Last modified: 2014-06-05 20:50:07 UTC
Please create an new group called "noratelimit" with user rights "noratelimit" and "autoreview". Group right should be assignable and revokeable by bureaucrats. The name of the already existing group "accountcreator" (which is currently not local asignable) would not match the intended use of the new group. Maybe this old group could be hidden. Because flagged revisions is enabled on dewiki autoreview is added to the right list. For confirmation: I am Merlissimo, bureaucrats on dewiki and there was a vote on dewiki: https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Projektdiskussion/ratelimit_bzw._Benutzerkonten-Ersteller_auf_de_einf%C3%BChren&oldid=124514442#Soll_das_Benutzerrecht_Benutzerkontenersteller_auf_Antrag_durch_Administratoren_oder_B.C3.BCrokraten_tempor.C3.A4r_vergeben_werden_k.C3.B6nnen.3F
I'm not sure how you guys reach consensus on dewiki, but there seem to be 19 votes in favour of administrators being able to assign this right, and 20 votes for bureaucrats -- I wouldn't call it consensus.
That is right. But option three to not create this group has zero votes. So there is a 39:0 voting for creating this group. Option one to let administrators asign this group implies bureacrats. So the only existing dissent is if admins should be able to assign this right, too. That is not what i requested.
I'm not exactly convinced that's true. Can you point me to where option I ("Administratoren können auf begründeten Antrag hin Benutzern temporär das Recht des Benutzerkontenerstellers gewähren.") implies bureaucrats?
(In reply to comment #3) > I'm not exactly convinced that's true. > > Can you point me to where option I ("Administratoren können auf begründeten > Antrag hin Benutzern temporär das Recht des Benutzerkontenerstellers > gewähren.") implies bureaucrats? This is implicit on dewiki. 'crats are on a higher (technical) level than admins.
Change 130809 had a related patch set uploaded by Withoutaname: Create 'noratelimit' user group on dewiki https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/130809
(In reply to merl from comment #0) > The name of the already existing group "accountcreator" (which is currently > not local asignable) would not match the intended use of the new group. I don't see a specific discussion of this requirement, are you sure it's needed? The database name of the group is not so important, you can change the displayed name with local system messages. Changing the name in database makes things harder, see last -1 https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/130809/
Local names for this new groups already exist on dewiki for de and en http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Group-noratelimit http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Group-noratelimit/en http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Group-noratelimit-member http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Group-noratelimit-member/en If we would reuse accountcreator and somebody use a language which we have not translated/overwritten locally the visitor thinks that he/she could ask these people to create accounts. But members of these groups will mostly not know about how to do this. Overriding all messages locally is nearly impossible. They want to have this right to send mass mails or other use cases. The new name is also very general so that other wikis could use in future, too. So having a new german name with an english fallback name locally should fit the first requirements. The display names i used for the local messages were discussed by bureaucrats internally last year, but could be changed by community later. Of course to have these massages new in translatewiki would be great.
Change 130809 merged by jenkins-bot: Create 'noratelimit' user group on dewiki https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/130809
