Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:PERM)

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 09:40, 7 December 2023 (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, 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 have made more than 4000 edits on Wikipedia, and going and created about 120 articles, nominated many Non-notable articles for deletion. I saw my Username mentioned in Wikipedia:Database reports/Editors eligible for Autopatrol privilege, so i'm here to ask for the privilege. Thanks. -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll be honest, this very recent SPI makes me nervous about granting permissions. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. I think autopatrolled should not be granted here. Autopatrolled permission is not for the benefit of the editor holding the permission, but to ease the burden on new page reviewers. So your ability to continue editing will not be hampered in any way. Given the checkuser result, and your account being fairly new, I think new page reviewers can just take on the tiny extra amount of work of reviewing your creations. MarioGom (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Not done per above -Fastily 02:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


While looking at new pages, I've noticed that Chase has quite the number of quality redirect and article creations. Over the last year, they've created 100 pages that have been assessed at high ratings, with only a couple stubs in the last 50 creations. I haven't crossed paths with their volcanic topic area, but with a 94% edit summary usage I feel this could be a worthy bit to grant. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Schwede66 14:35, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:PD Slessor

I have created several articles and I am focused on creating more articles. Granting me this right will help reduce the burden of new page reviewers and lessen the number of new articles waiting for review. PD Slessor (talk) 04:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done for 90 days. Your account is much newer than is typically granted Autopatrolled, for which reason only I'm limiting it to a 90 day trial after which you may reapply for permanent extension. However, otherwise your edits appear fine. You've created more than 25 articles, including more than 25 BLPs, none of which have been deleted. I've randomly checked 10 of them and all 10 passed a copyvio, NPOV and reference check. I see no other issues on checking the usual places. Keep up the good work. Chetsford (talk) 19:53, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm only asking this because I haven't seen the temporary-grants be used in this way, but @Chetsford: why a 90 day limit for autopatrolled? The way I see it, either someone has a track record of following Wikipedia policies and guidelines in article creation and can get the bit, or they don't (and the bit can be taken away). Sure the account is new, but if the quality page creation wasn't present then AP wouldn't be granted. In my eyes, this is the type of perm that should be given until pages become not-up-to-standard for whatever reason, at which point removed. I'm not an admin to make that call, just a patroller, but from my pov if the pages are consistently good, the pages are consistently good. It's no extra effort on the granted user's end because it just flips the "patrolled" flag, and progress could be reassessed in 90 days to make sure things are golden. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Utopes, you're correct, temporary grants aren't typically used this way, however, 50-day old accounts also aren't typically able to demonstrate sufficient familiarity with policies and guidelines to warrant Autopatrolled in the first place. In this case, the editor in question is apparently a savant; taking any action that might discourage them from continuing to robustly contribute to the project would be a mistake, in my mind. Nonetheless, this needs to be weighed against the fact that Autopatrolled exists to protect the most sensitive areas of the project and "the right is not normally given to very new editors, regardless of the number of articles created." I know this isn't an entirely satisfactory explanation but, I'm afraid, I can't go into greater detail here. Anyone else should feel free to make this immediately permanent, though, without objection from me. Chetsford (talk) 02:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Utopes:, re. this is the type of perm that should be given until pages become not-up-to-standard for whatever reason, at which point removed – the problem is that nobody is systematically reviewing creations by autopatrolled editors, so if this happens, it's unlikely to be spotted. This is fundamentally what makes autopatrolled a high-risk perm, and why are criteria for it are quite high. In edge cases like this, I think assigning it temporarily, so that the user's creations can be re-reviewed if/when it is extended, makes a lot of sense. – Joe (talk) 10:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. That's sound reasoning in this case by Joe Roe and Chetsford It happens on occasion. Regards, GenQuest "scribble" 02:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I regularly make list articles and BLP redirects, and their associated talk pages, in the WP:Astronomy space (quite modestly trying to fill the void that Rfassbind left when he stopped editing), and I plan on continuing to do so. I have been commended by a WP:NPP, Herpetogenesis, for my work. I have also fixed or reverted copyright violations on these pages as I see them [1], [2], [3], [4], [5].   ~ Tom.Reding (talkdgaf)  21:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)   ~ Tom.Reding (talkdgaf)  21:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So autopatrolled only affects non-redirects in the article namespace, and according to sigma you have created 23 of these in the last five years, just under our minimum criterion of 25. Of course your article creation record goes back beyond that, but on balance I don't think it's so high rate as to justify autopatrolled. You are already on the redirect autopatrol list, which does the same thing as autopatrolled for redirects.  Not done for the bot. – Joe (talk) 07:46, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That certainly helps.
I was not sure if the large # of preparatory meanings of minor planet names pages I recreated as non-#Rs, and then #R'd, counted or not. Would these still fall under redirect-AP, since they were not created as redirects?   ~ Tom.Reding (talkdgaf)  13:37, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those would have been briefly in the new page queue, but removed as soon as you redirected them. The redirect should then have been automatically patrolled by DannyS712 bot almost immediately. Since NPPers are asked not to patrol pages until an hour after they're created, I don't think autopatrolled would have made a material difference. – Joe (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have created over 25 articles from WP:AFC process and they are releated into Indian politicians and Which all are biographies. There are no copyright or any other issues in them; they all comply with the core policies and WP:BLP. I am requesting autopatrol to reduce some burden on NPPs.Thnx :) ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk)

(Non-administrator comment) @Aviram7 Being a pretty experienced editor with the NPP and AFC userright, you can directly create pages in the main-namespace without autopatrolled. Autopatrolled will not affect you AFC creations at all. Autopatrolled merely allows certain NPP users to ignore your contributions (it shows up with a purple icon).
That being said, while I really like the edits that you are making (Indian politics is not a easy area to tackle and I really respect your dedication to increasing Wikipedia's coverage in this area), you've had improvements suggested by reviews even yesterday I personally feel that having more eyes on your work would be a good thing in general, I would ask you to reconsider the application :) Sohom (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear @Sohom Datta: Hello, Thanks for comment on here,I know we can do directly creates article in mainspace, but I prefers WP:AFC for creating article, because I'm not like direct creating on mainspace, I'm eligible for this permission because I really need this and I try to make more better article but I don't know who suggest for improvement by reviews? I take a final decision If admin review my work If admin like my good (positive) work, so, they can do considereding to grant me this right,I think my requests should be left to the administrator to decide.Thnx 😊 ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 15:33, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No issues, I respect your descision :) Sohom (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Not done Aviram7 - everything looks good, except every BLP you've created is a stub. That's not an objective barrier to receiving Autopatrolled, however, extension of the right requires we observe that the editor in question "demonstrate familiarity" with policies related to BLPs. I think you are probably familiar with our policies related to BLPs, however, your corpus of work is not presently sufficient to serve as such a demonstration. Of course, familiarity can be demonstrated in other ways beyond merely creating articles but, in this case, I feel like it would be the path of least resistance if you could build out a couple BLPs to allow further review. After that, you should be good to go. By the way, your contributions are very thorough and nice and fill a gap that needs to be filled among Indian state legislators. Keep up the good work! Chetsford (talk) 23:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Hi admins, I copy edit and fix minor to major issues in articles and revert vandalism on Wikipedia regularly. The AWB access would help me to fix issues in the mainspace more efficiently with less hindrance. Regards. Leoneix (talk) 18:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have taken a thorough look to the AWB guide and will act in accordance to it. Leoneix (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done I would have preferred a request that more clearly specified what you would use AWB for, but you seem to know what you are doing, so let's roll! * Pppery * it has begun... 06:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Batagur baska

Hi. I think this utility would be a great help to me as I have become heavily involved in repairing and maintaining articles about cricket in India. A lot of repetitive tasks are necessary because of naming and dating errors, improving categorisation, and the like. I have systems expertise and have used utilities like this one professionally, so I am fully aware of what is entailed, although I will need to spend some time familiarising myself with this one's functionality and features. I have only been a member for about six weeks and I realise that isn't very long, but I have completed about 1,500 mainspace edits, many of which are the type that this utility could do so much quicker. Please let me know if you need more information. Thank you. Batagur baska (talk) 17:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC) Batagur baska (talk) 17:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I should add that I have read the guidelines and I believe I understand everything. I would just need some time to examine the actual utility, but I think I would soon be ready to use it. Thank you again. Batagur baska (talk) 12:56, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done * Pppery * it has begun... 06:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Pppery. That's great. I'll have a look-see over the weekend and should be okay for a trial run soon, something nice and simple to begin with. Thank you very much. Batagur baska (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Admins! I'd like to request access for AWB to help with adding links and categories to a large number of pages whenever I make a new page for a Victorian Ministry. AWB would allow me to save significant time with these tasks. I've read through the guidelines for AWB. --Ultraodan (talk) 10:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC) Ultraodan (talk) 10:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done @Ultraodan You're right on the edge of what I would consider enough experience to be granted AWB access with most of your edits being very small. Given that you show a track record of how you want to use the tool I'm going to grant it anyways. One thing I'm concerned about however is the lack of edit summaries. I know it can seem unnecessary when your edit is small and your making a lot of them, but it can be really helpful for people going through their watchlist. Given the minimal effort required to add oner when using AWB it's basically never considered acceptable to not add one when using the tool. --Trialpears (talk) 09:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Understood. Thank you! --Ultraodan (talk) 09:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

I am writing to request permission to use AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) as part of my ongoing contributions to Wikipedia. My primary motivation for seeking access to AWB is to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of my editing tasks, particularly in the areas of batch editing, maintenance, and project contribution. As a committed member of the Wikipedia community, I have actively participated in several editing projects, with a keen interest in Economy Article editing. I believe that AWB will be instrumental in my efforts to standardize formatting, update links, and fix typos across multiple articles related to this field. Such batch editing tasks are not only time-consuming but also prone to human error when done manually.

Additionally, I am deeply involved in maintenance and cleanup activities on Wikipedia. I regularly engage in correcting disambiguation links, fixing broken references, and removing deprecated parameters from templates. The automation capabilities of AWB would greatly assist in these tasks, allowing me to contribute more effectively and efficiently.

Finally, I am dedicated to the mission of keeping Wikipedia a reliable and credible source of information. In this regard, I also participate in anti-vandalism efforts. The use of AWB would enhance my ability to quickly revert vandalism, ensuring the integrity of articles.

I understand the responsibility that comes with using AWB and assure you of my commitment to adhere to Wikipedia's editing guidelines and the ethical use of the tool. I have familiarized myself with the AWB user manual and guidelines to ensure its proper and effective use.

Thank you for considering my request. I am eager to contribute more significantly to Wikipedia with the aid of AWB and look forward to your favorable response. Canada18 (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 19:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Not done Fails minimum criteria. This request also appears to have been written by a large language model such as ChatGPT, which completely fails to convince admins of your qualifications (as you are requesting permissions for yourself, not for the language model) although it is ironic here. I would probably have declined regardless, but keep that in mind for the future. * Pppery * it has begun... 06:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Reason for requesting confirmed rights Fugiman (talk) 05:23, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoconfirmed" user right. MusikBot talk 05:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Event coordinator


Reason for requesting event coordinator rights

Hi! I’m undertaking the train the trainer course through Wikimedia UK and am hoping to run a lot of editathons in my institution and beyond. Event coordinator rights would help with this massively, thank you! Octavosaurus (talk) 13:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Octavosaurus Do you have the dates for the editathons you'll be running? stwalkerster (talk) 19:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Stwalkerster The dates aren't confirmed yet, but there will be quite a lot of them in the forseeable future. so having these rights would help massively. Octavosaurus (talk) 10:57, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, I am requesting Event Coordinator Permissions because I am planning on running a Wiki edit-a-thon event here at the Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales Branch Library in Denver, CO on Saturday 13 January 2024 as part of our library programing. I hope to attract new editors from our local community and we may have some new editors signing up at the event. I will be working closely with our new editors to guide them towards making good edits and teaching them about proper citation, etc. If successful I plan on hosting future events here at our library, hopefully on a bi-monthly basis, or monthly if there is demand for it.

If helpful to the decision making process I can take a phone call here at the branch library during normal hours Tuesday through Saturday, with the exception of during the lunch hour. Gonzales Branch Hours Ask for Matthew and the desk staff will be able to transfer the call. Yrs, MatthewFromColfaxLibrary (talk) 17:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done for 45 days (right will expire January 20) Chetsford (talk) 23:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended confirmed


Javascript/userscript testing account, hitting a few pesky filters and CAPTCHA popups :) Sohom (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done, Sohom Chetsford (talk) 23:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File mover

Mass message sender


I will like to request for the mass message sender to be able to send mass messages to members of my community in other to engage them as an organizer. Thank you Jwale2 (talk) 08:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't intend to process this request, but I think it would be helpful if you gave a bit more detail @Jwale2. What community is this for and how often do you expect to send out mass messages? Hey man im josh (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hey man im josh, Thank you for your response. We are engaging with the Open Foundation West Africa Community, the Women In Sustainability community, the Ghana Pidgin Community, and others. The objective is to utilize a tool that can help facilitate the efficient sending of mass messages to community members through their wiki-pages, particularly for organizing events,campaigns and community support. Jwale2 (talk) 14:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New page reviewer


I want to be a net positive and help review pages and cut down on possible backlogs. Noorullah (talk) 03:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hey, re-requesting New Page Reviewer after a long hiatus. Previously had it, dropped for inactivity [6] [7]. Mostly, as I always have, work on cleanup from the new pages feed and AFC. A412 (TalkC) 06:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I was talking about it with a few other editors in the Discord server and finally decided to actually apply for NPR after passively thinking about doing it for awhile. I'd like to help with the massive backlog when I don't feel like working on content. I think it could also be helpful for my work at WikiProject AI Cleanup. Thanks!— sawyer / talk 04:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Request withdrawn sawyer / talk 06:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page mover


I do a lot of categorization and tidying of new pages, and sometimes need to move new pages with unnecessary or misspelled disambiguation. Page mover permissions allow me to avoid leaving implausible redirects. I was granted temporary page moved on 29 August, and have had no complaints so far, but the trial has expired today: could this permission be renewed please? Wikishovel (talk) 09:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure here. A lot of those are plausible redirects and moving Vendolite vending machine to Vendolite (for example) without a redirect seems likely to confuse a new editor. Wil leave up for some more admin opinions. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
HJM is right, Vendolite vending machine was a plausible redirect, and should have been retained, apologies for that. Some of the others they're concerned about may have been related to obvious sockpuppetry or subtle vandalism. Page mover would certainly have been helpful during my vandalism cleanup of this mess yesterday. But if the rule is "plausible redirects should be retained, pending admin intervention for other problems", then I'm happy to stick to that. How about a 30-day short leash, to demonstrate? Wikishovel (talk) 05:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done for another 30 days. If you haven't already, Wikishovel, I'd suggest reading WP:PMRC: basically, don't suppress the redirect unless it would have met one of the criteria for speedy deletion if retained. Redirects are cheap, so it's generally best to err on the side of caution when it comes to suppressing them. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:21, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Two reasons for requesting this user perm: first, I'm a reviewer at WP:NPP and I've been aware of this right for some time, weighing whether or not it's worth it for me to ask. The reason it's relevant is because as a NPP reviewer, sometimes I have the need to draftify things and I'm frequently leaving behind cross-namespace redirects with deletion tags that I think are just leaving behind more work for admins to do. It's not a lot but I do consider that you guys probably need less, not more tedious and menial work to do.

Second, I'm coming across instances more often writing articles where I am trying to move pages from the draft space (recently completed Draft:The Bear (The Bear)) to main space, where I would like to be able to do it over a redirect. Again, not a large reason, but would be nice to be able to do without waiting for admin eyes.

That's all really. Two minor reasons for this hat, but they are use cases specific to how I'm editing. Thanks microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 19:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pending changes reviewer



Hey again, its been just over a month since I first started patrolling recent changes for vandalism here. After learning the ropes, I quickly began warning editors for all my reverts, and I have developed a good understanding of how to use reversion tools such as Twinkle and Redwarn. I will use rollback permissions to effectively use Huggle or AntiVandal to do my job better. -REDACTED403 (talk) 15:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([8]). MusikBot talk 15:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done -Fastily 09:25, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template editor