Open main menu

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Administrator instructions

Requests for permissions

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

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

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

Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 21:30, 25 August 2019 (UTC)



Handled here

User groups

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

Handled elsewhere

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

Removal of permissions

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

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

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



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

Any editor may comment on requests for permission.


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

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

Current requests

Account creator



I've created 27 articles as well as a variety of dab pages and redirects. To be upfront, one has been tagged for notability, a borderline case which I have no intention of repeating. I am a new page patroller so have a good knowledge of creation policies. Triptothecottage (talk) 02:32, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done N.J.A. | talk 12:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)



Hi. I would like to get AWB to fix typos. I have read through the AWB info page and I have more than 500 non automated mainspace edits. Taewangkorea (talk) 06:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)


I made over 6,875 mainspace edits on Wikipedia and I wished to use AWB to make my editing jobs easier. Thank you. Cerevisae (talk) 20:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Cerevisae, what sort of edits do you regularly make where AWB would be helpful? Primefac (talk) 08:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC) (please do not ping on reply)
I would like to edit the wikiversity preprint to include the "w:" symbol in every wikilink. Cerevisae (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity (and because I think I'm misinterpreting something), could you please give some examples of what you mean? Primefac (talk) 06:45, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Never mind, I don't need AWB anyone. Wikiversity also has a code to simplify the process. Cerevisae (talk) 12:22, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
  Request withdrawn for the bot Primefac (talk) 16:01, 23 August 2019 (UTC)


User:Aishwarya Gowda

I need to change my page name and upload files immediately so please confirm my account soon. Aishwarya Gowda (talk) 06:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done - If the file you want to upload is available under a free license, it should be uploaded to our free media repository, the Commons. You do not need any special permissions to upload there, and you can use the same username and password you use here. If it is not available under a free license, it should be requested using the Files for Upload process, which does not require any special permissions. — JJMC89(T·C) 06:49, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Event coordinator


I have contacted Wikimedia Australia because I am organising an edit-a-thon and I was directed to this page in order to apply to be an event coordinator.

I am organising an Edit-a-Thon for women in science at the University of New South Wales on September 16th 2019. I would like to request to become an Event Coordinator and to have an exemption from the maximum number of allowable new editor accounts for the event.

The event will host 30 - 60 editors.

Saraiva.if (talk) 02:19, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


I'm organising a scientific writing hack-a-thon on September 26 with a possible follow-up in October if the event is successful. I'm organising via the Programs & Events Dashboards, but would like to assign confirmed status to accounts as well to have participants edit semi-protected articles (I expect quite a few climate scientists) and for the follow-up to create new articles. The event will host up to 40 editors. Femke Nijsse (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done Salvio 09:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Extended confirmed

File mover

Mass message sender

New page reviewer


Besides AfC, I would like to help here too. Dial911 (talk) 02:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done N.J.A. | talk 13:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I have made nearly 900 edits to wikipedia, and have Pending changes reveiwer. I think I can also review new pages. --Wyatt2049 | (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Wyatt2049 | (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  Automated comment This user has 413 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 17:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. With only 413 mainspace edits, you don't meet the minimum requirements for granting. Please come back when you have the experience required for administrators to review your edits. — JJMC89(T·C) 19:59, 24 August 2019 (UTC)



I would like to recieve the New Page reviewer rights. I have created many articles currently in the mainspace and would like to continje reviewing more pages. I would be grateful to be given this permission to improve Wikipedia maknspace articles. Cardei012597 (talk) 22:44, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

  Done Chetsford (talk) 03:03, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I have some experience creating pages and also have the "autopatrolled" right. I would like to begin reviewing new pages created by other users. – JocularJellyfish TalkContribs 16:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Page mover



I have read the guidelines and believe that I can be of use with the page mover right. With the right, I can reduce the backlog for administrators by renaming pages without redirection. I will also use the right to fulfill any requested moves with a clear consensus. I have significant experience in NPP and draftify articles not ready for main space. A recent example would be UA 175, where it was originally UA 75. I moved the page as UA 75 refers to United Flight 75, a completely different flight than United Flight 175. Thank you. AmericanAir88(talk) 22:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@AmericanAir88: In the case of UA Flight 75, this does not meet the criteria for suppressing a redirect, per WP:PMRC and WP:R3. – bradv🍁 22:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
@Bradv: UA Flight 75 refers to United Flight 75, a random flight number with no importance at all to flight 175. It is also can confuse the reader who typed that as there is no designation or statement that Flight 75 was associated. The redirect is completely useless and confusing. Thank you AmericanAir88(talk) 23:12, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Sure, that's a reasonable argument, but it has to made at RFD as the redirect doesn't fit the speedy criteria. – bradv🍁 23:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
@Bradv: It is a completely useless and confusing redirect that can fail R3. Also, sending to RfD would be a simple delete and just causes the backlog to grow (See WP:COSTLY). The redirect does not contribute to the encyclopedia in any means and just brings confusion. AmericanAir88(talk) 03:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
I'll leave this for someone else to review. I just wanted to highlight that the one example you gave of a redirect you would have suppressed does not actually meet the criteria (regardless of the merits of WP:IAR in this case). Do you perhaps have other examples? – bradv🍁 05:44, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
I noticed Draft:Hubert Le Gall of the draftifications, which really should have been WP:G7'd, but out of everything that's not the end of the world. I'm going to mull it over for the moment, but I only see five draftifications and no RM experience. Primefac (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2019 (UTC)



I would like to recieve Page Mover rights. I have moved a good amount of draft articles into the mainspace, including Coming 2 America, Killroy Was Here, and Gremlins: Secrets of the Mogwai. I have had some issues with redirects, especially Coming 2 America, that prevented smooth transitions to the mainspace. I would be grateful to be granted this permission to move acceptable articles into the mainspace. Cardei012597 (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Sir Joseph

Similar to Huldra's request [1] in the past due to this motion from Arbcom [2] that mandates the template be placed on articles before any restrictions are handed out.

In addition, I have done RM's in the past and can use this to help out in RM discussions to do more gnome work where regular moves will not work and advanced permissions are required. Sir Joseph (talk) 02:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer

User:Akmal Hashim

I have been editing for more than an year. Within this short period, I have tried my level best to improve Wikipedia articles, especially the articles based on Indian elections. I have also created 6 articles and several drafts in Wikipedia. I humbly request you to accept this request. Akmal Hashim (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 13:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done Mz7 (talk) 18:07, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

User:S. M. Nazmus Shakib

I have read about Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes. I love to work in Wikipedia. I have also read the criterias for becoming a pending changes reviewer. I have this right on Bangla Wikipedia too. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 05:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done unfortunately not keen on the lack of use of edit summaries for edits and the number of deleted creations. I struggle to see how the additional privilege would assist you in making Wikipedia better, but your efforts are very much appreciated. N.J.A. | talk 12:45, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I recently requested (and was granted) pending changes protection for 2020 Pakistan Super League. I would like to be able to review and accept pending changes for this project that I have been working for for long time, I even created this page, along with 2019 Pakistan Super League and 2018 Pakistan Super League and have worked on this project very extensively with other editors. So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 13:24, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
@TheGreatWikiLord: It seems that you've begun CVUA but not completed it yet. You're interested in proceeding with this request now, rather than after CVUA?
Also, looking through your talk page, I'm noticing a couple other concerns that have been raised over time, so I have a few questions on that front. In November 2018, in a block appeal, you wrote, "There was no attack, I just apointed out that the admin in question was unable to respect a difference of opinion." This followed a block for incivility for telling another administrator at a prior PERM request "It is obvious that you are too high on your administrator horse to see that I decided to take a softer approach. I will reapply in 90 days and hope that a more mature administrator reviews my request." Do you stand by what you wrote in that block appeal?
In April of this year, you made a request for rollback which was declined because your judgment was called into question for being unable to distinguish between good-faith and vandalism edits. As a pending changes reviewer, you will have to reliably exercise good judgment, including by properly categorizing good faith edits and vandalism. Since that request, however, you've only made a small number of reverts, and none for vandalism. How do you demonstrate that your judgment in differentiating between good-faith and vandalism edits has improved since that request? Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:15, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I do intend to finish CVUA. Since PSL 2020 is getting ready and will have many coming updates, I wanted to make sure that I can continue to get the article updated with the help of IP contributors and others. You can see my work on 2019 Pakistan Super League and 2018 Pakistan Super League, and you will see that I have great grasp of what belongs on wikipedia and what does not belong on Wikipedia.
As for my opinion on WP:AGF, as I pointed out back then too. I reverted all edits in questions which stands as a testament that I have removed information that does not belong on Wikipedia. Isn't that the end goal? to add what belongs and to remove what doesn't belong? I have reverted a lot of vandalism. I can use words and say stuff like I have done much reading and understand it better, but I am not going to use my words to justify. Instead, I will let my actions (edit history) show my intents. You can see my most recent vandalism work, and evaluate for yourself.
Just to again highlight the context of this request. I noticed the persistent adding of unverified information on 2020 Pakistan Super League. I tried to lookup references, and I engage the IP users and request references, and then when that didn't work I asked for protection. I want to continue to work on this even with that added protection. All I ask is that you take all that into account and not give undue weight to one incident. So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 01:51, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your answers. I will leave this to another admin for review, but if I were to decide this request, I would not be granting it. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:27, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
L235 May I ask your reason? So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 13:24, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


Hi. I would like to gain pending changes reviewer because I feel like it would give me another way to help Wikipedia in addition to just adding content (I have created 6 articles and have over 800 edits) and reviewing drafts (I am an AfC reviewer for 2 month probation). Taewangkorea (talk) 07:27, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done Chetsford (talk) 20:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Blue Square Thing

It'd probably be helpful - I watch a number of articles which have (or have had) this level of protection on them which, on occasion, means I've not been able to move an article on because of pending changes getting in the way. I've read the guidelines and edit a reasonable amount in BLP articles. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done Chetsford (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I have done more than 1200 edits and am extended confirmed. I am currently on the class program of CVUA. It will be helpful if I get permission for reviewing pending changes. I have read the related guidelines. Thank you, AbhiMukh97(Speak)(Contribs) 15:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC) AbhiMukh97(Speak)(Contribs) 15:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)



I have no recent history of edit warring , I fight against vandalism and disruptive edits. There were some edit conflicts but I didn't use undo feature for war. Most of the edit conflicts [which didn't turn into edit war however] have been resolved. If I will be granted rollback rights then it would be good for Wikipedia as I can remove vandalism more enthusiastically and with ease. I also have these rights on Gujarati Wikipedia and no misuse have been reported so far. Thanks and Regards, Harshil want to talk? 10:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done Although some counter-valdism edits, not significant to where rollback would assist much in your reverts already done using Twinkle. Also, and not always, but the lack of edit summaries on some edits is not ideal generally. I think if a more demonstrable need were shown I’d grant the privilege. N.J.A. | talk 14:28, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


I have been fighting vandalism for several months now, including on my watchlist, recent changes, and pending changes (as a reviewer). Having rollback would greatly help in the work. Rollidan (talk) 04:17, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([3]). MusikBot talk 04:20, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  Done N.J.A. | talk 12:31, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I would like to request for Rollback rights as the pages that I edit regularly or in my watchlist get vandalised multiper times and have to manually reverse the mess as the undo function is simply unable to reverse the changes. With the Rollback rights, it would greatly help in the work and help fight vandalism. Please approve my request. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 14:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  Not done not satisfied the extra privilege will assist the user in editing as there's not much anti-vandalism work (which is fine, but raises the question why would you need rollback?). I’d recommend, if interested, trying using Twinkle as that has reversion capabilities that should suffice. Also, and as a note, please use edit summaries in your edits. N.J.A. | talk 12:50, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


I would like to request rollback rights because I want to help revert vandalism and it will be very helpful when editing. Please accept my request. Thank you.

GummiBear139 (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

  Not done You have well below the recommended main space edits for this right. You’re fairly new though your anti-vandalism work is steady, but there have been some issues, which are forgivable due to the newness of your account. I’m not keen on the lack of detailed edit summaries for some of your edits, but this could be due to a lot of mobile use on your end. I would be minded to reconsider this decision in 90 days time to allow for further demonstration of your judgment through additional reversions. If not already, consider perhaps trying Twinkle as it allows for quicker reversions with pre-filled edit summaries. Your effective use of that tool would assist in a green light next time. Thanks, N.J.A. | talk 12:52, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Template editor