Wikinews:Water cooler/policy/archives/2019/December

Admins and crats
Hi. I'd like to suggest that we take a look at the Privilege expiry policy, which I just came across. The following privileged users appear to be inactive (just looked at sysops and 'crats, not reviewers or accredited reporters yet). All users mentioned are pinged. All 'crats listed are also administrators.

Pinging the users:

Are there any objections to posting a request on meta for the rights to be removed? (Specifically, remove 'crat rights and leave sysop rights, or remove sysop, respectively) Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 03:36, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I check in periodically, though I'm more active on en.wp. I'd like to keep the sysop bit on my account in case I do come across something I can help with. Thank you for the ping, though; I will make an effort to maintain a level of log/edit activity that meets the policy. Tyrol5 (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I would like to think a bit more about the 'crats. I might be inclined to go ahead and ask at meta for all of them to be de-crat'd, or maybe there's some reason I'd prefer to hold back on some; not sure, of course, till I take a closer look.  Thanks for tabulating the list; that's helpful.  (Of course, only 'crats would be a matter for meta, as I'm a 'crat as well as admin and can de-sysop and de-reviewer myself.) --Pi zero (talk) 19:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize that enwikinews 'crats could revoke admin rights --DannyS712 (talk) 19:16, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tyrol5, really appreciate the commitment. Gryllida (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * any update? I can re-run the numbers if you want. Just let me know --DannyS712 (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of a response, and that its been a month since my original post, with only 1 of the users responding, I'm requesting on meta that the 'crat rights be removed, per policy. --DannyS712 (talk) 08:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I've just been a little slow getting back to you. I've carefully kept this on my watchlist.  Any day now, I was going to request a subset of these. --Pi zero (talk) 13:27, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The hold-up was that I hoped to put some thought into which of these to request first, perhaps leaving some of them a bit longer (or perhaps not, depending on what emerged). However, there's nothing against the policy in these requests; so, done is done. --Pi zero (talk) 13:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Rights were ✅ by Wim b. --DannyS712 (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * User talk page notifications delivered. --DannyS712 (talk) 20:58, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I might have held back on SGN, at least on a first round. --Pi zero (talk) 21:12, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no objections to starting a discussion on changing the policy, but as long as we have a clear policy it should be enforced --DannyS712 (talk) 21:18, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Reviewers
Can an admin please remove reviewer rights from the above five users, per policy? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Accredited reporters
Per policy, the following users' accreditation has expired, as the user has not edited in the last 9 months.

Can someone process this? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , last edit: 2017
 * , last edit: 2017
 * , last edit: 2014
 * , last edit: 2012
 * , last edit: 2018
 * , last edit: 2016 (accredited as )
 * , last edit: 2011
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2018
 * , last edit: 2018
 * , last edit: 2015
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2016
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2010
 * , last edit: 2014 (accredited as )
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2010
 * , last edit: 2009 (accredited as )
 * , last edit: 2010
 * , last edit: 2015
 * , last edit: 2011
 * , last edit: 2010
 * , last edit: 2011
 * , last edit: 2012
 * , last edit: 2011
 * , last edit: 2013
 * , last edit: 2011 (accredited as )
 * , last edit: 2010 (accredited as )
 * , last edit: 2015
 * , last edit: 2014
 * , last edit: 2011
 * Accreditation we rarely remove. --Pi zero (talk) 21:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Then shouldn't the policy reflect that? --DannyS712 (talk) 01:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Eh, maybe. Though the policy doesn't require any removal of privs, just allows it.  I thought some of those numbers were a little on the low side.  But I'd forgotten accreditation was even in the policy. --Pi zero (talk) 02:03, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Without any comment on whether or not removal is needed here -- something that I do not believe I should have an opinion on -- I would suggest that in the case someone wanted to check the activity, it would need to be measured not only in edits on-wiki, but in the usage of the internal journalism workspace and internal email. Gryllida (talk) 03:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)