creator volunteers. Some of your responses do give me a bit a pause, but to say we've "put you through the paces," so to speak, is indeed an understatement. I've observed your added knowledge and experience over the years and am generally pleased with what I've seen. Crucially, though, your responses show strong caution and a willingness to consult with other wiki creators or Stewards where unsure. So, +1 from me. Dmehus (talk) 02:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
3. Support I am supporting only if other wiki creators train you slightly more, but I believe you have the knowledge, motivation, skills, and drive to be a wiki creator. Collei (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
4. Weak support It is not necessary for me to repeat the points made by NotAracham and Dmehus but I largely agree with what they have said. Based on your responses I would also encourage you to pay special attention to the balance that is needed between being confident that wikis will comply with policy but also not being excessively strict and declining too many wikis without giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming good faith on the part of the requestors. As long as this necessary balance is understood I do not have any particular issues with this. --DeeM28 (talk) 09:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
5. Partial support @Tali64³ is one of the first users I've encountered in the Community, RfC and comments recently (i.e. in the last few months). I can't say that NotAracham is the only one looking at wiki requests, our wiki creators like Naleksuh, Reception123, DarkMatterMan4500 are also looking at requests, if only a little bit. Your comments are also very satisfactory, but I would like to see you more active in Miraheze, I would like to see you help people in Discord, IRC, and give a comment/suggestion about the problem. I use my weak support by suggesting you to participate in RfCs. If I see you nice and active in the future application, I will always support young users like you (including me). Never lose hope, keep being active 💪. Best regards, Hey Türkiye ^Message? 11:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
6. Weak support I think that the questions submitted by other users were for the most part satisfactory and this user will be a great addition to the wiki creator team. I would note that there are some errors in the questions, but with a bit of time and experience, it's nothing that can't be fixed. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 15:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
7. Weak support per above --Blad (talk • contribs • global) 13:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose - I voted for the support before request.but I believe the reason for request seems very unclear to me.Requests for wiki creation were invariably coped even if there were fewer WCs. by Buehl106 ·Talk·e-mail 09:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

   Can you explain how my reasoning is unclear? In my request, I gave several valid reasons for becoming a wiki creator (for example, only one person is handling most wiki requests, which can be an issue in the future, say if that user were to take a wikibreak or was kept away from Miraheze because of personal issues). Tali64³ (talk) 11:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

   "Becoming wc because of few active them" shouldn't be reason.(I felt anxiety when I saw this request.)I've already shown you why I oppose.Thank you. by Buehl106 ·Talk·e-mail 13:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

   Only having a few active wiki creators is actually a reason to support this request, not oppose it. Having fewer active wiki creators is a problem, especially if there's only one person handling wiki requests. As I've stated before, if that one active wiki creator is inactive from Miraheze for any reason, the handling of wiki requests will be slower. Tali64³ (talk) 13:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

2. Oppose per above --小美粉粉 (T - C - S) 1004065811 bytes of data NOTE: Do not {{ping}} me! 12:27, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Comments

---

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

Ugochimobi (Administrator)

Ugochimobi (talk • contribs • page moves • block log • CA • rights log • global rights log • abuselog • farmer log • block)
Group: Administrator
Reason: Hello all, I'd like to request for adminship on Meta. I'm an active member of the Interwiki administrator group here on Meta, have enough cross-wiki experience. As I’m frequently patrolling recent changes on Meta (Being a patroller here too), it would be quite useful to be able to speedy delete nonsense page creations & spam or block vandals & LTAs. I am probably not the most active on this wiki, however I hang out a lot in IRC and could help people in more urgent situations there.--  Joseph  TB  CT  CA  12:53, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

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

---

1. Strong support - Already trusted user as global interwiki administrator. by Buehl106 ·Talk·e-mail 13:17, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

   This comment has nothing to do with this particular request but as a general note I don't how trusting someone enough to be global interwiki administrator has anything to do with Meta sysop. The two roles are completely different and one has significantly more responsibilities and discretion required. Reception123 (talk) (C) 16:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

2. Thank you for volunteering! I agree that you're very active in the interwiki-admin work however, on Meta, there's not really much of a need for additional administrators at the moment. If you're interested in volunteering in another role which requires assistance, I would advise applying for Global rollbacker instead when you've got more cross-wiki vandalism experience as you primarily seek to apply for sysop in order to help in vandalism which is great. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 13:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
3. Strong oppose I agree with NotAracham, Naleksuh, Agent Isai and change my vote. If you apply for a Global Rollbacker, I will gladly vote for it, but there are enough administrators in Meta and more seems unnecessary to me. Best regards Hey Türkiye ^Message? 21:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

   @HeyTürkiye: I didn't vote to support Ugochimobi. I just commented that we don't need more admins and to apply for something else instead. Agent Isai ^{Talk to me!} 17:58, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

   @Agent Isai: Hm, I think there was a translation error, I'm sorry. I decided to change my vote for Ugochimobi from Strongest support to Strong support, so I changed my vote for Ugochimobi from Strongest to Strong, inspired by your advice. Best regards, Hey Türkiye ^Message? 18:05, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

   The templates don't affect the result at all, the strength comes from the discussion. I also don't agree there is "no need" for more sysops (both in the sense that there is no maximum number and in the fact that there is a shortage of action). Naleksuh (talk) 18:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

4. I still cannot forget this.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
5. Oppose Not a personal opposition to the requester but as Agent said, we already have more Meta admins than are needed though there's some debate on this point. In either case, help in other roles would be more useful at this time.
   Assessing the candidate's actual merit, I have seen them work well in the interwiki administrator role, but there are also some concerns regarding past behavior with canvassing for a role as well as a leadership dispute on Famepedia that aren't recent but worth considering.
   If there is a proven need, I'll put some thought into what would be necessary to move my vote to support.
   --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 19:53, 3 February 2023 (UTC)