Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

    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, 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 18:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)


    Handled here

    • 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 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 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 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.
    • 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, 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




    I would like access to make typo error fixing edits to the wiki, as existing tools I have perms for don't let me filter for those. -REDACTED403 (talk) 05:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Done. Primefac (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Can't stop the stopr

    I would like to improve my workflow with copywriting on Wikipedia, as finding typos can be tedious and AWB can help with this. Can't stop the stopr (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You have 81 edits, which is well below both (very lax) minimum standards we have for this tool. Primefac (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done * Pppery * it has begun... 20:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Event coordinator

    Extended confirmed

    File mover


    Reason for requesting file mover rights

    I'm an autoconfirmed user. There are times when a file title needs changing but currently I'm unable to do that. Mcljlm (talk) 14:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Mass message sender

    New page reviewer


    Requesting a trial period of a month or less (dealer's choice) to address the backlog. I was previously granted this permission last summer but resigned them after a request to do so stemming from my repeated draftification of articles on potentially notable subjects that were created by disruptive editors (a more detailed accounting of that can be found in the discussion that took place on my talk page). Essentially, I wouldn't do that again, instead following the current NPP best-practices of leaning on more procedural alternatives like PROD, AfD, and improvement tags. I have a good amount of experience in AfC, have participated in a decent number of AfDs, and have a strong track record with my own article creations. I can provide additional context or affirmations of understanding of the current NPP standards as requested. I would prefer a trial period of at least two week so that my use of the permission can be observed and critiqued with enough examples. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Done for a one-month trial. – Joe (talk) 06:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I've got some experience at AfD, both participating and nominating. I have also written one article which was approved at AfC and got C-rated. I also have relevant experience in anti-vandalism, which shows I always try to be friendly to newcomers and I am always open to being corrected. I'd obviously be happy to have it granted on a trial basis. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jtrrs0: Thank you for volunteering, but I'd like to see a bit more prior experience in relevant areas. When we refer to AfC, it's reviewing AfC submissions that we're looking for – though a record in article creation is also relevant. You're off to a good start at AfD but when I look at this recent nomination, for example, you appear to have overlooked WP:NEXIST. That's a common enough mistake but it's the kind of thing we'd really like to be sure people have squared away before they start reviewing new articles with less supervision.   Not done for now, sorry. – Joe (talk) 07:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I have made many constructive edits to Wikipedia, and have a decent amount of experience in Articles for Creation, and I have approved AfC reviewer for nearly 1 year. I have had no controversy thus far while working in this area. I mainly want to focus on patrolling the backlog of redirects, but occasionally I would also review articles. I also know my limits, and only work in the areas I am confident in, or I seek help. I am big on assuming the good faith of editors and pointing them in the right direction if their efforts are misguided, as I often do at AfC. aaronneallucas (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Dan Leonard

    I'm nearing the end of my trial period just as the May backlog begins and I'd like to keep my permissions to participate. I've been intermittently active with new page patrol and I think my page curation log should show fairly uncontroversial activity and AfDs with consensus for my proposals. Reviewing the log myself there are two articles I marked as reviewed but were later deleted, but both appear to have been deleted for G5 (created by banned user) and not for notability or other content reasons. Dan 06:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Spicy (expires 14:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)). MusikBot talk 06:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I'm coming to the end of a two-month trial, and write to request that this access be extended. I've worked on NPP and, as asked, AfD. Many of these AfDs have been my proposals, which has been a helpful learning experience! Klbrain (talk) 09:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)). MusikBot talk 10:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Storye book

    On 13 December 2023 I was granted a 3-month new page reviewer rights trial, which expired on 12 March 2024. I reviewed 5 new articles in 2023, and 8 new articles in 2024. My habit is to spend a lot of time on each article, helping to expand them sometimes, and helping to bring some of them to DYK - which is why I did not attempt to achieve high numbers of new page article reviews.

    Being overloaded with WP research (some for my local Civic Society, which wanted WP articles on several historical subjects - all for free of course) I have had to miss out on new page reviews for a while. I was also needed to help with the recent DYK review backlog. But I would like to get back to it. So if you think that I have been useful so far, please would you kindly extend or confirm my new page reviewer rights? I have added my name to the May 2024 new page review list, but would like confirmation that I am still a valid member of this working group. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC) Storye book (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Done, trial extended for another 2 months. Thank you for volunteering and thank you for the work you're putting in! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much - much appreciated. I look forward to continuing with this, when I can. There are some great new editors out there, writing some good stuff. Storye book (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Hello! In December of 2023 I applied for New Page Reviewer Rights and given a 1 month trial period then again in January of 2024 I was granted 3 months. I am here today to apply for permanent rights. Over the last 90 days I have reviewed 370 articles. A short background on myself I've been on Wikipedia for over eight years and have created 47 active article on EN Wikipedia. I have strong knowledge of the policies that a NPP reviewer must follow and how each article should be treated. I would like to to continue to help decease the large article backlog currently on Wikipedia. I would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you! Grahaml35 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)). MusikBot talk 17:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I would like to participate in the upcoming backlog drive. I have done a trial period before. Knowledgegatherer23 (Say Hello) 17:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Orange sticker

    Hi, I'd like to help with the backlog, I enjoy doing maintenance tasks like WP:CAT and WP:ORPHAN and I've submitted AfDs for articles I've come across in this process:

    as well as taking part in more contentious deletions. Obviously still learning but have experience of quite a few different outcomes now such as redirect, merge and transwiki options. Orange sticker (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Hi, I'm volunteering to help in patrolling new pages on Wikipedia. Over the months I have stayed here, I've learnt much on relating with editors including the early mistakes I did at first; those have improved my person. It's also pleasing participating in the May drive. Thanks for considering me.— Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Hi, I would like to start start volunteering to help patrol pages across the Wikipedia site. I've been on the site for quite some time, sometimes I may make some mistakes around but it has led me to create more pages and overall be a more active person. I find it pleasing to help Wikipedia more and make it a more pleasing, friendly and diligent environment of people. Thank you for looking through, and hope whoever sees this has a blessed day. NYMan6 (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Page mover


    I'm an Articles for Creation reviewer and I need this right to make things easier. One of my recent submission reviews needed a move without redirect, but I couldn't as I didn't have that right yet. There have been many such incidents and will be in the future. I wish to be granted this right and I believe I meet the requirements now (was declined previously). Thank you. X (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC) X (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had 1 request for page mover declined in the past 90 days ([1]). MusikBot talk 19:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done, as I am not seeing a regular need for this right. One RM participation and no RM/TR requests, and a single need to delete a redirect (which upon further review was not even necessary) does not indicate a habit. Primefac (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I am requesting this right for the following reasons:

    1. ) To perform non-controversial page moves
    2. ) To undo incorrect/non-discussed controversial page moves
    3. ) To help move discussed moves
    4. ) To be able to move my sandboxes into articles when they are ready (as some are currently redirects)
    5. ) To assist with moving categories
    6. ) To help others with moving pages

    I have participated in various requested moves and I have performed some myself in order to acquire to naming conventions (both within pages in the main space and from my sandboxes to the main space), and I have also started a few move discussions too. I know about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, including naming conventions, and I often take part in AFD and other discussions, and I also have created articles and categories. I am happy to answer any questions or do a trial run. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done for now, as I do not really see a large need for this permission. You have barely a dozen article-space moves in the last two years, and while you do have a reasonable amount of RM participation I don't see much in the way of closing those moves (which you do not need this perm for doing). In other words, you say you want to continue doing a half-dozen different things, but I don't really see any evidence of you doing them now. Primefac (talk) 11:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Primefac: Regarding #5 and #2, these are not possible without the permission - there have been many examples of me wanting to move pages and categories to meet the naming conventions but I have been unable to as I do not have the permission. The same is also true for the others - for example, yesterday I wanted to move John McBain (character) to John McBain (One Life to Live) to meet the correct naming conventions, but I am unable to do so as a redirect for the latter already exists. Regarding #4, there is a lot standing in the way of me moving multiple pages from sandboxes to the main space if the redirects already exist. Yes, it is possible to ask admins to delete the redirects or move the pages, but this often takes a while and adds more work to me and the admins and that is partially why I was requesting it. Regarding closing the moves, I have actually never had the chance to as they have nearly always been closed by other editors beforehand (and also, I have been told by other editors that it is discouraged to close moves which you comment on). Had I had the permission, the amount of articles I would have moved in the past 2 years would be much higher (both my own articles and others, including undoing undiscussed/controversial moves). Hence, that is why I suggested a trial run in order to illustrate my need for the permission and how I would do it correctly. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not going to go point-by-point through your arguments, but generally speaking we don't grant this permission because someone might find it useful, we grant it because they have demonstrated that they have been going through the proper (non-perm'd) channels and it's getting to be tiresome for them. So far you have said that it would be nice to be able to do all of these things, but as of right now you do not appear to be doing all of these things.
    As a minor note about "moving sandboxes" - if there's a redirect, just edit the page and overwrite it. Unless there were multiple editors editing your sandbox, there is no reason to move the entire page. Primefac (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending changes reviewer


    There are a number of articles on my watchlist that require pending changes to be reviewed. This would facilitate reviewing those changes and approving or declining them as appropriate. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done According to the review log, you haven't used PCR since May 2022, nearly 2 years ago. As such, I'm not seeing a legitimate need to grant you this right. Please feel free to make a new request if you become active in RC patrol. Thanks, Fastily 20:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    With two years of dedicated service and prior receipt of reviewer rights twice, I respectfully requesting this right again. My intent is to assist in reviewing pending changes and lightening the workload for fellow editors. I remain committed to upholding Wikipedia's standards of accuracy and reliability. Granting me this privilege again would enable me to contribute more effectively to the platform's mission of disseminating knowledge to the world. Grabup (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Can I get a reply? 4 days passed but not recived any reply. Grabup (talk) 12:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 17:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I can't say I'd use this often and am not intending to patrol, but a number of the pages on my watchlist have pending-changes protection (even by my request) and I do sometimes see good edits to them awaiting acceptance. I am accustomed to filtering out vandalism, test edits, unsupported edits and the like, and to following WP:BLP (though a lot of my watchlist's deep in ancient history and mythology). NebY (talk) 12:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 17:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    User:Neko Lexi

    Reason for requesting rollback rights Hi! I would like to have rollback rights, because I keep seeing persistant Vandalism in articles, I usually warn editors and or IP users about that and I use Twinkle for that too. And I usually revert vandalism but It usually doesn't work properly because of my computer problems. Thanks! Starixxgamerrix (talk) 05:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 10 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 15:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done See the notice at the top of this page. You've barely made any contributions to the mainspace, let alone done any anti-vandalism work. -Fastily 02:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, Thanks and I completely understand, as soon as I get more edits in the main space, I will try again. Neko Lexi (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Me Da Wikipedian

    Mainly want them so that I can use a lot of the anti-vandalism tools, many of which are unusable/much more annoying without rollback. Also a few instances where in actual rollback would be helpful. I have done a lot of anti-vandalism work. I had 5 reverts at the very beginning that were problematic (my thinking is explained at my talk page), but I think I've gotten more aware of the policies and there has only been one other issue with my reverts since, which was caused mostly by the fact that I didn't realize there was an ongoing edit war, just saw an edit summary of "." removing content, and reverted.

    I have read Wikipedia:Rollback and understood it. I know what is intentional disruptive editing/vandalism, and a good faith mistake. For example, a typo is usually an honset mistake, and blanking a page is usually intentional, particularly if done repeatedly.

    Done a lot of anti vandalism work. I have like 140 edit to the user talk space, vast majority of which are warning for bad edits. Searching "revert" brings up 120 results in my contributions, the vast majority of which are me reverting vandalism.

    Thank you and have a nice day! Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    'Successful applicants will usually have: at least a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChanges."
    Your account was created on 28/03/2024 - less than one month ago, which already means you have not met that point well. Furthermore - I see several editors & administrators have had to remind you several times about your mistakes. While I am not implying you are a vandal or a problematic user of any sort - are you sure additional privileges are something you feel as if you're ready to undertake this early? Synorem (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done given the many, many complaints/warnings on OP's talk page. Me Da Wikipedian, at this point you're closer to being blocked than securing elevated permissions. -Fastily 00:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, wow! What should I do to improve/when would it be appropriate for me to come back @Fastily Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (non-admin comment) Do some decent editing, patrol RC for a month+ and do well to the point where admins are not on your back. That's my advice. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 21:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Do some decent editing" could you please define. Could this means for counter vandalism work or non counter vandalism work@TheTechie Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 00:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Like get experience. Sorry if that wasn't clear. If you want any more info, ask me on my talk page; I don't want to clog up this thread. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 01:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I am TheTechie. I was suggested by User:Synorem to become a rollbacker as I, at least in their words, am encouraged to apply for rollback. I meet the requirements as follows:

    1. As of this writing, I have 448 undeleted mainspace edits. 448 > 200
    2. I have been patrolling recent changes for a month+.
    3. I have not edit warred recently (frankly, I don't remember edit warring at all since I got this account)
    4. I consistently notify editors when I revert their edits which appear to be vandalism, and where there would be an obvious need to do so.

    Requesting permission because of these reasons. Thanks --- thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 01:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm curious why you felt it was appropriate to add yourself to add yourself as a CVUA trainer when you clearly lack the necessary experience (and then respond very defensively when Cassiopeia correctly called you out for it). There's also a lot of recent warnings/complaints on your talk page concerning basic understanding of our policies/guidelines. I'd prefer that requesters have a good understanding of these things before assigning them advanced permissions. Perhaps you'd like to comment on that? -Fastily 23:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't think there was an edit count associated with it.
    About the threads on my talk page on your permalink:
    1. WP:MAINPAGE was for April Fools.
    2. Ok, I agree that my CSD nominations are a hit or miss. I thought the Mama Lion wasn't very notable due to 3-4 sources. I will note that PROD/AFD is the way to go next time.
    3. About the CSD for the Gen Beta page, I reached an understanding by talking (politely) with other edits on whether G4 would apply. I told them that a comment was made during the AFD saying we could use G4 to create recreations, and after another admin told me to keep the page, I didn't re-tag it.
    4. About my signature: When pigsonthewing inquired about my signature, I was simply waiting for a third opinion. I agreed to change my signature after I had heard from a third opinion. And when Yamla asked me to remove the background from my signature, I complied.
    5. About CVUA: I didn't mean to sound defensive. I just was trying to understand. And in this diff I complied after the user explained to me. I did not re-add my name.
    6. About the signature of Nate: I read that you cannot have a name that is not similar to your username, which is why I brought it up elsewhere. I'm sorry if I sounded rude, but I've had a long day today and can't bother having any more problems. Maybe I'll take a wikibreak if need be.
    I hope that clears it up User:Fastily. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 02:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, but I get the impression that you're still very green around here and still have a lot to learn. Totally fine though, we all were at some point, however I think you'd benefit from more experience before applying for advanced permissions. Keep up the good work, and consider reapplying in a month. As such, closing as   Not done. -Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand, thank you. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 20:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Reason for requesting rollback rights: Hi! I am Vestrian24Bio; I have been editing on Wikipedia for almost 2 years now, I have made 2000+ edits and I have already reverted 200+ vandalisms, mostly using Twinkle. See my contributions here. Now, having the Rollback permission would be more helpful in patrolling vandalisms and it would grant me access to using the AntiVandal thus, making it easier to fight vandalisms. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 04:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, Thanks 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 03:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Reason for requesting rollback rights. I have at least 200 mainspace edits, frequently warn users, and no edit warnings. However, I do not yet have a month of experience patrolling Recent Changes. I would like to request rollback rights because it would be easier for me to revert vandalism through View History. I have a habit of going back to View History after comparing edits, and having the Rollback user right would make it easier for me to revert edits on View History pages. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has 190 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 16:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well that doesn't look like "at least 200" to me. Synorem (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 17:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, ok. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 18:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought I did... Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 18:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done I noticed you started actively reverting vandalism 4 days ago. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend more time gaining experience fighting vandalism before assigning you advanced permissions. Keep up the good work, and consider reapplying in a month. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits (I recommend using tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which makes this extremely easy). Thanks, Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your reply. I will continue to revert vandalism for some time and warn users.   Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 21:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    I've been patrolling Recent Changes for around a month or so, reverting any vandalism I come across, while also warning/notifying other users about their edits and why it was reverted. Having rollback would allow me to use AntiVandal, which is quite faster in reverting vandalism than RedWarn(the script I am using currently), while also allow quickly rollback edits without having to add a reason. That helps me deal with the edit and move onto other vandalism on the RC list. Some more info that you may want is that I have no warnings, no instances of edit-warring, joined 3/12/2024, which was around 36 days ago, and a near, if not perfect, track record in notifying users. Thanks - Muffin(Spreading Democracy, one edit at a time) 19:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Template editor


    I regularly edit templates while working on various articles on my watchlist, or when creating new articles that are part of something covered by a template. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([2]). MusikBot talk 17:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Only because it was part of the admin package. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think this should be controversial, but pinging JJMC89 for comment as they removed this permission earlier today — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please run through WP:TPEGRANT 5 and 6. I'm not seeing the need based on their recent template edits. — JJMC89(T·C) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you are willing to grant it it to me, fine. If not, fine. It's not worth my time to argue with you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done per JJMC89. -Fastily 03:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand this decision. The user easily meets criterion 5. There is nothing in the guideline that says the edits need to be "recent". I don't see how criterion 6 can apply because an admin would not usually be requesting edits to template-protected templates? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you would be willing to discuss your decision, or would you mind if I overturned it? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with JJMC89. Rights are assigned on as-needed basis. Given that OP's admin/crat bits were just revoked for cause, I think it's completely appropriate to be discerning here -Fastily 03:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]