Closed Bug 644941 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

Need ability to move/rename articles on


(Websites ::, defect)

Not set


(Not tracked)



(Reporter: pierros, Assigned: mconnor)


In order to accommodate the needs of Mozilla Reps program, we are using our MediaWiki extensively. Much of the information and day to day operations of the program will be handled via the wiki, so I will need "move" and "protect" on my user rights. I guess the easiest way to do that is to have Administrator rights (as we don't have a "protect" policy group)

A list of my contributions can be found here : and I can provide contribution log in other MediaWikis if needed.
I'm happy to give you move privileges, but why do you feel every page needs to be protected? Vandalism should get caught and reverted in a fairly quick manner, and in general, very few pages on wikimo are protected.
Reed: Not every page will be protected. It is just that because we are going to have many users editing around due to ReMo I want to make sure that some crucial ReMo articles cannot be edited by anyone (as Membership Categories etc). For the Move function, I really need it to restructure part of the Remo-related structure we have right now, and we are looking for many pages created (events, presentations) so I would like to be ready for tackling quickly problems with naming and name nesting.

Thanks in advance
So, I gave you move access on the 25th.

We have *very* few protected pages on wikimo, and I'd like to keep it that way. Let's try leaving stuff unprotected for now, and if it becomes a problem, we can revisit that issue in the future.

Sound good?
Assignee: desktop-support → reed
Component: Server Operations: Account Requests →
Product: → Websites
QA Contact: mrz → wiki-mozilla-org
Thanks Reed!

I am gonna re-open the bug when we reach the point that we want lock status to be enforced on some critical pages.
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Hey Reed!

Take a look on the last changes here :

That broke 10 people's profiles (and we are not into production yet)

I would love to have the ability to protect such pages.

Thanks once again.
Resolution: FIXED → ---
Protecting wikimo from edits by known Mozilla contributors is out-of-scope and unwanted. If you have a problem with somebody's edit who isn't doing something malicious, please bring it up with them.
Closed: 11 years ago11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Summary: Administrator status in → Need ability to move/rename articles on
Hello again,

I need to have the ability to delete pages (especially now with all the sandboxes created for SMW testing)


Resolution: FIXED → ---
I second that. 

I also definitely need the ability to delete pages as both Pierros and I are going to be working heavily on the wiki as long as ReMo is going to be entirely dependent on it for the next couple of months. 

Hello again, we tried our best to avoid this but this is getting out of hands:

and you can see that we did our best on WARNING everyone:

Please, can we have the ability to SemiProtect some articles? We are talking about basic administration here. All the wikis in the world SemiProtect crucial templates.

Ok this is out of control.

Please semi-protect the page or give me access to do that.

Severity: normal → blocker
I second that. Despite the VERY CLEAR warning sign a the top of the page, some Mozilla Reps just don't read it and edit the article directly, forcing us to fix it and making us lose time. This is EXACTLY the problem we feared we would have. 

Please could you semi-protect the page or give Pierros access?

Protected "Template:Remobox": Excessive vandalism ([edit=canmove] (indefinite) [move=canmove] (indefinite))

That work?
Nope, because thats a full protect. I need to have admin rights to edit it. Either semi-protect it, or give me admin rights. Or even better both.

you can edit it...
Though, protecting the page doesn't help much when admins accidentally edit it, as well. ;)
While I understand and respect Reed's reluctance to grant admin access unless necessary, we have a track record of granting the admin bit reasonably freely on wikimo to trusted contributors, where those powers are going to be helpful in ensuring that projects move forward with minimal friction.  This is why we have 45 admins at the time of this comment (but significantly fewer bureaucrats, I'll note).

At this point, it seems clear to me that William and Pierros do need this level of access to work more efficiently, and continue to be impeded in their daily work as a result of not having that access.  I don't see a really compelling reason cited here to not grant this level of access at this time.

Based on the above, I've gone ahead and set the admin bit for Pierros.  As in all cases of access grants, the expectation is that he will use this appropriately in all cases, and failure to do so will result in privs being pulled.

If anyone has questions or concerns with this please find me on IRC or via email.
Assignee: reed → mconnor
Closed: 11 years ago11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Thanks Mike! Really appreciated.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.