Permanently protected template

Template:Admin dashboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Immediate requests Entries
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages 0
Wikipedians looking for help 0
Requests for unblock 37
Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests 24
Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests 24
Wikipedia template-protected edit requests 3
Wikipedia fully-protected edit requests 6
Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests 211
Requested RD1 redactions 0
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations 2
Candidates for speedy deletion 8
Open sockpuppet investigations 34
Click here to locate other admin backlogs

Purge the cache of this page

Administrative backlog






Candidates for speedy deletion Entries
User requested 0
Empty articles 0
Nonsense pages 0
Spam pages 9
Importance or significance not asserted 0
Possibly contested candidates 3
Other candidates 0
The following articles and files have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
Deletion backlog

Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently
Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 149 items
Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review – No backlog currently
Requested RD1 redactions – 1 item
Proposed deletion – No backlog currently


Usernames for administrator attention



Requests for page protection

Current requests for increase in protection level

Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level

Talk:Marjorie Taylor Greene

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Persistent WP:NOTFORUM/WP:BLP violations by IPs and non-autos. Semi-protection of this talk page in the past has markedly lowered disruption. It demonstrably works, and is needed again. Curbon7 (talk) 04:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Curbon7, of course it works; that isn't the issue with talk page protections. The low impact on readers and the low frequency of such contributions need to be considered. The previous protection was in response to severe BLP violations which have not reoccurred during the last three months of non-protection. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I didn't see it rising to the needed level -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough. Cheers! Curbon7 (talk) 22:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Per the above tagging as Not done for the bot to auto-archive. Best, Mifter (talk) 01:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

2022 Durand Cup group stage

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Few individuals continue to edit even after requesting not to do so. Debankan talk  10:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Note: : Debankan Mullick, this unfortunately is a typical Cup or League protection request — no one can tell what's happening. El_C 19:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Babajide Sanwo-Olu

Reason: Disruptive editing by new users. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Note: I'll pass on this one. Looks like the non auto confirmed are removing negative WP:BLP. There should probably be a discussion about adding it back. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Or-- I hate getting letters from attorneys. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I've reverted my edit where I added the content back. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Killing of Jayland Walker

Reason: Frequent disruptive editing on the page. Semi-protecting it for at least 3 months would help prevent IP vandalism and disruption. Screendeemer (talk) 20:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Stop x nuvola with clock.svg User(s) blocked. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Note: I hve like zero tokernce or personl ttcks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

The Other Side: The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism

Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – WP:A/I/PIA. nableezy - 22:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC) 22:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 02:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Harriet Hageman

Temporary full protection: Repeated re-creation contrary to this AfD discussion which reached a consensus to redirect. That discussion determined the page can be created if she wins the general election in November. It can be created earlier if there is a consensus, but people need to use the talk page. ― Tartan357 Talk 23:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Electronic harassment

Reason: Semi-protection for at least a month. Disruptive edits primarily from IPs. Screendeemer (talk) 23:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Kevin Samuels

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Current requests for reduction in protection level

Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level

Sayed Noorullah Jalili

Reason: I was the one that initially made the article. The article was protected due to repeated creation by me and sockpuppets which I created. After a long unblock journey and learning to become a better member on wikipedia, I was unblocked and I would like the article to now be unprotected so that I can publish a new and viable draft for review and work towards the article being published on the live space. I am not a paid editor but I do have a conflict of interest to the subject of the article. I have declared that conflict of interest. Nonetheless, I have written a valid draft and eliminated the unambiguous advertising and biased material. Still, the article needs to be published for review and therefore this page needs to be unprotected in order for me to submit the article again under the name of the protected page. I am requesting the assistance of the admins in unprotecting, reviewing and improving, and publishing the article.

Thank you, SJYTMAIN (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

  • Just so I understand you, which sockpuppets are you referring to? Need to know to get the full picture before considering the request. Dennis Brown - 14:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
    @Dennis Brown: As far as I can tell, they used these accounts to repeatedly create that page (plus maybe SayedIJ123 (talk · contribs), though that one was never blocked). Considering that they were only unblocked fairly recently, and that promotional editing on that page was the reason for the initial block, I don't think them continuing to try and recreate the article is a good idea. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
    As unblocking admin, might I say, "ABSOLUTELY NOT." Thank you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I figured as much, just fishing. Dennis Brown - 16:09, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Declined - Editor can always create an article in their sandbox and submit that draft to be approved. Having this unprotected doesn't prevent that work. Dennis Brown - 19:16, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

Request a specific edit to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here

Mark Zuckerberg

Please shorten and add dates per short description, see like this: {{Short description|American internet entrepreneur (born 1984)}} (talk) 12:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Not done I see the talk page is protected. I am fairly sure that edit wouldn't be in consensus with other editors active on the page, as it deletes the fact that he founded Facebook, the thing he is best known for. Dennis Brown - 23:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Handled requests

A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.

Protected edit requests

6 protected edit requests
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
MediaWiki:Titleblacklist (request) 2022-05-21 12:41 MediaWiki page (log)
Template:Collapse top (request) 2022-08-04 04:14 Fully protected (log) Modified by MusikAnimal on 2019-02-25: "High-risk template or module; used in system message"
MediaWiki:Watchlist-messages (request) 2022-08-11 10:41 MediaWiki page (log) Unprotected by Cyberpower678 on 2018-11-20: "Breaks the RfX bot."
MediaWiki:Vector-action-addsection (request) 2022-08-15 07:44 MediaWiki page (log)
Template:Collapse bottom (request) 2022-08-15 17:42 Fully protected (log) Modified by Mr. Stradivarius on 2013-11-13: "Highly visible template: used in MediaWiki:Protect-text"
Raising Mamay (request) 2022-08-17 14:40 Fully protected, expires 2022-09-16 at 15:42:31 UTC (log) Protected by Stwalkerster on 2022-08-16: "Edit warring / content dispute - slow burn edit war"
Updated as needed. Last updated: 14:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
3 template-protected edit requests
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
Template:Inflation (request) 2022-08-05 07:46 Template-protected (log) Modified by Primefac on 2018-02-23: "high-risk template with 4000+ transclusions"
Module:Tennis events nav (request) 2022-08-14 11:00 Template-protected (log) Modified by KrakatoaKatie on 2015-07-13: "Highly visible Lua module"
Module:External links/conf/Sports (request) 2022-08-16 01:14 Template-protected (log) Modified by MusikBot II on 2021-08-17: "High-risk template or module 16175 transclusions (more info)"
Updated as needed. Last updated: 02:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Femke 196 2 2 99 08:42, 18 August 2022 0 days, 6 hoursno report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 02:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


Requests for autopatrolled



User:Curbon7 has created 81 articles, of which 7 have been deleted. Of these, two were deleted to make way for a page move (G6) and three were G7'd. The other two deserve a bit more of an explanation. Alexander Mamasidikov was deleted per WP:G5, which I would guess is because he lost control of his account around that time. Currently, he has the 2FA tester group, which I assume he makes use of. Finally, there is William J. Meade. He created the page, but later realized that the subject did not meet GNG. He was able to recognize that G7 was not applicable, so he PROD'd his own creation. Someone dePROD'd the page, so he took himself to AfD. In sum, I do not believe he needs new page patrollers to look after his work, because he looks after himself. HouseBlastertalk 21:47, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

For clarification, the weird G5 thing was because I moved someone's sandbox draft to draftspace (thus me creating a redirect from their sandbox), they removed the redirect and created a new sandbox draft, that got moved to mainspace, and it all got deleted anyways because they were a blocked user. That's why I show up as having that G5; no edits were made during the period my account was compromised, as it was instantly locked. Additionally, the other ones besides Meade were redirects that I G7'd, or G6s. Regardless, thanks for the nom. Curbon7 (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
It's been 3 weeks lol, can I get a close one way or the other?. Since this nom, I've created an additional 17 solid articles. It's a bit silly if I'm getting held up over an AfD that confused even an admin and a Jan 2021 compromise that had no effect. As I didn't start this nom, I don't mind which result I get, just a result would be nice. Curbon7 (talk) 10:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. WTF, Wikipedia? A loose necktie (talk) 07:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. Yet, Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and no admin is obligated to engage here. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 DoneTheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 22:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


Hi Folks!! I think this editor should be autopatrolled. Please take a look at this article: Lea Niako and this: Domna Visvizi. The editor has only been here two months odd with only 600odd edits and 15 articles already. I'm not sure exactly what the criteria is, so I guess this is a kind of speculative application, but some workload. scope_creepTalk 16:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has created roughly 15 articles. MusikBot talk 16:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Um, why do you care so much?? Unless... Unless we should deny. Which we should. You don't know what the criteria are? Any idiot can read the criteria. No. A loose necktie (talk) 07:37, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
@A loose necktie: cut it out, please.. there's no need for the personal attack against Scope creepTheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 22:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks @TheresNoTime: This is an truly excellent editor who has written six large, well formatted articles in one day. The 15 that have been written are steller. Probably the 2nd best article creator on Wikipedia and well worthy of being autopatrolled. Its been four days, it won't go through anyway. scope_creepTalk 22:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
I've looked over his work, and I have to say I am quite impressed with his creations. I suspect someone who may have edited in the past coming back to Wikipedia. He seems to have a clue and writes quite adequately for the pedia. 15 is somewhat low, but this is probably only the second time in 15 years that I would say it would be prudent to override the 25 minimum in this case. But, that's up to someone with a higher pay grade than I. Regards, GenQuest "scribble" 22:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
I shall take a look. Schwede66 01:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 Done Excellent work. When writing about European (especially British) topics, it would be better to use British English than American English. But that's about it. I also doubt that we are looking at just 15 articles; there must have been previous activity; even seasoned editors struggle to write such clean articles. Schwede66 02:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


Created over 100 articles. None have been deleted, and new articles do not appear to require attention from New Pages Patrol. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

NONE have been deleted?? That worries me much more than "5 have been deleted" or "30 have been deleted". Deny. Please. A loose necktie (talk) 07:35, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
@A loose necktie: Could you please elaborate on why you believe that writing content that doesn't get deleted would be an issue? --Blablubbs (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
If the implication is that the articles are receiving too little scrutiny, then I can say I have reviewed several of their articles and found them to be high-quality. They also tend to rely heavily on offline sources, which makes patrolling difficult. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 DoneTheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 22:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

User:A loose necktie

OK, I have written exactly 100 articles so far, 17 having since been deleted, which I think is a pretty good track record. I believe I have shown I have a good sense of Wikipedia's policies regarding notability, copyright, and verifiability, and while I realize this "right" doesn't really "change" anything for me, I don't see much point in burdening the new page patrollers with my work (though I do enjoy the idea of someone having to read over each of the articles I write! But that is just an ego need and I am letting that go). A loose necktie (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done Fairly sure your articles would do well to have a second pair of eyes on them for now, given the number of "concerns"/PRODs/draftified pages on your talk page — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 22:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


Created over 200 articles. None have been deleted, and new creations do not appear to require attention from New Page Patrol. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 DoneTheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 22:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights AK965 (talk) 03:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has created roughly 2 articles. MusikBot talk 03:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 Not done Thank you for your interest, but I am declining your request because 1) you did not give a reason and 2) you do not meet the criteria for autopatrolled (you have created one article that was later deleted at AfD). I encourage you to get some more experience in creating well-sourced articles about notable topics that comply with Wikipedia's guidelines. DanCherek (talk) 03:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


I've never had a NPP reviewer take issue with any of my articles and I wanted to request the right to try to lessen the queue. Of the articles I have created, one from 2012 was deleted and one from 2015 was redirected. Other than that, a lot of them I recently created are sent to DYK and hopefully GA, so they'll certainly have eyes on them regardless, but with the autopatrolled right they won't be taking up space in the NPP queue. - Aoidh (talk) 15:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC) Aoidh (talk) 15:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Requests for confirmation


User:Zippybonzo (public)

LEGITSOCK of Zippybonzo - I will sign below as proof - please also add Extended Confirmed. Thanks, Zippybonzo (public) (talk) 15:51, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 15:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 Done here. After a month, membership of the confirmed group will expire; if you still need access then, please request again. Sdrqaz (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Requests for extended confirmation

Extended confirmed

There are no outstanding requests for the mass message sender flag.

Mass message sender

Requests for new page reviewer

New page reviewer


I think I would make a good new page reviewer. I have a lot of experience in content creation, AfD, a light CSD log, and I've also dedicated a lot of time to content improvement (see Hot Pink and "WAP"). I could carry this over to NPR and I'd love to help make a dent in the backlog. Thanks :) —VersaceSpace 🌃 15:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure about your request. I've been mulling it over for a good while now. My concern comes in the CSD A7 form about whether you know what should be immediately deleted or not. I can't put my finger on why specifically at the moment, but I'm looking for any contributions that show your A7 knowledgeable, as it's a primary category of CSDs for NPRers. Anything like that that you can show me? -- Amanda (she/her) 18:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
@AmandaNP: I am aware of A7, and keep it in mind while editing. I would use it on any article that does not say why the subject of the article is notable. Exceptions are described at WP:CSD#A7; primarily as a music editor I've known that this can't be used on articles about albums or other creative works. I understand that this exception extends to other products. As an example, this criteria would apply to a store but not to a product in the store. If there's any other way I could display that I understand A7 or any other CSD to you, please let me know. —VersaceSpace 🌃 18:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment)@AmandaNP So I've been watching this for awhile and if you're still on the fence about granting @VersaceSpace NPR privileges I might have a solution. If you're leaning towards not granting NPR privileges maybe send @VersaceSpace to WP:NPRSCHOOL (if they're interested and have the time). I graduated from NPP School and I learned a LOT and I can't say enough good things about the experience. If this is improper, rude, or if I'm overstepping please let me know and it won't happen again. Dr vulpes (💬📝) 09:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment) I would agree with that - I think that NPP School is underused and therefore this is a good solution. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 10:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment) It's one of the reasons why I created the NPP school. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Interesting idea, @Cassiopeia, Atsme, and Rosguill:, as trainers who may have some capacity, are you open to taking on a new student? Seddon talk 22:41, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Absolutely, Seddon. Atsme 💬 📧 23:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
I would and pls see the trainer available slot for new students here. Cassiopeia talk 00:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


I am an AfC reviewer and I would like to reduce the NPP backlog. I have a fair bit of experience in both AfD and CSD. 0xDeadbeef 16:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)


After creating several articles I asked for and was given the NPP perm temporarily. I didn't use it very much and allowed it to expire. I recently heard there was a very high backlog and wanted to give it another go. Spudlace (talk) 21:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Spudlace: do you have a link to your previous request? Seddon talk 22:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
[1] Spudlace (talk) 08:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Might I suggest waiting a bit? You just got AFC and your first accept (or one of the first) was pretty abysmal. PRAXIDICAE🌈 12:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm in complete agreement with you and Seraphimblade that it was a spammy kind of article. It would probably have been deleted at AfD, which is where I was planning to send it. I don't think it would have survived AfD but any soloist in a national orchestra has probably received at least some press in their own country. Because the country is Iran, and music/arts and press are often subject to censorship there, it may not have been enough to pass at AfD (independent, reliable, etc.) The sources were not in English and maybe the community would decide they couldn't meet the standardss we need. As for waiting on NPP, I don't mind. I should explain, however, that I mainly applied for this AFC and NPP to help review unambiguously non-spam articles that are stuck in the backlogs, and some of the borderline ones like what is usually discussed at AfD. If that's not what is needed here, I don't know if I should reapply? I don't see my role on this project as a deletion patrol, nor do I forsee myself becoming interested in deleting possibly notable subjects without discussion. It's good work you all do, but it's just not my thing. My decision here was more that I didn't want to make this call unilaterally. Maybe I don't understand what the role of NPP is for the project. I will put some consideration into all the comments that I receive, if I am to reapply. Spudlace (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
You shouldn't AFC accept something that will be deleted at AFD. One of the reasons for AFC is to protect articles from deletion discussions, since deletion 1) stops an article from being worked on, and 2) is WP:BITEy to new users. The threshold for accepting an AFC draft is that it will probably survive a deletion discussion. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Yes it does @Novem Linguae:. The article stated some claims that made me think maybe notable but it wasn't easily verifiable. I only read WP:AFCSTANDARDS and the instructions before getting started and I thought I was supposed to be more flexible with non-English sources. I did think it might be notable, but it turned out there were more problems with the citations than I realized, which Praxidicae has explained in more detail in other venues of discussion. Spudlace (talk) 18:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

After this discussion, I think I'll just see how things go at AFC for now and apply for NPP again at a later time. This has definitely been a valuable exchange with good input for me. Spudlace (talk) 19:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 Request withdrawn by requester (adding the template for the bot). Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 22:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


Reason for requesting new page reviewer rights

I want to review new pages and will try my best to clear the backlog to the best of my capacity. I was granted a temporary right. After that, I reviewed many articles. Now I want to again get the right so that I can start the process of clearing the backlog. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 01:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


I was previously granted the right on a provisional basis and would like to make it permanent. I really enjoy NPP work, and would like to keep doing it. A manual log of my work is available. ~ Matthewrb Talk to me · Changes I've made 23:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Barkeep49 (expires 00:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)). MusikBot talk 23:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


I have sufficient experience in editing, writing, and publishing articles or pages here in Wikipedia. I've been an active user since January 2, 2020 and made about 6000+ overall edits already based from the. I'm keen on writing information regarding various articles or pages on Wikipedia. With that said, I also make sure to be in line with the guidelines given by Wikipedia in creating, editing, publishing, and writing Wikipedia articles or pages. ReVeluv02 (talk) 05:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) This user may possibly have conflicting views about deletion that may not be compatible with a neutral approach to new page patrolling.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I didn't know userboxes can affect my approach on getting accepted as a new page reviewer. In that case, I have removed the conflicting userboxes involved. However, despite my beliefs I always stay neutral on creating, editing, publishing, and writing Wikipedia articles. My approaches doesn't necessarily affect the way I edit and I believe that all articles must be in line with WP:NEUTRAL. ReVeluv02 (talk) 13:06, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Not done – aside from a single AfD vote, I'm not seeing any experience with our deletion processes, which are an integral part of patrolling. I haven't given it too much thought because I think it's moot in light of my concerns about deletion experience, but I will note that I think Kudpung also raises a valid concern (and one that doesn't seem to have much to do with WP:NPOV). --Blablubbs (talk) 13:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Requests for page mover

Page mover


I already have some RM participation experience, especially with closing them. If I were to have this right, I would then be able to participate in the RMTR area (where page movers are needed to execute some moves) or with editnotices. Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) 07:05, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

  • Edited request to reflect my new username. Separately, I would also like to note that I also have experiences starting RMs, including a current one. Thanks. NotReallyMoniak (talk) 16:33, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
    @NotReallyMoniak: Hello. You forgot fix the redirects in your user/talk page. You are currently not contactable. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
    @NotReallySoroka: Hello. This is your new account. This one should be in the header, and rfplinks template, not the older one. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
    I just changed my username. Thanks for reminding me to change my username here. NotReallySoroka (talk) 01:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)


To manage stubs and dirty redirects. nirmal (talk) 04:33, 25 July 2022 (UTC)


I am an active editor of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) articles and have been working on several redirects related to them, and have worked on a few disambiguation pages. I frequently encounter the need to move some MCU articles for title changes (sometimes to revert vandalism), with many drafts necessitating moves from their initial Untitled states to officially titled ones (though many have beaten me to them in the past), moving to a more acceptable titling format (history example), and the drafts having to be moved to mainspace once filming starts per WP:NFTV. I comply with the guidelines at WP:AT, and have an understanding of when to use WP:NATURALDAB, which prefers natural disambiguations over parenthetical disambiguations, for Rogue One or Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (which I made Glass onion (disambiguation) to help with navigation for). In the past I did make an erroneous undiscussed move at Draft:Blade (2023 film) but I learned from that mistake as it was a poor jumping of the gun on a minor italics formatting choice. I also was among those who suggested in the WP:MCU task force (before it was anything official) the naming conventions for the Phase articles such as Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Four being the title for that article over others discussed such as the more unambiguous and yet still helpful titles Phase Four (Marvel Cinematic Universe) and Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which were natural disambiguations but not decent disambiguations in their own right as the former's format is generally used for in-universe characters or elements, while the latter's read more as a sentence, so a compromise in the titling format I helped suggest was agreed upon. I also did recently move Secret Wars (film) to Secret Wars (2014 film) given Avengers: Secret Wars was just recently announced and that 2014 film needed to have further specification as the common name for the Avengers film would lie at Secret Wars (2025 film), even though that would not be the main article title. Trailblazer101 (talk) 07:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)


I have a long history with moving pages, participating in move discussions, and making requests in the technical requests section. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 02:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)


Hello, I would like to apply for Page Mover rights please. It is for moving new articles to draftspace if they are not ready for publication. Someone suggested that I apply for this right. I am quite experienced with page moves and this should avoid the need for an admin to manually delete the redirects that are currently being created. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)


I frequently move pages to correct titles where the current title is so inaccurate that a redirect would be worthless, or the subsequently redirected title is immediately overwritten when it would be better (or should really) be deleted first (e.g. WP:ROBIN moves like Robert Honywood, Robert Honeywood). Also looking to assist with moving unready articles into draftspace (e.g. Sheridon Gumbs, Josh Blake (cricketer), etc.). wjematherplease leave a message... 14:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Requests for pending changes reviewer

Pending changes reviewer


Hello, I am reapplying for this role. I did it some time ago. I am applying at this time as I believe that my extensive experience editing Wikipedia makes me qualified for this role. I am much familiar with Wikipedia BLP, Neutral Point of View, and other policies this time. Thanks Endrabcwizart (talk) 12:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


Most of my wiki activity is related to counter-vandalism and improving needy edits, so I'm requesting the user right in order to review pending changes that I come across while patrolling recent changes and to generally help out with the pending changes queue when I have time. I have read WP:RPC in its entirety and understand the pending changes review process, as well as the basics of the policies linked in that guideline. Thanks for your consideration. PlanetJuice (talkcontribs) 01:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


I am a regular contributor to Wikipedia and familiar with the policies related to reviewer rights. I would like to review pending changes to entries related the projects I am active in, including WikiProject Indiana and WikiProject Women in Religion. Jaireeodell (talk) 22:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


Team, been loving being back on Wikipedia and protecting our Wiki from vandals. I've noted the high backlog of pending changes, and would like to extend my hand to assist reviewing (when not busy hunting vandals!). I believe I have largely used my rollback permissions with good care, and would like to assist further. Poped in before but previous admin wanted a bit more track record since being back on. Thanks! Mr.weedle (talk) 04:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([2]). MusikBot talk 04:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)


I work a lot in the field of vandalism, and I see some vandalism happening in the pending changes section of articles and I would like to correct the vandalism. I also feel that a lot of pending changes happen and that they are not checked fast enough. 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


I've been editing Wikipedia for multiple years now and have over 2,000 edits. I also frequent Special:RecentChanges and have a good understanding of what constitutes constructive and unconstructive editing. Having pending changes reviewer rights would allow me to make a more positive contribution to the community. Partofthemachine (talk) 06:08, 7 August 2022 (UTC)


I asked for protections to be lifted on Aztecs, but they were only lowered. It is on my Watchlist and I would like to expedite and modify useful edits such as these. I will use the powers for good and not for evil etc. SamuelRiv (talk) 22:13, 9 August 2022 (UTC)


Requesting permission to expedite the reviewing process for new users. Best! nirmal (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)


I am a regular contributor to Wikipedia, so I believe that my extensive experience editing Wikipedia makes me qualified for this role. Phil81194 (talk) 10:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


Hello, I am applying for this role. I am fairly active on Wikipedia and have a history of constructive, timely, well-sourced edits. Geopony (talk) 11:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


I request for these rights as I have for a long time read, understood and practiced Wikipedia policies related to the role. I am a regular contributor (mostly on articles related to South Sudan) and an active member of WikiProject Podcasting. Majokthefirst (talk) 20:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 38 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 20:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Requests for rollback



Reason for requesting rollback rights

I've got 260+ mainspace edits, am a regular to recent changes, and I'd like to think I'm a good judge of vandalism. Heyallkatehere (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I noticed that you're not always warning editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4). Could you please comment on that? Thanks, FASTILY 08:09, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
@Heyallkatehere ^ -FASTILY 08:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi fastily! Sorry for the lack of reply, didn't get the ping till now. I almost always leave a warning, in cases 1 and 2, I was unable to judge intent and felt as thought it could have been an honest mistake, however in retrospect I should've left a message noting such. 3, I believe I left an adequate explanation in the edit summary. 4 is a consequence of honest mistake, I should've left a warning. I will commit to doing better at that in the future regardless of whether you grant perms, thanks for pointing that out Heyallkatehere (talk) 16:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. If you are reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor; I recommend using tools such as Twinkle or RedWarn which makes this extremely easy. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Could you please make a commitment to leaving warnings/notifications for every revert? -FASTILY 20:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Yep! I can make that commitment. Heyallkatehere (talk) 12:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


I would like rollback as I have done anti-vandalism work for some time now, and would like rollback as a useful tool, and to use Huggle. JML1148 (talk) 10:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I noticed that you're not always warning editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4). Could you please comment on that? Thanks, FASTILY 06:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, for diffs 1, 2, and 3 I was unsure exactly what template to use for that. I could have just left a message, in hindsight, but I didn't do that. I'm unsure why I didn't warn diff 4, as they should have gotten the missing citation template. Hope this answers your queries. JML1148 (talk) 08:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. If you are reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor; I recommend using tools such as Twinkle or RedWarn which makes this trivially easy. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Could you please make a commitment to leaving warnings for every revert? -FASTILY 22:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
I have both RedWarn and Twinkle, actually! I am happy to leave a warning for every editor that I revert, and I understand my mistakes. JML1148 (talk) 07:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Great, thanks for confirming.  Done -FASTILY 08:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


Currently enrolled within the WP:CVUA. I have been attempting to patrol the recent changes more and more and would like to experiment with using Huggle. Requesting access to utilize that tool. Skipple 02:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done You enrolled in CVUA yesterday. That's *way* too soon to be requesting rollback. Courtesy ping for @Cassiopeia -FASTILY 02:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Apologies Fastily, I wasn't aware there was a period of time I should be enrolled within the CVUA before requesting permission. From what I could see, I had met the requirements and have demonstrated reasonable judgement when editing & patrolling. Appreciate it though! Skipple 11:45, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Skipple When you have complete the CVUA program then you can apply for the user right like all other CVUA graduate participants. Cassiopeia talk 08:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Understood. Thanks, Cassiopeia. Skipple 11:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


Hello, I already have over 200 mainspace edits, I also reverted edits from vandals and warned them using Twinkle and RedWarn. So is this the time for rollback? If you cannot grant that, that is fine. Of course you may not grant that because I have a level-3 warning... but will you still grant that? Izivy (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done looking over the ANI thread, I don't think it is best to grant rollback at this time -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 14:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

So you just want me to quit wikipedia or to remove my account? Izivy (talk) 14:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I worked so hard editing wikipedia, and you want me to... remove my account? That is not possible, what kind of nonsense discussion is this? Izivy (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Guerillero, Thank you for making my manager mad after you declined the rollback request. Now I have to pay them $600. "What do you mean you have a manager, a manager for what?" I meant a manager to work on Wikipedia. Izivy (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


I've got 100+ mainspace edits, am a regular to recent changes, and I'd like to think I'm a good judge of vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaustubhkul (talkcontribs) 16:38, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 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 & RedWarn can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please start warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, FASTILY 20:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Note: while this may not be against rules, a bit odd to me they copied mine but changed the number /: Heyallkatehere (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


Hello, I've been actively struggling against vandalism in recent weeks. I believe that I am ready to use the rollbacking tool for my anti-vandalism work, so I thought that it would be appropriate to apply for that. Regards, BerkBerk68 22:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

User:YeYen KY

i might need this right for clearer edit of the return. YeYen KY (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 27 edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 01:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. With only 27 edits to the mainspace, I don't think you have sufficient editing experience yet. Take a moment to check out what counter-vandalism is at WP:CVU, and if you decide you'd like to get involved, you can enroll at the Counter Vandalism Academy to learn more. — JJMC89(T·C) 02:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC)