This page hosts requests forglobal permissions. To make a request, read the relevant policy (global rollback,global sysop,global rename, …) and make a request below. Explain why membership is needed for that group, and detail prior experience or qualifications.
This is not a vote and any active Wikimedia editor may participate in the discussion.
Global rollback and global interface editor requests require no fewer than 5 days of discussion while abuse filter helper and maintainer requests require no fewer than 7 days. Global renamer and global sysop requests require no fewer than 2 weeks of discussion. For requests that are unlikely to pass under any circumstances, they may be closed by a steward without further discussion (after a reasonable amount of input).
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:H:i, j F Y (T)|+5 days}}''
The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration ofno less than 5 days (with rare exceptions, no matter how obvious the result may seem). This isnot 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.
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).
=== 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:H:i, j F Y (T)|+2 week}}''
The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration ofno less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This isnot 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 havetwo-factor authentication (2FA) enabled.
When you give someone global rename rights, please add them to thelist of global renamers and ask them to subscribe to the global renamers'mailing list.
You are logged in on this wiki, and the account is part of your global account;
You have considered the addition of auser language box to your user page
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).
=== Global rename for {{subst:u|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} ==={{sr-request|status=<!-- don't change this line -->|domain= meta.wikimedia<!-- 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:H:i, j F Y (T)|+2 week}}''
The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a period of consideration ofno less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). While all input is welcome, there is a hard 80% support requirement for this role as perthe global renamer policy.
Hello, I would like to request global rename permissions. I am an administrator on the Arabic Wikipedia, the executive director of multiple Wikimedia affiliates, and an active contributor on the Arabic and French (newcomer at this project) Wikipedias. I also hold additional rights on Commons, Wikidata, and several other projects. The main reason: for submitting this request now is to be able to process blocked rename requests smoothly and efficiently, while fully respecting Wikimedia policies and global renaming guidelines. Regarding Languages: I am fluent in Arabic, English, and French, and I have basic knowledge of Spanish and German. Thank you for considering my request. --SanBonne (talk)22:14, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your question. I checked it grammatically, as it could contains errors. The prompt with the draft is:
check, make it clear and correct, and professional: "Hello, I would like to request the global rename permissions, I am admin at Arabic Wikipedia; the ED of multiple affiliates, and active on Arabic and French (Newbie) wikipedia; plus to having some additional rights on Commons, wikidata, and others. The main reason of asking this request now is to process blocked requests smoothly and efficacilly respecting wikimedia policies. I am fluent at Arabic, English and French, and knowing the basics in Spanish and German."
Then I repolish the version I got manually, adding subtitles, which are "The main reason" and "regarding languages".
I hope my answer is clear for you and for whoever else wondering about it.
+ Maybe you are also wondering about the chatbot answer; thus, it is good to add it here:
Here’s a polished, clear, and professional version of your message. I’ve kept the tone aligned with what stewards expect on Meta while making your experience and motivation stand out more confidently.
Revised Version
Hello,
I would like to request global rename permissions. I am an administrator on the Arabic Wikipedia, the Executive Director of multiple Wikimedia affiliates, and an active contributor on Arabic and French (newbie) Wikipedia. I also hold additional user rights on Commons, Wikidata, and several other projects.
The main reason for submitting this request now is to be able to process blocked or complex rename requests smoothly and efficiently, while fully respecting Wikimedia policies and global renaming guidelines.
I am fluent in Arabic, English, and French, and I have basic knowledge of Spanish and German.
Neutral - The fact that SanBonne used AI in itself is something I will usually penalise, because I want to hearyour voice, not an LLM. The fact that you disclosed the use of AI is what makes me notoppose this candidature. The use of phrases like "...and professional..." increases the likelihood of unexpected changes in meaning, and is what probably contributed to the LLM issues exhibited by another candidate in this year's steward election. If you claim that you are "fluent" in a language, I expect you to be able to write your statement without touching an LLM. Your original statement is perfectly fine - it's not like we expect perfection.Leaderboard (talk)18:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Question:SanBonne: I have supported your request, but I would like to ask a simple question, if you don't mind. If you become a renamer, what would you look at before accepting a rename request? Please don't use an LLM to answer this question. –DreamRimmer■16:42, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for supporting me. Here is my transparent answer without LLM:
I have readthe policy carefully before applying to get the rights. Mentioning that, I will mainly work to help with renaming in Arabic Wikipedia locally, but not without giving a hand and helping on the global one as I can and when needed.
Detailed Answer
First of all, I will find if the name is from a language I understand or not; if not, I will ask for help "as possible" to make sure that the new name is not violating the naming policy in general (the local and the global one).
Second: I will review why he wants to change his username, the purpose of this renaming, and whether there are local renamers whom the user should reach first (I found that as an action done in a recent case, as I remember)
Third: Review if his first renaming happened or not. If not, find out why the user wants to rename his account (username) again.
Fourth: I will review the renamer's global contributions to make sure that the user is not seeking the rename to conceal or obfuscate bad conduct or that he is not a blocked user (as blocked users can't change the username during the blocking period).
On the other hand, I will review if the username requested is used around WikiProjects or not, which also has other cases to solve.
I hope my answer is clear and covers the cases. If you have other important points to add, I am happy to learn from the experienced and have more information and knowledge than me.
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions. Please reviewGlobal 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, onlyglobal blocks.
If you want to edit the Chinese Wikipedia, usually global IP block exemptions will not help you. Please seethis instruction to request a local IP block exemption.
Instructions for making a request
Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that:
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.
=== 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}}}}<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~
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.
Hello. I am writing to request a global IP block exemption because I am in China which made me have to use VPN to edit pages. I've got an IPBE in ZH-Wikipedia. What annoys me is that whenever I have to upload a picture or a file on COMMONS-Wikipedia, I would always be blocked by an IP block banner.
I have a good command of English so I will use the IPBE to edit pages on EN-Wikipedia and upload files to COMMONS-Wikipedia.
I currently lives in mainland China. My IPBE is about to expire and would need a new IPBE to continue making contributions to Wikimedia projects, thanks,--Zophas (talk)04:04, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions.
Instructions for making a request
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.
=== <Add requested permission here> 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 -->}}<Add an explanation here>, thanks, --~~~~
The request will be approved if consensus to do so exists after a short period of consideration. Asteward will review the request.
Hello,I would like to request the apihighlimits permission for WikiMonitor tool. The tool relies on Wikimedia SSE to access recent changes; however, I need to analyze certain edits, such as retrieving the text added to pages and similar data.Note: No page is analyzed unless there is an active user connected to the tool. (Technical note: The tool is currently in a pre-release stage. The source code will be published soon. You can try the tool at:https://wikimonitor.toolforge.org. The tool is developed in Java). Best regards--Gerges(Talk)12:20, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Valid use case. I just tested this tool; it's a global anti-vandalism tool that can filter edits based on many raw filters available on the Wikimedia event stream. It's currently slow and faces limits when loading diffs, so having apihighlimits would be helpful. –DreamRimmer■14:23, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How would this work, as almost no users have this access. If it doesn't work without a global exemption, users aren't going to be able to make use of it. —xaosfluxTalk14:34, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what I'm asking. Almost no users have global apihighlimits access - if this tool requires that how would it ever get used? —xaosfluxTalk15:08, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Xaosflux, thank you for raising this concern. To clarify, the tool does not expose apihighlimits capabilities to end users, nor does it act as a proxy to bypass API limits on their behalf. All high-limit API requests are executed server-side under a single, accountable tool account, and only for internal processing (such as fetching diffs for analysis triggered by SSE events). Users do not directly control the request rate, cannot submit arbitrary API queries, and cannot exceed what the tool itself requires for its functionality. Additionally, the tool is rate-limited internally and only processes edits when there is at least one active user connected. The intent is to support a centralized anti-vandalism workflow, similar to other Toolforge tools that operate under a single service account.--Gerges(Talk)19:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi friends! @TChin (WMF) is occupied and unable to respond right now, but I'm checking with folks about this. I think this is probably not a Data Platform Engineering ("DPE")-oriented topic, at least not with the current tech stack. But, I'll work to see if I can help make a connection in the right place.
@Gerges are you able to share some screenshots or an animated GIF or video of the UI to showcase its facilities here a little more? If I understand correctly, the tool would respond to EventStreams by making additional requests against Action API or REST API endpoints to get relatively larger data payloads, possibly with higher velocity. Is that right? Thinking out loud, I'm wondering if there's some WMCS-accessible alternative for fetching the data via replica or some other WMCS-hosted route. But, hoping to learn a little more about the nature of the fetching behavior of the tool. Able to speak a bit to probable initial-to-medium-term request velocity and payload sizes, target data sources, and so forth?ABaso (WMF) (talk)16:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Dragoniez, The application uses the MediaWiki Action API, mainly thecompare andquery modules.Multi-value parameters are primarily used inaction=query, especially withlist=users through parameters likeusprop, which return multiple values such as rights and groups.Overall, the tool relies on API modules that natively support multi-value parameters, particularlyaction=query.--Gerges(Talk)13:14, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Gerges and @Xaosflux, thanks for the continued dialogue here.
Okay, I looked through the code. Here are some thoughts.
I agree, it's best to get a separate bot account for reads on behalf of other users, rather than potentially duplicating API calls by multiple concurrent users. The coalescing of API calls is a reasonable pattern.
If you batch up the usernames associated with the edits as conveyed by the stream and make an Action API call with a lot of them (say such as up to 5,000 distinct usernames), then you'd need theapihighlimit piece. If not that many usernames are added to filter watches this may not matter so much, it's just if you get a lot of usernames accumulated into early evaluation filter rules that have to run instead of short circuiting. If you won't be calling with so many usernames associated with edits at a time - let's say you only do up to 50 - theapihighlimit isn't really needed; this would equally apply if you decided to just page 50 lookups at a time even if it's more than 50. This reminds me: you may want to fetch both roles and groups at the same time if you're making this call, at least if you are pretty confident you'll need both.
apihighlimit may not strictly be needed here for theaction=compare call, as that has to be called sequentially one revision at a time instead of with a bunch of revision IDs (or, maximally, dispatched in parallel at a reasonable rate).apihighlimit is more oriented toward getting lots of records back at once. Eventually, however, the bot will probably need to be given the ability to make a higher velocity of requests because the raw velocity of diffs could be pretty nontrivial depending on the filters in play and how broadly applied they are across the various wikis. More information on the means of doing this will be on the way in the future for folks operating a trusted bot. If a filter is constrained to a low edit velocity wiki, this sequential calling is unlikely to be a big deal in the first place. Use of a mild level of parallelism for higher velocity wikis might mask the UX symptoms a little and help you get by, just be wary of lots of concurrent calls toaction=compare dispatched through the Spring app in that case.
Rather than needing to callaction=compare over and over, it might be nice to useaction=query&prop=revisions&rvdiffto=prev to get the diffs - meaning you could do 50 diffs at a time (or more if acquiringapihighlimit; although be careful - it's computationally expensive for the MediaWiki application servers to a degree). Butrvdiffto=prev was deprecated inhttps://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T164106 , so although you can attempt to use that in the fashion ofhttps://w.wiki/Hq7a , just be aware that it is deprecated, and also that it is not catered to handling Multi-Content Revisions. Usually you are probably looking for wikitext, so you may be fine with the implicit default "main" slot, but it's something to be mindful of in case of ever wanting to examine something other than that "main" slot, like other slotted data associated with a page (e.g., structured data on Commons).
You could consider usingaction=query&prop=revisions withoutrvdiffto=prev (because it's deprecated) and doing diffing in your Spring application when bothlength.old andlength.new are small so as to avoid very large collated payloads coming back; you'd need to mimic the HTML presentation one gets "for free" withrvdiffto=prev oraction=compare in that case. There are some gotchas here. In every casesome server component has to get the wikitext and some component has to perform the diff; there are certain caching mechanisms in the deeper backend, but there are also some tradeoffs. The benefit ofaction=compare is less data going between the MediaWiki application servers and your Spring app, which is good for the Spring app's performance in a way (upside it shifts the load to MediaWiki application servers; downside: it shifts some load to MediaWiki applications servers :) ) and better for the networking infrastructure in some sense - it's closer to a stream processing oriented way of doing things (and less like larger batching; although there are many forms of enqueuing things in stream based applications) which has some architectural benefits even if the payload serialization isn't optimized and the effect on the network is a little more chattiness. The benefit ofprop=revisions (with deprecatedrvdiffto=prev or with a heuristic on old and new size of the wikitext to avoid big calls) is fewer network calls altogether. A fancy way might be to consider processingaction=compare on one queue where it's needed (e.g., where either oflength.old orlength.new is bigger) and usingaction=query&prop=revisions on another queue opportunistically; but it's more complicated. Maybe you find out that you can get away with a careful flow ofaction=compare if you're lucky, though.
Undo, rollback, etc. should of course be done under the identity of an actual human (via their OAuth dance) who is initiating that behavior in the UI, and not under the identity of the bot. I think that's the intent here, but wanted to confirm understanding.
Oh, you may be considering this (I didn't look closely), but you could grab user rights/roles (and more) along with revision info at the same time if you wanted to, like inhttps://w.wiki/Hq86 . But again, this hinges on whether you choose to useaction=query&prop=revisions (with or without deprecatedrvdiffto=prev ; formally you shouldn't use deprecated parameters, and you may thank yourself later if you don't! but I'm sure you'll consider your options; you should be mindful to watch for hard deprecation or performance bottlenecks if you do use it).
I have some other code/config feedback if you'd be interested to discuss further. I could do Meet, Signal, or WhatsApp, if you like. If so, feel free to hit me up on IRC with your preferred contact channel and details and mutually available datetime slots next week and I could look and see if anything works. No obligation, of course. Also happy to email if you're interested in that at all, instead - please just side channel with the preferred email address and I can send it over instead of the video/audio call. I'm in Central Time US for correlation of clocks.ABaso (WMF) (talk)23:06, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @ABaso (WMF), Thank you very much for the detailed feedback and for taking the time to review the code. I truly appreciate your thoughtful analysis and the architectural considerations you shared — they are very helpful. @Xaosflux, Regarding the bot account, I already have a dedicated account namedGergesBot, which can be granted the permissions apihighlimit. I would be glad to discuss the additional code and configuration feedback. You can reach me directly via WhatsApp or Telegram, whichever you prefer. Please feel free to contact me there and we can continue the discussion. Thank you again for your support and collaboration. Best regards--Gerges(Talk)23:32, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Supportaqurs🍧11:23, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support浅村しき (talk)11:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong supportPeterxy（talk）07:40, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - The fact that SanBonne used AI in itself is something I will usually penalise, because I want to hearyour voice, not an LLM. The fact that you disclosed the use of AI is what makes me notoppose this candidature. The use of phrases like "...and professional..." increases the likelihood of unexpected changes in meaning, and is what probably contributed to the LLM issues exhibited by another candidate in this year's steward election. If you claim that you are "fluent" in a language, I expect you to be able to write your statement without touching an LLM. Your original statement is perfectly fine - it's not like we expect perfection.Leaderboard (talk)18:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Question:SanBonne: I have supported your request, but I would like to ask a simple question, if you don't mind. If you become a renamer, what would you look at before accepting a rename request? Please don't use an LLM to answer this question. –DreamRimmer■16:42, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
