Steward requests/Permissions/2009-11

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Administrator access

Ryuch@ko.wikisource

Status:    Done

Thanks. Albamhandae 13:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Ko.wikisource has local bureaucrat. You should ask him for granting sysop right. LeinaD (t) 15:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
The last edit by the only crat on ko.wikisource was made in September 2007 and the last logged action of him in 2006. There seems to be no activity. Barras (talk) 15:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I requested this because the localcrat has been inactive since September 2007. --Albamhandae 16:13, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Have you at least tried to contact him (talk page, email)? --FiliP ██ 07:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
He didn't leave an e-mail address on Wikisource, thus I cannot contact with him through the e-mail. --Albamhandae 12:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
As said FiliP, first you should try contact him, leave a message on his talk page. If he didn't respond, we grant sysop right after week. Moreover I would suggest you organize a vote for removing his bureaucrat status. LeinaD (t) 12:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I have just finished leaving a message on his talk page.[1] Last year, the removal vote of his bureaucrat status had been opened, and we determined to reject. [2] --Albamhandae 16:22, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we will wait until 27 October. BTW1. Maybe try again organize a vote? BTW2. Your bureaucrat was recently active on en.wiki. LeinaD (t) 18:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Done, sysop status granted. LeinaD (t) 18:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Xavier_Dengra@cawikiquote

Status:    Done

Thank you. --Xavier D. (talk!) 21:10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Alex Pereira falaê 13:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

小躍@kv.wikipedia

Status:    In progress

I want to make Wikipedia's contributions in the Komi wiki. Don’t encounter any destruction,so I work as time the Administrator, Can the management edition, the protection, delete the page and restore the page, and manage all users.--林躍錩 12:31, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Can you please add a local announcement saying that you intend to get administrator-rights, and give a link to this page. If noone objects within a week, we will grant you temporary sysop-rights. Laaknor 21:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Marmzok@ckbwiki

Status:    Done

Hi. I request Administrator and Bureaucrat accesses for our new Wikipedia after the community voting. The election started 16/10/2009 and ended 31/10/2009. Thanks --Marmzok 13:30, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Half-done - granted sysop status. Ckb.wiki has only one sysop (after that two sysops), relatively small community, in my opinion it's not enough for granting bureaucrat access. Moreover, please look at bureaucrat: "A small community generally doesn't require a local bureaucrat, because stewards can easily handle the low traffic of requests from that wiki with little delay; generally a user with this access is not needed until several local administrators are present.". Other opinions? LeinaD (t) 15:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. No need for crats just yet, I don't think. ++Lar: t/c 17:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I've marked this request as completed.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

J.delanoy@tpiwiki

Status:    Done

I temporarily assigned J.delanoy administrator access on tpiwiki to clear a deletion backlog, there being no active local administrators. He is now done and the access was revoked. —Pathoschild 18:07:07, 06 November 2009 (UTC)

Amdf@mhr.wikipedia

Status:    Done

My sysop access will expire 15-11-2009, please prolong it. амдф 15:36, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Please make a local announcement so if others object they can say so. - Andre Engels 23:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. амдф 19:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I support. Azimbaj 11:51, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Prolonged for another 6 months, expires: 15-05-2010. Regards, LeinaD (t) 12:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. амдф 18:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


SergeyJ@ru.wikiversity

Status:    Done

I was the administrator in betawikiversity. Now the independent Russian section (http://ru.wikiversity.org) is created. I ask to grant to me the constant rights of the administrator that I can technically support the given project. In the beginning it is necessary to transfer the maintenance from betawikiversity in ru.wikiversity.org. And then to keep order and observance to rules. SergeyJ 02:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I would like add to this proposition about temporary "ImportUpload" right to transfert more easier the 300 russian files from betawikiversity tou ru.wikiversity. Allow up to middle-december ?.Crochet.david 17:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
If it is not a part of the rights of the administrator, really I ask still the rights "ImportUpload" SergeyJ 17:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
It is an individual question - why me pursue on ruwiki !? SergeyJ 14:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
If the ru.wikiversity-community wants him, and is large enough to take the tools back if they wish it, ruwiki-history should not be important in the promotion. However, the question is if a new wiki has a stable enough community yet. Laaknor 14:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure it's large enough. At least 13 supports wasn't considered enough year ago. vvvt 17:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
In the same place just the status has been appropriated ... And the analogy here is completely not pertinent .. SergeyJ 17:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
All basic participants participating in development beta wikiversiteta have supported me. Opening of RU Wikiversitet already means that the community is available. SergeyJ 14:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Sysop granted. Good luck to the ru-community with your new wiki :) Laaknor 22:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks ! SergeyJ 22:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

MacTire02@gv.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I wish to apply for admin status on the Manx language wikipedia. We currently have no permanent admin on the project but we were informed that if we could get a vote from Alison as well as two other users we would be able to gain a permanent admin. The discussion for this proposal is listed as the first discussion in the template above. If we are still unable to obtain a permanent admin we have already had a vote on temporary admin status which can be seen at the second discussion listed above. Currently User:Shimmin Beg has temporary admin status until 16th November as part of an agreement between us, balancing on 6 months admin status for me, 6 months for him. But we in the community would be grateful if we could have a permanent admin. In the last few weeks we have seen a "flurry" of activity on the project and we feel it is necessary for us to be able to concentrate on managing this as well as maintaining pages, patrolling for vandalism, having the ability to delete nonsense pages, as well as general maintenance on the project. Kind regards, --MacTire02 13:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I only see strong community support and no opposition after multiple temp admin runs. Permanent admin status granted per community vote. Please keep up the great work! :) --Daniel Mayer (mav) 03:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much Daniel. Our community will greatly appreciate the permanent admin status. --MacTire02 08:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


seicer@en.wikipedia

Status:    Not done

Former administrator in good standing who is requesting administrator status to complete trivial tasks. Seicer 20:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Not done. Local bureaucrats exists and can grant sysop, as such stewards will not do it. Please contact a local 'crat. Laaknor 22:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

ПешСай@mhr.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hello. I request Administrator access for our Wikipedia after the community voting. The election started 10/11/2009 and ended 19/11/2009. Thanks. ПешСай 17:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Alex Pereira falaê 18:18, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hercule@ace.wikipedia

Status:    Done

There are few votes, but the pool is open since 2 weeks, and the 2 sysops have supported it. Regards Hercule 09:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

This page don't exist. Please, show us a valid link. Thanks. Alex Pereira falaê 11:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
The page is here.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
This just seems weird - the community is fine with having an admin who does not speak the language? Odd. --Daniel Mayer (mav) 03:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, they agree with it. Is it forbidden ?
I'm sysop and crat on wuu.wikipedia while I don't speak Wu, and there is also an admin/crat on wo.wikipedia who don't speak Wolof.
--Hercule 09:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
It's not unheard of... there are a fair number of other examples out there I believe. ++Lar: t/c 02:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Given the small community should this be temp access?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes with very limited active users. Done to expire on 2010-02-22.--Jusjih 21:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

小躍@hak.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I want to make Wikipedia's contributions in the Hakka wiki. Don’t encounter any destruction,so I work as time the Administrator, Can the management edition, the protection, delete the page and restore the page, and manage all users.--林躍錩 11:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I think he is asking for extension to his sysop status as his temporary permission expires on 24 Nov 2009—Bencmq 11:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you please make an annoucement on hakwiki about this, so if users don't want you to continue we will know? Otherwise, I'll prolong this closer to the expiry date.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Done - temp access extended for 6 months (May 21, 2010).  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Unai Fdz. de Betoño@eu.wikiquote

Status:    Done

My temporary permission is going to end in two days. I ask for a longer one. Thank's. --Unai Fdz. de Betoño 12:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please make an announcement on euwikiquote so the local community can make their opinions on this known?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes. I made it here, adding a link to this page.--Unai Fdz. de Betoño 18:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Done - extended temp access for 6 months (May 21, 2010).  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Jamesofur@mwl.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Requesting temporary sysop for a couple minutes just to go through the speedy deletions Jamesofur 04:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to help.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
done, added link to my post on their portal above. Jamesofur 04:53, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your help.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Dferg@biwiki

Status:    Done

May I have +sysop for 5 minutes in order to delete some gibberish? Thank you, —Dferg (disputatio) 16:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Done - thanks for your help.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. It is done now. —Dferg (disputatio) 16:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
& removed  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


Marmzok@ckb.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hi. I requested Administrator and Bureaucrat accesses for our new Wikipedia. I got admin access now, but we have no user with Bureaucrat accesses. You said: "A small community generally doesn't require a local bureaucrat, because stewards can easily handle the low traffic of requests from that wiki with little delay; generally a user with this access is not needed until several local administrators are present.". Now we need a steward for give a bot flag but even we dont know how to find him. Thus I repeat my request for Bureaucrat access. Kind Regards Marmzok 19:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

小躍@hakwiki

Status:    Done

I want to make Wikipedia's contributions in the hakka wiki.don't encounter any destruction.--林躍錩 08:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Still voting, see hak:Wikipedia:Kón-lî-yèn/Chhiáng-khiù/User:小躍—Bencmq 14:25, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello, You can contribute there without sysop status, or please explain what would You need sysop status for? One vote is not enough for permanent status btw. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 21:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
If I work as time the Administrator, Can the management edition, the protection, delete the page and restore the page, And manages all users.--林躍錩 23:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Done for 3 months to expire on 2009-11-24 as your wiki is too small to warrant you permanent adminship. Please ask locally again if you want renewal. Thanks.--Jusjih 19:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Demmy@yowikipedia

Status:    Done

Please kindly extend my temporary adminship to yo.wikipedia which expires tomorrow. Thank you. Demmy 07:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Done, expires: 01-09-2009 please remember to translate the interface at betawiki: only and to upload images preferably to commons:, please come back a few days before the status expires to prolong it or hold a local voting if the community grows, thanks, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 14:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Extended for more 3 months, expires 01-12-2009. Please remember to translate the interface at betawiki: only and to upload images preferably to commons:, please come back a few days before the status expires to prolong it or hold a local voting if the community grows, thanks. Alex Pereira falaê 13:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

Борислав@bg.wikinews

The following discussion is closed.
Status:    Not done

The lack of bureaucrat hinders some projects for attracting news submitters, and we decided that it will be useful to have one. Borislav is the creator of the Wikinews in Bulgarian, and is an active bureaucrat in bg.wikipedia, and we agreed that he is the natural choice. -- Григор Гачев 17:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Refused, bg.wikinews has only one sysop and too little community (and not enought supporters in provided link). Moreover, please look at bureaucrat: "A small community generally doesn't require a local bureaucrat, because stewards can easily handle the low traffic of requests from that wiki with little delay; generally a user with this access is not needed until several local administrators are present.". Please do not feel discouraged. Regards, LeinaD (t) 17:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
OK. As the projects for attracting news submitters, mentioned in the request, do require the presence of a bureaucrat, they will be suspended until one is present. (Unless the interest in implementing them is lost before this.) -- Григор Гачев 20:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure about what you want? Bureaucrat is a user who has only technical abilities, here you have listed bureaucrat rights. I don't understand you what "projects" you couldn't realise without bureaucrat access. LeinaD (t) 21:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I have installed about a dozen MediaWikis, and on most of them happen to be the only bureaucrat, for 2 to 4 years. Have modified some of them (rewriting at places the PHP source). Should be hell dumb to still not know what exactly any user group is in a typical MediaWiki. :-)
bg.wikinews is almost dead. To have a thriving community we need people, but people don't go to dead places. The projects mentioned are meant to break this vicious circle.
First, we are going to submit some news to bg.wikinews via a bot (I participate in a news site project, and obtained an agreement to release some news under CC-BY-SA 3.0). I know also several other sites who will see this as a clever advertisement of ours (news from us will contain a reference to the source, as I believe news ought to), and some of them will follow the suit. After bg.wikinews starts getting more than 20-30 news per day, it will start attracting readers, and with them will come the editors - maybe not many, but certainly more than now.
For this, we will need first to get a bot status for my bot (and maybe play with its specific rights, if wikinews projects allow a bureaucrat to manipulate them). Maybe the bot status will have to be stripped and given anew several times to allow for some experiments (I see, for example, that some autoconfirmed accounts meet a captcha when submitting a text with links, while other ones don't - this, and some other things may need experimenting to fine-tune the things). And this rock'n'rolling will have to be done promptly and conveniently for the people who will make the tuning, even if it has to be done a dozen times.
Next, we will probably have to create some more bot accounts, as other sites may like to start submitting news, too. Some will probably have to learn the difference from news and spam the hard way - blocking bot accounts, stripping bot rights, giving them again on agreement, all this very promptly (bots tend to be productive). Also, the first editors attracted by the opportunity to create news typically need a lot of admin-level sweeping after them. At this point we will need at least one, most probably more additional administrators: Borislav will probably be too busy to watch for all minor stuff that needs admin rights.
Of course, we could nag at you with bureaucrat-level requests until all comes to the point where we will have several admins, and The Rules will justify getting a bureaucrat. However, things will go far smoother and faster if bg.wikinews gets a bureaucrat now (from my experience, about one human month of work will be saved for the first six months). And Borislav has been a bureaucrat in bg.wikipedia since its creation, and has a sterling record at it. So, I believe that giving him a bureaucrat status will make the things easier for everybody around, and will save a lot of extra work and time.
Sorry for the long explanation; hope it was satisfactory. -- Григор Гачев 23:50, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
For experiments I would like suggest you use your dozen installations of MediaWikis. If you really need a bot flag, please submit your request on Steward requests/Bot status. Granting the user bureaucrat status in a very small community threatened that no one will control the user. The rest said Kylu below. LeinaD (t) 12:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to get involved since I'm not a steward, but in your discussion about becoming a bureaucrat you told the other user you wanted to grant him autoconfirmed and bot, but a bureaucrat cant grant autoconfirmed, I don't think you really know what a crat can do. Huib talk 22:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't think that you have really understood our discussion - we said nothing like this. However, you seem really convinced you did. No wonder you believe so easily that the other people are clueless. -- Григор Гачев 23:50, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Not done Stewards may only promote people who have been selected by a consensus of the local community and when there are enough local sysops to merit the promotion (typically five or more). Regardless of the personal merits of the individual, we can not grant bureaucrat under these conditions. This is not even a case of our deciding the matter: We're simply unable to do so, under the policy that our stewardships were granted. Sorry, but Wikimedia Stewards are simply unable to help you on this point at this time. Kylu 02:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

As the policy your stewardships were granted states:

Stewards do not make decisions, such as whether a user should (or should not) be promoted. Their task is to implement valid community consensus.

You either implement the community consensus, or are in direct breach of your obligation as stewards - that is, Kylu resorted above to a plain and direct lie. As we have a consensus of all users who care at all on the topic (want a voting?), you should be obliged to carry it. However, you didn't.

Also, as one of the oldest wiki rules states:

If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining a project, ignore it.

In this case it is clear that a guideline - not granting a bureaucrat status without having at least five sysops - prevents you (and through you the editors) from improving a project (bg.wikinews). So, you should break it. However, you didn't this, too.

In short: You have the discretion (actually, the obligation) to allow what is needed for bg.wikinews to improve and grow, but decided to break your obligations in order to obstruct it. Sorry: this is the bare fact. Hope you get an award for your work.

Enough said. -- Григор Гачев 03:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

You missed a linked page: Steward_handbook#User_access. I'll note some points, however: 1) Stewards, like any other volunteer on any other project hosted by Wikimedia, are not obliged to do anything, nor do I see myself as obstructing your ability to do anything (you can ask another steward if you'd like, though I'd advise you to do so one-at-a-time.) 2) See Steward_handbook#User_access. Your project has neither enough local users discussing the matter. Two users on a talk page isn't going to generate a meaningful consensus on that project. Actually, a paranoid mind may say it looks suspect, in fact. 3) IAR is decided by the individual, and I don't think that the greater wikimedia community would support me giving your friend bureaucratship, only based on your say-so. 4) If you wish to continue the discussion, please make a subpage at MW:RFC. This page is neither a forum for voicing your disapproval of my denial nor a place to attack other users. Continuance of such may well result in action by a local administrator. Please reconsider your position on the matter. Kylu 03:58, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Borislav@bg.wikinews

Excuse me for reviving this discussion so soon after it was archived, but I feel that certain details were not well explained which led to some haste and waste. Since I am also in touch with these details, I'd like to mend the matters and explain again why is this request for an exception of the general rules.

The Bulgarian contributing community is relatively small, not enough human resources to cover all sister projects and most of the people who voluntarily contribute to Wikimedia are those who contribute to Wikipedia. Another reason, especially concerning BG Wikinews, may be that, to the best of my knowledge, we don't have in Bulgaria a news media that originally releases news under free license, so we don't have such a free data source, while using non-free media (paraphrasing texts, access to images) consumes more efforts than those available.

Now, one of our wikipedians Grigor Gatchev (Григор Гачев, check SUL, a local user, bot operator, holder of several own wikis, programmer and active promoter of free software) used his personal contacts and managed to convince one relatively small but flexible Bulgarian news media to release some of its content under CC-BY. He also programmed a special bot to wikify and import this content on a daily basis, roughly 20-30 articles per day. Which already comprises a big resource, at least big for our humble standards; and freely licensed, which is no less victory :)

So, he will need bot status. But before he leaves the bot running, he will need to first make some tests which require the flag be changed on, off, on, off... (due to some already encountered problems with captcha and other fine tunings). Which means either constantly bugging stewards with such requests (which would take much more time, efforts) or the other option is that we have a local bureaucrat on BG Wikinews, and so far there is only one admin, Borislav, the person who once requested the opening of all BG projects and has been given either bureaucrat or admin rights in all of them (check his SUL and user rights). This is why Grigor used the phrase "natural choice" in his first request.

Our point is that presently there is nothing in BG Wikinews, around which a community may be built, while Grigor's efforts to run the news bot may very soon break the vicious circle and bring readers, and of course editors. An explanation was given that the wiki must have at least 5 admins in order to apply for crat, but with a *currently* active and interested community tending to zero this simply cannot happen in reasonable time.

So a community may start forming, only when there is *something* around which they may gather, a resource, which has lacked for about 6 years, and only now we have the chance to have it. Once we have the content, admins and crats will be very soon really needed to clean after the (inevitable) vandals, to help operating the bot (giving and removing the flag when needed) and do maintenance which is not accessible to regular editors. One admin will not be able to do all the job, while the lack of a crat to facilitate the bot operator's job will hinder its initial fine-tuning which may affect the quality of the bot job. It is not a good idea to make the project's progress constantly dependent on stewards for decisions of purely operational nature.

In other words, it is really an exceptional request that we'd like to be granted more trust than the usual procedure provides, but the idea and the expected result is really promising and the people involved (Borislav and Grigor, after writing you - me too :-) ) are not going to abuse this trust, as we haven't done it so far in all other sister projects where we actively contribute. Thank you in advance. →Spiritia 20:01, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Done I've spoken independently to Spiritia. Given the user involved and the nature of the request, as the local project is intending on granting and removing the bot flag, and that I'm convinced that doing this supports the growth of the nascent Bulgarian Wikinews project. bastique demandez! 20:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Does that communication address the reasons it wasn't done originally?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it addresses the fact that the reason it wasn't done before was per policy, and that I've granted it as an exception to the policy, in my position, because I'm convinced it will foster the growth of the project. I've also acknowledged that it was declined before per policy, as was appropriate. bastique demandez! 20:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, you granted him bureaucrat flag (I'm bit confused), but who will control what happens on bg.wikinews? If this is an exception, it should be somehow controlled. In my opinion permanent bureaucrat should be turned into temporary access - on one year period with possibility of prolongation. It's too small project for permanent bureaucrat. LeinaD (t) 11:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
who will control what happens on bg.wikinews? -- what this has to do with bureaucrat privileges? --Петър Петров 10:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Granting administrator access by bureaucrat have to base on decision of community, but bg.wikinews is a very small community, so it should be controlled. LeinaD (t) 14:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


Marmzok@ckb.wikipedia

Status:    Not done

I got admin access now, but we have no user with Bureaucrat accesses. You said: "A small community generally doesn't require a local bureaucrat, because stewards can easily handle the low traffic of requests from that wiki with little delay; generally a user with this access is not needed until several local administrators are present.". Now we need a steward for give a bot flag but even we dont know how to find him. Thus I repeat my request for Bureaucrat access. Kind Regards --Marmzok 07:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

For bot access, please make a request here and a steward will respond and act accordingly. This is Not done. --FiliP ██ 22:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


CheckUser access

IvanLanin@id.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I'm replacing the previous retired CheckUser. Above is the voting page. I've sent my proof of identity via email to the Foundation. Thank you. ivanlanin ♫ 11:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Waiting for Carys announcement of received identification. Laaknor 11:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
User has been identified: diff. --Barras 17:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. LeinaD (t) 17:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. •• ivanlanin ♫ 18:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Dominic@enwiki

Status:    Done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 22:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 11:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Jredmond@enwiki

Status:    Done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 22:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 11:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Checkusers@ptwikipedia

Status:    Done

On wiki.pt, Daimore and I were elected for a one-year term.

I'm identified (since February 2009: I'm already a local checkuser and was reelected now), but Daimore has not done so yet. So, once there are two identified users for the position, please, grant us the checkuser status. Thanks. Ruy Pugliesi◥ 14:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Waiting Daimore's identification. Alex Pereira falaê 18:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Now Ruy and Daimore are identified. @lestaty discuţie 19:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Done for both. Please register to the checkuser mailing list and, if you're using IRC, request access for #wikimedia-checkuser on #wikimedia-stewards. --FiliP ██ 19:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


MBisanz@enwiki

Status:    Not done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 23:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, we are waiting for your respond. LeinaD (t) 11:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm just going to mark this as not done & have it archived. When you know for sure you want it done, just place a new request. Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Oversight access

user Dweller@en.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Candidate has identified to the WMF.[9] Risker 17:21, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 17:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Dominic@enwiki

Status:    Done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 22:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 11:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Jredmond@enwiki

Status:    Done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 22:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 11:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


MBisanz@enwiki

Status:    Not done

For the Arbitration Committee, Risker 23:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, we are waiting for your respond. LeinaD (t) 11:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
As above - please make a request when you know for sure.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of access

SieBot@nds-nl.wikipedia

Status:    Done
Done--Nick1915 - all you want 12:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

bureaucrats@plwiki

Based on the new rule (after a year of inactivity, the bureaucrats lose their access), which was approved here, please remove bureaucrat access the following users:

Airwolf@plwiki
Status:    Done
MatthiasGor@plwiki
Status:    Done
Silthor@plwiki
Status:    Done
Taw@plwiki
Status:    Done
TOR@plwiki
Status:    Done
Tsca@plwiki
Status:    Done

LeinaD (t) 14:00, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

All Done. Laaknor 14:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

דוד1@hewikipedia

Status:    Done

Broccoli • talk page 09:20, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Please thank the user for his contributions. Laaknor 21:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, and I did as you advised. As far as I'm concerned this request can be archived. Broccoli • talk page 22:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

JzG@enwp

Status:    Done
Done--Nick1915 - all you want 21:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. JzG 23:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Adilch@ur.wikipedia

Status:    Done
Removal of access has been done, would you please leave a further notice to this user, thanking him for his past work as a sysop? Thank you, M/ 22:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! And I have left a message of thanks on his talk page. --Urdutext 02:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Aalahazrat@ur.wikipedia

Status:    Done
Removal of access has been done, would you please leave a further notice to this user, thanking him for his past work as a sysop? Thank you, M/ 22:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! And I have left a message of thanks on his talk page.--Urdutext 02:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sphl@ja.wikipedia

Status:    Done

He/she does/did not have edit activities for three months since 10:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC). According to de-sysop policy of ja.wikiprdia, I request to remove his/her sysop access. Thank you.--Hitachi-Train 11:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you please leave him/her a notice on talk page (and a "thank you" for his/her past work as a sysop) in japanese language? Thanks. --M/ 22:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I noticed him/her on talk page. Please check it.--Web comic 03:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Thanks a lot.
--M/ 09:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Basvb@nlwikipedia

Status:    Done

Own request - Greetings, Basvb 18:26, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your work. --M/ 22:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Andre Engels@nlwikipedia

Status:    Done

Own request - Andre Engels 21:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andre, you're listed both as a sysop and a checkuser. Is only one flag that you want to have removed?
Thank you, M/ 22:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the unclarity and thanks for asking. It's the sysop flag I would like removed. - Andre Engels 22:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Okay done, thanks for your kindness and your work as a sysop. --M/ 22:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Swind@ja.wikipedia

Status:    Done

He/she does/did not have edit activities for three months since 11:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC). According to de-sysop policy of ja.wikiprdia, I request to remove his/her sysop access. And I left notice his/her talk page. Thank you.--Hitachi-Train 12:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to the user for his pas work as a sysop. --M/ 12:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Metodicar@sr.wikipedia

Status:    Done
Yes, that's all right. Thank you for your work as a sysop.
Ciao, M/ 22:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I did my best to do my job conscientiously. Thank you and ciao. :)--Metodicar 22:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

You really didn't need this. :( --FiliP ██ 22:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


Liesel@dewiki

Status:    Done
Done --Mardetanha talk 12:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


Lechatjaune@ptwikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove my bureaucrat access due to the end of my term. Lechatjaune 00:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I find a justification for removing the rights of the other two on that page you linked. I mean I can do that in your own case as you requested it, but I'm not sure about the other two. Can you give a link to the policy, or to any discussion particularly about you three people? --თოგო (D) 00:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
On wiki.pt, bureaucrats and checkusers are elected for a one-year term. If a user doesn't run for a reelection or if he does but he is not relected, he must have his flag removed. Please see pt:Wikipedia:Pedidos de burocrata ("O mandato de um burocrata está limitado a doze meses") and pt:Wikipedia:CheckUser#Wikipedia:CheckUser/Candidaturas ("O mandato de usuários com acesso à ferramenta de CheckUser está limitado a 1 (um) ano.") Lechatjaune 00:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Thogo, Wikipedia in Portuguese now has new bureaucrats, Lechatjaune, Leonardo.stabile and Alexanderps were not elected and their privileges should be removed. I endorse and confirm this request ;) Thanks @lestaty discuţie 02:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for you 'crat job. Alex Pereira falaê 10:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Leonardo.stabile@ptwikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove his bureaucrat access due to the end of his term. Lechatjaune 00:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for you 'crat job. Alex Pereira falaê 10:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Alexanderps@ptwikipedia

Status:    Done

Please remove his bureaucrat and checkuser access due to the end of his terms. Lechatjaune 00:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. =) Alex Pereira falaê 10:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Keriluamox@frwiki

Status:    Done

GôTô@frwiki

Status:    Done
Done. Merci pour les services en frwp. Alex Pereira falaê 23:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Беломоев Алексей@ruwiki

Status:    Done
Okay, done. --M/ 10:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Не А@ruwiki

Status:    Done
Okay, done. --M/ 10:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment: It's was He A's own will to remove the access due to loss of interest in the adminship. Arbcom only confirmed it. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 17:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Random832@enwiki

Status:    Done
Done. LeinaD (t) 16:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Cseki@enwiki

Status:    Not done

--~Cseki 08:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Not done as you don't have any user rights on enwiki. --FiliP ██ 09:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Muneyama@svwiki

Status:    Done
Done. --Erwin 09:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Lavallen@svwikipedia

Status:    Done

Please, remove my sysop and bureacrat-flag on sv.wikipedia. No change on other projects... -- Lavallen 16:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your work as sysop and bureaucrat. --M/ 16:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank You!! -- Lavallen 16:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Laforgue@plwiki

Status:    Done
Done. Thank you for your work as a sysop. --M/ 20:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


Fristu@dewiki

Status:    Done
Done. Would you please leave a "thank you" message in german language on this user's talk page? --M/ 20:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, done. --Complex 20:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hennessy@zhwiki

Status:    Done
Please, you could be make an edit in your talk page on zh.wikipedia? You don't have a Unified Login... Thanks. Alex Pereira falaê 18:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The user made an edit on the local resignation page stating that he would like to resign. another user thought he was too inactive in administrative work and asked him to resign (and therefore he came to this page). —Bencmq 02:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for his job. Alex Pereira falaê 13:03, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

PatrickVanM@nlwiki

Status:    Done
Comment: translation of [20]: "I hereby hand in my modflags. From now on I will only be working on articles that I myself find interesting and no longer spend time on deletionlists (except when it concerns articles that are interesting in my eyes) and other discussions in which nonarguments are used continually. I also will not be making an effort anymore to support newbies, in many cases you don't get no gratitude and is constructive criticism seen as a personal attack." Taketa 15:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I've requested a confirmation to the user, may be on second thought... --M/ 17:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I have no account on metawiki, so you have to do with this anonymous signing. As confirmation I will sign your request on my user page (see [21]). With kind regards, 195.235.227.10 14:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Thank you for your work as a sysop. --M/ 14:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, that was quick :-) I've enjoyed most of my time as a sysop. 195.235.227.10 14:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Al_Silonov@ruwikt

Status:    Not done

Please, block this admin. Al Silonov delete all texts and links to authoritative dictionaries in project page. Publicly distributes its crazy ideas without giving any authoritative links. All pages are formatted they are the fruit of his imagination. Any person who disagrees with its illegal actions, he simply blocks. I beg to deprive this man of administrator rights and block.--Nikeagrad 17:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Your community vote this? You could show us this discussion? Alex Pereira falaê 18:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Publish voting in this discussion? No, because all registered users who adequately represent the situation - blocked! We are ready to vote on any external resources. This admin should be blocked because the officers exceeded their authority and their inappropriate behavior. Please, help! --Nikeagrad 20:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
This is sufficient to me. Please note that local wiki has 4 administrators (all active in the last month) and one is bureaucrat. --M/ 23:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Netsonfong@zhwiki

Status:    Done
Done. Thanks for your job. Alex Pereira falaê 12:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Juliancolton@simplewikiquote

Status:    Done
fin Kylu 03:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

海獺@jawiki

Status:    Not done

SAs a note for stewards looking at this: requester is blocked as a xwiki vandal on 10 wikis (everywhere he has edited except here) Jamesofur 07:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment Comment (Sorry Japanese only) この依頼は却下するべきであると思われます。理由は、権限除去に関する合意場所が明示されていない。依頼者は他のウイキメディアプロジェクトで荒らし、多重アカウントの不正使用などを理由として無期限ブロックされている (全ウイキメディアプロジェクト投稿履歴・投稿ブロック記録)。本依頼も私怨によると思われるからです。場合によっては本依頼を荒らしとして丸ごと除去してしまってもいいのかもしれません。--FREEZA 08:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Translation: "This request should be rejected. It has not had any discussion and consensus at the jawp. This requester has been blocked indefinitely for the vandalism using unfairly multi-accounts at several wikimedia projects. I guess he/she has a grudge against the sysop 海獺. This request may be considered a vandalism and it should be removed."
(User:FREEZA) translated --Balmung0731 08:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Not done. Best regards. Alex Pereira falaê 13:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I'd also place a warning to the user requesting two flag removals blatantly ignoring meta.wiki procedures and requirements. Any further abusive request will lead to an immediate and permanent block. --M/ 14:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Miya@jawiki

Status:    Not done
See above Jamesofur 07:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment Comment (Sorry Japanese only) この依頼は却下するべきであると思われます。理由は、権限除去に関する合意場所が明示されていない。依頼者は他のウイキメディアプロジェクトで荒らし、多重アカウントの不正使用などを理由として無期限ブロックされている (全ウイキメディアプロジェクト投稿履歴・投稿ブロック記録)。本依頼も私怨によると思われるからです。場合によっては本依頼を荒らしとして丸ごと除去してしまってもいいのかもしれません。--FREEZA 08:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Translation: "This request should be rejected. It has not had any discussion and consensus at the jawp. This requester has been blocked indefinitely for the vandalism using unfairly multi-accounts at several wikimedia projects. I guess he/she has a grudge against the sysop Miya. This request may be considered a vandalism and it should be removed."
(User:FREEZA) translated --Balmung0731 08:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Not done. Best regards. Alex Pereira falaê 13:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Mladifilozof@srwiki

Status:    Done

I don't wont to be admin no longer, just ordinary user. Please, remove my admin privilege.--Mladifilozof 22:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Done - Thank you for your service. ++Lar: t/c 02:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Rhcastilhos@ptwiki

Status:    Done

In accordance with the policy of inactivity, please remove the sysop tools. Thanks @lestaty discuţie 22:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Obrigado pelos seus esforços. Alex Pereira falaê 02:23, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Policy appears to require the user be notified, which apparently was done here: [22] ... However the user does have recent admin actions. Was it that there were not enough? ++Lar: t/c 02:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The local policy says "50 edits in last 180 days", he made 36 edits in last 180 days. Alex Pereira falaê 02:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah... mistranslated. I read that as admin actions rather than edits... oddly he made almost 50 admin actions though. ++Lar: t/c 03:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

NuclearWarfare@simplewikiquote

Status:    Done

I removed NuclearWarfare's administrator flags following a self-request over IRC, confirmed by his hostmask (NuclearWarfare!NuclearW@wikipedia/NuclearWarfare). —Pathoschild 02:35:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Juliancolton@simplewikibooks

Status:    Done

-sysop, thanks. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Done - thanks for your work there.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Jack_Merridew@enwikisource

Status:    Done
Done. Thanks for your job. Alex Pereira falaê 12:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

EBB@dewikipedia

Status:    Done
Done and notified on talk page. --M/ 16:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Pmlineditor@simplewikiquote

Status:    Done

Pmlineditor ∞ 09:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. LeinaD (t) 10:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Mathel@plWikipedia

Status:    Done
Done and thanks for all your work.

Bocianski@plWikipedia

Status:    Done
Done - thank you for your service to the Polish Wikipedia. Your rights on be-x-old:wp have not been modified. ++Lar: t/c 03:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Manning Bartlett@enwiki

Status:    Done
Done. Thank you for your work. --M/ 13:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Amdf@mhr.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Hello. After the local voting our community decided to remove administration access of user Amdf. The election started 10/11/2009 and ended 19/11/2009. 50% has voted agains this user, while the user needs 2/3 of all votes to become an administrator. Thanks. ПешСай 17:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Isn't clear to us. Amdf did have your temp sysop flag extended to May 15 2010, make a local announcement here. Alex Pereira falaê 12:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Amdf post a message to prolong his administrative access. But we begun a local voting. The result of the voting is to give administrative access for user ПешСай, and to remove access for user Amdf (because two of four votes are agains). I have made an announcement here. --ПешСай 18:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
You are doing very strange things, I think. I don't know why you want to remove my temporary sysop access after all my work in mhr wikipedia. I want to havem my temp sysop rights until May 15 2010, and I will not ask to prolong it after. амдф 18:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
The voting have made such decision. It is not comfortable for our community to have administrator, who don't know native language at all. And I have told you(Amdf) that you have made you work with mistakes, after which we spend a time to fix them.--ПешСай 19:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Are sure that having two administrators is not better than just one, at least for a limited amount of time? If you abstain, User:Amdf has 2/3 of votes. As you know, Stewards will not decide for your community, but given that it's a small one, I think that most of us will feel much more confortable if you decide to cooperate in order to achive the best results. Thank you, M/ 12:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I am sure. Mhr wikipedia is not too big to have several administrators. One admin will be able to watch and track whole activity in project. I don't want to abstain in the vote. I wouldn't be so insistent if Amdf's work was definitly good. Amdf have made mistakes, and doesn't know language at all. This two points let down development of Mhr Wikipedia. Stewards, please make attention to the fact, that this is the wish of community and the result of voting. Thanks. --ПешСай 17:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I will fullfill this request, after having jotted down that the only other user opposing User:Amdf had 83 edits at the date of the poll. A CU was negative. Any comments from other stewards? --M/ 17:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

If Amdf don't help mhr:wp, he don't need tools. Don't speak local language, to me, isn't a problem... Alex Pereira falaê 18:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
What is the problem, Guys? This is the local voting. The rule in the voting says that participate may anyone, who had made at lease one edit in Main namespaces before the start of the voting. --ПешСай 19:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Don't afraid that I'm a spamer or any other bad guy. I'm don't. I have translated the whole most used messages for Mhr:wp, and have made a lot of affords in incubator. So, it is my interest to make Wp:Mhr better. And I don't understand why you are delaying the decision made by the community during the voting.--ПешСай 19:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm taking the time that I think is needed, please don't pressure! 32 other Stewards have the same right that I have, but this is not an urgent matter and the community vote involves 4 users, and I'm wondering also if this may be a really small number for granting and also for removing rights.
@Alexander, I can count over 100 log lines for this sysop. --M/ 23:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Done and notified on talk page. --M/ 16:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. --ПешСай 18:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hamham,Dersonlwd,Farm@zhwikip

Status:    Done
Status:    Done
Status:    Done

All of the 3 sysops have asked for removal of their access at zhwikip, see the discussion links. --Kegns 10:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the flag. Please thank all three users for their work as sysop on zh.wikipedia. --M/ 12:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Razorflame@simplewikt

Status:    Done

Please remove both my sysop and bureaucrat bits. Thanks, Razorflame 02:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Done - Per your request (note that this was corrected to remove the request to remove Global Rollback, so that was not removed). Thank you for your service to the projects. ++Lar: t/c 02:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Restored per your request on IRC. —Pathoschild 02:22:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Done again. After further discussion with Pathoschild and other stewards, I have removed the bits again. A request to remove bits can be granted by Stewards. A request to restore them, even if given in 1 minute after the request was handled, cannot be. It is up to the community process to restore them to the user. Razorflame, speak to a local bureaucrat about restoring your permissions.
Note, if necessary, we can have a discussion about this, should there be a needed clarification of policy, but it is my view that this is the current situation. ++Lar: t/c 02:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok then. I will rerequest them back through the community. Cheers, Razorflame 18:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Mike.lifeguard@frwiki

Status:    Done
Done. LeinaD (t) 21:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

DerHexer@frwiki

Status:    Done
Done. LeinaD (t) 21:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Dantadd@ptwiki

Status:    Done
Done Thanks.--Nick1915 - all you want 00:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks @lestaty discuţie 00:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Dishayloo@dewiki

Status:    Done
Done. Thanks for his job. Alex Pereira falaê 12:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (rejected and expired requests only)

Shimmin Beg@gvWiki

Status:    Done

I'd like to request admin status at Manx Wikipedia. Our existing admin's temporary status has expired. Thanks. -- Shimmin Beg 12:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Done, expires: 16-11-2009 please remember to translate the interface at betawiki: only and to upload images preferably to commons:, please come back a few days before the status expires to prolong it or hold a local voting if the community grows, thanks, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 15:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Removed & left a note for the user on gvwiki.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Seagull.Stefanos@el.wikiquote

Status:    Done

On March 27th you gave me admin permission for three months, which are almost to expire. For this reason I'm asking you either to renew my temporary permission or to give me permanent adminship, as (probably!) no one else has express the will to help Greek Wikiquotes. I'm planning to make some more changes & addings in the project, during the next (summer/holiday) months... Thanks in advance! Thank you! Seagull.Stefanos 07:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Done - OK, let's renew this for next 5 months. Expires November 25 2009. --FiliP ██ 08:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Changed to permanent access. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests

User:Ciphers@arwiki for import

Status:    Done

Hi, i would like to request the importer rights on arabic wikipedia for my account for trial. I may change these rights to my bot account later in case the trial worked as expected. link to the local request is here, sorry it is in Arabic. thanks! --Ciphers 11:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

 On hold as you just added this on 2009-11-05.--Jusjih 02:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. --Ciphers 03:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Done to expire on 2010-02-13 as I see only one other user commenting on your request.--Jusjih 01:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! :) --Ciphers 14:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


Bot flags on mgwiki

Status:    Not done

Hello,

Many bots doesn't have the bot flag on mg.wikipedia. Indeed, the 48 robots that are categorized as such (which excludes the robots that have no user page), only 20 are classified as bots on wikipedia malagasy. That's why I'm requesting here, to give them an official bot flag. If you have another questions about this request, you may ask them in my home wiki --Jagwar 交談 homewiki 14:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Not done. Your wiki allows global bots, and the bots are probably global bots doing interwiki only. If you wish to give them local flags, you should discuss it and file a request on SRB. Laaknor 16:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, thank you! --Jagwar 交談 homewiki 17:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions/2009-11&oldid=24933214"