Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-confirmed-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:PERM)
"WP:PERM" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission or Help:Permanent link.
This page is under extended confirmed protection, but non-EC users may edit its subpages.

    Requests for permissions
    Shortcuts

    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.

    Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 18:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

    Permissions

    Handled here

    • 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.

    Handled elsewhere

    Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

    Review and removal of permissions

    The requests for permissions process is not used to review or remove user rights:

    The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight permissions 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.

    Process

    Requestors

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

    Administrators

    Full instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Administrator instructions

    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.

    Other editors

    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.

    Current requests

    Account creator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Autopatrolled

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Ojsyork

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]
    @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)[reply]

    User:SDGB1217

    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)[reply]

    User:C1K98V

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Schwede66 (expires 00:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 07:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you please point to where the date of birth of Gautam Vig is referenced, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    Sorry, which reference states the date of Vig's date of birth? I cannot see it. Schwede66 18:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    @C1K98V Is it just me or the webpage you're linking to from colorstv.com is redirecting to a /mena/ directory making it impossible to see what you're talking about or citing. As for the indiatoday.in, you did not initially position the citation as of when Schwede66 started reviewing your request, you only repositioned the citation today. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    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 [1]. 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)[reply]
    (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)[reply]

    User:Walco1

    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)[reply]

    User:S-Aura

    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)[reply]

    User:बडा काजी

    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. Garuda Talk! 13:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Иованъ

    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)[reply]

    User:Feralpearl

    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)[reply]

     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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

    AutoWikiBrowser

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


    User:Yeshivish613

    It would be helpful to use this tool so I can quickly do otherwise tedious tasks. In the past I've spent a lot of time adding a new navbox to a bunch of pages, this would make it a lot quicker. Yeshivish613 (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Event coordinator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Extended confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:AsmarTiba

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]
     Not done, looks like you managed to get your article to mainspace. Dr vulpes (Talk) 07:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ivan 6

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]
     Not done however, you may try the content translation tool by changing the new title to start with "Draft:" here. — xaosflux Talk 10:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]

    User:MediaGuy768

    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)[reply]

     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)[reply]

    User:Boutboul

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for extended confirmed declined in the past 90 days ([2][3]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 15:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tashmetu

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([5]). — MusikBot talk 15:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

    User:Respublica-23

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]
    Okay ☢️SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 16:07, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Upon looking a bit deeper, why did @Respublica-23 claim to be a new user when they created their user page ([6]). 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)[reply]
    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. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 21:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    backup account Respublica-23 (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh i put up a random description
    Since I read the policy on valid socks I changed it to "alt of scratchinghead" Respublica-23 (talk) 14:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done While I agree that "meh" is usually the right attitude here, I don't think the benefits outweight the potential negatives here. A backup account is not one of the reasons given in VALIDALT. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:05, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    File mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Mass message sender

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


    New page reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:GrabUp

    Requesting to extend my NPP flag. I enjoyed reviewing redirects and articles. Thanks GrabUp - Talk 07:43, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 07:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. SilverLocust 💬 08:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Rodney Baggins

    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)[reply]

    User:ViridianPenguin

    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)[reply]

    User:DoctorWhoFan91

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 21:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hounaam

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 11:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Page mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Bluetime93

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 1998 total edits. — MusikBot talk 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done, fails minimum criteria. Primefac (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Pending changes reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:BryceM2001

    I have lots of experience in the WP:TW scale of reverting edits, and wish to continue this through WP:PENDING BryceM2001 (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 92 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 20:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not at this time due to limited editing experience but please do apply again later. Dr vulpes (Talk) 19:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ali Beary

    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)[reply]

    @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)[reply]
    @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)[reply]


    Rollback

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Protobowladdict

    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)[reply]

    User:Vineyard93

    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)[reply]

     Not done User: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)[reply]

    User:UndeadAnarchy

    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)[reply]

     Done Elli (talk | contribs) 03:58, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Rahmatula786

    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)[reply]

    User:Xiphoid Vigour

    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 Xiphoid Vigour ༈Duel༈ 05:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 185 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Heeheemalu

    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)[reply]

    User:ScrabbleTiles

    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)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 76 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 18:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done Hello User:ScrabbleTiles. Usually, we expect users to have at least 200 edits to mainspace. I would like to see you understand warnings a bit better for isntance before giving rollback. At User talk:OKTO on 6, you have a level-1 warning and only warning in rapid succession. Of course, a second warning can't be an only warning, so a level-2 warning would have been more appropriate (or none, as they may not have noticed the first warning immediately). In the meantime, you can already install WP:Twinkle to combat vandalism more effectively. You're on the right track, so feel free to come back in a few weeks when you've hit the threshold. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, thanks for that. I went straight to 4 because their edits were very disruptive and I didn’t see any constructive edit coming from them but in the future, I will be more forgiving. I will request again once I have reached the threshold. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    User:Pbritti

    I've been involved in combatting low-intensity disruption and vandalism for a while. I've recently encountered an increased level of sustained socks, LTAs, and contentious topic disruption. Having rollback would be just another tool in the toolkit, as I've enjoyed the luxury of Twinkle for a couple years. An even more streamlined approach to combatting disruption is always nice, though. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Template editor

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Raph Williams65

    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)[reply]

     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)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1181725208"