Steward requests/Global permissions

← Requests and proposals

Steward requests (Global permissions)

latest archive→

This page hosts requests for global 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).

Quick navigation:

• Global rollback
• Global sysop
• Global rename
• Global IP block exemption
• Other global rights
• Removal of access
• Local permissions

Dynamic pages:

• List global group permissions
• List local group permissions

Cross-wiki requests
CheckUser information Global blocks/locks Permissions (global) Permissions (bot) Permissions (other) Username changes/ usurpation requests Miscellaneous requests URL blacklisting Title/username blacklisting Email blacklisting
Meta-Wiki requests
CheckUser information Deletion Permissions Requests for help

Requests for global rollback permissions

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.

Please also review the Global rollback policy.

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 of no less than 5 days (with rare exceptions , no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not 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.

Requests for global sysop permissions

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions, and not doing so would reflect poorly on your suitability.

Please also review the Global sysops policy.

Stewards

When you give someone global sysop rights, please list them on Users with global sysop access and ask them to subscribe to the global sysops mailing list.

Instructions for making a request

Before requesting, make sure that: You have a global account ; 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 of no less than two weeks (no exceptions are allowed no matter how obvious the result may seem). This is not 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 have two-factor authentication (2FA) enabled.

Global sysop for Huji

Status:    Done

• Global user: Huji (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Not ending before 10 August 2018 18:24 UTC

I would like to receive global sysop permissions to use it only for one specific but important use case: updating Abuse Filters across various wikis to make them compliant with the changes in the AbuseFilter extension.

For context, please see T191978. As we are revising the AbuseFilter extension, at times we have no better choice than to change how a function or operator works (we try our best to retain backward compatibility, but sometimes it is inevitable to change functionality). In those situations, we would need to (a) identify all Abuse Filters which may be affected by that change across all WMF wikis, and (b) edit those Filters in a way that would ensure they will continue to work properly once the change is implemented. For (a) we have a process we can use on Phabricator. For (b) I would like to use global sysop rights to perform the necessary edits.

While we can do this with the help of existing global sysops, having a person dedicated to just this task can reduce bureaucracy. Also, not all sysops are "technical" sysops (i.e. not everyone of them is fluent users of AbuseFilter), and having one of the contributing developers of AbuseFilter do this will make the process efficient.

I am nominating myself, because I believe I have already proven to be a trustworthy member of the community. I have been a CheckUser and Oversighter on fawiki for several years where I am also a bureaucrat and sysop, I am or have been a sysop in a number of other WMF projects, I was a member of the Ombudsmen Commission for two years and an auxiliary member of it for an additional two years thereby having access to CU logs across all wikis for four years, I hold +2 merge rights on the entire MediaWiki code base and its extensions, and I have contributed to the AbuseFilter code as well as some of the other sensitive extensions (such as CheckUser and LoginNotify) over the past several years.

Please note that, if approved, I will *not* use global sysop permission for any other use cases, as I am not interested. I want to stay focused only on the AbuseFilter extension. I am also emphasizing this, to point that unlike a typical global sysop request, where continuous cross-wiki edit history is key, I do not think cross-wiki activity would be relevant for my use case (as AbuseFilter is generally not editable to non-sysop users and so I could have only edited filters in projects where I have been a sysop).

Also note that, as you can deduce from the above, I have already identified myself to the WMF to have access to non-public data. Huji (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

 Comment I generally support but I think instead we should restore the Abuse filter editors global user group. I requested this back in February and it didn't pan out. Since then, there was a request for something similar by Daimona and now Huji. Can we just restore it already? :) The other issue, correct me if I'm wrong, is that global-sysop doesn't apply to every wiki. Beyond that, you'd have to add yourself to the local abusefilter-manager group (if that's how they have it set up). I agree wholeheartedly with Huji and the need to help with editing filters, I'm in this bucket as well, but global-sysop maybe isn't the right solution — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:41, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree with MusikAnimal that a global abusefilter-manager group would be the preferred answer here. But I also want to point out that I am making this request to reduce bureaucracy, and would prefer not to be diverted to a process (namely, creating of a new global group) that may itself involve a long bureaucratic process.

@MusikAnimal: Even if my request is approved here, as soon as we create that group I will ask to be removed from global sysops and added to that group. Do we have a Phab task for the creation of that group? Huji (talk) 18:51, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

The global user group was apparently removed because no one was in it. It would seem then that recreating it would be not-so controversial. When I first asked about it, it was just me. But now there are three of us (you and Daimona) who would clearly make use of it. I'm unaware of a phab task to recreate the group. I thought stewards can create custom global groups without developer intervention? I'm probably making that up — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: You may want to take a look at T150752; I am afraid that is about the ability to edit global filters (filters set on Meta that apply to all wikis), not to be able to globally edit local filters (which is what we are looking after).

@DerHexer: since you were the person who had removed MusikAnimal from abusefilter-modify-global can I ask you to please confirm/reject my interpretation and also comment about how much work it would be to recreate that? Huji (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

To be clear, DerHexer didn't remove me from the group, they removed the group itself ("delete empty group", was the log summary). The ability to edit filters everywhere was at some point a thing, as evidenced by Abuse filter editors — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Fair point. I also would like to notify User:Kaldari who performed this change to provide some historical context. Huji (talk) 19:20, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

In my opinion, it is highly problematic to create custom global user group with "active" permissions without consulting the affected wikis first. For example, the global sysop group has been created as a result of a global RFC and not as a result of a random steward decision. The previous global AF group at least has only been used by some WMF staff to whom the community practices with regards to assignment of user permissions do not really apply for obvious reasons. --Vogone (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I generally agree, but here we'd be granting more powerful permissions as a workaround. That can't be better? People in this abuse filter editor group don't have to stay there. Say, some new AbuseFilter features come about, we're temporarily added to the global user group, so we can fix all the filters globally on everyone's behalf (because having them do it, along with the timing constraint of deployments, etc., would be a nightmare). Furthermore there can be a serious impact on site performance if there are badly implemented filters, and many wikis don't have the expertise to fix these issues. So the need for this global user group is certainly there — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:30, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I would not have any objections if such action would be announced in advance on all affected wikis (e.g. by using mass message) and giving the communities some time to react. If the planned edits are indeed not controversial, then there likely won't be any objections by these communities either. This would be a requirement very similar to that of the interface editor group (only act after ensuring there is no objection on the wiki you are going to edit). --Vogone (talk) 19:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: Like I said: this would require a bureaucratic process that can take months. So, until then, I would like to maintain my request for global sysop rights. Huji (talk) 19:45, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

To further clarify -- I'm not suggesting we create a global user group that blanket permits us to create/modify filters to deal with local issues. Instead, we're talking about fixing filters so they don't break, or affect runtime performance of everyone who edits. These things don't necessarily require knowledge of what the filter is meant to do, only the implementation itself, such as the ordering of conditions, variables/functions used, etc. There will definitely be instances where you're unsure if your "fixes" will work, and of course that would require consulting previous authors of the filter. I'm sure you'd procedurally let them know of any changes you made, too. So overall an RfC for this user group is probably still needed, as you suggest, but I can only guess temporarily creating it is a reasonable alternative to using the more powerful global-sysop (though again I think global-sysop doesn't apply to large wikis?) — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, there are Special:WikiSets. :-) --Vogone (talk) 19:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, now I know where I can find that without combing through InitialiseSettings.php (if it's even in there) :) So here it seems global-sysop doesn't give Huji what they need, anyway? I stand by my recommendation of using a dedicated global user group, but for the record, I still  Support giving Huji global-sysop :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

 Support - Regardless of the global abuse filter editor group issue, I think Huji would be an excellent candidate for global sysop. He has the needed experience, community trust, and technical knowledge to be successful in this role. I would, however, also support the resurrection of the global abuse filter editors group, if there is more support for going in that direction. Kaldari (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

First, I  Support Huji for this role, no doubts. But, more important, I very strongly agree on the need of a global filter editor group. You guys already explained why such a group would be wonderful to have, so I won't add anything about that. However, I believe that we should start the process for re-creating it as soon as possible (since, as pointed out, it could take months). I also would love to join such a group in order to help keeping filters fresh and working, while I don't think global adminship would be fine in my case. And, after all, it doesn't really make sense that the less powerful group with abusefilter-modify and related rights is global sysop. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 09:15, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

•  Support - I have no issues with this. Creating the abuse filter editors group (not really re-creating because it was only populated with developers and not open to the community when it did exist) is a barrel of fun that we could choose to engage in, but for now global sysop would allow the requestee to help out. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:37, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

  I'm not sure if it would really help, given the list of wikis where global sysops don't actually have sysop rights. Still better than nothing though. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

  @Daimona Eaytoy: I think large wikis will expect to have the option to opt out of the future "abusefilter-manager" group too. That's alright though. The issue we are trying to solve is not with respect to a wiki like English Wikipedia, with hundreds of active sysops; there, you can (privately) ask the sysops to update a filter and they will likely do so within a day or two; the issue is with the large number wikis who don't have the ability to have a turn-around-time of hours to a few days. Only there we would like to intervene centrally. Huji (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

  Yes, they would still be able to opt-out, but abusefilter editor is way less invasive than sysop, thus I think wikis will be less likely to opt out. Anyway, I agree that this right would still help, and at the moment is the best we can get. --Daimona Eaytoy (talk) 10:06, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

•  Support--Capay (talk) 13:15, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
•  Support no concerns. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
•  Support, meets the criteria for get the global sysop right, no concerns. Marshmallych 16:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Alaa :)..! 07:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support: Even if the request was made with only a single purpose in mind, Huji is trustworthy enough for this permission, no concerns. Alex Shih (talk) 08:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Regardless of the circumstances, the user is trusted for the GS permission and I don't see why have objections here —AlvaroMolina (✉ - ✔) 03:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support no concerns. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 03:33, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Irwin ^talk2me 19:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Rufet Turkmen (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support for both GS and any AbuseFilter permission he needs to help the projects. Legoktm (talk) 23:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -FASTILY 22:34, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support + --►Cekli829 13:40, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:44, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Requests for global IP block exemption

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

Your request might be rejected if you don't follow the instructions. Please review Global 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, only global blocks.

Instructions for making a request

Before requesting global IP block exemption, make sure that: You have a global account ; 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.

Global IP block exempt for Tian2992

Status:    Done

• Global user: tian2992 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I use a personal-run IPv6 tunnel to access, which is affected by a IP block ban.--Tian2992 (talk) 18:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@Tian2992: Any ban? --Alaa :)..! 08:01, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@علاء: The general ban on DO IPv6 Servers affects me. Tian2992 (talk) 07:05, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Editing from your IP address range (2604:A880:800:0:0:0:0:0/48) has been blocked (disabled) on all Wikimedia wikis until 09:33, 2 April 2020 by Vituzzu (meta.wikimedia.org) for the following reason: — The preceding unsigned comment was added by tian2992 (talk)

Done --Alaa :)..! 07:45, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Ruhubelent

Status:    In progress

• Global user: Ruhubelent (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I am editing Turkmen wikipedia through VPN as I am in Turkey and I have block exemption there, I sometimes need to connect pages from other wikis. As I have no IP block exemption on other wikis I am unable to link pages. I rarely edit on other wikis as well. I know the vandalizm I have committed on Turkish wiki may make you think of denying me IP exemption, note that I truly regret what I have done there and I apologized to all of them on my talk page. I will never commit it again. Sincerely yours, kind regards, --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Have you asked for unblock? Ruslik (talk) 06:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Ruslik0, No, I have not asked as I have committed vandalizm. It would be pointless to ask. Is it necessary to get unblocked on a wiki a user has been blocked so that he can get global IP exemption? If so, I will try negotiating. --Ruhubelent (talk) 08:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Note that I truly regret committing vandalizm, Ruslik0. I always knew I should not damage Wikipedia, I appreciate Wikipedia. I do not have enmity towards it, I was just trying to protest their treatment towards me. I know I should not damage Wikipedia to protest its administrators. I regret it and will never commit it again, I can not ask for unblock because my block is now deserved one. Sincerely yours, --Ruhubelent (talk) 18:32, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE: Asked for unblock. Rejected. The admin said it is not possible as of now. --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Ken_Ookami_Horo

Status:    Done

• Global user: Ken Ookami Horo (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I am live in PRC and using some proxy software to visit Wikimedia Projects on devices which cannot edit hosts file. However, Some IP addresses which my proxy used is blocked globally. So may I request a exempt to edit? , thanks, --Ken_Ookami_Horo(talk|talk on zhwp|Email me) 02:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for HastaLaVi2

Status:    Done

• Global user: HastaLaVi2 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Hi, I am from Turkey and for a long while I was using Turkish Wikipedia via VPN. But when I create a new article and try to merge it with its wikidata item, it blocks me. So may I request this exemption? ~ Z (m) 15:46, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Done.--HakanIST (talk) 08:10, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Prof.Einstein

Status:    Done

• Global user: Prof.Einstein (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I have problems with using VPN services Prof.Einstein (talk) 09:15, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Done Ruslik (talk) 20:43, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Pelham17

Status:    In progress

• Global user: Pelham17 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I use a VPN pretty much all the time. There are many times that I might make a small edit or addition to an article, but when I try to edit, I am usually told that my IP is blocked. I'd like to contribute to both the English and Simple versions of Wikipedia (and possibly Commons), but it's highly unlikely that I'll be able to turn my VPN off with regularity to do so. Thanks. --Pelham17 (talk) 17:23, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Cekli829

Status:    Done

• Global user: Cekli829 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Hi, I am from Azerbaijan, I use a VPN sometimes and I have trip to Turkey in the coming months. So may I request this exemption? --►Cekli829 13:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Done, safe travels!--HakanIST (talk) 08:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Nina Eger

Status:    Done

• Global user: Nina Eger (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Nina asked me to request this as she is currently unable to log into her account (lost password, reset impossible with IP-block) through the VPN she has to use. This (also including editing) has been a frequent problem for months now. If you need confirmation, please contact her using the E-Mail function --Didym (talk)

It is usually preferable to directly contact us via Special:Contact/stewards, but this is fine as well. — regards, Revi 15:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Man77

Status:    Done

• Global user: Man77 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

For a couple of weeks I have experienced the effect of global IP blocks against Avoided which prevent me from editing Wikidata. Thanks to the block I cannot request locally on Wikidata, for some reason, however, I can edit here. I consider myself an experienced and trusted user (currently sysop of dewiki) who can handle this special right well. Thanks, --→ «« Man77 »» ^[de] 15:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Done – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for CopperSulfate

Status:    In progress

• Global user: CopperSulfate (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I come from Mainland of China, and have to use Proxy IP or something else to bypass Great Firewall. However, altho I have IP block exempt on zhwiki, it's inconvenient for me to edit wikidata, enwiki, jawiki and so on. That's why I want to get global IP block exempt (so as to contribute better and more conveniently). Thanks, --CopperSulfate (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Requests for global rename permissions

Steward requests/Global permissions/Global renamers

Global rename for Conde Edmond Dantès

Status:    In progress

• Wiki: meta.wikimedia.org (list 'crats • bot policy • summary • 'crats rights)
• User: Conde Edmond Dantès (talk • edits • logs • UserRights • activity • CentralAuth • email • verify 2FA)

Not ending before 19 August 2018 09:51 UTC

 Comment Hello, I have been editing since 2014 and I am currently an administrator and bureaucrat on my homewiki (pt.wiki). I have more than 30 thousand editions in this one, and I participate of other projects regularly. I want to have permission because of the lack of editors on pt.wiki, because Érico (talk · contribs) is responding to requests alone. Edmond Dantès ^{d'un message?} 09:51, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

•  Support Bureaucrat on Portuguese Wikipedia. Trusted user to perform this role. —AlvaroMolina (✉ - ✔) 18:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Looks trustworthy. Alex Shih (talk) 01:35, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support No concerns. Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 04:22, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support I've worked with Edmond Dantès extensively and have absolutely no concerns when it comes to his potential behaviour when undertaking global renamings. I'm confident that his work will be of the highest order, demonstrating competency and composure. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 04:39, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support No concerns.--►Cekli829 13:39, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support. Looks good to me, and it certainly sounds like pt.wiki could do with more renaming help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Rufet Turkmen (talk) 01:06, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Trusted and oldest user. Your help is very welcome on our local project. Good look! Stanglavine (talk) 07:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support: has a good reason to request the permission, and a brief look at their history on pt.wiki gives me no reason to not trust them. Sam Sailor 07:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:54, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
•  Support. Very experienced for this role. Érico (talk) 03:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Requests for other global permissions

Please be sure to follow the instructions below:

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. A steward will review the request.

add global oathauth-tester member for Sebastian Smarslik

Status:    Done

• Global user: Sebastian Smarslik (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I would like to test the Wikipedia Two-factor authentication, thanks, --Sebastian Smarslik (talk) 13:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Done, Linedwell ^[talk] 05:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

add oathauth-tester for 72

Status:    Done

• Global user: 72 (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I'd like to enable 2FA on my account for added security. I am familiar with 2FA, and have read the relevant information available here on meta. Thanks --72 (talk) 13:26, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --Alaa :)..! 14:19, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

remove global OTRS member for Basvb

Status:    Done

• Global user: Basvb (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Thanks, --Krd 13:46, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for Palnatoke

Status:    Done

• Global user: Palnatoke (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Thanks, --Krd 13:46, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 13:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

add 2FA for Twilight Magic

Status:    Done

• Global user: Twilight Magic (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

I need to add more security to my account by Two-factor authentication, thanks, --Twilight Magic (talk) 11:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Done --Alaa :)..! 11:58, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

add global OTRS member for דוג'רית

Status:    Done

• Global user: דוג'רית (edits ^(alt) • CA • global groups • crossactivity • verify 2FA)

Thanks, --Krd 06:16, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Done.--HakanIST (talk) 06:17, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

See also

• User groups — Information on user groups
• Global rights log — Log of global permissions changes
• Archives
  • 2026: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08

General requests for: help from a Meta sysop or bureaucrat · deletion (speedy deletions: local · multilingual) · URL blacklisting · new languages · interwiki map

Personal requests for: username changes · permissions (global) · bot status · adminship on Meta · CheckUser information (local) · local administrator help

Cooperation requests for: comments (local) (global) · translation