Steward requests/Permissions/2021-05

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Administrator access

Leofbrj@it.wikiversity

Status:    Done

Hello, I've been elected sysop (second time after a temporary adminship in 2019) as a result of a local election, please consider giving the permissions. Thank you, have a good day.--Leofbrj (talk) 07:08, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2022-05-04. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. Ruslik (talk) 10:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Neriah@he.wikinews

Status:    Done

Hello, Hebrew Wikinews is a small community, and we agreed that we need a new sysop there. tagging @Neriah: Xnet1234 (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 2021-05-01 --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Martin Urbanec, Can you make the request on Sunday and not on Saturday? Neriah (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Neriah I'm not sure why, but sure.  On hold until 2021-05-02 Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec, Now yes it can be done. Thank you! Neriah (talk) 19:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-05. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec, I opened the voting there for sysop indefinitely (like the other operators), and not for 6 months.
I would be happy if you extend my permission. Neriah (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Omarov M.@av.wikipedia

Status:    Done

This is third time I have been elected as administrator of Avar Wikipedia. On some pages there are changes that do not correspond to the norms of this language and Wikipedia; it is necessary to protect some pages from vandalism. In this regard, it is necessary to take appropriate measures, and Avar Wikipedia has no active administrator. So I decided to correct the situation. With respect Omarov M. (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-07. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- stanglavine msg 18:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Arularasan. G@ta.wikiquote

Status:    Not done

Hello, before this ta.wikiquote. There is no Tamil language known person as sysop. Last year I applied to be an administrator with the support of our community(Administrador Community discussion page). After that I became a temporary administrator. But it is now out of date. So again I ask you to extend my administrative approach.--Arularasan. G (talk) 13:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@Arularasan. G: to extend your rights you need a new local vote. We can't assign permissions without a local vote. Please, start one and post the link here. Thank you, stanglavine msg 16:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
@Arularasan. G: Any update here? stanglavine msg 20:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Not done no answer. stanglavine msg 18:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Neriah@he.wikinews

Status:    Done

Hello, Hebrew Wikinews is a small community, and we agreed that we need a new sysop there. tagging @Neriah: Xnet1234 (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 2021-05-01 --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Martin Urbanec, Can you make the request on Sunday and not on Saturday? Neriah (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Neriah I'm not sure why, but sure.  On hold until 2021-05-02 Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec, Now yes it can be done. Thank you! Neriah (talk) 19:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-05. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec, I opened the voting there for sysop indefinitely (like the other operators), and not for 6 months.
I would be happy if you extend my permission. Neriah (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@Neriah:

Otherwise stewards will decide whether to assign permanent adminship and the duration of adminship. See Steward requests/Permissions/Minimum voting requirements.

see above. Regards --Zabe (talk) 19:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@Neriah Hello, according to Steward_requests/Permissions/Minimum_voting_requirements, we are unable to grant a permanent adminship at this point, because of the size of the community. Thank you for your understanding. Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
OK. Neriah (talk) 18:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Tmv@ja.wikivoyage

Status:    Done

My administrator right will expire in 3 weeks. I am currently the only administrator of Japanese Wikivoyage. We want to avoid a situation where there is no administrator. For this reason I am applying for an extension of my admin and interface-administrator rights. Thank you. --Tmv (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Granted until 31 March 2022, per local policy. stanglavine msg 22:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Jumpy01@cowiki

Status:    Done

I would like to renew my temporary adminship access (3/6 months) for housekeeping and maintenance tasks in Corsican Wikipedia. There is no active sysop controlling it in real time. Here is the link of my announcement in local Community Portal. This is my second renewal. Jumpy01 (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-12. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Anasskoko@ha.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I'm requesting a long term admin right after the first and previous right has expired.--AnasskokoTalk 07:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 2021-05-15. stanglavine msg 15:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2022-05-15. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 01:05, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

شيماء@arwiktionary

Status:    Done

Please give her sysop flag on ar.wiktionary for 1 year. Best --Alaa :)..! 18:10, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2022-05-16. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:19, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

SHB2000@na.wikipedia

Status:    Done

While the Nauruan Wikipedia does have four admins, none of them are active. I am one of only 2 active people on this wiki, and the adminship page has been dormant for a while. I put a request recently, but I doubt it'll be answered soon. 7elteven's request has been silent.

I also occasionally revert vandalism there. SHB2000 (talk | contibs | en.wikivoyage | w:User:SHB2000) 12:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 2021-05-16 --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2021-08-16. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
@Martin Urbanec: Thank you so much! SHB2000 (talk | contibs | en.wikivoyage | w:User:SHB2000) 08:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Miałczuś@pl.wikinews

Status:    Done

Please grant Miałczuś administrator rights for three months, as requested. Openbk (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2021-08-19. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. --Wim b 13:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

arjunaraoc@tewikibooks

Status:    Done

I request that admin request be granted for six months to address the present requirement and any future requirements. Arjunaraoc (talk) 03:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-20. Ruslik (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Đức Anh@vi.wikibooks

Status:    Done

This is my second time running for this position. I hope to be able to become an administrator indefinitely. Đức Anh (talk) 04:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 2021-05-19 -- Amanda (aka DQ) 05:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
AmandaNP: Hey! Today is 2021-05-20! Đức Anh (talk) 06:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
@Đức Anh: Do not reset/remove requests that haven't been processed. I have not had the time to look at this and any steward can look at it. Please leave it for evaluation. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 01:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
@AmandaNP:: Nobody look at this request. When it is done? Đức Anh (talk) 16:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Granted for 1 year to expire on 2022-05-22. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- stanglavine msg 17:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Yivan000@tlwikibooks

Status:    Done

Requesting to extend my adminship. TY.— 🍕 Yivan000 viewtalk 12:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Fixed header. -- CptViraj (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Done Granted for 3 months to expire on 2021-08-26. To prolong your (interface) adminship, please start another election a few days before your temporary access expires, and after a week post your request again to this page. Thanks. -- stanglavine msg 22:28, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Synoman Barris@sw.wiktionary

Status:    Done

Hello once again, I am a former admin requesting a further extension of the rights. I have done a lot of improvement to the wiki i.e introducing word of the day. As per now I am the only active user. I would like to block spammers and delete pages not within the project scope. The vote has lasted for seven days. Cheers --Synoman Barris (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@Synoman Barris: Done Granted for 6 months to expire on 2021-11-28. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

NickLazımDeğil@tk.wikipedia.org

Status:    Not done

Hello,

... and I want to be an admin. NickLazımDeğil (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

A notice is still required regardless of no active users to vote. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Come on, bro, let's get a hand in this dump. Only 1 day. Ok? NickLazımDeğil (talk) 08:44, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I am not a "bro" and the regulations are stated clearly here. Not done -- Amanda (aka DQ) 10:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
With exactly two edits on the wiki and no justification in the request, this is unlikely to pass regardless of a vote on the project. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
All right, but I'll keep puffing your head up. NickLazımDeğil (talk) 15:33, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Interface administrator access

Tmv@ja.wikivoyage

Status:    Done

Same as #Administrator access. I obtained the consent to continue as an interface-administrator from the community. Thank you!--Tmv (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Granted until 31 March 2022. stanglavine msg 22:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Nirajan pant@dty.wikipedia

Status:    Done

This Wikipedia requires fixing of some MediaWiki tools and Twinkle tool but non of the Admins have Interface administrator right. Thus we are unable to fix the issue. So I am requesting here for the interface administrator right for an indefinite period. Nirajan pant (talk) 10:13, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until 24 May 2021 Ruslik (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Done Granted for 2 months to expire on 2021-07-25. Ruslik (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Bureaucrat access

CheckUser access

Oversight access

Vito Genovese@tr.wikipedia

Status:    Done

The nomination has received 26 support votes and 7 oppose votes, resulting in 78.78%. The Confidentiality Agreement has been signed as well.

As for the points raised by the opposers, let me provide a brief recap: I recently opposed the indefinite block for a user who, in their rationale for an oppose vote in a request for checkuser, referred to existence of a previous username -- not the name itself -- of the candidate. The username in question is a real name, but the change in question was the result of a renaming request, not a clean start. The blocked user concluded their vote with a note declaring their intention to "review her relationship with Wikipedia if the request becomes successful and declare this publicly", which was interpreted as a threat to reveal personal information of the candidate. I have argued that the information is question is not non-public as the oversight policy points out, so what the blocked user had done was unpleasant at best, only because the preference of the candidate was known. I also pointed out that the closing remark cannot be interpreted as a threat, because "this" clearly refers to the preceding statement, which is their intention to review their relationship with Wikipedia. Several fellow sysops have since agreed with this assessment and the block has been lifted on the same day. The first opposer (who was originally a supporter) notes that their confidence in me is shaken, because I don't respect the request for a clean start. They also note that such disclosure of personal information leaves the candidate open for off-wiki threats, and since this is relevant for being an oversight, they are opposing. In my response, I pointed out that this was not a case of clean start, nor the information in question was non-public information. Not to mention that the blocked user had only acknowledged that there was another username instead of mentioning the name explicitly. I argued that being an oversight has to do with non-public information, which is why it is not relevant. The second opposer expresses similar sentiments, concluding that I am not competent to identify personal information. They also refer to an edit to the local checkuser policy, which they consider unethical. With the edit in question, I rewrote what a checkuser is allowed to do by closely mimicking the global policy, because the original local text contained outrageous provisions, including that it is acceptable to provide the IP information to local authorities if they ask us to, which can have extremely dangerous consequences in a legally unstable country like Turkey. I pointed out in my response and argued that a local WMF project is not allowed to have provisions that contradict a global policy and that change had no bearing on the discussion where the policy had been referred to. The third opposer points out that I will not be able to devote time to being an oversight, because I am already a sysop and a crat. The fourth opposer argues the same, but because I am already a crat with no reference to adminship. The fifth opposer agrees with everything. The sixth opposer does not like a single user holding multiple advanced user rights. The seventh opposer agrees with the first opposer. In my response, I pointed out the workload of a crat is not more than one hour per year, so I did not agree with the time-related concerns. What I was particularly concerned about at one point was whether the community saw me fit to handle non-public information, because it has implications for my adminship as well. I now think that there is a consensus on the view that I am, the lack of which was going to result in my resignation.

Anyway, sorry for the long request. I just wanted to present things to you in a crystal clear fashion.

Vito Genovese 14:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

  • As the second opposer at the voting, because of the reasons that I explained, I think that there is no consensus. I have a strong drawback about the user's knowledge and mastery about non-public personel information -this was why I opposed for-. Just wanted to explain this situation at there. --justinianus 12:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
  • There is no consensus as candidate user stated, the concerns of opposed users are reasonable factors and it seems that candidate user did not answer them clearly in Tr.Wiki nomination page. Btw, same user concluded a bureaucrat nomination as unsuccessful despite same support rate 78% that she/he had at the moment. But now she/he applied for oversight access here. It's a bit contradictious, isn't it? Best regards. --Berm@nyamessage 19:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
    If there is no local policy, then Meta rules follow, which is 70%, unless I might be missing something. Leaderboard (talk) 19:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
The thing is @Leaderboard:, the nomination has not been ended yet by a Turkish Wikipedia bureaucrat. There is no rush :)--Nanahuatl (talk) 19:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
I am not sure that's actually needed - does CheckUser policy say otherwise? Leaderboard (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Well it's strongly recommended that consensus and strong support (Which is +80% rate) should be provided, especially for bureaucrat, oversight etc. nominations. It can be clearly seen that some nominations are concluded as unsuccessful even if they had higher support rates. Idk what's current progress here for these requests but it seems there is no consensus or strong support as candidate user stated here. Btw, i want to remind that the candidate user made request here before the nomination is concluded, i leave it up to the discretion of you. Best regards. --Berm@nyamessage 19:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
@Leaderboard:, what we do is to end these type of nomininations first. The approval of the consesus hadn't done yet. A Turkish Wikipedia bureaucrat that's not involved should end the nomination first and then we can act however it's necessary. Right now, there are no decision has been made.--Nanahuatl (talk) 19:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
On my home wiki, Turkish Wikipedia, crats' final decision for consensus of local votes is determined only for request for adminship and bureaucratship and closed by bureaucrats as consensus. Although there is a local policy for chekcuser and oversighter rights, there is reference to the global policies about voting (at least 25-30 support votes and %70-80 pre/con). It also states that if the candidate users has 25-30 support votes and %70-80, they can request access from the stewards, as our local CU and OS policies are adopted from global policies. See some requests for trwiki 1 2, 3, 4. --Uncitoyentalk 20:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────┘
To clarify any confusion, here is a verbatim translation and the original text of the trwiki local policy:

If consensus is reached at a request for oversight access (defined as achieving at least 70-80% support in polls where voters can support/oppose a candidate, or achieving the highest number of votes in a poll where voters are selecting amongst various candidates), the candidate must request access at the Steward requests/Permissions page on Meta Wiki and should include a link to the community decision when they are doing so.

Adaylar, başvurularını yaptıktan sonra fikir birliği sağlanması halinde (olumlu-olumsuz oylamalarda en az %70-80 oran ya da seçim düzeninde oylamalarda en yüksek oy sayısı) erişimi Meta üzerindeki Steward requests/Permissions sayfasında talep etmeli ve topluluğun kararının yer aldığı sayfaya verilmiş bir bağlantıyı da eklemelidir.

The confusion appears to stem from 1) users conflating the request for oversight access with the much more common RfA and RfB processes, where there is bureaucrat involvement, and in the case of RfBs, a higher defined cutoff (85%) and 2) the local policy not specifying any mechanisms for determining consensus apart from the candidate's own request, the wording being especially unclear regarding the 70-80% interval. The request above nonetheless appears compatible with the local policy. --Seksen iki yüz kırk beş (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold until the agreement is recorded at the noticeboard. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:37, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Martin Urbanec, which noticeboard are you referring to? Is there an active discussion or resolution plan about this matter? --Superyetkin (talk) 12:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
@Superyetkin I refered to the ANIP noticeboard: Access to nonpublic personal data policy/Noticeboard, which has a list of users who signed the confidentiality agreement. When the request was posted, the requestor was not yet listed there.
This happened already, but I didn't yet have time to formally review the voting and assign permissions – my apologizes. Me or another steward will do it soon.
Sincerely, Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Removal of access

Dr. Coal@trwiki

Status:    Withdrawn

I request my sysop rights to be removed. Dr. Coal (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

@Stewards: Please extend the cooling-off period for this one.
Vito Genovese 11:13, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
I hereby withdraw my request. Truly sorry for the inconvenience, and thank you, Vito Genovese. -- Dr. Coal (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, we are very happy to have him as a sysop in Turkish Wiki. Please extend the cooling-off period for this one. --Kemalcan (talk) 20:43, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Noted as withdrawn. Trijnsteltalk 08:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

User from Dag@lezwiki

Status:    Done

Hello. I ask you to remove the administrator access from user User from Dag. In accordance with the Policy on the activity of administrators, an administrator must complete at least 150 edits in the Lezgi Wikipedia over the last year, also he must take at least one administrative action. I asked him on his talk page to increase his activity, but nothing has changed. User from Dag has not met the activity requirement for five months in a row, so he had a lot of time.--Soul Train (talk) 22:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 22:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Adavyd@ruwiki

Status:    Done

I would like to request the removal of my local bureaucrat access on ru-wiki. For the time being, please keep my ru-wiki admin rights. Thank you, — Adavyd (talk) 12:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Done -- Amanda (aka DQ) 14:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Bubamara@sk.wikipedia

Status:    Done

I ask to remove sysop and bureaucrat flag on skwiki for Bubamara. Reason: per local rule: she does not have sysop edit for last 4 months. Bureaucrat flag should be (by sk rule) removed with sysop flag. Vasiľ (talk) 06:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Done -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Lakokat@zhwiki

Status:    Done

I have been inactive lately due to personal reasons. The community has evolved and I am lacking behind. There is a lot for me to pick up again and I do not see myself worthy for the admin tools now. I will definitely nominate myself again when I have relearned and regained trust from the community. Thank you very much. --Lakokat 18:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 On hold for 1 day, standard for resignation of advanced permissions --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
@Lakokat: Done Thanks for your services. stanglavine msg 02:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Phjtieudoc@metawiki

Status:    Done

This user hasn't done a rename for over a year. Thus, by inactivity policy, the global rename permissions should be removed. --Zabe (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Legion@elwiki and Glavkos@elwikinews

Status:    Not done
Status:    Not done

Hello! This sysops are inactive since April 2019. Best regards! 2A02:587:547C:3F21:11AF:EE15:B72F:4F60 16:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Please state pursuant to which policy are these removals being requested. Thanks, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Admin activity review 2A02:587:547C:3F21:DD17:72A1:F15:5DF8 20:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Not done then. Admin Activity Review (AAR) is a periodic process which is triggered only once a year. If by January 2022 these users meet the inactivity criterions, they'll be notified and eventually removed. This does not prevent the local community to vote for their removal should a local process for that exists. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Torstein @no.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Has not been re-elected in the re-election linked above. Please remove admin bit. Thanks.Anne-Sophie Ofrim (talk) 07:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Done, best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Ctande@no.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Has not been re-elected in the re-election linked above. Please remove admin bit. Thanks.Anne-Sophie Ofrim (talk) 07:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Done, best regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Ajsmen91@plwikisource

Status:    Done

Per Polish Wikisource inactivity policy, I regretfully request for removal of Ajsmen91 administrator bit as he is inactive for over a year and has not responded to the notification. Ankry (talk) 23:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Everything looks in order, but I see nothing about the email required mentioned at pl:wikisource:Wikiźródła:Odbieranie_uprawnień##Regulamin_odbierania_uprawnień_nieaktywnym_użytkownikom. Was that sent? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for asking. I have checked my email archive: the notification email to Ajsmen91 was sent via wiki on Fri, 14 May 2021 01:00:42 +0200 (this is the time that the copy received by me is dated). I just forgot to mention this in the notification. Ankry (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Matma Rex@global

Status:    Done

The user's GIE has been expired, it was granted on 21 May 2020 for 1 year to expire on 21 May 2021. CC: Matma Rex. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 05:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

MoiraMoira@global

Status:    Done

The user made their last edit at 10:47 29 May 2020 (UTC) on nlwp. Per the policy, their abuse filter helper right should be removed. CC: MoiraMoira. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Done --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

妙詩人@zh.wikipedia

Status:    Done
  • 妙詩人 has been inactive longer than 6 months that local policy prescribed, and still be inactive after notified over 1 month. As a local Bcrat, I hereby request for removing his sysop flag, Thank you.—AT (talk) 08:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for their service. --Sotiale (talk) 10:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Eddy bf@id.wikipedia

Status:    Done

Dear stewards, the Indonesian Wikipedia has decided to remove the sysop status of Eddy bf due to inactivity. Could you kindly implement this community consensus? Thank you. --Danu Widjajanto (talk) 08:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Done, best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:51, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Gzdavidwong@several

Status:    Not done

Per AAR, this user has inactive for 3 years on editing, and 2 years on logs. Discussed locally and no one oppose. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Status:    Not done

Per AAR, this user has inactive for 2 years on both editing and logs. Discussed locally and no one oppose. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Status:    Not done

Per AAR, this user has inactive for 2 years on both editing and logs. Discussed locally and no one oppose. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

AAR is a regular process that is handled by stewards when the time comes. Given no local inactivity policy, Not done. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Miscellaneous requests

Russian Federal Subjects@viwikibooks

Status:    Done

Eliminator for 2 years, please. Đức Anh (talk) 07:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Temporary permissions (expired and rejected requests only)

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions/2021-05&oldid=21527256"