Steward requests/Permissions/2014-10

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in October 2014, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion.

Simba16@ce.wikipedia

Asking for prolongation my admin rights. Thank you. Simba16 (talk) 19:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

You was given admin access for 1 year, until 6 April 2015. It will only expire in 6 months from now. Ruslik (talk) 18:46, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

6AND5@hy.wikipedia

The user has a support in the voting. --Lilitik22 (talk) 20:36, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 01:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Uğurkent@tr.wikimedia

There's no active sysop and bureaucrat. --Uğurkent^talk 17:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

On hold until 22 October 2014. Unless someone from the chapter tells us that they want you as an admin, then we could do it right away. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:43, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Application lasted three days saw. If you want to expect. This, thanks. Good wikis. --Uğurkent^talk 17:48, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Our bureaucrat the inactivity is unable to sysop access. Application is continuous sysop access. --Uğurkent^talk 17:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Espreon@ang.wiktionary

I hereby request that my adminship at the Old English Wiktionary be renewed so that I can continue to improve the website and remove incoming spam. Espreon (talk) 06:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Done for 6 months, as previously. Pundit (talk) 14:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Bokareis@got.wikipedia.org

Currently Zylbath is the admin. There are a lot of issues with the wikipedia though, a lot of errors in things which only admins can change and which contain wrong grammar use. Also, there is one admin but I 'm a very active user too and as I 'm an active contributer I would like to have the possibility to do more at the Wikipedia to improve it and make it into a Wikipedia which improves. I did a co-admin request but Zylbath said that it's very unlikely that Wikipedia would accept another Admin or Moderator at the wikipedia. Therefore I post a request here, so that I can see if you think it would be good to have more admins at the Wikipedia. Bokareis (talk) 22:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

There are no local bureaucrats who could give you the admin status, so you've come to the right place. But the stewards here (who can) need to see that the gotwiki community agrees with you having this status. So the right way would be to ask the community on a page where you usually discuss common issues (I'm guessing got:Wikipedia:𐌱𐌰𐌿𐍂𐌲𐍃_𐌱𐍂𐌿𐌽𐌽𐌰) and then demonstrate that you have support - if you have it. — Yerpo ^Eh? 12:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bokareis: to note that many of the grammar issues should be dealt with at translatewiki.net rather than on the specific wiki, so if it is the grammar that needs fixing, please look there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Didn't they disable something related to Gothic there? At first, I thought they outright disabled everything related to Gothic, but I checked, and it appears I can edit MediaWiki-related stuff. Perhaps they simply killed the process that's supposed to draw in Gothic translation updates from there?

I guess we'll see sooner or later since I transliterated MediaWiki:Friday back to Gothic. Espreon (talk) 12:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Further to the initial post, it is not up to a single admin to refuse your nomination, nor does it require their permission, nor is there a limitation on numbers, so hopefully we can knock that commentary on the head. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Siebrand: are you available to address the issue of Gothic at Translatewiki? Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I just stated my meaning about it. I would expect a better tone of an admin. He can't wander around and insult people or behave so stubborn when he doesn't get his will. If he would change that, I am fine with it if he sees the need for being an admin. I don't, but that's not solely up to me. That's what I said.

To the translationwiki: It is already closed a long time ago because the translators used too much Latin script. I argued a lot and several times on translatewiki with them and told them that I totally agree with using Gothic script. But all they've done is doing the good auld meta discussion about having a Wikipedia in a dead language and how silly that is. That's their excuse for shutting the translation function down... Zylbath (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Like I already explained to you, the reason that I acted like that is that I translated about 50 pages of a website in Gothic with a word from the dictionary at the Gothic wikipedia which I assumed to be correct. Suddenly I was told that it was incorrect, while the correct form was basically nowhere at the Gothic wikipedia and you just need to guess what the right form is if you use it. The reason for this being stubborn is that some words are already used like 200 times and if words then suddenly get changed this would either mean that a word needs to be corrected about 200 times or that a new word is proposed for official use which will in fact never get used and will end up wrong in the dictionary. For me, the Gothic language revival is a very serious issue and the reason that I 'm stubborn is because for me this is not some fun side-project in which you can do whatever you like, in fact I do a lot of translation work because I want the language to become at least similar to Lojban and Klingon, being used in some places, therefore we need rules and very good thinking before we do anything and most of all, there needs to be transparency which seems to be the biggest problem in our wiki, because it is not clear to a user at all which words to use etc., because there are so much problems at our wikipedia. And sometimes I just have a bad day, normally I don't insult people, also for one of the admins from Wikipedia, the English one, it's normal to insult the articles of users at wikipedia, I don't recall his name exactly. Bokareis (talk) 15:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done at this time. This is not a page for a community's discussion, so please take this back to the gotWP community and work out whether the community desires/needs another admin or not, and the reason. Whether it is translationwiki.net or not, is not the issue here. Please work it all out in your community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:00, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Рахман3@kaa.wikipedia

User:Рахман3 requested adminship, local community agreed. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maqmud Abdujaparov (talk)

<non-steward comment> For the stewards: please look at this carefully. Is it a bot as told on an user's page (and this)? Also, user's edit history is not very convincing. Btw, what was that? --Stryn (talk) 20:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

As an admin of Karakalpak Wikipedia, I'm against to give admin privileges to this candidate. The reasons are, first of all, he just recently joined, thus not aware of most of the Wikipedia rules and regulations. Secondly, the articles he made are not that good quality in terms of both grammar and content. If he will do some progress on those mentioned aspects, we can review his request. Thanks for attention. Qarahat (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done at this time. @Maqmud Abdujaparov: Please take it back to the community for further discussion and resubmit following that extended discussion. I will reopen the discussion at kaaWP.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Further note, that the period of nomination and recommendation to stewards was not of the expected duration, and looking at the quickness of the voting, and other similarities in processes and wording that processing of the application should be done with diligence.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Doostdar@fa.wikibooks

I am asking for prolongation of my adminship in Persian wikibooks. The only present admin there is not so active and we need another admin eventhough no consensus is possibble because there aren't enough users there. --Doostdar (talk) 09:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

They were removed due to a fellow steward working off expiries, without noticing that these rights had been renewed. I have added the rights again and will leave the existing active permission in the temporary archives.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--Doostdar (talk) 06:19, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hephaion@dewiki

According to the current CU election (see de:Wikipedia:CUWA#Auswertung) please give this user the checkuser right at dewiki. Set on hold until he has been identified identified. --Filzstift (talk) 06:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

On hold pending identification. Ajraddatz (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Identification successful. -- Hephaion (talk) 10:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Done, will do the other stuff now too. Trijnstel_talk 10:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

JurgenNL@nl.wikipedia

This is the best for now. --JurgenNL (talk) 11:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

 On hold for 24 hours per standard practice. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:49, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for your services. -Barras talk 12:08, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

EVula@en.wikisource

Removal of EVula's admin bit due to inactivity per local policy, thanks. Hesperian 00:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done... please thank them for their past work. -- Mentifisto 00:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and wilco. Hesperian 00:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Sanbeg@en.wikisource

Removal of Sanbeg's admin bit due to inactivity per local policy, thanks. Hesperian 00:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done... please thank them for their past work. -- Mentifisto 00:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and wilco. Hesperian 00:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Wild Wolf@en.wikisource

Removal of Wild Wolf's admin bit due to inactivity per local policy, thanks. Hesperian 00:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done... please thank them for their past work. -- Mentifisto 00:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and wilco. Hesperian 00:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Littledogboy@wikidatawiki

Please remove his sysop rights per the local inactivity policy, no 10 sysop actions in the last six months. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 15:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hy48@zh.wikiquote

I have previously requested for the removal of access of the concerned administrator. See this link. Another b'crat has stated that he will support if Hy48 does not respond after 30 Sept. --Good afternoon (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Having corrected the link and notified the inactive administrator unsuccessfully, I also support deflagging.--Jusjih (talk) 04:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Matanya (talk) 10:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

TBloemink@wikidatawiki

The Wikidata community does not trust TBloemink to serve as an admin on that project any longer. Please remove the flag. Vogone (talk) 17:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

You just choose a time that suits your opinion? I think it's standard that a neutral sysop closes a RfP, please discard this request. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I think the request should first be closed by a local 'crat. I would also note that, given no timeframe is mentioned in the removal section, it should probably run for the week that a RfA runs, as no alternate timeframe is offered in the policy that I could find. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

This request being made at this time doesn't change the possibility to make a decision on a more suitable time, if now is not suitable. EvilFreD (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I was trying to put it on hold, but got ec'ed and that part didn't carry over. I am putting this on hold and asking that a local 'crat close it when they believe it should be closed. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:45, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I am now giving green light to remove my sysop status. I am not active and should not fight any longer to keep rights I am not using actively. Also a majority wishes them removed. Regards, — TBloemink _talk 20:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I am reading your message here as statement of resignation on your part, please correct me in my understanding if that is not the case. In any case, I am putting this on hold for 48 hours for all to obvious reasons.Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 20:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

It is. Fine with 48h holding time if that is what feels best for you. — TBloemink _talk 20:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done by Matanya per WMF request--Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 06:32, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Sustructu@nl.wikipedia

I hereby request the removal of my sysop rights on NL wiki. Thank you. Sustructu (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your service. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

JurgenNL@commons

I hereby request the removal of all advanced rights for JurgenNL at Commons conform a Wikimedia Foundation request. - Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 13:23, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Please note that there is no Wikimedia Commons community consensus to revoke JurgenNL's adminship privileges. Also see this Village Pump thread. odder (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold - I am marking this as on hold as no action will be taken at this time while a discussion with the WMF continues. I deliberately have not closed this so that it prevents other editors raising a new request due to thinking no action has been taken. QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:32, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for tracking the request publicly. Question: I asked some questions which are better answered there before this request is un-frozen: [2]. --Nemo 13:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

  Questions were addressed in situ  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

  At least several users at Wikimedia Commons do not agree with a desysop without approval by local community. Without choosing a standpoint about this, I started a local desysop procedure. Jcb (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

  Hereby I request to remove my sysop bit on Commons. You don't have to wait 24 hours since I have made the decision a few days ago, but wasn't able to post the request here before. JurgenNL (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done as requested by Jurgen himself. Elfix 10:04, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Cinnamologus@itwikisource

I hereby request the removal of sysop status for this admin as per local policies: he's been completely inactive for more than a year, and after he's been warned on his user talk. - εΔω 06:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

-sysop done  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:18, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. - εΔω 22:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Frieda@itwikisource

I hereby request the removal of bureaucrat and sysop status for this user as per local policies: she's been completely inactive for almost two years, and she's been warned on her user talk. - εΔω 06:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

-sysop -crat  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:19, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - εΔω 22:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

PPerviz@az.wikipedia

Please remove adminship according to voting results. For removal we need at least 2/3 of all valid votes. In this case 26 users voted, 19 for removal.--Sortilegus (talk) 20:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Done For the record, I changed the name in the header+template from Pperviz to PPerviz, since the request was obviously about a user with the latter spelling. --MF-W 00:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks MF-W--Sortilegus (talk) 11:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

MrArifnajafov@az.wikipedia

Please remove adminship according to voting results. For removal we need at least 2/3 of all valid votes. In this case 27 users voted, 18 for removal.--Sortilegus (talk) 20:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Done --MF-W 00:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks MF-W--Sortilegus (talk) 11:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Lionster@he.wikipedia

Please remove my adminship in hebrew wikipedia. thanks, --Lionster (talk) 10:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Matanya (talk) 08:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Jafeluv@commons

Please remove my sysop rights on Commons. I haven't been active on that project for a long time now, so I'd like to hand in my tools. Thanks. Jafeluv (talk) 12:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold until 12:52 UTC 8 October 2014 - QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Thanks for your service. Matanya (talk) 12:22, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Reaperman@cs.wiktionary

Please remove my admin and bureaucrat flags on cs.wiktionary. Thank you. --Reaperman (talk) 05:24, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold for a day - QuiteUnusual (talk) 07:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Thanks for your service. Matanya (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Wiki13@nl.wikipedia

Please remove my admin flags on the Dutch Wikipedia. In the yearly confirmation round people don't seem to trust me anymore and therefore I want the right be removed. Note to stewards: this is a self-request and I don't need 24 hours to think about this request. Already thanks in advance. --Wiki13 _talk 11:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Done, thank you for your service. - Hoo man (talk) 11:35, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Leoman3000@wikipedia.it

I thank Leoman3000 for his work as a sysop. --Euphydryas (msg) 08:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Confirm this, the user has been notified in talk, there is no need to wait for 1 day. --M/ (talk) 19:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Trijnstel_talk 19:58, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Cruccone@wikipedia.it

I thank Cruccone for his work as a sysop. --Euphydryas (msg) 08:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

No problem on my part, it doesn't make sense to keep the "power buttons" when I'm not using them. --Cruccone (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Seen, I can confirm, there is no need to wait for 1 day. --M/ (talk) 19:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your work. Savh^ñ 19:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Pubuhan@wikipedia.zh

• Inactive for 6 months and still no edits after notification for 1 month, please remove his sysop and Bcrat flag --Kegns 23:35, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

  Done Please, thank the user for their work on behalf of the stewards team. Ruslik (talk) 19:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Rubentj 1@nlwiki

Rubentj 1 wasn't confirmed during our annual admin reconfirmations. Please remove his admin rights. --Trijnstel_talk 13:28, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 19:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Ashina@wikipedia.kk

Your remarks, etc. --GanS NIS (talk) 14:53, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 05:10, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

There should be information letter with this kind of request to change rights. I'd like to keep administrator rights if it still possible?!--Ashina (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ashina and Ajraddatz: I've restored the admin rights - this request was only for removal of crat rights. Trijnstel_talk 15:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry Ashina, misunderstanding on my part. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Sidelight12@en.wikiversity.org

• This is a request for emergency desysop.
• Background. Sidelight12 is a probationary custodian, the normal probationary period would have been one month, beginning after a long delay due to shortage of bureaucrats, in September 2013, with bureaucrat Jtneill as mentor; this coincided with start of probationary custodianship of User:Dave Braunschweig, see his candidacy page. Dave Braunschweig became a permanent custodian, with the clear approval of Jtneill, though not formally expressed, and by strong consensus. The only dissenter was Sidelight12, who also came to meta to complain with Requests for comment/Abd's disruption on Wikiversity. Jtneill often does not respond rapidly
• Current evidence.

• Wikiversity block log
• Notices for custodians discussion linked above in template. This shows Dave's consultation of the community.
• en:wikiversity:Wikiversity:Custodian feedback. I was blocked for notifying Sidelight of this filing. Custodian feedback is the last step before Community Review, which could consider desysop. At this point, Sidelight is attempting to block everyone who might question his actions, including the only active permanent custodian, Dave.

• This is a rogue sysop. Please remove the bit without prejudice. His mentor is a bureaucrat and may reinstate it if he chooses. Unfortunately, it may take some time to arouse Jtneill. I am announcing this filing on Wikiversity, on the Notices for custodians page, so that he or other Wikiversitans are aware of it and may comment if needed. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 17:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

While there is some merit to the request, you are clearly highly involved in the matter, is there a particular reason nobody else from Wikiversity has come here to request this action? Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I'm the only active user who knows how to file these thingies (other than maybe Jtneill or SB Johnny, who are largely inactive). I'm obviously involved, so I expected nothing to be done on my say-so. Until today, it was hoped that this could be resolved locally and that routine procedure could be followed. Until today, there was no wheel-warring, just some highly questionable actions. Those did not rise to the level of emergency. --Abd (talk) 17:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I also have pulled the user's sysop bit as an emergency measure, and I am in the process of drafting a statement. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Snowolf. As you know, if this is an error, it's easily fixed by Sidelight's mentor, who is a bureaucrat, and if he has no mentor, in effect, he is an unsupervised probationary custodian given to drastic action. Not a good situation. I appreciate your willingness to act protectively in spite of the irregularity of this request. For the future, we will be drafting clearer policy on probationary custodianship. --Abd (talk) 17:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I have now made a statement on Wikiversity's admin noticeboard and left notes for Jtneill, Sidelight and Dave. I hope the actions taken can facilitate a de-escalation of the situation. I have tried to provide some advice to the best of my abilities though obviously further actions are up to the local Wikiversity folks. For the record, I performed the removal as an emergency measure, unrelated to this whole mentorship matter. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 18:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, very useful. This was a situation I've never before seen on Wikiversity, a probationary custodian blatantly wheel-warring with a permanent one, unblocking himself to continue restoring blocks contrary to policy, and blocking the permanent custodian solely for attempting to stop him. We will resolve the "mentorship" matter with clearer local policy, making the steward job simpler. The desysop here will not be considered any proof that the sysop was "wrong." Your action removed the emergency. --Abd (talk) 18:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

you need to look at this again. Leucosite wrote an instructional page on suicide. It was erased. Then I Only blocked his email. The user couldn't be supervised over email, and that would be a big liability work wikiversity. The unblock was in bad judgement. I blocked only email again. Abd is protecting leucostite. Earlier this year, the only edits from leoucostitleoucostite p pertained to pedophila. Look up the history if you don't believe me.

No, I was not a rogue sysop. I believe that dave was. If you were to desysop me, dave also wrongly blocked someone who was trying to protect the community, he also used his unblock. I had to block leucostite. Look at it again. Look at the whole thing. Someone needs to step in and ingestigate this whole thing. Also there is no blocking policy at wikiversity, its a proposal as of this morning. This is nothing but dave, leucostite and abd reinforcing each other. -sidelight12 oct

The issue is that you have administrators acting against each other, rather than going through a discussion to resolve and to proceed according to a community consensus. If the community is unable to demonstrate a mature process to resolution then maybe all rights should be remitted. If there are no local polices then global policies apply. The role of administrators is to apply local policy and local consensus, not enforce their own opinions. So all of you go back to your community, have your discussions, and resolve, and in the interim your rights should not be used, or they should be remitted.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

What's the global policy on pedophilia soapboxing pages, and instructional suicide pages? Look, if you're going to look at my actions, look at dave's too. This is not about my opinion. This is abd and dave reinforcing each other and making up the rules as they go. Blocking lecosites email is reasonable, and I had to unblock myself to block it, bc someone with that edit history can't be trusted with email. If I abused my admin priviledges then dave did more so. dont make a judgement without looking at leucostites history, at abds abusiveness, or dave's overall block record. If that cant be done, then this is not a fair tdial about me. - Sidelight12

A comment from me. At the time of my action, I did not notice, despite extensive review of the logs, that the other administrator involved had unblocked themselves. That was obviously a significant oversight on my part, and I am sorry about that. As such, I merely acted removing Sidelight bit. This was merely an emergency action to stop the wheelwarring going on and cool down the situation, and allow the community to discuss the matter more calmly, and it expresses no judgement on the matter at hand, which is honestly immaterial to this. This is not a trial of you, Sidelight, at all. The removal is a temporary measure to address the immediate problem, and it merely is in effect until a local 'crat can look at the matter and decide what to do. You should bring any relevant issues to them as they are the next step in this process. As an aside, I also note that there is no such thing as an email-only block. The block hits the user *and* their ability to email. There is no way to merely disable their email access on MediaWiki. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 23:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

thank you for that. I'm not rogue, in fact i believe abd is a troublemaker who likes chaos. Did u see the backlash on my userpage, from abd and dave, I consider that harassment, but they acuse me of lying. They also acuse me of libel when I say they are enabling turmoil, or that leucostite is a dangerous user. I welcome a fair and complete review of the three others involved plus myself. I can accept responsibilty so long as their behaviors aren't let off the hook. I would also like to note, abd took advantage of when I said my internet connection would be out, so I'm texting through a mobile phone which I didn't want to do. Its my mistake about my email block error. I believe this is just abd defending his friend and trying to make bogus claims seem legitimate, and plays the victim. - sidelight12 oct 16

Stop the blame, stop pointing fingers, stop excusing your own behaviours. Please go back to your community and sort out the problem.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:37, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

you have not been helpful at all. Obviously they brought this here this time, and I have to clear up misconceptions. How did u miss where I said ill take responsibility so long as you don't let others walk, who cause the problem. Its 3 against 1. Why are you even a custodian, its like you avoid responsibilty. The last time you were too lazy to do anything, and you fail to realize there are not enough active custodians or users for this to be impartial. Why are you an admin again? Sidelight12 october 16

The request here was for an immediate, without prejudice, removal of rights, and that was agreed to by the steward who acted. That is where the conversation should have stopped on this page [this being is a request page for stewards to act] with all remaining components returned to your community. Your continued debate on this matter and your ill-informed commentary on this page does not bode well. Resolve your community's problems at your community.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Wlodzimierz@sr.wikisource

Please remove sysop access. The user didn't make any sysop action within last thirteen months. --FriedrickMILBarbarossa (talk) 16:17, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Froztbyte@dawiki

No activity the past 7 months. Please remove sysop flag. --Christian Giersing (talk) 07:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for their service. Ajraddatz (talk) 17:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

matanya@hewiki

I have removed my crat and CU flags. Matanya (talk) 14:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

koumz@species

As I am no longer either willing or able to commit time or effort to this wiki in a way that I consider acceptable according to my concept of what an admin there should be, I respectfully request removal of my admin tools (I'll keep my bot account and its flag for now as long as noone objects). Thanks very much, it was good while it lasted. Koumz (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks for your service. Ajraddatz (talk) 01:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Elelicht@de.wikivoyage

Thank you for your help. Elelicht (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done thanks for your work! -Barras talk 19:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@global

Please remove my global rollback and global sysop rights. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

:'( (on hold for 24h) Ajraddatz (talk) 20:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for all your work around here! -Barras talk 22:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@meta.wikimedia

Please remove my sysop and global-renamer rights. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for all your work around here! -Barras talk 22:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@ja.wikipedia

Please remove my sysop and bureaucrat rights. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for all your work around here! -Barras talk 22:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@wikidata

Please remove my sysop right. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done - Thanks for all your work around here! -Barras talk 22:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@outreach.wikimedia

Please remove my sysop right. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Outreach and testwiki have desysops handled by crats generally, ditto for meta. --Rschen7754 05:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Done (locally handled), thanks for your service. --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:38, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Rxy@test.wikipedia

Please remove my sysop right. --Rxy (talk) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Locally Done. ;-( -Barras talk 13:07, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Beeblebrox@en.Wikipedia

I have CheckUser access in my capacity as a member of the Arbitration Committee at en.wp. I have never actually used it and don't think I ever will so please remove it. Thanks. --Beeblebrox (talk) 01:32, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Done. You can have them re-added at a later time if you'd like, since you are entitled to them as an arbitrator. Ajraddatz (talk) 01:49, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank You. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Formica_rufa@wikipedia.it

User has been notified in talk. --M/ (talk) 12:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Abraham Taherivand (WMDE)@wikidatawiki

Please remove administrator and bureaucrat flags, as per community decision. The user was added to the new staff group already. Vogone (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Done —DerHexer (Talk) 23:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Kinzler (WMDE)@wikidatawiki

Please remove administrator and bureaucrat flags, as per community decision. The user was added to the new staff group already. Vogone (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Done —DerHexer (Talk) 23:41, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Jeroen De Dauw (WMDE)@wikidatawiki

Please remove administrator and bureaucrat flags, as per community decision. The user was added to the new staff group already. Vogone (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Done —DerHexer (Talk) 23:41, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Katie Filbert (WMDE)@wikidatawiki

Please remove the administrator flag, as per community decision. The user was added to the new staff group already. Vogone (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Done —DerHexer (Talk) 23:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)@wikidatawiki

Please remove administrator and bureaucrat flags, as per community decision. The user was added to the new staff group already. Vogone (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Done —DerHexer (Talk) 23:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Gmaxwell @ Wikimedia Commons

In line with the global CheckUser policy, I hereby request that CheckUser privileges be revoked from the account of Gmaxwell due to an inactivity period longer than one year. User's last CheckUser action was performed on 14 October 2013. Thank you! odder (talk) 11:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hm, he still edits and CU's Any user account with CheckUser status that is inactive for more than a year will have their CheckUser access removed. is ambigous in this regard. Though, stewards sometimes (usually?) revoke CheckUser access under these circumstances. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 11:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I have been told by a local Commons CheckUser that Gmaxwell hasn't performed a CU action since 14 October last year; that's also the date that was publicly mentioned in a previous discussion on this subject last month. odder (talk) 11:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

The policy does not mention inactivity with the CU tools. Merely an "account [...] that is inactive". An account which performs edits is certainly not inactive. Vogone (talk) 11:14, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Policy on Wikimedia Commons has always been to remove permissions based on logged actions, editors with administrator permissions could be uploading thousands of files or otherwise still active, but if they're not performing logged administrative actions, their permissions will be removed and they will need to undergo a new community vote. I don't see why checkuser or other permissions are excluded from that policy. I would suggest, in the case of privacy based advanced permissions, we follow the existing administrator activity policy until such time as the community wishes to make a specific exemption for checkuser and/or oversight. Nick (talk) 11:48, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, without misusing our steward access we cannot prove whether a CheckUser is inactive or not which is why the inactive-by-edits rule was established in the CheckUser policy. Additionally, c:Commons:Administrators/De-adminship does not cover CheckUser actions so that m:CU should be in effect. Although I can follow your reasoning and tend to agree that users who don't use their buttons for a while should not have access to them, I would not remove these rights here. But as this is one of my homewiki, I would not act anyway. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't see that we have a basis to act on here, as both the global and local policies are not clear on what to do in situations like this. The local community is welcome to start a removal discussion, however. --Rschen7754 13:22, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Nick and Odder. If Gmaxwell did not use his CU right for one year, it should be removed, even if he is still active as a user. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Closing as not done. Please seek local consensus for a clear and unambiguous definition of CheckUser inactivity. As far as we Stewards are concerned, m:CU refers to account activity - forming a minimum requirement - but there doesn't seem to be any local policy to complement it. On a side note, IMO the use of account activity instead of CU activity is to avoid encouraging checks for the purpose of complying with this criterion. Cordially, Savh^ñ 22:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Edinwiki@bs.wikiquote

After a temporal adminship, I would like to request a permanent adminship. The community is relatively small, but nonetheless, I think that my admin support will be of good use. -- Edinwiki (talk) 08:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

With just three votes only a temporal adminship can be given. Ruslik (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Temp adminship extended for a year. ✒ Bennylin 13:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

PS: I agree with Ruslik, seeing that you only have 57 contributions in that wiki, only temp adminship can be granted. ✒ Bennylin 13:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

 Granted for 1 year to expire on 2014-10-01. (template put here by: --MF-W 19:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC))

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Geoleplubo@pcdwiki

I had rights for adminship from 25 december 2012 and I am requesting a prolongation of my adminship statut. Thanks, Geoleplubo (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

On hold for a week until 3 April. --MF-W 16:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-10-03. -- Rschen7754 19:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

extended Ajraddatz (talk) 03:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Mohau@nso.wikipedia

We have a small community @ Sepedi Wiki, and I had temporary adminship before, but would like to apply for a permanent adminship.Mohau ^Talk 13:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

On hold until 7 October (minimum 1 week for discussion). --MF-W 14:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

 Granted for 1 year to expire on 2014-10-07. Your wiki still looks too small for permanent adminship per w:nso:Special:Statistics, but best wish for your dedication, thus 1 more year.-- Jusjih (talk) 04:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 05:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Edinwiki@bs.wikiquote

After a temporal adminship, I would like to request a permanent adminship. The community is relatively small, but nonetheless, I think that my admin support will be of good use. -- Edinwiki (talk) 08:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

With just three votes only a temporal adminship can be given. Ruslik (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Done. Temp adminship extended for a year. ✒ Bennylin 13:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

PS: I agree with Ruslik, seeing that you only have 57 contributions in that wiki, only temp adminship can be granted. ✒ Bennylin 13:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

 Granted for 1 year to expire on 2014-10-01. (template put here by: --MF-W 19:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC))

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Rachmat.Wahidi@acewiki

My previous administrator access has been expired. Therefore, I request a new administrator access on this wiki project. Thank you. — 👦 rachmatwhd ^{✎ talk} 07:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-10-10. Ruslik (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

removed. Matanya (talk) 08:11, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Mohau@nso.wikipedia

We have a small community @ Sepedi Wiki, and I had temporary adminship before, but would like to apply for a permanent adminship.Mohau ^Talk 13:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

On hold until 7 October (minimum 1 week for discussion). --MF-W 14:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

 Granted for 1 year to expire on 2014-10-07. Your wiki still looks too small for permanent adminship per w:nso:Special:Statistics, but best wish for your dedication, thus 1 more year.-- Jusjih (talk) 04:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 05:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

सरोज कुमार ढकाल@newiktionary

(One Sysop who is inactive for more than a year , want to change in the main page , delete pages marked delete , protect pages, I've been sysop in newiki for more than 2 years ) सरोज कुमार ढकाल (talk) 11:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 4 months to expire on 2014-10-13. Ajraddatz (talk) 04:07, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, could you please guide me how is it possible to assume permanent sysop ? --सरोज कुमार ढकाल (talk) 09:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

@सरोज कुमार ढकाल: Sorry for the slow response. To be a permanent sysop, I would expect to see a large enough local community so that at least eight people vote for you who are actually active there. I checked a few of the contributors who voted on the request, and for those few their only contributions were to a user page and that vote. However, it doesn't take much to renew your temporary access - start another vote a week before your access will expire, and if there is no opposition (or consensus for), then I'll expand your access for 6 months to a year depending on the situation. Does that help? Ajraddatz (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Ajraddatz: That completely makes sense.Let's keep our fingures crossed we'll have a big community by end of 4 months :) , Thanks a lot !

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 07:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Espreon@angwiktionary

I would like to have my adminship at ang.wikt renewed again so that I can continue maintaining the site.

Thanks,

Espreon (talk) 18:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 6 months to expire on 2014-10-17. Ajraddatz (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 05:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Gazimagomedov@avwiki

I ask to give me admin rights. Ӏ think you're must to give me the rights, because onӀy Ӏ am active user in av.wikipedia.org. And because there is only 1 administrator [5] in av.wikipedia.org -- Gazimagomedov (talk) 07:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

 On hold until until at least 16 July  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-10-18. Ajraddatz (talk) 04:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

removed Ajraddatz (talk) 06:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Doostdar@fa.wikibooks

I ask to give me admin rights. I'm a very active user in my local wikibooks (+5000 edits) and I need access to this right for making deeper changes there. By the way because of low number of currently active users, no consensus is possible: [6]. --Doostdar (talk) 07:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Please start a local vote or announcement anyway, link it here and leave it up for at least a week. Ajraddatz (talk) 03:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I announced it here, here and here. Now I'm waiting for your vote. --Doostdar (talk) 17:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

 On hold until 27 July the first url is where the vote would take place.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

 Granted for 3 months to expire on 2014-10-27. --Shanmugamp7 ^(talk) 06:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--Doostdar (talk) 09:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

removed. Matanya (talk) 09:30, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

ଶିତିକଣ୍ଠ ଦାଶ@or.wikipedia

Request to provide 'transwiki import' right. ଶିତିକଣ୍ଠ ଦାଶ (talk) 17:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 19:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Ernest-Mtl@frwikisource account creator

--Zyephyrus (talk) 22:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Cbliu@zhwikiquote

I request import access. Thank you.Cbliu (talk) 09:34, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

 On hold till 26 October 2014. Ruslik (talk) 19:00, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Done, to expire at 25.4.2015. Matanya (talk) 09:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)