Stewards

• About stewards
• Elections
• History

Requests

• CheckUser information
• Global blocks & locks
• Global rights
• Local bot rights
• Local rights
• Account renaming
• Miscellaneous requests
• URL blacklisting
• Title/username blacklisting

For stewards

• Help
• Policies
• Bugs
• Mailing list
• #wikimedia-stewards^connect

Noticeboards

• Access policy noticeboard
• Stewards' noticeboard

SpBot archives all sections tagged with{{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

I have left a message in the local Village Pump ("tabierna") of aragonese wikipedia stating that I can resume the activity another year and that I can continue as an administrator.[1].--EBRO (talk)22:15, 19 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

@EBRO: I believe this request should go inSteward requests/Permissions. Kind regards, –FlyingAce^✈hello00:03, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

@FlyingAce nope this is a response to theAdmin activity review/2024, we asked users to respond on this page if they want to keep their permissions.Johannnes89 (talk)07:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

FYI, the U4C requested temporary giving checkuser-log to our usergroup (change is already made). You can read the detailshere. Best regards,Luke08151515:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

• This was done inSpecial:Redirect/logid/59187298 byUser:EPIC. Not sure why this would have required any sort of "private request" as opposed to a public request, as the change is public. —xaosflux^Talk19:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

  @Xaosflux The announcement was made publicly, then a U4C member informed stewards about it. EPIC did the action, and another steward asked that future requests also be copied to SN. Can you clarify the nature of your objection?AntiCompositeNumber (talk)05:29, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Not an objection, just an inquiry as the rights log called out that there was a "private request". My inquiry is about what sort of privacy was needed. I expect requests to change global group permissions be made publicly in usual venues (steward requests or even here). Related, this was specifically requested as temporary, how are we tracking this against the temporary condition? —xaosflux^Talk09:24, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

  As the U4C motion says, it's temporary until the conclusion ofUniversal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Cases/Systemic failure in enforcing the code of conduct in Hebrew Wikipedia. I expect we'll get another motion asking for it to be removed when that happens.AntiCompositeNumber (talk)01:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Requests for comment/Welcoming policy is overdue for a closure - I think the points that are going to be made have been made.* Pppery *_{it has begun}03:11, 24 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Similar to the request below I would expect the wikis affected to be notified by the RfC initiator in order to allow RfC participation and make them aware of potential changes if the policy gets adopted.Johannnes89 (talk)19:41, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Consensus should be clear here.* Pppery *_{it has begun}19:00, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Have the wikis (potentially) affected[2] been notified about the RfC?Requests for comment/Policy#Initiating an RFC usually expects notifications, this RfC has apparently gone largely unnoticed, I don't see why just 10 users (including one sockpuppet and one opposing comment) should be able to implement such a change.Johannnes89 (talk)19:36, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Would someone kindly send the mass message regardingSteward requests/Bot status#Global bot status for KiranBOT? It has been almost three weeks since the request was put forward. courtesy ping toUser:EPIC. —usernamekiran(talk)20:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Requests for comment/Global ban requirements is overdue for a closure.* Pppery *_{it has begun}16:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Stewards
• Noticeboards