Commons:Administrators

Shortcuts: COM:A • COM:ADMIN • COM:SYSOP

This page explains the role of administrators (sometimes called admins or sysops) on Wikimedia Commons. Note that details of the role, and the way in which administrators are appointed, may differ from other sites.

If you want to request administrator help, please post at Administrators' noticeboard.

There are currently 187 administrators on Commons.

What is an administrator?

Administrators as of September 2023 Listing by: Language • Date • Activity [+/−]

Number of Admins: 187 -revi, ko, en-3 1234qwer1234qwer4, ru, de-4, en-3 1Veertje, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 32X, de, en-2, hsb-1, ru-1 99of9, en (bureaucrat) A.Savin, ru, de-4, en-2 Abzeronow, en, fr-1 Achim55, de, en-3, nds-3, la-2 AFBorchert, de, en-3 Ahonc, uk, ru-4, en-2, de-1 Aka, de, en-3 Alno, fr, en-3, es-2, pt-1 Андрей Романенко, ru, en-3, uk-3, be-2, fr-2, lv-2 Ankry, pl, en-2, ru-1 AnRo0002, de, en-2, fr-2, es-1 Anthere, fr, en-3 AntiCompositeNumber, en, fr-2 (steward) Aude, en, ar-2, de-2, es-3 Benoît Prieur, fr, en-3, pt-2, es-1, it-1, hy-1 Billinghurst, en Blackcat, it, en-3, fr BrightRaven, fr, en-3, nl-2, es-2, zh-1 Butko, ru, uk-2, en-1 Captain-tucker, en Christian Ferrer, fr, en-2, es-2 Ciell, nl, en-2, de-1 Common Good, en CptViraj, gu, hi-4, en-3 Cromium, en, de-1, fr-1 Cybularny, pl, en-2, es-1, de-1 Czar, en DaB., de, en-1 DarwIn, pt, en-3, es-2, fr-2, gl-2, ca-1, it-1, oc-1 Davepape, en De728631, de, en-5 DerHexer, de, en-3, grc-3, la-3, es-1 (steward) Dharmadhyaksha, mr, en-3, hi-3 DMacks, en Didym, de, en-2, fr-2 Dyolf77, ar, fr-5, en-2, it-1, es-1 D-Kuru, de, en-2, it-1 Ebrahim, fa, en-3 Elcobbola en, de (checkuser) Ellin Beltz, en (bureaucrat) Ellywa, nl, en-2, de-1, fr-1 Emha, de, bar, en-3, fr-1 Érico, pt, en-2, es-1 EugeneZelenko, ru, be, en-2, bg-1, pl-1 (bureaucrat) Explicit, en, es, ko-2 Ezarate, es-3, en-1 Fitindia, en-3, hi-2, mr-2 (checkuser) FunkMonk, da, en-4, no-3, fo-2, sv-2, de-1, es-1 Gbawden, en-3, af-1 Geagea, he, ka-3, en-3, ru-1 Geni, en George Chernilevsky, ru, uk-3, de-2, en-2, bg-1, la-1, be-1, fr-1 Gestumblindi, als, de, en-3 Gnangarra, en, nys-1 GPSLeo, de, en-2 GreenMeansGo, en Grin, hu, en-3, de-1 Hekerui, de, en-4 Herbythyme, en, fr-2, es-1, it-1 Hesperian, en Howcheng, en, ja-2 Huntster, en Indeedous, de, en-3, fr-2 Infrogmation, en, es-1 IronGargoyle, en, de-1 Jameslwoodward, en, fr-1 (bureaucrat, checkuser) Jaqen, it, en-2 Jarekt, pl, en JarrahTree, en, id-1 Jcornelius, de, lt-2, la-2, en-2, pt-2, fr-1 Jdforrester, en Jean-Frédéric, fr, en-4, es-1 Jianhui67, en, zh-4, ja-2, ms-1 Jmabel, en, es-3, ro-2, de-1, ca-1, it-1, pt-1, fr-1 Joergens.mi, de, en-3 JoKalliauer, de, en-3 Jon Kolbert, en, fr-4, de-2 (steward) Josve05a, sv, en-3 Julo, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1 Jusjih, zh, en-3, fr-2, ko-1 Kadı, tr, en-5, fr-2, az-2 Kaldari, en Kallerna, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1 King of Hearts, en, zh-3, es-2, ja-1 Klemen Kocjancic, sl, en-3, de-2, hr-1, bs-1 Krd, de, en-3 (bureaucrat, checkuser) Krinkle, nl, en-3, de-2 Kritzolina, de, en-3, fr-2, it-1 Leit, de, en-3, fr-1 Léna, fr, en-3, es-1 Leyo, gsw, de, en-3, fr-3, es-1, la-1 Lofty abyss, en, mt, it-2 Lymantria, nl, en-3, de-2, fy-2, fr-1, zea-1 Magog the Ogre, en, es-2 Mahagaja, en, de-4, fr-2, ga-2, la-2, cy-1 Maire, pl, en-4, es-2, fr-2, de-2, ru-1 Marcus Cyron, de, en-2 Masur, pl, en-3, de-1 Materialscientist, en-4, ru-4, nl-3, fr-1, es-1 MB-one, de, en-3, fr-1, pt-1 MBisanz, en Mdaniels5757, en, es-1 MGA73, da, en-3, de-2, no-1, sv-1 Mhhossein, fa, en-3, ar-1 Micheletb, fr, en-3, it-1, es-1 Mike Peel, en, pt-2, fr-1 Minorax, en, zh (oversighter) Missvain, en Mitchazenia, en, es-2 Miya, ja, en-2 Moheen, bn, as-1, bpy-1, en-3, hi-1, hif-1 Morgankevinj, en MPF, en, da-2, de-1, fr-1 Multichill, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1 Mys 721tx, zh, en-3 Nagy, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, sv-1 NahidSultan, bn, en-3, bpy-1 Natuur12, nl, en-3, de-1 Nick, en, sco-2, fr-1 notafish, fr, en-4, de-3, es-2, it-2 odder, pl, en-4, de-2 (bureaucrat, oversighter) Otourly, fr, en-2, it-1 P199, en, nl, fr-2, tl-2, de-1 Pi.1415926535, en, es-2 Platonides, es, en-2, fr-1 Poco a poco, es, de-4, en-3, fr-2, it-2, pl-2, pt-1 Podzemnik, cs, en-2 Polarlys, de, en-2, fr-1, no-1 Pyb, fr, en-2 Pymouss, fr, en-3, de-2, it-2, he-1 Racconish, fr, en-4 Ragesoss, en, de-1, fr-1 Ra'ike, de, en-2 Rama, fr, en-3, de-2, la-2, es-1, it-1, ja-1 (oversighter) Rastrojo, es, en-3, fr-2, eo-1 Raymond, de, en-3, nl-1 (oversighter) Red-tailed hawk, en, es-4, pt-2, ug-1 Regasterios, hu, en-1 Rehman, en, si-1 Reinhard Kraasch, de, en-3 Rimshot, de, en-4, fr-2, it-1 Romaine, nl, en-3, de-2, af-1, fr-1 Rosenzweig, de, en-3, fr-1, la-1 Royalbroil, en, es-1 RP88, en, de-1 Rubin16, ru, tt, en-4 Rudolphous, nl, en-3, de-2 Ruthven, it, fr, en-4, es-4, nap-4, ca-2, de-1 Sanandros, als, de, en-3, fr-1 Satdeep Gill, pa, en-5, hi-5, es-3, fr-2, fa-1 Shizhao, zh, en-1, ru-1 Spiritia, bg, en-3, ru-2, mk-2, de-1 Sreejithk2000, ml, en-3, hi-3, ta-1, kn-1 Steinsplitter, bar, de-4, it-3, en-1 Stifle, en, ga, fr-2, de-1 Storkk, en, fr-3, de-2, eo-2 Strakhov, es, en-2 TadejM, sl, en-3, de-2, fr-2 Taivo, et, en-3, ru-3, de-1 Tarawneh, en, ar, de-1 Teles, pt, en-3, es-2 Themightyquill, en, fr-2, de-1, hu-1 The Squirrel Conspiracy, en Thibaut120094, fr, en-2, ja-1 Thuresson, sv, en-3, no-2 Trijnstel, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 (checkuser) Tulsi, ne, mai, en-3, hi-2, hif-2, bh-1 Túrelio, de, en-3, es-1 VIGNERON, fr, de-2, en-2, zh-1 Wdwd, de, en-2 Well-Informed Optimist, ru, uk-4, en-3 Wikitanvir, bn, en-3, de-2, as-2, bpy-1 Wutsje, fy, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-1 Yann, fr, en-4, hi-2, gu-1 Yasu, ja, en-2, de-1 Ymblanter, ru, en-3, de-2, fr-2, nl-2, it-1, es-1 Yuval CT, he, en-3 Zzyzx11, en, es-1, fr-1 علاء, ar, en-4, he-1, es-1 (steward) Abuse filter, (automated account) CommonsDelinker, (bot) see request KrinkleBot, (bot) see request If 187 is not the last number on this list, there may be an error or there are some users assigned temporarily.

Technical

Administrators are users with the technical ability on Wikimedia Commons to:

• delete and undelete images and other uploaded files, and to view and restore deleted versions
• delete and undelete pages, and to view and restore deleted revisions
• protect and unprotect pages, and to edit admin-protected pages
• block and unblock users, individual IP addresses and IP address ranges
• edit less-restricted interface messages (see also Commons:Interface administrators)
• rename files
• add and remove user groups
• configure Upload Wizard campaigns
• delete and undelete specific log entries and revisions of pages
• import pages from other wikis
• merge the history of pages
• modify abuse filters
• not create redirects from source pages when moving pages
• override the spoofing checks and title or username blacklist
• send a message to multiple users at once (massmessage)
• use higher limits in API queries

These are collectively known as the admin tools.

Community role

Administrators are experienced and trusted members of the Commons community who have taken on additional maintenance work and have been entrusted with the admin tools by public consensus/vote. Different admins have different areas of interest and expertise, but typical admin tasks include determining and closing deletion requests, deleting copyright violations, undeleting files where necessary, protecting Commons against vandalism, and working on templates and other protected pages. Of course, some of these tasks can be done by non-admins as well.

Administrators are expected to understand the goals of this project, and be prepared to work constructively with others towards those ends. Administrators should also understand and follow Commons' policies, and where appropriate, respect community consensus.

Apart from roles which require use of the admin tools, administrators have no special editorial authority by virtue of their position, and in discussions and public votes their contributions are treated in the same way as any ordinary editor. Some admins may become more influential, not due to their position as such, but from the personal trust they may have gained from the community.

Suggestions for administrators

Please read Commons:Guide to adminship.

Removal of administrator rights

Under the de-admin policy, administrator rights may be revoked due to inactivity or misuse of sysop tools. In a de-admin request, normal standards for determining consensus in an RfA do not apply. Instead, "majority consensus" should be used, whereby any consensus to demote of higher than 50% is sufficient to remove the admin.

Apply to become an administrator

All intending administrators must go through this process and submit themselves to RFA, including all ex-administrators who are seeking to return to their previous role.

First, go to Commons:Administrators/Howto and read the information there. Then come back here and make your request in the section below.

• After clicking the appropriate button and creating the subpage, copy the link to the subpage, e.g. "Commons:Administrators/Requests/Username", edit Commons:Administrators/Requests and paste it in at the top of the section, then put it in double curly brackets (e.g. {{Commons:Administrators/Requests/Username}}) to transclude it. Request a watchlist notice at MediaWiki talk:WatchlistNotice, or edit MediaWiki:WatchlistNotice to put up one if you are an administrator.

• If someone else nominated you, please accept the nomination by stating "I accept" or something similar, and signing below the nomination itself. The subpage will still need to be transcluded by you or your nominator.

Use the box below, replacing Username with your username:

Voting

Any registered user may vote here although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted. It is preferable you give reasons for both Support and Oppose votes as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to an argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.

Promotion normally requires at least 75% in favour, with a minimum of 8 support votes. Votes from unregistered users are not counted. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Bureaucrats may, at their discretion, extend the period of an RfA if they feel that it will be helpful in better determining community consensus.

 Neutral comments are not counted in the vote totals for the purposes of calculating pass/fail percentages. However, such comments are part of the discussion, may persuade others, and contribute to the closing bureaucrat's understanding of community consensus.

Purge the cache Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.

Requests for adminship

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

• Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

Requests for bureaucratship

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.

• Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for CheckUser rights

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.

• Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

Jon Kolbert

Related requests:

• Administrators/Requests/Jon Kolbert

• Checkusers/Requests/Jon Kolbert

Vote

Jon Kolbert (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 00:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I would like to submit my name to become a member of the Commons checkuser team. I have been a Commons administrator since 2017 and a Wikimedia steward since 2019. You can review my loginwiki checkuser stats from 2019-present which comprises the vast majority of checkuser investigations made in the steward role and have made effective blocks to prevent abuse. I have been one of the most active checkusers of the stewards since 2019 and have fulfilled many requests for locks on m:Steward requests/Global primarily for reasons such as cross-wiki abuse or spam which often includes abuse that targets Commons.

Having dealt with cross-wiki long-term abuse in the steward capacity, I am familiar with implementing targeted blocks to avoid legitimate editors being caught within rangeblocks or shared IPs - and managing collateral when unavoidable. I have also been an active member of the Volunteer Response Team since 2017 and at this time mainly focus on the steward queues for e-mailed requests and users who are caught in global blocks.

My experience and connection to the steward team would be an asset to help combat abuse on Commons. Thank you for your consideration. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Votes

•  Support TonyBallioni (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Would be a great addition to the Checkuser team. Abzeronow (talk) 02:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose As it seems, background picture(s) on the candidate's userpage (embedded from User:Jon Kolbert/background) are being used not in accordance with Free License terms (neither attribution, license nor link to original file), this makes it impossible for me to even abstain, never mind support. Someone not familiar with basic copyright policies of Commons, should not be a sysop, and someone who should not be a sysop should not be a CU either. Sorry --A.Savin 03:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The latest 500 edits at Commons show 31 distinct days of activity since 9 August 2022. Users with advanced rights don't have to be the most active ones, but at least some continuous presence should be evident. --Krd 13:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support. —Hasley 14:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Experienced user, competent CheckUser, would be a benefit to the Commons CU team. Vermont (talk) 15:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose, per Krd.--Kadı Message 18:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ ^TALK 21:15, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose, per Krd Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very little activity on Commons since August 2019. Certainly a trusted user, but I expect CUs to be active and available. Yann (talk) 12:37, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Taivo (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral Jon is trusted, and experienced with the checkuser tool, but not active enough on Commons to warrant the bit here, I think. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral Per Mdaniels. Jon is highly-trusted, but (as Krd correctly notes) also has not been all that active on Commons over the past year. If they were more active on Commons, this would be an easy yes, but I would want to see higher levels of demonstrated activity on Commons before granting the bit here—I can't get behind granting the bit to someone who was active on Commons about four days per month over the past year. However, if Jon were to have consistently active Commons activity over the next six months, I'd be more than happy to support at that time. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Materialscientist

Related requests:

• Administrators/Requests/Materialscientist

• Checkusers/Requests/Materialscientist

Vote

Materialscientist (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 00:00, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Dear colleagues, I would like to help the project by performing checkuser duties. My motivation is cleanup. I do that daily as an admin on en.wiki and Commons and as a checkuser on en.wiki (since 2009, 2012 and 2013, respectively). Experience tells that having access to CU logs on two projects, especially en.wiki and Commons, greatly increases the chances of making a right assessment of a user.

Here are my en.wiki admin and CU statistics. None of my CU actions were found inappropriate. Materialscientist (talk) 05:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Votes

•  Support - No issues, will hopefully clean up a growing socking problem on this wiki...--Stemoc 07:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 07:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Юрий Д.К 08:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support user has ~2 million edits globally 💀 ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ ^TALK 09:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support as above. Yann (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Glrx (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support unreservedly. I have had nothing but good experiences with their work.🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 13:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Abzeronow (talk) 15:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

  Struck pending response below. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

  Unstruck. I'm reiterating my support, and would like to explain why the objections below don't hold water with me. First, the SPI (and ACC CU queue) backlog on enwiki is. to me, not relevant to whether Materialscientist would be helpful here. I think hardening the /32 IPv6 block appears to be an error in judgment, but given that they have made 6,510 CheckUser blocks ([1]), a small number of errors is inevitable, and, unless the errors are unusual or indicate recklessness in using the tools or blocking, not a factor for me. I am assured that the CU tool was in fact used before blocking that range, so JJMC's objection that it was not appears baseless (indeed, non-CUs don't have access to CU logs, so JJMC and I have no way of knowing that a range was checked before blocking other than the word of a CheckUser). Since this does not appear to be a pattern, and the other objections are not availing to me, I continue to support this nomination. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Support - Highly trusted user. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Taivo (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Mike Peel (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support —Yahya (talk • contribs.) 21:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Highly trusted and experienced user of Wikipedia, I think he can provide benefit to Commons on this capacity. NikosLikomitros (talk) 01:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Support. Highly capable and clearly knows what he is doing Robertsky (talk) 03:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--UltimoGrimm (talk) 08:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support—Teles «Talk to me ˱_{C L @ S}˲» 12:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Riad Salih (talk) 13:06, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support. —Hasley 14:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support —MdsShakil (talk) 15:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ferien (talk) 19:00, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support GMG^talk 19:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Hugo (talk) 02:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Trusted and experienced. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 09:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support EN-Jungwon 10:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Thank you for volunteering! --TenWhile6 (talk | SWMT) 14:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Yep. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Absolutely, yes. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 01:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ariadacapo (talk) 06:07, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support FitIndia ^Semi-retired 14:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Adamant1 (talk) 02:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Andy Dingley (talk) 21:49, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Kritzolina (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Jianhui67 ^T★C 18:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support – Ammarpad (talk) 10:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I am contesting your statement that "None of my CU actions were found inappropriate.". I find that en:Special:Redirect/logid/148499599 was an inappropriate CU action. You changed an IPv6 /32 anon. only block for a Jio range to a hard block, marking the new block as a CheckUser block. This caused a wave of appeals due to collateral. Since, per policy, I could not modify your CU block, I requested that another CU investigate the collateral and reduce the block. Another CU restored the block back to anon. only within hours of your modification, citing "significant collateral". Collateral aside, you marked the block as a CU block, but it was not backed by use of the CU tool. This unacceptably made the block unreviewable by non-CUs. If you cannot use the tool appropriately on a wiki where you already have it, you should get access to it on another wiki. — JJMC89 (T·C) 17:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  "I find that en:Special:Redirect/logid/148499599 was an inappropriate CU action." - indeed, that single action was found inappropriate by some users, and I still don't know who they were. There was no discussion that involved myself. Five long-term blocks were issued to that range before mine within 1.5 years. A public discussion was started a month after my block here. It didn't find the blocks inappropriate. All that said, I don't question the decision (of lifting my block or finding it excessive). Materialscientist (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  "it was not backed by use of the CU tool" - I have to disagree. We are talking about a busy ::/32 range. Getting its CU log is technically challenging even on a fast internet; hence we often scan parts of a range. According to Drmies that IP range has "1500 entries in the CU log since February 2021". Some partial results are kept on CU Wiki. That IP range has been CU-scanned ca. 100 times in the period 18 May 2023 to 30 August 2023 alone. I've checked that range 7 times from 20 May 2023 to 26 June 2023. My block was issued on 26 June 2023. Materialscientist (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  I'm personally not going to comment or vote because of (active or former) hats and this is not a community I regularly contribute, but I am concerned. I have had to repeatedly and excessively reduce rangeblocks at ACC because of how blatantly they ignore colleterial, and I did it for years. I know the CU training is lacking, but I also learned how to block just through CU expirience, or looking at how busy ranges are. It causes more work for others. I haven't been doing ACC as frequently recently, but the previous pattern was long and extensive. -- Amanda (she/her) 21:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  Amanda, for the record, I highly value your work and comments on CU mailing list. I wish you have talked to me personally so that I could learn from you. Materialscientist (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose - per JJMC89 - Faendalimas (talk) 17:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose while I have no issues with his CU actions, I do have an issues with the unreviewable blocks he has made in his capacity as a CU. While Materialscientist and I have different views on vandalism blocks, which I don't really hold against him, what I do have an issue with is that he has CU block very large ranges as hard blocks without running a check. This has the impact of preventing non-CU admins from reviewing without the input of a CU; and for IP ranges most won't review because they assume something private was involved. While it is not an abuse of the tool itself, it is an abuse of the status to make a block unreviewable. I'm opposing on those grounds. Note that I cannot speak to any specific block per the privacy policy, but the en.wiki Arbitration Committee can confirm that I have reported this abuse in the past. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  See my reply above. I am well known on en.wiki for a highly liberal view on my blocks, allowing to lift them at will. All you need is a brief message on my talk. Further, most admins merely assume that CU blocks are unquestionable and don't even try to discuss them. CUs, me included, may and do reveal some block details and reasoning, on Wiki and/or off Wiki. The discussion that I've linked above. Is an example of how it could be done. Materialscientist (talk) 22:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

  Materialscientist Did you made a CheckUser block without running a check? If so, why? I thought that CheckUser blocks are only for blocks involving CheckUser data, right? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

  No, see my reply to JJMC89 above. Further to that, some targeted users from that range alternately edited using accounts and IPs (this is easy to tell from editing pattern and filter logs); this gave extra data on the editing activity. Materialscientist (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Support--Kadı Message 18:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ooligan (talk) 04:20, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 08:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per JJMC89 and Amanda --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose per some of the above Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:18, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose - My en.wiki SPIs not uncommonly take 5-12 days to be reviewed. If en.wiki CUs are so overburden as implied by these (unacceptable) turn-around times, they do not appear to have the capacity to extend themselves into other projects. Эlcobbola _talk 13:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

  I cover different tasks on en.wiki and Commons. I don't cover SPIs on en.wiki (there are 46 active CUs over there), and get to en.SPIs via personal messages. My reaction to such messages is quick. Materialscientist (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Support 1989 (talk) 17:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments

•  Question Per m:Volunteer Response Team/Volunteering#Materialscientist I understood that you are going to focus on deletion request and permission tickets. Is CU an additional task you like to introduce to yourself at the same time? --Krd 07:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, these two are absolutely unrelated. Roughly speaking, the VRT nomination is about handling DRs, while CU aims at fighting abuse. I do both. Materialscientist (talk) 07:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

•  Question: Would you CU block an editor without having received a report against them from anyone on commons? (I was blocked like this in the en.wiki, that's why I ask.)Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:50, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Question:Would you CU block an account without having adverted them of an eventual violation? (I was also CU blocked without having been adverted of a violation on en.wiki and would have happily just edited with one account if given the option before being CU blocked)Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

  I guess you refer to a well-meaning editor who didn't know our policies on the use of multiple accounts, and your questions are 1) whether a checkuser may access CU logs without a community request? They may, at their own risk. All CU actions are logged, they can be questioned, and result in removal of CU rights. 2) Whether a checkuser may block on sight if they find evidence of abusing multiple accounts? Same answer. 3) What is my approach to 2)? It is highly individual. On-sight blocks are justified only when the situation is crystal clear, otherwise there must be a discussion, public or via email (e.g. via checkuser mailing list). The block severity depends on the situation. In case of abuse it may be indef hardblocks to all involved accounts. In case of obvious ignorance, the user may get away with a friendly message on their talk asking to consult our policies on the use of multiple accounts. Materialscientist (talk) 08:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the answer. For potential readers to clarify: Materialscientiest was not the CU who blocked me, and I AGF on them that they'd have AGFed my actions at the time as well. I have often observed them combatting vandalism during my rollback runs in the en.wiki. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Requests for Oversight rights

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.

• Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

See also

• Commons:User access levels
• Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section
• Commons:Administrators' noticeboard