Steward requests/Global

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Steward requests
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by Spacebirdy (talk | contribs) at 13:47, 8 April 2009 (→‎Global IP block exempt for MelancholieBot). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Spacebirdy
Shortcut:
SRG
This page hosts requests for membership in an existing global group and for requesting Global (un)blocks, locks and hidings. Proposals for new groups should be made on Meta:Babel.

To make a request, read the relevant policy (global rollback, global bot, global blocking) and make a request below. Explain why membership is needed for that group, and detail prior experience or qualifications and for requesting a global block, please indicate why a global block is necessary and for how long.

Any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion and vote.

Cross-wiki requests
Meta-Wiki requests

Request for global (un)block

none currently.

Request for global (un)lock and (un)hiding

  1. To request, copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why the account(s) should be locked/unlocked.
====Global lock/unlock for [[user:Foo|Foo]]====
*{{LockHide|Foo}}
*{{LockHide|Bar|wikt:fr:}} (if you know the home wiki)
*{{LockHide|Username|hidename=yes}} (if the username should not be shown here)
...
none currently.

Request for global IP block exempt

  1. To request global IP block exempt please copy the template below and fill in the info, and explain why or link to relevant discussions.
====Global IP block exempt for [[user:Foo|Foo]]====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!--don't change this line-->
 |domain    = global<!--don't change this line-->
 |user name = 
 |discussion=
}}
<Add an explaination here>, thanks, --~~~~

Global IP block exempt for MelancholieBot

Status:    In progress

MelancholieBot operates on IP(s) being in a range that has been blocked on jawiki e.g. (they do not have the IP block exemption feature). The range for jawiki is a Server4You VPS one, considered as Open Proxy there and on enwiki. Many thanks, --Melancholie 20:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Comment Comment there is no group like that right? Wikimedia_Forum#Global_IP_Block_Exempt_Group Huib talk 20:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
See http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=gblrights&page=Special:GlobalUsers/Global+IP+block+exempt --- Best regards, Melancholie 20:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

A few comments:

  1. I'm not sure we're ready to implement this at present without further discussion.
  2. This is meant for users who need to bypass global blocks - not local ones. If blocks on jawiki are a problem for MelancholieBot then they should either make them softblocks or get ipblock-exempt locally. Local ipblock-exempt is for when local blocks are a problem. Global ipblock-exempt is for when global blocks are a problem.

Please see bugs 18343 & 18337.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, softblocking ("anonymous only"?) doesn't make much sense for potential open proxies, I think, so there's definitely 18337 to be fixed first. Just thought that a global bot could get a global exemption ;-) --Melancholie 20:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment Comment, I personally don't see a problem here, Melancholie is a trusted user, his bot is a global bot, I know him from de.wikt where he is admin and I can't remember anymore how often he was ready to help me out with technical problems on any projects I asked him for. IP block exempt is for trusted users that are innocently caught in a block that was set to protect the project against vandalism of other users, imho that is the case here too. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 20:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • Regarding softblocks on open proxies: Yes it does make sense. Regarding Spacebirdy's comments: It's not a question of whether the user is trusted (certainly he is). Nevertheless, it is a local issue, not a global one. It is not our job to ensure that the blocks placed by local sysops don't have collateral damage - it is their job. There is no shortage of methods for them to place blocks in a more responsible manner. Until this is hashed out, I would not want to see this done.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
@softblock/sense: Spammers/vandals could create many accounts from an unblocked IP then first, using the account for spam/vandalism purposes then afterwards using their open proxy (a server). So, not sure whether communities are happy with "Block anonymous users only"+"Prevent account creation" only (some will do, though). I think I will wait for bug 18337 for the first (seems to become necessary for TorBlock anyway ;-). --- Best regards, Melancholie 20:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Question: Were there a consensus from ja.wiki to allow it, could a global group ("jawp.ipbe") with a wikiset of jawp only be created to grant this? It'd likely be an interim measure until the community approved a local IPBE right. But... thoughts? Kylu 05:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Global IP block exempt for WikimediaNotifier

Status:    In progress

The WikimediaNotifier operates on IP(s) being in ranges that have been blocked on enwiki and others like jawiki e.g. (they do not have the IP block exemption feature). The ranges are Strato and Server4You ones, both considered as Open Proxy ranges. Many thanks, --Melancholie 20:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not done for now, per [1].  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:20, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Requests for global permissions

  1. Before requesting, make sure that:
    • You have a global account;
    • You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
    • You have read the relevant description page for the access you want (see Global rollback). Your request might be rejected if you don't follow their instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.
  2. To request, copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable.
====Global rollback for [[user:Foo|Foo]]====
{{sr-request
 |status    = <!-- don't change this line -->
 |domain    = global <!-- don't change this line -->
 |user name = 
}}

The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration (typically approximately 3 days). If there is significant opposition, the discussion will require at least one week and 75% approval. This is not a vote, and all input is welcome. Stewards will determine whether consensus exists; when doing so it is likely that the weight given to the input of those involved in cross-wiki work will be most influential.

Global rollback for Techman224

Status:    In progress

I been doing vandalism "undoing" on small wiki for some time now by monitoring #cvn-sw, this tool would be much easier to use since I can rollback an edit without waiting for the text to load and freezing my browser sometimes. I have rollback on en and simple wikipedias, and also on English Wikibooks, so I know what rollback is and know when to use it and when not too. I also have been working on User:COIBot/XWiki lists. Techman224Talk 17:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Comment Comment I don't want to say no , But you are very new to SWMT and you don't have many crosswiki edits , 689 projects scanned. 10534 contributions found in 73 projects and 10229 of your edits is just in four projects enwiki meta enwikibooks and simple . so i think better to wait a bit more , Then i will support you for sure --Mardetanha talk 17:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
I agree - I'd prefer to see some more experience and maturity before such a request.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sorry but I tend to a no here, I have the feeling the user has too little experience in this area, please remember small wikis are sensitive communities. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 10:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Global rollback for Wutsje

Status:    In progress

Hi. I'd like to request global rollback. Recently I've been monitoring changes on small wiki's on #cvn-sw rather intensively, reverting vandalism where and when appropriate (as you can see here), and I've come to a point where I feel that I could make good use of this tool. As an admin on nl:wiki I'm already quite familiar with it and I think I can say that I know when to use this tool and when not. Wutsje 14:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

"rather intensively" is an understatement as well, he beats the rest of us to it almost every time. Effective and committed, as well as reliable and knows when &how to revert. Finn Rindahl 14:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Global rollback for Juliancolton

Status:    In progress

Hi all. I'm a sysop on the English and Simple English Wikipedias, where I've used rollback extensively. In addition, I've used the undo feature on several other wikis. I can hardly call myself the most active cross-wiki vandal fighter, but I do patrol #cvn-sw a bit. Overall, I think the tool would make my job quite a bit easier. Thanks for your consideration! –Juliancolton | Talk 20:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Comment Comment I trust you and i think you are familiar with tools but i don't see enough cross-wiki activity 58052 out of 58245 edits are just only 3 projects enwiki,simplewiki and commons and some of your edits in other 27 projects are just creating your user page .I would be happy to support you, next time with more cross-wiki activity --Mardetanha talk 20:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough entirely. Thanks for the feedback. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

See also

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

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Global&oldid=1452665"