Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page extended-confirmed-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:PERM" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission or Help:Permanent link.
This page is under extended confirmed protection, but non-EC users may edit its subpages.

    Requests for permissions
    Shortcuts

    This page enables administrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikipedia. Administrators are able to modify account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, extended confirmed, mass message sender, new page reviewer, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback, and template editor rights, and AutoWikiBrowser access.

    Editors wishing to request a permission flag here should do so following the procedure below. Editors requesting permissions are advised to periodically revisit the requests page, as notifications will not always be given after a decision is made. Editors should not expect their request to be answered right away and should remember to be patient when filing a request. To find out what permissions your account has, go to Special:Preferences, where your permissions are listed in the user profile tab under "Member of groups".

    Requests for permissions are archived regularly; please see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Archive for an index of past requests.

    Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 02:20, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

    Permissions

    Handled here

    • 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): IP masking is coming to the English Wikipedia in September 2025. To prepare for this, non-admins may request access to view temporary account data.

    Handled elsewhere

    Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

    Review and removal of permissions

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

    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.

    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

    Full instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Administrator instructions

    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.

    Other editors

    Requests for permissions is primarily intended for editors requesting a permission for their own account. Other editors are welcome to comment if they have specific information that is relevant to that request that a patrolling administrator is unlikely to discover for themselves. Otherwise, since only administrators can effectively respond to these requests, general comments or 'clerking' by other users are rarely helpful. Non-administrators cannot "decline" to grant a request, because they're not in a position to accept it.

    A limited exception to this is Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled, where third party nominations are encouraged. Other editors should still avoid offering general remarks on requests and leave the final decision to an administrator.

    Current requests

    Account creator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Autopatrolled

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Yoblyblob

    Requested this permission ~2 months ago, denied because I was mostly creating auto-notable stubs. I think I have expanded the types of articles I create, including well-sourced local pages or biographical entries where I take time to source subjects that do not inherently meet a generic notability criteria. (I still do create auto-notable pages sometimes, but those no longer make up the majority of pages I create.) As a new page reviewer, I got good experience with the notability guidelines reviewing articles during the backlog drive WP:MAY25, and also participating in AfD. Thought about requesting again as I have run into a few of my own pages while reviewing pages that are in topics I contribute to/am interested in. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Also wanted to mention that if I am unsure of a subject's notability, I will utilize WP:AFC for my own articles occasionally Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autopatrolled declined in the past 90 days ([1]). — MusikBot talk 02:20, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Came here to request this permission for a different user, but since Yoblyblob is referencing their WP:MAY25 NPP work, it is worth noting that among the re-reviews of each patroller's work, 14/17 of their patrol decisions were approved. Of the remainder, two were drafted/redirected as WP:TOOSOON coverage of 2026 state elections and one was drafted for lacking enough coverage to qualify under WP:NEVENT. Considering they were the fifth most active patroller of the drive, this accuracy is good, not great. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 19:20, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CherryPie94

    I was granted a two month trial for this. Have created 100+ articles with 10K+ edits and will continue to do so. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Dr vulpes (expires 00:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 23:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The sourcing provided here does not appear to meet WP:NORG, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Can you provide sources that establish the notability of this organization? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:22, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree some of the sourcing used is WP:CORPTRIV — the foundation has extensive coverage in Korea. I've just added some stronger pieces. The pre/post interview text in this Forbes feature is one with significant secondary coverage. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 05:24, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Onatic

    As part of the Women in Red project, I create pages about women by translating, adapting, and improving articles from the Spanish Wikipedia. Onatic (talk) 21:00, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jolielover

    Demonstrates understanding of the notability guidelines on a variety of subjects. The articles are fairly well-written and -formatted; a few are also now GAs. I marked a couple of her newer creations as reviewed and found no major issues. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Luxtaythe2nd

    I have created more than 25 non redirect articles within the past few weeks and 53 non redirects overall. The two mainspace ones that have been deleted were by my own request, thanks to a slip of the "Publish changes" button. Aside from those, all have been approved by the adminteam. I would greatly be thankful to receive this permission. Luxtaythe2nd (Talk to me...) 17:56, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TinaLees-Jones

    I have created over 650 new articles and hope to continue contributing to Wikipedia and knowledge sharing. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 03:38, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: I checked three of TinaLees-Jones's recently-created articles at random. One had not yet been reviewed, so I reviewed it and found a significant issue with source-text integrity. I recommend waiting for her reply here before this request is actioned.
    Separately, some of her articles have been nominated for deletion; it's hard to tell exactly how many, since her user talk page is archived by a bot, but the archives are not linked. One was recently deleted and one ended in no consensus. (I believe I have !voted in AfDs on her articles, presumably mostly to keep, but I can't tell because of the weird archiving.) I do think the vast majority of articles she creates are unquestionably notable, mostly on variations of NPOL, but as some have been questioned recently I'm not sure if granting AP now is appropriate. Toadspike [Talk] 13:35, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Shahnamk

    Hello,

    I would like to request the autopatrolled user right. I have created around 30 well-sourced, policy-compliant articles on the English Wikipedia.

    In addition to my contributions here, I am an administrator (sysop) on the Persian Wikipedia (fa.wikipedia), where I have been active for many years, focusing on content creation, vandalism control, and community support.

    Granting this right would help reduce the workload of new page patrollers, as my article creations usually meet Wikipedia’s quality standards.

    Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

    Best regards, Shahnamk (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sweetabena

    Hello,

    I would like to request the autopatrolled user right. I’ve created several articles, many of which are currently live and meet Wikipedia’s guidelines on notability and reliable sourcing.

    I’m familiar with the key content policies such as WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV, and consistently apply them when creating or editing articles.

    I understand that this permission is intended to reduce the workload of new page reviewers by marking trusted users’ pages as reviewed automatically, and I believe my contributions demonstrate the consistency and policy alignment expected for this role.

    I have not received any blocks or serious warnings, and I’m committed to continuing constructive, policy-compliant editing.

    Thank you for your time and consideration. Sweetabena (talk) 23:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi @Sweetabena: I’ve gone through some of the articles you’ve created, including Daniel Dung Mahama, Simon Akibange Aworigo, Anabah Thomas Winsum, and Nikyema Billa Alamzy. I noticed that these pages have been tagged for AI-generated content (WP:LLM). Could you please clarify this? Additionally, the article on Bright Owusu has a notability issue. Have you made any efforts to address or fix that? I also noticed that most of your articles are about politicians or MPs, which is generally a relatively easier area for a New Page Patroller. Regards! Baqi:) (talk) 12:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @Jannatulbaqi,
    Thanks for your response and for reviewing my request.
    I've now gone through the articles you mentioned; Daniel Dung Mahama, Simon Akibange Aworigo, Anabah Thomas Winsum, and Nikyema Billa Alamzy and made revisions to ensure they fully reflect a human-authored tone, improve clarity, and adhere to Wikipedia’s content policies. I manually wrote these articles based on reliable sources, and I’ve taken extra care to revise any sections that might have appeared too generic or AI-like in style.
    Regarding Bright Owusu, I realized that the subject is better known publicly as “C-Confion,” which is the name used in most reliable sources. I initially created a redirect page under that name, and since C-Confion better reflects WP:COMMONNAME, I’ve submitted a technical move request at WP:RM/TR to move the article accordingly.
    While many of my articles are in the political space, I’ve focused on that area because it's typically easier to demonstrate notability. That said, I’m open to expanding into other areas and continuing to improve the range and quality of my contributions.
    I appreciate your time and consideration, and I remain committed to constructive, policy-compliant editing. Thank you so much.Sweetabena (talk) 21:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think answers the implicit question, Sweetabena, which is "did you use AI" in the first place? Also, I confess parts of your comment seem a little LLM-y particularly and made revisions to ensure they fully reflect a human-authored tone, improve clarity, and adhere to Wikipedia’s content policies. I manually wrote these articles based on reliable sources, and I’ve taken extra care to revise any sections that might have appeared too generic or AI-like in style, although the misuse of the semicolon before the list of articles looks like a legit human error. Please divulge the extent to which you have used AI in your editing. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 00:14, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:AdobongPogi

    As a part of Wikipedia: Tambayan Philippines and the Music Task Force, I would like to request the autopatrolled user right. I have created over 25 articles, most of which are currently live and have been built with careful attention to WP:N, WP:V, and reliable sourcing. And also I understand that the autopatrolled right is meant to ease the workload of new page reviewrs by automatically marking new pages from trusted users as reviewed. Thank you! AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 04:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:AlphaBetaGamma

    Had my first AP request declined due to my poor judgement with notability of railway stations. I've learned from that mistake (and cleaned up after myself), and I've created articles like Expo 2025 pavilions (Although this was a collaboration with Epicgenius) and Magical Girl Witch Trials since my request was declined. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 01:06, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Link to their first request. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:21, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:GregariousMadness

    Hello! I've created a large number of My Little Pony and mathematics articles. I have over 6,700 edits and will continue to edit for as long as I can. I'm requesting autopatrol permissions so that the NPP backlog will be less cluttered with my articles. I believe I've demonstrated a solid understanding of the policies and guidelines with my articles, particularly with my coverage of various aspects of the My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom. Thank you! GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 17:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Toadboy123

    Toadboy123 has created 193 articles of consistently high quality; none have been deleted, while quite a few have gone through DYK and appeared on the Main Page, often with excellent hooks. I do not think we need to keep reviewing their creations.

    Toadboy123 was warned twice for copyright violations by Diannaa in 2022, but she and I have both taken a look at several articles created since then and haven't found further issues (discussed here, after which I spot checked six recent creations). Additionally, DYK checks each nomination for copyright violations. Thus, I believe they have taken that feedback to heart. Toadspike [Talk] 12:52, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done asilvering (talk) 16:34, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yenistardom

    Hi, since four years ago, I have started over two dozen meticulously crafted articles, which are free of issues. Most of these are Japan or Shinto-related, and are primarily about geographical features and historical figures. There was only one draftified article from a while ago, which I quickly learned from and have since created only notable topics with sufficient sources. I'm familiar with Wikipedia's core policies and copyvio guidelines. Yenistardom (talk) 06:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Queenofboston

    I have created more than 25 articles, over several years. I learnt over time to understand the notability criteria well. My new pages do not require attention from patrollers. Only one page I created is marked as deleted (it was recreated under a slightly different name). I have overall over 1000 edits. Thank you for the consideration. Queenofboston (talk) 12:24, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Queenofboston: Thank you for your contributions. Spot-checking one of your creations at random, Michelle Meagher, indicated direct copying from a source (report) and non-neutral prose ("Meagher was confronted with a crisis of consciousness", also closely paraphrased from the source). I'll leave a message on your talk page with more information about copyright considerations on Wikipedia, and I would recommend reading about the encyclopedic tone that should be used in articles. For these reasons, I don't think autopatrolled would be appropriate for you at the moment. Please let me know if you have any questions. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @TechnoSquirrel69 the article you singled out for copyright issues was published in 2024. The Michelle Meagher Wikipedia entry was created by me in 2023 with the contested phrase in it. So the 2024 article copied the 2023 Wikipedia page not the other way round. I did not infringe any copyright of the 2024 article as it did not exist at the time of the page creation. Queenofboston (talk) 18:02, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not seeing a date on the Green European Journal page, although it was only archived in the Wayback Machine in 2024. Even leaving that aside, though, there remain the issues of neutrality and close paraphrasing.
    I looked at another one of your creations for more information. Your most recent one, Aline Blankertz, has statements without citations, and doesn't demonstrate the subject's notability — the existing sources are either primary sources, like interviews or podcast appearances, or don't have significant coverage of the subject. However, I will note that I found no copyright-related issues here. I maintain that it would be beneficial for your creations to get a once-over from new pages patrol. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:52, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The information you flagged as missing citation was contained in the sources cited immediately prior, I now double-cite them in the two instances you flagged.
    I am not saying that my pages cannot be improved but my pages bring additions to Wikipedia. I focus on women as it is an objective of Wikipedia to re-balance the coverage away from a bias favoring pages of men Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, I believe this is valuable contribution. There are profiles of Aline Blankertz in leading German media outlets, only one source is a podcast and it is produced by an established German media outlet, that is a valid source in my understanding, it is not a podcast produced by the subject. None of the sources in that article are authored by the subject of the article. My pages do not have copyrights issues, as now clarified. I use some sources in foreign languages but it is not the policy of Wikipedia to disregard or downgrade sources that are in foreign languages for purposes of notability. Queenofboston (talk) 09:13, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Particleshow22

    I've been editing for more than 2 years now, and I noticed recently that reviews take longer than before. I was shocked by the workload waiting reviewers here. Besides my editing experience expanding and improving articles, I created and published 77 articles. For 2 years, only 1 out of 78 articles I created was deleted. I created 4 B-class articles, 37 C-class articles, 15 Start-class articles, and 2 Stubs.

    I believe having autopatrolled rights would reduce the review burden on NPP volunteers, as my articles typically include proper sourcing, formatting, and categories from creation. Particleshow22 (talk) 13:41, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:EF5

    I frequently write articles (most of which nowadays are above start-class and I aim for GA on all of my tornado articles) so maybe having this right would help patrollers. The only three articles of mine that were deleted since September 2024 that I can remember are 2020 Villejuif stabbing (which was procedurally deleted), Second American Civil War and Casualties of the 2011 Super Outbreak (which was deemed to still have some useful info in it that was merged into 2011 Super Outbreak). I don't think any of my last 100-or-so articles are orange-tagged, although I don't frequently check them if they aren't being improved. EF5 17:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC) EF5 17:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    AutoWikiBrowser

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


    User:Dantus21

    I would like to do cleanups after requested moves, in particular fixing links to go to the main article instead of a redirect. Dantus21 (talk) 01:20, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    This smells like a violation of point 4 of WP:AWBRULES. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:33, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree, but feel free to deny my request, or if you want I can retract it. Dantus21 (talk) 05:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It does seem reasonable to use AWB for this purpose (changing mistargeted wikilinks does not seem fun to do by hand, especially if it comes into the hundreds), albeit it might be a good time to see if there's consensus for this type of usage if there hasn't been any relevant discussions. Tenshi! (Talk page) 20:02, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure what I was thinking here. Though I do think that it is helpful for WP:PTOPIC changes and the WP:POSTMOVE after that, but not for every move. Tenshi! (Talk page) 12:34, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You may want to have a look at the Move+ script which can automate link retargeting. CoconutOctopus talk 10:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If the redirect is still targeted at the moved article (as I, and apparently Pppery but not Tenshi, interpret this request) then this would violate WP:NOTBROKEN. @Dantus21: Do you have an example of a requested move that you would use this to clean up? ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 03:39, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To be honest I'd rather have someone just deny this request now and I'll request it later if I need it for something else. Dantus21 (talk) 02:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Request withdrawn is how I'm reading the above; there are better tools that the OP plans on using. No prejudice against a future request. Primefac (talk) 00:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Event coordinator

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Extended confirmed

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    File mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    Mass message sender

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:AirshipJungleman29

    Just proposed a large WikiProject merge here, and intend to propose more in the future of similar scale. I would rather prefer avoiding the trouble of sending individual notifications (in this case to 55 WikiProject talk pages) and don't want to be a bother constantly spamming the talk page with requests. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @AirshipJungleman29: Do you anticipate needing mass message permissions again in the future? If it's just a one-time thing, leave the details in a request at WT:MMS and I'd be happy to sort it out! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:26, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    New page reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Icem4k

    I would like to renew my patroller (New Page Reviewer) user right, which is set to expire on 10 August 2025. I have remained active in reviewing new pages, tagging problematic content, and contributing to the overall quality control process. I understand the policies surrounding page curation and continue to apply them carefully. I’d appreciate the opportunity to continue serving in this capacity.

    Thank you for your consideration. Icem4k (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 10 August 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 15:47, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Icem4k, could you comment on your evaluation of the case for notability of Tyler Toney? signed, Rosguill talk 15:22, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh @Rosguill, I wasnt expecting that question but here’s my comment on Tyler Toney’s notability well... Uhmm Primarily, he is the co-founder and central on-screen member of the sports and comedy group Dude Perfect, one of the most popular and influential YouTube collectives globally. I believe that his foundational role in creating and leading Dude Perfet constitutes a major contribution to the evolution of online sports entertanment. Given his consitent presence and prominence within the group, and the fact that there is significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources, I believe he meets the General Notability Guideline (GNG). Icem4k (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Creatives notable for work with exactly one group are typically not given separate articles, but instead are covered in that article. So unless coverage for Tyler Toney exclusively outside the context of Dude Perfect meets WP:GNG, we would merge/redirect his biography to Dude Perfect. Looking at the article, essentially all the coverage is in the context of Dude Perfect, so I’m not seeing the case for a stand-alone article. signed, Rosguill talk 16:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks again, @Rosguill.... Uhmm, so to be fair I did question the depth of individual sourcing when reviewing the article, especially in relation to WP:GNG. I completely understand that notability can’t be inherited trust me, I know, as emphasized at WP:INHERENT. I also understand that mere mention in sources doesn’t automatically justify notability. Group coverage alone isn’t always enough to warrant a standalone biography believe me, I’ve seen this firsthand with one of the bands I come from in Zambia. That aside, having looked through both the Tyler Toney article and the Dude Perfect article, I still believe there’s a nuanced case to be made for keeping his article separate. Tyler isn’t just one of the five members he is repeatedly positioned as the central figure in the group. And if I may quote from WP:NCREATIVE to support my thinking: A person who has “created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work” may be notable if that work has been the primary subject of multiple independent, reliable sources. I believe Tyler clearly qualifies here. He has played a central and sustained role in Dude Perfect's formation, content, and public image. And just to add some meat to the bone here when you read WP:INHERITED, it clearly gives caution against assuming someone is notable just because they’re part of something famous. But that’s not the argument I’m making but this isn’t a case of passive association. Tyler didnt just appear in a few videos he co-founded, led, and remains the most visible and consistently cited figure in a globally documented creative project. That aligns more closely with WP:NCREATIVE, where notability arises from playing a major role in co-creating a well covered body of work which I believe applies here... Now, looking back at both articles, Tyler is:
    • The co-founder, often the main on-screen face.
    • The one most associated with group identity (e.g., “The Beard”).
    • Cited in interviews on personal matters talking about his faith, marriage and leadership.
    • Mentioned in external media as the lead voice or spokesperson.
    • Credited individually in multiple world record achievements and tour leadership roles.
    Even the Dude Perfect article itself refers to him by name, quotes him in records and interviews, and shows a pattern of media outlets singling him out. While much of this is still within group context, I think it elevates his individual recognition enough to consider standalone notability cause based on support from WP:NCREATIVE, I will still say that he is arguably notable enough for a separate article particularly given the volume and quality of mentions that focus on his identity, persona, and leadership to the group. That said, as a reviewer I think I would be open to a merge or redirect if consensus supports it, given the current source landscape. However, based on the subject’s prominence and recurring individual coverage, I believe there’s potential for a standalone article to be fully justified in the future should more independent, in-depth sources focusing solely on Tyler come to light if a merge or redirect was to happen. Icem4k (talk) 20:05, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate the well-reasoned response  Done signed, Rosguill talk 21:50, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Page mover

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Julietdeltalima

    I attempt whenever possible to correct article titles to sentence case when necessary, but am frequently unable to do so because of the existence of a single-edit redirect. I've been advised at "Requested moves" just to ask for the pagemover right already after 75,000 edits in nearly 11 years.

    A perfect current example: Sweet and Sour Pork, which I can't move to Sweet and sour pork without requesting the move and making someone else do my work for me.

    Thanks for your consideration! Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:52, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Note that Sweet and Sour Pork and Sweet and sour pork was actually unfortunately not a great example to make a case for page mover permissions - on review, you’ll find that there is a a long history at the latter as it was merged to Sweet and sour in 2013, as well as a whole mess as the former was (re-)created as a move from Gu Lao Rou, which in turn was only created in 2024 as a manual fork of Sweet and sour.
    So what we have here is now a pretty mess of “admin required” for histmerge as well as a few “{{copied from}}” on the relevant talk pages and review of the page edit histories to make sure attributions are placed as needed. I’ll copy this over to RM/TR, since I can’t action on the admin required histmerge review. (Edit): posted at RMTR. Raladic (talk) 07:33, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Pending changes reviewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:JuniperChill

    I have been editing for over a year and one of the pages that I recently requested protection is now at PC protection. I also have some experience with reverting vandalism, some via Special:RecentChanges. JuniperChill (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Giraffer (talk) 19:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Alephjamie

    I would like to request reviewer rights and help flag vandalism across Wikipedia. I believe in Wikipedia’s core mission of neutrality, reliability, and free access to knowledge. I aim to contribute by reviewing pages for quality and sourcing, and to help maintain article integrity by countering vandalism. I have studied Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, notability, and civility, and am eager to support content moderation. Thank you for considering my request.

    Alephjamie (talk) 11:08, 4 August 2025 (UTC) Alephjamie (talk) 11:08, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


    Rollback

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Yelps

    Hello, I'd like to get rollback rights to fight vandalism more effectively. While I don't patrol recent pages often, I do patrol new pages and short pages, where I frequently undo obvious vandalism (as seen in [2]). I'd like rollback to more easily undo edits, as well as access huggle and other tools. Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 08:24, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done You do not have a lot of experience reverting vandalism, and I have noticed that you have not been warning editors whose unconstructive edits you have reverted. Please get a bit more experience (making sure to leave warnings) and feel free to request again. Malinaccier (talk) 12:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Camilasdandelions

    Hello, I want to receive a rollback right because there are a lot of editors who add informations but not citing sources. Usually, they do not add unsourced informations at once, but they add them by multiple times. There are also edits violating MoS or Wikipedia policies. And I have struggled with reverting all of them one by one, so I decided to request a right for rollback. Thank you. Camilasdandelions (talk!) 03:56, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBot talk 04:00, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oops, my notification didn't notice that reply. I'm sorry for it. Camilasdandelions (talk!) 09:55, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Panda Arun

    Hello, I am requesting Rollback rights to help stop vandalism. I have made more than 2000 edits on Wikipedia since 2021. I understand how rollback works and will use it only when needed.

    Thank you Panda 🐼 Arun (Talk) 07:10, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. I can only see 33 reverts in your contributions, and you have only warned a user once. Per the instruction box above, we generally expect to see a track record of notifying editors when reverting as well as more counter-vandalism experience. Giraffer (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:OceanLoop

    I am a budding copyeditor with a growing number of watched pages to police for vandalism. Unfortunately, some vandals use multiple revisions, making it tedious and time-consuming to fix without a rollback permission. Thank you for your considerations. OceanLoop (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. Per the instructions at the top of the page we generally expect to see at least a month of counter-vandalism experience before granting rollback. You're on the right track, but you've only been at it for two weeks or so. Feel free to reapply once you've gained some more experience. Giraffer (talk) 18:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JohnDavies9612

    Hello, can I request rollback rights to deal with vandalism? I will try to do whatever is necessary for the good of all. JohnDavies9612 (talk) 01:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. Please re-read the instructions at the top of the page. You do not have a track record of warning editors nor a month of counter-vandalism experience. Giraffer (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Nil NZ

    I'm an active Recent Changes / anti-vandalism patroller, currently using UV & Twinkle (including Twinkle mobile), which have quasi-rollback. I've previously tried out RW but was not a fan of the interface personally, so I'm interested in trying out AV or Huggle as more efficient tools, both of which require rollback. Nil🥝 05:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Just went through some edits, I felt like this could've been a talk page message: L (Death Note) this version. Valorrr (lets chat) 04:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Normally I would, but in this particular case I didn't think it necessary as it was an obviously Good Faith edit and not vandalism. When I revert GF edits, I sometimes opt to leave a longer edit summary explaining the issue, rather than a (potentially bite-y) talk page message, especially when it's a one-off harmless edit from an IP with no other contributions in their history. Nil🥝 05:10, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. Giraffer (talk) 18:53, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:MelissaFukunaga

    Hello, I would like to get my rollback rights to fight vandalized articles more often as I am finding it more effective to keep the article from being vandalized again. While I don't do patrol articles often, I could still protect articles that weren't protected by any editors given that they may have watchlist or not, even with unfamiliar articles, I would still revert vandalized article or section. MelissaFukunaga (talk) 06:43, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. No demonstrated track record of counter-vandalism. Giraffer (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:NDG

    May I reapply?

    200 mainspace editsGreen tickY a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChangesGreen tickYNo history of edit warringGreen tickYA track record of consistently notifying editorsGreen tickY NDG (talk) 12:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([4]). — MusikBot talk 12:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Salvio giuliano 12:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Template editor

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:Darth Stabro

    Howdy. I'm an active participant over at WP:DYK, and recently ran in WP:AELECT but did not pass the threshold. Discussion centered around lack of experience on WP:AIV, an area I expressed interest in getting involved in. A decent part of my running for adminship was wanting to help with processing WP:DYK queues, which are template-protected. In my election discussion there were no concerns raised about my professionalism, content creation or reviewing competency, which are the primary things needed with processing DYK queues. I do not meet some of the standard template editor guidelines (e.g. sandbox/significant template edits, etc), but I also do not plan on using the role outside of DYK queue processing. Thanks for your consideration. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 16:46, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Are there any active DYKers that you are working with often that could leave support here? — xaosflux Talk 19:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've seen Darth around at DYK but don't have the impression they're really one of the regulars. Looking over their contribution history I only see 33 hook promotions going back about 4 months (at least based on searching for PSHAW log messages). And looking through the WT:DYK archives, I'm seeing some consistent level of activity over the past 8 months, but not a huge volume compared to a few of the people that I would consider our major contributors to the behind-the-scenes DYK work, reinforcing my initial impression. Also, most of what I'm seeing (in an admittedly unscientific spot check) is routine participation in discussions; I haven't found any examples of complicated situations where they've had to carefully navigate contentious issues. In short, I'm not seeing any problems per-se, but I'm also not seeing the depth of experience and quality time in the trenches that an advanced permission like TE requires. We can certainly use more qualified hands at DYK, but I'd rather see Darth get more experience promoting hooks, managing the prep areas, and making tough decisions when nominators push hard for their own desired outcomes, before moving up to working on the queues. RoySmith (talk) 09:33, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As someone who has worked with Darth Stabro in the past on DYK and is familiar with his work, I would support him getting the permission. He is a DYK regular and is familiar with the ins-and-outs of the project. Plus, we're short on hands, and more people being able to work with Queues is a plus in our eyes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:51, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    We do need more people to contribute to queueing, but Darth Stabro has so far promoted only 32 hooks, equal to three and a half Main Page sets. I'd prefer to see significantly more experience in prep sets, perhaps a hundred hooks promoted or more, to demonstrate "a need for the right". In RfA terms, NOTYET. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:39, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @RoySmith @AirshipJungleman29 Putting the question another way, do you see a reason why DeathStarbo should not get the rights? WP:TPEGRANT only requires working the sandbox of three template-protected pages and successfully proposing five significant edits to template-protected templates. I'm not at all involved with DYK, but 32 promotions sounds like more than equivalent to that. – SD0001 (talk) 10:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Well yes, as I said above, I'd prefer that they should get more experience. You can do 32 promotions in ten minutes if you don't take care, but in queueing sets the highest priority is taking care. (You also, incidentally, need to be familiar with the entirety of WP:DYKCRIT, WP:DYKRI and WP:DYKAI, and I'm not sure you can do that by promoting three-and-a-half sets.) ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done No consensus to grant * Pppery * it has begun... 14:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    WT:DYK should really come up with a formal criteria/guidelines for granting the right and aim for a amendment to WP:TPE. The WP:TPE criteria and this process were never meant to deal with these kinds of requests (primarily because the folks who watch this venue are technical admins and have limited interactions with WP:DYK). See also Hilst's request at [5] which imo was also misjudged. Sohom (talk) 14:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Or they really should split "DYK queue editor" out of "template editor" as a completely separate right. The current situation is an affront to logic. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:59, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    We do not need all these separate user rights, we just need to give out adminship to everyone who would volunteer more effectively with it. I would happily vote for abolishing the template editor permission. —Kusma (talk) 15:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary account IP viewer

    Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

    User:JayCubby

    I'm not as active as I'd like to be, but still do work (drawer an occasional sock, clean up vandalism, etc) which would be impacted by not having access to IPs. JayCubby 02:14, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Could you post a few diffs showing your sock and or vandalism work? Thanks. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rsjaffe, looks like the last time I filed a case at SPI was in (late) April. [6].
    Example countervandalism is this diff, from a week ago. here
    @HouseBlaster, it was a fairly standard loutsock a while back. Nothing I'm too proud of, but my psychiatrist thinks the underlying mental health issues have mostly been resolved. As for why there're five tickets, I can't say. JayCubby 02:03, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not going to accept or decline this request, but can you also comment on your own socking? (Admins, see UTRS:96920 and the five other UTRS appeals linked therein.) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Yoshi24517

    I'm a rollbacker and a reviewer, and a RC patroller, I use Huggle a lot, requesting this so I have it for when the time comes. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 01:49, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Forgot to mention I do agree to abide by the policy to which this permission pertains. Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 01:52, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Sohom (talk) 01:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hah. Giraffer (talk) 10:28, 5 August 2025 (UTC) [reply]

    User:Jannatulbaqi

    Hello, I am an AfC and NPP. Gaining access to temporary account IPs would be beneficial for detecting disruptive actions, particularly after the implementation of IP masking. Best! Baqi:) (talk) 09:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Salvio giuliano 09:21, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:LaffyTaffer

    Have been doing counter vandalism for a bit over a year, being able to still see IPs once this change goes through will be very helpful. Taffer😊💬(she/they) 22:02, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Some1

    This tool would be useful for conducting sockpuppetry investigations, and I have experience with doing counter-vandalism work. Thank you for considering! Some1 (talk) 23:00, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:10, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Compassionate727

    I sometimes help at WP:EFFP. Some edit filters target specific IP ranges, so I sometimes need to know which IP someone was using to determine which filter condition they tripped. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 00:11, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:19, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Valorrr

    Recently just got rollback, and believe this would be helpful, even signed the policy on confidentiality. Valorrr (lets chat) 04:55, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Automated comment This user has had an account for 142 days. — MusikBot talk 05:00, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done. Must have had account for six months to be eligible. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:30, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:ZDRX

    Hello, I currently hold the New Page Patroller and Pending Changes Reviewer rights. Temporary account IP viewer would help me to fight vandalism and various spams. THEZDRX (User) | (Contact) 05:06, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 05:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CoffeeCrumbs

    I fairly regularly report or discuss SPI issues, whether or not as part of a formal investigation, and have actively reported/reverted vandals at sensitive areas such as GSCASTE. I also do this beyond the motivation of tattling and try to give advice to editors in these situations so that they don't get sanctioned further or can eventually return to editing. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 07:09, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done CoconutOctopus talk 07:17, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Salvio giuliano 07:17, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    again! Ophyrius (he/him
    T • C • G    ) 09:47, 6 August 2025 (UTC)    [reply]

    User:Mellk

    I often deal with vandalism and socks so this would be useful for me. Mellk (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 12:44, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Traumnovelle

    I've dealt with an LTA (demographics vandal) and I use IP information to confirm that the IP is a proxy. Other instances that I've used IP information involve when multiple IPs make the same edit to a page repeatedly to determine if it is multiple editors or one editor.

    I agree to follow the WMF's guidelines and criteria/terms for usage of the tool. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done I'm not seeing much anti-vandalism work and the second reason is largely mooted by temporary accounts anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 23:14, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure how you've come to that conclusion given I've reverted vandalism today. Here are some examples of the LTA I've reverted [7] [8] Traumnovelle (talk) 00:08, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:VolatileAnomaly

    I'm active in anti-vandalism work and agree to abide by Foundation policy for usage of the tool. — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 23:24, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:PharyngealImplosive7

    I am a non-admin edit filter manager that would benefit from this right when tracking LTAs (specifically the ones tracked by 1161 and 1343). I technically already have access to this right because of my temporary grant of GAFH, but would like this right permanently on enwiki as I will benefit from this right even after my GAFH right expires. I will abide by the Foundation's policy when using the right. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 03:43, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:NDG

    RC patrolling and fighting X-Wiki-Vandalism. I am experienced temporary account IP viewer in my Homewiki NDG (talk) 11:53, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Salvio giuliano 12:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lyndaship

    I primarily work on ships articles and almost daily there are IP addresses changing the gender on random multiple ship articles. Seeing the IP address allows me to see which other ones they have vandalised. It's also been useful on my work on gambling site insertions in tandem with WP:JUDI Lyndaship (talk) 17:14, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:17, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:BillHPike

    I do a decent amount of anti-vandalism work. I've also contributed to SPIs related to IP accounts. I agree to abide by applicable policies. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 17:39, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done asilvering (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Thewolfchild

    This would be primarily for use in AIV, but also SPI if I come across any instances of it. I agree to abide by the foundations guidelines and our OUTing policies at all times. - \\'cԼF 18:32, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Salvio giuliano 18:43, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TylerBurden

    I have a fairly large watchlist where encountering vandalism comes with the territory, as well as where there are articles with very persistent sockpuppets and LTA's. I do my best to counter these when they pop up and I think this right will help in terms of continuing that when this change to accounts rolls out. I agree with the Foundation's guidelines in using the permission. TylerBurden (talk) 19:02, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Abo Yemen

    Hello! I do AfC and NPP reviews and unfortunately have quite a few of sock-masters and LTAs that I have to deal with on a weekly/monthly basis. I have read and agree to the conditions for granting this right. Best, 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 21:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done CoconutOctopus talk 21:30, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Nil NZ

    I'm an active RC patroller, with numerous reports to AIV, so am requesting as it would be useful in the anti-vandalism space. I agree to abide by WM's guidelines. Nil🥝 01:50, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

     Done — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:24, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=1303932167"