Steward requests/Global permissions

Shortcut: SRGR Please be sure to follow the instructions below: Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability. Please also review the Global rollback policy. Please note that Global rollbackers discussions are not votes. Comments must present specific points in favor of or against a user's approval. Instructions for making a request Before requesting, make sure that: You have sufficient activity to meet the requirements to be allocated the global rollback flag To make a 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 {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} === {{sr-request |status = <!-- don't change this line --> |domain = global <!-- don't change this line --> |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} <!-- don't change this line unless you're nominating another user --> }} ::''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+5 days}} UTC'' The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than 5 days (with rare exceptions , no matter how obvious the result may seem). 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.

Very active in the SWMT now and am very much so lacking in my ability to help combat vandalism. I've had this bit in the past. Thanks, Razorflame 13:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

&   That goes a bit fast. --MF-W 14:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True, this request was a bit fast, but I'm finding myself more and more handicapped in fighting cross-wiki vandalism. I've had this bit in the past. Is there anything that I've done that shows that I cannot handle this bit again? Razorflame 14:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think it would have been appropriate to provide continuous activity before requesting this tool again, especially since this was mentioned in your last SRGP? I will not oppose here as your recent activity is quite impressive, but I also share MF-W's concern. Vogone talk 14:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that my activity has been continuous? Yeah, that is something that I was specifically working on, but I'm not sure why you worded your comment that way? Have I not been active enough? Razorflame 14:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel I can count activity in 2010 + 1 week of activity now as continuous. :-P Vogone talk 14:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that is your prerogative :) Razorflame 14:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I personally have no problem with this request, but maybe you should have waited a little longer. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:15, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Support, still. This is no big deal and I don't see a reason for him to not have this flag. - Hoo man (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose My oppose last time was on maturity and attitude, not activity, and that just doesn't change in a week. Courcelles 15:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Per last time, no concerns with how he'd use the bit. If this were a request for gs then I would have some concerns with attitude per some of his responses on the last request, but this is a request for rollback. Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:03, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support, per his experience with the tool and recent activity. LlamaAl (talk) 17:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose per Courcelles. Your statement didn't address whether the issues of the last request weren't going to reappear.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  You're right. I forgot to mention both of those points in my statement for this request. Here's my addendum: I don't think I've treated anyone in a disparaging manner in this request, and I do not believe that I am being combative like I was the last time. I might still be replying to some comments on this request, but all replies to comments made in this request have been in a normal, mannered tone of voice with no hint of attitude. As for attitudes, I believe that they are easily changed over the course of a week, and I believe I have made the correct attitude adjustment since my previous request. As for the maturity, I cannot really say if anything has changed because I cannot tell if what I am doing is what others would consider to be the mature thing. What I'm trying to say is this: I don't know what others think of me because it is something that I lack. With that being said, I believe that I am mature enough to handle the bit, with any residual maturity issues being worked out in the interim. I don't believe that the residual maturity issues will hamper my judgement when it comes to my judgement in terms of what is appropriate or not in terms of whether or not to revert, but I do want to say this: I've been fighting vandalism on Wikimedia projects using the local rollback tools since 2008. I specialized in fighting vandalism on the English Wikpiedia using the Huggle tool when I was still active on that project, and I believe that when I was active on that project, I had a chance to possibly become a vandalism-only administrator on that project. I've also used the rollback tool on the Simple English Wikipedia since 2008, and while I did make some questionable reverts over my time period on that project, those questionable reverts happened over the course of when I first got the bit and first started fighting vandalism. I've also been a sysop and a bureaucrat on the Simple English Wiktionary, and while I did have a few bumps in the road (I was still new to being an administrator), I smoothed those out and handled every situation on that project with poise and maturity, in my opinion. I've also had the global rollback tool three times in the past, and each of those times, I used it in the correct manner and was trusted with it. I don't know what has changed since then, but I think that I am being held up to a bit high of expectations. While maturity and trust are key for getting the global rollback tool, I believe that both of those criteria are met. I am speaking honestly here, and I am not trying to be combative. I hope this alleviates any concerns you might have about my ability to handle the global rollback tool. Razorflame 19:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support I am surprised that this is any controversial. He gave up his rights voluntarily and there's no reason he shouldn't be getting them back. -- Liliana • 21:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --cyrfaw (talk) 04:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose - Per Razorflame's combative behavior. Because global rollback affects so many small wikis that often go unwatched, those with global rollback must be able to demonstrate their ability to self-police and positively interact with members of a large variety of projects. Tiptoety ^talk 04:58, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think there has been any combative behavior during this request for GRB. While I understand your concern, I've only had positive encounters with those in the smaller Wikimedia projects, and I'm sure you'd understand it more if you asked them about my behavior on their Wikimedia projects. Thanks, Razorflame 23:20, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose Really sorry about this, and I think you mean well, but this is just too soon since the last request. :( For the record, I still don't have GR and I've made it just fine with global Twinkle. --Rschen7754 05:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Two requests in about one week plus the fact that Razorflame just got back from a rather extended wikibreak. I'd like to wait a bit longer. -Barras talk 13:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak oppose Although reverts are fine, this is just is too soon. --Glaisher [talk] 15:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak oppose per Glaisher--Steinsplitter (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Why does everyone think that this is too soon since my last request? I understand that it might be too soon since the last request, but what about the quickness of my requests shows that I wouldn't know how to use global rollback correctly? Razorflame 23:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcut: SRGS <translate> Please be sure to follow the instructions below: Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability. Please also review the Global sysops policy. Stewards When you give someone global sysop rights, please list them on [[<tvar name="T:GS">Template:List of global sysops</tvar>|Users with global sysop access]] and ask them to subscribe to the [[<tvar name="2">mail:global-sysops</tvar>|global sysops mailing list]].</translate> Please note that Global sysops discussions are not votes. Comments must present specific points in favor of or against a user's approval. <translate> Instructions for making a request</translate> <translate> 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; To make a request Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain of why you need the access and why you're suitable. If you previously requested that right, please add a link to the previous discussion(s).</translate> === Global sysop for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} === {{sr-request |status = <!-- don't change this line --> |domain = global <!-- don't change this line --> |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} <!-- don't change this line unless you're nominating another user --> }} :''Not ending before {{subst:#time:j F Y H:i|+2 week}} UTC'' <translate> The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration of no less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). 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. Please note: Since 2019 all global sysops are required to have two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled.</translate>

Shortcut: SRIPBE <translate> Please be sure to follow the instructions below: Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions. Please review [[<tvar name="1">Global IP block exemption</tvar>|Global IP block exemption]]. You may request Global IP block exemption via stewardswikimedia.org if you can not edit this page. Please note: Global IP block exemption does NOT make one immune to locally-created blocks of any sort, only global blocks.</translate> <translate> If you want to edit the Chinese Wikipedia, usually global IP block exemptions will not help you. Please see [[<tvar name="1">zh:WP:IPBEMAIL</tvar>|this instruction]] to request a local IP block exemption. </translate> <translate> Instructions for making a request</translate> <translate> Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that: You have a global account ; You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account; To request global IP block exemption Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain why you need the access and why you're suitable. If needed, link to relevant discussions.</translate> === Global IP block exempt for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} === {{sr-request |status = <!--don't change this line--> |domain = global<!--don't change this line--> |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} }} <translate><!--T:6--> <Add an explanation here>, thanks</translate>, --~~~~ <translate> The request will be approved if there is demonstrated need for the permission, such as bypassing a global block from someone who is not the intended target.</translate>

Because of the Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China and Great Firewall of China, I can't access to some Wikimedia Projects pages directly, so I need to use proxy to visit Wikipedia sometimes. I have 14,796 edits in zhwp.

The block log is as follows:

Editing from your IP address (50.31.254.202) has been blocked (disabled) on all Wikimedia wikis until 21:29, 27 September 2017 by Vituzzu (meta.wikimedia.org) for the following reason: Open proxy: hosting on server central + spam from 50.31.240.86

This block began on 21:29, 27 September 2012

You can contact Vituzzu to discuss the block and you may make unblock requests or file appeals at meta:Steward requests/Global. Your current IP address is 50.31.254.202. Please include all above details in any queries you make.

Thanks, --Hvn0413 (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you applied to zhWP for a local block exemption? The preference of stewards is that local exemptions to blocks are preferable. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To note that the IP addressed use on this request is not from or near the blocked range, though would be from the indicated country of origin. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:57, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have IP block exempt on zhwp and enwp, and I have never abused them. I am not related to the spam. Thank you. --Hvn0413 (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the information about the local assignations previously having been undertaken would have been good upfront. Done — billinghurst sDrewth 13:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

<translate> Please be sure to follow the instructions below: Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.</translate> <translate> Instructions for making a request</translate> <translate> Before requesting additional global permissions, make sure that: You are logged in on this wiki; No specific section on this page exists for the permission you want to request; To request additional global permissions Copy the template below to the bottom of this section and explain what kind of access you need and why. If needed, link to relevant discussions. If you hold, or have previously held, the right and are asking for either a renewal or revival of that right, please add a link to the previous discussion.</translate> === <translate><Add requested permission here> for</translate> {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} === {{sr-request |status = <!-- <translate>don't change this line</translate> --> |domain = global <!-- <translate>don't change this line</translate> --> |user name = {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} <!-- <translate>don't change this line unless you're nominating another user</translate> --> }} <translate><!--T:5--> <Add an explanation here>, thanks</translate>, --~~~~ <translate> The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration. A steward will review the request.</translate>

• User groups — Information on user groups
• Global rights log — Log of global permissions changes
• Archive