Wikibooks:Requests for permissions
| Discussions | Assistance | Requests |
|---|---|---|
| General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books | General | Technical | Administrative | Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions | Renaming |
| Requests for Permissions Archives |
|---|
|
|
|
All rights available on Wikibooks are handled here, including reviewer, importer, uploader, 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 in granting reviewer, importer, and uploader flags. Administrators may use their best judgement in granting those. 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.
Removal of permissions[edit]
 |
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. |
Just thought I'd let you all know that I have requested at meta that my admin rights here be dropped. I still pop in on a regular basis, but I haven't done any admin tasks in quite some time. It is better to not have the rights if they are not actively used. Thanks for trusting me here. It has been enjoyable. I'll be around, just not as a sysop. --Jomegat (discuss • contribs) 00:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Requests for permissions[edit]
|
Note: When adding nominations, please use the format =={{usercheck|Username}} (Right requested)== followed by the nomination. |
Jeepday (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]
Not sure if I don't have the permissions or if I am to stupid to figure out how to do it... If I read these instructions correctly I don't have permissions, because that is not what I am seeing. when I look here. I work OTRS tickets mostly for Wikisource, but Wikibooks has more then Wikisource so I peak in on yours once in while to answer the easy stuff. Wikibooks could defiantly user a stronger presence at OTRS, to answer questions. In the mean time could some one review and approve the 3 pending changes at History of Wyoming to correct a red link issue? Jeepday (talk) 00:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- That much I can do for you, though ISTR that it isn't strictly necessary in WB. Except for the kids' sections, the latest edit is what shows by default, rather than the latest approved, so the redlink issue was already resolved. Chazz (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- As Chazz notes, there's likely no great need for you to have the reviewer priv here. Promotion is automatic once you meet the criteria; by my count, though, over the years you've only made about 20 content-space edits (your first edit was apparently in 2006, though don't ask me how that can be so when your account here was created in 2007 :-). --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 11:54, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- I also edit with the account User:JeepdaySock, not sure if that brings the count up high enough to make a difference, but given this & this I am probably pretty low risk from being a potential problem. JeepdaySock (discuss • contribs) 15:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Jianhui67 (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]
done, not sure when auto promotion is actually going to happen but you've waited long enough QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 15:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)Hi! I would need the reviewer permission to revert vandalism and review others' edits. I have made more than 90 edits here. I have also done many mathematical codings as well. I would be making many edits related to mathematical codings and I think my edits can be automatically reviewed. I am a reviewer and rollbacker in English Wikipedia and I have rollback on several Wikimedia projects. By the way, am I close to autopromotion? Thanks. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 12:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
- A few edits away from autopromotion. Give it a couple of days (we need to leave the request open anyway as some people object to early granting) QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 14:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
- Well, I already have more than 100 edits. But I'm not autopromoted. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:48, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
- QuiteUnusual, I have 118 edits now. But I'm not autopromoted. What do I lack? Jianhui67 talk★contribs 10:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- By my count, you have exactly 100 content-space edits (3 in Wikijunior space and 97 in mainspace). At a guess, looking at the criteria for autopromotion, I suspect you're not yet up to "8 edits are spaced 2 or more days apart from each other (which takes at least 14 days, if you edit every 2 days)." That one is hard to judge by eye, but I'm guessing you've got an edit on Feb 20, Feb 17, Sep 23, Sep 20, and Sep 17. That's five, although, depending on exactly how the algorithm counts, edits later today could bring the number up to six. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 11:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note that the objective is not the edits counts by themselves but to give wikibookians time and experience on the project. It is just a way for the process to avoid granting automatically the rights to editors that could cause disruption. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Indeed. To be clear, we don't mean deliberate disruption; it's just a matter of having had breadth of experience on the project, as a stable foundation for ones' judgements when exercising the bit. Since not having the reviewer bit doesn't seriously limit contribution, we allow people to accumulate that sort of breadth before they're autopromoted. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 13:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note that the objective is not the edits counts by themselves but to give wikibookians time and experience on the project. It is just a way for the process to avoid granting automatically the rights to editors that could cause disruption. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- By my count, you have exactly 100 content-space edits (3 in Wikijunior space and 97 in mainspace). At a guess, looking at the criteria for autopromotion, I suspect you're not yet up to "8 edits are spaced 2 or more days apart from each other (which takes at least 14 days, if you edit every 2 days)." That one is hard to judge by eye, but I'm guessing you've got an edit on Feb 20, Feb 17, Sep 23, Sep 20, and Sep 17. That's five, although, depending on exactly how the algorithm counts, edits later today could bring the number up to six. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 11:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Hym411 (discuss · contribs · count · logs · block log · rfp · rights [change]) (Reviewer)[edit]
Hi. I am Commons admin, and I may occationally contribute with file moving stuff (not yet), or as an OTRS volunteer, do some fix with Wikibooks tickets. I believe my edits do not need patrol by others. And because I will unlikely to pass autopromotion creteria, I am requesting reviewer flag. —레비Revi 14:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
