This page enablesadministrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikipedia. Administrators are able to modify account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, extended confirmed, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback, and template editor rights, and AutoWikiBrowser access.
Editors wishing to request a permission flag here should do sofollowing the procedure below. Editors requesting permissions are advised to periodically revisit the requests page, as notifications will not always be given after a decision is made. Editors should not expect their request to be answered right away and should remember to be patient when filing a request. To find out what permissions your account has, go toSpecial:Preferences, where your permissions are listed in the user profile tab under "Member of groups".
This version of the page may not reflect the most current changes. Pleasepurge this page to view the most recent changes.
Bot report:No errors! Report generated at 20:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Permissions
Handled here
Account creator(add request ·view requests): The account creator flag is granted to users who are active in therequest 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 areauto patrolled inSpecial: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, especiallyWP:BLP andWikipedia:Notability.
AutoWikiBrowser(add request ·view requests):AutoWikiBrowser is a semi-automatedMediaWiki editor forMicrosoft 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 therules of use and registration requirements on the main page before requesting permission. This is not a trueuser right, but access needs to be granted by administrators just like other permissions. If approved, your name will be added to theCheckPage. Users with under 250 non-automated mainspace editsor 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 forautoconfirmed status. These are users who have not had both 10 edits and 4 days experience. People with this flag canupload files and editsemi-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.
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.
Page mover(add request ·view requests): The page mover user right allows usersexperienced in working with article names tomove them,subject to policy, without leaving behind aredirect. They may also move allsubpages 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.
Rollback(add request ·view requests): Rollback enables users to removevandalism much more quickly and efficiently than byundoing it. Users who do not demonstrate an understanding of what constitutescapable vandalism fighting, either because they have no or little history of doing so, or show a poor ability to discern betweengood and bad faith editswill 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, seeWikipedia:Rollback. For information about the technical details of the feature, seehere.
Template editor(add request ·view requests): The template editor flag allows users to edit protected templates andLua 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.
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 atcheckuser-en-wpwikipedia.org or contact a CheckUser directly.
If you believe someone's actions meritremoval of a permission, raise your concern at theadministrator's noticeboard
The bureaucrat, checkuser, and oversight permissions are removed atmeta:Steward requests/Permissions. Stewards will typically not carry out such requests unless they are made on behalf of theArbitration Committee, by a user who is requesting their own access be removed, or in cases of an emergency.
Process
Requestors
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 thecriteria explained above and can be trusted not to abuse the tool(s). Administrators may either grant these permissions permanently or temporarily. For convenience, abot will automatically comment with relevant data if the user does not meetconfigurable 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 theconfig), the request will be archived automatically: approved requests will be placedhere; declined requests will gohere. SeeUser:MusikBot/PermClerk#Archiving for more information on archiving functionality.
Other editors
Requests for permissions is primarily intended for editors requesting a permission for theirown 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 isWikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled, where third party nominations are encouraged. Other editors should still avoid offering general remarks on requests and leave the final decision to an administrator.
Current requests
Account creator
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
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 ofLoretta 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 alsohttps://search.worldcat.org/search?q=au=%22Burger%2C%20Jeff%22 -- Burger should be considered reliable.Sswonk (talk)16:34, 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 ofChapter 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]
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 theHonky 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 toa current page. So we are dealing with theWP: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 onLed Zeppelin which was at the time poorly organized but since I left has been promoted to GA status. My opinion is thatLoretta 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 havetop-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]
@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]
@Voorts yes, odd about the ping. Well, as you can see in the article I posted about a month ago, I was able to identify the three sources plus the "further reading" thesis as verification for the information in the article at the time I posted it. I did not find much more, at least not that well sourced. The timing, the fact that the king did not stick by the Dutch, may make Southampton more obscure, and conceivably it might be well-challenged as notWP:RSed enough, but why? What I posted might be merged with an article that treated (pun?) the entirety of pre-civil war relations, something like that "further reading", don't know. I mean, I simply decided to write that stub article because it (the subject) is an entity that exists in history, that was mentioned in timelines, had a "redlink" where I first saw the treaty mentioned in Wikipedia, and that has sourced material about it. The entire treaty, albeit in French, is available to follow leads from. So I think it is worth posting a brief article about. This project is really a good jumping off point for people to explore and edit articles about obscure history topics. What is your opinion, Voorts, isn't what is sourced and the quality of those sources sufficient? And, shouldn't the topic be part of the encyclopedia? I have less than 8K edits in over four years of active editing, maybe I am missing something; I fell as thoughTreaty of Southampton fills a gap in coverage, without relying on original research. I understandWP:OWN and basically, whether obvious or not, I stepped away from editing the article the day I started it, hoping others might follow up, it isn't anything I claim to know a lot about other than those sources. But someone, or a few someones, might be able to expand the article to have more sources in a way I can't grasp this morning, and I hope that they do.Sswonk (talk)13:52, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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 inMarch 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.,[2],[3] and[4]. Regards.QEnigma论03:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I formally request the autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in English and Spanish, and I consider that, after so many years and hundreds of articles created on both wikis, i am in the position to say that I know the rules and styles. I've never cared much about user rights, but now that I've started a personal project (ambassadors of Spain and all its lists) to expand diplomatic information about my country, Spain, I'd like to avoid the workload that comes with reviewing articles that comply with our rules. Thank you.TheRichic(Messages here)11:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I formally request the Autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in Turkish and English. I have contributed to the Turkish Wikipedia, particularly on the Tao-Klarjeti region. I have also started to transfer these contributions to the English Wikipedia. I think it would be good to reduce the workload involved in reviewing the items I have written. Thank you. --ႧႤႧႰႨ ႾႠႰႨ (talk)15:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been editing Wikipedia since 2006, have created numerous new articles, edited countless others, and am very familiar with its policies.Λeternus(talk)12:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've periodically patrolled Michelangelo1992's articles, and consistently found them to be in good shape. Focused on books as a topic area and very clear familiarity withWP:NBOOK. He's created 135 articles.~ L 🌸 (talk)22:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AutoWikiBrowser
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
I'd like to effectively change articles without taking a lot of time to manually edit them one-by-one, especially for edits that are excessively repetitive--the same information copied and pasted over and over again. Information may not be changed quickly or left unchanged at all in some rare cases.Bugnawfang02:41, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm requesting AWB rights mostly for common errors (hyphen-endash-emdash) in grammar and spelling, especially in weather/tropical cyclone articles. Additionally, those articles have common errors or widespread practices that have since changed, such as the color RfC, and lots of pages have not been updated to reflect those changes.HurricaneZeta (T) (C)00:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been manually working on subcategorization and working on adding proper categories to articles about species, one aspect of my editing involves placing {{[[Genus]]-stub}} into multiple articles, which requires a lot of manual labour. I found out about this tool and would like to have it to facilitate my editing.Zalaraz (talk)02:43, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'd like to use it to add lang templates throughout an article where it would be otherwise too tedious to do so (example) (in particular on articles with Chinese text, though I also intend to use it for other languages). I was recommended AWB bythis teahouse question I asked when I was newer. If any less powerful tools can do the same thing, I'd be happy to use it instead.Just a generic username (talk)10:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm planning to work to improve geo-stubs that need similar information added/updated (e.g. updating populations of villages after a new census and adding geo-coordinate data)Giuliotf (talk)14:37, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to request access to this tool as I find myself making alot of category edits, particularly with cleaning up and creating new categories. For example, I have a manually compiled list of over 20 articles to go in a new category Music videos featuring mermaids and I'd like this tool so I can more easily do that work.WinstonDewey (talk)17:40, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Hi! I am the user behind the account Zulresso. I forgot my password and didn’t add an email so i am using a new account from now on. You can verify my identity using a check user as i am still using the same device. I need to be confirmed so i can put the notice on the old account. Thanks!Spravato (talk)10:28, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Event coordinator
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
HelloNortix08. Will you be working on English or German Wikipedia for this event? Getting event coordinator on English Wikipedia doesn't help you too much if it's on German Wikipedia.—Femke 🐦 (talk)16:00, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Translate Greek articles to EnglishStavrosKwn (talk)16:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC)I would like to request the extended permission in order to translate Greek articles - mostly about the railway in Greece but other topics also - in English language. I would like to note that the account I am writing this request doesn't have all of my edits as i had 3 older accounts that i lost all access resulting into having an account that looks relatively new. i would also like to note that i am a qualified english speaker by a C2 level degree[reply]
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
I go through new pages to check for sourcing, notability, and overall quality, and I really enjoy helping new editors improve their articles. I also participate in AfD discussions, where I help evaluate notability and sourcing issues. Since I’m already active in this area, I’d like to take a more direct role in keeping the feed clean and guiding page creators. Becoming a reviewer would let me contribute more effectively to maintaining Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you for considering my request!Acrom12 (talk)09:12, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: you've only been active at AfD for four days, which doesn't give me a lot to work with. Get some more experience first and then maybe try out AfC reviewing, which you can apply for atWT:AFC/P.Extraordinary Writ (talk)22:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I was looking at thenew pages feed, and I was wondering if I could try to help clear some articles off the backlog? I don't really think I'll be available to do it everyday, on a regular basis, but when I do decide to take action, I want to at least gain some experience from this. I'll also be aware to give the newer articles at least a few days before looking into them, and focus more on the older pages that have been hanging around a while. I think that's all I can say. —Alex26337 (talk)10:38, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: not seeing much experience in any of the three areas listed atWP:NPPCRITERIA (the deletion process, articles for creation, and new article creation). I see you've participated in a handful of AfDs, so you might want to spend some more time there and/or giveAfC reviewing a try.Extraordinary Writ (talk)22:22, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and your interest in this permission. Unfortunately, between the low AfD match rate and the questionable nature of theGood offices redirect, I don't think you've quite demonstrated sufficient fluency in the relevant policies and guidelines for new page review.Not done for now, please consider reapplying once you have a stronger track record at AfD and/or in article creation. All that having been said, I do want to compliment your excellent work atDorfromantik (board game), where you almost single-handedly wrote a GA and thus encourage you to keep up the good work in general on Wikipedia.signed,Rosguilltalk16:31, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had not realised there was such a big backlog at NPP and would like to help reduce it; I am an experienced editor and article creator myself, and would be very happy to do more to help new editors learn about Wikipedia. I am interested in helping to eliminate the backlog, particularly for articles involving Indian articles sources—languages I am familiar with—that often remain stuck for long periods due to language barriersSinghchen (talk)06:25, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions and your interest in this permission. Unfortunately, I'm not seeing much experience in article creation or AfD that would indicate a sufficient knowledge of relevant policies and guidelines for new page review. I also find it concerning that you createdImtiaz Developments on Oct 10, which was nominated for AfD on the same day, which you then neglected to participate in, but then you immediately file a request for undeletion after the AfD is closed as soft delete. Why didn't you just participate in the discussion? Which sources do you believe establish the subject's notability?Not done.signed,Rosguilltalk16:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Page mover
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Mostly interested in just the occasional round robin swap which I have now had the opportunity to perform but cannot without this perm. Approx. 83,000 edits. New page patroller, rollbacker, and 1,200+ AfDs and other trust measures that can be looked at. Thanks.Iljhgtn (talk)22:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can request swaps atWP:RM/TR. When requesting this permission for bold swaps, which almost all users cannot revert on their own, you should have a history of requesting correct and non-controversial moves at RM/TR. Since yourlast request for this permission was declined theonly request you have made there was seeking a category move (after having been told in the declined permission request that those have to go throughWP:CFD). SoNot done. I'd suggest requesting this permission again when your 5 most recent RM/TR requests have been accepted. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust💬)02:52, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pending changes reviewer
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been editing Wikipedia for about 7 months now, and made just under 500 edits. While sometimes I make mistakes, I learn from them and try to be as understanding as possible. I've merged one article, and recently split several. I think this permission would help me improve Wikipedia,and help take some pressure of other reviewers.Tactical Falcon (talk)22:58, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I already make a habit of keeping an eye onSpecial:PendingChanges when I'm spending time on Wikipedia, and it would be great to be able to accept edits that meetthe requirements rather than just reverting those that don't, especially when the backlog fills up with acceptable edits waiting for a reviewer. If I could do with any constructive criticism, please let me know.Seercat3160 (talk)10:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reason for requesting pending changes reviewer rightsI have been on here for six months now, and recently also joined the simple Wikipedia. Have had 2 declined rollback requests in July and August but have since then, I now officially fully understand the basics of Wikipedia and how to edit, only issue I have had with my editing lately was an accidental page blanking I did due to page-move vandalism and failed move-back about a month ago, but have 2000 additional edits since then (4,100 total). I recently came across one article I was editing (Seth Curry) where the issue of not being a PC-reviewer took full effect, so I am requesting to be a PC reviewer, especially as some "Likely Have Problems" pending edits I have seen in the recent changes have actually been good.MakaylaHippo1998 (talk)04:20, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been patrolling the recent changes for a couple months and feel confident that I have the hang of it, including notifying users on their talk page for the reason behind the reverts as well as reporting users who repeatedly vandalize or disruptively edit. I am interested in helping to address the backlog of pending changes request—I have read and understand the sixcriteria to receive this permission. I have over 400 mainspace edits and extended confirmed user permissions.MossOnALogTalk14:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have made over 500 edits and currently hold the extended confirmed user status. I would like to help reduce the backlog by reviewing pending changes. Thank you.BrownCanary61 (talk)20:07, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have patrolled hundreds of edits for vandalism via recent changes, I am well-versed in what is vandalism and what isn't (among other reasons to deny a pending change). And would like to help with pending changes reviewing.CocaPopsRather19:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rollback
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been a long-time recent changes patroller, and having rollback permissions would improve my efficacy as a patroller. I almost always notify editors when I've reverted (even for obvious vandalism), and I have no history of edit warring.Ludus56 (talk)22:31, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was suggested that i am on right track but reverting from only 2 week and need to gain some more experience[6].Hence Re-requesting this perm as i regularly patrolSpecial:AbuseLog andSpecial:RecentChanges to fight vandalism, and always leave msg on user's talk page after reverting their edits.Khagendra (talk)14:45, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been patrolling the recent changes for a couple months and feel confident that I have the hang of it, including notifying users on their talk page for the reason behind the reverts as well as reporting users who repeatedly vandalize or disruptively edit. Having rollback permission would make patrolling the recent changes more efficient. I have used the Twinkle rollback feature and I have over 400 mainspace edits.MossOnALogTalk14:31, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done -- you've only been making reverts for a few weeks. You're on the right track, but I'm hesitant to push the granting guidelines when your overall Wikipedia experience is low (<1000 edits). Feel free to reapply in a few weeks when you have a bit more experience.Giraffer (talk)15:33, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been actively engaged in counter-vandalism and recent changes patrol on the English Wikipedia for a considerable period. I frequently use tools such as SWViewer and Twinkle to revert vandalism. Rollback rights would allow me to perform this work more efficiently.Fardin🛸17:48, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been reverting vandalism for quite a while now, and since I don't have rollback, I use Twinkle to both revert and warn users. The ability to useWP:ANVDL andWP:HG will sure help. As of now, I am bothextended confirmed and have thepending changes reviewer right. (I know it says I'm requesting PCR, but my PCR request didn't get archived.) The experience I have, especially with pesky vandals and sockpuppets likeUser:Office editorial, is decent.
As of the time I post this edit (including this edit), I have made 1,469 edits, have 634 mainspace edits, have 320 user talk edits, and have significantly expanded and created 3 articles.HwyNerdMike(tokk)05:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I am requesting Rollback permissions is because it would make me much more efficient Vandalism reverter. I am a fairly active counter-vandalism editor who uses features in both Twinkle and RedWarn. I also perform fairly frequent copy editing and MOS enforcement, demonstrating understanding of Wikipedia and its policies. I feel I know the difference between good and bad faith, but that isn't for me to decide. I will also use the permission to perform my actions underWikipedia:AntiVandal. I fully understand the weight of the Rollback permission, and I will therefore use it only for reverting vandalism or other legitimate purposes, and never for content disputes.
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Pleasecreate an account in order to request user account permissions.
A fair proportion of my editing is gnomish, small changes to grammar/syntax for clarity, reverting vandalism or egregious (but sometimes cleverly subtle) violations of policy in article space and on talk pages by single-edit new accounts, and the like. This (the gnomish nature) is probably obvious by my rather piddling (all other things being equal) 23,000 edits over the last twenty years...
Reviewing IP's is a helpful tool when dealing with vandalism, sockpuppetry, etc., so it would be nice to retain the ability. I've read and understand the requirements, limitations, responsibilities, and obligations as set forth in the Foundation policies, and happily agree to abide by them if granted permission. cheers.anastrophe,an editor he is.20:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the ability to view temporary accounts IP Address's will be beneficial for efficiently dealing with subtle vandalism, to link accounts.I have read and understand the rules and privacy guidelines and agree to follow them. I have readWP:TAIV and MediaWiki's policy and agree to not use this permission for anything other than preventing vandalism.CocaPopsRather12:28, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't do a lot of anti vandalism work but I do chip in at NPP occasionally, and more importantly keep an eye out for some persistently abusive IP's that have disrupted articles on my watchlist. I'm concerned that the IP masking would make it harder to identify these users. I read and agree to abide with the foundation policy. (t ·c)buidhe14:56, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am very involved in counter vandalism and once the changes come into affect, this permission would allow me to remain effective. I have read and agree to the conditions associated with this permission.Equine-man (talk)20:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
