Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-confirmed-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 16:50, 27 April 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:CherryPie94

    New page reviewer who has made over 90 articles including 1 good article and quite familiar with content guidelines, I may also as well not clutter the backlog for other reviewers. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 06:06, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    One thing that immediately jumped out at me is some biographical articles created (e.g. Kim Na and Son Se-bin) have unsourced biographical information, such as the date of birth. This information should be sourced to ensure compliance with WP:DOB. - Aoidh (talk) 03:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've considered adding references directly next to DOB, which I did at my two most recent BLPs: Mike Kim and Lee Joon-ho. If birth information is not 100% verifiable, I play it safe (eg. Lee Seung-yoon). Per WP:DOB, links to websites maintained by the subject are generally permitted so I included Kim Na's personal website which states birth year as 1986 in the external links section. I created Son Se-bin over 5 years ago when I was much less experienced, so I don't quite recall which exact source I used for DOB (birth year seems to have been present in Star Today), so I've just amended that. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 04:22, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah I've misinterpreted that personal website policy, though it does fall under WP:ABOUTSELF, I've now also directly sourced it. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 04:39, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Kjansen86

    I am autopatrolled and an NPP reviewer; I would actually like to nominate User:Kjansen86 to be autopatrolled. I just reviewed and cheerfully accepted almost a dozen perfectly-formulated articles on Zoroastrian texts, and they have made more than 25 overall. Looking at their talk page, this appears to be an experienced and effective editor. Checking their AfD stats, I find one (successful) AfD that they initiated, indicating an awareness of notability. We may as well take them out of the NPP backlog. (This is my first time nominating someone else so if I did it wrong, please let me know!) ~ L 🌸 (talk) 21:17, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoreviewer" user right. — MusikBot talk 21:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @LEvalyn: I went ahead and adjusted the nomination so it reflects who's actually being discussed, hope you don't mind! For future reference, you can use the "add request" link at the top of this page and replace the {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} with whichever user you're nominating. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, I really appreciate your fix for this nomination and your tip for next time! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 23:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @LEvalyn: Thank you very much for the positive evaluation of my work on Wikipedia. I really appreciate it. Kjansen86 (talk) 08:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:-Verso-

    78 live articles, (64 of which is start class, 5 Cs, 8 Stubs). Only one was deleted which is from 2018. All of the articles are well-sourced. I think this user is good enough for Autopatrolled Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 04:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hteiktinhein

    Hello, I have created over 30 articles, none of which have been deleted. I am well-versed in Wikipedia's notability guidelines and currently assist new Burmese editors. I focus on creating articles related to Myanmar that need to be written, including those covering current events. Granting me autopatrolled rights would help reduce the backlog of articles awaiting review. Feel free to ping me if you have any questions. Thank you for your consideration. Hteiktinhein (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Fade258

    Hello Admin! I have been regularly creating articles and I'm also familiar with WP:AUTOPAT and Wikipedia policies. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MerlinVtwelve

    Hallo! I've created 46 articles, and have been editing Wikipedia since 2010. How time flies! merlinVtwelve (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Phantomdj

    Hi, I have created 118 pages and would like to have autopatrol rights, please. Thanks. Phantomdj (talk) 01:46, 26 April 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:Tylermack999

    Looking to experiment with automated/plugin-assisted editing Tylermack999 (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Any specific task in mind? This request is kind of vague. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:00, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Tylermack999: * Pppery * it has begun... 14:19, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems I’ve misunderstood the use cases of AWB. I thought it was able to help with single articles, but it seems more for larger-scale editing than I intended. I may come back to it later but for now it’s no longer a goal of mine. Tylermack999 (talk) 15:38, 27 April 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:Arc Rev

    Good day,

    As a new editor, I am eager to contribute by editing articles without distractions and addressing vandalism. However, due to the autoconfirmed status restriction, I am currently unable to access those pages.

    I would appreciate it if you could review my contributions to assess whether I am qualified to hold these rights. Thank you for your time and consideration. Arc Rev (talk) 05:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done – Hi, and thank you for creating an account to edit Wikipedia. Although I fully understand your desire to dive right in, many of our articles are semi-protected because they are controversial, prone to vandalism, or other reasons. As a new editor with few edits, it might be wise to discuss your edits on the article talkpage in order to gain consensus for your edits, and then use {{Edit semi-protected}} to request the edit be performed. I only recommend this until you are used to the challenges of reliable sources, the biographies of living persons policy, and other similar policies. The good news is that fewer than 5 percent of Wikipedia articles are protected; this means that more than 95 percent of the articles can use your help right now! You will also automatically be confirmed in two more days, and I don't see a valid reason to bypass that waiting period. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     17:33, 26 April 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:Tashmetu

    I had my EC revoked last year by the arbitration committee. I have since completed the required 500 substantial edits to the best of my knowledge. I applied about a month ago and was refused because I didn't clearly understand the requirements. But hopefully this time I got it correctly. Tashmetu (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2025 (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 14:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Xaosflux hey, sorry for tagging you. I just noticed you are the only active admin on this thread and I was wondering if you can look into my request or let me know who I can contact to have it looked at. Tashmetu (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Tashmetu, the ArbCom remedy requires that Tashmetu shows that they have made 500 substantive edits; all I can see is a statement that you did. While I think it doesn't mean you have to provide a list of all the contributions (that would be hard to review and pointlessly redundant to the full list), I personally think you should explain at least in some detail how you improved the encyclopedia since the revocation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair point, I assumed there would be some process for this but I will do my best to explian. So I have worked mostly on the history side of Wikipedia, contributing to the "years in France" series and "years in Iraq " series, writing articles, adding details, events, and references. I have a huge library of history books so I thought that's the best use of my resources. I also try to create and enrich pages of notable Iraqi figures, though not as often because it's harder to find reliable sources for these. One of the issues I ran into while editing Iraqi history pages, because they are more recent, is the continuous topics keep coming up, like it's hard to talk about Iraq in the 90s without mentioning Kurdistan! This one of the reasons I would appreciate having my confirmation reinstated. Tashmetu (talk) 16:20, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:IdanST

    I had my ECP revoked 5 months ago. Since then, I've made hundreds of meaningful edits and currently have 806 edits. IdanST (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([3]). — MusikBot talk 18:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello IdanST, please describe the meaningful edits and what you'd like to use the permission for. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, some of the edits I've made were focused on tidying up articles, such as List of snipers (you can check the history). These edits involved a major overhaul: adding sources, removing false or unsourced information, and fixing sentence structures. I've also made substantial edits to other articles, such as Embraer C-390 Millennium (you can check the history), Tilhas Tizi Gesheften, Oradour-sur-Glane massacre, Ayi Silva Kangani, alongside dozens of other articles where I've made meaningful, though not as extensive, contributions.
    You should be aware that most of these edits are the result of my work translating articles to the HE Wikipedia, as you can see here. Since my ECP was revoked, I’ve translated over a hundred articles. While reading the English articles before translating them into Hebrew, I also fix any mistakes or make improvements wherever I see the need. IdanST (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jlktutu

    I had my EC revoked because of gaming of the system. I believe this happened March 22, 2025. Since then, I have attempted to edit constructively on Wikipedia. I want to see if there is a way that I can get EC. Thanks again

     Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 05:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Jlktutu, please describe how you have constructively edited since the revocation and what you'd like to use the permission for. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe that I have made over 1000 edits. However, I do want to put the edits in context. The vast majority of them have been Anti-Vandal. Have also made some other edits, such as one to the Article on Bitcoin. I do want to see if I can contribute to Articles that are EC protected. Especially when there’s something in the news that means the Article ought to be edited. For example, and I am not mentioning this for any special reason, Article on Jerusalem. I would have gotten EC if there was no gaming of the system. I have, however, attempted to become better. Hope I made sense and answered your questions. Thanks again. Jlktutu (talk) 04:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The Jerusalem article seems like an odd choice given that it is the most contested city on the planet and probably in the top 10 most controversial and difficult articles to edit out of the ~7 million English articles. Are you planning to change something there that won't be immediately reverted by one of the 1000+ page watchers? Sean.hoyland (talk) 12:59, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I am not. In fact, it has nothing to do with that Article specifically. I was only using it as an example. I plan on making edits that will not have a need to be reverted Jlktutu (talk) 19:14, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ofirius

    Alt Account saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 11:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    For which purpose? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:48, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ToBeFree Sorry, I did'nt notify. I've made it to edit on public computers. saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 10:30, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm. Your public computer account would then have the same permissions as the main account. The only purpose I can see then is to keep an account in case one is compromised. I will grant extended confirmation if you insist, but I think you should consider enabling two-factor authentication and leaving your public account as unprivileged as possible. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:02, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ophyrius: Can you confirm whether you still want the extended-confirmed permission for the Ofirius account in light of ToBeFree's advice above? Mz7 (talk) 19:49, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mz7 Because of the advice, I would like this request of mine to be  Withdrawn. Thanks for using your precious time to reply to my request. saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs⚔ 11:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Chathirathan

    to translate important pages available in Tamil language to English Chathirathan (talk) 10:29, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Already done (automated response): This user already has the "extendedconfirmed" user right. — MusikBot talk 10:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sir, I am unable do to translation from my Tamil to English due to error in Initial Translation where the translation tools are not available. Thank you Chathirathan (talk) 06:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not something we can help diagnose or fix on this page; I'd suggest asking on WT:CXT or WP:VPT. stwalkerster (talk) 13:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:LovecJO

    Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights: I would like to transalte some articles fron english to czech. LovecJO (talk) 14:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    • translate
    LovecJO (talk) 14:52, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done. While the content translation tool is indeed restricted to extended-confirmed editors on the English Wikipedia, it's use on the English Wikipedia is for translating articles into English. As you want to translate articles from English you'd need to do the work on the Czech Wikipedia instead, and extended-confirmed on the English Wikipedia will have no impact on what you can do on the Czech Wikipedia. stwalkerster (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:$govindsinghbabhan$

    Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights: I want to contribute my knowledge and will for editing good articles. Also I will try to find more reliable sources. $govindsinghbabhan$ (talk) 23:24, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. This permission is almost never granted early. Once you have made 500 edits, you will automatically get this permission. (And it is pretty much only removed if you use trivial edits to gain the permission.) JensonSL (SilverLocust) 01:32, 27 April 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:Velella

    I am informed by a courteous bot that my extendedmover rights expire in a few days. This is a useful capability especially for correcting article titles that do not conform to WP:MOS and to move Draft young articles which are unsourced but capable of improvement. Thanks  Velella  Velella Talk   20:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Velella Are you asking for filemover or extendedmover? Your request is in the section for file mover. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     17:13, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:HurricaneEdgar

    Hi, I’d like to request the file mover right. This will allow me to correct myself in case I upload a non-free image, especially for pages related to Ahmed al-Sharaa. I’ve read the file mover policy, and I’m also a file mover on Wikimedia Commons. HurricaneEdgar 13:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     17:35, 26 April 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:Rahmatula786

    I am reapplying for the new page reviewer role after my initial request was declined because now I realize I had applied prematurely. Since then, I have gained some experience, refined my understanding of Wikipedia’s policies, and have been actively contributing to the Articles for Creation (AfC) review process. This has not only strengthened my ability to assess new articles but has also given me useful experience in engaging constructively with editors.

    I am well-versed with Wikipedia’s guidelines, particularly regarding notability, verifiability, and neutrality. My strength is my ability to remain unbiased while reviewing, and I always strive to improve by learning from my mistakes. Though my registered account is only a few months old, I have been editing Wikipedia for a long time, which has given me substantial familiarity with its norms and regulations.

    I have been enjoying reviewing AfC drafts, and this experience has encouraged me to take on a more active role in maintaining Wikipedia’s quality. I now feel myself confident that I can handle this responsibility and would greatly appreciate the opportunity to contribute as a new page reviewer.

    Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Rahmatula786 (talk) 17:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([5]). — MusikBot talk 17:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rahmatula786: What do you mean by though my registered account is only a few months old, I have been editing Wikipedia for a long time – did you have another account before this one? – Joe (talk) 08:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No Sir, Before creating this account, I used to edit Wikipedia anonymously and made various contributions. However, after realizing the benefits of having a registered account, I created this one and have since been actively editing and contributing regularly. Rahmatula786 (talk) 09:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) Why did you reject this submission?[6] topic is notable.. it's seems you don't have knowledge about notability guidelines. Hellorld4 (talk) 01:10, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have replied on your talk page. Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:09, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Junbeesh

    I would like to request NPR rights to contribute more effectively to this area and help reduce the backlog at NPP. I have created 18 articles and have been actively involved in patrolling new pages, tagging non-notable and promotional content for CSD and AfD. Many of the articles I have nominated for CSD or AfD have been deleted, which I believe reflects my understanding of Wikipedia's notability and content policies. With NPR rights, I will be able to continue this work more efficiently. I am familiar with relevant guidelines and policies and would appreciate the opportunity to help out in this area. Thanks for your time and consideration! Junbeesh (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for 3 months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Upjav

    I've been an editor for a while and have experience in article creation (mainly on the shorter side for more niche areas with fewer sources) and have a few DYKs under my belt. Think my knowledge of policy demonstrated through this makes me a good fit for these permissions. Upjav (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    As a further note, I'd like to review new pages. Upjav (talk) 02:17, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Just out of pure morbid interest - you reviewed the first page I created back in 2014! Did it all work differently back then or something - like not needing the reviewer right? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:42, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yooooooooooo that's awesome! It didn't require a permission back then (this became a thing in Oct 2016), and I think I was inactive in page review around that time so I didn't notice and didn't apply. Most of what I do is article creation in niche areas, so I haven't bothered to apply. Upjav (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, you left a kind word with your review back then and it's stuck with me since, so you were clearly doing NPP right!!! :) Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done for 1 month. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:16, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JustARandomEditor123

    I wish to apply for New Page Reviewer permissions to deal with the large backlog of unreviewed pages. I have participated in many AfD discussions, which proves my understanding of Wikipedia's content policies and notability guidelines. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @JustARandomEditor123, can you comment on Draft:Tarana Quarry railway station and how your understanding your notability has changed since then (ideally ditto for Litophyton columnaris). Sohom (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    After the article on Tarana Quarry railway station was moved to the draftspace for not having enough references (only 1 source was present at the time), I learned that articles required multiple reliable, independent sources that go into detail about the topic were required to demonstrate notability, leading to the draft now having 6 references to meet WP:GNG. As for the Litophyton columnaris article, I learned that articles that have been created in another language version of Wikipedia should only be translated if they meet the notability requirements of English Wikipedia, and should not be translated through machine-generated means such as Google Translate. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 09:00, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Itemirus

    Hi, I am a quite experienced Wikipedia editor and pending changes reviewer; I may contribute in this field as well. Itemirus (talk) 15:00, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done, with very little recent activity and very little to no AFD/CSD or PRoD work, I don't think I can justify giving the right here even if you've been around for a while. Sohom (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yutsi

    I have significant experience patrolling new pages from years ago. I have re-familiarized myself with content policies and would like to resume. — yutsi (talk) 01:58, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Done, I've given it for a trial of approx 3 months, mostly so that there is a check-in period, for us, given how much the notability policies have changed since you were active. Overall, no concerns. Sohom (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mekomo

    I have temporary NPP right which will expire in few days, I kindly request renewal of this right to continue reviewing articles. Thank you. Mekomo (talk) 14:33, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 28 March 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 14:40, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rosguill do you want this one? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    HJ Mitchell I’m generally fine with other admins reviewing track records for people whom I conferred trial runs to (and arguably the extra set of eyes is a good thing). My activity has been rather inconsistent lately in particular due to other demand on my time so I would expect others to step in more signed, Rosguill talk 22:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done for further 3 month trial. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:53, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CSMention269

    I am an AFC reviewer asking for another trial or permanent permission for this flag. Last time, it was granted by @Sohom Datta: for a 2-month trial after the first month trial was successful. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔) 04:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Sohom Datta (expires 00:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 04:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd like somebody that is not me to take a look at this request. Sohom (talk) 22:39, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Moritoriko

    Hello, I have 1 denied applied about a month ago because I didn't have 500 undeleted Main space edits at the time. I now have 501 so I am reapplying for temporary permissions. I have a decent amount of experience going through AfDs and source searching to check if they are notability. Moritoriko (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([7]). — MusikBot talk 06:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:AstrooKai

    I would like to expand my contributions to Wikipedia by helping address the extensive backlog at NPP. I have been an active participant in the AfC process as a probationary reviewer for multiple months, and I regularly take part in AfDs and occasionally in PRODs within the scope of WP:PHILIPPINES. While I understand that my impact on the backlog may not be significant in terms of numbers, I am committed to performing thorough, policy-aligned reviews to the best of my ability. AstrooKai (Talk) 19:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for 3 months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:27, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yoblyblob

    I had a trial permission to manage redirects close to a year ago, if I remember correctly. I did not have time for the back half of that trial, but have more time now. I have noticed how large the article backlog is and would try to work on lowering that, since I am finding myself with a lot more free time on here. Generally think I have a good past experience with AfD, not as much as some, but understand most guidelines well. May leave some more questionable pages up for a different reviewer, but have a good record adding categories and WikiProjects on my own article. Lots of my current pages are election pages or football pages, so might lean more into reviewing those since I am most familiar with those guidelines. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months Sohom (talk) 22:16, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:QEnigma

    Hello, I was granted temporary New page reviewer rights on 14 January 2025 ([8]) for a period of two months and again on 20 March ([9]) for an additional month. This current period is due to expire on 20 April. I would appreciate it if these rights could be extended and made permanent. Thank you. QEnigma talk 05:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 05:20, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Sohom (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cinder painter

    I was granted temporary New Page Reviewer rights for one month, which expire on 20 April. During this period, I carefully completed a reasonable number of reviews (of pages of various topics), including reviewing and tagging new pages with banners, draftifying, requesting speedy deletions, and creating AfDs. While reviewing new pages, I often searched for additional reliable sources and added them to the articles I was reviewing, to ensure that they were not lacking significant coverage references. It was time-consuming, but I felt it was a good thing to do. Therefore, I kindly ask to review my NPP work and, if it's ok, consider granting me permanent NPP rights. Cinder painter (talk) 07:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 07:40, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Sohom (talk) 22:12, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Afonso Dimas Martins

    I believe I meet most criteria. Plus I already review scientific articles irl, so I would say I have some experience on reviewing in general. Here to help where needed. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) @Afonso Dimas Martins: It appears that you don't have any AFD votes. I suggest try to engage yourself with WP:AFD. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:40, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not as much interested in deletion, rather on creation. This was a request to become a reviewer of new articles after all, not a judge of articles that need to be deleted. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 15:42, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Afonso Dimas Martins: NPP is about reviewing if article is good enough (i.e. notable enough) for wikipedia. AFD votes are proof that you are aware and know what is or is not for Wikipedia. Plus, knowing AFD is part of the criterion for granting Have a good knowledge of content policies and guidelines and an understanding of quality control processes. This is typically demonstrated by prior participation in one or a combination of the following areas: The deletion processes, i.e. AfD, PROD, and CSD. This is base on my own experience as a once got decline due to lacking AFD votes. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:55, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Afonso Dimas Martins If this helps, Wikipedia has its own arcane set of standards for what topics can be included -- it doesn't always even matter what text is in the article, just whether reliable sources exist talking about it (see the general notability guideline). Essentially, there is a requirement that you have experience arguing about whether articles meet the criteria before you are able to mark new pages as reviewed, which means among other things you think they meet the criteria. Mrfoogles (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you both @Miminity and @Mrfoogles for your response. It wasn't clear for me this should be a criteria for reviewers, but it makes sense. I will keep an eye on the AfD backlog and see where I can contribute. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ambrosiawater

    Hello, I was given the New Page Reviewer rights as a one-month trial. This permission will expire on 20 April 2025. During this time, I have been doing active reviewing of new pages and learning more about notability, reliable sources, and the CSD/PROD/AfD process. I tried always to be careful and make constructive reviews. I really want to keep helping with this work. So I would like to ask if possible to renew or give the reviewer rights permanently, depending on my work this last month. Thanks a lot for your time and consideration. Ambrosiawater (talk) 09:56, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 10:00, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Old-AgedKid

    I've been active on Wikipedia for over two years, during which I've created 130+ articles, with 1 being deleted. I've also participated in numerous AfD discussions, been active as an AfC reviewer, and have a profound understanding of Wikipedia's notability guidelines and importance of reliable in-depth coverage in reliable sources. I'd like to help reduce the backlog of unreviewed articles and try a role of NPP. I don't hurry and review the pages carefully when nominating articles for deletion, accepting AfC submissions, and patrolling newly published pages. I hope to become a valuable team-member of the patroller community. Old-AgedKid (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:29, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Fade258

    Hi, Currently I am an AFC reviewer and I would like to request for new page reviewer permission right, and I have read Wikipedia's policies and guidelines as requested. Thank you Fade258 (talk) 09:21, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for 3 months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bakhtar40

    I believe I meet the criteria to review a page. Kindly verify my eligibility to undertake this task. I am cognizant of the obligatory Wikipedia rules when reviewing a page. I request a trial period; upon successful completion, you may grant me a permanent post. Thank You. Bakhtar40 (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ZDRX

    I am requesting permission to become a New Page Reviewer as I have considerable experience contributing to Wikipedia. I am aware of AfD (Articles for Deletion), PROD (Proposed Deletion), and CSD (Criteria for Speedy Deletion) processes. Additionally, I have also created and improved numerous pages, I strive to ensure that all new content adheres to Wikipedia’s standards for notability, verifiability, and neutrality while maintaining a high level of editorial quality. THEZDRX (User) | (Contact) 10:04, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Abo Yemen

    I want to help with the WP:MAY25 backlog :) 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 08:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for 3 months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:49, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Golem08

    Hello, I'm requesting the New page reviewer permission to help out in the May backlog drive. I was a temporary new page reviewer in April 2024 to participate in a backlog drive, and I'd like to help out again. Thank you. Golem08 (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sophisticatedevening

    I'd like to request 1 month NPR to participate in the backlog drive, I'm currently an AfC reviewer and have good knowledge of guidelines for CSD, draftifying, etc. Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 12:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months Sohom (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MCE89

    Hello, I'm interested in becoming a new page reviewer. I have participated in about 200 AfD discussions, have experience with CSD tagging, and have done a bit of AfC reviewing. I have also created about 40 articles and have spent time helping in copyright cleanup. I'd love to help with the new page backlog and believe I have a solid understanding of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Thank you for considering me! MCE89 (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ViridianPenguin

    Interested in participating in the May 2025 NPP backlog drive, I am applying to extend my new page reviewer permission. I was granted it for three months in May 2024 and another three months in February 2025, but other real-world and Wikipedia tasks kept me from significantly expanding my NPP/AfD contributions during the latter trial. Accordingly, while I would be happy to permanently receive the new page reviewer permission in light of my continued content creation, I feel another three-month extension is reasonable. I have no behavioral blocks or 3RR violations. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 17:40, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Sohom Datta (expires 00:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 17:50, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, for 3 months Sohom (talk) 22:22, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Coeusin

    Hello, I'd like to request the right temporarily so I can help in WP:MAY25. Think I have enough experience creating new pages myself and in AfD to be helpful. Thanks, Coeusin (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC) Coeusin (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:25, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bobtinin

    Greetings, I would like to request permissions to become a new page reviewer. I used to do this a decade ago before they changed the system and policies. I haven't been active on Wikipedia for years, but I have the time to contribute again and would like to help out. I've re-familiarized myself with the current policy and guidelines. Thank you for your consideration. Bobtinin (talk) 01:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 491 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 01:50, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done, minimal recent contributions and basic requirements not met. Sohom (talk) 22:21, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mrfoogles

    I was looking at the new backlog drive for May, and I decided to finally apply for NPP permissions here. A lot of the pages I've created have been reviewed, and it seems like an interesting way to find new topics to read about. I meet the account age & edits guidelines, have a lot of experience at AfD, have created several articles (e.g. Hibernation factor, Chloronitramide anion, Matilde Isabel de Sant'Ana e Vasconcelos Moniz de Betencourt), and have reviewed an article for GA. I haven't done vandalism cleanup a lot, but I have interacted with newbies adding questionably sourced stuff a couple of times, and I've interacted with a decent number of people trying to get through AfC with their new article at the Teahouse, so I have what I think is a decent amount of experience there. Therefore, I'd like to apply and see what the backlog drive is all about. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC) Mrfoogles (talk) 03:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done , for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Johnson524

    I wish to apply for NPR rights. In the three years I've contributed to the encyclopedia, I have created 76 articles on a wide variety of topics and 17 Good Articles. I feel confident in my ability to review new articles, and would particularly like to help out in the backlog drive taking place next month. Cheers from North Carolina! 🙂 Johnson524 07:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC) Johnson524 07:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:45, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Noleander

    My home page showed banner at the top asking for volunteers to help with Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2025. I'm happy to help. I've got 19 years experience on WP; 38,000 edits (all hand-crafted, no bots); promoted five Featured Articles, created over 90 articles, and performed about 100 detailed article reviews (FA, GA, or Peer Review). If the admins don't mind, I'd prefer indefinite duration, so I don't have to re-apply every time there is a backlog-elimination drive. Noleander (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Zzz plant

    Hi, I would like to apply for a trial run of NPR so I can help with the upcoming backlog drive. I have participated in AfD for a while now and also recently started AfC and CSD. I've created one article and done substantial re-works to a handful of others. I believe I have a solid grasp on notability, copyvio, and other key policies. Thank you for your consideration, Zzz plant (talk) 06:00, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, for 3 months. Sohom (talk) 16:33, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mateus2019

    I have created 158 articles and lists (+ some categories) within a 15+ year time span and would like to have a one to three month try-out to help with the backlog starting this May. I would work in the areas of human geography, transport and visual arts. Most people know my be User:Scriberius (cannot log-in anymore because I've lost the password). Thanks, --Mateus2019 (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:HilssaMansen19

    I would like to request temporary rights to contribute to Wikipedia by reviewing new pages as there is a huge backlog. I have been working on Wikipedia for past few months as an active user. During this time period, I have learnt a lot of things and learning something new every time I work here. Before these 2 months, I had a little experience on creating pages and within this time period, I started contributing by expanding older or creating new articles mostly within similar topic base. I would be glad to contribute to Wikipedia by reviewing new pages and also, learn along the way. I will also be working with the editors of new articles which might be notable but lack sources or other requirements. Thus, I am requesting a temporary grant of this right and I will prove for further grant by doing worthy work. HilssaMansen19 (talk) 09:52, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:AlphaBetaGamma

    Requesting temp NPR rights since I'm considering joining the backlog drive. I have some experience in AFC reviewing and CSDs. Hope that's enough record to prove my competence. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 10:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:20, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ClaudineChionh

    I had been planning to request AfC permission but the May backlog drive prompted me to request NPP instead. I am a long-term gnome, vandal-fighter, rollbacker, and occasional Teahouse helper. Since returning from my last wikibreak I have familiarised myself with current policies and contentious topics and am developing a nose for LLM and copyvio content. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 14:44, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Smartypants327

    I would like to have this flag because I like proofreading and making sure articles are factual and concise. I am a writer for The Griffins' Nest as well. Smartypants327 (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lollipoplollipoplollipop

    Requesting temporary rights to participate in WP:MAY25. Been an editor for a decade now with some experience in AfD, PRODs, and creating new articles so I hope I'll be able to help out with the drive. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 19:05, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Valorrr

    I understand that the guideline is atleast 90 days on Wikipedia, but I have been Granted PCR, and I believe I can help with the huge backlog of articles/redirects shown at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers, with the oldest article spanning 4 years, and over 18,000 articles to review.

    Per the Criteria, it states;
    These criteria are guidelines; meeting them does not constitute a right to the permission. At their discretion, administrators may grant the permission to editors who do not meet the strict criteria but that they otherwise deem to be competent, or may ask for additional experience. Typically, consistent recent activity is required, to ensure that reviewers are familiar with current policy and guidelines. Activity on other Wikimedia projects is not taken into consideration.
    It doesn't mean that I have to follow the strict criteria, but it is up to the Administrators, discretion.

    And I can have it revoked at any time, per the same article but guidelines for revocation per this;
    The user right can be revoked for violating any of the above conduct standards and for other misconduct. Additionally, it can be revoked at any time by an administrator without any process or prior notice in any of the following circumstances:
    The editor has demonstrated a pattern of performing obviously controversial reviews without first determining consensus.
    The editor has demonstrated a pattern of failing to exercise sufficient care when reviewing pages, resulting in users being offended or discouraged (especially new users).
    The editor has used the permission as leverage in disputes or used any project tools in any improper way.
    The editor has performed any blatant vandalism (not limited to page reviewer vandalism).
    The editor has failed to report to an administrator after noticing unauthorized use of their account or otherwise neglected account security practices.
    The editor has been inactive for 12 months or more.
    The editor has accepted or solicited payment in return for reviews.

    And of May 2023, new page reviewers are granted access to AFC, but the section states;
    As of May 2023, new page reviewers are able to accept and decline submitted drafts in draftspace without applying to become an AFC reviewer at WT:AFCP. You can use Special:NewPagesFeed to find submitted drafts. Reviewing a draft involves activating the AFC Helper Script in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, then visiting a submitted draft. The AFC helper script will display at the top of the page, giving you the option to accept, decline, reject, or comment. The procedure for reviewing drafts is located at WP:AFCR. It is very similar to new page patrolling, with one difference being that all WP:GNG passing sources must be located in the draft, or it can be declined as non-notable. Any questions about AFC reviewing should be directed to WT:AFC.

    I wish for you to consider my request, I am positive that I may receive this, but there is no promise on this as it is up to the administrators discretion, not mine.

    Thank you for considering this,
    ~~~~ Valorrr (lets chat) 20:29, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had an account for 41 days. — MusikBot talk 20:40, 27 April 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:Somajyoti

    I am requesting permission to be a Pending Changes Reviewer. I spend most of my day editing Wikipedia. I have gone through almost all the pages under Category:Wikipedia policies, including Wikipedia's policies on vandalism detection, BLP policy, NPOV, Verifiability, and copyright. I have read the Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes guideline. Please consider my request. Somajyoti ✉ 07:26, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had an account for 25 days. — MusikBot talk 07:30, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Loserhead4512

    Hello. I would like to request pending changes reviewer rights. I pass the WP:PCCRITERIA as far as I know, and the right would allow me to help even more to build the encyclopedia by making sure only acceptable edits are approved. Thank you for your consideration. loserhead (talk) 16:26, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Starfall2015

    I want to become a PCR due to my recent editing and how I can continuously do repeated tasks. Starfall2015 (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC) Starfall2015 (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had an account for 28 days and has 15 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 12:40, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done Only 15 mainspace edits is nowhere near enough experince for this right. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:05, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You're slightly wrong. I have an old account with about 65 mainspace, which pushes me up to 80. So all I need to do is get 20 more. Starfall2015 (talk) 08:15, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:United Blasters

    I am requesting the Pending Changes Reviewer permission. As a Rollbacker, I frequently handle vandalism, and this right would allow me to review edits on PC-protected pages, addressing subtle disruption and helping clear the backlog at pending changes backlog. I understand the responsibilities and core policies involved (like WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:BLP) and will use the tool carefully. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 04:50, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done * Pppery * it has begun... 16:06, 26 April 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:WormEater13

    Hi! I've been patrolling, creating, and monitoring articles on Wikipedia for months, but recently i've been able to be more active. I would like to request the rollback right - having the right would make my work patrolling Special:RecentChanges easier, as I wouldn't need to manually undo edits, but rather just be able to rollback edits directly. I use tools such as WP:RedWarn and WP:Twinkle, so having rollback rights would help me combat vandalism easier. Not to mention, I am aware of Wikipedia's core policies - such as WP:N, WP:NPOV, etc. As a newcomer myself, I am very well aware of WP:BITE and try to be as friendly and welcoming to new editors as possible. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 192 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 00:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    {{not done}}. I've just granted you the Pending Changes Reviewer permission from your request there. Let's see how you get on with that first and then we'll take another look again when you've made a few more edits. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:08, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Understood. Thank you so much! WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Callanecc! I apologize if disturbing, but would I be able to ask for a re-review? Since you replied, i've made about ~300 more edits (60%), and have been able to review quite a few articles with PCR. I would love to utilize the rollback feature, especially since a lot of my contributions as of right now are towards combatting vandalism. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd prefer you spend a couple months using the pending changes reviewer permission to see how you go first.  Not done for the bot. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:59, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Nahida

    I feel like rollback rights will help me fight vandalism more effectively here on the English Wikipedia. I generally meet the guidelines on the top of this page (I've patrolled actively for the better part of a month now) and I believe it would help me more efficiently fight back against vandalism than being limited to Undo and base Twinkle. I try my best to correctly warn editors as well. Nahida haii 17:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 196 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 14:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Nahida I've liked how you've been patrolling so far after a review of your contributions and warnings, though your main space edits are a little on the low side. I'd probably be comfortable with starting you off with pending changes reviewer and you can return to apply for rollback in a few weeks/months once you've used PCR a bit to show your understanding of other important policies such as Copyrights. Does that sound fair? Any other admin can opine here if they think this isn't the best approach that I'm taking. Fathoms Below (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Fathoms Below! I'm okay with PCR if that's the more comfortable option right now. I understand the lower edit count. Nahida 🌷 01:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Granted that permission, marking  Not done here for the bot. Fathoms Below (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cutlass

    I've been dabbling with antivandalism for a bit now. I think using rollback would be helpful for this. I already have it on another project (Commons) so I understand its usefulness. Thank you for your consideration. CutlassCiera 19:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Mz7 (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:RaschenTechner

    I request rollback rights primarily to get Huggle, AntiVandal, ORES and similar tools to fight and detect vandalism and revert unconstructive edits more easily. I currently have an edit count of 928 and have patrolled recent changes (mostly around January-February). RaschenTechner (talk) 11:58, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Titan2456

    I’ve been patrolling and working on a lot of Pakistani BLP and other no-protection articles on MNAs, MPAs, and programs. Several IP vandals have made changes which I can’t undo. Particularly on the Sehat Sahulat Program, I need a rollback. Titan2456 (talk) 02:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Traumnovelle

    Been dealing with the Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Demographics vandal LTA and would prefer using mass-rollback to revert his contributions instead of manually. Only intended to use the tool in relation to this user and I have no desire to use rollback elsewhere. I do check the ip to make sure it is a proxy/webhost as well. Traumnovelle (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Valorrr

    I wish to receive rollback rights to use Wikipedia:Huggle, Wikipedia:AntiVandal and some others, with this permission I could revert vandalism so much faster than doing a regular pseudo rollback, using Wikipedia:Twinkle or Wikipedia:Ultraviolet. I was granted Wikipedia:Pending changes reviewer by @Callanecc: (mentioning as per my previous request), It may say I have had 2 requests denied in the previous 90 days, but one of them was by Callanecc for the bot, the other was when I didn't have as much experience, I am positive that I do this time.

    Using Special:PendingChanges I have reverted and accepted changes, and if I made a mistake I unaccept them. I follow the polices of PCR, and know the policies of Wikipedia:Rollback and Help:Reverting. I know to use Rollback when its a clear vandalism, and attempt to use it in good-faith when a edit-summary or talk page note would be needed, as the Wikipedia:Rollback states
    Where the following text refers to MediaWiki rollback, it means the form of rollback built in to the MediaWiki editing software. MediaWiki rollback may only be used in certain situations. As with any other tool, editors who misuse MediaWiki rollback (for example, by using it to make unexplained reversions of good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary or talk page note would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed. Since rollback is part of the core administrator tools, theoretically an admin could be stripped of their administrative privileges entirely to remove those tools. and the section "When to use rollback" states;
    MediaWiki rollback is a fast way of undoing problematic edits, but it has the disadvantage that special tools are required to provide a custom edit summary. MediaWiki rollback may be used:
    1. To revert obvious vandalism and other edits where the reason for reverting is absolutely clear
    2. To revert edits in your own userspace
    3. To revert edits that you have made (for example, edits that you accidentally made)
    4. To revert edits by banned or blocked users in defiance of their block or ban (but be prepared to explain this use of rollback when asked to)
    5. To revert widespread edits (by a misguided editor or malfunctioning bot) unhelpful to the encyclopedia, provided that you supply an explanation in an appropriate location, such as at the relevant talk page[1]
    With a custom edit summary explaining the reason for reverting the changes.
    As with any other methods of reverting, when using rollback to restore text to a page, ensure that the content being restored does not violate any Wikipedia policies.
    Knowing this I have familiarized myself with the current policies and up to speed.

    Thanks,


    --Valorrr (lets chat) 20:17, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([10][11]). — MusikBot talk 20:20, 27 April 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:Rwv37

    For quite a while now (a year? years? I don't know), I've been frequently making changes to various taxonomic articles to help cut down on Special:WhatLinksHere/Template: Taxobox (there's a relatively new set of templates, such as {{Automatic taxobox}} and {{Speciesbox}}, which is intended to largely replace {{Taxobox}}). These newer templates make use of another set of new templates, {{Taxonomy}}, in order to cut down on difficulties making and maintaining the "Scientific classification" portion of the infoboxes in taxonomic articles.

    For example, {{Taxonomy/Homo}} is used by the {{Speciesbox}} on Homo sapiens in order to automatically figure out that the genus Homo is in the subtribe Hominina, then uses {{Taxonomy/Hominina}} to figure out that we're in the tribe Hominini, and so on up through the various taxonomic ranks. In the case of Homo, this is all already done, of course, but it's fairly common that when editing a taxonomic article to update it to the new {{Automatic taxobox}} scheme, you'll also have to create a new {{Taxonomy}} template to go along with it. Also, fairly often I'll notice that an existing {{Taxonomy}} template is missing a reference, or that its parent {{Taxonomy}} template is, so I usually try to update that while I'm there.

    And that's what leads me to this request: For most {{Taxonomy}} templates, no special permission is needed to edit them. But once it gets high enough up the taxonomic tree (maybe the Family level? not sure exactly), editing them requires this permission. I don't run into this situation very often, but I do run into it once in a while, and in fact I just ran into it a few minutes ago. So, I would like this permission in order to be able to just make such changes myself rather than opening up a new section on the talk page or whatever, describing the proposed change there, et cetera.

    Beyond this specific taxonomy-related stuff, I have on occasion made other template changes in the past, and to modules too (though in that case, almost entirely -- maybe literally entirely, not sure -- just to my own personal MediaWiki-based sites). I don't use Lua very often, but I have used it both in and out of MediaWiki, and before I retired I was a professional computer programmer for decades.

    I've also been a Wikipedian for decades (I believe 100% in good standing, but certainly at the very least very close to 100%), and have made thousands of edits, including hundreds of template edits (mostly but not entirely of this taxonomical sort). - Rwv37 (talk) 22:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Standard Guidelines review:
    1. Green tickY (guideline: >1 year, applicant: 21 years)
    2. Green tickY (guideline: >1000 edits, applicant: 2000)
    3. Green tickY (guideline: >150 template edits, applicant: 200)
    4. Green tickY (guideline: !<6 months, applicant: never)
    5. Red XN (guideline: 3 sandboxes, applicant: 0 but more like N/A since sandboxes aren't generally used for this area)
    6. Red XN (guideline: 5 requests, applicant: 0)
    This is an odd use case, so the standard guidelines don't apply clearly, but running them anyway. Leaving the merits of this request for others to evaluate. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    maybe the Family level? not sure exactly - it's based on the number of transclusions, which for taxonomy templates is the number of child taxa with Wikipedia articles (counting genera and above twice). The threshold for template protection is 5000-ish transclusions. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure I'm understanding, but I think #2 and #3 are reversed - I have over 2000 edits including over 200 template edits, not 200 edits including 2000 template edits. Also, I definitely don't understand what the transclusion count is referring to? I have over 200 template edits definitely not counting transclusions (here are my most recent 200, and you can see there that there's another page after that. Eyeballing it, I think I have maybe 250 or so (again, transclusions not involved).
    Like I said, I'm not sure I'm understanding; my apologies if not. - Rwv37 (talk) 22:50, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep, I swapped those, now fixed. The transclusion count comment was referring to what pages get template protected, not your edits. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery Oh, never mind about the transclusion thing - I didn't understand that you were explaining the rules under which a {{Taxonomy}} template would be protected, and mistakenly guessed you were instead talking about my "2000" (really more like 200) template edits. Rwv37 (talk) 22:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll take a look at possible mitigation for the protection level of this template family later, but we (admins) might want to consider adjusting either the TPER rules or the protection rules for cases like this where an editor only wants to edit a single template (or template family) and otherwise has no interest in templates elsewhere. I know it's not a discussion for this request specifically but it's been on my mind for a while. Primefac (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Primefac Thanks. To be clear: (1) I do not "otherwise have no interest in templates elsewhere", but (2) I understand that I haven't really demonstrated much of an interest in templates elsewhere, and (3) it's definitely correct that (at least at the present time, and at least on Wikipedia specifically) most of my interest in templates elsewhere is largely theoretical rather than practical. - Rwv37 (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies, my comment was about the general case (I've been seeing a lot of this type of request in the last few months), so I wasn't necessarily saying you didn't have any interest in other templates. Primefac (talk) 11:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    At the moment I am leaning towards "not done for now" primarily because of the lack of edit requests. Being occasionally inconvenienced is not really a reason for having this permission, whereas being regularly inconvenienced demonstrates a need. With zero edit requests (and all of four template-talk-space edits in total) I'm just not seeing that need. Primefac (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I withdraw my request. - Rwv37 (talk) 12:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1181725208"