Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-confirmed-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:PERM" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission or Help:Permanent link.
This page is under extended confirmed protection, but non-EC users may edit its subpages.

    Requests for permissions
    Shortcuts

    This page enables administrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikipedia. Administrators are able to modify account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, extended confirmed, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback, and template editor rights, and AutoWikiBrowser access.

    Editors wishing to request a permission flag here should do so following the procedure below. Editors requesting permissions are advised to periodically revisit the requests page, as notifications will not always be given after a decision is made. Editors should not expect their request to be answered right away and should remember to be patient when filing a request. To find out what permissions your account has, go to Special:Preferences, where your permissions are listed in the user profile tab under "Member of groups".

    Requests for permissions are archived regularly; please see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Archive for an index of past requests.

    Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 19:10, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

    Permissions

    Handled here

    • Account creator (add request · view requests): The account creator flag is granted to users who are active in the request an account process. The flag removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24 hour period. It also allows users to make accounts with names similar to other accounts. The account creator flag is only given to users who participate in the ACC process and may be removed without notice should a user's participation in the account creation process cease.
    • Autopatrolled (add request · view requests): The autopatrolled flag is granted to users who are active in the creation of new articles. This tool is granted so their creations are auto patrolled in Special:NewPages. Unlike other requests, any user may nominate an editor for Autopatrolled, even without that user's consent. A user who wishes to have this flag generally should have created at least 25 articles and must be trusted, experienced, and must have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia:Notability.
    • AutoWikiBrowser (add request · view requests): AutoWikiBrowser is a semi-automated MediaWiki editor for Microsoft Windows, designed to make tedious repetitive tasks quicker and easier. It is essentially a browser that automatically opens up a new page when the last is saved. When set to do so, it suggests some changes (typically formatting) that are generally meant to be incidental to the main change. Please read the rules of use and registration requirements on the main page before requesting permission. This is not a true user right, but access needs to be granted by administrators just like other permissions. If approved, your name will be added to the CheckPage. Users with under 250 non-automated mainspace edits or 500 total mainspace edits are rarely approved. You will need to give a reason for wanting AWB access.
    • Confirmed (add request · view requests): The confirmed flag may be granted to new users who have not yet hit the threshold for autoconfirmed status. These are users who have not had both 10 edits and 4 days experience. People with this flag can upload files and edit semi-protected pages before hitting the autoconfirmed flag. Users requesting this flag must indicate clearly why they should be exempted from the customary confirmation period.
    • Event coordinator (add request · view requests): The event coordinator user right allows editors to create multiple new accounts, and to temporarily confirm accounts so that they can create new articles.
    • Extended confirmed (add request · view requests): The extended confirmed flag is normally automatically added to accounts after 500 edits and 30 days, but may be added to legitimate alternate accounts of users that already have this access. The flag allows users to edit pages under extended confirmed protection.
    • File mover (add request · view requests): The file mover user right is intended to allow users experienced in working with files to rename them, subject to policy, with the ease that autoconfirmed users already enjoy when renaming Wikipedia articles.
    • Mass message sender (add request · view requests): Mass message sender enables users to send messages to multiple users at once. This flag is given to users who have made requests for delivery in the past, clearly showing an understanding of the guidance for use.
    • New page reviewer (add request · view requests): The new page reviewer user right allows users to mark pages as patrolled and use the page curation toolbar. At administrators' discretion, the right may be accorded on a time limited basis or indefinite.
    • Page mover (add request · view requests): The page mover user right allows users experienced in working with article names to move them, subject to policy, without leaving behind a redirect. They may also move all subpages when moving the parent page(s). General guidelines include making 3,000 edits and 6 months of editing history. At administrators' discretion, the right may be accorded on a time limited basis or indefinite.
    • Pending changes reviewer (add request · view requests): The reviewer flag is granted to users who are experienced enough with Wikipedia editing and its policies for contributing to the process of reviewing articles placed under pending changes.
    • Rollback (add request · view requests): Rollback enables users to remove vandalism much more quickly and efficiently than by undoing it. Users who do not demonstrate an understanding of what constitutes capable vandalism fighting, either because they have no or little history of doing so, or show a poor ability to discern between good and bad faith edits will not be granted this right. Also, it is unlikely that editors with under 200 mainspace edits will have their request granted. For a more detailed explanation of rollback and information about when it is appropriate to use the tool, see Wikipedia:Rollback. For information about the technical details of the feature, see here.
    • Template editor (add request · view requests): The template editor flag allows users to edit protected templates and Lua modules. General guidelines for granting include making at least 1,000 edits overall (with at least 150 to templates or modules), being a registered user for over a year, and having a record of successfully proposing significant edits to several protected templates. Users should demonstrate proficiency with template syntax and an understanding of the need for caution when editing heavily-used templates.
    • Temporary account IP viewer (add request · view requests): Temporary accounts are coming to the English Wikipedia in November 2025. To prepare for this, non-admins may request access to view temporary account data.

    Handled elsewhere

    Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

    Review and removal of permissions

    The requests for permissions process is not used to review or remove user rights:

    The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight permissions are removed at meta:Steward requests/Permissions. Stewards will typically not carry out such requests unless they are made on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, by a user who is requesting their own access be removed, or in cases of an emergency.

    Process

    Requestors

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

    Administrators

    Full instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Administrator instructions

    Administrators are permitted to grant account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, event coordinator, file mover, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback and template editor flags to any user who meets the criteria explained above and can be trusted not to abuse the tool(s). Administrators may either grant these permissions permanently or temporarily. For convenience, a bot will automatically comment with relevant data if the user does not meet configurable qualifications. Even if the bot does not comment, administrators should review the user's contributions and logs to ensure the tools will be used appropriately and check for any indication of potential misuse.

    Once an administrator has granted a permission or decided to deny a request, they should add {{done}} or {{not done}} respectively under the request with their comments. If a user already has the requested permission, or is autoconfirmed and requesting confirmed, {{already done}} should be used. N hours after the last comment was made (as specified by the config), the request will be archived automatically: approved requests will be placed here; declined requests will go here. See User:MusikBot/PermClerk#Archiving for more information on archiving functionality.

    Other editors

    Requests for permissions is primarily intended for editors requesting a permission for their own account. Other editors are welcome to comment if they have specific information that is relevant to that request that a patrolling administrator is unlikely to discover for themselves. Otherwise, since only administrators can effectively respond to these requests, general comments or 'clerking' by other users are rarely helpful. Non-administrators cannot "decline" to grant a request, because they're not in a position to accept it.

    A limited exception to this is Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled, where third party nominations are encouraged. Other editors should still avoid offering general remarks on requests and leave the final decision to an administrator.

    Current requests

    Account creator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Autopatrolled

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Sswonk

    Permission was revoked at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=169754554 . The permission was revoked four months ago before I recently returned after 14 years of absence from the project, please reinstate. Sswonk (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([1]). — MusikBot talk 15:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This RfC recently established that autopatrolled can be procedurally revoked from inactive contributors, but I don't think there was consensus that it could be procedurally reinstated upon request, so I would encourage the reviewing administrator (I'm not one) to consider this like any other request. @Sswonk: I had a couple of questions about the articles you recently created: what makes this website (on Loretta Lynn: Coal Miner's Daughter) and this website (on Honky Tonk Girl: My Life in Lyrics) reliable sources? Also, since IMDb is an unreliable source, is there another citation that could be used for the award on that first article? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, I forgot to say: welcome back to the project! I realized my comments above could come across as trying to shoot you down after your wikibreak, but I did mean it as genuine questions/feedback. :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:20, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks TS69, I did not realize that you had posted here before I went to your talk, I am copy-pasting that here so we can continue the conversation in one place. Below is re: Jeff Burger, will respond on other questions momentarily.
    I added a second citation to the first paragraph of Loretta Lynn: Coal Miner's Daughter. I think the first citation is fine, yes it is a self-published source by Jeff Burger however Burger is well-known (https://www.chicagoreviewpress.com/burger--jeff-contributor-301827.php) and the site serves as an archive of his previously published reviews. The page I cite is a reprint of a review first published in 1976, the publication is not specified, however the information about Burger suggests it satisfies "Self-published sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." See also https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=au=%22Burger%2C%20Jeff%22 -- Burger should be considered reliable. Sswonk (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding the second question about Chapter 16, please see https://chapter16.org/about-us/ and https://www.humanitiestennessee.org/about/our-story/?cn-reloaded=1 publisher of the cited, archived website. I would also consider that as satisfying WP:V.
    I did not realize IMDb was unreliable, I used that because it is the single source of the page 38th Golden Globe Awards. I added the actual Golden Globes as a source. Sswonk (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for making those changes — your point about Burger makes sense to me, so I'll remove the {{sps?}} tag, and citing the Golden Globes' website for that award looks appropriate. I'm less sure about the reliability of Chapter 16, but I think I'll leave this for an administrator to weigh whether or not that would be a significant blocker to granting the permission. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate that, thank you. Sswonk (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The question remaining from TechnoSquirrel69 asks for administrator input on the reliability of the Chapter 16 web outlet of the Tennessee Humanities organization. Links are provided a couple of paragraphs above. I am noting here that this morning I changed the previously existing citation link on the Honky Tonk Girl: My Life in Lyrics page to a direct link rather than to the archived page, as I was able to find the current url for the review. The link TechnoSquirrel69 includes above in his initial post has been updated to a current page. So we are dealing with the WP:RS status of a current page on a site that supports a 51-year old Tennessee institution funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. I think Chapter 16 is entirely reliable and should be used on Wikipedia articles related to Tennessee culture and history as needed. However, I want to thank TechnoSquirrel69 for diligence in finding areas for improvement in these stubs. Like him, I strive for the best references available and had determined the Chapter 16 and Jeff Burger sites were satisfactory prior to opening this request for permission; however I have been away for over a decade and am prepared to face challenges with humility. Fifteen years ago I worked on Led Zeppelin which was at the time poorly organized but since I left has been promoted to GA status. My opinion is that Loretta Lynn is on a similar level as a significant performer and figure in popular music history, and naturally I want articles about her and her work to have top-shelf reviews; even stubs should strive for high quality, especially references within them, to help other editors find further material, to set a tone of sincerity and professionalism. Thank you again TechnoSquirrel69. Sswonk (talk) 14:17, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What makes the Treaty of Southampton notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 21:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sswonk voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts -- The notability rises from its mention in reliable sources as the first alliance between England and the Dutch Republic and as an initial policy forming act of Charles I. There was an existing maritime agreement, but the treaty went further and allied the two nations against Spain during a volatile period. To quote Anton Poot whose PhD thesis is one of the sources, "the maritime agreement had not mentioned Spain by name as the common enemy; the Treaty of Southampton left no doubt. It created an Anglo-Dutch partnership for a joint war against Spain, effectively meaning that England joined the Dutch in a war they had been waging already for decades." Charles was asserting England against Spain formally. The sources find it significant in the history of the Eighty Years War and of pre-civil war England. Sswonk (talk) 13:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems like your ping didn't go through @Sswonk. Are there any sources other than the PhD dissertation that discuss the treaty in depth? voorts (talk/contributions) 01:11, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts yes, odd about the ping. Well, as you can see in the article I posted about a month ago, I was able to identify the three sources plus the "further reading" thesis as verification for the information in the article at the time I posted it. I did not find much more, at least not that well sourced. The timing, the fact that the king did not stick by the Dutch, may make Southampton more obscure, and conceivably it might be well-challenged as not WP:RSed enough, but why? What I posted might be merged with an article that treated (pun?) the entirety of pre-civil war relations, something like that "further reading", don't know. I mean, I simply decided to write that stub article because it (the subject) is an entity that exists in history, that was mentioned in timelines, had a "redlink" where I first saw the treaty mentioned in Wikipedia, and that has sourced material about it. The entire treaty, albeit in French, is available to follow leads from. So I think it is worth posting a brief article about. This project is really a good jumping off point for people to explore and edit articles about obscure history topics. What is your opinion, Voorts, isn't what is sourced and the quality of those sources sufficient? And, shouldn't the topic be part of the encyclopedia? I have less than 8K edits in over four years of active editing, maybe I am missing something; I fell as though Treaty of Southampton fills a gap in coverage, without relying on original research. I understand WP:OWN and basically, whether obvious or not, I stepped away from editing the article the day I started it, hoping others might follow up, it isn't anything I claim to know a lot about other than those sources. But someone, or a few someones, might be able to expand the article to have more sources in a way I can't grasp this morning, and I hope that they do. Sswonk (talk) 13:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:QEnigma

    Hello, I am requesting Autopatrolled rights in order to reduce the backlog of articles awaiting review. I primarily create new articles on politics and law with a focus on biographies of notable individuals. I ensure that the content I add are verifiable and the articles comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. My previous request was declined in March 2025. Since then, I have strived to improve the quality of my contributions and have made substantial improvements to several existing ones, upgrading them to B-grade, e.g., [2], [3] and [4]. Regards. QEnigma 论 03:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TheRichic

    Hello! I formally request the autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in English and Spanish, and I consider that, after so many years and hundreds of articles created on both wikis, i am in the position to say that I know the rules and styles. I've never cared much about user rights, but now that I've started a personal project (ambassadors of Spain and all its lists) to expand diplomatic information about my country, Spain, I'd like to avoid the workload that comes with reviewing articles that comply with our rules. Thank you. TheRichic (Messages here) 11:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @TheRichic: why is Francisco Javier Conde de Saro notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 01:20, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ႧႤႧႰႨ ႾႠႰႨ

    Hello! I formally request the Autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in Turkish and English. I have contributed to the Turkish Wikipedia, particularly on the Tao-Klarjeti region. I have also started to transfer these contributions to the English Wikipedia. I think it would be good to reduce the workload involved in reviewing the items I have written. Thank you. --ႧႤႧႰႨ ႾႠႰႨ (talk) 15:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Aeternus

    I have been editing Wikipedia since 2006, have created numerous new articles, edited countless others, and am very familiar with its policies. Λeternus (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Guylaen

    User regularly creates articles relating to military history, biographies, and the US. User has created over 200 articles. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 05:57, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) +1 agree and articles created are generally good in terms of standards. Agent 007 (talk) 18:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Michelangelo1992

    I've periodically patrolled Michelangelo1992's articles, and consistently found them to be in good shape. Focused on books as a topic area and very clear familiarity with WP:NBOOK. He's created 135 articles. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    AutoWikiBrowser

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Bugnawfang

    I'd like to effectively change articles without taking a lot of time to manually edit them one-by-one, especially for edits that are excessively repetitive--the same information copied and pasted over and over again. Information may not be changed quickly or left unchanged at all in some rare cases. Bugnawfang 02:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bagwe Neza

    Hello, I request AutoWikiBrowser rights to generally help apply consistent templates and make efficient edits across many pages. I saw it on WP:JWB.

    Thank you. Bagwe Neza (talk) 09:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Just a generic username

    Hi, I'd like to use it to add lang templates throughout an article where it would be otherwise too tedious to do so (example) (in particular on articles with Chinese text, though I also intend to use it for other languages). I was recommended AWB by this teahouse question I asked when I was newer. If any less powerful tools can do the same thing, I'd be happy to use it instead. Just a generic username (talk) 10:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Staraction

    There are many location-related pages that, as a pattern, refer to a dead GNIS url as a citation. See Julia, West Virginia as an example. I plan to fix these refs, like at Special:Diff/1318492490. I also plan to use AWB rights in other places I've wished I had them, such as in categorizing redirects (e.g. Special:Diff/1316915448), instead of making 50+ manual edits. Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:01, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done * Pppery * it has begun... 05:03, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Alexanderino

    Much of my current work involves fixing CS1 errors located via tracking categories. My latest focus is on removing or replacing deprecated parameters inside an infobox (currently over 59,000 entries). Being able to use AutoWikiBrowser in this task (and other similar ones) will save time and boost my output. I will continue to exercise care as usual. Alexanderino (talk) 05:25, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Vlodiker Chimok

    I am requesting access to AutoWikiBrowser to efficiently create and edit Wikipedia categories. Manual edits are time-consuming, and this tool would help me adhere to guidelines more effectively. I would appreciate the opportunity to use AWB for these tasks. Thanks. Vlodiker Chimok (talk) 22:32, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done Fails minimum criteria. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Peaceray

    Reason for requesting autowikibrowser rights So I can make the same edit to a number of pages. Specifically, I have a mass message timestamp error to rectify. Peaceray (talk) 04:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done I am an administrator, so I added myself. Peaceray (talk) 04:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Admins are approved automatically without needing to be added to the check page. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:03, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Valorrr

    I wish to use AWB for minor errors, emdashes, ect. I already use Huggle and AntiVandal, so I am pretty well versed in any automated tool use. Valorrr (lets chat) 12:34, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Spravato

    Hi! I am the user behind the account Zulresso. I forgot my password and didn’t add an email so i am using a new account from now on. You can verify my identity using a check user as i am still using the same device. I need to be confirmed so i can put the notice on the old account. Thanks! Spravato (talk) 10:28, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Just found another device I was logged into! I am Spravato :D Zulresso! :D (talk) 07:04, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Dot.py (alt)

    This is a legitimate alternate account used by Dot.py for security reasons. dot.py (alt) 02:24, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    This is my main account. dot.py 02:26, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You only need to make six edits to be autoconfirmed. I know this isn't in the box above but frankly I am hesitant to grant confirmed to an alternate account of a user with <100 edits. Giraffer (talk) 11:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoconfirmed" user right. — MusikBot talk 22:00, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Event coordinator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Extended confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:StavrosKwn

    Translate Greek articles to English StavrosKwn (talk) 16:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC) I would like to request the extended permission in order to translate Greek articles - mostly about the railway in Greece but other topics also - in English language. I would like to note that the account I am writing this request doesn't have all of my edits as i had 3 older accounts that i lost all access resulting into having an account that looks relatively new. i would also like to note that i am a qualified english speaker by a C2 level degree[reply]

    File mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Mass message sender

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


    New page reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Thilio

    I'm not hunting for the New Page Reviewer right, but I'm confident that if or when I have it, I'll make a real difference in helping reduce the huge New Pages backlog... I’m a fast learner and actively participate in multiple (multitask) areas of maintenance work. Most of my contributions focus on anti-vandalism, using AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) for cleanup, adding or removing maintenance tags, copyediting, correcting categories & fixing bare URLs.

    I have also participated in Good Article reviews, WP:AfD discussions and the New Pages Feed. Am familiar with our core content policies especially verifiability WP:V, No Original Research WP:NOR, Neutral Point of View WP:NPOV, reliable sourcing WP:RS, Biographies of Living Persons WP:BLP, notability WP:N and What Wikipedia Is Not WP:NOT and am confident applying them when reviewing pages.

    My goal as a New Page Reviewer is to help reduce the backlog while ensuring that new articles meet Wikipedia's standards for quality and notability and also to support good-faith new editors along the way. Thank you in advance. ThilioR O B O T🤖 talk 06:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Squawk7700

    I realize I am not the most experienced editor, I have however been observing the process and reading up a lot of the associated policies for a long time now and would like to get involved myself. I am currently in NPP School, but would nevertheless like to start getting some experience with some light weight cases (redirects, DAB pages, clear cut cases) and perhaps some lightweight AFC reviewing, before I graduate. I have also created a few articles and would appreciate getting the chance. Kind Regards Squawk7700 (talk) 12:41, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for a one-month trial. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:53, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SpragueThomson

    I would like to renew my expired one month trial run. I still believe I have a good understanding of Wikipedia's guidelines and a good record. SpragueThomsontalk 17:50, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Casablanca Rock

    I would like to have NPP rights mostly to patrol redirects. As background, I have written a number of articles and also created a number of redirects. I would mostly use this to patrol redirects. I am fairly active at WP:RfD. I am rarely active at AfD and would not use this to patrol articles unless they are fairly obvious as to what to do with them (bright-line either passes or fails), just to reduce the backlog. Casablanca 🪨(T) 02:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:WikiPinakpani

    Hello, I wanted to take this appointment to review new pages. Well aware of the notability of Wikipedia. WikiPinakpani (talk) 04:25, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had an account for 30 days and has 365 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 04:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done because you do not currently meet the criteria for this right. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yenistardom

    I want to help reduce the New Pages Feed backlog as a new page reviewer and will not review my own articles. My contributions and interests (mainly related to Japanese religions) are very similar to those of @Komitsuki: who also recently applied here last week; I have helped fix his some of articles and many other articles to fit WP:MOS guidelines. I'm a native English speaker who also knows Japanese and am very detail-oriented. I will be happy with a trial period and will try to get more AfD experience. Also, I understand this is a learning process that I am happy to carefully participate in. Thank you for considering my request. Yenistardom (talk) 19:06, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Page mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Cs california

    Reason for requesting page mover rights. Moving pages for plant and animal species pages. Most of the pages I have redirect, moved or request moving are species synonyms. The reason for the request is during updates for larger plant genera sometimes names of species are reverted back to a previous name and I have move over an existing redirect, when there are lots of species pages where I have to update the existing names to the newer names it becomes difficult to keep track of these pages so other editors can help merge the history of the pages. Cs california (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done You have never edited [5] the page for technical move requests, WP:RM/TR. Your last edit to a move discussion (requested move) was in 2020. Please come back when you have demonstrated a good track record of RM/TR requests and RM participation, which would show that you have a need for this tool and that you understand how to use it correctly. Toadspike [Talk] 23:00, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Pending changes reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Inu06

    I'd like reviewer rights so I can help with pending changes and speed up the review process. Inu06 (talk) 07:19, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yerlo

    I have been reverting spam and vandalism on Special:RecentChanges, and I'd like pending changes reviewer to review pending edits as they show up there. Yerlo (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tactical Falcon

    I've been editing Wikipedia for about 7 months now, and made just under 500 edits. While sometimes I make mistakes, I learn from them and try to be as understanding as possible. I've merged one article, and recently split several. I think this permission would help me improve Wikipedia,and help take some pressure of other reviewers. Tactical Falcon (talk) 22:58, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Seercat3160

    I already make a habit of keeping an eye on Special:PendingChanges when I'm spending time on Wikipedia, and it would be great to be able to accept edits that meet the requirements rather than just reverting those that don't, especially when the backlog fills up with acceptable edits waiting for a reviewer. If I could do with any constructive criticism, please let me know. Seercat3160 (talk) 10:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MakaylaHippo1998

    Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rights I have been on here for six months now, and recently also joined the simple Wikipedia. Have had 2 declined rollback requests in July and August but have since then, I now officially fully understand the basics of Wikipedia and how to edit, only issue I have had with my editing lately was an accidental page blanking I did due to page-move vandalism and failed move-back about a month ago, but have 2000 additional edits since then (4,100 total). I recently came across one article I was editing (Seth Curry) where the issue of not being a PC-reviewer took full effect, so I am requesting to be a PC reviewer, especially as some "Likely Have Problems" pending edits I have seen in the recent changes have actually been good. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 04:20, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:BrownCanary61

    I have made over 500 edits and currently hold the extended confirmed user status. I would like to help reduce the backlog by reviewing pending changes. Thank you. BrownCanary61 (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CocaPopsRather

    I have patrolled hundreds of edits for vandalism via recent changes, I am well-versed in what is vandalism and what isn't (among other reasons to deny a pending change). And would like to help with pending changes reviewing. CocaPopsRather 19:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jaufrec

    wikignome ready to do a little bit more Jaufrec (talk) 02:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Rollback

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:ফারদিন

    I have been actively engaged in counter-vandalism and recent changes patrol on the English Wikipedia for a considerable period. I frequently use tools such as SWViewer and Twinkle to revert vandalism. Rollback rights would allow me to perform this work more efficiently. Fardin🛸 17:48, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:HwyNerd Mike

    I have been reverting vandalism for quite a while now, and since I don't have rollback, I use Twinkle to both revert and warn users. The ability to use WP:ANVDL and WP:HG will sure help. As of now, I am both extended confirmed and have the pending changes reviewer right. (I know it says I'm requesting PCR, but my PCR request didn't get archived.) The experience I have, especially with pesky vandals and sockpuppets like User:Office editorial, is decent.

    As of the time I post this edit (including this edit), I have made 1,469 edits, have 634 mainspace edits, have 320 user talk edits, and have significantly expanded and created 3 articles. HwyNerd Mike (tokk) 05:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ullint0

    The reason I am requesting Rollback permissions is because it would make me much more efficient Vandalism reverter. I am a fairly active counter-vandalism editor who uses features in both Twinkle and RedWarn. I also perform fairly frequent copy editing and MOS enforcement, demonstrating understanding of Wikipedia and its policies. I feel I know the difference between good and bad faith, but that isn't for me to decide. I will also use the permission to perform my actions under Wikipedia:AntiVandal. I fully understand the weight of the Rollback permission, and I will therefore use it only for reverting vandalism or other legitimate purposes, and never for content disputes.

    Edit: I feel the need to point out I was recently granted access to Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library, which confirms that I am in good standing Ullint0 (talk) 01:07, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has 170 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 08:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) Comment: I thought most extended confirmed editors have access to the library... HwyNerd Mike (tokk) 03:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @HwyNerd Mike (Non-administrator comment) It just means that you have extended confirmed and your account is over 6 months old. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 06:47, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) Yep, I knew. 500 global edits and 6+ months old. HwyNerd Mike (tokk) 06:50, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done. You have <200 mainspace edits and <50 reverts/undos -- we are generally looking for more experience. TWL access is granted by default to anyone over a certain threshold; it does not indicate good or bad standing. Giraffer (talk) 11:52, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SirJustinfranklin

    Reason for requesting rollback rights SirJustinfranklin (talk) 01:39, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I’ve been patrolling the recent changes to revert vandalism. I’ve been using Twinkle.

     Not done -- you have ~30 reverts/undos. We are generally looking for a longer track record than that. Giraffer (talk) 11:54, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Three Sixty

    Had rollback before but had it removed at my own request to take a wikibreak. I have since returned and would find rollback useful. Thanks, ⟲ Three Sixty! (talk, edits) 12:55, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Template editor

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Solidest

    I'm currently updating {{Single chart}} and have already requested about 5 major code changes, so it seems easier to just make the changes myself instead of bothering others with more requests. Especially since I plan to update {{Album chart}} the same way at some point. Before that, I had occasionally been working on embedding error checks, tracking unknown parameters, and other maintenance stuff – Template talk:Series overview/Archive 3#Unknown parameters check, Template talk:Category redirect#Magic word to remove from Special:UnconnectedPages, etc. UPD: An just to formally list more accepted requests:

    Somewhere I published changes directly in the talk page, bypassing the sandbox, because it was not possible to check their functionality through sandbox or the code added was not that big. Solidest (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2025 (UTC) Solidest (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary account IP viewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Dclemens1971

    I believe this permission would be helpful as a new page reviewer considering my reviews often result in SPI reports and having access to IPs may help me file more informative reports. I have read the Foundation policy and agree to follow it. Thank you! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:42, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1303932167"