Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

This version of the page may not reflect the most current changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes.

• Account creator (add request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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 request · view 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.
• Temporary account IP viewer (add request · view requests): Temporary accounts are coming to the English Wikipedia in October 2025. To prepare for this, non-admins may request access to view temporary account data.

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

• Administrator and bureaucrat access: Requests for administrator or bureaucrat access need to be posted at requests for adminship and requests for bureaucratship, respectively.
• Bots: Request for bot flags should be made at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval.
• Edit filter: Requests for access to the edit filter manager group and the edit filter helper group should be made at Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard.
• Interface administrator: Requests for interface administrator access should be made at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard. Only current administrators may become interface administrators.
• IP-block-exempt: While the IP-block-exempt right can be granted by administrators, this flag is not handled here. Requests for the IP-block exempt right should be submitted via email to the checkuser team at checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org or contact a CheckUser directly.
• CheckUser and Oversight: These rights are only granted by the Arbitration Committee, and only after strict scrutiny. More information can be found here.
• AfC reviewer: This access is granted by administrators at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants.
• Redirect autopatrol list: Addition to the list is granted by administrators at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect autopatrol list.
• Steward permissions can only be granted in yearly elections, and are rarely given.
• Election clerk has no process for requesting it; admins can grant it sua sponte to themselves or other admins.
• Global permissions such as global renamer, sysop, IP block exempt, rollback, etc. should be made at meta:Steward requests/Global permissions.

The requests for permissions process is not used to review or remove user rights:

• If you wish to have any of your permissions removed, contact an administrator
• To request a review of another editor's use of a permission, use administrative action review
• If you believe someone's actions merit removal of a permission, raise your concern at the administrator's noticeboard

The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight permissions 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.

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

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

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.

• Sswonk (requesting Autopatrolled) (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)^(notify)

Permission was revoked at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=169754554 . The permission was revoked four months ago before I recently returned after 14 years of absence from the project, please reinstate. Sswonk (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([1]). — MusikBot ^talk 15:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This RfC recently established that autopatrolled can be procedurally revoked from inactive contributors, but I don't think there was consensus that it could be procedurally reinstated upon request, so I would encourage the reviewing administrator (I'm not one) to consider this like any other request. @Sswonk: I had a couple of questions about the articles you recently created: what makes this website (on Loretta Lynn: Coal Miner's Daughter) and this website (on Honky Tonk Girl: My Life in Lyrics) reliable sources? Also, since IMDb is an unreliable source, is there another citation that could be used for the award on that first article? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I forgot to say: welcome back to the project! I realized my comments above could come across as trying to shoot you down after your wikibreak, but I did mean it as genuine questions/feedback. :) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:20, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TS69, I did not realize that you had posted here before I went to your talk, I am copy-pasting that here so we can continue the conversation in one place. Below is re: Jeff Burger, will respond on other questions momentarily.

I added a second citation to the first paragraph of Loretta Lynn: Coal Miner's Daughter. I think the first citation is fine, yes it is a self-published source by Jeff Burger however Burger is well-known (https://www.chicagoreviewpress.com/burger--jeff-contributor-301827.php) and the site serves as an archive of his previously published reviews. The page I cite is a reprint of a review first published in 1976, the publication is not specified, however the information about Burger suggests it satisfies "Self-published sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." See also https://search.worldcat.org/search?q=au=%22Burger%2C%20Jeff%22 -- Burger should be considered reliable. Sswonk (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the second question about Chapter 16, please see https://chapter16.org/about-us/ and https://www.humanitiestennessee.org/about/our-story/?cn-reloaded=1 publisher of the cited, archived website. I would also consider that as satisfying WP:V.

I did not realize IMDb was unreliable, I used that because it is the single source of the page 38th Golden Globe Awards. I added the actual Golden Globes as a source. Sswonk (talk) 17:01, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making those changes — your point about Burger makes sense to me, so I'll remove the {{sps?}} tag, and citing the Golden Globes' website for that award looks appropriate. I'm less sure about the reliability of Chapter 16, but I think I'll leave this for an administrator to weigh whether or not that would be a significant blocker to granting the permission. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that, thank you. Sswonk (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The question remaining from TechnoSquirrel69 asks for administrator input on the reliability of the Chapter 16 web outlet of the Tennessee Humanities organization. Links are provided a couple of paragraphs above. I am noting here that this morning I changed the previously existing citation link on the Honky Tonk Girl: My Life in Lyrics page to a direct link rather than to the archived page, as I was able to find the current url for the review. The link TechnoSquirrel69 includes above in his initial post has been updated to a current page. So we are dealing with the WP:RS status of a current page on a site that supports a 51-year old Tennessee institution funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. I think Chapter 16 is entirely reliable and should be used on Wikipedia articles related to Tennessee culture and history as needed. However, I want to thank TechnoSquirrel69 for diligence in finding areas for improvement in these stubs. Like him, I strive for the best references available and had determined the Chapter 16 and Jeff Burger sites were satisfactory prior to opening this request for permission; however I have been away for over a decade and am prepared to face challenges with humility. Fifteen years ago I worked on Led Zeppelin which was at the time poorly organized but since I left has been promoted to GA status. My opinion is that Loretta Lynn is on a similar level as a significant performer and figure in popular music history, and naturally I want articles about her and her work to have

top-shelf reviews; even stubs should strive for high quality, especially references within them, to help other editors find further material, to set a tone of sincerity and professionalism. Thank you again TechnoSquirrel69. Sswonk (talk) 14:17, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What makes the Treaty of Southampton notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 21:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sswonk voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts -- The notability rises from its mention in reliable sources as the first alliance between England and the Dutch Republic and as an initial policy forming act of Charles I. There was an existing maritime agreement, but the treaty went further and allied the two nations against Spain during a volatile period. To quote Anton Poot whose PhD thesis is one of the sources, "the maritime agreement had not mentioned Spain by name as the common enemy; the Treaty of Southampton left no doubt. It created an Anglo-Dutch partnership for a joint war against Spain, effectively meaning that England joined the Dutch in a war they had been waging already for decades." Charles was asserting England against Spain formally. The sources find it significant in the history of the Eighty Years War and of pre-civil war England. Sswonk (talk) 13:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Meli thev (requesting Autopatrolled) (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)^(notify)

Meli thev has created nearly a hundred astronomy articles over almost six years. I think they're ready for AP. Toadspike [Talk] 11:38, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Meli thev: why is Daniella Bardalez Gagliuffi notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't really looked further, but in Special:Diff/1313335271 added the text:

Swift observed the Nova on 2025-09-23.64 and detected a bright source of hard x-rays at the position of the nova. The early detection might indicate a symbiotic nature of the host binary system. Alternatively the nova may be unusually fast in clearing up its ejecta

compare to the source:

The early detection might indicate a symbiotic nature of the host binary system. Alternatively the nova may be unusually fast in clearing up its ejecta[2]

Similarlly, in Special:Diff/1313838571

NEOMIR would have shorter exposure times and higher cadence of revisit, this would ensure that faster NEOs are not missed.

compared to source:

shorter exposure times and higher cadence of revisit, ensuring that faster and therefore closer NEOs crossing the field of regard are not missed.

Again, have not looked further, and it's not egregious. But worth a note. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 19:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Mupper-san (requesting Autopatrolled) (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)^(notify)

I would like to request autopatrolled rights. According to an XTools analysis, in the past year, I've created 44 articles, of which 14 are C-class and 10 are B-class (10 of the remainder being yet to be assessed). Mupper-san (talk) 15:16, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Cohen 2003 a reliable source for the proposition that the wars in the Caucasus created two million refugees? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mupper-san. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:19, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts Given Cohen's status as a "specialist in human rights and humanitarian and refugee issues" (per the Brookings Institute, where she is [was?] a senior fellow) and given the fact that she's worked with the United Nations on refugee issues (per Francis Deng), I don't see a particular reason not to consider her work reliable, though as I recall the number did somewhat surprise me. Mupper-san (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer a solid secondary source here, given that this article is covered by multiple CTOPs and community sanctions. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts Got it. I've rewritten that passage accordingly. Mupper-san (talk) 23:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• QEnigma (requesting Autopatrolled) (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)^(notify)

Hello, I am requesting Autopatrolled rights in order to reduce the backlog of articles awaiting review. I primarily create new articles on politics and law with a focus on biographies of notable individuals. I ensure that the content I add are verifiable and the articles comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. My previous request was declined in March 2025. Since then, I have strived to improve the quality of my contributions and have made substantial improvements to several existing ones, upgrading them to B-grade, e.g., [3], [4] and [5]. Regards. QEnigma 论 03:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Junglenut (requesting Autopatrolled) (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)^(notify)

Over the last 5 years, Junglenut has created 240 articles on various plant species, many of which have been elevated to C and B class. Of these 240 pages, none have been deleted apart from one G7. Nothing really needs to be done to these besides get marked as patrolled. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:03, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Junglenut. Thanks for working on these articles. The articles I've sampled look good on the surface. Unfortunately, some of the information in Scindapsus altissimus seems to be missing from the cited source. In particular, where does [6] say it's a root climber or it's present in the Solomon Islands? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Femke. The distribution is according to the reference from POWO, which I did not include at the end of that paragraph but is included overall. The fact that it is a root climber is from the knowledge that all climbers in the family Araceae are root climbers. I have made the appropriate adjustments to the article now, but I would also point out that this stub article is barely hours old, and I always revisit these articles to make corrections and additions. BTW, at this moment the POWO website appears to be unresponsive to me (perhaps to you too?) but an archived version of the page I referenced can be seen at Archive.org. Cheers 🌳 Junglenut · Talk 09:41, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above should read 'barely 24 hours old' 🌳 Junglenut · Talk 09:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at another handful of articles. They look to be in good form. With the root climber however, I would like to see that knowledge cited. According to Araceae, there's a lot of diversity in that family. Araceae#Classification makes a distinction between climbers and terrestrial plants (but in a historical context, so not 100% that still applies). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:58, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said I have edited the article - the word 'root' has been removed for now. I will look for sources to confirm the statement and include it again at that time, if I find one. 🌳 Junglenut · Talk 10:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. Happy to assign AP if you say you'll be more careful with statements like that in future creations! I'm sure you've got a lot of knowledge yourself, but errors can slip in easily when you rely too much on it. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 10:16, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, they can slip in. I will take more care in the future and use a more objective eye to review before submitting an article. 🌳 Junglenut · Talk 10:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 10:36, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• JesusisGreat7 (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (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) (edit CheckPage)

Hi, I’m requesting AWB access to add categories (which I usually add manually), fix typos, and tag articles that contain a lot of LLM content, like over here [7]. I know AWB doesn’t detect it automatically, but tagging articles after reviewing would make cleanup easier. Jesus isGreat7 ☾⋆ | Ping Me 14:43, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autowikibrowser declined in the past 90 days ([8]). — MusikBot ^talk 14:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go out on a limb and grant this - you're well above the standard criteria for granting AWB and while people have complained about various things on your talk page often (another thing I check for) most of them have little to do with automated tool usage. If you hadn't been so insistent on requesting permissions and hence annoyed admins like myself I probably would have been willing to grant this to you long ago. But please be careful - AWB usage, like everything else, is a privilege not a right and if you misuse the tool it may be revoked.

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Spiral6800 (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (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) (edit CheckPage)

This is my second request for AWB permissions. My first request was denied in July, citing a lack of editing experience. I made hundreds of edits in the mean time and have gained more experience with Wikipedia and its policies. So I'm requesting permission to perform batch edits via AWB, mainly for adding Rcat templates, as well as for fixing broken links using Regex, where the URL schema has changed (e.g. http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-detail/detail/airbus-launches-a-new-systems-enhancement-package-for-in-service-a320-family-aircraft/ -> https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2007-09-airbus-launches-a-new-systems-enhancement-package-for-in-service)

I asked a follow-up question in the last thread, but didn't get an answer. So if this request is denied, please answer my following questions: By which metrics do you measure experience, and how do you think could I enhance my editing skills and knowledge? What would be a good point in time to make another request? Spiral6800 (talk) 18:20, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autowikibrowser declined in the past 90 days ([9]). — MusikBot ^talk 18:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:40, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 8rz (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (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) (edit CheckPage)

Have already accumulated 1000+ edits over the past few days. I will be using AWB to mass fix typos, lint errors, regex for bigger edits where \n and \r aren't supported with the advanced replace option in source edit.

Returning AWB user (with previous experience) on my previous account User:Renamed user e2bceb05e0c43dd19cc50e3291d6fac5. 8rz (talk) 10:31, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is more proof that I am capable of using AWB. Usually I don't share information like this publicly, but for the sake of proof here it is

([A-Z]+)\s(\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)
→ {{flagicon|$1}} [[$2 $3]]

{|
|-style="vertical-align:top"
|

• Seeds:
The top four/eight [[Single-elimination tournament#Seeding|seeds]] received a [[Glossary of tennis terms#Bye|bye]] to the second round.

S:(\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)
→ {{flagicon|$3}} [[$1 $2]] ''()''
D:(\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)\s\/\s(\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)
→ {{flagicon|$3}} [[$1 $2]] / {{flagicon|$6}} [[$4 $5]] ''()''

* if forgotten to remove *? from \s*?:
# {{flagicon|G}} [[Gabriela Sabatini AR]]
(#\s\{\{flagicon\|)(\w+\}\})\s(\[\[\w+\s\w+|\w+\s\w+\-\w+)\s([A-Z]+)\]\]
→ $1$4$2 $3]]

• Draws:
Expanding names in finals section:
(expand names in finals section FIRST:
1. make sure all flags are present
2. use " / " not "<br />")

• Finals:
S: (\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)
→ {{flagicon|$3}} [[$1 $2]]
D: (\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)\s\/\s(\w+|\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+|)\s([A-Z]+)
→ {{flagicon|$3}} [[$1 $2]] <br /> {{flagicon|$6}} [[$4 $5]]

 Section draws:
1. (\w{1})(\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+)\s(\w+) (X-Y)
→ {{flagicon|$4}} [[$1$2 $3|$1 $3]]
2. (\w{1})(\w+)\s(\w+\s\w+)\s(\w+) (X Y)
→ {{flagicon|$4}} [[$1$2 $3|$1 $3]]
3. (\w{1})(\w+)\s(\w+)\s(\(\w+\))\s(\w+) (tennis)
→ {{flagicon|$5}} [[$1$2 $3 $4|$1 #3]]
4. (\w{1})(\w+)\s(\w+)\s(\w+) (regular)
→ {{flagicon|$4}} [[$1$2 $3|$1 $3]]

Merging 1,2,4 into one:
(\w{1})(\w+\-\w+|\w+)\s(\w+\-\w+|\w+\s\w+|\w+)\s(\w+)
→ {{flagicon|$4}} [[$1$2 $3|$1 $3]]

* if forgotten the forename's initial letter:
S:\[\[(\w{1})(\w+)\s(.+)\|(.+)\]\]
→ [[$1$2 $3|$1 $4]]
D:

* to expand each section's last brackets (check for correct 'RD'):
S:(RD4\-team\d+\=)('''\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]'''
→ $1$2]]'''
  (RD4\-team\d+\=)(\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]
→ $1$2]]

D:(RD4\-team\d+\=)('''\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]\s(\/\s\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]'''
→ $1$2]] $3]]'''
(RD4\-team\d+\=)(\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]\s(\/\s\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\}\s\[\[.+)\|.+\]\]
→ $1$2]] $3]]

• Wiping full brackets:
S: 
1. remove ''' first → 
2. (\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\})\s(\[\[.+\]\])
→ [[]] ( )
D: (\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\})\s(\[\[.+\]\])\s(\{\{flagicon\|.+\}\})\s(\[\[.+\]\])
→ [[]] ( ) <br /> [[]] ( )

(seed\d+\=|score\d+\-\d+\=).+
→ $1

For context, after creating the page template,

I would fill out the necessary information: name, surname, and country to get from a stub to a finished article, like so:

1. Step 1: Fill out the added seeded players using the first line of the above code.
2. Step 2: Add the players and their countryflags in the finals and then expand them to the standard Wiki format.
3. Step 3: Fill out the rest of the draws with the players and flags, followed by expanding the players' names and countryflags in the draws into a standard wiki format.

Rinse and repeat for related pages using the above regex. 8rz (talk) 12:01, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:39, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Q8682 (requesting AutoWikiBrowser) (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) (edit CheckPage)

Seek to automate certain find-replace tasks within articles, such as spaced hyphens with spaced en rules (- → –), search for redundant quotes in reference names (ref name="bob" → ref name=bob) as cannot do with RefRenamer, space between punctuation and a reference, and so on. Beats doing it manually and repetitiously. Q8682 (talk) 14:32, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @Q8682. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:53, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• LasVegasGirl99 (requesting Extended confirmed) (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)

I want to edit extended-confirmed protected pages. LasVegasGirl99 (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No reason given to grant this early; that is almost never done here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sksatsuma (requesting New page reviewer) (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)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Reason for requesting new page reviewer rights

I believe I have a good track record as an AfC review, demonstrating understanding of notability and reliable referencing. I am semi-active in AfD as well. Part of my AfC reviews include civil feedback to new users and I try to be as thorough, friendly and helpful as I can with this. sksatsuma 16:23, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for a one-month trial—feel free to re-apply a few days before it expires. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:21, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I forgot to set an expiry date. I wasn't really convinced you needed a trial in the first place (your AfC record looks great), so let's just leave it at that: I'm sure you'll be fine. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:27, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• EarthDude (requesting New page reviewer, Pending changes reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 previously participated in the September 2025 NPP Backlog Elimination Drive. Although I made several mistakes early on, I believe I have learned and grown significantly in my understanding of page reviews and curation. I am now requesting permanent NPP rights and would like to contribute to reducing the backlog. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 10:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Cameremote (requesting New page reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 formerly requested NPP rights, I think (5-6months ago), but was declined. I have since worked, contributed to AFC and AFD, created more articles, and my edit count has increased by over 1,000. And I have continued to create more articles since then. Although I'm still learning, I would like to have the NPP right to help clear backlog drive. I have recently been fond of helping make edits to articles on the NPP page.Cameremote (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2025 (UTC) Cameremote (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Sorry, you're not ready for this one yet. Feel free to ask any questions by email. -- asilvering (talk) 23:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Lorraine Crane (requesting New page reviewer) (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)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hello everyone! I’d like to request NPR rights. I’ve been actively contributing through editing and translating articles, taking part in AfD discussions as both a nominator and voter, and assisting with welcoming new users. I’d be grateful for the chance to help with NPR as well. I believe the experience and insight I’ve gained have prepared me well for this responsibility. Lorraine Crane (talk) 03:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Kirokeer (requesting New page reviewer) (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)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I mostly engage with improving new pages like adding cats, short desc. , etc. and would like to help further in the new pages reviewing for quality and to help with the backlog. Kirokeer (talk) 07:38, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I'd like to see some more experience first, for instance at AfC (where you've had the permission for a while but only made a handful of reviews). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:54, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 11wallisb (requesting New page reviewer) (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)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hello! I originally applied for new page reviewer for the September backlog drive. I didn't plan on re-requesting until I had completed the goals I had set myself here, I realise now that I have had multiple months of gaining the experience, so I feel more confident with re-requesting at this time. I reviewed about 120 articles, of which three were sent to AfD, these were deleted as can be seen here. I think I did okay, however I unfortunately didn't receive any feedback from re-reviews, though I did receive a barnstar!

For statistics, my performance at AfD recently has been a bit below where I would prefer it to be. Currently, 4 out of 5 of the articles I !vote on match the closing result, which is okay. I have been inactive at AfC for about a month, as I was participating in the backlog drive, however I plan to get back into that! I have also completed the theory part of NPP/S, where @Zippybonzo has been my mentor! I believe they are currently less active, so the completion of the practical part will happen when we are both active!

I was quite negative in my last request, so I am trying to focus on the positives without it sounding like I am bragging. I have had a non-deliberate tendency to accept drafts before they are ready (I am happy to link some examples if necessary, however I think the active admins here are aware of those cases!). I also need to be more independent and thorough when reviewing, I received some excellent advice from @Toadspike here. That AfD was very informative.

With all this being said, I will request only another month of new page reviewer, to see if I am absolutely ready! Thanks for reading and thank you to the NPP/AfC/AfD team! 11WB (talk) 17:45, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Mgp28 (requesting New page reviewer) (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)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I've been working on Articles for Creation for about a year. I also participated in a New Page Patrol backlog drive last year. Would like to do more new page reviews. Mgp28 (talk) 18:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Red0ctober22 (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I am applying for the permission of page mover so that I will be able to carry out page moves without worrying about being blocked due to the target page already having a redirect, which then requires me to make a technical request and fill up the backlog. This particularly would help when the grammar or spacing of an article title is changed, and if there are subordinate articles relating to the main article, I will be able to change them as well en masse. I believe I meet all of the basic requirements, and I do have significant experience in page moving, and especially in initiating and participating in move discussions. A few examples of successful page moves I initiated and discussed in were: Sirius XM → SiriusXM, American Athletic Conference → American Conference (NCAA), and Delaware Valley → Philadelphia metropolitan area. I also participated a lot in the discussion to ultimately have the Stanley Cup Finals page changed to Stanley Cup Final.

Using the example of SiriusXM, when the title was changed to reflect the official branding and common usage by removing the space, this required the titles of all of the pages for SiriusXM channels to be changed as well. I was able to change some, but not all, and this required me to have to fill up a backlog on the WP:RM page, which obviously have been more efficient with this permission. Red0ctober22 (talk) 12:42, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Red0ctober22 Can you please explain this RM/TR request [10] of yours? It is connected to the American Conference example you list above. As a reminder, the talk page looked like this [11] at the time. Toadspike [Talk] 22:43, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that. What happened there was we had two people opposing the move, and six (seven including me) in support of it. The first person in opposition, glman, opposed it because the conference had not updated its website to reflect the name change yet. However, that reply was sent on July 21, and by the time I sent the move request, it was July 24 and the website had been updated (I believe they did it on the 24th, it may have been even earlier on the 23rd). The second dissenter, O.N.R., claimed that "American Athletic Conference" was the common name of the conference and should remain. However, as I mentioned in the reply chain, I could not find any meaningful evidence that "American Athletic Conference" even was the common name in the first place when compared to shortened names like the "AAC" or "The American".

What followed was six consecutive users supporting the move, as they all agreed that "American Conference" was the common name, and especially Finchwidget citing the fact that media sources such as ESPN were already changing the name. At this point I felt that this had become an "uncontroversial move", and decided to submit a request.

Looking back, I do admit that it was a premature action to take, and the more appropriate action to take in that situation would have been to request a close. Red0ctober22 (talk) 23:12, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Red0ctober22 Yes, it was a bit premature. I'm glad you recognize that though. Toadspike [Talk] 16:21, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done for a three month probationary period. Please feel free to re-request a couple weeks before expiry. Toadspike [Talk] 16:23, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ophyrius (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hi, I'm requesting these rights as they would be helpful to me in moving pages without redirects, help at WP:RM/TR. I'm also a file mover & it would assist me in moving files without redirects. Also, it would be very useful in Draftifying.

1. The editor should be a registered Wikipedia user for at least 6 months. (11/8 months)
2. The editor should have at least 3,000 edits. (2438+1230=3668)
3. The editor should demonstrate experience with moving pages in accordance with guidelines. Participation in requested moves and move reviews, or experience closing move requests is a good way to gauge this.
4. The editor should have no behavioral blocks or 3RR violations in the 6 months prior to application.

I have made many mistakes in page moving in the past, but I try my best not to repeat them & learn from them. Thanks! Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 11:11, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has 2503 total edits. — MusikBot ^talk 21:00, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ophyrius: Quick questions: Would you move files without leaving a redirect in instances where you wouldn't currently have requested speedy deletion of the move redirect? If so, what would be an example? ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 06:20, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SilverLocust I don't think I would need to do that because a redirect has to be suppressed when moved per WP:FNC#2, 4, 5, 8, 9, and sometimes per WP:FNC#3. All of the redirects left due to these meet the speedy deletion criteria. Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 10:21, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ophyrius: What CSD do you consider 2 and 4 as falling under? ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 10:29, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SilverLocust:, Many files renamed according to criteria 2 and 4 fall under CSD G1. I could be mistaken about this, as I don’t have much experience with renaming files in these categories. However, whether the redirect should be suppressed depends on the original file name, not the renaming criteria. Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 13:59, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILEREDIRECT is clear that most file redirects should be kept, even if the name is gibberish. Developers have even threatened to desysop admins who delete file redirects without very good reason. No opinion on the merits of this application. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:06, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ophyrius How many times would you relist an RM that has received no comments? Toadspike [Talk] 22:25, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike: I would normally relist discussions twice before closing them as 'no consensus.' In exceptional cases, I might relist them for a third time if I believe additional time is needed and that more discussion would happen, which would be enough to determine consensus, but this only applies to RMs with some discussion. Therefore, it would be a maximum 2 times for such discussions. Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 15:36, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ophyrius: What about WP:RMNOMIN? Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tenshi Hinanawi: While it too is to be followed, it's for uncontroversial moves that can be WP:SNOWed or moved boldly, without any need for discussion. I believe controversial moves are better relisted for consensus. (The question is about RMs with no comments/discussions, if you didn't notice) Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 16:58, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Easternsahara (requesting Page mover, Pending changes reviewer) (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 meet all of the Wikipedia:PMCRITERIA. I have never been blocked and I have never violated the 3RR. Otherwise, my history of contribution] has been fairly good, I have reviewed GAN, FLCS, and FACS, and currently have to FLCs running right now. I have 3,000 edits and my account hit the 6 month mark last month. As you can see, I have a history of moving things unopposed and contributing to Requested Moves, even in contentious topics where there are more things to take into consideration (I don't know how to link it, just go through my user contributions). I am also good at moving-adjacent things, like discussing changes on the talk page and I am familiar with redirects. In addition to moving things often, I am also a reviewer at AFC. Giving me this right will create less burden at WP:RMTR and will prevented other unopposed moves which I create discussions for. I will not use this right to bypass discussion, and have never used moving to bypass RM for topics which could be controversial. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 02:19, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara "will prevented other unopposed moves which I create discussions for" – what would you check for before deciding that a move is sufficiently uncontroversial to be performed without discussion? Toadspike [Talk] 15:05, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Toadspike:, hey thanks for the quick response. Sorry for the bad grammar, I had created this when I was sleepy. By uncontroversial, I mean in violation of policies like disambiguation. Some examples that I have moved Talk:Israeli attack on Doha#Requested move 1 October 2025 (although this was in contentious topic, so maybe I'd put it in RM just in case), both Shah Abdul Wahhab which had unnesscary disambiguation of scholar (they were both scholars and the only Shah Abdul Wahhab's on wikipedia, John Quested (RAF officer) (RAF unneeded), Side A, Side B, Side X, Side Y (theological views), Route of the Franciscan Evangelisation in Guatemala, Akbar Aghayev (lieutenant), Jason "Human Kebab" Parsons, Smoke-free bathhouse (Vysotsky's song) etc. If it is not obviously the common name, or if the current article name does not directly fail any article-naming criteria, then it could be controversial (or if it does but is in a contentious topic). Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 21:41, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara How would you factor in previous moves or RMs when deciding whether a move could be controversial? Toadspike [Talk] 07:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RMs go towards building consensus and I can not go against consensus even if I think my idea is good. Consensus if how Wikipedia works, and if I think my argument is good enough, I can create a new RM with my arguments. I should not use my Page mover powers to move it instead because that would be disrupting consensus. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 07:52, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will do some more looking around. In the meantime, please remember to do post-move cleanup. It looks like you forgot to de-bold "in Guatemala" after moving Route of the Franciscan Evangelisation. If you don't already, you should also try using User:Nardog/MoveHistory.js to check for past moves, which can sometimes indicate whether a move is controversial. Toadspike [Talk] 22:25, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The candidate's two most recent RM/TR requests were contested. They have made six RM/TR requests total, which is not much of a burden. I don't feel ready to grant at this time. However, I will leave the final decision to another admin. Toadspike [Talk] 22:39, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To the other admin(s), the first one was contested and then it got almost unanimously passed at RM and the latest one should just be Long Island, Madang Province per WP:NCDAB: "Comma-separated disambiguation. Ambiguous geographic names are often disambiguated by adding the name of a higher-level administrative division, separated by a comma, as in Windsor, Berkshire. See Naming conventions (geographic names)." Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 16:07, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• ElijahPepe (requesting Page mover) (t · th · c ^{(RM/TR · RMs)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I often open requested moves and have occasionally encountered issues with existing redirects, such as here. My area of expertise is current events articles, so it is common to see back-and-forths where it is impossible to move a page back for one reason or another. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:47, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done 3 month probationary period, feel free to re-request one or two weeks before expiry. Toadspike [Talk] 22:06, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• WhatADrag07 (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I have been editing Wikipedia almost daily for a while now and have made over 500 edits, mostly patrolling the recent changes on Wikipedia to revert vandalism and improve article quality. I often edit a range of topics that interest me and take the time to investigate the information I add and edit.

I used to struggle with copyright laws for uploading images to Wikipedia, specifically WP:NFCC. I have sinced learned from my mistakes and intend to do better moving forward.

This permission would allow me to help review edits without burdening the other more experienced volunteers, and I would help to ensure that new edits meet Wikipedia's values. WhatADrag07 (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Khagendrawiki (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I regularly review edits on a variety of articles, particularly in topics related to music, sports, Nepal and also from Special:AbuseLog . I often check for sourcing, formatting, and promotional content, and I’m familiar with policies such as WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:BLP. Having PCR perm would allow me to help ensure that constructive edits are approved promptly and unconstructive ones are filtered efficiently. Khagendrawiki (talk) 09:08, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Inu06 (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I'd like reviewer rights so I can help with pending changes and speed up the review process. Inu06 (talk) 07:19, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Theeverywhereperson (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 think I should be a pending changes reviewer because I am a considerably experienced Wikipedian by this point. It should also be noted that I am an extended-confirmed user, so I think i should be good for the job. I currently have 552 edits, for the record. Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 10:25, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([12]). — MusikBot ^talk 10:30, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Request withdrawn Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 17:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Easternsahara (requesting Page mover, Pending changes reviewer) (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 around 3.7k edits. I'd like this privilege since I edit about World Heritage Sites and contentious topics, both of which have their fair share of vandalism. I've reverted a fair amount of vandalism. Clearly, I am familiar with V, RS, BLP, MOS, etc. as I do reviews at FAC, FLC, and GAN. I always discuss changes of mine that have been reverted, and those which I revert. This is in accordance to WP:BRD and use templates when doing so. I also meet the other criteria. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 03:08, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done asilvering (talk) 21:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Metallurgist (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I work regularly on a wide variety of pages that have protection and see these come up. I have fulfilled these requests informally in the past without realizing there was a right that could be granted and a list of such requests. I have been editing for quite some time, created over two dozen well-sourced articles, regularly revert vandalism when I see it, and assist newer editors when I can. I also review changes to articles in controversial topics to ensure they are properly sourced and cited. Metallurgist (talk) 04:27, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done asilvering (talk) 21:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Yerlo (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I have been reverting spam and vandalism on Special:RecentChanges, and I'd like pending changes reviewer to review pending edits as they show up there. Yerlo (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Agent VII (requesting Pending changes reviewer) (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)^(notify)

I would like to contribute at Special:PendingChanges. I am aware about the policies that are important here and that are mentioned in details at WP:NOT. Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 20:00, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done asilvering (talk) 21:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• EarthDude (requesting New page reviewer, Pending changes reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 mostly edit articles related to contentious topics, particularly WP:CT/SA. I know the policies and guidelines and have been fighting against vandalism and disruptive editing for quite a long time now. I am also a rollbacker and I believe getting this user right will further help in my efforts against vandalism. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 14:46, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I Am Andumé (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

I have recently gotten back into recent changes patrolling (I used to do it a decent amount), and would like rollback rights to be able to use tools such as AntiVandal, which could improve my efficiency. Andumé (talk) 04:54, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Giraffer (talk) 19:35, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Prothe1st (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

Reason for requesting rollback rights: I’m requesting rollback right for 1 month. Usually I use twinkle to rollback vandalism, disruptive edits and any good-faith edits made by others on my computer whenever I am home. However when I am outside, I have to use my phone to edit and twinkle doesn’t support mobile meaning if I want to revert multiple edits made by others, I have to undo each revision one by one or manually revert it. Also I want to see whether wikipedia’s rollback is better and easier to use than twinkle’s rollback or not. If after a month I find wikipedia’s rollback better than twinkle’s then I will re-request for permanent rollback rights. --Prothe1st-- 10:52, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has 195 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot ^talk 11:00, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Twinkle can be used on mobile devices, see User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile. (Non-Admin comment) Andumé (talk) 19:40, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Eulersidentity (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

Hi! I am requesting permissions as part of the required prerequisite permissions and training for the Countervandalism Academy track. I am an extended-confirmed user with additional rights as a pending changes reviewer and Articles for Creation probationary reviewer. Eulersidentity (talk) 18:29, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bambifan111 (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

I have 350+ total edits and 220+ mainspace edits, with a variety of reverts/user warnings that discern from obvious vandalism, test edits, unsourced material, and good faith edits. Having rollback would enable faster reverts and more anti-vandal tool options than Twinkle. Bambifan111 (talk) 21:55, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. You've only been reverting vandalism for ~2 weeks, which is around half of the month or so we usually like to see. Your overall experience is also very low for a rollbacker -- while not itself a hinderance, it makes the patrolling experience extra important. Giraffer (talk) 19:33, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• GoodCrossing (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

I have been doing WP:RCP on and off for the past few years now, and I have always made sure to add warnings and interact with users whose edits I rolled back. However, I would like to use better tools such as Huggle in order to be able to more easily review edits and revert them, so I would like to have rollback permissions in order to do this. GoodCrossing (talk) 15:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC) GoodCrossing (talk) 15:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. You're on the right track, but your last 30 edits go back over two years -- it would be good if you could get some more experience reverting (just so we can be sure you're up to speed again) and then reapply. Thanks, Giraffer (talk) 19:30, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• TimeToFixThis (requesting Rollback) (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)^(notify)

I’d like to request rollback rights to help counter vandalism more efficiently. I have over 2K edits and have been patrolling recent changes for just over a year. During that time, I’ve reverted numerous vandalism and disruptive edits and successfully reported several vandals at WP:AIV. I’m familiar with WP:VAND, WP:AGF, and WP:BLP, and understand that rollback is only for clear vandalism or non-constructive edits - not content disputes. I’d use the tool responsibly to help keep Wikipedia accurate and clean. Thanks, TimeToFixThis | 🕒 19:10, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, sorry, but one of your most recent edits is a dealbreaker for me: this AIV report, made after one (arguably good-faith) edit and zero warnings, is this kind of thing we try to avoid when granting rollback. Giraffer (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Poketape (requesting Template editor) (t · th · c ^{(template space · edit requests)} · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · templates created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Earlier this year I had attempted to obtain this permission, which ultimately triggered action on my template edit requests. I am once again asking for the permission, only this time I've waited a month to see if my request would be acted upon. I am particularly interested in sports-related templates. poketape (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous review from April. #5: Sandboxes is a N (2), #6: TPER is Y (6). The discrepancy is mainly because poketape has really only sandboxed two (related) protected templates. Primefac (talk) 00:32, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done You may be very slightly short of the criteria but we've been chronically short on template editors for ages so we're in an all hands on deck situation and I'll call it close enough. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:51, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• JohnDavies9612 (requesting Temporary account IP viewer) (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)^(notify)

Hi, I, as the holder of WP:RBK, would like to request WP:TAIV to track IPs. I also actively monitor AntiVandal and Recent Changes. I have read the policy and understand how to use it. Thanks! JohnDavies9612 (talk) 22:03, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for temporary account ip viewer declined in the past 90 days ([13][14]). — MusikBot ^talk 22:10, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• PritongKandule (requesting Temporary account IP viewer) (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)^(notify)

I am an active recent changes patroller with a demonstrated track record of counter-vandalism work and reviewing problematic edits. I've demonstrated my ability to detect and investigate possible sockpuppet use when I uncovered a massive sockpuppet operation back in 2023. I've recently been testing the IP Information Tool and I find having this permission would be useful once temporary accounts fully roll out this month. Thanks! PritongKandule-✉️📝 16:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done asilvering (talk) 18:06, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• EarthDude (requesting New page reviewer, Pending changes reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 primarily edit articles on contentious topics, particularly those listed under WP:CT/SA. I’ve been working to counter vandalism, sockpuppetry, and disruptive editing for quite some time. Recently, I became a rollbacker to strengthen my efforts against vandalism. I’m now requesting temporary IP viewing rights to enhance my ability to combat vandalism more effectively once temporary accounts start rolling out. I know the policies and have been keeping up with the discussion about temporary accounts at VP/WMF. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 16:34, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:43, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Theeverywhereperson (requesting Pending changes reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 request to be a Temporary account IP viewer for quite a few reasons:

1. I am considerably experienced at Wikipedia, having been here for upwards of 11 months and have had made about 650 edits,
2. I do not have any plans of leaving Wikipedia,
3. I will be trustable with the information of the IPs and do not plan to maliciously use said info.
4. I just want to help the growth of the encyclopedia, even if it is only through the adding of new features.
5. I would like to combat vandalism through these accounts, in the event that IPs use temporary

Kindest regards, Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 17:53, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, insufficient experience with WP:AIV/WP:SPI. asilvering (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Cameremote (requesting New page reviewer, Temporary account IP viewer) (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 here to humbly request the Temp account IP Viewer right, I have read and understand the requirement.Cameremote (talk) 23:46, 11 October 2025 (UTC) Cameremote (talk) 23:46, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide some diffs showing sockpuppet or anti vandal work? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per block. Sohom (talk) 02:54, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Arcrev1 (requesting Temporary account IP viewer) (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)^(notify)

I am a rollbacker and an almost daily recent changes patroller, though I am not very active at the moment due to workload. I have also reported several SPI cases to the administrators, so I believe that should be enough to qualify for the granting. - Arcrev1 (talk) 05:15, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for temporary account ip viewer declined in the past 90 days ([15]). — MusikBot ^talk 05:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]