Requests for global roles

You can request Steward, Global Sysop, and Global Patroller permissions on this page.

Any user who registered before a request was opened may vote in that request. Only one vote per user per request is permitted, and it cannot come from an alternative account. This is to prevent abuse.

All archives by year can be found here.

Please make your request below the line.

Fearless (Global Administrator)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

This request is successful, gaining the required 5 !votes and support ratio. Globe's concerns have been considered, and I too would like to encourage the candidate to ask a lot of questions to Stewards when in doubt. Justarandomamerican (talk) 16:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'd like to run for Global Administrator so I can assist in CVT-related matters and be able to help the platform on-wiki as well rather then only being able to help on the Discord Server, while being able to have a chance to be mentored by someone extremely experienced like Raidarr and grow my experience & judgement as well. Although I don't have many edits on Meta, I've been in the WikiOasis Discord Server for months now and have assisted in moderation, in addition to helping Skywiki getting merged to WikiOasis. All questions are welcomed and I'll try my best to answer them in a timely order.

Thank you for your consideration, --Fearless (talk) 13:30, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Do you believe that community facing users such as Stewards and Global sysops need to be professional when interacting with community members on-wiki and off-wiki? Does it matter with whom you are speaking to? -Globe (talk) 13:44, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe respect is for everyone (that is being reasonable) regardless of whatever position they are in or anywhere. However, I hold higher respect for people such as Raidarr whom has given me priceless advice before that I couldn't get elsewhere until recently this year. Though, for professionalism, while I would say I treat it similarly as respecting people, but it depends on where and context.

If I'm in a public space, doesn't matter if it's on or off wiki (such as WikiOasis Discord Server at #general), I'll try to be a bit professional in my responses and be more patient for individuals who isn't being incredibly disrespectful (like calling volunteers nazis, for example).
If I'm in a friend group, then I won't be professional at all, no need to be stiff when you don't have to.

I hope I have addressed your question appropriately. Thank you. --Fearless (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I will enter and say Support, but other things as well. Generally, I think you could do reasonably with the role here; its a good place to grow from and you do improve as time goes on. It can help you get more used to features and working with people. As far as one thing to improve, Globe asked a good question and I think your answer is quite muddled. Now, I'm the one who will make it clear if I do not like you for your approach from the outset, I am after all the one who made this lock on Miraheze. But there are a few things to say about this. For one it was exceptional in proportion to the attitude. You can review that profile and see they really pushed the boundary and no less than that should elicit the most curt responses. Secondly even with that in mind, it really isn't the ideal response. It can feel good to make, but it's not very professional and it does not contribute to the better image of Miraheze. After the action I'd wondered if anyone would think so and I did not see comment about it, but if someone did comment about that they'd be well within their rights. So if there is anyone I hold in greater respect when taking actions its people like peer NotAracham who is consistently professional, and yet has a more 'fearsome reputation' in some circles (I'm told, anyway). Here I've said in a couple places Dream Indigo is the role model for representation, they remind me of Reception123 on Miraheze. A consistent face, friendly but capable of being firm. So what is a good answer to Globe? I think it is to commit to a baseline of respect. You give everyone a fair chance, an initially equal opportunity from the moment they first turn up. You resist the urge to withhold it, unless it is proven decisively that it is not deserved, as MrPseudonymousEgo did by attacking a volunteer, and doubling down when the consequences were delivered despite saying he was leaving anyway. Even then the above would apply, but then you're mixing both necessary professionalism with a honest reflection of principle, and not accepting the premise of abuse. You also set a very high bar before the claws come out. Not every occasion of bad attitude or being a dick deserves your rebuke, and a respect-first attitude helps you avoid making that call when it simply isn't fair. Food for thought, --raidarr (📡) 12:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would like to begin by stating that he has addressed my inquiries regarding his candidacy on Discord, and I must say that his responses were quite close to what I was seeking. I believe this could serve as a solid foundation for him to learn. --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 17:04, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support — I expect you to obviously make some mistakes, but I think overall you're in the right place and I think with some guidance you should be able to contribute positively to the project. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 19:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've mulled over this for a few days, and I think I'm going to land at a Weak oppose. I have a few concerns regarding Fearless's previous interactions with some of our communities and unfamiliarity with our processes. In the previous request, it was mentioned that despite Fearless's lack of experience on-wiki, they are still familiar with how the wiki operates due to them being active on the Discord. A few things have surfaced over the past few days/weeks that make me question this philosophy. I'll name a few:

Asking stewards to close Raidarr's after it had been open for just three days, simply because of the vote count
Asking one of our communities why they chose WikiOasis over Miraheze, and specifically inquiring about whether or not they were banned from Mira (they were not)
Making comments in the Miraheze Discord server about how "oasis is basically like a not so great training academy [for mira volunteers] but it works."
Taking it upon themselves to make statements on behalf of WikiOasis in semi-public spaces, such as "I do know so I can make the comment. But WO is in no position to host such a wiki. We have zero manpower."

These are just a few that I recalled when writing this, but more have appeared through our interactions that have given me pause to support a request for global sysop if this is what they have done without any additional tools. All of these together, combined with no on-wiki experience anywhere that I am aware of and the extremely vague response to my question, concerns me. If elected, I would encourage Fearless to familiarize themselves with more of our inter-workings and ask frequent questions of the team before acting. -Globe (talk) 21:09, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the third one is partially my fault because I have expressed the thought that oasis for its much more informal structure and younger management can act as a sort of 'proving ground' to consider at Miraheze, but a not so great training academy is a poor way to phrase that and it is by no means anything official. I will concur the need to be far more careful in open statements, especially 2 and 4. 1 is a procedural quirk I assume has already been corrected. --raidarr (📡) 12:01, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Going to go with a Weak support, I have had ok interactions with Fearless but I understand there have been some issues. Not sure I can comment too much, mostly because I'm the new kid on the block. Crystalite13 (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Sapphire Jack (Global Administrator)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Withdrawn as said on WO Discord, and this request would not have passed due to canvassing, inexperience and have no interactions with the global community nor have any credible contributions in similar wikifarms (Miraheze). A few community members suggested the candidate to run for Global Patroller instead, and the candidate is encouraged to not canvass their vote, involve themselves in the global community by contributing or interacting with discussions, and learn how certain Global Roles work before creating a similar request in the future. Fearless (talk) 09:22, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I’m Sapphire Jack, the owner of the largest wiki on this platform, the Italian Brainrot Wiki. I’d like to run for global administrator so I can gain perspective on how different wikis are managed and gain experience working with different moderation teams, as well as overall helping the platform grow as a whole. If you have any questions about me or my prior experiences, please let me know. Sapphire Jack (talk) 03:26, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

What do you currently do that requires Global Administrator capabilities?
How do you feel the role of a Global Administrator fits in/complements existing local administration teams without so to speak "cramping their style"?
(shamelessly stolen from raidarr) Do you believe you have made mistakes on this platform so far? If so, what did you do to improve from those mistakes? You could elaborate on just one if you like, or a couple.
Global Administrators are responsible for wiki creations, how would you go about approaching the following requests, including additional action you may take following the acceptance/denial of each request?
- A well known troublemaker on the platform decides to request a new wiki, describing it as a new "uncensored encyclopedia on politics".
- A brand new user decides to request a wiki saying that they are going to "create their version of Wikipedia".
- A brand new user requests a wiki and fills the request form with racial slurs and abuse towards our staff members?

Best, --zippybonzo (c • ca) 06:14, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m an experienced moderator, and would like to be able to help moderate other wikis, while ensuring everyone follows global policy. Also, on my current wiki, there is a frequent amount of users requiring to get globally locked for underage/breaking other global rules. I could deal with those global locks entirely, so other global admins/stewards could spend their energy elsewhere.
Global admins try to help deal with major vandals, however, each wiki has its own structure, style, and way of running. Aside from enforcing global policies, we don’t need to interfere with that.
I don’t believe I’ve made any mistakes on the platform so far, and after taking a poll, the users on my wiki agree that I’m the “Best owner ever.”
For the first example, I would simply deny the request, no further action needed. For the second example, I would also deny the request: we don’t need a forked wikipedia. However, for the third example, I would not only deny the request, I would also Glock them and ask a Steward to run an alt check to see if they’re an alt of an existing vandal.

Sapphire Jack (talk) 12:41, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@Sapphire Jack have you been on other Wiki platforms before as I would often use those as perspective Lvst7070 (talk) 03:39, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my wiki was previously on Miraheze, before getting moved to here. Sapphire Jack (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve also used fandom Sapphire Jack (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Struck vote with extended discussion

Oppose submitting an opposition. I strongly encourage the candidate to explore alternative ways to contribute that do not involve advanced permissions before requesting any such permissions. Furthermore, I do not currently feel comfortable granting advanced permissions to someone who is not well-known within the community without demonstrating the necessary skills and trust required for these permissions. Being a moderator alone does not justify sufficient experience to warrant the level of expertise needed for these permissions, as there is much more involved than merely understanding the fundamentals of moderating MediaWiki functions and knowing how to utilize the tools. --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Struck due to the use of LLMs in this comment. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 16:34, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
reading that that does not sound like it was made by LLAMAS at all yes that's what I call llms llamas Lvst7070 (talk) 17:21, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did use LLMS, however probably shouldn't of - There is no policy against it And therefore should unstriked until such policy is put into place Cocopuff2018 (talk) 17:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There is no policy against murdering people who vandalise wikis, it's still frowned upon --zippybonzo (c • ca) 17:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, there's the law.. Justarandomamerican (talk) 17:27, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's very generic and doesn't follow the pattern of writing I'd expect to see, and makes no grammatical sense: "Oppose submitting an opposition" is a double negative. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 17:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose submitting an opposition

Do you support or oppose? Justarandomamerican (talk) 17:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
oppose- However, there is still no policy which Underlines such Cocopuff2018 (talk) 17:26, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it's frowned upon, and removes any validity from your argument, the whole point is simply they "don't have enough experience", but you could've just written that instead of a paragraph of incoherent blabber that I makes little to no sense --zippybonzo (c • ca) 17:32, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I note for the record on this tangent that it is not ideal to strike a full voting comment. Where its usefulness comes in, like what kind of argument it makes or even the fact its an llm, would be a post-closure determination. It would weigh rather less for being incoherent or wrong, while it may have greater influence if it is well reasoned. I believe this is the steward duty, rather than a pre emptive full strike since the alternative is people just don't offer reasoning at all, like what actually happened. I do agree the initial position was rather nonsensical. Now 'collapsing' this section so it is less of a confusing read later. --raidarr (📡) 22:08, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support: ultimately I don't see a major difference between your credibility and that of the other GS/Stews. I think there's room here to coach and grow. The work on IBW — wrangling a fairly substantial number of misbehaving children without leaving it as someone else's problem — is definitely something in your favour, however I don't know whether GS is the way to go for this. I commend you throwing your hat into the ring. I implore to you that if this request does succeed that you take things slowly and learn how they work before doing anything drastic, but generally I don't have any significant concerns beyond the general lack of experience, although it's not incomparable to what already exists on the team, and I'd hope you could shape into a fairly active contributor globally with the right guidance, but I won't jump the gun there. Best, --zippybonzo (c • ca) 17:24, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not thrilled about them canvassing. They also show a lack of knowledge of what the duties of a global SYOSP are, which leaves me to oppose this request. I'd strongly advise the candidate to find other ways to help that don't require global rights; perhaps in the future they can be reconsidered. And coached on how to use the tools if they can show maturity in the future. I don't find them being an "admin of Italian brainrot" a sufficient reason to be a global admin, as there is way more to it than just being a local admin and other tools to learn how to use that a global admin has access to. Their reasoning is also not convincing enough as to why they need These tools, IMHO, --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know, I’m not just a moderator on the wiki, I’m the owner. I’ve been working with different stewards for quite some time now, and have been moderating for nearly a year now. Raidarr is a steward on miraheze, so he can fill you in on the details about his experience with me when the wiki was on miraheze. Sapphire Jack (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral AlPaD (talk) 00:58, 13 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
going to go with an Oppose here, while I applaud your efforts and acknowledge you've been helpful but I personally believe the GA toolset is too advanced for someone who has little presence outside their own wiki. I don't think simply having experience managing your own wiki makes you qualified for such a large hat. I would suggest trying to build a helpful presence such as on our Discord or here on meta. Crystalite13 (talk) 21:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a voting comment but I will say that Sapphire Jack has a very thankless role with experience that is unique even among the current crew of global volunteers. It takes real effort to keep a community with heavy appeal to rambunctious children in order, and to do that actively. And Sapphire is at the top of that list, not just any moderator on the team. Now I address Sapphire directly. I think there is reasonable concern that a global role like this requires somewhat different skills from maintaining a single, although large community. These are things I'm sure you could learn and your second answer is very promising. I think people would be generally more comfortable with you as Global Patroller where you can be included in global affairs and get an idea how they work/prove that capability, and then expand to larger access. But relative to the current volunteers I don't think your competence is out of range for advancing straight to Global Administrator. Regardless what you get, I wish you the best of luck and I'm pleased you're looking into something new like this. --raidarr (📡) 22:19, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to drop a Support here. Your work handling the challenge that IBW can has been impressive and you've always seemed easy to work with. I think there's definitely some global training that is needed, but you seem willing to learn and your answers to questions don't raise any major red flags. Globe (talk) 23:25, 14 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Oppose for a few reasons. I've monitored a few discussions between stewards and the candidate and they seem to show a fundamental lack of understanding of what a global administrator does and what they should not do. I wasn't initially planning to fully oppose, however, the candidate has canvassed users to this discussion, which is far below what I expect of a GA. Globe (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
~~I'll go ahead and drop a Support. You have a clue and are not a jerk. This role isn't a big deal anyways, it doesn't include PII access or even global locks.~~ Justarandomamerican (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for canvassing users to this discussion in private. Justarandomamerican (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose While I believe your work in keeping IBW from exploding is extremely respectable. I don't think you have enough interactions on meta here or have any credibility elsewhere I have observed, I would rather you be Global Patroller for a bit to learn how WikiOasis Global Enforcement works first before expanding, basically referencing Crystalite here. Fearless (talk) 01:19, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
cough cough *guilty as charged* cough cough Crystalite13 (talk) 01:30, 16 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted following steward discussion to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --zippybonzo (c • ca) 14:50, 17 May 2026 (UTC) 12:29, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what? Sapphire Jack (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's the general agreement among Stewards that your request should not have been closed as it didn't yet meet the 2/3 support ratio required for election. Tali64³ (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose he's a power demon and demoted me from admin to rollbacker on ibw because I called him out for using world edit on the wiki Minecraft server, he also generally acts like a dictator Q (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't even know this person that well enough, so I don't have that much confidence. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:12, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn’t that be reason for abstain or neutral tho? Sapphire Jack (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
you're not getting gadmin lil bro 💔 Q (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Sapphire Jack: Since you resorted to basically canvassing other editors, I don't have any trust in you to even be a global admin, never mind gaining any advanced rights. There's not a snowball's chance in hell this will be a success with the direction this is heading in, if you ask me. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 23:23, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for canvassing my vote. I was unaware that attempting to convince people to support my rfp was against global policy, and understand I shouldn’t have done that. Sapphire Jack (talk) 02:56, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support A good guy, and the best one between the staff in the Brainrot wiki, for example, he rewarded me interface admin after I worked out with Fantaman1209, a controversial kid. He deserves to be a global admin aswell ElNazari (talk) 20:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC) Striking as vote is almost certainly canvassed. Tali64³ (talk) 20:42, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain Canvassed the vote, but overall great candidate Los Tictacsitos (talk) 03:06, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain The user in question, Sapphire Jack, is the "owner" of the wiki I most commonly edit in, hence I have some conflict of interest in this discussion. Nevertheless though, I do think he does have good intentions, however, again, good intentions isn't enough to get GA, which from what I can see is quite a senior role. Additionally, in the Italian Brainrot Wiki, he is mostly inactive outside of discussions regarding bureaucrats and relations with other wikis/the farm, and doesn't edit pages to much of a degree nor moderate outside of blocking people who insult him. Most of the administrative work is actually done by bureaucrats like me, to give an example, he haphazardly promoted a user called Cityngeon to the role of Bureaucrat, who changed the requirements of the vote, among other fishy actions (it otherwise wouldn't have passed by quite a margin), which I had to find and bring to attention to him. At the end of the day, though, he could be a somewhat decent candidate. --SPIRACY NOTCANON (talk) 07:12, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Vwregewrrergrge/VWR (Global Patroller)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Withdrawn Globe (talk) 15:26, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, my name is Vwregewrrergrge, though you're welcome to call me VWR. I am a bureaucrat on the largest wiki on WikiOasis (Italian Brainrot Wiki), and a Miraheze contributor with experience across multiple wikis. I actively maintain and contribute to several wikis including the Prehistoric Wiki, the Minecraft Wiki, and the Mathematics Wiki. As it stands, WikiOasis currently has no global patrollers, and I believe that is a gap worth filling. I am volunteering for this role out of genuine concern for the safety and quality of the platform, and to properly support staff in keeping it safe. Underage users are a serious issue on WikiOasis, they return repeatedly despite being blocked, and having a dedicated global patroller reporting directly to staff would make handling these cases significantly easier. On average, a blocked underage user creates around 5 alt accounts, and I have experience detecting them through patterns in writing style, user page formatting, and also grammar. I take this application seriously and I hope it is received the same way, and I am not trying to act like a security guard, what is this nonsense, Ii anyone is willing to guide me through any responsibilities associated with the role, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. VWR (talk) 2:40, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

Oppose. You have solicited PII from suspected underage users. That is simply inappropriate, and this is a matter of public record. Justarandomamerican (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I understand where you're coming from, I shouldn't have asked for that information and I won't do it again, I now know the right way to handle it. Sorry. Vwregewrrergrge (talk) 15:02, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose users should not be acting as vigilantes, especially not on the matter of child safety. They should report it to safety and not be soliciting their personal information through the platform. To be frank I am surprised that more action was not taken at the time of the incident, however this is definitely a no from me. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 15:01, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, and I respect your concern, looking back I should have immediately reported it to staff rather than taking matters into my own hands, and I genuinely regret that. This role is exactly what would stop me from ever needing to do that again since I'd have the proper tools and authority to handle it the right way. There were some mistakes I have made, do not hate me for that. There are no Global patrollers. Vwregewrrergrge (talk) 15:04, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The fact there are no global patrollers is not a reason to support your request. You have been acting as a vigilante against underage users, and then proceed to list that as a reason why you want the bit. You do not need the global patroller tools to make a safety report. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 15:06, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Global patroller has no tools involved for this process. --raidarr (📡) 15:07, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I don't need the tools to report, but having them would let me help WikiOasis much faster and more effectively, and that's genuinely all I want to do, along with helping with pages, stubs, technical problems if necessary, I just want to provide WikiOasis with help. Vwregewrrergrge (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this is going anywhere — Global patroller does not have any tools that particularly enhance the ability for someone to provide technical support nor edit pages --zippybonzo (c • ca) 15:16, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have decided to After withdraw this vote, I might commence it again in the future, I understand that I am not ready. Please, may someone shut this vote down? Vwregewrrergrge (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

DarkMatterMan4500 (Global Patroller)

Hi, I am DarkMatterMan4500 from Miraheze, and I want to apply for the Global Patrollers permission here on WikiOasis, based on my experiences from Miraheze, since I have been working hard on clearing away vandalism all across the wikifarm for the counter-vandalism team from said wikifarm. Now, I understand that some of you may have questions and concerns for me, and I'll do my best to answer them in the best way I can, so feel free to give your honest opinions without sugarcoating anything. I am fully aware that Global Patrollers can block users all across the WikiOasis wikis (regardless of where disruption is taking place), delete pages, revisions, and use the basic tools, but with limited options, something that I'm willing to take as a fellow editor. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:57, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Discussion

Strong support Why not? - FNFGamer718 (talk) 17:51, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - Candidate is well known in Miraheze and known in the MH Discord as a GP that deals with vandals or CVT issues at the CVT channel. Additionally after consulting Raidarr, the candidate has some issues that can be fixed (but no red flags) and 200 edits on Meta. This is what Raidarr said about DMM: "He has problems identifying and staying on the line and the overall approach, well, you can kind of tell by interacting long enough, that said he is one of the most determined watchers and catches things pretty much everyone in here wouldn't have time to look for, the act of patrolling he can do very well, knowing the line on pressing elevated buttons, always been an issue". I believe this person is fit for GP and the issues can be edged out in time. Fearless (talk) 10:20, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Fearless: I'm glad to hear that, especially from Raidarr indirectly. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:12, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Always had good interactions for DMM, I have no doubt that they would put the tools to good use. --Crystalite13 (talk) (contribs)
@Crystalite13: Don't forget to sign your vote! Fearless (talk) 01:05, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support no major concerns, would be good to have a few more people to help around. --zippybonzo (c • ca) 18:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest support Per Fearless. AlPaD (talk) 09:05, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest support --PinkPugPrincess (talk) 12:05, 21 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Globe (Revocation)

Hello all.

I have been ruminating on this for a while, and while I understand my own role in this conflict, it has been brewing for many months behind closed doors. I understand Globe has held this role (or equivalent) since almost day 1 of WO, however right now, I don't believe that Globe has either the intention or the ability to continue to act in the best interest of WO. This latest incident which has cemented my opinion on the matter is relating to attempts to micromanage the opinions of volunteers. I will detail this further along in this fairly long topic.

This is not meant to be a spiteful attempt to remove him from a position of trust within the community, but I myself feel the trust that I have placed in Globe is no longer honoured. This stems from a pattern of behaviour that I have noticed that appears to me to be anti-community, and some are downright ridiculous:

Globe has a very strong opposition to 2FA (two-factor authentication), which is currently mandated for all foundation managed Google accounts. Globe does not have 2FA enabled currently on his on wiki account as of writing, and at the time when I changed 2FA to become a requirement for foundation Google accounts, I recall Globe saying (through channels that have since been made private to me), that he was considering motioning the board to remove requirements for 2FA. I need not explain the security risks this poses, but the attitude of "I have a strong enough password not to get hacked" really isn't sufficient, and runs a risk of compromise to users safety.
I continually have the belief that Globe wants to keep control of the site, such as election of stewards, global sysops and other RfC topics under the control of the board, one of his concerns being people from less reputable communities supporting their preferred candidates who may cause problems. While I appreciate the community governance mechanisms haven't been around for long, these concerns are yet to be realised, and I've seen evidence above on this page that these concerns have actively not happened.
The latest incident is surrounding volunteer opinions, their ability to speak freely, and Globe actively trying to micromanage them. If you read User:Globe/Volunteer Conduct Policy (which is largely LLM generated), it effectively removes any ability for volunteers to speak critically on any matter. This is backed up by internal messages, where Fearless said to Globe 'You're just trying to drag it out for some ideal behaviour that you want to be enforced on WikiOasis Volunteers', where he then responded 'Correct. You've got it'. The belief that volunteers represent the foundation is entirely unfounded, has not been approved by the board to my knowledge, and these roles are entirely community managed and shouldn't be micromanaged by the foundation, this goes entirely against the point of the roles being appointed.

I don't want to turn this into a big spat, because it's not worth the time, but right now the constant internal arguments provide an environment I cannot work in, to the point that I am planning to distance myself from the project entirely (or at least to tech only until someone can takeover those responsiblities) when these weekly arguments are happening, it contributes to me becoming ever more burnt out, and generally makes me not enjoy working on the project in the way that I did. I am ending up pulled away from tech to defend my peers when their conduct is continually being pointed out by Globe as unacceptable for various reasons which to me and others seem unacceptable.

I appreciate this is very much the nuclear option, but right now I don't see Globe's involvement in the steward team to be contributing positively to the overall success of this project, and instead focuses on micromanaging his peers as though he has superiority over them, and continually picking flaws with how they speak in public channels. The approach of those in the private channels must only ever speak positively of WO and the wikis that are hosted on it is not the right one in my belief, and Globe is pushing this so hard that it comes at the expense of the overall wellbeing of the project, to the point that it is actively harming it.

Discussion

Support. I, too, have been pondering on this for a while, and Globe's involvement in the project is very much hurting, rather than helping. Constant spats with Zippy, constant dictatorial actions. I'm done with Globe, and I think it's his time to move on from the project. Justarandomamerican (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - FNFGamer718 (talk) 20:23, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No offense, but he has to go and move on. A lot of times Globe and Zippy are usually arguing at each other for something that is just nonsensical. Additionally, the ideal he wants to be enforced is just dictatorial and delusional, everyone has human rights, and one of our rights is the right to have our own opinion. Fearless (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Well, I haven't been aware of Globe's recent conduct, but upon seeing this, I can actually understand why, and am actually quite troubled by the fact that Globe apparently wants to motion in removing the requirements for 2FA, when that's the most basic part about security. I mean, who in their right minds would want to get their accounts hacked regularly? ----DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:32, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I plan on making a larger statement later, but the part about me motioning away requirements for 2FA on Google accounts did not happen. I have 2FA enabled on my Discord account and, if a requirement for volunteers to have 2FA on their on-wiki account passes, I would enable it here as well. I have already done so to comply with such a requirement on testwiki.wiki. I don't have it currently enabled because my authenticator is only on my phone, so I would be unable to access WO when I don't have my phone on me and am instead using my laptop. For the record, I do believe in account security and strong/unique passwords. Globe (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Globe: I am just so genuinely confused right now. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 20:45, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How so? I’m happy to explain anything further. Globe (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I never said you motioned it, I simply said you considered motioning it, might have been slightly unclear in my description but the general sentiment was that you were going to take further action from a board role about it --zippybonzo (c • ca) 20:48, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Any way you want to say it is untrue. Google themselves requires 2FA for superadmins, it is not a board matter. Globe (talk) 20:50, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I do not have access to the channel but someone such as tali who retains access could check, you were saying you wanted to motion the board to remove the 2FA requirements that I had personally set on Google, as well as that which was set on Discord --zippybonzo (c • ca) 20:54, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]