Wikinews:Requests for permissions

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
(Redirected from Wikinews:RFA)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.



CheckUser and Oversight[edit]

To add a nomination for CheckUser


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)[reply]


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)[reply]
I have, yes. We really need 2 active and involved here.--Bddpaux (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


  • 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)TCM 20:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Strong Support very nice well deserved user BigKrow (talk) 22:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
To add a nomination for Oversight


  • {{Remove}} means "support removal of permission".
  • {{Keep}} means "keep permission".


Inactive for at least two years since 16 July 2021 (last edit). No recorded log since March 2021. Twice notified about inactivity; no response yet. Per WN:PEP, should be de-sysopped. --George Ho (talk) 19:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Questions and comments[edit]

  • Comment: For what it's worth, they've continued to edit at enwiki as recently as this morning. Heavy Water (talk) 19:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Unsure how this counts. But thanks for the reminder, so I sent a message there. George Ho (talk) 21:21, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Yes, I've been away from Wikinews for a long while, I'm just busy in real life. Wikinews isn't like Wikipedia, since most articles are written mostly by one person with minor edits made by others. At least, that's it's always been to me. Wikipedia currently fits my workflow better in my busy life. I should note I was contacted by someone from the Foundation recently about the Wikinews Facebook account and trying to regain access to it because currently it is posting semi-NSFW videos using the Stories feature. Granted, I never had access and I think the person who had access was Brian McNeil, who as we know is sadly no longer with us. I will abide by whatever this RfP proposes, however, I don't think I should be de-sysopped for what it's worth. --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 16:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I will take action on this before May 15th. Please leave up for now.--Bddpaux (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been two days after the said date. What action shall you take then? George Ho (talk) 12:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am absolutely swamped IRL, but have not forgotten about this. I intend to take action this week.--Bddpaux (talk) 14:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, so if my count is accurate, it looks like 4 for de-sysop and 3 to keep. Taking action now. I appreciate this person's past contributions and they are 100% welcome to re-engage with this project in the future, but they have been notable absent here for quite a long time.-Bddpaux (talk) 15:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have contacted a Steward at Meta to have this person de-sysop'd/admin'd -- let's let the wheels turn.--Bddpaux (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]