Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

(Redirected from Wikipedia:RFPERM)
"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 04:40, 27 March 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:C1K98V

    Hello, I have created 75+ articles, since I got autopatrolled mostly focusing on television series. For transparency, I'm still working on the feedback received from @Schwede66 in my last request. And I intent to keep doing the good work. Thanks for your consideration. Wishing the community a prosperous new year. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 06:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Schwede66 (expires 00:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 07:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you please point to where the date of birth of Gautam Vig is referenced, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Schwede66, I hope you enjoyed your vacation. I have sourced the DOB in the early life section as per WP:INFOBOXREF. I followed the editing style of Geniac, the way he improved Sheezan Khan and tried adapting the same. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 08:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, I had a fab wee holiday. I don't understand your answer. I see that there is one ref in the infobox, and that reference does confirm the date of birth, but it is attached to the spouse only. Could you please explain what you mean, and how the referencing confirms the date of birth, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Schwede66 In the above mentioned article I have sourced the date of birth in the Early life section, see here. And the spouse's source is just about their marriage. I'm following the editing style of Geniac, the improvement he did in one of my previously created article see here. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 09:38, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, which reference states the date of Vig's date of birth? I cannot see it. Schwede66 18:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Schwede66, I have used two sources for DOB, Colors TV and India Today. You can find both the sources in the Early life section. Hope it helps, if you still can't verify the birth date, you're most welcome to remove it. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 18:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @C1K98V Is it just me or the webpage you're linking to from colorstv.com is redirecting to a /mena/ directory making it impossible to see what you're talking about or citing. As for the indiatoday.in, you did not initially position the citation as of when Schwede66 started reviewing your request, you only repositioned the citation today. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Vanderwaalforces, I'm not sure if the Colorstv website works outside of India. Let's wait for Schwede66 to confirm if they're able to verify it. I'm sharing a screenshot of the website for reference [1]. While searching for sources related to their academics, I found IndiaToday and added it later in the Early life section. I repositioned the named citation as I wanted to highlight it for Schwede66, so I left an edit summary too. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 03:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) I can access the colorstv source and confirm that it mentions Gautam Vig's date of birth. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's good to know, because I have the same problem that Vanderwaalforces talks about. I will have to get back to this item. Schwede66 07:44, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Schwede66 Hi, did you manage to finish this review? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, and I'm a bit snowed under with preparing for a talk. And then I'll have visitors for three days. So it'll be Tuesday next week or so before I have a good chunk of time available. If anyone else would like to look at this in the meantime, please feel free. Schwede66 09:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MaplesyrupSushi

    Great editor, with high quality articles.Has written 32 live articles. Xiphoid Vigour ⚔Duel⚔ 15:22, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The above account has been blocked as compromised. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     16:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:NaveenNkadalaveni

    I have created 65 articles which are live, I understand the Wikipedia notability and other standards. I do create the articles of great quality. Hence request you to kindly grant the autopatrolled right, as the articles which I have been created are in pending for review state from long time, which demotivates me from creating new articles. Now a days, I'm mostly creating articles on Indian Villages. I have an experience of 11 years in Wikipedia, My articles are featured in DYK and ITN section of Wikipedia main page. Thanks in Advance. —Naveen N Kadalaveni (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:36hourblock

    36hourblock has created 106 articles in mainspace, none of which have been deleted. I have marked several of 36hourblock 's articles as reviewed through NPP; initially, I noticed some issues with NPOV, but since I discussed this issue with them, the creations have been more neutral in tone. I would grant AP personally, but I would like a second opinion. Please ping me if you find any issues. Thank you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:QEnigma

    Hello, I would like to request Autopatrolled rights. I am actively involved in reviewing recent and pending changes. I have been undertaking AfC reviews since December 2024. Currently, I am awaiting the renewal of my NPR rights, which I was granted for two months in January 2025. My primary areas of interest include Sri Lanka, South Asia, law, politics, politicians and history, as reflected in my page creation history. I am aware of the current NPP backlog and would like to contribute by ensuring that the articles I create do not add to it. I will ensure that the articles I create will meet all page creation guidelines. Thank you. QEnigma talk 12:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Noble Attempt

    Now created several hundred accepted articles including multiple ITN and DYK articles. Nomination made with their permission. Blythwood (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm a bit of two minds for this user. Skimming through their talk page shows their creation 2025 Fullerton plane crash was deleted at AfD in January, as well as a few others from last year, and some others such as Multiple breadbasket failure have had cleanup tags on them for months. I don't know, however, if that outweighs the really good work the majority of their other creations represent. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:02, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Maximilian775

    Hello! Am reacing out at the encouragement of Bunnypranav and pbritti. I have created 30+ live articles, have 10 DYKs on articles I have authored, and have substantially improved a few dozen more articles. I mostly write concerning Midwestern / Rust Belt / Appalachian Catholic history and contemporary churchmen, but certainly contrbute in other spaces. If there are any other concerns, please let me know. Maximilian775 (talk) 18:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    This user is highly recommended for autopatrolled. He's a quick learner and has adopted Wikipedia's best standards for article creation. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:09, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Clearly suitable candidate, highly recommend. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 04:06, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SDGB1217

    Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights Can I have autopatrolled rights re granted, as they have now expired? Thank you! SDGB1217 (talk) 17:05, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aristoxène

    Hello, I am nominating Aristoxène, they currently have 14 articles up pending NPP review (which I am working through) does not have any issues with recently created articles. A good editor, producing good quality articles. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. -- asilvering (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Olesya Drotsulova

    Hello! A am Olesya. I created my account on June 8, 2023 and I have 664 edits. I have more than 25 new articles, written by me. I like to study Wikipedia, write new articles, and edit articles according to the rules. My favorite topics are persons and companies. I would like to get Autopatrolled status to be more useful for English Wikipedia. Thank you! Olesya Drotsulova (talk) 15:23, 26 March 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:Czarking0

    Citation and grammar edits Czarking0 (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ScienceDawns

    I'm currently working on some general maintenance of articles related to the theory of general relativity and would like some extra tools for automatic syntax fixing, etc. Some articles like this one could use some semi-automated tender love and care. A recent rewrite I did here might improve with some finishing touches too. ScienceDawns (talk) 08:44, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:OpalYosutebito

    I feel like I've improved as an editor since my rights were revoked in July 2024 (due to a long series of impulsive mistakes I made and not checking my work hard enough), and since I last tried to apply in November 2024. I've tried slowing down on the editing, especially with Rater, as Pppery pointed out.

    Anyway, the main reason why I wanted to reapply for AWB is because cleaning up Category:Pages using infobox Russian inhabited locality with unknown parameters has been rather tedious; I recently found a bunch of unnecessary parameters (most notably, "date") that I believe can be removed more efficiently if I had access to the application. However, I will try to remove parameters (or use AWB in general) as a last resort (like if the params are truly redundant), and instead try to fix them if possible. OpalYosutebito (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I also found Category:Pages using infobox university with the image name parameter, which should be an easy fix, as it mostly requires changing one parameter to another - OpalYosutebito (talk) 10:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:AllCatsAreGrey

    I am requesting access to AWB to help me efficiently fix typos and clean up articles that I find with the "random article" button. AllCatsAreGrey (talk) 21:10, 21 March 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:Kevin Wang Canada AltAcc

    Reason for requesting confirmed rights, I have requested to add permissions here from my original account, “Kevin Wang Canada”. I’m just confirming that this is the alternative account. Kevin Wang Canada AltAcc (talk) 06:50, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done * Pppery * it has begun... 02:26, 26 March 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.

    User:Librarian Daireon

    I am a librarian who will be running an editathon for my small liberal arts college on April 3rd and 4th from 9-4:30 PM. This is the third year we have done this, but I am new to the position and the event. Let me know if you need any other information from me. Librarian Daireon (talk) 14:47, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Who was the previous coordinator? Were they also granted event coordinator rights? (Not a strict requirement to answer this, but it will be easier to review by cross-checking what was done before versus reviewing from scratch). * Pppery * it has begun... 19:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Pppery, I don't know the previous research and instruction librarians Wikipedia account name and don't know if they were granted event coordinator rights. Sorry I couldn't be more help! Librarian Daireon (talk) 13:14, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    u/Kelseyem was her name! Librarian Daireon (talk) 17:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Kelseyem wasn't granted Event Coordinator rights. Special:UserRights/Kelseyem shows that. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Cool beans, thanks for your help! ill just run it through the Programs and Events dashboard. Librarian Daireon (talk) 13:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    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 ([2]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([3]). — MusikBot talk 14:00, 3 March 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 ([4]). — MusikBot talk 18:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bluppyt789

    Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights

    I had an old account that I courtesy vanished due to harassment on the List of Presidents page which had ECP and I have since created this account and would like ECP back Bluppyt789 (talk) 01:39, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    My account was Renamed user b6cf806b879bb8a657cba66ecff39112 and was originally named 6218946rr Bluppyt789 (talk) 01:45, 23 March 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:Cactusisme

    Hello, I would like to request file mover rights on this Wikipedia. I usually come across file titles where there is usually some issue relating to the file title as it does not match to its contents (misleading). I usually have to submit a rename request. With this right, I would be able to move the files without filing a rename request and waiting for a file mover to move the file. Example of files that I have requested to be renames include these: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 (mainly pokemon related files). I have also read Help:Files#Renaming files. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:20, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cactusisme: On #1 you introduced a capitalization error for Cynthia (Pokémon). Beyond just the help page, have you read the Wikipedia:File names guideline? These don't seem to fall into the "widely undisputed" reasons for file renaming (WP:FMV/W). #2, 4, and 5 are marginal improvements that are questionable given WP:FMNN: Removing all caps (which seems comparable to the example of adding spaces), adding "Surfing near" to "Cinnabar Island Coast", adding "in". JensonSL (SilverLocust) 18:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    For the first one, it's not really a capitalisation mistake. Cynthia is not a pokemon but from the previous title, it (Cynthia Pokemon), tells me the character is a pokemon when in fact she is a champion (the article is also in brackets). Thus, I felt a bracket qould help to distinguish between that. I have also read WP:File names. Thanks --Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 23:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The Pokémon franchise is capitalized as a title and a trademark. To the extent it is ever correctly written in lowercase as pokémon (which at least in books is rare), it would be as a common name – that is, when referring to the creatures rather than the franchise. But Cynthia isn't a pokémon, she's in Pokémon. So yes, that introduced incorrect capitalization. In any event,   Not done per the issues I raised in my prior reply. JensonSL (SilverLocust) 03:44, 25 March 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]

    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]

    User:Jolielover

    I was granted temporary permissions and I'd like to extend it, I love interacting with the new page and AFC process. I'd like to reduce the backlog. jolielover♥talk 03:58, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([7]). — MusikBot talk 04:00, 14 March 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]

    User:Taabii

    I have enjoyed reviewing newly created articles over the past two months, during which I have reviewed more than 200 articles. I plan to continue this in the future and kindly request an extension of my patroller rights. Taabii (talk) 10:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Sohom Datta (expires 00:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 11:00, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Elías Fortaleza de la Fuerza Sánchez

    Elías Fortaleza de la Fuerza Sánchez (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)(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te) I would like to request new page patrol rights to help patrol new pages and reduce the backlog. If declined I would like a short and concise explanation why. Please no too much talking.

    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]

    User:Aydoh8

    I have over 6,000 edits and already have PCR and rollback, as well as a good CSD ratio. thought I'd have a go at reviewing new articles as well. Aydoh8[contribs] 02:19, 18 March 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]

    User:Vrxces

    Reapplication for lapsed NP reviewer status, where I was asked to reapply after a second two-month trial. As in the previous requests, I've been an active WP:VG page creator, editor, and involved in WP:AFC and WP:AFD decisions. Happy to provide any more information. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Vrxces: It looks like, during your last two month trial earlier this year, you marked a total of 5 pages as reviewed, 3 of which were nominated for deletion (hence are procedurally marked as reviewed). I'd be fine with granting you another trial, but do you intend to participate a bit more at NPP? Most of us will not feel comfortable granting the permission permanently without you demonstrating your ability to patrol pages appropriately. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:34, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's absolutely fine! Life gets in the way. Happy to proceed with another trial. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Cyrobyte

    I am requesting this permission because I want to volunteer in reducing the NPP backlog and ensuring that new pages are encyclopedic and properly cited. I believe that I am qualified to be a new page reviewer because I have created many new articles that are encyclopedic and adequately sourced, nominated new pages for speedy deletion when appropriate and have participated in the AfD process. Cyrobyte (talk) 00:09, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sebbog13

    I want the new page reviewer right to voluntarily review new articles or redirects. I previously had the right temporarily. - Sebbog13 (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2025 (UTC) Sebbog13 (talk) 00:20, 22 March 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]

    User:Drat8sub

    I've been in wikipedia since 2016, contributed significantly in vaious B, GA, FA and FL articles and also contributed in AfD, thus understand wikipedia guidelines and policies well. I mostly do edits related to sports and football where I often come across pages which are unassessed or stubs/starts which I feel need careful review. Already have autopatrolled rights and pending review rights, along with these rights, New Page Reviewer right will be very helpful for me to navigate and make wikipedia articles to get in better shape. Thank you. Drat8sub (talk) 19:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Relativity

    Hello, I'm requesting NPP rights to help out with the backlog. I have been a Wikipedia editor for almost three years now and made over 4,000 edits. I have participated in Articles for Creation for over a year and have made some contributions to AfD. While I have not been the most prolific article creator, I have brought the article Boot Monument to FA status and have reviewed 10 good article nominations (see this one I'm currently working on as an example). I have helped new users at the Teahouse and assisted them via the mentorship module. Note that I also have PCR and rollback permissions. Thank you for your time and consideration! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ScrabbleTiles

    Hi there. I would like to request new page reviewer rights so that I can help reduce the large backlog at AfC. I contribute at AfD and also nominate articles for speedy deletion when required. I also have a good knowledge of Wikipedia’s policies. Thanks, ScrabbleTiles (talk) 17:29, 26 March 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:Owais Al Qarni

    I have been an active contributor to Wikipedia, focusing primarily on religion-related articles. In my editing experience, I have frequently encountered situations where page-moving rights would be highly beneficial, especially in cases where inexperienced editors move well-established pages without following proper procedures, such as this one. I have considerable experience with the requested moves venue, move reviews, and closing move requests. My move logs reflect my familiarity with Wikipedia’s naming conventions and best practices. Thanks. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 00:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     16:35, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Itemirus

    I am requesting the Page Mover permission to enhance my contributions to Wikipedia, particularly in maintaining and improving pages related to Italy. As a long-time contributor with extensive experience in page curation, I remain committed to upholding Wikipedia’s principles. Itemirus (talk) 10:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done per criterion #3 (moving experience) and lack of demonstrated need. I count 17 distinct page moves, 1 RM, and 2 RM/TR requests (the first one was contested, and on the second one an editor has asked for evidence of usage in English sources). @Itemirus: For now, please continue to request any uncontroversial moves at WP:RM/TR or open requested move discussions for any contested or potentially controversial moves. – JensonSL (SilverLocust) 03:18, 25 March 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:Abhinav Walker

    I’m requesting reviewer rights to contribute more effectively to Wikipedia. With over six years of experience in patrolling and recently gaining rollback rights, I’ve developed a good sense for spotting genuine edits. I mainly focus on improving articles about my hometown and nearby areas. Reviewer rights will help me approve valid edits faster and keep Wikipedia’s content accurate and reliable. Abhinav Walker (talk) 20:40, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sheriff U3

    I am requesting this right due to my experience with reviewing articles which looks like this would be similar in some ways. I have an understanding of the polices related to this user right and understand the responsibility that comes with it. I have read and understand all of the polices related to this to this user right, namely: WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:V and the WP:Copyright polices. If you have any questions I would be glad to answer them for you. Sheriff U3 05:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Abo Yemen

    I've been editing here for a long while and understand Wikipedia's policies well, understand what is vandalism and what is not and have read the guideline on reviewing. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 13:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. JensonSL (SilverLocust) 04:08, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bruhpedia

    I've been editing for a long time and understand Wikipedia's policies and goals. I especially like to help out at pages which have a lot of enthusiastic edits by knowledgeable people who might not understand Wikipedia's format and goals, making them perfect candidates for pending changes protection.

    I think pending changes reviewer rights would be the perfect way to help separate the wheat from the chaff and help our newest editors participate and make a difference while maintaining our high standards. Bruhpedia (talk) 20:52, 26 March 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:United Blasters

    I'm requesting rollback rights to enhance my ability to fight vandalism. I Would like to try out AntiVandal tool. I'm a Mobile user, so Rollback will be very useful for me. I'm active in recent changes, pending changes, and new pages patrol, and I understand rollback is for clear vandalism cases. I'll use it responsibly. Here is my Undo/Revert History : [8]

    UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 14:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TheM1sty

    I'm requesting rollback rights to speed up my fight against vandalism. I have about 1,000 edits involving reverting vandalism. I'm also interested in tools such as AntiVandal. TheM1sty (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Osmo Lundell

    I have taken up patrolling recent changes and clear vandalism prevension / sourceless BLP-edits in en-wiki too. I have enough experience of the tool through fi-wiki, where I am a rollbacker, pending changes reviewer and ”page stabilzer” (I think the group closest to it here was called editor?). I know I have under 200 edits too now, but my interest at the time here is vandalism prevention which is hard and takes multiple edits (causes spam in recent changes) without rollback-tool. I would ask for sysops to look at my well trusted global status and experience. Thank you! Osmo Lundell (talk) 20:33, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 73 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 22:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Osmo Lundell: Twinkle's red "vandalism" button should revert consecutive edits by the same user in the same way that rollback does. It appears when you view the diff (noting that you have Twinkle enabled). Have you tried doing that? – JensonSL (SilverLocust) 04:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey! Thanks for metting me know, I thought that using that button would need the rollback user group. Good to know if it works just like that for everyone! I would still leave my request pending, because rollback is still useful from the recent changes view etc. --Osmo Lundell hey 07:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MAS0802

    Hi. Last month, I request for become a rollbacker but unfortunately is unsuccessful. For this month, I do some rollback thing and start using WP:Twinkle to make sure the page is not going vandalism by some immoral user. I hope I can become rollbacker because I want to make sure the rule of Wikipedia is no broke by any immoral user. And another reason is if I become rollbacker, I will protect the whole page everytime. MAS0802 12:03, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([9]). — MusikBot talk 12:10, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Oostpulus

    Oostpulus (requesting Rollback) (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)

    I am sending a second rollback request. I know that my last request for a rollback was very recent, but during this time I corrected the remarks that were voiced in that request, also during this period of time I made more than 50 reverts. As I wrote in my first request, I need rollback rights primarily to delete vandalism. Oostpulus (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([10]). — MusikBot talk 16:10, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Anerdw

    I've been patrolling RC since 26 February 2025 and have made 776 mainspace edits. I'd like to use Rollback to make counter-vandalism easier, and I'm curious about both AntiVandal and Huggle.

    Disclaimers: I've made a couple (three, I think?) accidental reversions with Twinkle. I've also received a few talk page warnings. Anerdw (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Valorrr

    I wish to rollback edits using WP:Huggle, I have been using WP:Twinkle, along with Ultra Violet, they have been good, but I wish to do it more efficiently, and having Rollback permissions will grant me that. I have been patrolling Recent Changes, along with editing, I have over 200 edits and have been warning users when I have rolled back their edits. I may be a bit new, but I already know the ropes. Valorrr (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    • Some questions: 1) would you have used rollback here? (You identify the edit as "Disruptive editing" in your edit summary). 2) Do you think this revert meets the criteria for vandalism, and would you have used rollback on it? 3) Would you have used rollback here? ("Disruptive editing", has subsequently been re-added by a registered user and not reverted.) 4) What were the factual errors in this revert? That was only a couple of pages worth of your recent contributions, keen for your thoughts. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      (Note: I cant really set custom reasons on programs I use)
      1) I would as Wikipedia:Rollback states that you should use rollback for
      • "To revert obvious vandalism and other edits where the reason for reverting is absolutely clear"
      • "To revert edits in your own userspace"
      • "To revert edits that you have made (for example, edits that you accidentally made)"
      • "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)"
      • "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"
      • "With a custom edit summary explaining the reason for reverting the changes."
      Therefore making it a valid as the 5th reason, "Revert widespread edits", he kept doing it, therefore making it a rollback reasoning.
      2) Yes I would think its vandalism, its removing a whole section and it mentions information you may want to learn, therefore under reason 1, I would use rollback.
      3) No, Looking back it looks like it should be kept, not reverted, I admit my mistake there.
      4) I told him this "Hello! I'm Valorrr. I just wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the page Ramón Villa Zevallos have been reverted because they appear to have added incorrect information. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source, discuss it on the article's talk page, or leave me a message on my talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. 1.70m is 5.57 feet, rounding it up is 5.6 feet, just reverting it to correct information! Valorrr (talk) 04:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)"[reply]
      Would you like to ask anymore, @Daniel? Valorrr (talk) 00:42, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Also, I made a mistake on 4. I thought he added the Feet/Inches, but clearly it didn't show what he changed, only said template. Valorrr (talk) 00:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Number 1 should not be reverted using rollback, it was a good-faithed edit with an edit summary that had an arguably valid rationale. It does not qualify as "widespread edits ... unhelpful to the encyclopedia". Number 2 is borderline not vandalism in my view, given the edit summary, and would not be appropriate for rollback (undo with an edit summary more appropriate). Number 3 & 4 are errors, as you acknowledge above. For me, given the small sample size I chose and these four popping up in that small sample, I believe this request should be declined. I'll allow another administrator to review and make a final decision either way, however. Daniel (talk) 00:54, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      1) I don't want to cause a fight, but I believe it would be rational, he did it 2 other times, before mine. Therefore I believe its valid.
      2) It was a big edit, when you see those edits and see a whole thing is blanked, you'd assume to rollback, but we can always revert our edits if we are wrong, I believe due to the urgency I would believe if you read over it quickly and saw, you'd revert it.
      I believe as your range is pretty big, 5ish hour difference from one edit, which makes it pretty big, may I know how many pages you did, @Daniel? Valorrr (talk) 01:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      22 reverts checked at random, all in a 24 hour span. Daniel (talk) 03:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done. Agree with Daniel, and in general I think you need to slow down and get more experience. Your account isn't even a month old yet. -- asilvering (talk) 03:55, 26 March 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.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1181725208"