Steward requests/Permissions: Difference between revisions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 233: Line 233:
==== Hman@ja.wikipedia ====
==== Hman@ja.wikipedia ====
{{sr-request
{{sr-request
|status = <!--don't change this line-->
|status = done<!--don't change this line-->
|domain = ja.wikipedia
|domain = ja.wikipedia
|user name = Hman
|user name = Hman
Line 245: Line 245:
:::: Please.--[[User:Hman|Hman]] ([[User talk:Hman|talk]]) 12:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
:::: Please.--[[User:Hman|Hman]] ([[User talk:Hman|talk]]) 12:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
:::: I confirm pending is no longer needed, just in case it matters any. I have [[:ja:User talk:Hman|notified locally]]. and [[:ja:User:Hman]]'s decision seems firm. --[[User:Whym|whym]] ([[User talk:Whym|talk]]) 12:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
:::: I confirm pending is no longer needed, just in case it matters any. I have [[:ja:User talk:Hman|notified locally]]. and [[:ja:User:Hman]]'s decision seems firm. --[[User:Whym|whym]] ([[User talk:Whym|talk]]) 12:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{done}}, thank you for efforts. <i><b>[[User:Snowolf|<font color = "darkmagenta">Snowolf</font>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Snowolf|<font color = "darkmagenta">How can I help?</font>]]</small></sup></b></i> 12:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


==== Jan Friberg@dawikiquote====
==== Jan Friberg@dawikiquote====

Revision as of 12:43, 12 January 2013

Shortcut:
SRP

This page is for requests to have stewards grant or revoke administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight rights on Wikimedia projects which do not have a local permissions procedure.

Old sections are archived. The list of archives is below.

  • Requests for bot flags are handled at SRB, and requests for global permissions are handled at SRGP.
  • If you are requesting adminship or bureaucratship, and your wiki has a local bureaucrat, submit your request to that user or to the relevant local request page (index).
  • For urgent requests, such as to combat large-scale vandalism on a small wiki, contact a steward in the #wikimedia-stewardsconnect IRC channel. In emergencies, type !steward in the channel to get the attention of stewards. Otherwise, you can type @steward for non-urgent help.

Other than requests to remove your own access or emergencies, please only make requests here after gaining the on-wiki approval of your local community.

Quick navigation: Administrator | Interface administrator | Bureaucrat | CheckUser | Oversight | Removal of access | Miscellaneous | Global permissions

(translate | edit)

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Using this page

1. Place the following code at the bottom of the appropriate section below: 

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = <!-- such as en.wikibooks -->
 |user name = 
 |discussion= 
}}
(your remarks) ~~~~

2. Fill in the values:

  • domain: the wiki's URL domain (like "ex.wikipedia" or "meta.wikimedia").
  • user name: the name of the user whose rights are to be changed (like "Exampleuser"). In case you're requesting access for multiple bots, leave this field blank and give a list of these bots in your remarks
  • discussion: a link to the local vote or discussion about the rights change (for example, "[[ex:Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#ExampleUser]]"). This should normally be for at least one week, but no more than three weeks (if so, you'll need to restart the process).

3. If anything is missing from your request, a steward will request more information.

Confirmation of signing confidentiality agreement

Certain permissions (notably CheckUser and Oversight) additionally require users to sign a confidentiality agreement. Users requesting these permissions must make a request below, and must also sign the confidentiality agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation. The request is placed on hold temporarily, until the receipt has been formally confirmed by the Office.

Requests

COPY THE FOLLOWING CODE to the bottom of the appropriate section below: 

==== Username@xxproject ====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    =
 |user name =
 |discussion= 
}}

Administrator access

Steward requests/Permissions/Sysop-header

Aldar Badmaev@bxr.wikipedia

Status:    On hold

--Gubin (talk) 11:30, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This would have been a temporary admin appointment, but [2] leaves me with great concerns. Personal attacks and vandalism are not acceptable from our administrators. He also appears to be blocked in the only other wiki he's substantially edited [3] for edit warring. Snowolf How can I help? 07:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But... Aldar is the only active native spiker in our wiki, and we need his adminship. And block in other wiki is not the reason for the refusal. For example, I am also permanently blocked in the Russian wiki. So what? I became the administrator of the Buryat wiki, raised activity, brought to the 1000 articles, invited users. Now we have 50 active users and 1115 articles. Thanks for permanently blocked in the Russian wiki man (me). So think.--Gubin (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would like some input from my colleagues, which is why I haven't marked this request as not done, but the personal attack and vandalism on another user's page that I've linked to which took place during this very RfA is most troubling to me. This is not appropriate for an administrator. Snowolf How can I help? 17:10, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure if the users that participated in the rfa were aware of this. How about notify them about it and see if the community has any opinion? --Bencmq (talk) 14:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I just took a look to the two last accounts who voted, and they are obviously not members of this community, judging on their creation date and their number of edits. Some voting accounts were obviously created to vote, and when you know that Губин Михаил, who is making this request, was involved in sockpuppets abuse and canvassing and tried to get adminship on several projects this way, you can't endorse such a request... -- Quentinv57 (talk) 12:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Les Meloures@lb.wiktionary

Status:    On hold

Request for adminship.

Hello, I think this is for the fifth time I make a request. Since beginning I was the only real luxemburgish native speaking member. I am an administrator on Wikpedia:lb since five years, and I don't understand why on wiktionary I'm only granted for temporary adminship. If I'm not active, there is no native luxemburgish speaking user. I don't do this work because I have nothing else to do, but as I was requestet to save the lb: Wiktionary. If you know someone who can do this work better, you may name hime as an administrator. I will never more ask for temporary adminship and continue this requests every six months, like a little boy who asks for gifts. I let you be the judge if an adminship is usefull or not. Best regards --Les Meloures (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think I would agree with this Les Meloures user, especially like the saying: "I will never more ask for temporary adminship and continue this requests every six months, like a little boy who asks for gifts." Or that would look like a puppet or beggar that ask for sysop every 6 months. Trusted users should be trusted and treated with more respect in my opinion. Their contribution are obvious very valuable.Trongphu (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For the moment the IP 94.224.1.254 is creating wrong, and misswritten articles. As I am no more an admin I cannot delete and actually nobody of all stewards is able to verify what is wrong and what not. I was 15 days in hospital and in this time I could not verify. Afterwards i had a job for ten days to correct. Please hurry up with adminship otherwise the lb:wiktionaty will have bad future. --Les Meloures (talk) 18:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please start a discussion on a central community page (such as the Village Pump), even if the wiki is inactive, and leave it open for at least seven days. Then provide the link to this discussion in the "discussion=" box above. If there are no objections to your adminship after that period, stewards will consider temporary adminship, but these steps must be followed first. The local community must be given an opportunity to voice their opinions before we decide the outcome. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion on a central community page for adminship was done allready once on this page, in June and the stewards were informed. Bur I think nobody noticed, an again nobody notices that the lb: community is very little and rather without permanent users. But it grows step by step and the saving of the project needed hundreds of hours, done by less than 3 users. The problem is this: If there is no permanent survey by an admin than lb.wiki will become the playstation op a lot of IP-users, as you may see again on the activities today. Best regards --Les Meloures (talk) 21:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what Les Meloures says and I think we could make an effort, even if it's contrary to our principles. I helped him to start this wiki and know that he is wise and trustable. The best compromise would be, in my humble opinion, to grant a very long delay of temporary adminship, such as two years. What do you (Les Meloures and other stewards) think about it ?
I thought about something to help the luxembourgish community to grow up, because you're the only contributor on this project right now. What abouting welcoming users who contribute for the first time and offering them your help, thanking users who made a good contribution, etc. ? This is done on lots of projects and would not be a waste of time. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see nothing wrong with 6 months temporary adminship. This is not a question of gifts or little boys. I'm not aware we've had any complaints about Les Meloures' admin work over lbwikt. Sometimes we do tell the user a week before the permissions are going to expire so they can arrange a vote. I understand it might be a bit boring having to ask each six months the community and obtain the silence as response, but two years of temporary adminship will be excesive, notwithstanding one year maximum of temporary adminship as exception may work for me. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know what can help the community to grow up. Actually two users are working.Some IP-adresses and specially one of the flamish region takes the lb wiktionary as his own playstation. He does experiments in all possible language that we are not able to control, and he does so many mistakes, and so more than 60% of his contributions must be deleted. A weekly survey with noticing other steward to delete is not the best solution. On the request to 3 years ago to help saving lb.Wiktionary I agreed, and a lot of cleaning up was done. A young user helped for some months, but actually he is busy on his studium, but still remains interested. If lb Wiktionary should be considered as as trustworthy there must be no articles that are not controlable and verified by an nativ speaker, and for foreign languages there should exist interwiki to confirm. I do this controls since beginning of the request. As I am a confirmed admin on lb.Wikipedia since 5 years, I don't understand the problem for giving an adminship for longer time. I am an 62 years old man, intrested on helping to grow this project, but i am not willing every 6 months to repeat the same litany to have adminship. Best regards --Les Meloures (talk) 09:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK. No problem for me, as I said above. Waiting the opinion of other stewards, I want to have your point of view on this MediaWiki extension, which could help you to review the articles. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 12:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm shure that this tool maybe very usefull, for big wikis. It is used on lb.wikipedia and helps to localise rapidly new articles without revision. As it seems only two of the admnins know how it works, and the community was never informed how it works. You must know that users on little wikis, even if they are admins and very usefull to that wiki, don't surf on every project, and a lot of them don't understand english enough to follow every details and explications. --Les Meloures (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No need to understand english... It has been translated in French long ago, and as far as I know most of the luxembourgish people speak french... Also, you can translate it in the project's language if you need. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Masahiro Naoi@tl.wikibooks

Status:    In progress

Please link to a discussion on the local wiki, without which the request will not be honored; thank you. -- Avi (talk) 17:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sasakubo1717@th.wikibooks

Status:    On hold

Sir; User:Sasakubo1717's adminship in that project was expired and he accepted me in my talkpage in th.wikipedia already so I nominated him again. Thank you. --B20180 (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On hold until 12 January 2013. -- Tegel (Talk) 15:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nullzero@th.wikibooks

Status:    On hold

Sir; User:Sasakubo1717 nominated adminship for User:Nullzero and User:Nullzero accept from User:Sasakubo1717's request in User:Nullzero's talkpage in this project already. Thank you. --B20180 (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On hold until 12 January 2013. -- Tegel (Talk) 15:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sasakubo1717@th.wikiquote

Status:    On hold

Sir; User:Sasakubo1717's adminship in that project was expired and he accepted me in my talkpage in th.wikipedia already so I nominated him again. Thank you. --B20180 (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On hold until 12 January 2013. -- Tegel (Talk) 15:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sasakubo1717@th.wikisource

Status:    On hold

Sir; User:Sasakubo1717's have experience in wiktionary, wikibooks and wikiquote before and him accepted me in my talkpage in th.wikipedia already so I nominated he to have sysop right in this project. Thank you. --B20180 (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On hold until 12 January 2013. -- Tegel (Talk) 15:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ralgis@eswikivoyage

Status:    Done

Unanimous support. Consensus in the community is for three month temporary adminship. RalgisWM-CR 02:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-04-10. MBisanz talk 03:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Patricio.lorente@eswikivoyage

Status:    Done

Unanimous support. Consensus in the community is for three month temporary adminship. RalgisWM-CR 02:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-04-10. MBisanz talk 03:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

B1mbo@eswikivoyage

Status:    Done

Unanimous support. Consensus in the community is for three month temporary adminship. RalgisWM-CR 02:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-04-10. MBisanz talk 03:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MercurioMT@eswikivoyage

Status:    Done

Unanimous support. Consensus in the community is for three month temporary adminship. Alan.lorenzo (talk) 13:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-04-10. -- Mentifisto 14:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lentom@fiwiktionary

Status:    Done

Unanimous support in the nomination for adminship. I am an admin myself in the project and giving the admin rights is ok, but we have not been able to reach our sole bureaucrat in the weeks after the voting ended. Thus, there has been major lag in getting the rights. Therefore, Meta-Wiki is the place to ask for the admin rights, as the usual route to ask from the local bureaucrat has failed. Hartz (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2013-07-11. Since we are processing this through Meta, we have to take into consideration that there are too few comments to grant permanent adminship at this time. This is in-line with all promotions which are considered by stewards. Therefore I have set this to expire in six months; if in that time the local bureaucrat decides to make it permanent, that is their call. Please inform us if that happens so we do not inadvertently desysop him later. If there is still no comment from the local bureaucrat after six months, please ask for an extension here if needed. Many thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Iste Praetor@wikidatawiki

Status:    Done

Please close my RfA as the voting period has ended today. If you consider it successful, please note that a reconfirmation after three months is still necessary. Thanks and regards --Iste (D) 21:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2013-04-11. Congratulations on your appointment and good luck. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Regards --Iste (D) 22:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat access

Steward requests/Permissions/Crat-header

CheckUser access

Steward requests/Permissions/CU-header

Oversight access

To request to have content oversighted, ask in #wikimedia-stewards, or, for requests regarding English Wikipedia email oversight-en-wp@wikipedia.org. This is the place to request Oversight access. Note that temporary Oversight access is not permitted and the temporary status is only used by Stewards.

Stewards
Do not grant Oversight access unless the user is identified to the foundation, which will be announced on the Identification noticeboard. When you give someone oversight access, list them on Oversight.

Removal of access

<translate>

  • If you're requesting the removal of your own permissions, make sure you're logged in to your account. If you have multiple flags, specify which you want removed. Stewards may delay your request a short time to ensure you have time to rethink your request (see [[<tvar name="self-discussion">Talk:Steward_requests/Permissions/2011#Self_requests</tvar>|previous discussion]] on 24 hour delays); the rights will not be restored by stewards once they are removed.
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions, you must gain consensus on the local wiki first. When there is community consensus that the user's access should be removed, provide a link to the discussion, with a brief explanation of the reason for the request, and summarize the results of discussion. However, as bureaucrats of some wikis may remove users from the administrator or bureaucrat group, please see also a [[<tvar name="crat-rem">Bureaucrat#Removing_access</tvar>|separate list of these specific wikis]].
  • To request the removal of another user's permissions for inactivity, link to your local inactivity policy. If your site does not have inactivity policy, the global policy [[<tvar name="aar">Admin activity review</tvar>|Admin activity review]] applies.
  • See the [[<tvar name="usage">#Using this page</tvar>|instructions above]] for adding new requests. Please post new requests at the bottom of the section.</translate>

Reality006@trwikipedia

Status:    On hold

I summarize issue. On 15 July 2012, 4 users blocked by 5 administarator because of be a troll. Then community of Turkish Wikipedia against these blockings and the majority of the community started Rfc. however nothings happened and unfair blockings didn't unblock and I try to unblock these 4 blockingns (21 users support and 1 user neutral for unblocking of users). Firstly, tr:User:Kibele reblocked these users and then tr:User:Vito Genovese blocked me indefinetely. So I don't want to be administrator no more. Please remove my access. Thank you and best regards and sorry for my bad English. Also you can see my answer and you can see my first approve of removal of access because of this issue. --Reality 20:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for 24 hours. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:32, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I kindly ask this to be kept on hold for a longer period of time. Again the issues on the local wiki are the reason behind this and those should really be resolved first. If user still wants to resign at that point, it is fine then. Right now this is an emotional response unhelpful to tr.wikipedia. -- とある白い猫 chi? 14:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Progress report? Ok, this looks kinda dramatic/complex, but it's well over a month this request was posted. Any progress on this? Can we close as "not done" for now or Reality really wants to quit? Thanks. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment I don't known whether User:Vito Genovese responded or not to this question of User:PeterSymonds in Turkish Wikipedia on 27 November 2012. Takabeg (talk) 09:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PCode@cv.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove both bureaucrat and administrator flags of this inactive user. --Jusjih (talk) 19:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • This wiki has active users and I believe no inactivity policy, so I do not see why this should be a Meta issue. Please try to get the local policy first.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The communities have the power to remove admins without an inactivity policy. Snowolf How can I help? 03:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, but there was no reasonable discussion. The user was not notified on-wiki. I am editing that wiki every day and I am familiar with the situation.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Why not comment in that local discussion made by Jusjih then? --Bencmq (talk) 11:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I somehow missed it when it started. I will comment now. However, I do not think it is a good idea when someone without any contribution in the project shows up and open a deadminship discussion.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:47, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    What's the reason of your oppose, by the way ? I don't understand much because having inactive users with bureaucrat status could be a security issue if the account was hijacked. Anyway, there will be no problems for this user to have his flags back when he comes back if he still have the approval of the community. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    PCode is a kind of Jimbo Wales of Chavash Wikipedia, a person who founded the project and recruited the editors himself, making it the most successfull of all projects in minor languages spoken in the former USSR. The project is active, there are at least two active admins. If they do not consider his inactivity as a problem and do not respond on the deadmin page, why should Jusjih, without any contribution to the project, single-handedly deadmin PCode? I believe insufficient efforts have been made. Try to contact the admins, ask them whether they know what is going on, they may even contact him off-wiki, ask their opinion, then may be if everybody agrees, deadmin him. But not just like this - first open the discussion, vote for deadminship, then come here and request desysop.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    This request was posted here before your local response. Being a bureaucrat means responsibility, not honor.--Jusjih (talk) 07:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, it is just your contribution to that project is five edits, all of which are related with this deadminship. Compare it to mine contribution, if you wish. You are just not a member of the community.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, now PCode showed up and voted for his deburaucrateship. I asked him a question to confirm it (if I remember correctly, he does not speak English, and this may be an error), but obviously if he does not want to be a bureaucrat I am not going to object.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you ask PCode to post that here, or are you certain that he is happy with the removal of the crat bit? -- Avi (talk) 22:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Done I will proceed to the removal of permissions per this. If PCode wants to return and to get his tools back, just ask the community opinion and there will be no problem at all for us to give them back. Many thanks to him for helping the project to grow up. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 17:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hman@ja.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove my sysop flag, on ja-wikipedia --Hman (talk) 06:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After 24 hours, I guess :) -- Avi (talk) 07:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your consideration. I retires from all wiki projects. --Hman (talk) 08:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Avraham: Yes, I think there is a good reason for giving time for possible reconsideration in this case. It apparently came out of recent (and perhaps stressful) discussions showing subtle disagreement between participants. Hmanさんへ：お疲れさまです。色々と気遣いが求められるであろう案件に辛抱強くとりくんでいらっしゃるのをいつも拝見しています。もしお心がわりがありましたら遠慮なくおっしゃってください。 --whym (talk)
48 hours passed.I must say a word of farewell to erstwhile mate. and I have to start for the next work. Please remove the flag quickly.
Please.--Hman (talk) 12:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I confirm pending is no longer needed, just in case it matters any. I have notified locally. and ja:User:Hman's decision seems firm. --whym (talk) 12:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thank you for efforts. Snowolf How can I help? 12:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Friberg@dawikiquote

Status:    On hold

Can you please remove his Sysop access. Thanks --Simeondahl (talk) 10:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The removal discussion started on Jan, 9. Wouldn't it be appropiate to let it run for a full week first? Has Jan Friberg been notified? Regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. He has been notified. He don't replay becurse he is inactiv. --Simeondahl (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GálaBot@se.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I'm forgotten the password of my bot, GálaBot. --Gálaniitoluodda (talk) 16:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I remembred the password i was forgotten 1/2 years ago today, but can add sysop-rights with local system. :) Gálaniitoluodda (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Silthor@pl.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Due to our policy, I hereby request removal of sysop acces due to inactivity in main namespace longer than one year. The user has been notified two weeks earlier. Tar Lócesilion|queta! 19:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous requests

Steward requests/Permissions/Misc-header

Hazard-SJ@wikidatawiki

Status:    Done

Per d:Wikidata:Translation administrators, administrators can request the translation administrator right without community consensus.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  05:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Snowolf How can I help? 06:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Steward requests/Permissions/Footer

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&oldid=5024615"