Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"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 17:40, 3 January 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:B.Korlah

    Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights

    Hi, I am requesting for this rights, because I have about 5 new articles that are yet to be reviewed and surely meets the notability criteria, I have been creating and improving articles especially on African Cinema and with this right, I hope to reduce the backlog on the new page reviewers log.

    Best regards, B.Korlah (talk) 06:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done A few of your recent articles have unencyclopedic/subtly promotional sentences. For example, in Seven Doors (2024 series) you write Netflix top leaders also expressed excitement at the project and how much it portrays the Nigerian culture, Netflix further reiterated her commitment to showcasing African stories and culture at large. This kind of information is generally considered promotional fluff and shouldn't be included in the article since it does not say anything substantive. (also cc @Ibjaja055 who reviewed the article)
    This is the kind of mistakes NPP is designed to catch and correct and I think you will benefit from somebody taking a second look at your articles. Sohom (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    oh wow. Okay then, thank you for the feedback. B.Korlah (talk) 08:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CommunityNotesContributor

    To support WP:JAN25 I'd ideally like to be contributing to reducing the backlog as opposed to contributing to increasing the backlog at the same time. Overall in the last 25+ BLP articles I've created, there have been few to no edits made by NPR, aside from typos, grammar, and duplicate words. The first handful lacked certain templates, categories, default sorting, talk page banners, and the usual technical parts of articles, but I've since got to grips with including these. Since then I've only moved my drafts to mainspace, or created in mainspace, when I'm confident that there is enough SIGCOV and structure, and otherwise "incubate" articles not quite ready in draft space if not. I otherwise create quite a few redirects, with one disambiguated, and one batch up for discussion, but otherwise none deleted so far. Thanks for considering. CNC (talk) 12:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done – Joe (talk) 08:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sundostund

    An experienced editor with around 600 pages created, with few deleted; I've reviewed pages that they have created as part of NPP and they reach the standard expected without intervention. Klbrain (talk) 09:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, thanks for the suggestion. – Joe (talk) 08:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:C411978

    Has created more than 200 articles, with none having been deleted. As part of NPP, I reviewed a recent creation, and found it to be complete without the need for editing. Reviewing other pages, they look to be similarly appropriate. Klbrain (talk) 09:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done – Joe (talk) 08:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aidillia

    Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights

    Hi, I would like to request this right because I have met the criteria for 25 articles that are free of problems. I would like to use it for my interest in WikiProject Korea. You can see all of articles i've created here! :) Aidillia(talk) 07:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) In Buried Hearts, there's a bit of mess with the history, seeing that it was first deleted but later recreated and then expanded, this time, with copyright violations which remained not until GreenLipstickLesbian fixed and requested a revision deletion today. Checking through some other creations revealed some issues like grammar errors. Things like these are what the NPP is for, and English Wikipedia is not ready to keep copyvios on the site, not ever.
    It also appears to be that Labor Attorney Noh Moo-jin had copyvio issues, which GLL fixed too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I don't know if translating from a website is forbidden, because a few months ago, there was someone who reverted my edit because of no reliable sources for the description I wrote myself. So after that, what was included in the sources I used. Many people I see do that. And now I know I'm trying to remove it as much as possible and do some fixing. Aidillia(talk) 11:30, 1 January 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:EF5

    Rename from "Sir MemeGod", which is already on the list. Planning on whittling away at Category:Talk pages with comments before the first section. EF5 20:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC) EF5 20:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CommunityNotesContributor

    I arrived here from WP:POSTMOVE, and it's not my first time needing to clean up wikilinks from a recently moved page. This tool looks like it could save me a reasonable amount of time having to redirect links post move. Thanks in advance. CNC (talk) 21:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. SilverLocust 💬 21:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tails Wx

    Hiya! A year ago I had AWB self-requested to be removed due to inactivity with it. Now, I think it's necessary for me to have this tool again to fix formatting issues and as part of the ongoing NPP drive. Thanks! ~ Tails Wx 02:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. SilverLocust 💬 21:59, 2 January 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.

    User:Genius64868

    Reason for requesting confirmed rights

    I have use wikipedia since year 2021 and contribute regularly for the readers in wikipedia. I think it's time to get categorised in confirmed user because the contributions I make in past year. And there won't be any reason to request to denied. Thanks Genius64868 (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoconfirmed" user right. — MusikBot talk 18:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    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:Boutboul

    Reason for Request: I am requesting reinstatement of Extended Confirmed Rights after their removal by User:ScottishFinnishRadish for concerns related to "gaming EC through adding a machine translation of Fondation Maeght and Rueil-Malmaison in many small edits without attribution." He asked me to "make at least a few hundred edits" to regain it. Since the removal, I have added attribution to the concerned articles. I have made over 300 referenced contributions, focusing on adding reliable sources to improve verifiability, expanding content in alignment with Wikipedia’s standards, and enhancing article quality. I believe my recent contributions demonstrate constructive and policy-compliant editing.

    Examples of Recent Contributions: Water metering, Smart meter, and Gas meter, which are in my area of expertise. My recent edits also contributed significantly to upgrading the article History of the Jews in Tunisia from "Start-Class" to "B-Class." Michael Boutboul (talk) 12:28, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for extended confirmed declined in the past 90 days ([1]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([2]). — MusikBot talk 12:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Boutboul, are you using AI (such as ChatGPT or similar tools) to write your talk page messages and permission requests? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @ToBeFree,
    I use ChatGPT from time to time to translate sentences or correct English syntax, as English is not my mother tongue. I also used an LLM to translate French Wikicode into English Wikicode; it’s much faster than doing it manually.
    Have you had the opportunity to check some of my edits? They are far from perfect, but I really try to follow Wikipedia standards (Verifiability, No Original Research, Follow Style Guidelines, etc.). I’m genuinely puzzled—I don’t understand why they are not considered valuable enough to regain my extended confirmed rights. I’ve been a Wikipedia member since 2006, with more than 900 edits in English and over 1,500 edits in total.
    Thanks for your time and interest. Michael Boutboul (talk) 10:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From their last post to their talk, @Boutboul seems interested in CT areas. I have concerns about the EC request given other issues raised on their Talk. Courtesy ping @ScottishFinnishRadish who removed initially. Star Mississippi 17:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They're also continuing to translate from French Wikipedia without proper attribution, e.g. here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I properly attributed the translation by adding the template to the main page. However, a bot moved it to the talk page. I even explained this in a discussion topic on the talk page. Translation is not prohibited; in fact, it is encouraged by Wikipedia. Michael Boutboul (talk) 20:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (b) Place the {{Translated page}} template on the target article's talk page, for example: emphasis mine. Nor did you attribute it in the edit summary as required: Add a statement to the edit summary of the target article of your translation providing translation attribution to the authors of the source article, including an interlanguage link to the source (translated-from) article. Example: This continued misunderstanding plus the LLM usage does not inspire confidence that they're ready to have E/C restored. They're welcome to edit in other areas but I explicitly do not think they're ready for CTs. Star Mississippi 20:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Firstly, I am not sure why you are using the plural for me. I am the only one making all the edits, and my pronoun is 'he'.
    Secondly, I have attributed the text to a French translation in several edit summaries, for example, here and here. I may have forgotten some instances. However, if I am not mistaken, there is no rule stating that an editor must make no mistakes when editing to regain Extended Confirmed Rights. Furthermore, the quality of the translation is sufficient, as other editors appreciated it and upgraded the article from Start-Class to B-Class.
    In addition, using an LLM for translation, syntax correction, or any other purpose is not forbidden.
    It therefore seems that the decision not to reassign the Extended Confirmed rights is arbitrary. Michael Boutboul (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Using third-person gender-neutral pronouns is pretty common and normal online. I have a question for you Michael out of interest. If you acquire the EC privilege, will you use it to advocate on behalf of any of the parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus violating WP:NOTADVOCATE and the part of the Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct that prohibits "Systematically manipulating content to favour specific interpretations of facts or points of view"? The reason I ask is that using extended confirmed privileges that way is puzzlingly common in the WP:PIA topic area, and I wondered whether you have considered these constraints. Sean.hoyland (talk) 10:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sean.hoyland, Thank you for your constructive message. I believe that we all interact, on all sorts of topics, with our biases; we all have biases. I also believe that the beauty of Wikipedia lies in collectively building reliable content, based on discussions grounded in valid sources, despite everyone's individual biases. This is the mindset in which I wish to use my Extended Confirmed Rights. Michael Boutboul (talk) 11:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there something preventing you from simply stating that you will not (consciously anyway) advocate on behalf of any of the parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict? Is it an unrealistic expectation given the nature of the topic area? That is what I would have done by the way, provided assurance that I'm not a potential disruption vector in a contentious topic area. And then try to make a case for restoration of EC rights on that basis. Of course, if you did that, you would probably the first editor in Wikipedia's history to do so. Feel free to ignore my questions by the way. I'm just interested in things that might help to depolarize the topic area, like explicit commitments to not advocate on behalf of parties to the conflict (although I'm aware that the adversarial nature of the topic area might, under certain circumstances, help to increase the quality of content). Sean.hoyland (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Like any contributor on Wikipedia, I respect the platform's core principles, rules, and best practices to the best of my knowledge. Specifically, I strive to avoid advocating for any side and ensure that both my contributions and those of others align with the principle of neutrality of point of view (NPOV).
    Since you raise the topic, I believe the best way to depolarize a contentious area is to acknowledge that every party involved inherently has its own biases.
    Anyway, your concern is far from that of ScottishFinnishRadish. Michael Boutboul (talk) 18:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Star Mississippi, have you reviewed my edits? Could you please clearly explain your concerns? No one has provided a clear explanation for refusing to reassess my extended confirmed rights. Additionally, @ScottishFinnishRadish made an incorrect statement regarding proper attribution for translations. Michael Boutboul (talk) 20:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Heyaaaaalol

    Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights

    Not extended confirmed despite meeting criteria Heyaaaaalol (talk) 05:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Already done – You are already autoconfirmed. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 05:54, 2 January 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.

    User:Owais Al Qarni

    Hello, I primarily work with files on Wikimedia Commons, where I have file mover and autopatrol rights. The process of file moving on English Wikipedia is almost the same as the practices on Commons. I also have experience working on files on English Wikipedia, including submitting several rename requests. Moreover, I have file mover rights on Bengali Wikipedia, further demonstrating my familiarity with file management across Wikimedia projects. I am familiar with Wikipedia:File names and request this right to enhance my work. Thanks.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 05:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    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:History6042

    The backlog is getting insane and I just want to help. I have well over the needed edit count and time editing. History6042 (talk) 16:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @History6042: Could you please look at the other WP:NPRCRITERIA (apart from edit count/account age) and let us know if you think you meet them? – Joe (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think I meet the writing new articles criteria as I have 41 current pages created. I promise to only do this on a volunteer basis. I've never been blocked, I also think I'm pretty good at interacting with other editors, I don't think I've ever been in an edit war and definitely not one recently. Overall I think I fulfil the criteria. History6042😊 (Contact me) 21:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @History6042: Thank you, but I'm afraid that since several of your articles have been deleted, I can't consider this alone as demonstrating "good knowledge of content policies and guidelines and experience with quality control processes". Please consider spending some time at WP:AFD and/or WP:AFC and then re-requesting. – Joe (talk) 10:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done for the bot. – Joe (talk) 10:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Voidxor

    I would like to help out with the January NPP drive, as I've participated in the other recent drives. I believe I meet the criteria for the NPR right after reviewing them. Thanks! — voidxor 21:56, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Voidxor: I realise that you're a highly experienced editor, but I'm seeing limited directly involvement with new article work (AfD/AfC/article creation) in your logs, which is the main thing we look for with this right. Could you perhaps elaborate on what other maintainance work (e.g. backlog drives) you've done in the past? – Joe (talk) 10:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I participated in the Citation Needed backlog drive in June, and the Unreferenced Articles one in November. — voidxor 14:18, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:The Midnite Wolf

    I'd like to help with the backlog. I've created around two-dozen mainspace pages (including disambiguations) and 150 redirects and have participated in AfD discussions. – MW(t•c) 09:26, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. Thank you for volunteering, but in reviewing your editing history I wasn't able to find sufficient experience with the deletion process or evaluating content. I encourage you to spend some time at WP:AFD and make policy based votes to show that you're familiar with our policies and comfortable evaluating notability. Alternatively, you could apply to help out at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Completely understandable. Hope you have a good new year’s! – MW(t•c) 22:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Marleeashton

    Hello! I've been giving feedback on new pages for sometime and would love to participate in the January NPP drive. I'm quite well versed on what the standards are and when I don't I look it up! Would be more than happy to assist. Marleeashton (talk) 09:29, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. Thank you for volunteering @Marleeashton, but in reviewing your editing history I wasn't able to find sufficient experience with the deletion process or evaluating content. I encourage you to spend some time at WP:AFD and make policy based votes to show that you're familiar with our policies and comfortable evaluating notability. Alternatively, you can still apply to help out at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good! Will do. Happy new years! Marleeashton (talk) 00:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Spiralwidget

    I would like to join the NPP backlog drive! Spiralwidget (talk) 11:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for the usual two-month trial period. After that, please make a new request here to make it permanent. Thanks for helping out! – Joe (talk) 09:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lordseriouspig

    Hi, I'd like to request NPR rights to participate in the January backlog drive. I meet the criteria and have previously had NPR on a trial period for the last backlog drive. Thanks. Lordseriouspig 00:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, thanks for your work so far and for helping out again. The right will not expire this time. – Joe (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CSMention269

    I have been an AFC reviewer since March 2024 and am currently on probation. I want this flag to clear the backlog drive for next month (January 2025). Kindly read User_talk:Sohom_Datta#NPR_request for my previous decline cause conversation. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔) 15:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBot talk 15:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) @CSMention269 But you were going to re-request by February 2025. Why this now? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure @Vanderwaalforces, at first I thought I have well idea about reviewing pages through AFC. So I just want to explore page curation tool as a part of trial request (I phrased it as "test") to see if I can be adjusted there as well. But when it went declined, I quickly realised that I need to rephrase it, which I later talked to admin Sohom Datta at his talk page, which I stated if again declined, I will apply again on Feb. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔) 19:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ampil

    Hello I'm Ampil. I'm participating January 2025 drive. I have 78 AFC reviews and 19 accepts. My rights set to expire 10 days. Thanks. ~🌀 Ampil 「💬 / 📝」 11:59, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 12:00, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ampil:  Done. You've done great work on the whole so far but please take note of WP:NPPHOUR. You draftified Draft:Yutong HD thirteen minutes after it was created and just four minutes after the creator's last edit – it could well have been that they were planning to work on it further. – Joe (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Gardenkur

    I want to apply for new page reviewer rights as I want to participate in January NPP backlog drive with the time I have in hand and the contributions I have been making from last few years. Hope it will be accepted.Gardenkur (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC) Gardenkur (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. This was previously declined as your recent article creations do not suggest that you have sufficient knowledge of notability guidelines for this permission. I also have concerns about your command of English, and other editors have noted issues with promotional editing. That was two years ago, but the concerns expressed on your talk page since then don't suggest that much has changed, in my view. You also have no real experience participating in the deletion process (aside from your own articles being nominated for deletion). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ensconce

    I’ve been actively contributing and working diligently to improve the quality of pages. With a significant number of edits under my belt and extensive experience gained over time, I believe I am well-qualified to be granted new page patroller permissions. I’m eager to help tackle the growing backlog and ensure that new pages meet the required standards. I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to take on this responsibility permanently. Ensconce (talk) 00:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for being willing to help out, Ensconce, but given that NPR is a fairly sensitive right we generally need to see significant prior experience in new article-related work, i.e. deletion, AfC, and/or article writing, before granting to be sure that you have sufficient knowledge of the relevant policies. Unfortunately as far as I can tell you don't really have this. I'd strongly encourage you to consider giving WP:AFC (which also has a dire backlog) and WP:AFD a go first, after which you could make a new request. But  Not done for now, sorry. – Joe (talk) 10:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mason7512

    So I can participate in the News Page Patrol January backlog drive. I have participated in a New Page Patrol drive before, and wish to help again. :) Mason7512 (talk) 01:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MimirIsSmart

    I would like to help out with the NPP backlog drive. I believe I fit all the minimum guidelines; I have a good knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies and sufficient experience with quality control processes, as I engage with the deletion process, especially PROD and CSD, whenever possible and I help out WikiProjects by writing new articles. I try my best to communicate in a civil manner with editors in communication. In the scenario I get approved for this, I strive to review pages and reduce the backlog strictly on a volunteer basis, to contribute greatly to Wikipedia by reviewing pages with this duty. MimirIsSmart (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yeshivish613

    There is a massive backlog which I would love to help out in! Yeshivish613 (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Snowycats

    I was previously a reviewer, hopeful to return now after illness. I'd like to get back into it, and already into the working again in AFC/vandalism. thanks! Snowycats (talk) 04:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:BoyTheKingCanDance

    I would very much like to remain a New Page Patroller, please, and to have the three-month period extended indefinitely. I greatly enjoy this aspect of being a Wikipedia editor, and believe that I have made a very positive contribution. In the three months since my NPP rights were last discussed, I have marked as reviewed several hundred pages, some of which I had to edit quite a bit to get them into appropriate shape and others which were created so well that they were really good without me having to do much or anything. I have of course reflected a lot on how best to go about this important task, and to minimize my errors and weak judgements. I am far more cautious than before, and consequently I have actually marked as reviewed far fewer pages per week than I did before. Indeed, when patrolling new pages, I often edit pages for hours each day without marking any at all as reviewed. I am demanding a higher standard in my own mind than hitherto. This does not mean that I have not made mistakes over the last few months. I am human and have made errors. I do not believe there have been many, however, and I consider my efforts to be reliable and trustworthy, but I am disappointed in myself for making any mistakes at all. The key here is that I try hard always to learn from them and not to repeat them. I am neither proud nor disputatious, and I try to treat all fellow editors with respect and pleasantness if they highlight any issue, and I do try to absorb and begin using any and all guidance that I receive. I respectfully ask my fellow editors to see that any errors over the last three months have been very few, and that by percentage of the pages I have edited or marked as reviewed, the errors are a tiny percent, thus establishing me as dependable and trustworthy. I have gratefully received several barnstars for my patrolling throughout this period. I repeat that I regret getting anything wrong at all and aim for zero errors. I am committed to this standard. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 10:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Barkeep49 (expires 12:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 10:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) After the ANI thread that caused BTKCD's right to be revoked, I raised concerns and Barkeep49 found them reasonable to give BTKCD a three-month trial reinstatement. I mentioned that during this time, I'd personally watch BTKCD's reviews myself. I am proud to say that he has improved especially based on the feedback he received back then. He used tags appropriately, responded to talk page messages, etc. These are things I'd personally love to see in NPPers. I am supporting the permanence of his NPP right. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Vrxces

    Managing the NPP backlog is something I've been doing for some time in terms of monitoring video game pages as part of WP:VG. I've been pretty extensively involved in managing drafts, particularly flagging and identifying drafts that do not meet WP:GNG or other reasons, and taking WP:DRAFTIFY, WP:PROD or WP:AFD actions for recently created articles that do not meet WP:GNG. I think the track record with WP:AFD is pretty solid even if it leans to deletionism a little. I've just realised I could be doing something more constructive and marking reviewed pages as well. Believe there was a one-month trial run I did in 2024. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Gauravs 51

    I’d like to request temporary NPP rights to participate in the January NPP drive. I have two years of editing experience and meet the criteria. Thank you! Gauravs 51 (talk) 15:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request — MusikBot talk 15:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lukewarmbeer

    I fit the basic criteria and I think I could make a contribution here. I have a fairly good idea of my limitations and will deal with them by passing on the more difficult new page decisions. I may trouble more experienced editors for guidance from time to time while I get up to speed but I'll be as self contained as possible. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 18:48, 3 January 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.


    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:Gwanki

    I request Pending Changes Reviewer rights to assist in reviewing edits. I have experience with editing and want to help maintain the quality of articles. Gwanki (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Freedoxm

    Hi. Recently, i've been reverting vandalism and disruptive edits on Wikipedia with Twinkle and Ultraviolet, and as an extended-confirmed user, I have over 850 edits. I also revert good faith edits, and if I get this request accepted I will be able to reject vandalism put on pending changes (on pending changes). 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 22:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Even if you're not pending changes reviewer, you can reject pending changes by reverting them. Pending changes reviewer, on the other hand, gives you the ability to accept changes. Rusty 🐈 14:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I already know that, and the reason why im really requesting this is to accept pending changes and to reject them at the same time. (forgot to put the acceptance part) 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 03:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mon Bhai

    I believe this could help me out with the current vandalism fighting I do that may involve pages with pending changes. I have read WP:RCP, and I have a good understanding of Wikipedia's P&Gs. Mon Bhai converse∫edits Mon Bhai (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Asteramellus

    Requesting Pending Changes reviewer permission - I am active editor for quite some time now and recently saw an alert for January New Page patrol backlog drive. I want to contribute to that, but thought I can start with Pending change reviewer first. I have a good understanding of wiki policies, and am continuing to familiarize myself with them. I have also read Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes#Criteria_to_receive_this_permission and understand expectations for both gaining the rights and performing the pending changes. Asteramellus (talk) 12:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Blitzkriegswunder

    I patrol recent changes on occasion and have split part of Mikhail Gorbachev into General secretaryship of Mikhail Gorbachev. I have reverted countless non-constructive edits and I think I have enough experience to be a pending changes reviewer. I have also reviewed the GAN of Kiruko and Mizo Chieftainship. Sangsangaplaz (Talk to me! I'm willing to help) 12:04, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User was just renamed to User:Blitzkriegswunder. ToadetteEdit (2025 is here) 11:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Fathoms Below (talk) 18:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ultraodan

    Hi. I've been editing wikipedia semi-actively when real life allows for almost 3 years and recently surpassed 1000 edits. I have fully read and understood everything linked at WP:PCCRITERIA. The main reason I think I am suited to having pending changes reviewer rights is because of my current project to clean up the backlog at CAT:ESP, CAT:EEP and in the future CAT:COIREQ. The work between those and proposed changed reviewing is very similar and would allow me to help there as well. Ultraodan (talk) 11:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mithilanchalputra7

    I was granted right for 60 days now I would like to renew it. Mithilanchalputra(Talk) 08:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Already done (automated response): This user already has the "reviewer" user right. — MusikBot talk 02:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ArtistPrime

    Have been a part of Wikipedia for a while now, usually contributing with proofreading, rewriting for clarity, updating data, removing inaccurate data, etc. With most of my contributions being of an editing nature (rather than creating something new), I think that being able to approve pending edits from others would allow me to contribute more. ArtistPrime (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 68 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 16:00, 2 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:NXcrypto

    I would like to request rollback rights to combat vandalism more efficiently. I am an experienced recent changes patroller and I understand that the rollback should be used mainly for clear cases of vandalism. I am committed to using this tool responsibly. Nxcrypto Message 12:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi NXcrypto, please undo Special:Diff/1265567139 and respond to Worldbruce's concern. It doesn't look like the worst kind of edit warring I've ever seen, but Worldbruce was concerned about it without being involved in the reverting, so you should probably take a moment to address their concerns instead of throwing them away. The edit summary of Special:Diff/1265564114 indicates that their primary concern is you not (yet?) using the article's talk page. If that's true, perhaps change it or announce that you are not longer interested and disengage from the conflict. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Reverted and replied on both venues, talk page[5] and article talk page.[6] Thanks. Nxcrypto Message 00:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lemonademan22

    I previously asked for rollback rights back in November but was turned down with the reason given was I need more experience first. I'm here two months later to once again ask for rollback rights as it would make what I do a lot easier. Although I don't edit Wikipedia purely to revert vandalism, I come across my fair share of it or unsourced claims and stuff to that degree that need reverting. So I am once again asking for rollback rights as I took the previous advice on board. Lemonademan22 (talk) 6:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([7]). — MusikBot talk 10:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. This is not what Rollback is for. Take a moment to read Wikipedia:Rollback and if that's what you would like to do, you can then check out the Counter Vandalism Unit to learn more. Rollback is only for reverting obvious vandalism—unsourced additions should be undone with an edit summary. Malinaccier (talk) 14:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Patrick_Welsh

    I edit mostly in academic philosophy and closely adjacent areas. Twinkle is adequate for the vandalism that I encounter in articles on my watchlist. I read Wikipedia more broadly, however, and might be more active in assisting with general anti-vandalism efforts with the help of tools such as Huggle that make this easier to do, but which require rollback privileges to use (this would be the case especially if any of them make it easier to do in a responsible way on a tablet, rather than at the desktop I use for regular editing). I've been bitten as a newbie, and am alert lest I do this to anyone else. Wikipedia's coverage of the humanities is, to put it generously, uneven. On the few occasions I've encountered someone new with obvious subject-matter expertise who is making problematic, but good-faith edits, I have made a deliberate effort to welcome them, offer information, and protect them from more aggressive defenders of guidelines and policies (who might turn them off Wikipedia before they even have a chance to learn the basics, which are in some ways quite at odds with academic norms). This is just to say that I will, of course, use manual reverts with edit descriptions and talk pages, rather than rollback or anything requiring it, except in cases of blatant vandalism or persistent abuse by editors who disregard clear and polite notices of issues with their edits. Thank you for your consideration, Patrick (talk) 03:29, 3 January 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:Abhiramakella

    Can I work on the {{Infobox game score}} template by adding the tooltips to the table headers corresponding to the quarters and overtimes, just like how they are implemented in {{Infobox American football game}}? I also did this in {{Americanfootballbox}}. I promise this will be really quick. Abhiramakella (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. As I said at this discussion, you do not meet all of the criteria, and gaming the system to try and boost your stats is not a good look. You have submitted an edit request, and there is no rush to get it implemented. Please be patient. Primefac (talk) 07:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1181725208"