Wikiafripedia:Requests for permissions

From Wikiafripedia, the free encyclopedia that you can monetize your contributions or browse at zero-rating.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Administrator instructions

Requests for permissions

This page enables administrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikiafripedia. 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, 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 Wikiafripedia:Requests for permissions/Archive for an index of past requests.

Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 20:30, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Permissions[edit source | edit]

Handled here[edit source | edit]

User groups[edit source | edit]

  • Account creator (add requestview 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 requestview 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 Wikiafripedia's policies and guidelines, especially WAP:BLP and Wikiafripedia:Notability.
  • AutoWikiBrowser (add requestview 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 quick guide 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 requestview 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 requestview 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 requestview 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 requestview 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 Wikiafripedia articles.
  • Mass message sender (add requestview requests): Mass message sender enables users to send messages to multiple users at once. This flag is given to users who have had made requests for delivery in the past, clearly showing an understanding of the guidance for use.
  • New page reviewer (add requestview 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 requestview 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 requestview requests): The reviewer flag is granted to users who are experienced enough with Wikiafripedia editing and its policies for contributing to the process of reviewing articles placed under pending changes. There is no set number of edits that must be done, but a general rule of thumb is that a user is Extended confirmed. However, a user must be Confirmed or auto-confirmed user to add requests to the page.
  • Rollback (add requestview 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 Wikiafripedia:Rollback. For information about the technical details of the feature, see here.
  • Template editor (add requestview 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[edit source | edit]

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

Removal of permissions[edit source | edit]

If you wish to have any of your permission flags (except administrator) removed, you should contact an administrator. If you want your administrator flag removed, you should contact a bureaucrat.

This is not the place to request review of another user's rights. If you believe someone's actions merit removal of a permission flag, you should raise your concern at the incidents noticeboard.

The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight flags 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[edit source | edit]

Requestors[edit source | edit]

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

Any editor may comment on requests for permission.

Administrators[edit source | edit]

Administrators are permitted to grant account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, event coordinator, file mover, mass message sender, 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.

Current requests[edit source | edit]

Account creator[edit source | edit]


Autopatrolled[edit source | edit]


User:Spudlace[edit source | edit]

I've created 50 new articles now without incident and I guess that qualifies as prolific enough that it would reduce the work for reviewers if I requested this. Spudlace (talk) 07:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done TheSandDoctor Talk 07:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser[edit source | edit]


User:RogueScholar[edit source | edit]

I don't anticipate heavy use of this tool, but as I have a tendency to do article overhauls as a minimal number of revisions, each with high deltas, I'd like to be able to use it as quality control after aforementioned edits to ensure that I'm not ameliorating some issues only to create new ones in my wake. Though once I feel more comfortable with its toolset, I could foresee adding it to my workflow within WikiProject Schools. Thank you for your time and consideration. ⚞ 🐈ℛogueScholar ₨Talk🗩 ⚟ My recent mischief 14:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
RogueScholar, not super-thrilled that your sig is still 612 characters long, almost 3x the suggested limit. Primefac (talk) 00:48, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
@Primefac: Sorry it's not higher on my list of priorities, kind sir, but I won't lie to you and tell you that it is. Unlike some other programming languages, CSS remains a genuine labyrinth to me and my ability to craft functional solutions to everyday problems isn't even rudimentary; layout syntax and aesthetics in general have always been a struggle for me despite my fondness for them. Without being glib or disrespectful, I shall again take refuge with my favorite of the Five Pillars: WAP:5P5 and pray that you'll be patient with me. I did take another whack at it yesterday afternoon and shaved off a few more superfluous characters though, as a token of good faith and respect.  ⚞ 🐈ℛogueScholar ₨Talk🗩 ⚟ 11:14, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

User:Hmains[edit source | edit]

I mainly work on categories and would use AWB to help ensure the categories are complete, that they contain all articles/ sub-categories they are supposed to contain and no other. I have made some erroneous edits with AWB in the past and do not intend to repeat that again. I have recently been using AWB a great deal in Commons and have not made such errors there. Thanks. Hmains (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Administrator note I revoked AWB access per consensus at ANI. — JJMC89(T·C) 03:57, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Note. This occurred on 18 Feb 2019, at which time you wrote "After a period of no less than six months you may request access" here, which I have done. Thanks Hmains (talk) 15:35, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

User:Dmehus[edit source | edit]

In terms of basic requirements, in addition to being a Wikiafripedia user for 15 years, I've made over 1,200 mainspace edits, all non-automated and mostly manual (until using Twinkle of late), and have been particularly active in the AfD space. I'm particularly interested in the WikiProject - Deletion sorting lists and the AWB tool appears like it would be particularly helpful in this area. AfDs, CfDs, and RfDs seem to be where I will be focusing more than 80% of my Wikiafripedia editing. --Doug Mehus (talk) 23:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC) Doug Mehus (talk) 23:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has approximately 486 non-automated edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 00:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
How up-to-date is this? My total edits is more than that and most of them are non-automated. I'm going by the "Preferences" screen. Is it not counting minor edits? I almost always tag my manual edits as 'minor' if I'm just updating citations, removing wikilinks, and the like. Doug Mehus (talk) 23:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Doug, you have 517 edits to the article space, with 48 semi-automated edits from things like Twinkle. Thus, your count is 469. Also, if you're looking at WikiProject Deletion sorting for the purposes of sorting AFDs, then User:Enterprisey/delsort will be far more useful than AWB. Not looking to deny you access at the moment, just making sure you're using the right tools for the job! Primefac (talk) 11:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Primefac, yeah, I noticed that afterward that Twinkle edits were still counted as semi-automated and much of my edits have been other namespaces, especially Talk, Template, and Wikiafripedia. Thanks for that tool, and the deletion sorting categorization is useful but already included in Twinkle which works very well (and is built-in). Are you aware of any features besides that in delsort? Also, are you aware of any semi-automated tools that can remove multiple wikilinks from the page one is editing? There are a lot of school district pages that link to their school pages, which have since been deleted and redirect back to the school district page. Twinkle can easily remove backlinks, but not links on the same page. So, I'd like to have an automated or semi-automated way of correcting these same page double redirects. AWB may or may not do this, but that would be one of the primary reasons for using it. Hope that helps clarify. If there's another tool besides AWB for such meta-editing tasks, I'm definitely open to that, but haven't been able to find anything. Doug Mehus (talk) 16:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

User:Vashti[edit source | edit]

Hi, I'm looking to help out more and I'd like to investigate using AWB to fix typos, grammar slips, ENGVAR on categorised pages and the like. I have around 3,000 edits and I like doing small, useful things. Vashti (talk) 20:32, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

User:Bellowhead678[edit source | edit]

I'd like to use AWB to fix typos - I have over 20,000 edits and have been going through Wikiafripedia:Typo Team/moss/A this morning but hopefully AWB will speed up the process! Bellowhead678 (talk) 11:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done, but please make sure you're paying attention to context (per this discussion). Primefac (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed[edit source | edit]


User:VinitNitinBhadange[edit source | edit]

Hello! I request you to grant me confirmation right. The reason is, in India many local users are using Wikipedia for their promotional purposes, where as this is not supposed to be. So, I am requesting you to grant me confirmation rights as I can contribute to Wikipedia by removing all such users.

Hope you do needful. VinitNitinBhadange (talk) 16:27, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoconfirmed" user right. MusikBot talk 16:30, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Event coordinator[edit source | edit]


User:DrLibraryCat[edit source | edit]

I would like to confirm users so that they can create new pages. I am organizing one edit-a-thon today (,_2019)), another on Oct. 22.( (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC) DrLibraryCat (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user was granted temporary event coordinator rights by Tom Morris (expires 15:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)). MusikBot talk 15:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 DoneDrLibraryCat: I've granted the permission for one month. If you find yourself organising more editing events in the future, please feel free to request it again, or request it on a more permanent basis. Thank you for your work on helping new editors. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:32, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

User:CogSciLibrarian[edit source | edit]

Reason for requesting account creator rights

I'm hosting a edit-a-thon on Thursday evening Oct. 24, 2019. We'll be editing North Carolina newspapers (current & historic) (meetup page at

I'm expecting over 25 students to attend & would like to be able to make accounts for them on that evening.

thank you! CogSciLibrarian (talk) 19:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Administrator note moved from "account creator" queue. — xaosflux Talk 19:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Extended confirmed[edit source | edit]


User:Rklahn[edit source | edit]

I realize this does not neatly fit into this request form, but I would like to be added into Extended confirmed anyways. At issue is edits to the Kamala Harris page, where before extended confirmed protection, I was permitted to make edits. Before protection, I think I was acting in a way that the level of protection is trying to assure. Im a long time editor (2007), but with few edits. These days I tend to focus in few areas of high volume edits, Kamala Harris is something of an exception for me. Anyhow, thought I would ask, and "no" being status quo, does not hurt to ask. Thanks in advance for the consideration. Rklahn (talk) 16:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Not done It will be automatically added you you meet the requisites. — JJMC89(T·C) 20:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

File mover[edit source | edit]


User:Yogwi21[edit source | edit]

Hello. I am making a new request for file mover user rights. I am working on uploading several football club emblem and sports tournament logos in vector format. Sometimes, I encounter an issue on the file naming. If given this permission, it would be easy for me to rename just in case if there is a need to rename certain files. I can also help in handling renaming requests. Hopefully my request would be granted. Thanks. Yogwi21 (talk) 03:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Consider using edit summary. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Mass message sender[edit source | edit]


New page reviewer[edit source | edit]


Zindor[edit source | edit]

Zindor (t · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools • sigma· non-automated edits · BLP edits · logs (blocks • rights • moves) · rfar · spi) (assign permissions)(acc · ap · fm · mms · npr · pm · pcr · rb · te)

  • Looking for permanent granting of NPR user-right. Pinging Rosguill as temp granter. Thanks Zindor (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)) and has 172 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 20:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I have to offer a bit of a mea culpa here--I miscalculated the amount of time elapsed since Zindor had been blocked on their prior account, and should not have conferred the original trial period. Following the guidelines strictly, I should have waited until early November. That having been said, having reviewed their AfD record and their reviews over the past two weeks, I think they've done good work and would normally grant permissions at this point. I'm thus going to let another admin make the final decision here. signed, Rosguill talk 21:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Rosguill: Here is my problem. Government College, Kodanchery reads like an advertisement, and is debatable G11. The user only seems to know three modes of review (notability, references, and stubs) while not tagging other issues. Plus several things in the curation log are stuffers (redirects, disambigs, etc). Given there are not even 50 entries in there, I hesitant. Add the block history and number of administrative hands involved with the user, and I'm extremely hesitant. My recommendation is don't grant anything over another 1 month trial or a tad more if the user needs it, request a certain amount of legitimate reviews, require going beyond the three tags I listed, and encourage usage on BLPs or more policy heavy articles to show they can be granted permanently. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Inclined to agree with Amanda on this one. I would suggest another month or two on the project to get some experience, and reapply in Nov when the normal time would be appropriate. Primefac (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
AmandaNP, Primefac I think that Government College, Kodanchery is a bit of an unfair one to ding them on given that their first action there was to draftify the article (IMO the correct call, although I'm not sure why they prefaced their comment with "A1"), only for that to be reversed by another editor who admonished them. That having been said, the rest of your concerns are valid, so I'm going to agree to mark this Not done for now, but am willing to grant another trial run in November on request. signed, Rosguill talk 00:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@Primefac: As you noted yourself when you moved me back into active AfC reviewers, the block had nothing to do with the userrights. Indef doesn't typically mean a stripping of userrights and I fail to understand why I'm getting treated like a leper here. There was no prejudice against my access to these tools in either the community or un-block discussions. Yes I have to use NPR tools in a wider array of topics, Rosguill pointed that out to me, but I can't do that without access to the tools. If you'd like me to apply other tags, then I'll do so. I've been around for 15 years, I can distinguish between actual promo and the combination of Indian English and mild fancruft present in the government college article: if that's G11 i'll eat my socks. There's a disparity between NSCHOOLS and AfD consensus regarding degree-awarding institutes, certainly for India-related articles. I was towing a hard central line, but being familiar with AfD outcomes I fully understood why SD0001 moved it back into mainspace, and it would have been a waste of time for us to hash it out.
I've demonstrated enough competency to at the very least be granted another trial. Discretion could easily be used here to grant a trial from today onwards.
If i'm not back in good-standing i guess I shouldn't even be helping out at the Teahouse? Nick Moyes, thoughts?
@Zindor: Thank you for the ping. When you signed up as a Teahouse host, I did take a look at your mainspace edit count. It thought your mainspace edit count was a little on the low side for some new hosts, but I didn't want to put you off by turning you down. To be quite frank, absolutely nothing I've seen you do or say at the Teahouse, thus far, has caused me any concern whatsoever. You have just the perfect welcoming, helpful style we need, and your answers have all been pretty sound. We have another host who is a reformed vandal (now making excellent contributions) plus another very long standing host who has just got themselves indeffed for incivility and personal attacks. So you're doing just fine - don't be downhearted. And do please stay! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I made mistakes, apologised, was welcomed back. I was granted Perm NPR in the past; now I can't even get a trial? All this hoop-jumping feels punitive. Have I become less competent since the decision to permanently grant me the NPR tool was made?
Thanks all for looking it into this, but between you could you muster the strength to extend my trial please. Regards as ever, Zindor (talk) 14:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Ah well, Rosguill I don't think I "admonished" them – or at least that wasn't my intention. It's definitely not a G11 either, perhaps AmandaNP is not accustomed to the weird situation we have surrounding Indian colleges – being degree-awarding institutions, they're almost always considered notable, but there usually aren't any good sources to write with. What I do is to just leave them, even removing the fluff isn't usually worth the effort as that does little to "improve" the article. – SD0001 (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
SD0001 I just meant that you advised them against it, wasn't trying to imply that you were too harsh signed, Rosguill talk 17:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I may not be accustom to notability claims at AFD in the current climate, I admit that. But that is not my argument, my argument was that it had promotional material in it and read like an advertisement. I mentioned it is borderline G11, and hence why I haven't deleted it. I'm thinking some tags about the promo and the fact that the sources are all primary sources weren't applied. Page review is not a simple process and there is a very detailed guide on it. But Zindor mentions they don't want to hash this out which I agree. I have multiple other points made.
Usually people who are caught socking have to wait six months for the standard offer, but your violating an active block through most of July goes contrary to the sockpuppetry policy. So no, apologies alone don't get you your previous standing back. You have to earn that trust back. Also, I see there are 7 years since it's creation, not 15. Besides, tenure doesn't mean you automatically get userrights.
Also, good standing for say checkuser rights and good standing to edits are two different things. I use that to illustrate the point that good standing is also different for NPR. Someone can be an editor but be creating a lot that gets deleted at AFD eventually. Doesn't mean they are going to be blocked or in a bad standing as an editor, but there certainly aren't good for NPR. So no, that doesn't mean you need to stop helping at the teahouse.
As for if you get a trial or not, I did not opine on that and left my original recommendation of what should be done at most. I think that still stands with this commentary. My final comment is punitive would be not letting you edit. Preventative and caution is ensuring you won't abuse privileges given moving forward. If you really have issue our three opinions after further comments, you can try AN. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@AmandaNP: "Debatable G11" and "borderline" are two different things, let's not gaslight here. It doesn't read like an advert. While I'm not in the business of making generalizations, new Indian editors are typically extremely enthusiastic about content addition. Even if there were flowery words about the subject, that does happen in Indian English, which for some speakers comes out unintentionally poetic. I would copyedit prose like that for neutrality, but I wouldn't be slapping down promo tags for it. That would be mis-characterizing the situation.
Promo sticks out like a sore thumb, and i'd happily tag it, rephrase it or nuke it; whichever fits the situation.
I have 15 years of tenure, yes there are seven on that account, and no i've not socked before the event you note. I've never abused the NPR privilege, nor have I given indication that I would.
I'm well aware that you didn't opine on the matter of an NPR trial, and I wonder why you even bothered blessing us with your opinion.
The strawman you created about an editor who makes sub-standard content is left wanting, and I question its relevance to this discussion.
I see two opinions about perm NPR, and a recusal. No indication was made that i'd be unsuitable to continue my trial. We all edit at our own pace and do what we can. I'm not saying that apologies alone gets standing back, but it's clear I'm a net positive editor, so how does an arbitrary time period play into this?
Not granting a user-right to a capable editor is preventing them from editing, and is punitive.
The idea of bringing this to the cabal inner fortress sounds interesting. Naturally I'll let you know if I decide to bite that carrot. All the best, Zindor (talk) 20:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
If you are going to throw around comments like you wonder why I even commented in the first place, then I'll just step back and not reply, because clearly there is no value for me or you contributing to this discussion. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Synoman Barris[edit source | edit]

I believe I have establish a track record since I’ve been able to review over 100 pages since granted trial period. I will be going on a short Wikibreak next month and would want to avoid my first edit after the Wikibreak to be here. I have followed the guidelines of the NPP flowchart while reviewing, I am also farmiliar with renaming articles (due to extensive participation in RM) and I am also an AFC reviewer. I also have a clean record with the deletion processes I.e AFD and CSD from my logs. I am thereby requesting for indefinite extension of this user right to my account. Best regards Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 22:13, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Salvio giuliano (expires 00:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([1]). MusikBot talk 22:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

User:TheBirdsShedTears[edit source | edit]

I want to try this right to help reduce the NPR backlog. I have a good understanding of notability and have draftified many newly created non notable pages. I think i have a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, and can identify paid and poor quality sources. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done TheSandDoctor Talk 07:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

User:CptViraj[edit source | edit]

I want to help patrolling uncontroversial redirects and pages in File, Wikipedia, User, Draft, Talk namespaces. @Previous request. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 05:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done TheSandDoctor Talk 07:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Page mover[edit source | edit]


User:SpectresWrath[edit source | edit]

I need this flag because I move tv seasons and don't want to annoy the admins with move requests when I'm unable to move the page without approval. SpectresWrath (talk) 06:28, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for page mover declined in the past 90 days ([2]). MusikBot talk 06:30, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Reasonable number of successful RM/TR requests (only one declined that I can tell), but with the exception of JoJo there doesn't appear to be any RM experience, no edit summaries for the moves, and not really anything that looks like it would require suppressing. I'm solidly on the fence here, but if it weren't for the RM/TR requests I'd say no. Primefac (talk) 13:18, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
@Primefac: FWIW, I agree. I was looking over this one briefly before and I couldn't find a solid need for the permission because they've only made a handful of RM/TR requests and have limited experience outside that, too. I'm not sure whether to grant a trial period or decline for a few months. Anarchyte (talkwork) 14:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done, per the general lack of need. If that changes feel free to ask again. Primefac (talk) 13:06, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:The9Man[edit source | edit]

Majorly for the Draft moves without leaving a redirect during WP:NPP. - The9Man (Talk) 18:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
@The9Man: I'm not seeing a true need for this permission. Out of all your talk page edits, you've only participated in one RM where you didn't give any rationale in your !vote. Furthermore, you haven't made that many moves in total and I disagree with some, such as Draft:Sofia Millares. You moved it to draftspace four months after its creation, which may come across as a way to circumvent the typical deletion methods. While I'm not saying this was your intention, if it fails the notability guidelines, it should have been AfD'd/PROD'd this far after its creation in mainspace. Are you opposed to waiting some more months and then re-requesting when you have more experience in obvious areas that require this permission (such as WP:RM)? Anarchyte (talkwork) 15:54, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
@Anarchyte: No oppose at all. As I said, I thought it would be convenient and helpful while doing the WP:NPP. It is perfectly fine if you didn't see any need at all. Just to make it clear the delay in Draft:Sofia_Millares was because it was still in the new articles que and never reviewed. I will take a note of your suggestion in this matter. Thanks for your time. - The9Man (Talk) 18:15, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Andrew nyr[edit source | edit]

I am mainly requesting this right to create pages over redirects in an easy way. I have created articles (mainly about hospitals) that formerly were a redirect to the health network. When I do this I usually have had to use a curly apostrophe, then having to request a round robin move later. I feel as having this right would take load off the system and allow me to help out in requested moves. I have read the entirety of WP:PMVR. Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 14:51, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for page mover declined in the past 90 days ([3]). MusikBot talk 15:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:John B123[edit source | edit]

I frequently move articles to draft as part of New Page Curation (see User:John B123/Draftify log). Being able to move these articles without leaving a redirect would save somebody else the trouble of deleting these
  1. REDIRECT Template:Template link

tagged redirects. John B123 (talk) 20:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done TheSandDoctor Talk 00:25, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer[edit source | edit]


User:Giraffer[edit source | edit]

Hello, I'm Giraffer. I have nearly 2000 edits, of which ~1500 are counter vandalism. I have been granted rollback temporarily with two extensions and am enrolled in CVUA. I have never been warned for any of my CV actions (although I have made a couple misclicks), nor have I ever been blocked. I am requesting PCR to be able to do more in my CV efforts. Recently I have run into multiple pages with PC protection, and have had CV experience on them - see this, this, and the ANI thread I filed. It's quite frustrating to see the backlog, and also not be able to reject revisions I know are bad. I've read up and understand all the relevant policy and would love to help. Thanks! Giraffer munch 21:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done. Fun fact: technically, non-PCR editors can reject edits—if you submit an edit that reverts a PC-protected article to its last accepted revision, that edit will be automatically accepted. Mz7 (talk) 06:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Walwal20[edit source | edit]

I have seen some innocent pending changes in my watchlist, and would like to be able to accept them when this happens. I believe I know enough of WP:MOS and MOS:MATH (since I mostly contribute to mathematics articles) to be granted this permission. I also believe I can identify clear WP:VANDALISM; if it is not clear vandalism, I'd assume good faith and accept the edit if I felt capable of improving upon their accepted edit. Best, Walwal20 talkcontribs 02:24, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Mz7 (talk) 06:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Suonii180[edit source | edit]

Hello! I've been a Wikipedian for a while now and I would like to contribute and help out more. I have read and understood WP:RPC and I also understand WP: VANDALISM, WP:MOS and WP:GF. Suonii180 (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Mz7 (talk) 03:43, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:SwitchBladeZer0[edit source | edit]

I have been in wiki for a few months now, and would like to take on some additional responsibility to help in assisting in filtering out vandalism. SwitchBladeZer0 (talk) 05:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Spudlace[edit source | edit]

Quite a few of the pages on my watch list have the pending changes protection so I would use it to review these types of changes. I already have rollback and use huggle for vandalism. Spudlace (talk) 08:07, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:CptViraj[edit source | edit]

I would like to have my PCR back, It was removed on a self-request. -- CptViraj (talk) 06:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Rollback[edit source | edit]


User:Rdp060707[edit source | edit]

I am a user who fights vandalism since June 15 of this year. I first reverted vandalism on this article called "Bacoor", then to Philippine-related articles, who has vandalized edits on any section. As of today, i went to any articles vandalized by any vandals. I reverted this by "Undo" button as of today, but it is time to give permission to rollback any vandalism over the free encyclopedia. My edits on my first day on Wikipedia is 2, and as of today, it grown now to 4,026. I got thanked by the users of Wikipedia for my fight against vandalism. It looks like that i am a fastest-growing Wikipedian by total of contributions. I already read the instructions on how the one Wikipedian rollbacked the vandalized edits. Rdp060707 (talk) 07:45, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Wug·a·po·des 22:20, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Nalbarian[edit source | edit]

There are many incidents reported regarding vandalism on Wikipedia after a social media debate or due to other controversies. I always try to figure out the reasons why it's happening and then what the root cause of doing these activities by people. Rollback feature will be added advantage for me to prevent such vandalism. Please check my profile for trust factor. Thank you! Nalbariantalk 06:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done Insufficient experience. Only 5 undoes in total and a recent warn for copyright violations. Anarchyte (talkwork) 14:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Doggy54321[edit source | edit]

Hello! I’m Doggy54321. I am applying to become a rollbacker because the pages I visit always have vandalism, and I would like a quicker way to revert that. I have been on Wikipedia since June 2019, have made over 1800 edits, and have familiarized myself with what vandalism on Wikipedia looks like and how to revert it. Currently, I don’t have Twinkle or any other tool, so reverting vandalism takes more time. Thank you for considering me! Doggy54321 (talk) 13:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Wug·a·po·des 22:23, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:KRtau16[edit source | edit]

I am regularly active on Wikipedia editing mostly on Fijian related articles. I've been watching the recent changes and I've reverted a lot of edits usually on vandalism or unsourced statements. I was declined this request due to "No Experience", however I've been using Twinkle and RedWarn. Just want to help out more. Thanks. KRtau16 (talk) 05:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([4]). MusikBot talk 05:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Contributions since previous decline show good reverts with warnings and AIV reports as necessary, so I think reasons for previous decline have been resolved. Wug·a·po·des 22:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:AviationFreak[edit source | edit]

Hello! I've spent a decent amount of time on enwiki, creeping up on 3,000 edits (currently >1300 in mainspace). I occasionally do vandalism watching and I would like to try using Huggle instead of Twinkle, as my current setup does not work as smoothly as I'd like. I've read the guidelines thoroughly and I'm pretty familiar with Wikipedia policy. AviationFreak💬 19:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Wug·a·po·des 22:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Seemplez[edit source | edit]

I have been using Twinkle to fight vandalism in my spare time for a few months now, and I feel that rollback permissions would be beneficial in helping me continue this. I have just over 1000 edits on all wikis, of which 600 are on enwn. Thank you for considering me. Seemplez 13:08, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
It has been two days, any update? Seemplez 11:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Wug·a·po·des 22:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Jacob Gotts[edit source | edit]

Hi! I've been a Wikipedia user for a number of years, but I have been getting more seriously into it now -- creating articles, participating in project dicussion, and most relevant to this, patrolling RecentChanges. So far I have done a couple thousand rollbacks using TWINKLE. While this basically works (and I have little rollback buttons on the page), it sometimes gets sluggish, and it's kind of tiresome to load fifty separate tabs from RC... and then try to keep my browser windows straight when each revert shifts focus to a new tab for giving the user talkpage warning. I have heard that Huggle is a well-made piece of software and I'd like to try it out. I don't think I have done any seriously dumb rollbacks (although I have fat-fingered a couple and reverted to the wrong version). I don't know of any way to measure the efficacy of a rollbacker beyond that, but my reverts almost always stand, and people give me "thanks" sometimes, so I guess that's cool. jp×g 09:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done, although try to escalate warnings only after they've ignored previous ones, Lofty abyss 10:13, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:PlanetJuice[edit source | edit]

This account is a clean start and has overwhelmingly been used to fight vandalism over the past several months (with a little bit of copy editing and other tasks as well). I know my activity has been very off-and-on as time permits for me to edit, so I completely understand if an administrator wants to see a more constant editing pattern over time. I'm currently using Twinkle for CV, but if approved for rollback, I would like to use Huggle and possibly try out some other rollback-mandatory software. Besides CV and RCP, I'm also looking to get involved in some other things, such as DYK and some WikiProjects. Thanks for your time! —PlanetJuice (talkcontribs) 02:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Thepesar[edit source | edit]

Hello! I’m Thepesar. I am applying to become a rollbacker because the most pages I visit always have vandalism, and I would like a quicker way to revert that. I have been on Wikipedia since june 2019, have made many edits and doing help wikipedia encyclopedia , Thank you Thepesar (talk) 01:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has 102 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 02:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 Request withdrawn Thepesar (talk) 02:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Template editor[edit source | edit]