Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard

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.

Click here to add a new section

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	1
RfBs	0
Overdue RfBs	0
Overdue RfAs	0
BRFAs	10
Approved BRFAs	0

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

RfA candidate	S	O	N	S %	Status	Ending (UTC)	Time left	Dups?	Report
Asilvering	75	0	0	100	Open	09:15, 6 September 2024	4 days, 13 hours	no	report

It is 19:17:38 on September 1, 2024, according to the server's time and date.

Not sure whether bot flag is needed

Resolved

I've just speedily approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Addihockey10 (automated) as an uncontroversial task, but I'm not sure whether it should be given a bot flag or left to run unflagged. The edit rate is about 6-10 EPM according to Addihockey10 (looks to be a bit lower than that going through his contribs), which isn't a lot, but a bot flag would be helpful. The issue is that the account isn't a strict "bot" account (i.e. an automated account with a "Bot" at the end), but rather one intended for AWB/Huggling, and I don't think we give bot flags to those. A separate, dedicated account cannot be used because the bot runs cross-wiki, and it is already flagged as "Addihockey10 (automated)" on a few other wikis, as I was told. So what do 'crats think? Best, — The Earwig ^(talk) 04:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree that we don't give bot flags to manually run tasks. Andrevan@ 02:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Aye, he's running it from his main account (which is used for non-bot edits), and it doesn't look like he has any particular need for the high limit if the edit rate is going to be kept that low. Manually reviewed edits run from a primary account don't get flagged. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Request

As apparently being in the same ε-closure isn't enough for some people, I guess I'll have to make the state transition explicitly...Can someone resysop the Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs) account? Thanks. T. Canens (talk) 10:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for desysop

Please desysop Malcolm (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) further to the Arbitration Committee motion announced here. Thank you. Risker (talk) 05:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Help needed

•  Done Many thanks buddies. MBisanz ^talk 16:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

There are some usurp requests that have been pending awhile and haven't been fulfilled because I'm the only person working the page and I'm uncertain on how to handle them. I would appreciate the input of some other crats, specifically on:

• Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#SalfEnergy_.E2.86.92_Wagner
• Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#None_.28SUL_request.29_.E2.86.92_DLR

Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 22:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I have been very inactive, so if what I'm saying is contrary to current practice, I welcome correction (including from non-crats). That said, in the case of SalfEnergy, I'd be inclined do the rename since the enwiki user is by far the most active. By similar reasoning, for None, I'd be inclined to turn the request down simply because, while the current English DLR user has been inactive since 2004, they have nearly as many edits as the French user requesting the usurp, so there's no compelling case that the later should control the SUL. But I should re-emphasize that I'm not aware of present practice, and I'd suggest that no usurps take place until more folks chime in. -- Pakaran 03:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Pakaran and have commented at both requests. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Chiming in at the usurp page. --Dweller (talk) 10:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'd probably lean slightly on the side of granting the 'DLR' request as well, given that the en.wiki user is inactive for over 9 years and the requesting user already controls the SUL. –xeno^talk 14:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I missed that he already has the SUL - I took it that he was thinking of doing so. Will amend my response accordingly. --Dweller (talk) 14:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for desysop II

Please desysop me. Bishonen | talk 20:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC).