• Tuesden (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Been editing for a little over a year as an IP user on and off. Decided to get a bit more committed as at November and looking at creating a bunch of good articles with a focus on biographies mostly. I have created 59 articles as of the time of my request, none have been deleted and I have a solid understanding of WP:BLP, WP:CV and notability guidelines. Getting the right will help reduce workload from WP:NPP. Tuesden (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• sawyer777 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Slightly below the recommended 25 creations (22 if you count articles created from a redirect), but I'm familiar with sawyer's work and have consistently found it to be of a high quality and not in need of review from new pages patrol. I did my usual spot-checks for policy issues anyways, and have no notes. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:46, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has created roughly 21 articles. — MusikBot ^talk 23:50, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Epicgenius (talk) 01:23, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I swear I thought sawyer was already AP, but Epicgenius beat me to the button by a few seconds! Sohom (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Trinsics (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

This editor has steadily created 18 very high-quality articles largely related to the eighteenth-century publisher John Ralph, with every sign of continuing to be prolific in this area. I frequently review their work at AfC and NPP, and it is always well-sourced and well-written. I think they are a good candidate for autopatrolled; by the time they reach 25 articles it will be long past time for NPPers to be relieved of the needless work of double-checking their efforts. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has created roughly 12 articles. — MusikBot ^talk 01:50, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done They haven't reached 25 articles and they haven't edited for 3 months. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:36, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• SeldomSeldom (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I have been working with article creation very recently, (30 being just this month) and so far have not encountered any problems, in terms of articles being nominated for deletion. I realize that I have been creating often recently, and do not want to be a burden on the amazing users who review my articles. I have also familiarized myself with the guidelines. SeldomSeldom (talk) 03:56, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done Per WP:APCRITERIA, your article creations don't demonstrate "regularly demonstrate familiarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially those on biographies of living persons, copyrights, verifiability and notability". Additionally, "the right is not normally given to very new editors, regardless of the number of articles created", and you've only been actively editing for about four months. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:40, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• Galactikapedia (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Mass adding {Db-g7} to purposeless circular redirects on taxa pages that I made 5-8 years ago. Galactikapedia (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:57, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Masktapeisawesome (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I am requesting the ability to use the AutoWikiBrowser, as I think it would be very useful for my editing, and I can be trusted to use it responsibly. I have been editing Wikipedia articles since 2022 and have made over 1,000 edits. As my recent edits can attest, I have recently been trying to edit the Wikipedia pages of every municipality in New Jersey (my home state) so the infobox is formatted correctly. Many of NJ's municipalities have an unnecessary space between "County" and "County name". For example, look at Hillside, New Jersey. There is a large unnecessary space between "County" and "Hudson". The reason for this large space is that the infobox contains "subdivision_name2 = flagicon image (county name)". Even if "flagicon image" did render the county's flag, it would still go against Wikipedia's Manual of Style, which states that flags shouldn't be displayed in infoboxes for second-level (or lower) subdivisions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Icons I believe that giving me access to AutoWikiBrowser would allow me to fix this problem quickly across all the affected Wikipedia pages. Masktapeisawesome (talk) 05:57, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:58, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Masktapeisawesome (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Babin Mew (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I am asking for AutoWikiBrowser permission to make changes to multiple pages within a short time; such as adding cleanup or citations-related (More refs needed, citation needed, original research, etc.) tags to pages. Adding and dating them manually takes quite a bit of time, which can be reduced with the help of AutoWikiBrowser. Babin Mew (talk) 07:19, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Please give Wikipedia:Tag bombing a read, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:59, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Tonymetz (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Replacing ascii icons with unicode equivalents e.g. --> with → Tonymetz 💬 01:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:59, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Ira Leviton (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I want to use AWB so I can be more efficient when fixing typos, word duplications, and some types of formatting errors in references that generate CS1 errors. Ira Leviton (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• Prime679 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Hi I'm Prime 679 I want to Confirm My Account Prime679 (talk) 04:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done No reason given. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:01, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Prayerie (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I’ve been a Wikipedia user for nearly a decade, but my sporadic editing pattern means my account only has 150 edits. I’d quite like extended confirmed status to use the content translation tool: it would enable me to translate articles from two alternate language wikis for languages I speak. A page I already created/translated based on its Japanese version can be seen here: Mahjong Fight Club.

I’m aware that as I’m not requesting for an alt account, this will be denied, but I may as well ask. Thanks! prayerie (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Per the instructions on WP:CX, you should still be able to use the tool, but the translated pages have to be created in userspace or draftspace first. ScalarFactor (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done per ScalarFactor. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:02, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• M.Myy6 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Hello I wanted to get this permission so I can edit some pages under the security Umbrella Thank you M.Myy6 (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done – Hi, and thank you for creating an account to edit Wikipedia. Although I fully understand your desire to dive right in, many of our articles are semi-protected because they are controversial, prone to vandalism, or other reasons. As a new editor with few edits, it might be wise to discuss your edits on the article talkpage in order to gain consensus for your edits, and then use {{Edit semi-protected}} to request the edit be performed. I only recommend this until you are used to the challenges of reliable sources, the biographies of living persons policy, and other similar policies. The good news is that fewer than 5 percent of Wikipedia articles are protected; this means that more than 95 percent of the articles can use your help right now!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:47, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• ScrubbedFalcon (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Hi, I'm aware that there's a high likelihood of this being declined. I've been working through the merge backlog via the "merge a random article" button (see for example Metaphysical grounding, Model minority, BNP Paribas, Dippy etc.) and came across the page for Ward Boston which per two discussions from 2022 has consensus to merge to USS Liberty incident. I'm not sure about performing the merge since its been in the backlog for so long so I thought it might be worth reopening the discussion, but the talk page at the USS Liberty incident has a warning to not even to start a discussion without the EC permission which is why I'm here. I realize that granting the request would be an exception, so I thought it might be possible even for just the one talk page. Or let me know if I can just remove the template:being merged template from the Ward Boston page. Happy to answer any questions if needed! ScrubbedFalcon (talk) 16:27, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done Thanks for working on such a long-term backlog! I'm afraid I can't grant EC in this case; regardless we practically never grant it before 500 edits but the USS Liberty Incident is part of the Israeli-Arab conflict contentious topic which is very strictly extended confirmed restricted. I would advise you carry on as normal and then once you are EC you can return to that page to discuss the merge. CoconutOctopus talk 18:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Geichel (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

• Dinitrify (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

There are many new and old articles that haven't been reviewed as today, I request to be new page viewer in terms to reduce the number of articles that are not reviewed. Thanks Dinitrify (talk) 01:12, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([1]). — MusikBot ^talk 01:20, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done, please address the concerns brought up in the old request. Sohom (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• Monkeysmashingkeyboards (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

patroller perms expiring soon, I've made some goofs(see my most recent AfD nom) but I learn from my mistakes, and I... think I've been a net positive to this project? I was very active with December's AfC drive, though not as much recently since I've been doing more content work. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 04:10, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Sohom Datta (expires 00:00, 31 January 2026 (UTC)) and has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([2]). — MusikBot ^talk 04:20, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• FantasticWikiUser (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I have been recent changes patrolling for a short amount of time and often I see these requests come up and I'd like to be able to act on them as I see them. I have read and understood WP:PCR (the permission should mainly be used to find things like vandalism, BLP vios and copyvios, but it is not necessary to check if the edit is correct). FantasticWikiUser (talk) 17:47, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:00, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• TrueMoriarty (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Hello. I am requesting rollback rights to combat vandalism in Wikipedia. I qualify to all the criteria mentioned above. I have been in monthly top five pending changes reviewer multiple times and I think if I have rollback rights, I can prevent vandalism even better and make Wikipedia a nicer place. Also, I have read the Wikipedia articles on rollback and reviewing changes thoroughly. TrueMoriarty (talk) 12:39, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@TrueMoriarty although it's not directly relevant to rollback, I'm concerned about your very recent brush with copright (cc Diannaa). Is there anything you can say about that that would make me more comfortable? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:22, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell. Hello. I deeply regret what occurred about that copyright issue, but believe me, my intentions were not bad. It was purely an accident and here’s what really happened. It is slightly troublesome to change tabs repeatedly while creating an article, so I copy-pasted the whole thing in my sandbox, where I thought I would peacefully take information from the article in question to the article I was creating. While creating the article, I was fully aware of copyright, notability, style and other guidelines but at that certain moment I was under considerable mental pressure and I accidentally mistook some paragraphs of the copy-pasted article as written by me so I just gave references and published it. It was kind of a mix-up. Like my paragraphs were there and so were the paragraphs of the copy-pasted articles and I accidentally deleted mine and kept the copy-pasted ones. Once again, I apologize sincerely for my mistakes and I hope I will be forgiven and be given rollback rights. Have good day!TrueMoriarty (talk) 07:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Given the recent concerns about copyright, perhaps it would be best to wait a few months before attempting another request? 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 Zach^H007 22:07, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now. This isn't a punishment, I believe you when you say it was accidental, but I need you to build a track record without any similar mistakes so you can demonstrate that you've learnt from it. Feel free to reapply in a month or so. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:29, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Sure. Thank you for the suggestion.

TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 14:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• Dafootballguy (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I have been involved with stopping vandalism whenever I see it. I make sure to warn the vandal as soon as I can. I am well versed in the policies and will not abuse the privilege. Thank you for your time. Dafootballguy (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Could you elaborate more on why you think you need rollback in particular? 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 Zach^H007 11:55, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

I have dealt with a decent amount of vandalism, and it would free me up to combat more vandalism at a faster pace and makr Wikipedia a better, vandalism free site. Thank you for your time. Dafootballguy (talk) 02:56, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now. According to the notice at the top of this page (WP:PERM/R), applicants are expected to have "At least a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChanges." Please spend some additional time patrolling recent changes before applying again. I noticed that you started using Twinkle on 11 January. If you find it helpful, you may also be interested in Ultraviolet, which is another tool that assists with counter-vandalism without needing the rollback permission. Thank you for volunteering in this area.​ — Newslinger talk 15:38, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

What specifically should I do, and when should I apply again after following those instructions? Dafootballguy (talk) 00:39, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Dafootballguy, I recommend patrolling recent changes for a month or so before reapplying. The section WP:RCP § What to do explains how to do this. This task involves going to Special:RecentChanges, scanning recent edits for vandalism, fixing or reverting unconstructive edits, and sending appropriate notifications to the editors who made them. (Please keep in mind that the rollback permission requires a track record of consistently notifying editors when you revert their unconstructive edits.) Twinkle and/or Ultraviolet should be helpful tools for recent changes patrol. — Newslinger talk 07:33, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• Theeverywhereperson (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I would like to be a rollbacker for a few reasons:

1. I am a recent changes patroller and have been patrolling for a few months now,
2. I have made more than 700 edits in mainspace and more than 1700 edits in total,
3. Since I am already a pending changes reviewer, I am also used to reverting vandalism in some areas where it isn't visible to everyone yet, so I think I am trained for the job,
4. This would allow me to use tools like AntiVandal to revert vandalism easier and faster, for the benefit of Wikipedia as a whole.

Thank you (in advance) and Kind regards, Theeverywhereperson talk here 06:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBot ^talk 06:30, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

For any passing admins, see here. But you may ignore the other comment and look at my request with a different set of eyes and see what I have already done on Wikipedia, but just because I have been declined before, doesn't mean an automated comment should mean i should be declined again. Theeverywhereperson talk here 12:14, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@Theeverywhereperson OK, you made a mistake a little while ago. We all make mistakes. Can you tell me, specifically and in your own words, what your mistake was and how you'll avoid it in the future? This is important because rollback will allow you to do things much quicker, which is a problem if you use it incorrectly. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:38, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell, What happened was I came across a TA removing an astonishing amount of information from all sorts of routes without giving an edit summary, so I thought it counted as unexplained content removal. I then used RedWarn to revert all of their edits for that reason, then it turned out that I had accidentally readded all sorts of info that was unsourced without reviewing the edits. My goal is to review edits before reverting them, as in this case the removal was so fast that I couldn't review them all in case they made more potentially bad edits. Theeverywhereperson talk here 05:37, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) This user recently WAY overstepped by relisting a TFD they were actively involved in despite not having any TFD experience, in direct violation of multiple WP:NAC rules. Strongly advise against granting additional permissions at this time. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:56, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

I had done this because I noticed a discussion that had gone on past the point of relisting, which can be around 7 days, and there was no real consensus. I haven't read that before, and didn't know about its existence. My involvement was just a simple reply with no further engagement, and then relisting it by the ratipnale I have given above. I can't see why this affects me getting rollback permissions (Vandalism reversion is a vastly different field to deletion discussions, maybe I would have withdrawn if this was for Template editor) and this was just a lack of judgement. I actually tried to use XFDcloser (the tool I relisted it with) and tried to abort it, but by then it was too late. Courtesy ping to Zackmann08 to read the above and see why I did that, and hope you understand now.

Kind regards, Theeverywhereperson talk here 12:05, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

The fact remains you violated multiple policies in what you did. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse for violating them. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 14:54, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Zackmann08, I promise, I won't do it again. Also see my most recent comment for more information. We can leave this at a simple 'Don't do it again' and I'll probably be back here in a month or so. Also sorry for the double ping. Theeverywhereperson talk here 15:51, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I'll leave this to an admin (which again, I am not) to decide. I have voiced my concern. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:52, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Theeverywhereperson talk here 16:02, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

• Phlogiston Enthusiast (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

Hello! I am Phlogiston Enthusiast. I would like a moment of your time to request rollback rights. I believe that I could use rollback permissions to assist in anti-vandalism in the recent changes tab. There are multiple reasons for this.

For one, it would streamline reverts on articles that need them, and be a useful tool against vandalism. This is because if a user is making edits of a vandalistic nature, they are likely to have made multiple. Rollback would assist with these issues and prevent long and drawn-out revert wars by vandals.

Second, I believe that I meet the qualifications for the role. I possess experience patrolling the recent changes section, and have reverted many vandalous edits. If need be, I can attempt to provide a comprehensive list of the articles on which I have combatted vandalism.

Finally, I understand that it looks bad to have had two arguments over vandalism-related subjects in the past. However, I would argue that this is almost the opposite, as having a clean record with no mistakes would mean that I had no mistakes to learn from, and as well I have apologized to all parties involved in both.

In summary, I believe that I should possess rollback rights as to better combat vandalism, and if need be there can be elaboration. If not, I completely understand. uᴉɐʇsǝɥʇuƎ uoʇsᴉoʅɓoʅɥԀ (Hit Me Up) 15:34, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done Sorry, I think it's a bit too early to be giving out permissions that require trust and experience. You've only been with us for a month and a half and, although you've racked up an impressive edit count for such a short period of time, there's more to experience than statistics. It's better to take a bit of time to absorb how things work than rush in too quickly and potentially cause problems. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:22, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay! Thank you for the response, and no hard feelings. If it isn't rude to ask, how long should I wait exactly? I don't mean to sound impatient; I simply find it helps me to have a goal to work torwards. Thanks! uᴉɐʇsǝɥʇuƎ uoʇsᴉoʅɓoʅɥԀ (Hit Me Up) 20:28, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

@Phlogiston Enthusiast a month would be a minimum but I'd suggest maybe two or so. A bot will flag any new request made within 90 days. But to be clear, "experience" is subjective—it's not just about numbers. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:57, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll hopefully see you back here between 2 months to 1 year from now. uᴉɐʇsǝɥʇuƎ uoʇsᴉoʅɓoʅɥԀ (Hit Me Up) 21:03, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh, also, would you reccomend writing something new when I re-apply later, or re-using this thing I've already written? pHLOGISTON eNTHUSIAST (tALK pAGE) 17:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Go with something like what you've written but include something about your latest experience. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:29, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• Ludus56 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I've involved myself in Anti-Vandalism patrol, as well as pending changes review, and consider myself to be reasonably experienced. Recently, I've become more convinced of the utility of IP viewing after dealing with an individual where having GeoIP might've revealed either socking or increased evidence against a single-purpose account. Ludus56 (talk) 01:37, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• Kadermonkey (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te · taiv)}

I do a large amount of recent change patrolling and have been having issues with multiple temporary accounts run by evidently the same person based on the edits they make vandalizing pages Kadermonkey (She/Her) (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2026 (UTC)