Jump to content

Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SemiHypercube (talk | contribs) at 14:16, 1 February 2019 (→IAdmin request (Galobtter): s). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
    Bureaucrat tasks
    To contact bureaucrats to alert them of an urgent issue, please post below.
    For sensitive matters, you may contact an individual bureaucrat directly by e-mail.
    You may use this tool to locate recently active bureaucrats.
    Shortcuts

    The Bureaucrats' noticeboard is a place where items related to the Bureaucrats can be discussed and coordinated. Any user is welcome to leave a message or join the discussion here. Please start a new section for each topic.

    This is not a forum for grievances. It is a specific noticeboard addressing Bureaucrat-related issues. If you want to know more about an action by a particular bureaucrat, you should first raise the matter with them on their talk page. Please stay on topic, remain civil, and remember to assume good faith. Take extraneous comments or threads to relevant talk pages.

    If you are here to report that an RFA or an RFB is "overdue" or "expired", please wait at least 12 hours from the scheduled end time before making a post here about it. There are a fair number of active bureaucrats; and an eye is being kept on the time remaining on these discussions. Thank you for your patience.

    To request that your administrator status be removed, initiate a new section below.

    Crat tasks
    RfAs 0
    RfBs 0
    Overdue RfBs 0
    Overdue RfAs 0
    BRFAs 9
    Approved BRFAs 0
    Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
    No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)
    It is 04:18:45 on November 10, 2024, according to the server's time and date.


    User:Bjelleklang

    Nothing to do here. — xaosflux Talk 23:05, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    As I was managing a user talk page at Meta, I noticed that a local admin has been inactive globally for two years. Per our procedure about inactivity, I have left a note about retention of rights during their editing hiatus (see User talk:Bjelleklang#Activity: no edits or actions for over two years.) I will try to come back in a month, though that I cannot guarantee my memory on that one. :-) — billinghurst sDrewth 00:40, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The User has edited on 15 July 2018 .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Billinghurst: not sure what tool you were using, but it appears to be inaccurate, both w:en:Special:Contributions/Bjelleklang and GUC (warning slow loading page) show edits here last year. — xaosflux Talk 01:05, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    IAdmin request (Enterprisey)

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Hi everyone! I'd like to request intadmin for myself. I will primarily maintain the AfC helper gadget, as well as script-installer (RfC) and reply-link when and if (respectively) they become gadgets. I'd also like to contribute to a couple of user scripts (e.g. ePH or this). Qualifications-wise, I've been working on scripts here since at least mid-2013, and I've written quite a few myself. Thanks! Enterprisey (talk!) 22:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    There is a standard 48 hour hold for this request. — xaosflux Talk 22:43, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
     Bureaucrat note: @Enterprisey: please note, WP:2FA is required for this access, if you have not yet enabled this for your account, please do so. Wikipedia:Simple 2FA has a good overview to get going, please take careful note about managing scratch tokens. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 23:29, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I have indeed enabled 2FA. Enterprisey (talk!) 01:26, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Fastest admin-to-int-admin in the West. SemiHypercube 22:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose if reply-link works in this reply, because that means he's overqualified for the job :P Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:34, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Galobtter, it works. :p —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I don't understand - why are so many non-bureaucrats chiming in here as if it was up to them? This is the bureaucrats board and this is a decision made by the 'crats - isn't it? -- MelanieN (talk) 05:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      MelanieN, Editors may discuss the applicant, but the final decision rests with the reviewing bureaucrat. Hhkohh (talk) 05:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      In this specific case, I'll admit the pile-on support commentary is pretty useless because Enterprisey is such an eminently qualified candidate. However, as this is a pretty sensitive permission in general, I think it's a good idea to allow endorsements and objections from non-bureaucrats in the community during that 48-hour "hold" period between the request and the earliest the permission can be assigned. The quote that Hhkohh referred to comes from the page Wikipedia:Interface administrators. Mz7 (talk) 09:05, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      I'd say it is really that people don't need an excuse to vote support or oppose on things. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      Support per Galobtter. He sums it up well: wiki[pm]edians liking !voting, especially when it's a lot like voting. I agree that most don't need an excuse. On a more serious note, it's possible that such standardization of bold support/oppose/delete/keep/etc. !votes, while wholly unnecessary here, makes providing dissent more palatable. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:31, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    MelanieN It's the bureaucrats' final decision but I don't think bureaucrats have also been tasked with vetting and debating the candidate. For my part I appreciate {{nbo}}s helping us with the decision. –xenotalk 20:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. Thanks for clarifying. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:14, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Badger badger badger. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:20, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. 28bytes (talk) 23:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Darn, if I knew this was happening, I would have opposed for hat collecting! He's been an admin for a week! ;) Natureium (talk) 00:05, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    IAdmin request (Galobtter)

    Hello folks, per Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Proposed gadget: Shortdesc helper, my user script Shortdesc helper is becoming a gadget, and I'm mainly requesting the rights to be able to fix/update it myself. I can't claim to be anywhere near as qualified as the (overqualified :)) Enterprisey, but I think maintaining the gadget will provide well enough of an ongoing need for the right. As required, I have 2FA enabled (and a strong password). Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

     Bureaucrat note: There is a standard 48 hour hold for this request. — xaosflux Talk 18:05, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Inactive administrators/2019#February 2019

    The following inactive administrators are being desysopped due to inactivity. Thank you for your service.

    1. Brian (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    2. Master Jay (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    3. Ragib (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    4. Rossami (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    5. Tom (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    6. Oscarthecat (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    7. Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
    — xaosflux Talk 00:34, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    To do: update crat activity check point report

    Looks like its that time again to refresh Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity/report. — xaosflux Talk 03:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I've updated the report, if anyone sees anything missing that can change the yes/no status of a cell, please update. — xaosflux Talk 05:08, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a note think a crat Kingturtle needs to be notified as per this report.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pharaoh of the Wizards: thanks for the note, this is being tracked now at Wikipedia:Bureaucrat activity. — xaosflux Talk 05:08, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard&oldid=881272457"