Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

"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 05:00, 9 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: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]

    User:Pseud 14

    Meets the minimum criteria, and the majority of their creations have passed a quality content review. It's been a little bit since the last creation, but I believe this editor has demonstrated enough familiarity with the policies and guidelines surrounding new articles that input from NPP will not be needed in the future. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cmacauley

    Cmacauley has been an editor since 2007, meets all the required criteria, and would likely benefit from having the AP right granted. This editor currently has 59 live articles and has only had one article deleted. They have consistently produced well-referenced, high-quality articles, with the majority receiving B-class ratings. Wikipedialuva (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Anon423

    I've been around for some time, am quite familiar with tough conversations at the Teahouse or IRC (though I've sadly been inactive at the latter for a while) with new editors excitedly pushing their (often promotional) new articles, and do occasionally write new articles, 53 so far. I might as well not clutter the new pages queue. — Anon423 (talk) 01:51, 9 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:Evolt

    Primarily grammar and typo editing Evolt (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TinaLees-Jones

    I plan to replace the publisher (in Chinese) in some of the book sources with the corresponding English articles. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 12:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ubcule

    Reduce amount of manual work in updating links (including, in this case, Superia to Superia (comics)) Ubcule (talk) 19:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aluxosm

    This would mostly be used for adding and fixing wikilinks related to the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) task force. I had started to write a userscript to help me out but this looks to be a far easier way of achieving the same thing. Aluxosm (talk) 00:19, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Kaffet i halsen

    Use AWB for standard typos, citations and WP:KARLSRUHER. Rights granted in April 2023 but lost due to inactivity. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had their access to AutoWikiBrowser automatically revoked ([1]). — MusikBot talk 15:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done. Primefac (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cameremote

    I'm requesting an auto-wiki to reduce the manual work involved in updating links. I do a lot of mini-edits, and they typically take a long time. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 20:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done Wikipedia editing is not a race. I'm not willing to grant access to AWB to someone who has set themselves a goal of making 30,000+ edits by the end of 2025 as you said on a different permission request - that seems like a very clear recipe for the use of automated tools without sufficient care. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Nedia020415

    My reason for having autowikibrowser is to do typo editing. Ned1a Wanna talk? 00:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done Fails minimum criteria. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Matanb

    Reason for requesting autowikibrowser rights.

    I have used AWB before and found it practical to correct spelling errors. I think I then used it only (mainly?) on Swedish Wikipedia and that is what I plan to do in the future as well. And I think I will use it primarily on such misspellings that are common in the swedish language. In that case the AWB tool is much more handy than doing it with no help at all.

    Thanks in advance. Matanb (talk) 13:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC) Matanb (talk) 13:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done This page only controls access to use AWB on the English Wikipedia. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:02, 9 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.

    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 600 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: Foucault pendulum, Water metering, Smart meter, and Gas meter. 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 ([2]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([3]). — 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 a decision not to reassign the Extended Confirmed rights would be 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 and Star Mississippi. 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:Scratchinghead

    @OhNoItsJamie removed my access to EC because i made a quite a few test edits and said if i made 100 constructive edits, i would gain it back, and so im asking for it, if not its fine i guess   SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 10:16, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 10:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Zabezt

    Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights Hello! A few weeks ago my extended-confirmed protection was removed for breaking WP:PGAME, I sincerely apologize for this, I was impatient and I had no knowledge of the rules existence at the time. I’ve done ~50-80 dummy edits on my sandbox, and have done over 500 cheat-free edits since. Zabezt (talk) 02:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([5]). — MusikBot talk 02:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Gish1991

    Hello! I would like to request the ability to be able to translate pages from Spanish to English and English to Spanish. I overwrote almost an entire page about some Smashing Pumpkins demo tapes, and I wanted to translate it into English as well since there was only one page and it was in Spanish. However I don't have 500 edits, and I can't seem to achieve it. I made a Wikipedia account to edit and share my knowledge with other SP fans who speak Spanish and are looking for more, updated info, as I'm fluent in both. Therefore I'd like to request this ability because I want to devote my time to translating on Wikipedia. I have three drafts so far and would really like to publish them. Thanks! Gish1991 (talk) 07:49, 9 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:Steven Crossin

    I’m returning and previously held this role as part of my work to move images to Commons. Could I have this restored, please? Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 18:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Already done (automated response): This user already has the "filemover" user right. — MusikBot talk 18:10, 6 January 2025 (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: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]
      Request withdrawn Too much backlog here. — voidxor 13:57, 6 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 ([6]). — 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]
      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply. signed, Rosguill talk 19:08, 8 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]

    Thank you for your interest in this permission and your past work. Unfortunately, upon reviewing your last trial run, there were a number of examples of pages where you accepted a page that would later be deleted, as well as cases where obvious COI/UPE was not flagged. I would be willing to confer an additional trial run after you get some more experience participating at AfD. For now,   Not done. signed, Rosguill talk 19:21, 8 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]

      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply signed, Rosguill talk 20:02, 8 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]

    Thank you for your contributions and your interest in this permission. Unfortunately, I don't see any past experience at WP:AFD or other article deletion processes, and some of your recent article creations (particularly Gateshead Hebrew Congregation and Zanvil Weinberger) themselves fall short of clearly-demonstrating that they meet notability guidelines. Please gain some more experience with notability and deletion guidelines and processes before reapplying.   Not done for now. signed, Rosguill talk 19:25, 8 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]

    Not seeing any issues with past work,   Done signed, Rosguill talk 20:04, 8 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 ([7]). — 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]
      Done signed, Rosguill talk 20:11, 8 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]

      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply. signed, Rosguill talk 20:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:RedactedHumanoid

    I want to help with the backlog, as well as an overall desire to help contribute to Wikipedia in any way I can. I meet the edit number and account age requirements, and I have created about 20-25 articles (only two of which were deleted). RedactedHumanoid (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply signed, Rosguill talk 20:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aqurs1

    Reason for requesting new page reviewer rights: I would like to help with the NPP work. Aqurs1 (talk) 07:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply signed, Rosguill talk 20:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SunloungerFrog

    I've been an active editor for just over three months, principally trying to help with unreferenced articles as part of WP:URA. During that time I've dealt with a number of unreferenced articles that were quite new, and would like to help with the new articles backlog more formally as part of NPP. SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done for 1 month as a trial run, after which you may reapply signed, Rosguill talk 20:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Miminity

    I know this is a bit too early but I was granted an extension for NPP trial on October and it was about to expire on the 25th. I am hoping for an extension or maybe a permanent one. Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Joe Roe (expires 00:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 07:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done, track record thus far looks good. signed, Rosguill talk 20:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hounaam

    Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

    I kindly request the "New Page Reviewer" permission. I was previously granted "Autopatrolled" status based on my contributions as a writer and editor, and the granting administrator encouraged me to consider applying for this role.

    I now feel prepared to take on the responsibilities of reviewing new pages alongside my current duties as an "Autopatrolled" user, particularly in my areas of expertise: Iran, the Persian language, and the Persianate world. I am committed to upholding Wikipedia’s standards and collaborating with fellow editors to maintain the quality of new articles.

    Thank you for considering my request.

    Best regards, Hounaam Hounaam (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done as a trial run, after which you may reapply. signed, Rosguill talk 20:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Pizzaonpineapple

    I would like to be a new page reviewer, i am trying my best to continuously check new pages and fix issues with them and i believe a new page reviewer will help me review these pages apart from just fixing them, there is a huge backlog of unreviewed pages and I'm sure that i will be of good help in reviewing! Pizza on Pineapple🍕 (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 100 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 13:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pizzaonpineapple   Not done. You only have 112 edits to articles and two contributions to deletion discussions, which is not enough to establish a solid track record. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     19:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Pupusareawesome

    Hello, I want to be a new page reviewer because I work hard to share information to the public and make it easier for more people to find information about a topics that there are interested in and hide the things that are incorrect or just aren't true, and help the truth to be showed first when you search it, abd help for the truth will always show up first. Pupusareawesome (talk) 18:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for your contributions and your interest in this permission. Unfortunately, I'm not seeing quite enough experience with the relevant guidelines and policies. In particular, you have not participated in any deletion process, you had an article WP:A7 speedy deleted just a few months ago at Serbian dancing lady, and several of your recent article creations fail to demonstrate a strong understanding of how to identify RS for creating an article and properly format references. Please build up more experience in these areas before reapplying.   Not done for now. signed, Rosguill talk 20:29, 8 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.

    User:CommunityNotesContributor

    Have participated in handful of RMs in past year, as well as at MRV. I've only come to RMTR once, but otherwise would be useful for disambiguation purposes. As I often create the disambig first, in order to justify a page moving away from ptopic; this often leaves me with having to swap the disambig page with the redirect and visa versa afterwards, when I simply need to perform a swap. I've otherwise closed RMs before, and would probably close more that aren't too controversial, but am often restricted due to the need to overwrite a redirect. CNC (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Leaning towards no, mainly on account of a lack of demonstrated need, but willing to be overruled or persuaded otherwise. Primefac (talk) 19:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As an example; I'd be able to close this RM if there is no consensus, as I did the previous that lacked consensus, but I wouldn't be able to if there was consensus. The one I closed had sat in the backlog for almost two months. CNC (talk) 19:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Steven Crossin

    I previously completed many XFD discussions as a non-admin which resulted in the use of this user right for round robin deletions, and have shown good use of it before. I understand it’s been a while since I’ve been back, so wondering if this can be restored as I intend to complete this work again. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 18:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done; welcome back! Let me know if you also want autopatrolled or NPR back. charlotte 👸♥ 20:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that would be great if you could. Time to dust off the shovel and get cleaning again! Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 21:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hameltion

    Hi, I find myself not infrequently asking at RM/TR to move drafts over existing redirects with bits of history; I'd appreciate being able to do that myself. I also like taking in part in RMs and would like to be able to help with more than just the easiest closes. Thanks. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 18:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Not seeing a huge need but do agree there is a fair amount of RM and RM/TR experience. Short trial is probably on the table, will think on it. Primefac (talk) 19:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Intrisit

    I've been requesting occasional, regular and errant page moves at RMTR ever since I either created this account or achieved the extended-confirmed threshold. After 30 months of existence and persistence and in this new year, I'm ready to take the next step and have this right for a start as I can have an impact on this encyclopaedia. Intrisit (talk) 20:05, 7 January 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: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]

      Not done You do have a lot of experience, but I'm not really seeing relevant experience as it relates to what this tool is for. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 22:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TheAstorPastor

    I am requesting this to assist with reviewing edits. I am fairly active on this platform and occasionally handle edit requests. I have made significant contributions to articles, including List of things named after Julius Caesar, which I have nominated for FL. I have also participated in some AFDs and believe that I am eligible for this. The AP (talk) 10:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done Beeblebrox Beebletalks 22:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cameremote

    As a relatively new Wikipedia editor, I quickly grasped the core principles and ideology of the encyclopedia. With over 500 edits and several articles created, I have made steady progress, and at my current editing rate, I project to reach 30,000+ edits by the end of 2025. The Pending Changes Reviewer privilege would provide me an opportunity to my broaden efforts against page vandalism and ensure accurate, stable, and reliable content. I sincerely appreciate rejections or acceptance given my understanding, however, please endeavor to leave any explanation if you deem it fit to reject. Cameremote (talk) I came from a remote place 15:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done Some of your recent edits give me serious doubts that you are ready for any sort of advanced permissions. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 22:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JurassicClassic767

    It works in tandem with reverting vandalism and it can be a good alternative for tackling possible vandalism or content that's not appropriate for Wikipedia. I'm already familiar with vandalism policy and handling inappropriate edits as I'm a rollbacker. Additionally, I'm very familiar with Wikipedia's content policy, given that I've been editing for around 5 years now. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 21:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done Beeblebrox Beebletalks 22:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tenebre.Rosso.Sangue995320

    As I also do recent changes patrolling, having this permission will extemeley help me with combatting vandals, as edits requesting review can be viewed on the Recent Changes page, which will help me.


    Thanks, Tenebre_Rosso_Sangue, Editing with SSStyle! Call for Medic! My Stats! 23:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Closed Limelike Curves

    I know this may come as a bit of a shock, but I'd like to request the "pending changes reviewer" permission so that I can review some pending changes. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 05:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TrueMoriarty

    My sole purpose of editing or the desire to review edits is for the wellbeing of Wikipedia. I made a few pages and made 1300+ edits. I believe in quality not quantity. TrueMoriarty (talk) 17:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ampil

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

    Note: The bot becoming silly, and marking as already done.

    Hello I'm Ampil. The right set to expire 12 days. I've received a award. and I'm a AfC reviewer. ~🌀 Ampil 「💬 / 📝」 04:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Already done (automated response): This user already has the "reviewer" user right. — MusikBot talk 05:00, 9 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[8] and article talk page.[9] Thanks. Nxcrypto Message 00:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:55, 6 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]

    Patrick Welsh, thank you very much for requesting this permission, and for the calm, thoughtful request. For a permission that allows you to undo a series of edits with one click that is granted only on request because its overuse is so tempting, there's not a better application one could file. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done happily ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tenebre.Rosso.Sangue995320

    I have been patrolling the recent changes page for a long time now, and it's pretty much the only thing I do on here (other then occasional copyediting.) When I learned about rollback and its benefits, I thought that could be a huge help for me and patrolling against vandalism. I love patrolling, and this will make my life so much easier.

    Thanks, Tenebre_Rosso_Sangue, Editing with SSStyle! Call for Medic! My Stats! 20:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Tenebre.Rosso.Sangue995320, is there something in the Simple Wikipedia you may like to reconsider? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you mean? ive only done 2 edits to the simple wikipedia
    1 to the ultrakill page
    2 to my user page Tenebre_Rosso_Sangue, Editing with SSStyle! Call for Medic! My Stats! 01:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    oh wait i know what you mean. ill change that. @ToBeFree Tenebre_Rosso_Sangue, Editing with SSStyle! Call for Medic! My Stats! 01:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Done, i just copy n' pasted my userpage from the main wikipedia over to the simple. Tenebre_Rosso_Sangue, Editing with SSStyle! Call for Medic! My Stats! 15:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:John

    Hi there. I was an admin for years but lot my bit through inactivity. I do a fair bit of anti-vandalism work and regaining this right would save me a few clicks. John (talk) 13:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Of course! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Steven Crossin

    Previously I held rollback before my departure as part of my anti-vandalism work, so hoping for this to be restored. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Already done (automated response): This user already has the "rollbacker" user right. — MusikBot talk 18:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done by Acalamari (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:19, 6 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:Steven Crossin

    Hi there, I had the user right previously (see my user rights log. I’m back to Wikipedia so hoping to have this right restored, my return was prompted by a TFD and I’d like to make sure it’s not in use and modify the source template if required (if some of my other user rights could be restored at the same time that’d be appreciated). Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 17:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC) \[reply]

      Done and welcome back. Didn't expect to see your name appear in my watchlist! Acalamari 18:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I know, it’s been absolutely forever, but alas I got an email and it prompted me to decide to return again! I’ll pop a request over for the other bits and pieces if that’s OK too. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 18:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course it's okay - I already switched back on some of them for you :) Acalamari 18:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1181725208"
      NODES
    Chat 2
    design 1
    Done 45
    eth 3
    News 1
    orte 1
    see 25
    Story 7
    Users 40