Global rollback for lp0 on fire

Not ending before 13:52 29 June 2026 (UTC)

At my previous request, the main concern raised was account age, in particular now that GR includes TAIV auto-reveal. It's been slightly over 3 months since then, and my account will be more than 9 months old before this request closes, which still isn't hugely long, but I believe I've done enough in that time for my editing to be assessed. I also now have experience with TAIV, including on meta which is essentially global. I haven't been as active in antivandalism recently, but have instead done significant antispam work; whereas vandalism is usually reverted within minutes on all but the smallest wikis, even quite large wikis often lack the capacity to deal with subtle spam, which can go unreverted for months or even years. I believe GR would help me by saving time when I am reverting (in one case I needed to revert more than 80 edits by a single user, and Selective Rollback would've been very helpful) and reduce the burden of patrolling on local users. lp0 on fire () 13:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support No concerns. – DreamRimmer ■ 14:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support per my last support vote. Leaderboard (talk) 17:30, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --V0lkanic (talk) 19:23, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Seen in anti-van, no issue. Hamish 19:24, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support LGTM. Divinations (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Seems fine, no concerns here. EggRoll97 (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support NDG (talk) 22:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support several positive impressions. --Icodense (talk) 23:07, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 02:27, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Saroj (talk) 02:29, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support — Morkoz (talk) 05:34, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support PieWriter (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support — Gerges ^(Talk) 14:56, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support I've been seeing a lot of positive work from this candidate and am glad to support this time around. Ternera (talk) 16:10, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support No doubts. Tenshi! (Talk page) 16:15, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support -J. Ansari Talk 17:49, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 18:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
• Support LuniZunie (talk) 03:43, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Count Count (talk) 08:05, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:57, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:15, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Strong support Peterxy（talk） 22:38, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

 Support Least Action (talk) 11:30, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support aqurs 🍧 12:22, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Global rollback for Gerges

Not ending before 14:55 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

First, I would like to clarify that I have not been highly active in rollback work recently. However, I currently assist in reverting vandalism across multiple wikis, primarily using WikiMonitor. The types of edits I commonly handle include unexplained content removals, spam link additions, and random date changes. One issue I frequently encounter is that some local abuse filters prevent me from reverting vandalism, particularly in cases involving unexplained content removals. Having the Global Rollback permission would help me address such cases more efficiently. In addition, granting this permission would help reduce the workload on local patrollers, as my reverts would automatically be marked as reviewed. It would also allow me to quickly revert all edits made by the same vandal on a page when necessary. My regards--Gerges ^(Talk) 14:55, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support No concerns, --Ameisenigel (talk) 18:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support per Ameisenigel. //shb (t • c) 23:44, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support PieWriter (talk) 00:35, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Divinations (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Saroj (talk) 03:00, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support No issues here. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support NDG (talk) 03:54, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

 Abstain for further comments --NDG (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support لوقا (talk) 06:07, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Count Count (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --V0lkanic (talk) 08:18, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:58, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 10:45, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Hamish 14:21, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Syunsyunminmin 🗨️talk 14:24, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Gerges has made a great effort in counter-vandalism --Ibrahim.ID (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Strong support Peterxy（talk） 22:38, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
• Thanks for volunteering. I see your cross-wiki activity is very limited based on the data here, and most of your reverts are on wikis where you already have local rollback rights, so I'm not sure why an exception should be made in this case. In your nomination, you said, "One issue I frequently encounter is that some local abuse filters prevent me from reverting vandalism, particularly in cases involving unexplained content removals." I could only find abuse filter hits on Arabic Wikipedia, your home wiki, and Meta Wiki, and I couldn't find any evidence on either project of abuse filters preventing you from making the reverts you described. Am I missing another project where this happened? If not, why did you make that claim? – DreamRimmer ■ 12:19, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  Hi DreamRimmer, The issue has happened to me on a few projects, including Russian Wikipedia, where reverts sometimes trigger a CAPTCHA. I've also encountered cases on other wikis where abuse filters block edits involving specific external links. As a result, when reverting vandalism that removes content containing those links, the revert itself is blocked or requires completing a CAPTCHA because it restores the filtered links.-- Gerges ^(Talk) 13:13, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  I couldn't find any abuse filter or spam blacklist logs on ruwiki. I also checked all 870 projects where your account is attached and found abuse filter hits on only two projects, which I have already mentioned. Neither matches the reason you described. Could you provide links to the relevant logs? – DreamRimmer ■ 13:43, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  @DreamRimmer, Looking at the Wikimonitor logs, I attempted to undo revision 37364929, but the operation failed. I have encountered this issue multiple times when trying to revert unexplained content removals. I mistakenly described it as being caused by a local abuse filter, but that was inaccurate—the issue does not actually appear to be related to local abuse filters.

  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log:205324:2026-06-20 21:02:57 [tomcat-handler-417] ERROR o.q.w.w.c.WikiActionController - Error performing undo for title: İzmir
  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log-205325-org.qrdlife.wikiconnect.mediawiki.client.Exception.UsageException: The text you wanted to publish was blocked by the spam filter. This is probably caused by a link to a forbidden external site. The following text is what triggered our spam filter: archive.today [Code: spamblacklist] [Result: {"error":{"code":"spamblacklist","info":"The text you wanted to publish was blocked by the spam filter. This is probably caused by a link to a forbidden external site. The following text is what triggered our spam filter: archive.today","spamblacklist":{"matches":["archive.today"]},"*":"See https://tr.wikipedia.org/w/api.php for API usage. Subscribe to the mediawiki-api-announce mailing list at <https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-api-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/> for notice of API deprecations and breaking changes."},"servedby":"mw-api-ext.eqiad.main-fd8dbf45-gn246"}]
  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log-205326-	at org.qrdlife.wikiconnect.mediawiki.client.Requester.checkForErrors(Requester.java:185)
  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log-205327-	at org.qrdlife.wikiconnect.mediawiki.client.Requester.sendRequest(Requester.java:159)
  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log-205328-	at org.qrdlife.wikiconnect.mediawiki.client.Requester.post(Requester.java:100)
  ./wikimonitor.2026-06-20.log-205329-	at org.qrdlife.wikiconnect.wikimonitor.service.MediaWikiService.undoEdit(MediaWikiService.java:309)
  

  Gerges ^(Talk) 15:04, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  You only triggered the spam blacklist three times across two wikis (trwiki and lvwiki), excluding your home wiki. Global rollback doesn't help with bypassing the spam blacklist, as only bots and global bots have the sboverride right. Therefore, I don't see a demonstrated need for this right based on the rationale you provided in your nomination. – DreamRimmer ■ 15:19, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  I would also like to clarify that the abuse filter point was only one part of my rationale, and I acknowledge that I was mistaken about it.

  The other reasons I mentioned still apply. Global rollback would automatically mark my reverts as reviewed on many wikis, reducing the need for local patrollers to manually review reverted edits.

  I also have limited time to patrol recent changes. The rollback tool would make my work significantly more efficient because it can revert all consecutive edits made by the same user to a page with a single action. When using undo, if a vandal has made multiple consecutive edits to the same page, I often have to undo them individually or deal with edit conflicts, which is slower and reduces the number of edits I can review. A faster workflow would allow me to spend more time patrolling additional edits and contributing more consistently to cross-wiki anti-vandalism work through Wikimonitor. Gerges ^(Talk) 15:47, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support aqurs 🍧 12:22, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Global sysop for Icodense

Not ending before 21:46 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I would like to request global sysop rights to assist with cross-wiki maintenance work, especially in dealing with spam and routine cleanup on small wikis. I am currently a global rollbacker, an arbcom member on dewiki, and I am also doing maintenance work as a temporary sysop on dzwiki. I have been doing work in cross-wiki maintenance for some time, can communicate in several languages, and would be happy to help, particularly with requests at GSR/GSRSD. Thanks for considering my request! --Icodense (talk) 21:46, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Strong support Of course! Definitely no concerns. Thank you. NDG (talk) 22:24, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Strong support Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 23:02, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Divinations (talk) 23:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Sure. --V0lkanic (talk) 23:49, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Saroj (talk) 05:37, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support — Morkoz (talk) 05:41, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support of course. --Count Count (talk) 09:45, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support absolutely. - Squasher (talk) 09:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support PieWriter (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Tenshi! (Talk page) 16:15, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support -J. Ansari Talk 17:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 18:25, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Seems fine to me. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:46, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:56, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Jianhui67 ^{talk★contribs} 09:34, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Strong support Peterxy（talk） 22:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support aqurs 🍧 12:22, 27 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support SonalDahanayaka (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Global rename for Aelxen

Not ending before 12:49 29 June 2026 (UTC)

I would like to obtain the Global Renamer right to help process username change requests across Wikimedia projects. I am an experienced contributor on the French Wikipedia, where I serve as an Interface Administrator, Abuse Filter Manager, and VRT member. These roles require trust, discretion, and familiarity with advanced tools. I would be pleased to use this experience to assist the global community with username renames in a timely and careful manner.

Kind regards. Aelxen ^{Équipe EBRC} 12:49, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I wonder why you're not a sysop. Leaderboard (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Leaderboard,

I am not a sysop, because my previous nomination was unsuccessful for various reasons.

However, I am still planning to run in the next election. Aelxen ^{Équipe EBRC} 17:53, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Question: You originally failed your frwiki request for adminship due to frequent rights requests. You largely have very little cross-wiki experience, though I note at least a little bit of history on French Wikisource, French Wiktionary, and Commons. You hold no advanced rights outside of the French Wikipedia, and your requests for interface adminship and abuse filter manager on the French Wikipedia were both uncontested requests at the bureaucrat's noticeboard. While I don't doubt your trust, and I don't really hold global renamer to be high-risk or anything like that, I would like to ask whether you have any pertinent experience you can point to with regards to renaming or advanced rights in general. EggRoll97 (talk) 09:11, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Greetings @EggRoll97,

Regarding my experience with renaming, I had already received several VRT tickets in which users asked how to do it, what the conditions were, and so on. I have also performed a global renaming myself for reasons of security and privacy of personal data.

As for my rejected administrator request, it’s true that a number of contributors felt I was chasing status, but that was never the case.

I use all the statuses I have on a regular basis, except perhaps the "abuse filter" status, which I only use in specific cases. Aelxen ^{Équipe EBRC} 14:24, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support It was a bit of a pain finding the request (which is wikipedia:fr:Wikipédia:Administrateur/Aelxen), but it appears that the reasons for their failing their RfA were (i) too new and (ii) requested permissions rapidly. Both are innocuous, the OP has since more than tripled their edit count, and I don't see evidence of the second concern holding weight today. While I can see some minor weaknesses (for instance, "my previous nomination was unsuccessful for various reasons" tells nothing and the explanation you provided suggested that you renamed yourself (which isn't possible)), on the whole I think this person is a net contributor which leads me to a clear support. Leaderboard (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support I echo Leaderboard. Based on their answer, I'm still somewhat on the edge on this, but global renamer is not terribly a big deal. The requester is a trustworthy contributor, and hopefully should be a net positive with GRN. EggRoll97 (talk) 17:57, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support ToadetteEdit (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support PieWriter (talk) 00:54, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 07:11, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --V0lkanic (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 19:59, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Divinations (talk) 20:19, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support – DreamRimmer ■ 10:26, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Saroj (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support -- SonalDahanayaka (talk) 10:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support NDG (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support — Morkoz (talk) 05:41, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:51, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support aqurs 🍧 12:22, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Global rename for Hamish

Not ending before 20:15 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I am Hamish from zhwiki and was previously a global renamer back in 2020-2021. I acknowledge that my previous role ended during my inactive pandemic period, and the impact of an office action that revoked my local adminship. While I understand this history may raise initial concerns, I have since worked to rebuild and regain the trust of the local community, successfully returning to sysop as well as ArbCom member. Now I wish to resume contributing as a global renamer to assist with local unblock requests and help the global queue. I remain fully familiar with the global renamer policy. Thank you. --Hamish 20:15, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support I'm okay with this. No issues here, and I don't think your trust is impacted at all by the office action, personally. EggRoll97 (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Weak support PieWriter (talk) 01:24, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Clearly no issue. SCP-2000 02:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 07:09, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Ren Jian(Talk) 07:10, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --V0lkanic (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support SonalDahanayaka (talk) 13:45, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Divinations (talk) 20:20, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Neriah - 💬 - 07:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Strong support Peterxy（talk） 09:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support – DreamRimmer ■ 10:25, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support --Saroj (talk) 10:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support Sakurase (talk) 04:42, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support NDG (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support ZhaoFJx_(T) 15:38, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support — Morkoz (talk) 05:41, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
• How is it possible that, per EggRoll97, their trust has not been "impacted at all by the office action" when the OP themselves say that "have since worked to rebuild and regain the trust of the local community" which suggest that they had done something seriously wrong for their adminship to be revoked (as opposed to a no-fault administrative measure)? I think that needs to be clarified. Leaderboard (talk) 07:13, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for your comment. I have to say that this is a complex issue in our local community. From my point of view, some users will primarily view me as an ex-admin whose rights were revoked by OA. This makes it a challenge to have a successful election, hence why I used the phrase 'rebuild and regain the trust'. Hamish 14:37, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

  "I have to say that this is a complex issue in our local community" is too vague. Why were your admin rights revoked? One gets the feeling that you are downplaying the seriousness of having your admin rights revoked. Leaderboard (talk) 16:17, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

  I certainly have no intention to downplay the situation. The truth is, I genuinely do not know the actual and official reason for the revocation; the exact mechanics of the decision were never fully clarified to me or the community. Based on the available information from the WMF, I suspect it was due to the support votes I received in my previous RfA from users who were later glocked in that office action, appeared in my previous RFA. When I referred to it as 'a complex issue', I was not brushing off the seriousness of losing sysop tools. I hope you can understand that even a tangential association with the OA creates a preconceived distrust among segments of the community from my point of view. This makes it exceptionally difficult to run a successful RfA no matter how much I contribute or whether I actually had any connection with those glocked users, which is the complexity I was alluding to. Hamish 07:19, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

•  Support ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:56, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support aqurs 🍧 12:23, 27 June 2026 (UTC)
•  Support -J. Ansari Talk 16:11, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for David.C.LOK

I am a contributor from Hong Kong, primarily contributing photographs and media content to Wikimedia Commons. I also participate in Chinese Wikipedia and occasionally make image-related improvements and maintenance edits across other Wikimedia projects, including Meta-Wiki and Wikimedia Commons.

I regularly travel between Hong Kong and mainland China for photography and documentation purposes. During my stays in mainland China, access to Wikimedia projects may require the use of VPN services or other network configurations. As a result, I may be affected by global IP blocks or proxy restrictions that prevent me from editing, uploading files, or maintaining existing contributions.

I am requesting Global IP Block Exemption so that I can continue contributing photographs, uploading media files, and performing image-related maintenance work across Wikimedia projects while travelling.

I understand Wikimedia policies and will use this permission only for constructive contributions and legitimate editing activities.

Thank you for your consideration.--David.C.LOK (talk) 10:43, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for SonalDahanayaka

Hello Stewards,

I am an active contributor on Wikimedia projects. Because I travel between different countries and also use VPNs, shared networks, and the Tor Browser as my default browser, I am often affected by global IP blocks. These blocks prevent me from editing or continuing my contributions, even though my edits are constructive and policy-compliant.

I previously received a local IP block exemption on Wikidata, but since I also contribute on English Wikipedia and Sinhala projects, I am now requesting a Global IP block exemption. This would allow me to continue contributing productively across all Wikimedia projects without interruption, regardless of whether I am traveling or using VPN/Tor connections.

I fully understand and agree to follow all Wikimedia policies and guidelines, and I will use this right responsibly only for constructive and legitimate editing purposes.

Thank you very much for your consideration. --SonalDahanayaka (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2026 (UTC)