Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

(Redirected from Wikipedia:PERM)
"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 15:30, 5 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 October 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.

    User:Hzea

    For work better on Wikipedia. Hzea (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done You are not a member of the WP:ACC team. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:21, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Autopatrolled

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

    User:Hteiktinhein

    I am returning to request full rights after the three-month trial period expired. During the trial period, I encountered no issues and successfully created many articles to contribute to Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/Myanmar. Hteiktinhein (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hteiktinhein: I notice that you routinely cite YouTube videos. Why is this source from Kyaukthittar Pagoda reliable? voorts (talk/contributions) 01:41, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts Thank you very much for your response. You asked whether the YT reference is reliable. I would say 'yes', because it is a documentary-style storytelling piece from Myanmar Celebrity Media, which is considered Myanmar's largest entertainment media outlet after the 2021 Myanmar coup d'état. Before the coup, they operated a website channel, but now they only operate a YouTube video channel. After the coup, around 90% of entertainment media outlets were shut down, leaving only a few video-based entertainment news sources and other media only focus on the war and political news. I used this video version as a source for Wikipedia because it comes from a verified major media outlet. According to WP:YOUTUBE-EL, "If the source would normally be considered reliable (e.g., a segment from a well-known television news show, or an official video channel from a major publisher), then a copy of the source on YouTube is still considered reliable." Therefore, I sometimes use YouTube sources when needed. Best regards. Hteiktinhein (talk) 04:34, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Do they have editorial standards? An "entertainment" outlet is quite different from news media. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:40, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts I don't think their current website maintains editorial standards... When I checked, the remaining site did not mention any editor's name and only posted event and celebrity photos with very brief descriptions, without detailed news coverage. It seems the current version of their website is mostly for show and not suitable to use as a source for Wikipedia. If someone used it, sure I will remove. However, on their YouTube channel, they provide more detailed reporting and include the interviewer's name in the hashtags. Therefore, I think their place-documentary programs, where they interview or trace origin with local historians or highly venerated monks, are acceptable to use. Hteiktinhein (talk) 05:30, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Since I don't speak/read Burmese, I can't really independently evaluate whether I find the source credible, and I can't really easily research if they had editorial standards in the past. I'll let another admin evaluate your request. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:14, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Anyway, thank you very much for your question and concerns @Voorts. I always welcome feedback or comments from senior editors, and I am eager to learn from others. Please correct me if I am wrong. I really do not want to use YouTube as a source; I only turn to it when there is no other choice (Myanmar is now a low-resource media environment, and it is difficult to find website-based reports bcs all gone [1], [2]). My Wiki mentor once told me that YouTube could be used as a source if the channel is verified and has a media license under the Myanmar government. After learning this, I began to cite videos from YouTube only when they came from licensed media.
    If media license–holder outlets that report on notable Burmese celebrities are not considered reliable sources, I am happy to agree with that. I have used YouTube sources in only a few of the articles I created (especially on temple or pagoda topics), and if this is still unclear, I am willing to remove or replace them with other references.
    I believe MC (Myanmar Celebrity) is one of the most popular celebrity and entertainment news outlets in Myanmar under license, although its website is now low in editorial standards and seems focused mostly on monetization and viewership (some reports on cele may gossip). The second most popular online outlet is Stun Magazine. To give a sense of MC's influence in Myanmar, as Burmese saying goes: “Someone can become a celebrity if Myanmar Celebrity features them.” Thank you again for reviewing my request. Hteiktinhein (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue is that celebrity/gossip outlets tend not to be particularly reliable. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:58, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I partly agree. Sometimes they report on celebrity conflicts, which feels more like gossip, but most of their reports are focused on celebrity life and news. They also have multiple programs such as travel, documentary, food reviews, daily life, and program of "forgotten celebrities". Some of these are actually very good reports.
    For ordinary lifestyle interviews with celebrities, I don't think those should be used as sources because I know they are not independent. But for other local news reports, I think we can consider using them for Wikipedia. In my view, the reliability of such MC sources should be decided on a case-by-case basis at each article's talk page. How do you think? Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:08, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts As of now, MC is a questionable source, and the reliability of that outlet still we cannot be decided. Therefore, removing it is better now, and I have replaced it with another source on Kyaukthittar Pagoda. You can verify again, and if you have any concerns about this, kindly ping me. Thank you. Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hteiktinhein Have you used that or similar sources in other articles? voorts (talk/contributions) 18:46, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts I think I used MC only for this article. I’m checking my temple articles, and if I find any, I will replace them. If you notice any, please ping me. Cheers. Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:51, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts I have cleared MC sources from the article. I only found two in my contributions. In the future, I will not use MC since the reliability of that media is not clear at this time. However, if someone else uses it, I think it is best to discuss on the talk page and decide on a case-by-case basis. If you don’t have any further concerns, please review my request again. If there are concerns, I cannot follow up right now...it's already midnight here i now prepare to sleep but I will respond in the morning. Thank you. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hteiktinhein: have you used similar gossip/celebrity news sites in any other articles you've written, not just articles about temples. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:35, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, there are no more. I checked all my articles quickly with XTools and also cleaned the Media Queen source, the same as MC. Now I believe I have removed all celebrity news channel references from my articles. You can check as well, and if I missed anything, please ping me here. @Voorts Hteiktinhein (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I nearly forgot about my request. I've just checked the discussion again, and there have been no further questions within the past month. As Vroots the admin mentioned above, “let another admin evaluate your request.” So, if there are no more major issues or questions, may I kindly ask you to evaluate my request? If there are, Im happy to address them. Hteiktinhein (talk) 07:24, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hteiktinhein: This is not an easy one to review, given the high degree of non-English sources. Two more requests around sourcing: Could you add in the translations of titles for non-English sources? Not a requirement for AP, but it makes it easier to review your articles. In addition, if you could add page numbers for very long sources, that again makes it clear to show your text is WP:verifiable.
    In your article on Pale Yin, you cite a PhD thesis, which is fine. But you do not state the page number. It seems the information is on 158 and 159. But.. the source gives this as an example, not as some generality, whereas you seem to give this as a generality. Could you please adjust?
    I'm considering given a longer temporary AP. I tend to give temporary AP when I see somebody growing as an editor, but there are still some minor issues to be worked out with core policies. PERM/AP gives more in-depth feedback than NPP, and NPP isn't great at catching issues with sourcing as above. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Femke I've adjusted the page numbers in the sources as you suggested. Occasionally I forget to include them, but I always make sure to provide page numbers for Burmese-language sources whenever they are available. Some books, however, do not display page numbers in their editions. I also generally do not add page numbers for Google Books that are only available in snippet view, since those can be accessed directly through the link. I've also added English-language sources as backups, even though the Burmese sources are already sufficient to support the article. Including English sources helps English-speaking editors better understand the topic. The legends of Burmese nats are mainly found in Burmese-language books and are rarely available in English.
    In the past, I did not include translations of titles for non-English sources because it was not strictly required. Following your recommendation, I've started adding translations of titles in the more recent articles I've created. That said, some book titles are difficult to render in English because of their deep literary or poetic meanings.
    Please don't worry about the Burmese-language sources. I have a tutor in history with strong knowledge of Burmese, and if you ever need verification or if Google Lens isn't sufficient, you can always ask me or other experienced Burmese editors here on Wikipedia. Thank you again for your helpful suggestions. Hteiktinhein (talk) 17:37, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Done for 6 months —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:57, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    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 ([3]). — 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]

    User:Meli thev

    Meli thev has created nearly a hundred astronomy articles over almost six years. I think they're ready for AP. Toadspike [Talk] 11:38, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Meli thev: why is Daniella Bardalez Gagliuffi notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't really looked further, but in Special:Diff/1313335271 added the text:
    Swift observed the Nova on 2025-09-23.64 and detected a bright source of hard x-rays at the position of the nova. The early detection might indicate a symbiotic nature of the host binary system. Alternatively the nova may be unusually fast in clearing up its ejecta
    compare to the source:
    The early detection might indicate a symbiotic nature of the host binary system. Alternatively the nova may be unusually fast in clearing up its ejecta[4]
    Similarlly, in Special:Diff/1313838571
    NEOMIR would have shorter exposure times and higher cadence of revisit, this would ensure that faster NEOs are not missed.
    compared to source:
    shorter exposure times and higher cadence of revisit, ensuring that faster and therefore closer NEOs crossing the field of regard are not missed.
    Again, have not looked further, and it's not egregious. But worth a note. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 19:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mupper-san

    I would like to request autopatrolled rights. According to an XTools analysis, in the past year, I've created 44 articles, of which 14 are C-class and 10 are B-class (10 of the remainder being yet to be assessed). Mupper-san (talk) 15:16, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Why is Cohen 2003 a reliable source for the proposition that the wars in the Caucasus created two million refugees? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mupper-san. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts Given Cohen's status as a "specialist in human rights and humanitarian and refugee issues" (per the Brookings Institute, where she is [was?] a senior fellow) and given the fact that she's worked with the United Nations on refugee issues (per Francis Deng), I don't see a particular reason not to consider her work reliable, though as I recall the number did somewhat surprise me. Mupper-san (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I would prefer a solid secondary source here, given that this article is covered by multiple CTOPs and community sanctions. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Voorts Got it. I've rewritten that passage accordingly. Mupper-san (talk) 23:45, 28 September 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., [5], [6] and [7]. Regards. QEnigma 论 03:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Niasoh

    I think my edits are kinda well so please grant me this. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 17:04, 5 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:JesusisGreat7

    Hi, I’m requesting AWB access to add categories (which I usually add manually), fix typos, and tag articles that contain a lot of LLM content, like over here [8]. I know AWB doesn’t detect it automatically, but tagging articles after reviewing would make cleanup easier. Jesus isGreat7 ☾⋆ | Ping Me 14:43, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autowikibrowser declined in the past 90 days ([9]). — MusikBot talk 14:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Red0ctober22

    I am requesting this permission to help speed up an ongoing process I am partaking in. I recently helped orchestrate the moving of the Delaware Valley page to Philadelphia metropolitan area, and there are over 1500 links to Delaware Valley, many of which are links to "Delaware Valley" but with the text showing "Philadelphia metropolitan area", so I want to speed up the process of making all these links directly to the page instead of redirects. Red0ctober22 (talk) 23:49, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Red0ctober22: This use would go against WP:AWBRULES#4/WP:COSMETICEDIT, so   Not done. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 07:09, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Spiral6800

    This is my second request for AWB permissions. My first request was denied in July, citing a lack of editing experience. I made hundreds of edits in the mean time and have gained more experience with Wikipedia and its policies. So I'm requesting permission to perform batch edits via AWB, mainly for adding Rcat templates, as well as for fixing broken links using Regex, where the URL schema has changed (e.g. http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/airbus-launches-a-new-systems-enhancement-package-for-in-service-a320-family-aircraft/ -> https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2007-09-airbus-launches-a-new-systems-enhancement-package-for-in-service)

    I asked a follow-up question in the last thread, but didn't get an answer. So if this request is denied, please answer my following questions: By which metrics do you measure experience, and how do you think could I enhance my editing skills and knowledge? What would be a good point in time to make another request? Spiral6800 (talk) 18:20, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autowikibrowser declined in the past 90 days ([10]). — MusikBot talk 18:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:8rz

    Have already accumulated 1000+ edits over the past few days. I will be using AWB to mass fix typos, lint errors, regex for bigger edits where \n and \r aren't supported with the advanced replace option in source edit.

    Returning AWB user (with previous experience) on my previous account User:Renamed user e2bceb05e0c43dd19cc50e3291d6fac5. 8rz (talk) 10:31, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Here is more proof that I am capable of using AWB. Usually I don't share information like this publicly, but for the sake of proof here it is
    For context, after creating the page template,
    I would fill out the necessary information: name, surname, and country to get from a stub to a finished article, like so:
    1. Step 1: Fill out the added seeded players using the first line of the above code.
    2. Step 2: Add the players and their countryflags in the finals and then expand them to the standard Wiki format.
    3. Step 3: Fill out the rest of the draws with the players and flags, followed by expanding the players' names and countryflags in the draws into a standard wiki format.
    Rinse and repeat for related pages using the above regex. 8rz (talk) 12:01, 1 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:YaelMontoya

    Reason for requesting confirmed rights

    Hello, I am an active contributor on the Spanish Wikipedia, but I am currently editing and translating content into English as well. I believe some of my edits are not being counted or are being restricted due to the lack of confirmed user rights on the English Wikipedia. I would appreciate it if I could be granted confirmed status so I can continue contributing more efficiently and without interruption. Thank you! ~

    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.

    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:Ophyrius

    Requesting extension of the NPP rights as they expired today. Ophyrius (he/him
    T • C • G    ) 15:06, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Ophyrius, could you comment on your decision to mark these two articles as reviewed: Noel Katz, Aisha Kahlil? signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rosguill, I found some WP:SIGCOV for Noel Katz, so I didn't find any issue in marking it reviewed. As for Aisha Kahlil, I had reviewed the redirect & not the article, later reviewed by User:Mariamnei. Ophyrius (he/him
    T • C • G    ) 10:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ophyrius, making sure I understood you clearly, you found additional coverage online that wasn't cited in the article? Do you by any chance remember additional details about said sources that could help find them again now? signed, Rosguill talk 14:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I remember that it was about his biography. I don't remember much, but I'm sure it had some additional information. Unfortunately, it looks like the site is down as I also can't find it now. So, I'm tagging the page for notability issues for now. Until a some more SIGCOV is found, I am marking it unreviewed. Thanks for finding that issue. Ophyrius (he/him
    T • C • G    ) 15:32, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I think it would be appropriate to extend your trial run for another month.   Done signed, Rosguill talk 15:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Filmssssssssssss

    My trial New Pages Reviewer right will expire soon. I believe that I have gained enough experience to continue to have this right, and I would like to extend this right so that I can further contribute to the ongoing new pages feed backlog. Filmssssssssssss (talk) 18:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 4 October 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 19:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Filmssssssssssss, could you comment on your decision to mark Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College as reviewed (and further noting that at the time you reviewed it, it had the pretty transparently unencyclopedic title of Shaheed Bhagat Singh College (Evening), which was addressed by another editor)? signed, Rosguill talk 19:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I marked it because the content seemed sufficient to me as it did not seem as a notability issue. I make mistakes though, and I will try to be more careful in my other reviews and markings. Filmssssssssssss (talk) 22:44, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, given that the article did not cite a single independent source, I'm going to have to mark this request as   Not done for now. I would suggest reapplying in the future, and perhaps participating more at AfD first. signed, Rosguill talk 14:50, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Veko

    Was granted temporary rights by @Rosguill:, renewing as they expired. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 21:26, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SnowyRiver28

    I've recently been patrolling changes and reviewing new articles, and I've also written a couple articles. I'd like to help out with the massive backlog here! SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 462 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 09:20, 5 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:Red0ctober22

    I am applying for the permission of page mover so that I will be able to carry out page moves without worrying about being blocked due to the target page already having a redirect, which then requires me to make a technical request and fill up the backlog. This particularly would help when the grammar or spacing of an article title is changed, and if there are subordinate articles relating to the main article, I will be able to change them as well en masse. I believe I meet all of the basic requirements, and I do have significant experience in page moving, and especially in initiating and participating in move discussions. A few examples of successful page moves I initiated and discussed in were: Sirius XM → SiriusXM, American Athletic Conference → American Conference (NCAA), and Delaware Valley → Philadelphia metropolitan area. I also participated a lot in the discussion to ultimately have the Stanley Cup Finals page changed to Stanley Cup Final.

    Using the example of SiriusXM, when the title was changed to reflect the official branding and common usage by removing the space, this required the titles of all of the pages for SiriusXM channels to be changed as well. I was able to change some, but not all, and this required me to have to fill up a backlog on the WP:RM page, which obviously have been more efficient with this permission. Red0ctober22 (talk) 12:42, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Викидим

    I am hereby requesting the page mover privilege. On multiple occasions I had to request uncontroversial moves, as I was not able to move the page myself. Most of these requests were due to WP:NPP and requested after reverting the WP:CUTNPASTE moves by other editors and re-doing the moves properly. Usually I helped the editors to request the move themselves, see, for example User talk:Worvandae#Renaming the page, but on few occasions I had requested the move myself to assist the original editor (see, for example, Talk:Spotsylvania Courthouse, Virginia). Sometimes I needed the move to unscramble the situation in the article I was working on, see, for example, Talk:Iron oxide red#Requested move 13 May 2023. I also create articles in my user space and occasionally need to move them over a redirect, the latest one was User:Викидим/Mikogami.

    I do have the corresponding right in Russian Wikipedia. Викидим (talk) 06:17, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 07:00, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Veko

    I've recently been helping out in closing RMs and have also participated in some as well. I'm also a NPP, and do a decent amount of draftifying through that process. Having the page move right won't just make closing RMs that require a tech move easier, but it will also allow me to help clear the WP:RMTR backlog. Also, when draftifying, I can reduce the workload on administrators for CSD R2. I'm okay with going on trial if it is found to be necessary. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 16:06, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done initially for 2 months. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 06:53, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TheBritinator

    I would like the role as part of my duties as a new page patroller, so I don't have to leave a redirect after moving a page to the draft space. In addition, from time to time, I create categories with typos/grammatical errors, and I would like to have the power to fix them without the need of a move request. Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 23:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ophyrius

    Hi, I'm requesting these rights as they would be helpful to me in moving pages without redirects, help at WP:RM/TR. I'm also a file mover & it would assist me in moving files without redirects. Also, it would be very useful in Draftifying.

    1. The editor should be a registered Wikipedia user for at least 6 months.  Y (11/8 months)
    2. The editor should have at least 3,000 edits.  Y (2438+1230=3668)
    3. The editor should demonstrate experience with moving pages in accordance with guidelines. Participation in requested moves and move reviews, or experience closing move requests is a good way to gauge this.  Y
    4. The editor should have no behavioral blocks or 3RR violations in the 6 months prior to application.  Y

    I have made many mistakes in page moving in the past, but I try my best not to repeat them & learn from them. Thanks! Ophyrius (he/him
    T • C • G    ) 11:11, 3 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:LuniZunie

    I have been doing counter-vandalism on the recent changes tab a lot and have seen many pending revisions edits go by without being accepted for a while. I would love to be able to accept / deny the revisions to help speed up the process. LuniZunie (talk) 18:57, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done Mz7 (talk) 23:47, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Pr0m37h3u$

    I have over 500 edits patrolling Recent Changes for vandalism. This permission would be great as I would love to help the process of reviewing pending changes. I am familiar with all policies, WP:NPOV, WP:NOT etc.

    Thanks, Pr0m37h3u$ 12:00, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:59, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Austiñobobbiño

    I'd like permission so that I can help out when things come up. I tend to use Wikipedia in relation to current events, so I may be able to offer some assistance related to these issues. austiñobobbiño (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SnowyRiver28

    I've been doing a fair bit of patrolling recently and I think I've established a solid enough track record here to allow me to help out with pending changes review. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:39, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Guest91164779

    I became an extended confirmed user. Can you please give permission to pending changes reviewer? Guest91164779 (talk) 11:37, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Guest91164779 You did not provide a reason? Plutus 💬 mess — Fortune favors the curious 13:04, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No Guest91164779 (talk) 13:14, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done Blocked from this page for disruptive edits (see page history).— rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:56, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SnowyRiver28

    I've been doing a fair bit of patrolling recently and I think I've established a solid enough track record here to allow me to help out with pending changes review. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:39, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:WhatADrag07

    I have been editing Wikipedia almost daily for a while now and have made over 500 edits, mostly patrolling the recent changes on Wikipedia to revert vandalism and improve article quality. I often edit a range of topics that interest me and take the time to investigate the information I add and edit.

    I used to struggle with copyright laws for uploading images to Wikipedia, specifically WP:NFCC. I have sinced learned from my mistakes and intend to do better moving forward.

    This permission would allow me to help review edits without burdening the other more experienced volunteers, and I would help to ensure that new edits meet Wikipedia's values. WhatADrag07 (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Guest91164779

    I became an extended confirmed user. Can you please give permission to pending changes reviewer? Guest91164779 (talk) 09:01, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done No reason given, hardly any mainspace edits CoconutOctopus talk 19:52, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Khagendrawiki

    I regularly review edits on a variety of articles, particularly in topics related to music, sports, Nepal and also from Special:AbuseLog . I often check for sourcing, formatting, and promotional content, and I’m familiar with policies such as WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP. Having PCR perm would allow me to help ensure that constructive edits are approved promptly and unconstructive ones are filtered efficiently. Khagendrawiki (talk) 09:08, 5 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:BalaM314

    I've been RC patrolling for a few years now, requesting rollback right so I can fight vandalism more effectively and use the anti-vandal tools that require it. 『π』BalaM314〘talk〙 13:43, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Krsnaquli

    Hello, I've been doing recent changes patrolling on a regular basis, and asking for rollbacking rights to increase my effeciency on my counter-vandalism efforts. I meet all the prerequisites mentioned in the instructions. Krsnaquli (🙏) 17:21, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Somepinkdude

    I have been patrolling Special:RecentChanges and Special:AbuseLog for about 40-50 days, definitely more than a month, and have collected over 610 edits, most of which are reverts of vandalism. I have only been given one warning regarding my editing, a contentious topics BLP alert, and have never engaged in edit warring or been blocked. Although I was more careless about warning users earlier, I always place {{uw}}s when I revert edits, except in the most minor and routine reversions. As everything moves very quickly at Special:RecentChanges, rollback would help me revert obviously bad-faith edits quicker and also possibly use AntiVandal and Huggle. Somepinkdude (talk) 12:35, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SeanBeans1981

    I would like to request for Rollback permission, so that I can help tackle vandalism in Wikipedia articles. I am reaching 2000 edits and have never been involved in any edit warring or any fights at any point. I work well with other users and consistently give proper edit summary for most changes I make. The only suggested requirement I don't currently meet is to notify other users on their Talk Page when reverting an edit (I have only reverted a few obvious vandalism), but I will definitely do it from now on.

    I will follow all the rules listed on this page, and am familiar with the editing guidelines. I will be a good addition to the Wikipedia community and will help prevent vandalism with this rollback permission. SeanBeans1981 (talk) 07:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello SeanBeans1981, you have never used the "undo" link next to someone else's edit yet ([11]), and your list of manual reverts is very short. I'm very open to granting this permission to an experienced editor like you, but you'd need to have the required track record of countervandalism, for example by using the links here on my dashboard to find and undo vandalism without the rollback tool for a while. See Help:Reverting for ways to undo multiple contributions at once, see WP:UWARN for templates to be used on the reverted users' talk pages. Please notify me on my talk page (or re-request here) when you have built the track record of recent changes patrolling experience. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:52, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CardboardLamp

    Hello, I am requesting rollback permissions so I can use some other tools that will make it a lot faster to revert vandalism. Currently I just click diffs on recent changes, which isn't exactly the fastest. Thank you, CardboardLamp (TC) 00:55, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:UpTheOctave!

    I am back from a Wikibreak and committed to editing again, particularly in AV. I had rollback on my old account, but regardless I still meet the criteria now. I've made over 200 mainspace edits, have multiple months experience with RC patrolling (albeit on and off), try to hold myself to a 1R rule for reverts not exempt from edit warring, and always warn after I revert. I use Ultraviolet for AV and know my way around Huggle, so rollback would help me use both of these quicker and more efficiently. In addition to my reverts, I have made several G3 requests and AIV reports (all of which were acted on in some way), and am active in anti-promotion work. Thanks, UpTheOctave! • 8va? 20:51, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Crushcrushcrush1

    Hi. I have been patrolling recent changes for a while and I would like to request the rollback permission. Most of my edits since I signed up have been undos and reverts, and I have already been using Ultraviolet for a while. I have read the guidelines and I understand when I'm supposed to use rollback. Thanks. Crushcrushcrush1 (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ZKang123

    To help mass revert any vandalism on Singapore MRT pages, especially if it's an IP/vandal. I usually oversee these articles.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 07:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC) ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 07:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I second this as someone who works on MRT articles. Kawasaki Heavy Industries C151 was nearly demoted of its GA status as it accumulated unsourced content/vandalism. Icepinner 11:37, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Seconded as well. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 13:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Furbybrain

    I've been helping a bit with 2025 Manchester Synagogue attack and it would be useful to quickly remove vandalism on this sensitive topic. Furbybrain (talk) 10:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 179 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 15:30, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:WikiHelper3906

    I just reverted some edits that removed content and even welcomed them to Wikipedia. I would revert worse things with this role. I will make Wikipedia a better place with this role, so this role will be useful to my goal. WikiHelper3906 13:20, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 56 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 13:20, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JohnDavies9612

    Hi, I would like to request WP:RBK to combat vandalism by using Twinkle and Ultraviolet. At the same time, I monitor at special:RecentChanges. I have also installed AntiVandal as a tool to use rollback. Thanks. JohnDavies9612 (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([12][13]). — MusikBot talk 16:20, 5 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:Poketape

    Earlier this year I had attempted to obtain this permission, which ultimately triggered action on my template edit requests. I am once again asking for the permission, only this time I've waited a month to see if my request would be acted upon. I am particularly interested in sports-related templates. poketape (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Previous review from April. #5: Sandboxes is a  N (2), #6: TPER is  Y (6). The discrepancy is mainly because poketape has really only sandboxed two (related) protected templates. Primefac (talk) 00:32, 4 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:BalaM314

    I have been active fighting vandalism for several years. I frequently use IP addresses to help fight vandalism by checking for more vandalism coming from the same /24 (ipv4) or /64 (ipv6) range after reverting a problematic edit. I am requesting the temporary account IP viewer permission to continue fighting vandalism. I have read the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy and agree not to disclose IP addresses. I defined IP access controls for an video game server network that has access to thousands of user IP addresses and understand why keeping IP addresses private is important. 『π』BalaM314〘talk〙 18:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:29, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Seanwk

    Hi! I am an active RC patroller and try to fight vandalism any time I can. Having IP viewer rights will help me in my mission to make wikipedia a better place. I've reverted a lot of vandalism, and I believe IP viewer rights are important so that I can accomplish my anti-vandalism goals more efficiently. Having this right is not a necessity for me, but it is a privilege that will certainly help me in counter vandalism. I know my account hasn't been here for a long time, but I have experience in anti vandalism, so I hope you can make an exception. Thanks. Seanwk :) | Talk 22:48, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had an account for 52 days. — MusikBot talk 22:50, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done Your account must be at least six months old. Dr vulpes (Talk) 00:19, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:SnowyRiver28

    I've been active in RC patrol recently and regularly encounter IP vandals. I would use this tool to aid in investigating vandals and socks. I've read the Foundation Policy and agree to abide by it. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 08:29, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Khagendrawiki

    I am actively involved in fighting vandalism and regularly patrol Recent Changes and the Special:AbuseLog. Temporary IP viewing access would help me identify and prevent disruptive editing more effectively.I have read and understood the Foundation’s Guidelines. Khagendrawiki (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you provide some examples of your actions where this right would be useful? (Diffs) — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:32, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, here are some general examples where temporary IP viewing would have helped: 1 2 3 4 this perm would have allowed me to check whether these unregistered editors had a history of similar disruptive edits. This helps identify patterns of vandalism, prevent repeated spam or unconstructive content. Khagendrawiki (talk) 17:42, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1303932167"