Wikibooks:Requests for permissions

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions
This project page is move-protected.
Requests for Permissions Archives
  • Close discussion with {{closed}}/{{end closed}}
  • Requests should be moved to subpages at Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/User Name
  • Change the heading to +Position or -Position
Shortcuts:
WB:RFP
WB:PERM

All rights available on Wikibooks are handled here, including autoreview, reviewer, importer, uploader, administrator (and interface administrator), bureaucrat, CheckUser, pseudo-bot, and bot flags. A nomination must demonstrate how the project will benefit from granting the rights.

Nominations
To nominate a user (including yourself), add their username to the appropriate section below. Please explain why you feel the nominated user would be a good choice. All registered Wikibookians may comment, and provide arguments in support or opposition. For the bot flag, technical information about the bot may be requested. See the specific requirements for each type of access on their respective pages.
Outcome
Consensus does not need to be demonstrated —though discussion is welcome— in granting autoreview, reviewer, importer, and uploader flags. Administrators may use their best judgement in granting those. Interface admin was historically part of the administrator tool set and is granted on request to administrators. All other tools require community consensus and can only be granted by bureaucrats. Access to CheckUser is governed by CheckUser policy. After about one week, if there is consensus to grant access, then a bureaucrat will make it so and record the fact here. If not, a bureaucrat may refuse to grant the rights and the request will remain until a consensus is reached.

Contents

Removal of permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Note: You may request removal of your own rights at meta:Steward requests/Permissions. Requests to remove others' rights should be placed here, whether due to inactivity, or abuse. Proposals for the removal of advanced permissions (included admin and bureaucrat rights) are governed by the WB:ADMIN policy. A minimum discussion of one month is required to remove an admin or bureaucrat for inactivity.

Johan (WMF) (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Confirmed)[edit]

Confirmed right redundant, person mentioned has autoconfirmed. Calvinkulit (discuss • contribs) 11:14, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Seems like a bureaucrat will have to change this user's right group as I'm unable to. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:17, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Requests for permissions[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg Note: When adding nominations, please use the format =={{usercheck|Username}} (Right requested)== followed by the nomination.

Ayutac (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Autoreviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Not done I don't have any issue with you, but there is no support at this time. You can just contact any reviewer/admin or post a request at WB:HELP regarding the pending changes. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 22:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I nominate myself for autoreviewer. I'll probably only write commentary work like this one and I think I have written enough original material to qualify as not a vandal. As a some of my book changes are still pending, I think it would also take a little bit of work off the backs of others. If you read this, it would be nice if you could accept the outstanding pending changes in the book as well. Could also just make me a full reviewer, although don't expect me to work outside of my niche, I simply lack the time :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayutac (talk • contribs) 10:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

We generally prefer to let users gain experience on the project, acclimating to its unique local culture, before giving them reviewer privs. Likewise autoreview, mostly. Cf. WB:Reviewers. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
While I disagree with Pi zero to an extent, I think that you'll do fine without autoreview at this time, partially because of your sporadic activity, and also it's easier to review your type of edits since you create them in one go. Maybe try again after about 40 edits? Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 14:47, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't mind. I just thought it would be more convenient for others. I don't really care about about the pending change line. --Ayutac (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I would like to advise getting more experience, including remembering to sign your talks.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 04:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Texvc2LaTeXBot (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (bot flag)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Done, for 3 months as this seems to be a time limited requirement. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 13:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Request for bot permissions

  • Bot name: Texvc2LaTeXBot (discuss · email · contribs · logs · count)
  • Bot operator: Salix alba (discuss · email · contribs · logs · count)
  • Automatic or manually assisted: automatic but closely monitored
  • Purpose of the bot: to replace deprecated syntax in the LaTex mathematical syntax
  • Edit period(s): A one off run affecting 200 pages.
  • Programming language(s) (and API) used: python/piwikibot
  • Other projects that are already using this bot: enwiki, dewiki many other wiki across the whole of WikiMedia sites.
  • Additional information: All ready running on the English wikipedia at en:User:Texvc2LaTeXBot. Has sucessfully run on many other wikis, the update plan is described in mw:Extension:Math/Roadmap. The bot will apply 10 regexps replacing deprecated syntax inside <math>...</math> tags. The code has been tested to eliminate false positives. The bot is operated by Salix alba on English language wikis and meta:User:Debenben on German and other language wikis.
  • Comment There is no registered user with that name. Before noticing that, I was going to ask how much activity one would expect from such a bot, thus whether it would be better to allow it to run without the bot flag. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
I've now created the account, it seemed to happen automatically. The activity is going to be about 200 edits, with maybe a second run to catch pages we've missed. I'm happy to run with/without the bot flag, but thought it would be better to check. --Texvc2LaTeXBot (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
It's been my understanding that one should get permission before running a bot, regardless of whether one wants the flag for it. Though I don't see that spelled out in policy (WB:Bots), so either I'm overlooking it, or I'm looking in the wrong place, or it's more of a matter of courtesy/etiquette. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
We will want to flag the account so that the edits autoreview. Another 200+ manual reviews will not be welcome. While the policy doesn't spell it out, it is custom and practice here to not allow bot-like processes to be run without discussion due to the additional impact of having flaggedrevisions active here. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
In which case, I do want to request bot permissions. --Salix alba (discuss • contribs) 15:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

大诺史 (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Autoreview/Autopatrolled)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Not done; sense seems to be that the situation is under control without. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I'm from commons & zh.wiki. I would like to request to have the autopatrolled permission as I am here to change images/files (usually png -> svg, gif/jpg -> png). As you can see, commons is currently changing the table images of chemical elements from png format to svg format, so I will be active here to make the necesary changeds. By giving me this permission, my edits can be autoreviewed and backlog on the "to be reviewed" edits will be reduced. 大诺史 (discuss • contribs) 05:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Comment We've kept up with these so far, I think. These are all to Wikijunior, I believe. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
I cleared all the pending ones. --Cohaf (discuss • contribs) 15:11, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712 (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Withdrawn. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 15:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd like to request to be manually flagged as a reviewer to help patrol changes. I haven't yet made 100 edits, but my changes so far have been constructive. I won't misuse the rights, and am happy to answer any questions. I have experience on enwiki as a reviewer and rollbacker, and know how to use the rights properly. Thanks, --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 08:00, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: I'm not quite sure why you need the rights - no evidence of "patrolling changes" as such. Could you explain on that - maybe I'm missing something. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 08:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
@Leaderboard: so far I've been going through recent changes and undoing the spam or vandalism, but this would also let me approve the good changes. --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 18:12, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: I don't think you have much experience here to gain reviewer, as @Pi zero: often says, reviewer here is a bit different compared to some other projects. That's just my line of thought though. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 26 May 2019 (UTC):
Just looking through some of DannyS712's unreviewed edits, on one hand they've certainly been doing useful counter-vandalism edits, on the other hand some moderately tricky situations arose that can benefit from a certain amount of additional project-specific experience. For example, in one case they made a useful de-wikifying edit, but then they also figured to remove the {{dewikify}} tag, which seems to me premature as the page still had some half dozen or so redlinks. On another page I found they'd undone IP vandalism to a page that already had a pending IP vandalism edit to it (and it took me a bit of studying to be quite certain the earlier edit was vandalism). Another page had a whole pile of unreviewed previous edits on it that I wasn't even sure of, and I left the whole sequence still pending.

Note that it's not urgent to have review for these things; we really do try to keep up, but when we don't, the unreviewed edits will wait for us. So I don't think there's any lasting harm in letting DannyS712 continue making helpful edits and learning the project by osmosis, for a while. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 15:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@Pi zero: I understand. I'd like to withdraw this request --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 05:19, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Great to see your involvement. In due season, you should be autopromoted. Cheers. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:13, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

WolfgangFahl (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Not done; sense is that it's not needed. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

I would like to resolve https://github.com/jscad/OpenJSCAD.org/issues/446. The committers of the OpenJSCAD project don't know how to proceed in being able to get their pages to a "reviewed" stage. I did a few edits and I don't know any reviewer who could do the work. I could do it might self but i don't edit any other WikiBooks content. You'll just see me on Wikipedia and more on semanticmediawiki.org. --WolfgangFahl (discuss • contribs) 13:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, @WolfgangFahl:. A few thoughts.
  • Reviewing edits on English Wikibooks is something we do mainly as a counter-vandalism measure. We get to things when we get to them, and though we prefer to do so sooner when possible, it doesn't greatly hurt anything if we don't get to it for a while. It isn't something that should be an administrative concern for some other project (as with the external page you link to). Wikibooks is, after all, a collaborative project.
  • We prefer to limit review privileges to users who have enough experience with English Wikibooks to be familiar with the local culture. Our autopromotion criteria usually suffice.
--Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Also I'd note that you can just ask any administrator or reviewer to have your pages reviewed. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 08:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Debanshu.Das (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Autoreviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Not done; sense is that it's not needed. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Please allow me to be autoreviewer so that I can upload the changes I have made. I am about to make a pdf version of the book and some portions remain unreviewed. Hence I ask for this permission. Debanshu.Das (discuss • contribs) 16:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

@Debanshu.Das: Autoreview is not required to make a PDF version; the difference between reviewed and unreviewed pages isn't much. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 14:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Guywan (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Autoreviewed / Reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Looks like they'd have been autopromoted before now if autopromotion were working. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:14, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to request Autoreviewed and Reviewer rights. Autoreviewed for obvious reasons, and Reviewer so that I may review pending changes to books that I am interested in. (Chess, Chess Opening Theory, Chess Strategy, and, if ever a regain the courage to deal with it, Japanese.) I realise I have made no edits to Chess or Chess Strategy, but all in good time!

I have zero experience with reviewing, but I do believe I have good common sense. I do not intend, at this time, to leave these areas (although I will not rule out a foray into computer science and programming, at some stage) and assist with the backlog. Sorry!

If no promotion will be forthcoming, could I ask that someone go through my contribs and approve pending changes?

Regards, GUYWAN (t · c) 20:25, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Guywan: I went through and checked your pending changes - they all looked good. But, it looks you should get autopromoted soon - if you keep contributing it'll happen automatically. --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 23:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Looks to me as if they'd have been autopromoted by now if autopromotion were working. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:11, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712 bot (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Done for two months on 30 November 2019 by User:Leaderboard. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:18, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I completely forgot about the bot task discussed at Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals/2019/June, and when I just remembered and went to run it I found out that the rights had expired. Ping @Leaderboard: for renewal. Can they be indefinite this time? Thanks, --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 12:22, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Not sure if they should be indefinite (especially because the bot hasn't done a lot yet), but I wouldn't mind renewing for a couple of months or so. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 17:08, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
...so can you renew it please? --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 05:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
@Leaderboard: ping --DannyS712 (discuss • contribs) 00:07, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Sorry, forgot about it. Done for two months. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 19:20, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Dino Bronto Rex (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (importer)[edit]

I would like to ask for permission to import pages from Wikipedia, because I have been lately asking for imports through the request for imports page, but there are still lots of pages left to import into two books (one that I have created, and another that I’m contributing to), and I kinda feel bad to spam the requests for imports page. Could I please have permission to import? Thanks in advance, Dino Bronto Rex (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello? Dino Bronto Rex (discuss • contribs) 14:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Oppose at this time for being premature, he should probably get some experience reviewing first. But I would Support the user getting the reviewer flag. I think he should have been autopromoted as he seems to have fulfilled the criteria, but autopromotion is currently broken at the moment per phab:T237191. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 01:55, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Good point about reviewer; done. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Dino Bronto Rex: Do you still need importer? Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 23:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Uziel302 (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Done; straightforward. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I am doing some maintenance work through my project Wikibooks:Correct typos in one click and Jules  recommended to ask for reviewer permissions. Uziel302 (discuss • contribs) 18:49, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Done. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 19:41, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Anachronist (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Autoreviewed)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
No objections raised since my last comment... so Done . —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 12:27, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm an admin on the English Wikipedia, and finding myself doing some editing here on Wikibooks. I seem to be autoconfirmed here, but I've noticed edits I'm making appear to be subject to pending-change protection. It would be nice to have autoreview permission here. At the moment I'm not requesting anything else, but if a Wikibooks admin sees fit to entrust other permissions to me, I won't complain. :) Anachronist (discuss • contribs) 22:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment Not to get issues tangled with each other, while a user's bona fides can reasonably be established from their activity on other projects, reasonably establishing familiarity with the specific culture of Wikibooks wants experience specifically with this project. Our reviewer autopromotion criteria (though they currently don't work automatically) were chosen to reasonably establish both. So it is relevant to a discussion of this RFP that you're not yet close to satisfying the autopromotion criteria. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 02:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
    • @Pi zero: are you aware that the user is requesting autoreviewer rather than reviewer? There is no auto-promotion nor fixed promotion criteria with regard to the autoreviewer right, only the judgment that their edits are unlikely to need external review, and it is then granted at the discretion of an administrator. But my non-admin view is that I Support them being given the autoreviewer right; their work both here and at other WMF projects makes it unlikely that their edits will need review. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 15:19, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
      • I've not taken a position as yet, just tried to provide a bit of perspective. Afaik we have no established best-practice on autoreviewer. Clearly a large-scale unintended problem would be less likely to happen with autoreviewer than with reviewer, but quite what that implies is not immediately clear to me. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
        The main intention behind my request was to prevent unnecessary work for others. I've noticed that someone else has to take time to review my edits and mark them reviewed. This isn't necessary in my case, but if the Wikibooks community feels otherwise toward an editor already trusted on other projects, I can withdraw this request and carry on like I've been doing.
        A secondary intention was to learn what the criteria are for the different permissions on Wikibooks. I couldn't find them for autoreview. Anachronist (discuss • contribs) 17:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Well there's a page at Wikibooks:Autoreviewed users. There doesn't seem fixed requirements, it is at admin discretion pretty much. For a reviewer, the requirements are at Wikibooks:Reviewers; as automatic promotion is not currently working it would need to be requested here when you fulfill the requirements (unless they fix the automatic promotion in the meantime).
Maybe its best just to withdraw your request, it doesn't seem like it will be given at this present time. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 20:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
On the other hand, I'd be interested to hear if any other admin has anything to add here. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe this should be an issue. I've handed the Autoreviewer tool to many users that are trustable with many good edits. Anachronist is right in terms of saving work from others... it is quite a hassle to accept several edits from trustworthy users to which a simple right change can save all that time. I'm willing to give Anachronist the right but I don't want to move forward without Pi zero's response... just to be cautious. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Encik Tekateki (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (reviewer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Seems to satisfy the autopromotion criteria. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 04:46, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Kindly auto-promote this user to auto-reviewer since I participate in this Wikibook project for sometimes (Almost 1 year) and fulfill the requirement set in here: Wikibooks:Reviewers.

Thanks for seeing this message

By Encik Tekateki (discuss • contribs) 04:15, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Wikibooks:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=3653849"