Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Administrator instructions

Requests for permissions
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, 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 01:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)


Permissions

Handled here

User groups

  • 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 Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia: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 only need to give a reason for wanting AWB access if you do not meet these qualifications.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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 Wikipedia 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 hoverbar. At administrators' discretion, the right may be accorded on a time limited basis or indefinite. Note: This is a 'use-it-or-lose-it' right.
  • 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 Wikipedia editing and its policies for contributing to the process of reviewing articles placed under pending changes.
  • 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 Wikipedia: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

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

Removal of permissions

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.

Note: The bureaucrat, checkuser and oversight flags cannot be removed using this process page; those need to be posted at 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.

Any editor may comment on requests for permission.

Administrators

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). 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

Account creator


Autopatrolled

User:Broichmore

Broichmore has been around since 2009 and has produced 30 good quality and non-contentious articles, mostly about ships and historical figures. While not a high number of creations, the pace has increased this year. They are clearly aware of the notability requirements and I think are suitable for the autopatrolled right. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done I'm not comfortable granting this flag at this time. Broichmore is doing some good work, but when they had finished with their latest creation, it looked like this, and required substantial work from a new page patroller, including an orange refimprove tag. Vanamonde (talk) 11:47, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, but it looks from the edit history like someone else took it on before Broichmore could finish it. Isn't this permission mainly about the notability of the creations? Philafrenzy (talk) 12:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: I wouldn't say so. NPP's primary function is to screen wholly unsuitable articles, but patrollers are also expected to review the content (see Wikipedia:New pages patrol). As such, if an editor is going to bypass it, we want them to be consistently creating articles that require no attention at all.
Also, 30 articles over nearly a decade isn't a creation rate that will have any appreciable impact on NPP, so I'd say that Broichmore has no demonstrated need for the right. – Joe (talk) 13:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, thank you. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps some explanation is required here. I was at a Wiki event and this article was created to showcase Chrome, its apps, especially Google translate, along with how to give attribution to the original foreign wiki editor from whose article this was translated etc. That's why the article is non-sequitur to my usual modus operandi, and uncharacteristic / unrepresentative of my work. The intention was to go home and sort out any outpoints, as it was inappropriate to follow through at the time. No one thought, that within 40 minutes someone would jump in and make the necessary changes to it, rather than flagged for speedy delete. By the time I got home there was nothing to do. I regret this exercise now. If your going to judge me I would have been happier if my work over several previous articles had been examined, rather than one. Also I have created 23 articles in less than two years. Does this plea make for any mitigation? Regards. Broichmore (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Teratix

I normally make a couple of uncontroversial, stub-/start-class articles every week on Australian Football League debutants. I think they are of good enough quality to skip manual review. TeraTIX 07:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 Done Nice work! Schwede66 08:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

User:Luigi Boy

Dear admins, I've recently seen the tag on the last edited page that a user did make use of this tool. I thought this would be a nice tool to correct some of the errors I've made. Luigi Boy ルアイヂ ボイ talk 05:58, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @Luigi Boy: What kind of errors are you talking about? Swarm 12:16, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
    • @Swarm: I thought about typing mistakes. Additionally, I'd like to improve some articles, I've been reading through. Using AWB I could tweak articles a lot faster.--Luigi Boy ルアイヂ ボイ talk 12:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Nctechnology

some of other editors use AWB to tweak articles. AWB would help me to make small improvements to the many articles that I start and edit. i want to write high lavels Aeticles and try to fixed some errors of wikipedia article so that i need Auto Wiki Browser Nctechnology (talk) 11:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC) Nctechnology (talk) 11:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has approximately 36 non-automated edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 13:30, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done, fails minimum edit criteria. Primefac (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed

User:Chocoboyworld

Chocoboyworld (talk) 13:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 13:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)


Not done No reason given Swarm 18:20, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Event coordinator

User:Sic19

I am a Wikimedia UK accredited trainer and request this permission to make sure I can be responsive to requests for training at short notice. I will be involved in two or three training events in the UK over the next three months and I am also supporting a project that is likely to require ad hoc training as it progresses. Please ask if you require any further information. Thanks, Simon Cobb (Sic19 ; talk page) 23:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 Done through the end of the year. If you still need it after that, feel free to request again. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:31, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Extended confirmed

User:Awangba Mangang

Awangba Mangang (talk) 06:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 06:50, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

File mover


Mass message sender


New page reviewer

User:Jonathan35is

I have read the New Pages Reviewer guidelines and know what is expected for this role. I have created several new pages and also have experience in moving an article. I made a request before and was asked to apply again after a month to see how I handled my Pending Changes Reviewer role. Jonathan35is (talk) 15:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([1]). MusikBot talk 15:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done No CSD/AFC expirience, plus, you uploaded copyright images to Wikipedia (see commons deletion logs of files) in May. Not comfortable giving you this right at the moment. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 16:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I understand. Is it required to have both AfC and CSD experience, or are contributions to just WP:AfC fine? I also want to clarify that I uploaded those images when I first joined Wikipedia four years ago in 2014, and I nominated them for speedy deletion in May of this year when I read and familiarised myself with the policies of both Wikipedia and the website of those two images. Jonathan35is (talk) 08:20, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Jonathan35is: Either or works for me, if you have both, even better. Just something to show me you know how to handle basic issues with WP:NOTE, WP:BLP, WP:NOT, CSD A7 & G11, and handling newcomers. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Cymru.lass

I used to review new pages pages way back when, before a permission was needed. I've been less-active on Wikipedia over the last three years due to school constraints, but now that everything's calmed down I'm ready to jump back in. I have an eight-year history of editing with this username, and I was an IP editor for I think two years before that? I have a good working knowledge of the criteria for speedy deletion, as well as content guidelines and the PROD and AfD processes. Please let me know if I can answer any questions for you! cymru.lass (talkcontribs) 19:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done You've only been back about two weeks time. You have no draft space/WP:AFC experience (I understand you had some before ACTRIAL, but I'm looking for something recent to review) and your last CSD was June 2015. I would like you to become familiar with policies again and have edits to show that you understand any changes that have occurred in policy, and to show you remember them well. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@DeltaQuad: Sounds like a plan. I'll work on that and come back in a while! cymru.lass (talkcontribs) 16:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Johannes Maximilian

Hereby, I am requesting page reviewer rights. I own the corresponding rights in the German language version of Wikipedia, also, I am mentor for new users over there. After several years of editing Wikipedia, I know how to create good articles and how to use reliable sources, resulting in over 140 (including some good and featured) German articles (average size more than 8 kB) and several English articles. With page reviewer rights, I want to ensure that the quality of Wikipedia remains on a high level. Best regards, --Johannes Maximilian (talk) 02:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC) Johannes Maximilian (talk) 02:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has 229 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 02:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done You've been relatively inactive the past several months, you don't have any CSD/AFD experience, you only have 229/500 mainspace edits (and the NPR page clearly notes contributions from other wikis are not taken into account). Are you trying to apply for WP:AUTOPATROL? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
I am not applying for autopatrol. I known well how speedy deletion and deletion in general work, the reason for my "inactivity" is that I am mostly active in the German language version of Wikipedia. It says editors "should" have made 500 edits to the ANS that demonstrate knowledge of page quality control, not must have made. Considering that there are several editors on Wikipedia with over 100,000 edits but almost zero content contribution, I suppose that taking the quantity of edits into consideration only isn't the best way of determining how someone edits Wikipedia; I have seen plently of editors with page patrol rights on the German language Wikipedia who would even mark obvious vandalism as "good" edits. It's up to you to believe me or not, but, as I said, I am not a Wikipedia beginner. Best regards, --Johannes Maximilian (talk) 10:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Abelmoschus Esculentus

I have been reviewing AfC submissions for a while. I also have some experience in article maintenance and would like to help clear the backlog. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 06:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([2]). MusikBot talk 06:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Page mover



Pending changes reviewer

User:Goodtiming8871

Hello. I'm requesting the pending changes reviewer permission to support implement edit requests and counter vandalism. I've been on Wikipedia for some time now and I've familiarised myself with most of the wiki policies. I have been increasing my edits in recent months and will continue doing so. I have also created several adequately cited and formatted articles, such as 2018 inter-Korean summit, Peace House, House of Freedom. As such, I would like to request for this permission to assist me in handling vandalism and I'm able to identify undoubtedly inappropriate edits accurately and promptly to improve Wikipedia articles. Thanks for your consideration. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 02:58, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 Done Mz7 (talk) 03:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Rollback

User:Funplussmart

I spend a lot of my time on Wikipedia reverting vandalism and other violations of Wikipedia policy. I think having Rollback will help me a lot in my efforts to keep this site clean from vandals and trolls. funplussmart (talk) 21:20, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 Done I have spot-checked your contributions, and those of your reverts that I checked were all correct. Vanamonde (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Tulsi Bhagat

Namaste ! As stated by the revoker, I'm here to let you know that I have some free time from my busy schedule & I'm active a bit against vandals these days and the slow internet connection here in Nepal prevents loading Twinkle Gadget which upsets me most of the time. Honestly, I've acknowledged my mistakes (Running sock farms in past year for which i have been globally locked). Actually, My intention wasn't bad & haven't yet misused any of my permissions or the associated tools. I apology from my inner core of the heart for my bad(s) and lastly i would like to request you to re-grant me the revoked permission(s) (If i can be trusted a bit) which will be quite helpful for my anti-vandalism task. Thanks for reading my request ! Kind Regards,Tulsi Bhagat (talk) 02:33, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm inclined to grant this, but given the history with the global lock, etc, I'm going to ping Ajraddatz to confirm that there is no reason to believe this account is/was compromised, as was originally stated in the unlock request. Vanamonde (talk) 12:06, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed, the account is/was not compromised, and to the best of my knowledge has not returned to previous disruptive behaviour. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
While Vanamonde may be ready to give this back, normally when we allow a sockmaster back in at English Wikipedia, we ask to know about all accounts that were ever used. There is nothing easily linked in your request which explains what happened a year and a half ago. Could you please provide this? I also do understand your a sysop at two other wikis. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:56, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
@DeltaQuad: Hope it explains everything (I want to forget all this. Please, forgive me.). Thanks for your consideration ! Kind Regards,Tulsi Bhagat (talk) 15:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for being open about the issue. I'll take a look a little later. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
The socking issue looks like a mess. I would try to make sure you keep on the good side while you are here. I have reviewed your recent reverts for consideration as I would with anyone else. Can you explain why you are only selectively warning people? Also you only have been back for a week, racking up edits. How can we be sure you remember policies with only being back a week? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
It's fine. Thanks for reviewing my recent reverts. I would say, It's my bad that I'm selectively warning people. I'm afraid to make any other fault. Hoping this uncontroversial. I'll try to recover my bad. Actually, racking up edits depend on my real life leisure time. The more i have the free time & the more i will be involved. Also, This is the time i have fascinated here on en.wiki to contribute. I assure you that I still remember the policies. Since, I'm a Sysop at two other wikis & also a Rollbacker at Commons. If you have any additional questions or concerns, Please feel free to ask. Regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (talk) 07:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

User:LovSLif

I have seen many edit wars and vandalism among the users who modify the spaces specifically with the Indian articles which I actively monitor. Request you to grant me the acess to more effectively manage and maintain the peace By LovSLif (talk) 03:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 03:30, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done There is no way that rollback can be used to "maintain the peace" in edit wars and is fundamentally against the nature of the user right. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:58, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Knightrises10

I have been fighting vandalism from quote some time. My previous request was rejected for Indid not reach the criteria and had only a few edits at that time. However, now I have learned a lot about vandalism, good faith edits and other policies. I hope to get the rights to assist me. Thanks, Knightrises10 (talk) 21:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC) Knightrises10 (talk) 21:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([3]) and has 185 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 08:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done You are sparingly warning users about the reverts you are making, and you also missed oversightable content in a recent revert you made. You also don't seem to be following swarm's advice as you applied for this after you were declined for PCR. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
@DeltaQuad: I just checked the previous declined request as it wasn't in my watchlist. I'm looking forward to the counter vandalism academy. However, if I revert vandalism by an IP user, should i warn them too? Thanks, Knightrises10 (talk) 16:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, you need to be warning everyone. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

User:JC7V7DC5768

Hi, I want rollback for so I can fight vandalism more efficiently . Rollback would help me undo fast blatant vandalism. But i would put 100 percent care into using it per guidelines for it. I have studies the Rollback page for about a week and have grasped the ins and out of it.

However, I would only use rollback to revert blatant vandalism. For consecutive edits that are edits that violate Wikipedia's policies that aren't blatant vandalism, I will just click 'edit' and remove the edits manually (to the way they were before those non vandalism but still bad edits were made).

I would never use rollback to undue anything but blatant obvious vandalism, so using it an 'edit war' would never occur.

Using Rollback would also benefit me in that I could use Huggle which would only benefit me fighting vandalism even more.

I always mark in my edit summaries clearly and in user talk pages of editors who I revert clearly and whether the edit that I reverted is vandalism, tests, unsourced ,commentary, non neutral POV edit(s), MOS issues etc. I use all the warning templates so I am as clear as I can be to the user that I am warning so they can know what they did wrong and how to change it for the better .I am not perfect and I would be more than willing to have rollback for a trial period if you feel it is needed. Thank you. JC7V-constructive zone 01:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([4]). MusikBot talk 01:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Template editor

User:Scout MLG

Because i like be edit more template for help wikipedia. Scout MLG (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has 590 total edits and has 8 edits in the template and module namespaces. MusikBot talk 02:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done. You don't need TPE in order to edit most templates, just the ones that are heavily used. Primefac (talk) 02:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=841239541"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Requests for permissions"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA