Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 18:40, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


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, 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 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.
  • 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.
  • 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 come from members of the Arbitration Committee or a user who is requesting their own access be removed.



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 are permitted to grant account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, 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



Can you please give me autopatrolled rights, I'm a genuine contributor,I contribute to the Wikipedia in whatever way I can,I often help newcomers too,as I don't want a valuable contributor quit wikipedia. Can you please assign me the autopatrolled rights, Im requesting these rights as lot of articles are created everyday,other patrollers may not be able to patrol a newly created page, due to which most of the articles including some of mine remains unreviewed, I meet the criteria of having 25 new articles, I admit that initially 2 of my created articles were deleted, it was because I was a new user 1 year ago ,and had no information about guidelines and notablility, and as I do not belong from programming background ,so I had not knowledge about markup language, but after that i worked very hard and by myself learnt markup languages,read guidelines and now i have more than 1000 edits, the autopatrolled rights will really be helpful. Anoptimistix (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has created roughly 24 articles. MusikBot talk 21:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Anoptimistix, I believe 30 is the minimum number of articles created for you to be eligible for autopatrol rights. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
The guideline for granting is 25 articles, but the bot is only counting live articles (not deleted), bringing this user's total down to 23 MusikAnimal talk 20:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 Comment: Now I have 26 undeleted articles, please check. you can also check my pending changes reviewing and new page patrolling history, I have done my work honestly

Anoptimistix (talk) 04:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm having a look now. Schwede66 01:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Not done Anoptimistix, your work, especially the last five articles, give the impression of great haste resulting in a sloppy output that is definitely worth others casting an eye over. You should consider taking more time and producing fewer articles, but improving the quality of what you work on. As an aside, the first thing I do when I review an editor's work is look at their talk page. Yours is empty apart from being granted the pending changes reviewer userright. Looking through the talk page history, I come across numerous PROD notices (admittedly, your articles are mainly kept) and copyright violation notices. Deleting those items, and only keeping the userright notice, looks like hat collecting while trying to hide the stuff that's not pleasant. I can guarantee you that this gives the exact opposite impression of what you might try to achieve, and I suggest you start archiving your talk page instead. Schwede66 02:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Schwede66:. Thanks for spending your valuable time at looking at my autopatrolled rights request. I really felt bad to know that you had an unpleasant experience reviewing my talk page history, but I didn't intentionally deleted other messages, I like to keep things clean so I removed those messages . I didn't knew about talk page archiving, but as you informed me about it I had created archive box in my user page, I will save all future messages there. And I kept pending changes right notice because it had the useful link of pending changes feeds, so it was time consuming as I could have direct access to the feeds, rather than searching on Google . And about the articles that I created fast I want to say that I did it because bot informed me that I had created 23 articles, I got to know that I had to create 25 live (undeleted articles) , my initial 2 articles were deleted if you go through it you may realise that I was newbie at that time so I had no knowledge about guidelines and wiki markup languages at that time. But I self- learnt markup language and I am contributing genuinely to this amazing encyclopedia, and about copyright violations I had less knowledge about image file licensing , but know I am fully informed about Creative Commons licence etc, initially I was not informed that lyrics are not allowed in songs article, but after I got informed I never write lyrics in song article. Mistakes happen with humans, you can go through my Wikipedia contribution history ,I always tried to help new comers and contribute genuinely as much as I can.

I am not hat collecting , initially I didn't bothered about autopatrolled rights but now I have to bother because my created articles gets unreviewed for a very long time I wanted autopatrolled rights ,because new page patrollers hardly patroll new pages due to workload, I am too a new page patroller I can understand this, as most pages remains unreviewed for long time , it gets uindexed in search engines, and all my hard work and effort, and time goes in vain because of this.

If you can assign me the rights ,then I would get more encouraged to work and contribute about India and music ,biographies of notable person etc relate articles to the wikipedia without bothering about getting my contributions ignored.

Anoptimistix (talk) 06:48, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your considered reply, Anoptimistix. How about you look closely through the edits that I've made on your last ten articles, take the issues on board, produce five more articles that are up to scratch, and then come back here? I'd be most glad to have another look. Schwede66 06:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Schwede66: I have created 5 more articles upon your advice, please spend some of your valuable time checking those articles, honestly I try to fix those issues. I won't have requested autopatrolled rights if my created articles would have been reviewed within sometime of it's creation,but unfortunately for months many of them stays unreviewed, but I know I can't complain as I am too a new page patroller I know the workload there is, as a patroller I try to do sincerely my work but unfortunately I can't patrol my own creations that's why Autopatrolled rights would have been very helpful to me.Anoptimistix (talk) 17:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


The user's only been around about ten months, but they've managed to create 65 articles, and they're categorically undeletable since nearly all are species. They only have a few hundred edits, but that's pretty deceptive since they're creating articles in a single edit, where the same work might otherwise be done by another user in dozens of edits. TimothyJosephWood 19:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 Donexaosflux Talk 11:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Paul 012

I previously said I wouldn't bother, but seeing how some of my page creations still remain unpatrolled after half a year, increasing the backlog with my edits seems like something that should be avoided. The fact that a highly searched-for news topic like Death of Wichian Klanprasert is still stuck in the backlog (and thus unindexed by Google) was a regrettable missed opportunity. Paul_012 (talk) 05:57, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Paul 012, I've now patrolled all yours in the backlog, although any more than 30 days old were already available for indexing by Google. Boleyn (talk) 10:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
It was 30 days, now 90 days. Legacypac (talk) 23:00, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Reviewing this request now. Schwede66 02:35, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Good work! If you wanted to improve things even further, your referencing could be a bit denser.  Done Schwede66 03:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Been on the project nearly ten years, 3.5k mainspace edits, 85 articles created, none deleted, clean block log. You'll find on their talk page where myself and other have raised issues with their articles that needed fixing, and from what I can tell, from the moment the issues were raised onward, it was never an issue again. Most recent articles are pretty much impeccable stubs as far as I can tell. TimothyJosephWood 16:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC) TimothyJosephWood 16:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Reviewing this request now. Schwede66 03:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Ok, I'm picky, but having looked over the last 10 articles (all from June 2017!), there were a ton of little things that I improved. Have a look through my contributions, starting with this edit and then the next 23 or so edits (ignoring the date setting exercise which is mostly just there to get a dmy tag but it did pick up a few MOS issues, too). I'd be inclined to say that the articles could do with review, but if another admin thinks that autopatrolled can be granted, that'll be fine. Schwede66 04:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Well... you might have a better argument if the improvements you've done had happened before the articles were reviewed. But whatever issues there are, reviewing doesn't seem to be fixing them. TimothyJosephWood 11:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Requesting for Hildabast, who has now written 29 great articles on science and scientists, with her consent. I'm keen to reduce the review queue in future and her articles are all very solid. Blythwood (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2017 (UTC) Blythwood (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


Sports articles mainly, and those I'ver eviewed are well-formed from the start. Boleyn (talk) 13:44, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 11:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Amys eye

Good articles on notable Chinese people; no concerns about those I've patrolled. Another editor raised an issue about Kristina Hu, but this is an atypical topic for Amys eye.

Boleyn (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


I don't create a large number of articles, but if any of the load can be taken off the good people at NPP, that's probably a good thing. Of course, I'm open to any questions. Equineducklings (talk) 15:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


I have been on Wikipedia for 4 years and have created numerous articles. I believe I would benefit from the user rights as I understand policies for creating new articles and I don't think articles I create should be worth patrolling. Thank you! Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 20:54, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has created roughly 10 articles. MusikBot talk 00:40, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Not done Keep up your good work and once you've got 25 articles under your belt, please come back and apply again. Schwede66 01:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I've made almost 7,000 edits and created over 40 articles and none have been deleted (a redirect was deleted to make way for a move). I intend to keep creating new articles which would add to the backlog, hence I'm hoping to be granted this user right. Bennv3771 (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Oberhof has created over 100 articles, mainly on Ukrainian topics. I've no concerns. Boleyn (talk) 06:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


Has created 33 pages and no deletions. Mainly works in disambiguation, and has shown a solid understanding of page requirements by correctly nominating dozens of dabs for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 09:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


Has created around 68 articles, including around 26 this year, none of which were deleted. Seems to have learnt from his initial articles getting deleted. Works on old Indian movies, and adds as much references that can possibly be found. Also has many FA, GA and FL credits, so its probably time we let his articles pass through automatically.Jupitus Smart 12:24, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Rajkrishnan R

I've been active in Wiki since 5 years, and have created a number of Articles, and is now willing for the Autopatrolled Group. Rajkrishnan R (talk) 15:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has created roughly 1 article. MusikBot talk 15:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


Has created nearly 50 articles, 3 deleted (looks like at creator's request), and those date back to 2013. Recent articles are well-referenced and I have no concerns. Boleyn (talk) 19:15, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Roy Bateman

Has created 85 pages, 1 deleted (and I think this was an error in the title and topic created elsewhere). No concerns. Boleyn (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:09, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks Both.Roy Bateman (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


Mliu92 has 39 entries with no deletions and clean block log in eight years on the project. On a personal note, I encountered Mliu's strong work when they contributed greatly to an entry I had begun: for comparison, my opening foray versus after their additions! (And all done in just a couple of edits, so even if their edit count may seem somewhat low next to length of tenure, they're clearly doing a great deal of work before posting that others--ahem, yours truly--might more likely do in a series of successive edits.) Innisfree987 (talk) 03:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:10, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Jonas kam

Lots of good articles, mainly on volleyball. Small number of deletions (6) seem to be broken redirects rather than deleted articles. Boleyn (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 10:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)



I wish to use AWB to clean up various warship pages, and ensure the pages share the same format. Some entries for ships of the same class have noticeably different details. I will also use AWB to work on all of the GOES-series satellite pages to use the same designation format (e.g. GOES-16 instead of GOES 16). More generally, I will use AWB to fix other errors as I find them. Dziban303talk 13:07, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Recently I start back work in article that related to the Diplomatic missions of Palestine, and after create several of them I notice that I must replaced the position of some templates and to change the name of some portal (Example), and some time I create some templates and I wanna put them in suitable articles, and add them manually is hard -almost-. I'm a sysop in and know how to use AWB in correct way (I use it in ckb.wikipedia also, and use it by My Bot). Finally I read Gide and the policy that related to using AWB in en.wikipedia. Thanks --Alaa :)..! 12:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


I'd like to AWB to fix case of letters in articles, mainly singles articles as I've been working on them, some of them tend to capitalize the "V" in "Music video" in section headings. Otherwise just something like changing "Tracklist" or "Track listings" into "Track listing", or "Chart positions" to "Charts". Hayman30 (talk) 08:01, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


Extended confirmed


~AbHi Chat Me!! 📥 10:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm from Hindi Wikipedia. Want to Edit Many things here but not able. So I'm requesting you to give a permission.

 Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 10:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

File mover

User:Tushar Singha

I would like to continue sorting throuh orphaned files and moving these with ambigous titles/descriptions to better names as to identify the subject of the file better. Tushar Singha (talk) 14:46, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for file mover declined in the past 90 days ([1]). MusikBot talk 14:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: My previous request was not done as i do not understand that the user rights is for which. Now I understand how can it use and for which. Tushar Singha (talk) 15:14, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
@Tushar Singha: My biggest concern is that you do not have a good understanding of the English language. Did you know we have a Hindi Wikipedia? You might consider contributing there. They could use your help! MusikAnimal talk 20:08, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


I am an editor on wikipedia since 2015.I have reviewer,rollback and Page mover user rights permissions.I wish to organise files in sets and correct error filled file to ones with meaningful names.I've a file mover user rights on the wikimedia commons.See here.Now i need a file mover user right permission.thanks.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@CAPTAIN RAJU: It doesn't appear that you've had much to do with files on this project (no uploads) and only 26 edits in the file namespace. Could you please comment on your need for this permission (as opposed to just making a request). Thanks, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Callanecc, I see that the rough guideline says a uploaded and rename of a file at Commons. I would like to mention that I am not a new user, I am basically requesting this permission for project so that I don't have to keep track of the files I have requested for renaming (to see if the renaming is done), which will delay the review process, to make it easy I requested the flag so that I can rename, when I see it required per our renaming guidelines.I thought that if Commons has upload or file mover user rights then the file mover user rights in wikipedia would be considered acceptable.I will re-request when I experience {{Rename media}}.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:31, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Lately I am working on big series of non-free images for film festival posters, some have been uploaded with meaningless names that do not harmonize with at least some of their surrounding years of the series. And each series of festival needs a more consistent naming. I would have to make too many requests to file movers while I can do it by myself instead. I have file mover rights in Commons by the way. Hoverfish Talk 02:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC) Hoverfish Talk 02:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Mass message sender

New page reviewer

User:Michael Powerhouse

I am interested in expanding my Wikipedia activity from editing and creating articles to helping newcomers, and looking through new articles is one way I'm interested in doing this. Michael Powerhouse (talk) 13:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm concerned about your understanding of Wikipedia policy related to new articles given that a number of the articles you have created have been deleted (of three created this year, two have been deleted). Could you please comment on that? Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:24, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I made 190 patrols under the old system and was hoping to do some more. You will notice that I don't edit regularly, but hopefully you will also notice that I understand the rules rather well. Rentier (talk) 21:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 Question: You have only made 99 mainspace edits over the past 12 months. As 90% of the new page reviews are being done by less than 10% of those who request this right (less than 40 out of 400+), please let us know how you believe you have a need for this right and what your commitment to it would be. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I see it simply as an extra way to do my bit to help the project. As mentioned above, I don't edit regularly. On the other hand, it appears that the 156 patrols I made in April 2016 would put me among the most active reviewers in any given month. I would expect my activity in the coming months to at least match the last year's level. Rentier (talk) 19:16, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Many rules and guidelines have changed since you were last active. Please confirm that you have read and understood all the tutorials for Page Reviewing and Page Curation. Thanks Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:46, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I confirm I have carefully read the tutorials. I have also refreshed my knowledge of some of the relevant policies and guidelines (Notability, Deletion, COPYVIO, COI). Rentier (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I have read the guidelines for granting the New Page reviewer user right and believe that I meet all of the criteria. Having created articles myself and edited many, I am familiar with the maintenance tags, CSD and notability guidelines. I have been watching the Special:NewPagesFeed recently and tagging articles for speedy deletions, and I believe that I can competently help with the quality control of new pages. Bennv3771 (talk) 15:17, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I'd like to get this permission in order to be able to use the curation toolbar. I sometimes help review new content and it'd be helpful to have the toolbar that help me in that area. I've read the tutorial and feel well informed with the tool. SweetCanadianMullet 04:47, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Love to work on articles by either creating new ones or building on already existing ones. Love to have this right so I can be of more service. Thanks. God bless. CrossTemple Jay 21:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done, however, Crosstemplejay ensure that you fully familiarise yourself with the tutorials (WP:NPP & WP:NPT) before beginning to patrol. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 01:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Page mover


Working on articles mainly from Ghana in particular and Africa in general, I regularly come across pages that need to be moved and would like to do so without waiting for an admin. Thanks. CrossTemple Jay 16:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:21, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I've written and created a lot of high quality new articles (see list: User:Sagecandor#Articles_created). It was kindly suggested to me by Nicnote to ask for this. I've got 8,000 edits over 7 months. Thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 23:10, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Sagecandor: Could you please comment on your understanding of when the page mover right should be used, or your experience in contributing to move discussions. Thanks, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I need the page mover right to be able to move pages without leaving a redirect. E.g. moving an unsuitable article to draft, moving articles to assist at WP:RM, round-robin moves if necessary. - TheMagnificentist 11:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Not done This is an administrator level tool and I'd like to see long-term (at least a year) of editing which demonstrates a clear understanding and application of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Specifically edit warring and incivility are big red flags for this tool as it would grant you the ability to do things without discussion which can be difficult to detect and revert. I'd suggest re-applying after November with a very clear demonstration that you've learnt from the block and that you have demonstrated behaviour which clearly shows an understanding of policy and guidelines. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


Primary reason is for round-robin moves of articles which do not meet naming conventions. Secondary reason is including subpages when moving main page. I have reviewed Wikipedia:Page mover and am familiar with the policies and guidelines regarding page moving and naming. Zyxw (talk) 21:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Emir of Wikipedia

I'm just going to go ahead and request this on their behalf. They have well beyond the requirements, and per this thread they're active in areas where it will be helpful. Two years on the project, almost 20k edits, and a clean block log. No reason not to do it. TimothyJosephWood 22:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
@Emir of Wikipedia: do you want this? — xaosflux Talk 17:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: To be able to move articles between different namespaces, to help with requests at WP:RM/TR, and to be able to do round robin moves. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
No worries, just making sure it was something you actually wanted - editors aren't normally "nominated" on this one. — xaosflux Talk 20:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)


I haven't moved many pages as of now, but I do have a clear understanding of the policies. Recently I came across a page move which I could not undo, leading to this. The only other request was submitted a couple of months ago about a Ben 10 page.
If granted the flag, I can contribute actively at WP:Requested moves, and it might also be useful to move pages while reviewing new pages. (New editors/single purpose editors sometimes tend to be stubborn, they might move the page; leading to similar situation of Latur junction.) Thanks for considering my request. Best, —usernamekiran(talk) 14:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Note: I recently converted WP:MAFIA as a "semi-active" wikiproject. Currently, there is only one active member (NorthAmerica1000) other than me. There has been no work through the project as of now (i am still working on it offline), but soon it will go in action. At that time, this flag will come in handy, as there might be a few technical moves to perform. It wouldnt be efficient to go to WP:Requested moves, page mover, or an admin everytime. If there is any doubtful rename, i will discuss it before moving forward. The project is the main reason i am requesting for this flag. Surprisingly i forgot to mention it in my original request. —usernamekiran(talk) 15:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer


In recent months I was fairly active in the project and I like engaging. I cherish the guidelines of Wikipedia and aim to contribute in a beneficial and supportive manner. I was absent for some time, however given the new circumstance and opportunity, as well as the positive way i engaged and will engage in the future it would be of advantage to use this option. Joobo (talk) 20:23, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Not done Sorry Joobo, I appreciate that you have made an effort to adhere to community norms since your return, however, I'd like to see at least 6 months of editing following your unblock which clearly demonstrates that you understand and can comply with policies and guidelines. Happy to discuss further if you'd like to. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:35, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Well then I guess I got to wait until September 11th. Anyway, happy editing.--Joobo (talk) 09:46, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


I've been on Wikipedia for two and a half years, and most of what I've done in that time is copy-editing and checks for spelling, grammar, sentence fluency, etc on varying pages. My only reason for this request is to be able to quickly reject pending changes that are blatantly vandalism, and to accept valid contributions made by the community. CentreLeftRight 04:08, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

User:A Great Catholic Person

I have had rollback rights for several months, and have made over 8,000 edits to Wikipedia, with a small number of them before 2017. I am against vandalism, and the majority of my edits have been improving Wikipedia and taking down unconstructive edits. For pages with pending versions, I just want to make sure the edits meet guidelines. It's not only vandalism, I patrol recent changes for a few hours a day, sometimes going over 200-300 hundred edits a day, and have also reverted other unconstructive edits such as neutral point of view, unsourced content, etc. and in my opinion, having this right will give me a boost. A Great Catholic Person (talk) 00:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:38, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


I would like to have the right to review articles, and are therefore requesting to do so. I believe I warrant this right as I am knowledgeable in specific subjects areas and would be able to ascertain whether certain articles and any information within them are correct. D0UGYT123 (talk) 01:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 Automated comment This user has 19 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 01:10, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Not done due to inexperience. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 08:18, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


User:Quite A Character

I have zero tolerance for vandalism, as should we all :) This feature would enable me to better/quicker revert substantial amounts of rubbish edits. Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Note: before setting up this account, i edited extensively as anon (my home IP, my place of work one, displaying the same disgust for vandalism but with, unfortunately, less up-to-par summaries regarding vandals/trolls). --Quite A Character (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

  • Any reason as to why this has been the only query that has not received one single word of feedback (it the problem was my report, I can certainly accommodate)? Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 09:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
@Quite A Character: Reviews can take a while. I'm curious, have you had another account previous to this one? This seems to suggest you have -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 11:15, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Indeed, twice I reached my wiki-limit (fed up mainly) of the trolling and the vandalism and asked that my account be vanished with the intention of leaving forever. Seems I cannot, which is not necessarily a bad thing because then I can improve/monitor articles :) --Quite A Character (talk) 13:13, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Quite A Character, I'd note that Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing says "vanishing is not a way to start over with a fresh account". Could you please consider revealing the link between your current and old accounts so that your editing history can be fully reviewed. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 11:26, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Sure thing, if i understood it correctly: this was the first account i vanished, AlwaysLearning (, and this the second and last Be Quiet AL ( It just hit me now that the latter is not vanished at all, i remembered asking for it back in the day but it just was not possible due to some technicality.
Can anyone please help out because i don't want to incur in any wrongdoing and/or raise some eyebrows by having two accounts at once? Hopefully i was of service replying what was asked of me, attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
My poor judgement it seems, the Be Quiet AL account seems to have been vanished, it was even renamed (728 added to it). Am i correct in this assessment? --Quite A Character (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Unless @There'sNoTime: has an objection I'm happy to grant you rollback (and pending changes reviewer if you want that too). I'd ask, however, that you note the usernames both of your two previous accounts on your userpage (template if you want) so that other users can see the link between them. Regards, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 00:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Callanecc: No objection here :) -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 09:05, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 09:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


Can you please give me rollback rights, I wanted the right. Because I love to contribute to the Wikipedia, but it's my experience that several anonymous IP's and new editors vandalise pages and make unconstructive edits,as they make several edits, it is quite difficult to revert those edits using regular reverting methods, I can distinguish between good-faith edits and vandalism

As I have spend more than an year with over 1000 edits, I regularly help new comers ,and make them familiar with guidelines ,and markup language, including helping them to create their talk pages and userpages and make them familiar with it's uses as they are not familiar with it. I primarily use mobile interface but switch on desktop mode, as it is more comfortable to edit wikipedia,while using desktop mode I faced no issues while reviewing pending pages ,and patrolling new pages,as I had been assign to these rights earlier, I will also face no problem while using roll back rights. You can check my pending changes reviewing and new page patrolling history, I have done my work honestly Anoptimistix (talk) 07:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([2]). MusikBot talk 08:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Mz7: want to review? — xaosflux Talk 17:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Xaosflux. Instead of me, I would appreciate a fresh pair of eyes on this one. Regards, Mz7 (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Winged Blades of Godric

Well, I had been a holder of this right which was revoked (by Iridescent) due to my carelessness.More than half-a-year later, I am sufficiently experienced(check my talk-page, contribs. etc.) to regain back the tool and help in maintaining the project.Incidentally I have the page-mover and pending-changes reviewer flags and there have been no complaints.Thanks! Winged Blades Godric 12:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Iridescent: having had a rummage through their contribs, I can't see anything which would be a total deal-breaker to rollback. Do you have any comments? -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 17:08, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Just fyi There'sNoTime, but iridescent hasn't edited since the 21st, four days ago. Must be factory week :) — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 09:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Comment: From my interaction with Godric, he still seems to be a little aggressive, and a little short tempered. Other than that, no issues. But the combination of these two traits and rollback can be a little risky for wikipedia. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:53, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

I have to say, my experience of User:Winged Blades of Godric is almost the polar opposite. In the last few months they appear to have 'very much taken upon themselves the way of the 'Pedian', and cast off those previous traits that originally led to the loss of RB. Just mho, of course. — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 01:11, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 Done Take it slow and consider each edit you make - if you have any questions or concerns, let me know -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 09:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


Hi all ^^ ! Requesting to be a rollbacker, please :) . I have to admit, I usually stay within a few unique articles on Wikipedia and luckily, for the most part, most of them have pretty much stayed clear of vandalism (-for the most part ;o ). When vandalism does show, though... well, I just kind'a shake my head and try to fix what has been done ;o (that is, if a bot hasn't fixed it first ;p heh ^_~ ). Bad words, advertisements, minor edits to throw an article off (like a change of a letter, etc.), a slight slip-in of something inappropriate here/there, etc., are honestly just a plain ol' time waster here on Wikipedia ;o (for both the honest editor and the person doing the vandalsim in the first place :/ ). Having been on Wikipedia for nearly four years now (Wikipedia, a great source of information - love it ;D !~), I'd like to help do my part and take a greater part in helping pages/honest editors (especially pages in my neighborhood ^_~ ) avoid the things that should not be there ;o (vandalism). Again, requesting rollbacker :) . Thank you ^_^ !!!~ Hanyou23 (talk) 07:09, 26 June 2017 (UTC) Hanyou23 (talk) 07:09, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Template editor

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
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