See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Limits_to_configuration_changes#Changes_that_are_likely_to_be_declined - some groups may be not necessary and users should be encouraged to request adminship instead.

In T269067#6658867, @Bugreporter wrote:

See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Limits_to_configuration_changes#Changes_that_are_likely_to_be_declined - some groups may be not necessary and users should be encouraged to request adminship instead.

Here I have clubbed autopatrol, rollback, page mover in one right patrollers. And other user rights which are parts of admin rights but would be useful here as many don't want to take up full adminship. Importer and template editor would be an great help to update templates, help pages, community pages and in general maintenance.

We have received clear support from the community when this would be taken ahead?

Do you actually need all that groups? For small wikis like mrwikisource, it is way better if people just have the full admin pack. Note importer is quite sensitive permission (even sysops don't have it by default), and should probably be granted by bureaucrats or stewards only.

I have been having second thoughts about importer and edit filter manager, given the security risk. But the whole purpose of this discussion and community vote was to encourage editors to take up something from admin rights and contribute. probably we can create these user rights and only stewards can grant these? But account creator, patroller, template editor can be assigned by admins locally?

Can't we just go ahead with account creator, patrollers, and template editor? (admin can add and remove!) And leave edit filter manager and importor for now.

Sorry for not being aware of the processes here. But is this task being taken by someone or its just waiting for attention? Analysis is happening or not? I can't see anything more than status updates. Please let me know what we are doing with this task. Thanks in advance

I have words with Sureshkhole. Now they are agree to remove edit filter manager and importer user rights group from this request. For account creator and patroller, this request seems very genuine as both groups can't be compare admin rights. For template editor, I am unsure. Since @Urbanecm has worked on lots of Wikimedia site request. Can you give your opinion whether I should go ahead with it or not?

@Urbanecm ping :)

Change 659000 had a related patch set uploaded (by Jayprakash12345; owner: Jayprakash12345):
[operations/mediawiki-config@master] Add accountcreator user rights group

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/659000

Change 659000 abandoned by Jayprakash12345:
[operations/mediawiki-config@master] Add accountcreator user rights group

Reason:
Account creator is already exist. Checked at https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:UserList&group=accountcreator.

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/659000

A gentle reminder! did we abandon the whole task? or just an account creator group? The account creator group was there, But we thing we need is, admins should be able to add/remove account creator, template editor, and patroller groups. thanks

In T269067#6821551, @Sureshkhole wrote:

A gentle reminder! did we abandon the whole task? or just an account creator group? The account creator group was there, But we thing we need is, admins should be able to add/remove account creator, template editor, and patroller groups. thanks

No, just account creator group. I think there is objection from last 20 days. Now good to go. We will do.

Another gentle reminder, when are we doing it?

@Sureshkhole Sorry to ask, Can you announce this once again on village pump?

Let's say it and accept that we never wanted to do this, I am really not happy with the attitude and time-consuming processes which are been forced without any reason. I hereby stop myself from writing anything on this thread, you are free to do anything with it. I am really tired and disappointed with the help I have received for this particular task and the time wasted altogether. thanks and regards.

I saw requests for clarification and consideration in this task; I don't know what is meant with "attitude"... unfortunately things sometimes don't get picked up quickly as anyone is free to decide what [not] to work on. :-/ If you would like to speed up the process by writing a configuration change, please see https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_site_requests - thanks!

I don't understand what is the need for community confirmation again and again and how many times we need it? and delays like this, it was started four months ago. I don't know what was wrong in the processes I followed, I would be happy to know that, as I believe learning helps. But keep things pending for four months and asking again for community consensus, which means you are again buying time of one month. Basically, the delays were another way of saying NO. As per my knowledge, this was doable and it's still doable only if you want to. If I am wrong in understanding processes please enlighten me, I assure you that I will not repeat my mistakes.

Apart from you, only Komal Sambhudas and सुबोध कुलकर्णी is seems genuine voting user.

1. https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/विशेष:योगदान/Pushkar_Ekbote (2 edits after voting; Total: 4 edits)
2. https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/विशेष:योगदान/ज्ञानदा_गद्रे-फडके (no edits after voting)
3. https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/विशेष:योगदान/Svnavare (no edits after voting)
4. https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/विशेष:योगदान/Punekar_Yashashree (no edits after voting)
5. https://mr.wikisource.org/wiki/विशेष:योगदान/Adhokare (no edits after voting)

Basically, the delays were another way of saying NO

See T269067#6658867, It was being rejected. I was the person who somehow is trying to done this.

You did not understand my good faith. I am apologizing if I wasted your time. Please consider Assume good faith for writing comments.

("Developers will set an assignee when they plan to work on the task.". Please never assign tasks to other people without consent - thanks!)

@Zabe , @Aklapper, I am extremely sorry for the actions. Will remember that.

Which makes the following
पेट्रोलर patroller

Mark others' edits as patrolled (patrol)
Quickly rollback the edits of the last user who edited a particular page (rollback)
View recent changes patrol marks (patrolmarks)
Not create redirects from source pages when moving pages (suppressredirect)
Confirmed (confirmed)

I will post this again to community and see what they have to say about it, mostly its a technical issue so probably they will agree with it. Lets see.

[[ s:mr:Special:Diff/139607 | Community opinion ]], I have informed the community about the changes in the original proposal. I hope this will not wait anymore as we have been waiting for this for the last 5 months now. thanks

In T269067#7860029, @Sureshkhole wrote:

Which makes the following
पेट्रोलर patroller

Mark others' edits as patrolled (patrol)
Quickly rollback the edits of the last user who edited a particular page (rollback)
View recent changes patrol marks (patrolmarks)
Not create redirects from source pages when moving pages (suppressredirect)
Confirmed (confirmed)

I will post this again to community and see what they have to say about it, mostly its a technical issue so probably they will agree with it. Lets see.

No. Which makes the following (please pay attention to autopatrol and patrolmarks):

• Edit protected templates (templateeditor)
• Edit the content model of a page (editcontentmodel)
• Override the title or username blacklist (tboverride)

• Have one's own edits automatically marked as patrolled (autopatrol)
• Mark others' edits as patrolled (patrol)
• Quickly rollback the edits of the last user who edited a particular page (rollback)
• Not create redirects from source pages when moving pages (suppressredirect)

Please note that "Enable two-factor authentication (oathauth-enable)" will also be dropped as 2FA is automatically enabled for all template editors.

Furthermore, I assume that you want another protection level called "templateeditor". If this is not the case, please let me know (some projects such as fawiki, my homewiki, have template editors without having the associated protection level).

Yeah I will note that, actually I am not a code literate but I want to help in other aspects. So few things might not reach me.
I am informing the same to community too.
Yes, we will need templateeditor protection level too. As that's what triggered me and others in the community to this ticket.
We wanted to freeze few pages/ completed books as any other source project but not at admin level. So there should be scope for few others to edit those pages too. Thanks

Change 784255 had a related patch set uploaded (by 4nn1l2; author: 4nn1l2):

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] mrwikisource: Add template editor and patroller user groups

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/784255

Change 784255 merged by jenkins-bot:

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] mrwikisource: Add template editor and patroller user groups

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/784255

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2022-04-19T13:27:15Z] <taavi@deploy1002> Synchronized wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php: Config: [[gerrit:784255|mrwikisource: Add template editor and patroller user groups (T269067)]] (duration: 00m 50s)

Thanks a lot 😊