Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Requests for permissions

Shortcuts WP:PERM WP:RFPERM This page enables administrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikipedia. Administrators are able to modify account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, extended confirmed, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback, and template editor rights, and AutoWikiBrowser access. Editors wishing to request a permission flag here should do so following the procedure below. Editors requesting permissions are advised to periodically revisit the requests page, as notifications will not always be given after a decision is made. Editors should not expect their request to be answered right away and should remember to be patient when filing a request. To find out what permissions your account has, go to Special:Preferences, where your permissions are listed in the user profile tab under "Member of groups". Requests for permissions are archived regularly; please see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Archive for an index of past requests.

If this page has been recently modified, it may not reflect the most recent changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes.

• Account creator (add request · view requests): The account creator flag is granted to users who are active in the request an account process. The flag removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24 hour period. It also allows users to make accounts with names similar to other accounts. The account creator flag is only given to users who participate in the ACC process and may be removed without notice should a user's participation in the account creation process cease.
• Autopatrolled (add request · view requests): The autopatrolled flag is granted to users who are active in the creation of new articles. This tool is granted so their creations are auto patrolled in Special:NewPages. Unlike other requests, any user may nominate an editor for Autopatrolled, even without that user's consent. A user who wishes to have this flag generally should have created at least 25 articles and must be trusted, experienced, and must have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia:Notability.
• AutoWikiBrowser (add request · view requests): AutoWikiBrowser is a semi-automated MediaWiki editor for Microsoft Windows, designed to make tedious repetitive tasks quicker and easier. It is essentially a browser that automatically opens up a new page when the last is saved. When set to do so, it suggests some changes (typically formatting) that are generally meant to be incidental to the main change. Please read the rules of use and registration requirements on the main page before requesting permission. This is not a true user right, but access needs to be granted by administrators just like other permissions. If approved, your name will be added to the CheckPage. Users with under 250 non-automated mainspace edits or 500 total mainspace edits are rarely approved. You will need to give a reason for wanting AWB access.
• Confirmed (add request · view requests): The confirmed flag may be granted to new users who have not yet hit the threshold for autoconfirmed status. These are users who have not had both 10 edits and 4 days experience. People with this flag can upload files and edit semi-protected pages before hitting the autoconfirmed flag. Users requesting this flag must indicate clearly why they should be exempted from the customary confirmation period.
• Event coordinator (add request · view requests): The event coordinator user right allows editors to create multiple new accounts, and to temporarily confirm accounts so that they can create new articles.
• Extended confirmed (add request · view requests): The extended confirmed flag is normally automatically added to accounts after 500 edits and 30 days, but may be added to legitimate alternate accounts of users that already have this access. The flag allows users to edit pages under extended confirmed protection.
• File mover (add request · view requests): The file mover user right is intended to allow users experienced in working with files to rename them, subject to policy, with the ease that autoconfirmed users already enjoy when renaming Wikipedia articles.
• Mass message sender (add request · view requests): Mass message sender enables users to send messages to multiple users at once. This flag is given to users who have made requests for delivery in the past, clearly showing an understanding of the guidance for use.
• New page reviewer (add request · view requests): The new page reviewer user right allows users to mark pages as patrolled and use the page curation toolbar. At administrators' discretion, the right may be accorded on a time limited basis or indefinite.
• Page mover (add request · view requests): The page mover user right allows users experienced in working with article names to move them, subject to policy, without leaving behind a redirect. They may also move all subpages when moving the parent page(s). General guidelines include making 3,000 edits and 6 months of editing history. At administrators' discretion, the right may be accorded on a time limited basis or indefinite.
• Pending changes reviewer (add request · view requests): The reviewer flag is granted to users who are experienced enough with Wikipedia editing and its policies for contributing to the process of reviewing articles placed under pending changes.
• Rollback (add request · view requests): Rollback enables users to remove vandalism much more quickly and efficiently than by undoing it. Users who do not demonstrate an understanding of what constitutes capable vandalism fighting, either because they have no or little history of doing so, or show a poor ability to discern between good and bad faith edits will not be granted this right. Also, it is unlikely that editors with under 200 mainspace edits will have their request granted. For a more detailed explanation of rollback and information about when it is appropriate to use the tool, see Wikipedia:Rollback. For information about the technical details of the feature, see here.
• Template editor (add request · view requests): The template editor flag allows users to edit protected templates and Lua modules. General guidelines for granting include making at least 1,000 edits overall (with at least 150 to templates or modules), being a registered user for over a year, and having a record of successfully proposing significant edits to several protected templates. Users should demonstrate proficiency with template syntax and an understanding of the need for caution when editing heavily-used templates.

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

• Administrator and bureaucrat access: Requests for administrator or bureaucrat access need to be posted at requests for adminship and requests for bureaucratship, respectively.
• Bots: Request for bot flags should be made at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval.
• Edit filter: Requests for access to the edit filter manager group and the edit filter helper group should be made at Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard.
• Interface administrator: Requests for interface administrator access should be made at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard. Only current administrators may become interface administrators.
• IP-block-exempt: While the IP-block-exempt right can be granted by administrators, this flag is not handled here. Requests for the IP-block exempt right should be submitted via the Unblock Ticket Request System or, if there are significant privacy concerns, email the checkuser team at checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org or contact a CheckUser directly.
• CheckUser and Oversight: These rights are only granted by the Arbitration Committee, and only after strict scrutiny. More information can be found here.
• AfC reviewer: This access is granted by administrators at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants.
• Redirect autopatrol list: Addition to the list is granted by administrators at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect autopatrol list.
• Steward permissions can only be granted in yearly elections, and are rarely given.
• Global permissions such as global renamer, sysop, IP block exempt, rollback, etc should be made at meta:Steward requests/Global permissions.

If you wish to have any of your permission flags (except administrator) removed, you should contact an administrator. If you want your administrator flag removed, you should contact a bureaucrat.

This is not the place to request review of another user's rights. If you believe someone's actions merit removal of a permission flag, you should raise your concern at the incidents noticeboard.

The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight flags are removed at meta:Steward requests/Permissions. Stewards will typically not carry out such requests unless they are made on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, by a user who is requesting their own access be removed, or in cases of an emergency.

To make a request for a permission, click "add request" next to the appropriate header and fill in the reason for wanting permission.

Any editor may comment on requests for permission.

Administrators are permitted to grant account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, event coordinator, file mover, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback and template editor flags to any user who meets the criteria explained above and can be trusted not to abuse the tool(s). Administrators may either grant these permissions permanently or temporarily. For convenience, a bot will automatically comment with relevant data if the user does not meet configurable qualifications. Even if the bot does not comment, administrators should review the user's contributions and logs to ensure the tools will be used appropriately and check for any indication of potential misuse.

Once an administrator has granted a permission or decided to deny a request, they should add {{done}} or {{not done}} respectively under the request with their comments. If a user already has the requested permission, or is autoconfirmed and requesting confirmed, {{already done}} should be used. N hours after the last comment was made (as specified by the config), the request will be archived automatically: approved requests will be placed here; declined requests will go here. See User:MusikBot/PermClerk#Archiving for more information on archiving functionality.

Requests for permissions is primarily intended for editors requesting a permission for their own account. Other editors are welcome to comment if they have specific information that is relevant to that request that a patrolling administrator is unlikely to discover for themselves. Otherwise, since only administrators can effectively respond to these requests, general comments or 'clerking' by other users are rarely helpful. Non-administrators cannot "decline" to grant a request, because they're not in a position to accept it.

A limited exception to this is Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled, where third party nominations are encouraged. Other editors should still avoid offering general remarks on requests and leave the final decision to an administrator.

---

• Bsoyka (requesting Autopatrolled) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hello! I believe I've shown a sufficient track record of creating valid articles, and I plan to continue doing so. In particular, I have a list of red links with potential that I plan to create articles for in the near future, and I don't want to fill up the new page feed if I don't have to. Thanks for your time and consideration! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 06:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Elli (talk | contribs) 15:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• Un assiolo (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (edit CheckPage)

Would be useful to make tedious edits. Un assiolo (talk) 22:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anything specific in mind? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: A user was approved with this exact request, so I thought it was sufficient. I literally copied and pasted it. But OK. I saw AWB has an option to merge duplicated references, which is what motivated the request. This is something I've done in the past and it's annoying to do manually. I expect to learn about the other features as I use it. --Un assiolo (talk) 16:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction between that request and this one is that they have 20 times as many edits (and correspondingly more experience like having written several FAs, not just raw edit count) as you so I applied less scrutiny to their requests than I do to a user with less experience. The point of providing a specific task is to ensure both that you know what AWB is, you aren't hat collecting, and you aren't planning to do something like make mass cosmetic edits in violation of rule 4, etc. That response convinces me on all three fronts, so  Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• NyanThousand (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (edit CheckPage)

Requesting so I can help streamline small edits like typos, general maintenance, and so on. NyanThousand (talk) 12:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Kowal2701 (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (edit CheckPage)

To tag pages for Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce Kowal2701 (talk) 09:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Itineris55 (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (edit CheckPage)

It is very useful for searching/modifying same string/link/name on many articles when required. I am using it already for ro.wiki. --itineris₅₅ 08:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I would have preferred a more specific description of what you were going to do with AWB, but I'm just going to assume your experience from rowiki will carry over and ou'll do something reasonable. But do keep in mind WP:AWBRULES, which might not be the same from wiki to wiki. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

---

---

• IamAnisurrahman (requesting Extended confirmed) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)

Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

I am writing to request extended confirmed user rights. I have come across several articles on Wikipedia that are incomplete or contain misleading information, and are currently under the extended confirmed protection policy. I believe these articles require attention and correction. Granting me extended confirmed user permissions would enable me to amend and improve these articles. Thank you for considering my request. IamAnisurrahman (talk) 07:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. This will be granted automatically when you meet the requirements (which will be after the next edit or two that you make) stwalkerster (talk) 09:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thank you for your update. I appreciate your feedback and insights. IamAnisurrahman (talk) 06:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

---

---

• HRShami (requesting New page reviewer) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I want to reduce the massive backlog. I have been looking at the new pages patrol feed sporadically for the past two months and the backlog keeps increasing. I want to play a part in reviewing the articles. HRShami (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Xegma (requesting New page reviewer) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hello there, I am interested tn helping out in new page reviewing as there are very large articles backlog and love to do so. Xegma(talk) 07:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question, though I am not an administrator, I see that you have published accepted AFC submissions, even if they lack citations or are in need of some fixing. And some have orange banners on them. Why is this? — 48JCL 01:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL: As they should. The standard at acceptance at AfC is that the article would probably survive an AfD. Nothing more. Declining a draft for surmountable problems like a lack of citations or pretty much anything covered by a cleanup banner is inappropriate. – Joe (talk) 08:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I spot checked the 4 most recent accepts and they had lots of citations at time of acceptance. Feel free to link to the specific draft accepts you are concerned with. A complete lack of citations is a valid draftification reason and valid AFC decline reason, but I am not seeing that here. A major lack of citations such as entire paragraphs missing a citation (and also not supported by any WP:GENREFs) could be a valid decline reason (WP:V is policy after all). But it may also be reasonable to accept a draft that is mostly cited and just missing a couple citations, such as Draft:Norah Fulcher. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Iwaqarhashmi (requesting New page reviewer) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I would like to request new page reviewer rights to help review newly-created articles and lower the backlog. I have accepted lots of drafts at AFC and participated in many AfDs with deep discussions to exhibit my knowledge of notability, as I was advised previously. Thanks! Waqar💬 19:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([1]). — MusikBot ^talk 20:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see you found the IP at AfC who submits soundtrack articles (41 accepts of soundtracks it looks like). I'm glad to see you've started to accept drafts at AfC, instead of just declining (a ratio of 1 accepted to 348 declined at the time of the last application). I do still have concerns about your experience at AFD, given that, of your last 40 votes, all but 2 of them were pile on votes where the result had basically already been decided based on the number of votes for the conclusion you chose. You accepted one piece of criticism from me, your lack of accepts at AfC, but you do still appear to be pile on voting. Honestly, I'm not sold, but I'll leave it up to someone else whether they want to grant you a trial or not. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I understand your points, I've made lots of contributions recently, and I hope I will be granted a trial to demonstrate my willingness to contribute positively. Best, Waqar💬 07:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to say that I've been working so hard for the past couple of months. I've made so many contributions to AFCs, I've reviewed over 1,160 articles (accepts: 138, declines: 670, and the rest either rejected or speedily deleted) so far. I'm also actively patrolling the new page feed, adding maintenance tags, and tagging articles for speedy deletion like A3, A7, and G11. I've drafted more than 200 articles that either lacked reliable sources or needed additional sources. In the AFD discussions, I voted on more than 150 pages. Without considering the no consensus results, 98.6% of my AfD's were matches, and even though the votes were assumed to be piles on voting, most of my recent votes were very detailed and specific and weren't pointing towards anyone, but I will accept their valuable advice and try my best to make improvements at AFDs as well. Having said that, I believe that all those contributions exhibit my hard work and dedication. I hope I get a chance to at least prove myself by patrolling new pages, and I would be more than happy to help with the backlog. Thanks for your time and consideration. Waqar💬 18:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Persian-art-and-culture (requesting New page reviewer) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

With my expertise in the field, I am confident in my ability to assist fellow Wikipedians in reviewing newly created articles on Iranian art and culture, with a particular focus on modern and contemporary art. I would be grateful for the opportunity to contribute in this capacity and respectfully request the necessary permissions to do so. Persian-art-and-culture (talk) 10:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Persian-art-and-culture: Hi. You have fewer edits than people who are usually granted this permission, but that isn't inherently a problem. However, I noticed you submitted this version of Leili Anvar, a BLP which left some sentences unsourced. Can you explain your thought process there? Elli (talk | contribs) 14:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Elli, Thank you so much for reviewing my request and for your message.

That’s true; the article I created for Leili Anvar was one of the first subjects I thought should be in English Wikipedia since she is an important bridge between French and Persian literature. The article was mostly based on articles on French and Persian wikis, and unfortunately, other than unsourced sentences, there were many mistakes in layout, style, and so forth. But I always learn and open to learn from experienced fellows and I learned a lot from all those amazing wikipedians from the Women in Red Project.

Also, as you can see, I’m not eager to create countless articles. I have made very few articles here and on the Persian wiki, and I keep polishing them all the time, both mine and others’ articles.

But if you think it is still soon for me to step forward, I understand and I respect that from the bottom of my heart; I will keep polishing articles and learn, and I will apply later. Thanks again. Persian-art-and-culture (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Persian-art-and-culture: I think you would do well with a bit more experience making sure articles are properly sourced, as that's pretty important for New Page Patrol. Will mark this as  Not done for now, but do feel free to reapply once you have more experience. Let me know if you have any questions as I'd be happy to help :) Elli (talk | contribs) 01:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Elli, Thank you very much for your kind reply and your attention; I appreciate your decision and I understand the importance of experience. I'll reapply later and as you said with more experience. meanwhile I will learn from you fellow Wikipedians. cheers! Persian-art-and-culture (talk) 09:46, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• OnlyNano (requesting New page reviewer, Page mover) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Experience with AfC reviewing, as well as tagging pages for CSD (although I do not often tag pages for CSD). I meet all of the criteria, and have read the expectations and requirements for this role. I am looking to be a new page reviewer to try out new avenues for ways I can contribute to Wikipedia. I have a page for my AfC reviews, for easy viewing. OnlyNano^talk 18:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for a trial period of three months. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• KingSkyLord (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I have been editing for over 7 years and I plan on using this permission in order to help with discussions on WP:RM and deal with cross-redirects for articles that should have more disambiguated titles. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 12:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• OnlyNano (requesting New page reviewer, Page mover) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I am an active AfC reviewer, and I frequently move pages, either from userspace to draftspace, or publishing articles. My request for this privilege comes from my anti-vandalism work (which I am highly involved in). I notice several sleeper accounts, in their early stages, however I am unable to effectively take action with move vandalism in a productive manner. OnlyNano^talk 15:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OnlyNano: have you come across much pagemove vandalism that you were unable to reverse? You should be able to revert moves, so long as the redirect page hasn't been edited since the move. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:45, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From just using anti-vandalism tools (as in just having a lot of experience with anti-vandalism, the tools themselves don't have built in sleeper detection, haha), I can almost tell which accounts end up being sleepers for various purposes. However, I haven't really tracked any users that I suspect, due to me not knowing it is possible to circumvent the need for this privilege for my purpose. OnlyNano^talk 16:03, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OnlyNano: I'm not really sure how having this permission would help you much with your anti-vandal work. I don't think pagemove vandalism is that common so most of those sleepers you might find probably wouldn't be planning on it anyway? You're right on the borderline for getting the permission granted in terms of tenure and edits, but you don't really engage in many pagemoves so I'm inclined to not grant it at this point. If you start doing WP:NPP (and draftifying articles) or start participating in RMs more, I'd probably grant the permission at that point as I don't see any red flags, though. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good, thanks. I think this has been helpful, and I will make an effort to monitor those accounts more, and re-assess if this privilege would be something I would be using (aside from the standard privileges) frequently enough to warrent the granting of this privilage. I have been looking into getting into doing NPP, however, I think it's best I put a pause on this request, especially with this new information. I plan to come back if I do decide to participate in NPP, and/or I find that these accounts I am referencing are in fact, motivated with page-move vandalism in mind. Thank you very much for all your help today! OnlyNano^talk 16:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, then marking this as  Not done. Feel free to reapply if/when you have more of a use for the permission. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thanks! OnlyNano^talk 16:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Remsense (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Was granted page mover for a few months; now requesting it to be extended as the expiry date is coming up. I admit in the interim I earned a 24h block for a 3RR violation that I had to learn from, so I understand if that's a reason it would be appropriate to decline this. Remsense诉 19:17, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary page mover rights by Primefac (expires 00:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBot ^talk 19:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Remsense: So, there are two blocks here, both for warring at Russian Civil War. Can you explain what was problematic about your behavior in those cases, and how you'll avoid that going forwards? Elli (talk | contribs) 19:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. The first was my fault in an uncomplicated way: I thought I was in the right because of content guidelines, but was negligent as to the spirit of 3RR as a behavioral guideline, in that I was ultimately being disruptive by perpetuating further cycles of reverts even if I was enforcing consensus, as it were.

The second is a tad more nuanced, though still a learning experience: I thought there was an explicit guideline that the content under discussion during an RfC should not be altered from when the RfC began. While I didn't violate the letter of 3RR here, if I realized there was no such guideline, I wouldn't have engaged in any reversions myself. When I explained this error to the blocking admin, the block was lifted. Like I said, still a learning experience. To sum up, I've had to do better over the past few months not letting bad-faith and gray-faith editors use me as an "amplifier" for disruption in the moment.

If you have any more questions, please let me know? Remsense诉 19:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Elli (talk | contribs) 20:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, esp. for taking me in good faith here. Remsense诉 20:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ToadetteEdit (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Reason for requesting page mover rights: I want to have my page mover rights extended, as I contribute to RM/TR. Was given 3mo trial and it will end on August 20. Toadette^Edit! 08:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary page mover rights by Robertsky (expires 00:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBot ^talk 08:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• PadFoot2008 (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I was granted pagemover rights nearly a month back, but due to mistakes on my part, the rights have been now revoked. So, I am requesting the rights again on Primefac's advice, explaining why I made the mistakes and how I shall avoid those mistakes going forward.

• On 5 July, Liz told me at my talk page about the terrible quality of my page swap on Polish–Russian War (1609–1618) which I had moved after closing an an RM discussion in the talk page, and that I had left a dozen broken redirects that she had to clean up. This mistake was due to my inexperience, as it was my first page swap. Following that, SilverLocust recommended me User:Ahecht/Scripts/pageswap to prevent such issues, which I have been using ever since, and there have not been any more such errors.

• On 8 July, SilverLocust informed me about MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES after I moved Polish–Russian War of 1792 to Polish-Russian War of 1792. I was not aware of MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES at that time, and since then I've taken up the task to fix other article titles violating it as well. I had been aware of and had read the WP:Article title policy, but I had not completely read through the WP:MOS at that time. I've completely familiarised myself with the guideline now and hence hope to minimise mistakes I might make relating to that.

• On 30 July, I moved British Indian Army to Indian Army (1895–1947) after which Celia Homeford informed me that the move had been unilateral, following which I immediately proceeded to check the talk page of the article for previous RMs, which I did find and had resulted in the move of Indian Army (1895–1947) to British Indian Army. I hadn't checked the talk page before swapping the page and thus had not been aware of this RM when I had swapped — a mistake on my part. I had checked the WP:COMMONNAME of the article and sought to make the article title WP:Consistent with other historical army related articles like German Army (1935–1945) for instance. I should've checked the talk page and it's archives for any previous RMs and discussions before making the swap. That is what I usually do before making a move or a swap, but this step had slipped my mind in this case. In future, I shall make sure to always check the talk page and the archives for RMs and discussions regarding the article title without fail before making a move or a swap.

I've learnt from my mistakes and hope not to repeat them. I also aim to minimise any chance of any other maitakes on my part. PadFoot (talk) 17:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([2]). — MusikBot ^talk 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• ThatOneWolf (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hey there! I'm ThatOneWolf, and, I know I've been here twice before, but those times I admit I didn't really get the whole idea of experience and stuff. Plus, my last request was months ago. I took a little break recently when I just was checking my talk page and watchlist, but now I've come back to editing.

Anyway, the reason I'm requesting Reviewer rights now is because I feel like I could help in that area, with most of my edits being vandalism reversions. I also feel I suitably warn editors when I think they are intending to vandalize, or just let them know if it seems they could be trying to help. I've read all the policies listed in Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, and am very familiar with the copyright laws. This is why I feel I would be more fit now to receive this right. Thanks for reading! -- ThatOneWolf (^Chat_Edits 12:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Elli (talk | contribs) 14:46, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Lordseriouspig (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Rollback) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I've been doing RCP for a little while now, and recently started NPP. I believe I could assist in patrolling recent changes to expand on my anti-vandalism work. Thanks, Lordseriouspig 06:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• MarksmanRifle (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Rollback) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Have experience in monitoring recent changes and believe this tool would help in improving Wikipedia as I generally know the difference between constructive and unconstructive changes MarksmanRifle (talk) 23:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had an account for 9 days and has 80 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot ^talk 00:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for the same reason I declined your request for rollback -Fastily 10:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• Lordseriouspig (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Rollback) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I've been patrolling recent changes for a while now, using Twinkle to warn members. I have over 200 mainspace edits, and I'm extended confirmed with over 700 edits total. I've also been doing NPP for a little too. I'd like to use rollback for more advanced tools such as Huggle and AntiVandal. Thanks, Lordseriouspig 06:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits. Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 10:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t believe I'm not, @Fastily:, I warn people using twinkle, here is my warn logs: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=Lordseriouspig&namespace=3&tagfilter=twinkle&start=&end=&limit=50. Lordseriouspig 20:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ednabrenze (requesting Rollback) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Have been participating in counter vandalism for a while now and have developed strong interest in continuing in this area of editing. I request this right to enhance my counter vandalism capacity. Ednabrenze (talk) 07:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done While you appear to be on the right track, you only have a few days' worth of anti-vandalism experience and that's simply too few reverts for me to evaluate whether you'd be able to use the tool appropriately. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 10:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• MarksmanRifle (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Rollback) (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Mainly patrol the recent changes page for problematic edits, and believe that rollback would assist further with the most obvious vandalism MarksmanRifle (talk) 23:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has 80 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot ^talk 00:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done I noticed you started actively editing a week ago. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month gaining experience editing Wikipedia before assigning you advanced permissions. Thanks, Fastily 10:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---

• BrandonXLF (requesting Template editor) (t · th · c ^{(template space · edit requests)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · templates created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I am a frequent editor and creator of templates and modules, and I have encountered several instances where having the template editor permission would be helpful. Many of my requested edits on protected templates have been performing minor visual fixes or fixing small bugs with the template's logic. For these uncontroversial edits, having to submit a request and involve another editor feels unnecessary, considering the nature of the requested edits. In other cases with more significant changes, going through the edit request process works fine for the most part, but I like to be able to avoid the process because of the backlog the edit queue can have at times and the added potential confusion added by having to request technical changes. Because of this, I'd much rather be able to have a standard discussion on template talk pages, if necessary, followed by implementing the agreed upon changes myself rather than having to request someone else to implement the changes. In the near future, I plan on exploring adding support for the new dark mode to more templates and being able to implement these changes on protected templates myself would be of great help. In the future, I would also like to use my technical knowledge of wikitext and Lua to help with processing the template edit request queue.

Another issue that the template editor permission would resolve is that several templates I've created or rewrote are now template editor protected: Template:For-multi, Template:Country name, Template:Yearly archive list/display, Template:Visible anchor/styles.css, Template:Divbox/styles.css, and Module:Outdent. As a result, I am unable to edit them, which makes several of them difficult to maintain. Per the guidelines, three templates sandboxes I've worked on include Module:Jcon/sandbox, Template:Visible anchor/sandbox/styles.css, and Template:Infobox road/sandbox and at some requested template edits are [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8][9].

Also, I acknowledge that I performed what ended up being (unintentionally) disruptive templates several years ago. Since then, I have learned a lot about collaborating with others on Wikipedia and being mindful of the impact template edits can have on articles across the wiki. Since then, I have been much more careful with the edits I perform, as these past experiences have shown me the dangers of not doing so. With the template edit permission, I intend to take from these past mistakes, and I will follow the best practices to ensure the template edits I perform are well-tested, agreed upon, and non-disruptive. I find that now I am very cautious with my template edits, and I always create thorough test cases (e.g. Template:Jcon/testcases) before performing changes. – BrandonXLF (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at your contributions I'm inclined to grant, but would like to know if Primefac, EdJohnston, or Galobtter (admins who were involved with the placing and then lifting of your sanctions) have thoughts. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon has definitely matured as an editor since their first go-round with this permission. I've been burned in the past but let's say I'm cautiously optimistic. Primefac (talk) 12:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]