Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Steward requests/Global permissions

< Steward requests
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Leaderboard (talk | contribs) at 06:58, 24 April 2025 (→Global sysop for Aqurs1: support). It may differ significantly from the current version.
Shortcut:
SRGP
This page hosts requests for global permissions. To make a request, read the relevant policy (global rollback , global sysop , global rename , …) and make a request below. Explain why membership is needed for that group, and detail prior experience or qualifications.

This is not a vote and any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion.

Global rollback and global interface editor requests require no fewer than 5 days of discussion while abuse filter helper and maintainer requests require no fewer than 7 days. Global renamer and global sysop requests require no fewer than 2 weeks of discussion. For requests that are unlikely to pass under any circumstances, they may be closed by a steward without further discussion (after a reasonable amount of input).

Quick navigation:
Dynamic pages:

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests


Requests for global rollback permissions

Global rollback for Oostpulus

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 11:24, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello everyone again. My past request for GR was unsuccessful. I tried to listen to the comments made in the discussion and draw conclusions. I need global rollback rights to work more effectively in eliminating cross-wiki vandalism. At the moment I have rollback rights in ruwiki and ruwikitionary, enwiki. And also according to statistics, I have 1406 undos/rollbacks, of which ~500 are made outside of ruwikitionary, ruwiki, enwiki. I understand the global rollback policy and local policies for using it. Thank you for your consideration. Oostpulus (talk) 11:24, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global sysop permissions

Global sysop for Aqurs1

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 12:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I'm Aqurs1, a global rollbacker and a sysop in Chinese Wikivoyage. As a SWMT member, I'm active in anti-vandalism and cleaning spam, especially in small wikis with no or less admins. I'm here requesting global sysop right as it can help my work be more efficient when I patrol small wikis (just like what I did in fawikt and other small wikis), I would also like to offer help in Global_sysops/Speedy_delete_requests and GSR where I made over 1500+ edits. The reason I made this application is also because multiple colleagues encouraged me to do so.

I already read and I'm familiar with local policies related to GS. If I'm granted the right, I will take it slowly to learn the toolkits and will not hesitate to ask questions to other GS or stewards if I have any doubts or concerns. 2FA is enabled. Thanks for your consideration~ --aqurs 🍧 12:35, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reconfirming my !vote. Although the mentioned iswiki incident is concerning, I believe that both parties need to improve. While I respect the opinions of BRP and Ferien, Aqurs1's cross-wiki work and dedication lead me to trust that they will be cautious and will not repeat this when collaborating with cross-wiki communities in the future. Dealing with cross-wiki abusers is a tough job; however, it must be handled with proper care and respect for the communities involved. I believe they will take this incident as a learning opportunity. – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support –FlyingAce✈hello 13:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support definitely, very active and experienced. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 13:54, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support as one of those who encouraged him to run. – Svārtava (tɕ) 14:01, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I acknowledge the user's background with crosswiki and their four years as a global rollbacker, which is impressive. However, I must   Oppose their request due to my criteria. Their last successful request was in February, just under six months ago, and they lack significant sysop experience in the past year. Moreover, some of their comments on other requests do not reflect the good faith I expect from someone seeking a global permission. Best, --Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 16:36, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi. I appreciate your reflect, based of the 'do not reflect the good faith' part, my comment was in good faith. The major part of that is just I'm concerned about users don't familiar with such global rights and criteria of them, participating with related discussion is not ideal in my opinion, which did leave me bad taste. There's no other meaning or accusation by that, thanks for your comment. aqurs 🍧 16:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your comment. Please note that mine is not intended as a revenge oppose, and since your comment clarified many things, I've decided to give you a chance by changing my comment to   Neutral. Best, Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 18:01, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another possible revenge oppose by Galahad? Hmm.   Support - the candidate has a crazy amount of experience in cross-wiki work and can be trusted with the access. A quick review of the GSR edits shows no glaring errors. – Ajraddatz (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support definitely. كريم رائد (talk) 17:25, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --LR0725 ( Talk / Contribs ) 18:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support. --Paloi Sciurala (talk｜contribs) 18:13, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Alaa :)..! 19:20, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --M/ (talk) 19:27, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • -J. Ansari Talk 19:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Is this supposed to be a support vote? //shb (t • c) 07:44, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support   Strong support —Meruleh {talk} 19:50, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Ferien (talk) 21:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strike "vote" per BRPever, replacing it with a regretful   Oppose. The iswiki incident is all quite poor, I'm disappointed in seemingly a few global sysops' (and potential future GSes/GRs) simply adding flames to the fire here rather than stepping back and reviewing whether they could perhaps take a less aggressive approach to the situation. Again not defending the iswiki sysops involved here either (threatening to "block your ass" and blocking over a few edits from a trusted user is perhaps excessive at best!) but when you write on local talk pages on the way you did, you're just going to be viewed as having your own agenda you want to push on a wiki. You're there to help their community, not to boss them about and tell them how to do their work. Ironically, when you cited AGF towards the admin in question (here), you violated the principle that you also assume the assumption of good faith towards you, which is technically an assumption of bad faith on your end by assuming this was not the case. This is addressed on the very guideline you cited on enwiki, Although bad conduct may seem to be due to bad faith, it is usually best to address the conduct without mentioning motives, which might intensify resentments all around., as well as here on meta However, they may start making personal attacks towards you [...]. Now, you may get angry, right? As a result, your comment certainly did intensify resentments all around, as did other global sysops' comments on the page that I'm not impressed with at all either. --Ferien (talk) 09:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • Update to   Strong oppose per the doubling down on assuming bad faith below, although I am perhaps more disappointed of the other global sysops who have consistently acted as though they have the right or authority to override smaller wikis on content matters. I would typically reflect on whether they are likely to improve based on the feedback, per what DreamRimmer said, but we have seen nothing other than deflection here from all users involved. Not once have any of the users in question accepted that their actions might have even been slightly out of line. Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Cases/Snævar is also particularly telling on this point, with criticism of their actions being described as victim blaming and de-adminship of the admin being proposed when their own tones worsened the situation for it to get to that point ("go ahead [and block me]", "yeah right" etc are still the type of things heard on a playground too, not on Wikimedia). I doubt this comment will even slightly affect the evasion of responsibility for those involved, but I just thought I'd make my position clear. --Ferien (talk) 10:35, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        FYI, comments you cited have nothing to do with Aqurs1, so how are they relevant here? A09|(pogovor) 13:22, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        Yeah, but there is pretty much an agreement from them there. And there is plenty of confrontational comments made by Aqurs1 themselves like, Thanks for telling us that you are lack of understanding on AGF and Universal Code of Conduct. BRP ever 13:54, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        My opinion is that global sysops as more experienced cross-wiki patrollers will set the tone for how discussions play out, so Aqurs1's comments also appear to be matching the attitude of existing GSes such as yourself. It'd be unfair if I only noted Aqurs1's comments when the comments you and SHB2000 made as global sysops come across as just as confrontational if not more so. --Ferien (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support YG1 (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support quebecguy ⚜️ (talk | contribs) 00:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Thanks for volunteering! Also, being a zh native speaker, Aqurs can give a great contribution for the team in those projects! --Superpes15 (talk) 14:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support no-brainer --Wüstenspringmaus talk 16:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support no concerns. Borhan (talk) 10:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --نوفاك اتشمان (talk) 14:31, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support--A09|(pogovor) 14:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support ShifaYT   ✉Talk 10:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 10:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support sure. 0xDeadbeef (talk) 11:13, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Good job.Hehua (talk) 01:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Saroj (talk) 03:57, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support No concerns. --Jan Myšák (talk) 11:30, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support JavaHurricane 12:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --V0lkanic (talk) 21:09, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 23:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong support. (because of recent concerns, I will have to stay   Neutral for now.) Codename Noreste (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Langusto (talk) 11:43, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support No concerns. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 12:45, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support-- Hasan (talk) 16:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support no concerns.--人间百态,独尊变态(Talk) 08:58, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I'd say not now. Initially, I was going to support but the recent iswiki incident has been making me think otherwise. I expect GS to have a certain level of diplomacy skills; this situation was clearly inappropriately handled. If the user is not globally banned or wmf banned, the project has the autonomy over how they handle the content unless it is clearly inappropriate. A mass revert, followed by the argument with local admin who is telling you the edits are fine is by no means acceptable for this role. While I do find few comments by local admin unacceptable for a collaborative community; I think the other involved users also played a part for things to get that far. Thus, the oppose.-BRP ever 09:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for feedback. Initially, I do not have any argument against my block. Since the block reason was 'content removal', I was just clarifying what I did actually, and I would fully respect their judgment if they consider those edits are appropriate for the community and advise against reverting them. However, the lack of communication before the block, did made me confused. The 'argument' part would be in Snævar's talk page, and that's not related of my block, it's because I believe their attitude is problematic. While I think the situation could have been managed better, but both sides need to put effort to improve it. aqurs 🍧 09:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Notice or warning aren't always necessary before blocks; it usually depends on the community. From what I see you asked local admin for clarification on block reason, which they did. But I do not see you acknowledge any mistake or error from your part there. Normally, unlock requests (at least on my home wikis) starts with understanding of the issue, followed by corrective measures. BRP ever 09:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Neutral Per BRPever. bright mensaje 08:04, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose In case anyone else is wondering, "the iswiki incident" can be read about here. It doesn't look too great for the candidate. --MF-W 17:11, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, no. The concerns voiced above are clearly problematic, as is you telling a local administrator that what you said above only that show you are refusing to follow policy and assume good faith, in defense of another global rollbacker stating Please stop giving bot permissions to accounts of long term abusers. Uljas kai is a sockpuppet of Risto hot sir, so it should be blocked on sight AND NOT given flood permissions. You are a guest helping out on a wiki that has local administrators. If they don't feel the need to get rid of someone, that needs to be the end of it, and you have not demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the expected behavior of global rollbackers. The behavior seen in that incident isn't behavior I think is really compatible with that of a holder of global rights. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    'Refusing to follow policy and assume good faith' part is for threatening with the word 'block your ass', and the policy is linked to WP:ATTACK on Icelandic Wikipedia version, I really cannot AGF to them if they made harassment like that, as it should goes for both way. If they don't feel the need to get rid of someone, that's completely fine, but the serious thing is don't grant LTA bot or flooder flag, if they think it's not harmful, at least it affected our work. Although that's just a reminder of course, and we can do nothing if they still grant flags to LTA. If you believe that it's a major red flag, I'll respect your decision anyway. aqurs 🍧 03:55, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You're still saying don't grant LTA bot or flooder flag. Granting of permission flags is at the discretion of the local administrators, and the demand made by A09 was delivered in a way that began the conversation confrontationally. You defended that "reminder", and I maintain that impacts my assessment of your judgement and communicative abilities as a global rollbacker. EggRoll97 (talk) 04:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd hate to break it to you, but I'm sure being on Meta-Wiki, you'll probably have found on by now that not everyone is a native English speaker. I'm not saying the way Aqurs1 responded was perfect (I certainly would've used phrasing that's a bit more calmer, but I'm also an en-N speaker), but they are also not a native English speaker and expecting them to be spot-on with communication in English goes against the entire principle of the Wikimedia Community aiming to cater to a diverse range of linguistic abilities – all the more so when the phrasing Aqurs1 used was still within the bounds of what's considered civil. I will also say it's pretty disappointing on your end to expect everyone to have that ability. //shb (t • c) 10:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Aqurs1 did not need to chime into that debate at all. They had the option to simply ignore the talk page in its entirety and remain uninvolved, but decided to chime in regardless. That is a decision that doesn't require linguistic ability to be able to make. Your point is correct that the comment they made was civil. My point is that they do not need to get involved at all. It was fully an option for them to let the discussion between A09 and Snævar continue and come to a natural end, without their involvement. EggRoll97 (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If block your ass is truly such an offensive comment that you cannot even bare to assume good faith that the admin could just be having a bad day, how do you intend to deal with the more emotionally charged situations global sysops face? Global sysops have to collaborate with smaller wiki admins, not find themselves in conflict with them. If a single comment stops you from assuming good faith, that shows a poor ability to work through conflict because as much as you seem to like to point to AGF, you're simply not following it. The moment you assume bad faith because of a single bad comment, as you've now explicitly stated you have (I really cannot AGF to them), your assumption of good faith has gone out the window. How can you even point to AGF when you are actively refusing to follow it yourself? --Ferien (talk) 08:40, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support no concerns. I don't see any problems on iswiki: they are the usual problems, already seen and poorly addressed by some small wiki. --Mtarch11 (talk) 04:33, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Neutral--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 06:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks to those who opposed here, which made me think more about it, and let me had some reflect to myself. My main point would be AGF is a two-way street. I believe iswiki should treat all users equally, from those with zero edits to admins and bureaucrats. But when they threatened to block A09 with a statement like that, in my view, is not conducive to collaborative communities like Wikimedia. I always strive to act in good faith, and my replies to the iswiki admins were made in that spirit.
I am aware of my mistakes in the conversation, that I left confrontational comments to the local sysop, which is not ideal. My stance for the future is clear: I apologies on that, and I will not repeat this type of behavior moving forward.
Not trying to convince anyone or what, but it happened, at least this is the best thing I can do here. aqurs 🍧 14:10, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global sysop for Svartava

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 14:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I'm a global rollbacker and an administrator on English Wiktionary, Meta and MediaWiki. I received encouragement from several active cross-wiki patrollers and I am finally running for GS after some careful consideration. I am active in patrolling cross-wiki and have also made numerous requests for global sysops at GSR, of which nearly all were accepted.

As indicated by my babel box, I have native and near-native proficiency in Hindi and English and have decent skill in Sanskrit as well; along with that I have quite interest in linguistics (as also seen in Wiktionary being my home wiki), due to which I have some basic knowledge of many other Indic languages (such as Punjabi, Gujarati, Bengali, Marathi, etc.) as well as some Romance languages (such as French and Spanish). My experience in linguistics also helps me when making sense out of and dealing with languages which are completely new as well.

As a global sysop, my areas of working would include GSR and GSRSD along with my usual cross-wiki patrolling work where having administrator tools on small wikis would be quite effective for me as well as reducing the load for other users with GS permissions. I have read the relevant policies (both global and local) and I understand the high-impact nature of GS permissions, considering which I will always tread mindfully and take care with whatever I am doing.

Thanks for considering! – Svārtava (tɕ) 14:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global rename permissions

Global rename for YG1

The following request is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Status:    Not done
Not ending before 22:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Greetings to all my fellow Wikipedists, I have been contributing to our encyclopedia as a Wikipedia volunteer for 1.5 years. I have the right to patrol and send mass messages on my local wiki, Turkish Wikipedia, during this time I have never abused the authority given to me on my local wiki, I have contributed to the world encyclopedia Wikipedia by working day and night. I have never hesitated to learn and ask questions; it is not a shame not to know something, it is a shame not to learn. I was trying to contribute to our encyclopedia on my local wiki, now I want to contribute globally and reduce the workload of my fellow Wikipedists in the renamer group because this is an encyclopedia that provides information to our world, so I am working and will work so that people learn correct and safe information and that Wikipedia is not damaged by bad users. Even if my application is negative, I will not give up Wikipedia projects and I will continue my struggle for humanity, best regards. YG1 (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Weak oppose  Oppose due to the lack of advanced perms anywhere. Thanks for volunteering, though. //shb (t • c) 22:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @SHB2000 Yes, you are right, I need to start learning from somewhere for me to develop so that I can experience and improve myself, it is true that I am inexperienced according to you at the moment, but you wanted to improve yourself like me at the time and you succeeded, I started on this path by taking this thought as inspiration. Thank you for your thought. YG1 (talk) 22:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely would encourage you to rerun once you get advanced perms on your home wiki (which I assume is trwiki), however. :) //shb (t • c) 23:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay maybe not, after learning about your troubled history on trwiki. //shb (t • c) 07:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Weak oppose Speaking from personal experience—having gone through the same path myself—it's important to start by requesting advanced permissions gradually. This will help you become more confident and capable, especially since these tools are quite sensitive. It's best to gain experience and build trust by using the most essential permissions on your home wiki or wherever you are most active. —Meruleh {talk} 23:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Weak oppose per above. Borhan (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong oppose This user was recently unblocked on trwiki, and I have suspicions about why are requesting GR permissions. I believe it's still a bit early to grant these permissions and fully trust the user. bright mensaje 06:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Could you explain a bit about your block log on trwiki for users who do not understand Turkish? I'm quite concerned about the number of blocks you have received there. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 06:37, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong oppose Hello everyone,
    I feel the need to draw attention to some important issues and offer a warning. I do not believe that YG1 requested this permission in good faith. He was recently unblocked from trwiki—earlier than he should have been. The reason for the block was vote canvassing. He did this to me in 2024: he asked me to support his application, I refused, and I reported him to the authorities. Later, he publicly shared some of my personal information on Wikipedia. That was the reason for the block. Therefore, I do not believe he is a suitable user for this or similar permissions.
    Furthermore, the GR permission has nothing to do with “bringing knowledge to our world” or “helping people learn accurate and safe information.” To be honest, these just sound like empty words to me. Due to unfortunate and demoralizing experiences I have had in the past, I would like to state here that I do not wish to engage with YG1, and I once again express my opposition to this request. -- kızıl message 07:11, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose. The block concerns are too strong to ignore here - global renamer is a role that does involve working with private information, and I also felt that the statement was little more than fluff (though detailed reasoning isn't required in a role like this). Leaderboard (talk) 07:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Neriah - 💬 - 10:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I would like to see some experience with advanced local or global user rights first. --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Per Kızıl's comment. – Phương Linh (T · C · CA · L · B) 12:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose per Leaderboard and Kızıl --Wüstenspringmaus talk 12:12, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done Closing early as unlikely to pass under any circumstances and to avoid further piling on. Thank you for volunteering, please take the comments here into account, and feel free to potentially re-apply in the future. EPIC (talk) 12:29, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global rename for Iming

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 04:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I am an edit filter manager on Chinese Wikipedia, I've read the policies and guidelines about rename, and I'd like to help process rename requests on zhwiki and global rename requests written in Chinese. I noticed that the global community expects the requester of this right to have advanced permissions on their home wiki, I'm not sure whether the edit filter manager permission meets this requirement or not, but based on enwiki, I believe it does. So I have submitted my request here. If it does not meet the requirement, I'll withdraw it. Thank you! :) Yours sincerely, Iming 彼女の愛は、甘くて痛い。 04:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for global IP block exemption

Global IP block exempt for Α->Ω

Status:    In progress

<I'm live in mainland China, So I have to use a proxy to access Wikimedia's other projects and projects in Chinese languages.>, thanks, --Abiran Goliah (talk) 16:50, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP block exempt for User:Kurgenera

Status:    In progress

I'm a citizen of PRC mainland. Because of GFW, I have to use VPN to access Wikimedia's other projects for further contribution. Thanks for your access.--Kurgenera (talk) 05:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global IP Block Exempt for 古海岸遗址

Status:    In progress
— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 古海岸遗址 (talk) 2025-04-21T03:02:21 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for HMOXDSS1

Status:    In progress

我是一名来自中国大陆的维基用户，先前已在中文维基百科申请本地IP封禁豁免权，由于GFW的封锁，我现在必须使用代理才能编辑维基，但我的代理被封禁，无法编辑维基的页面。因此，希望处理人员为我授予全域IP封禁豁免权以避免受到影响。--HMOXDSS1 (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's the connection between you("HMOXDSS1") and "Abiran Goliah"? Stang 01:29, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
抱歉源代码复制错了。Sorry, the source code was copied wrong. HMOXDSS1 (talk) 06:42, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
已修复错误The error has been fixed HMOXDSS1 (talk) 06:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for 2 Factor Auth tester permissions

Requests for other global permissions

global-interface-editor for MusikAnimal

Status:    In progress
Not ending before 01:27, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I got a nifty reminder from Global reminder bot that my Global interface editor rights will soon expire. I'd like to request a longer appointment, or if permissible and should you have my trust, to retain these rights indefinitely. See xtools:globalcontribs/MusikAnimal/8 for some examples of my somewhat sporadic, but ongoing global interface editing. In addition to helping out fixing scripts, deprecations, etc. on an ad-hoc basis, I maintain several "global" gadgets that occasionally require me to manage their local gadget definitions. See previous requests [1][2][3] and my 2020–23 stewardship. In full transparency, I note that I also hold global-edit-interface rights with my staff account (solely for editing in a staff capacity). — MusikAnimal talk 01:27, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global_permissions&oldid=28599123"