Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard: Difference between revisions

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	0
RfBs	0
Overdue RfBs	0
Overdue RfAs	0
BRFAs	13
Approved BRFAs	0

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

It is 13:46:28 on June 20, 2025, according to the server's time and date.

Resysop request (Jjaj9393)

Not a valid request as user has never had sysop rights. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Jjaj9393 (current rights · rights management · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) · block log) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjaj9393 (talk • contribs) 14:12, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

User has never had them. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

• I'm not going to play with your board, but the initial revert should have remained, not all this business of responding because "we should". I blocked the account as a  Confirmed sock. That account shouldn't be taken seriously.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bureaucrat inactive for over 3 years

I recently came across Useight who has the bureaucrat and administrator flags enabled on his account although has not made a single edit in 3 years and 8 months. I wanted to make the bureaucrats aware of this before requesting removal of rights at m:Steward requests/Permissions. Additionally, please desysop the following users due to 1-year of inactivity:

• Thunderboltz (talk · contribs)
• Nandesuka (talk · contribs)
• Thatcher (talk · contribs)

— Music1201 ^talk 06:33, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

• Useight comes up time and time again -- he remains active to this day (although as of late he's stuck to his public network alt, Useight's Public Sock). Also, please don't ever request removal of permissions to the Stewards yourself -- let the 'crats do their job! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:40, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
  • In fact, stewards will reject any request not made by a bureaucrat, because the policy (WP:CRAT) requires that a bureaucrat make that request. Please do not do this. --Rschen7754 07:39, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
    • And the desysopping of inactive users is done near the beginning of each month. Graham87 08:37, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Thunderboltz has a log entry less than a year old. The other two users are pending, see WP:INACTIVE. –xeno^talk 11:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Salvidrim!, I never requested removal of rights to stewards, thats why I posted here. — Music1201 ^talk 16:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

• Music1201 By Crat consensus WP:INACTIVITY policy has not been applied as account specific.Pedro raised it here and by me in the same discussion here that WP:INACTIVITY clearly states Admin accounts which have made no edits or administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped with emphasis is on accounts and not person and there is consensus it is not person specific and there was consenus IP editing is not activity. But Crats have consistently viewed edits or logs made by alternate accounts as activity as mentioned here. It needs a fresh WP:RFC if one wants the Crats to apply the WP:INACTIVITY policy to be applied as account specific .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Since Useight only uses his alternate account, wouldn't he qualify for inactivity regarding bureaucrat actions? It's been 3 years, 8 months since he used that account and Useight's Public Sock doesn't have bureaucratic status, so he hasn't met Bureaucrat activity requirements. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 12:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Technically an alternate account may be considered an extension of the main account used for security or segregation purposes, I believe this is the thinking employed in not exercising inactivity removals on Useight's main account. Their last definitive bureaucrat action was 11 July 2015. –xeno^talk 12:43, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Resysop Request (Gonzo_fan2007)

Gonzo_fan2007 (current rights · rights management · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) · block log)

Hello all, I am back editing and would like to request the tools back. You can find my original RFA here and my resignation here. I have reviewed recent Wikipedia policy and feel comfortable that I will get back into the swing of things. I expect to mostly perform basic clean-up at first as I reacquaint myself with the tools. Please let me know if you have any questions! Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 04:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

• Speaking as a non-Crat: You gave up the admin bit in 2009, which was over three years ago. I don't think that would qualify for an automatic resysop, but would likely make a new RFA easy after 3-6 months of regular editing. Either way, welcome back. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:41, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

  Wikipedia:Administrators#Lengthy inactivity only applies if there is a three-year period of complete inactivity following relinquishment (further explained by Pharaoh below). –xeno^talk 12:48, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

  • • Ah, ok. For some reason I thought it required you have had the bit within three years as well. I don't see a lot of activity before this year, but enough to satisfy the requirements. I stand corrected, and my apologies. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 13:21, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
• non crat observation. He is not long term inactive ( without an edit or logged action for three consecutive years) as he has edited every year as per this and do not see anything to say that he left under a cloud as per this ,he only stated that he is retiring not vanishing .Do think he is eligible for a resysop as per policy.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
• Being the person who closed the RfC that made the resysop requirements policy, I know that this request meets requirements. Provided they clear the 24 hour waiting period.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Meets the requirements for restoration - voluntary resignation in good standing, and no period of inactivity as long as 3 years. WJBscribe (talk) 19:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)