Wikinews:Requests for permissions
(Redirected from Wikinews:RFP)
|
 Requests and votes |
Requests for permissions (RFP) is the process by which the Wikinews community decides which users can have access to the administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight permissions.
- Users can submit their own requests (self-nomination), or
- Other users can nominate a candidate.
| I | Please read the policy before making a request for permissions. See also the global permissions policy.
Previous requests have been archived, and contain some common questions, comments, and objections made during the process. |
|---|---|
| II | Create your request for permission:
|
| III | Questions
You may be asked questions by other users so they can review your request. Please try to provide full answers. |
| IV | Community decision
The request must remain open for at least one or two weeks (depending on the permission sought). A bureaucrat will close the request and will also grant the appropriate flag, if the minimum criteria have been met. For CheckUser or Oversight, the bureaucrat will request the flag at Meta. Closed requests are moved to the Archives. |
Administrator[edit]
Bureaucrats[edit]
CheckUser and Oversight[edit]
- To add a nomination for CheckUser
- To add a nomination for Oversight
Bddpaux[edit]
Nominating myself. One of ours is 100% in-the-wind and the other is about 98% in the same category. We need at least one CU active and checked in, although I am heavily focused on Reviewing and developing Reviewers (primarily) at the moment.--Bddpaux (talk) 19:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Stats[edit]
Questions and comments[edit]
- I guess you've brushed up on the technical knowledge needed? (I ask since you asked Acagastya last month what CUs' duties are.) Also Acagastya is still fairly responsive to CU-related inquiries, not that having another CU would hurt. Heavy Water (talk) 03:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have, yes. We really need 2 active and involved here.--Bddpaux (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Votes[edit]
- Support Very active, long-time editor here with advanced user permissions and who has already publicly declared his identity. No issues on other wikis. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support We could definitely use another CU. I don't see anything that would cause me any issues in supporting this request. A.S. Thawley (talk) (calendar) 18:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support very nice well deserved user BigKrow (talk) 22:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I have recently had the need to request CU and unfortunately, neither local CU has responded. And our need for Checkusers will only increase once Temporary Accounts is rolled out. So I see this as both a short- and long-term solution for us. I also agree with Justin's comment above. Michael.C.Wright (Talk/Published) 23:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support, I am not entirely convinced that this wiki should have local CUs. It's really too inactive and underserved with admin support to justify having them, and I think this can be taken over by stewards sooner or later, who are quicker to handle CU requests most of the time. However, this wiki does get quite a bit of abuse to the level where I think it does somewhat justify having local CheckUsers, and if there is someone relatively active who wants to help out, then that's positive. EPIC (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support Very active and experienced editor, already advanced permissions, we need another CU, disclosed identity, etc. Also, this user makes up more than 20% of this entire wikis editing, and is the main reason it hasn't totally fallen apart. Well deserved.Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 23:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support - As one of the current checkusers (and a former steward), I don't want to see this wiki relying entirely on stewards. Most people are familiar with English Wikipedia and often incorrectly judge Wikinews by the activity levels of English Wikipedia. [24Cr][talk] 20:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support solely on merit. Regarding @Cromium:'s point, I've seen many times that the reluctance of this wiki to take help from other users has been, to the detriment of the wiki. Let's be fair - I don't normally see the level of requests that rise to requiring a CU, and this wiki has a problem in that admins don't seem to be around to do standard housekeeping tasks. How about ensuring that stewards can always action CU requests irrespective of the presence/absence of CU users? That's how it works on en.wikibooks. Leaderboard (talk) 07:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)