Template talk:User access levels

This template is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp articles

Untitled

What is the name of the permission to send an email to another user? -- penubag (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's only emailconfirmed, which allows you to send and receive email. — ^PDD 13:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Key

Can we have a key which explains what the different colours used are? Harryboyles 04:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The key is on WP:UAL but I'll provide it here for your convenience. -- penubag (talk) 05:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Granted	Inherited	Denied	Revoked	Depends	Limited	Deprecated

Names

Where do these permission names, like nominornewtalk and tboverride, come from? Us441(talk)(contribs) 16:48, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

proposed additions

If no one objects, I'm going to change the cell color that represents (auto)confirmed users and the rollback permission from gray (denied) to yellow (depends), because some non-admin users have rollback permission. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 01:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, never mind, just realized that it's covered by the "other groups" column. Please excuse the tired girl. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 01:15, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed

There has been a flurry of edits recently about adding a column for the Extended Confirmed access level. I personally disagree with this addition. Because this right only modifies one row of the table, it makes more sense to add it to the "other groups" column than to give it its own column, similar to groups like Researcher and Oversight. Please acquire consensus for the change here before adding the column back into this table. Mamyles (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No abuse log for blocked users

Why blocked users cannot view the abuse log? 107.77.215.150 (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updating from the Group Rights page

On viewing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ListGroupRights (UGR), I found 43 codes that are not in the User Access Level (UAL) template, and that 2 codes in the UAL are no longer in the UGR.

I have a spreadsheet with the columns Group, Right, Code, and Location (e.g. "Bots", "Not be affected by IP-based rate limits", "autoconfirmed", and "both" (UGR and UAL). I don't know what format you would like it, or how best to get it to you. Tagus (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagus: If there are errors with the template, you can just be bold and fix the template yourself --DannyS712 (talk) 23:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between Denied and Revoked?

Why have two different statuses and colors for Denied and Revoked? They seem to act the same. Tagus (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like "denied" is really "not granted" - revoked is about blocked users, which is an additional user flag different from a user's groups and associated permissions. The blocked flag overrides and revokes the permission they would otherwise have had. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are these permissions in Global?

Special:ListGroupRights doesn't list the bigdelete, edittalk, oversight, and renameuser Permissions. I don't know if they are in Global or if they're deprecated now, so I left them in. Tagus (talk) 13:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tagus: 'oversight' items are called 'suppress' , 'edittalk' is just part of 'edit'. The global permissions are viewable in Special:GlobalGroupPermissions. Almost entirely, renames don't use the local renameuser permission, as our projects are part of Wikipedia:Unified login and renames are handled at meta-wiki. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:04, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux:, thank you for the answers. I just updated the template without knowing much about the subject. Hoping "Bold" covers me. :-) Tagus (talk) 14:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked users (sitewide)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The "Blocked users (sitewide)" has been removed from that recent overhaul, is it possible that anyone could bring that back? I appreciate it. 192.12.147.117 (talk) 13:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because (a) "blocked" isn't a user type, and (b) when updating the original version I found a lot of mismatches between what was in the table and what was in Special:ListGroupRights - with no way to "verify" the old "revoked" entries I don't really want to add them back in. Primefac (talk) 13:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, of course, if someone does have an idea of how to do it, I'm all ears. Primefac (talk) 01:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete-redirect

Hey Wugapodes, I hate to say I stopped watching the discussion on the newest PGM perm when it became obvious it was going to pass - is it bundled in with the Admin tools as well, or is it really just for pagemovers? Primefac (talk) 22:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: According to Special:ListGroupRights it's just page movers. I assume it's because admins have delete, making the right redundant. — Wug·a·po·des 22:49, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I figured, just couldn't remember (and don't feel like looking it up, yes I'm feeling lazy!). Primefac (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 January 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved - It's been a week and no-body else showed up to cancel the mild oppose to this, which does not appear unreasonable. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 21:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– These pages are for transcluding at Wikipedia:User access levels#Table. They should be subpages rather than being in the template namespace, since they contain content that is primarily for transclusion on a single page. As subpages they will appear in Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:User access levels/ and have backlinks to Wikipedia:User access levels. Either way, they can still be transcluded on other pages. (The three pages are currently transluded also (1) on three user pages and a village pumps archive, (2) nowhere else, and (3) nowhere else.) SilverLocust 🃏 💬 04:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 17:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Help Project has been notified of this discussion. ❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 17:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Wikipedia has been notified of this discussion. ❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 17:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Templates has been notified of this discussion. ❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 17:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am mildly opposed to this, if only because they are transcluded elsewhere and have some measure of "inertia" being where they are. If someone else actually shows up to the discussion and is fine with moving it, though, I won't stand in the way. Primefac (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.