Stale report. User has not edited in two days. One edit since October. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:32, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
yeah the contribs show there's sometimes years inbetween, still seems like all edits are vandalism though Csillagkohó (talk) 13:43, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Declined. Changing transliterations in good faith (even if not in line with policy) is not vandalism, and certainly not something that warrants jumping straight to 4im warnings and then to AIV with no attempt to explain the issue to the user on their talk page. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
@Blablubbs: The problem is that they also introduced invalid file names, deleted hatnotes etc. Mellk (talk) 13:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
@Mellk: Yes, and I agree that's bad, but it's still something that warrants an attempt at handling by way of a brief talk page message explaining the actual problem. --Blablubbs (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Makes sense. I also agree that it was not the best idea for the other editor to immediately jump to a level 4 warning. Mellk (talk) 13:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, so please be careful when blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 14:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 14:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. -- DQB (owner / report) 14:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply an unauthorized bot. Do not block accounts in which the "bot" suffix arises naturally -- DQB (owner / report) 18:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on file The word troll may imply an intent to disrupt Wikipedia - but that is not certain. Please use discretion to determine if this is a violation or not. -- DQB (owner / report) 19:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
*:User has vandalized. — rsjaffe🗣️ 20:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
This username matched "(admin|coordinator|bureaucrat|check *user|developer|moderator|oversight|steward|sysop|committee|staff)" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 00:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply a position of authority -- DQB (owner / report) 00:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply an unauthorized bot. Do not block accounts in which the "bot" suffix arises naturally -- DQB (owner / report) 03:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Is this true for all reports? ScrabbleTiles (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
@ScrabbleTiles See the box above. Except in the instance of an egregious name violation, please do not report accounts with no edits or those who have not edited in the preceding 2 weeks. and Promotional names require evidence to be blocked. Do not report a username merely because it "appears" promotional. (evidence usually means that they have edited promoting the same company their username represents) --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 20:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Not a violation of the username policy. Real names are permitted except when they imply that the editor is a specific living person they are not. Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Being discussed with the user. They haven't made an edit since this was broughtr up on their talk page four days ago. BeeblebroxBeebletalks 19:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Being discussed with the user. They don't appear to have editied since you dropped a discussion template on their page. BeeblebroxBeebletalks 19:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Comment: It's not clear to me how the username implies shared use or how it's promotional as it seems to be a real name. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 03:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Not a violation of the username policy. Stage names and pen names are permitted except when they imply that the editor is a specific living person they are not. Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 10:44, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.
Place requests for new or upgrading of article protection, upload protection, or create protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content to BLP due to subject being in the news regarding a potential transfer. ser!(chat to me - see my edits) 12:14, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism. Octilllion (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 12:56, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism by caste fanatics. They are reverting previous edits and adding new edits without any sources to cite. Minakshi Pillai (talk) 12:44, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Temporary pending changes protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Back and forth dispute with an IP editor who seems to view my language templates for Chinese terms and removal of the existence of a film as a reference to...itself as "vandalism". I'd like to nip this simmering edit war in the bud. They have already come to my talk page to yell at me about it without making any material improvements to the page, which I have done in the form of references, language templates, a new section, and removing unreferenced material. Kazamzam (talk) 12:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent disruption from fly-by ip users and newly registered accounts with few edits (or one), also likely sock/meat puppets. There is a discussion for consensus on the tp, with a close request filed today, that may help, but in the meantime we should seek to limit the disruption. This page was protected last week for 3 days, but a lengthier time seems to be needed. Thank you - \\'cLf 13:27, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism and edit warring by several new accounts to exert a baised POV, with possibility of sockpuppetry. TheInfernoX (talk) 14:13, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page, click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page," which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page, please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected, please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
Modified by Oshwah on 2019-06-15: "Used by Twinkle and Huggle to warn users. This is a high risk point for potential large-scale disruption if vandalized."
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've seen this editor's work on multiple occasions at New Page Review. Has created 208 pages, none deleted, more than 3/4 of them B-class. High-quality page creation with infoboxes, quality references with proper formatting, images, etc., requiring no cleanup by reviewers. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm concerned that many of the articles on lifeboat stations don't meet GNG. After looking at a random sampling of them, most of them cite the Lifeboat Enthusiasts Society (of which Martin states they are a member of on their talk page), which appears to be an WP:SPS, and The Lifeboat, a publication of the RNLI, which is not an independent source. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
@Voorts I would have thought the same thing when I first encountered these articles, but there are several independent published sources on these lifesaving stations. Whenever I've done a BEFORE search on one, I always find GNG-qualifying sourcing. This came up in an AfD for one of Ojsyork's creations last year (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bamburgh Castle Lifeboat Station), which resulted in a "keep". Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights
I have created almost 50 articles and whilst producing these articles I have developed my understanding of wikipedia policies, conformed with the rules for biographies of living persons and have improved the content and formatting of numerous articles. SDGB1217 (talk) 14:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I have created 75+ articles, since I got autopatrolled mostly focusing on television series. For transparency, I'm still working on the feedback received from @Schwede66 in my last request. And I intent to keep doing the good work. Thanks for your consideration. Wishing the community a prosperous new year. C1K98V(💬✒️📂) 06:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Schwede66 (expires 00:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 07:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Could you please point to where the date of birth of Gautam Vig is referenced, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Schwede66, I hope you enjoyed your vacation. I have sourced the DOB in the early life section as per WP:INFOBOXREF. I followed the editing style of Geniac, the way he improved Sheezan Khan and tried adapting the same. Thanks C1K98V(💬✒️📂) 08:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks, I had a fab wee holiday. I don't understand your answer. I see that there is one ref in the infobox, and that reference does confirm the date of birth, but it is attached to the spouse only. Could you please explain what you mean, and how the referencing confirms the date of birth, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Schwede66 In the above mentioned article I have sourced the date of birth in the Early life section, see here. And the spouse's source is just about their marriage. I'm following the editing style of Geniac, the improvement he did in one of my previously created article see here. Thanks C1K98V(💬✒️📂) 09:38, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, which reference states the date of Vig's date of birth? I cannot see it. Schwede66 18:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Schwede66, I have used two sources for DOB, Colors TV and India Today. You can find both the sources in the Early life section. Hope it helps, if you still can't verify the birth date, you're most welcome to remove it. Thanks C1K98V(💬✒️📂) 18:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi Vanderwaalforces, I'm not sure if the Colorstv website works outside of India. Let's wait for Schwede66 to confirm if they're able to verify it. I'm sharing a screenshot of the website for reference [2]. While searching for sources related to their academics, I found IndiaToday and added it later in the Early life section. I repositioned the named citation as I wanted to highlight it for Schwede66, so I left an edit summary too. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V(💬✒️📂) 03:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment) I can access the colorstv source and confirm that it mentions Gautam Vig's date of birth. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Concise, well-written and sufficiently articles, mostly with a royal or Church of England focus. I looked at an articles of theirs as part of NPP, and found it to be up to standard without editing. Others look reasonable too. Klbrain (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
I’m requesting Autopatrolled rights for my account. I have contributed a significant number of edits, and my contributions are well-sourced and meet notability standards.
I believe this rights would help my workflow and reduce the load on reviewers. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 12:56, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
The editor has written 176 articles, with only two being deleted. Their work is well-researched, notable, and meets the encyclopedic standards. Given their track record, I believe they can be trusted to patrol their own articles. GarudaTalk! 13:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
It is my 8th year of editing (4th with this account). I have written a number of articles of various types and none have been permanently deleted. I have made mistakes, but understand what they were and how to avoid them. Ivan (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
As part of NPP, I've reviewed and article of there's, and then checked their other recent pages. They produce appropriately referenced, well-written, and appropriately formatted pages. Klbrain (talk) 18:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Not done. User:Feralpearl, thanks for all your new articles, in general they look to be in decent shape. I'm not granting as I'm seeing too many instances of non-cited content, for instance on the date of death in Ann Harithas, and citations to ancentry.com, which is generally unreliable. You can highlight these unreliable sources to yourself using scripts such as User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter. Other very minor squabbles: per MOS:ORDER, external links need to come after references (Jeanette Vondersaar), you underlink your articles quite a bit, and leads of longer articles should be at least a few sentences long.
Feel free to apply yourself (including by leaving me a message on my talk page) when you've got another few articles under your belt: you're clearly on the right track! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestions! I'll clear up the issues you've mentioned and take heed of your guidance in the future. Feralpearl (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
There are no outstanding requests for the confirmed flag.
Confirmed
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Hello, long time user of Wikipedia here, with a relatively new account which has less than 500 edits, while I was working on translating an article about an Israeli nurse and women's rights activist שרה לשנסקי (Sara Lishansky) from Hebrew to English. I noticed that I was only able to publish my translation as draft, What are my options in this case? AsmarTiba (talk) 11:06, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
P.S. I have previously done translation from English to Hebrew, I figured this limitation only applies when translating to English. AsmarTiba (talk) 11:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
Not done, looks like you managed to get your article to mainspace. Dr vulpes(Talk) 07:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to translate some articles that are currently only available in Russian and not in English. The machine translation feature is not yet available to me, but I'd like to help in that area. Ivan 6 (talk) 08:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
P.S. I'm familiar with Russian and fluent in Bulgarian which are both of the slavic language family. Ivan 6 (talk) 08:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Not done however, you may try the content translation tool by changing the new title to start with "Draft:" here. — xaosfluxTalk 10:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice, but translation features do not work for me even under "Draft:". This is why I requested permission in the first place. Ivan 6 (talk) 17:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
I am an aviation industry member and expert and would like to edit some articles involving aviation and add maps, clarification in some text, and even existing photos to some areas. MediaGuy768 (talk) 05:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Not done None of those things require Extended confirmed. If any articles you wish to edit are protected, you can request edits on the talk page. Donald Albury 14:11, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Arcticocean requested that, "If [I] wish to gain [ECR] again, the onus would be on [me] to prove that trust has been regained." To address this challenge, I would like to respond to the two concerns raised:
1. "You have added translated content from other Wikipedias without attribution."
2. "You have artificially split your article contributions into separate edits to more quickly reach a high edit count."
1. Translated content without attribution
In October 2024, I misunderstood the rules regarding proper attribution for translated content. Since January 2025, I believe I have consistently included proper attribution in all my edit summaries, as demonstrated in these examples: here, here or here.
2. Split article contributions
Regarding this concern, I would like to clarify that my first 350 edits, made between 2006 and 2013, occurred before the 500 edits rule was introduced (2016). These edits could not have been intended to meet a requirement that did not exist at the time.
I acknowledge that I intentionally split my contributions to reach the 500 edits threshold, only for the remaining 150 contributions needed to meet this target.
However, since then, I have made over 700 additional contributions (~1200 in total) without splitting them. This can be seen in my average edit size, which is approximately 350 bytes and aligns with averages observed among contributors, including administrators.
I hope this explanation demonstrates my commitment to addressing the concerns raised and regaining trust. Michael Boutboul (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for extended confirmed declined in the past 90 days ([3][4]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([5]). — MusikBottalk 15:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, My Extended confirmed permission was revoked last December because the arbitration committee deemed my contributions to be majority minor edits. I have since made between 150-200 edits that are more substantial, I would like to now appeal and have my permission restored. Tashmetu (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([6]). — MusikBottalk 15:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Not done. The AC said you could appeal after 500 substantative edits. Furthermore, many of you additions are adding citations to one WP:unreliable source: www.catholic-hierarchy.org. Could you revert those changes and add reliable sources instead. You can install User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter to help you identify unreliable sources if you cannot determine reliability yourself. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I thought the 500 is in total and includes my previous edits before my permission was revoked, because they weren't all minor edits. I will try to fix the reference issue, I had no idea. unfortunately to make my edits more substantive I kept making several changes per edit and so simply reverting them won't be possible . But I'll try anyway, thanks for the advice. Tashmetu (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
That is a good point. According to Xtools, you've made some 220 non-minor edits. However, I see you've tagging edits as WP:minor that are not according to Wikipedia's definition. For instance, this edit where you added a source should not have been marked as minor and was substantative instead. Please have a look at what should be marked as minor in its guideline and adjust accordingly. If we instead look at edits of >20 bytes, we get to ~310 edits. We're still a bit too early for regranting the permission in my books therefore. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Not tagging adding references as minor edits is something that I should have known about since I've read the page you mentioned but slipped my mind as I was being extra cautious of being accused again of gaming the system. Thank you for the advice, I'll work on learning from my mistakes and sorry for wasting your time. Tashmetu (talk) 19:31, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights
I'm the alt of Scratchinghead and im requesting the ec for this. If not, then it's okey and i will get rid of this account and switch to just using my main one. Respublica-23 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello @Respublica-23: could you confirm this from your main account? Happy to grant it when that's done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Upon looking a bit deeper, why did @Respublica-23 claim to be a new user when they created their user page ([7]). That seems dishonest if this is a WP:VALIDSOCK. Could you explain why you have need of a second account? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I would normally be inclined to just say "meh" and grant the user right anyway, but the account this is an alt of had EC removed for cause in December and only got it back a few weeks ago. That, combined with the concern brought up by Femke, makes me question if this is a good idea. BeeblebroxBeebletalks 21:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
To be honest i dont really need it, I could be fine without it So I withdraw my applications Respublica-23 (talk) 14:49, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Requesting to extend my NPP flag. I enjoyed reviewing redirects and articles. Thanks GrabUp - Talk 07:43, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 07:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
I've been Wiki-editing since 2018 and have become a familiar face on the snooker project. I'm accustomed to creating articles and redirects, and I'm fully conversant with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I've co-nominated three articles for FAC (all promoted) and contributed to many other FACs. I've been a pending changes reviewer since May 2020, and I like to think I am fair and neutral in any discussions that I get involved in. With over 24,000 main space edits to my name, I've been quite an active editor over the years, and I think I could make a useful contribution as a New page reviewer. Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
I've been editing for over five years with 2.2K mainspace edits, which includes over 30 new articles. In May 2024, Clovermoss gave me a three-month trial of the NPP permission, and I got the reviewer barnstar in that month's backlog drive. I sparingly used AFD and CSD during my reviewing, but that is mostly because when I found deficient articles, I spent the time to make them passable, rather than sending them for draftification/deletion. When I did propose content for deletion, I generally received community consensus to do so. I am seeking the permission for permanent use, but another trial works too! ViridianPenguin 🐧 ( 💬 ) 18:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
My trial of 2 months is ending soon, so I would like to be granted the permission permanently. I know that I have made mistakes while reviewing (though nothing close to egregious), so in case it would be another trial, I can ask later, as I might or might not be busy this month. And thank you for providing me the trial, it's been fun, trying to help Wikipedia through npp. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 21:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia Administrators,
I would like to formally request the permanent assignment of the New Page Reviewer permission.
Since being granted this role on a trial basis, I have actively contributed to reviewing new pages, particularly those related to Iran, Persian language, and Persianate culture areas in which I have both expertise and a long-standing editorial commitment. In addition to evaluating new articles, I have assisted other authors in completing their work, providing guidance when they were unfamiliar with Wikipedia's guidelines. In cases where further intervention was needed, I took the initiative to edit the articles myself to ensure they met the necessary standards.
I believe my trial period as a New Page Reviewer have demonstrated my dedication to maintaining and improving Wikipedia’s content. I remain committed to collaborating with fellow editors and ensuring that new articles align with Wikipedia’s guidelines.
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Best regards, Hounaam (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 11:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I have been a regular contributor to both the Turkish and English Wikipedia for many years. Based on the experience I have gained throughout this period, I aim to make more high-quality and sustainable contributions. I am particularly interested in articles related to transportation and believe that these articles require regular monitoring. My primary objectives include updating incorrect or incomplete content, performing page moves when necessary, and ensuring that these articles comply with Wikipedia standards. In this context, I am requesting the "page mover" right to address content deficiencies and errors while also helping to reduce the workload of other administrators. Thank you for your attention and support. --bluetime93💬 11:16, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has 1998 total edits. — MusikBottalk 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Not done, fails minimum criteria. Primefac (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I have lots of experience in the WP:TW scale of reverting edits, and wish to continue this through WP:PENDINGBryceM2001 (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has 92 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBottalk 20:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Not at this time due to limited editing experience but please do apply again later.Dr vulpes(Talk) 19:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
I'd like to request pending changes review rights because I am familiar with the policy and this would help me with my vandalism patrols. Furthermore, I am currently trying to accept a request, but I do not have the permissions. Thanks! Ali Beary(talk2me!)(stalk me?!) 13:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
@Ali Beary Given your recent WP:CUTPASTE move, I'd like to see a little more time for you to demonstrate your knowledge of Wikipedia policies and procedures before granting additional permissions. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 22:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
@Ahecht, ah, apologies. I didn't realize a "request moves" page existed, and I do not have move or merge permissions. I was simply undoing something that wasn't correct... hence why I requested move perms earlier so I could fix it. Ali Beary (talk) 12:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I am requesting rollback rights because I spend most of my time on Wikipedia reverting vandalism, and I would like to help fight vandals more effectively. I have made some mistakes, but I mostly have a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, and I try to always WP:AGF. Rollback will also allow me to use tools like AntiVandal. Thank you. Protobowladdict (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
Some newbie editors contain IP address not their username editing wrong and fake information even if is not the area origin. Vineyard93 (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Not doneUser:Vineyard93. I don't understand your request. You don't need rollback to revert fake information. If you encounter vandalism from IPs, you can warn the users. When they persist after sufficient warnings, you can report to WP:AIV. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I have been working on counter-vandalism with RedWarn for a while now. Despite my inconsistent and relatively low edit count compared to other requesters, I believe I would be a good fit. I approach CV with the idea that it is better to have somebody with malicious intentions get away with their behavior than it is to accuse an innocent person of Vandalism. I aim for high accuracy over total reverts. I have made mistakes in the past but I am usually quick to notice and fix them. The main reason I am requesting Rollback is to gain experience with the Huggle desktop application.
Thank you for the consideration and I look forward to hearing back. UndeadAnarchy|✉ 14:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
I would like to request rollback permission to help combat vandalism, particularly in Nepal-related articles, which I frequently come across while patrolling recent changes. Having rollback rights would allow me to efficiently revert obvious and disruptive edits, improving the quality of affected pages.
I always assume good faith and am careful when reviewing edits. If I am uncertain whether an edit is vandalism, I do not revert it. I am also familiar with Wikipedia’s warning templates and know when it is appropriate to report persistent vandals to WP:AIV.
I believe rollback will be a valuable tool in my efforts to maintain Wikipedia’s integrity, and I will use it responsibly. Thank you for your time and consideration. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm requesting this right to revert vandalism from the all the articles on Wikipedia, especially India related articles. I'm also patrolling recent changes from when I started i.e. almost a month. Please
remember to ping me if done XiphoidVigour༈Duel༈ 05:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has 185 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBottalk 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
I have been actively combating vandalism on Wikipedia for some time, especially Taiwan related articles. I regularly monitor recent changes and undo obvious vandalism while ensuring that good-faith edits are not mistakenly removed. Having rollback rights would allow me to revert vandalism more efficiently, especially on high-traffic pages. I am familiar with Wikipedia’s policies on vandalism, edit warring, and proper rollback usage, and I will use the tool responsibly to help maintain the integrity of the encyclopedia. Heeheemalu (talk) 12:57, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to request rollback rights as I have been patrolling on Wikipedia for a while, finding vandals, and I would like to have the ability to use rollback to revert their edits more effectively (as I have had a couple where I had to undo lots of small edits and it took up lots of my time). Thanks, ScrabbleTiles (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I request that I be given a right as a template editor, to edit templates protected. Am sure my edits will be pleasant to everyone, I have a strong password as required. I promise to respect the guidelines on editing templates. You can revew templates I my self have created here... – Raph Williams65 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Not done, you haven't met the guidelines for granting or demonstrated a need for this permission. The format in which you requested this also does not give me confidence that you will use the necessary level of care in, for example, checking a page's instructions (documentation in the case of a template) before editing. If there is a template you are unable to edit, please just use an edit request for now. SilverLocust💬 13:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at Waters http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Calmer Waters.
