• CherryPie94 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

New page reviewer who has made over 90 articles including 1 good article and quite familiar with content guidelines, I may also as well not clutter the backlog for other reviewers. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 06:06, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

One thing that immediately jumped out at me is some biographical articles created (e.g. Kim Na and Son Se-bin) have unsourced biographical information, such as the date of birth. This information should be sourced to ensure compliance with WP:DOB. - Aoidh (talk) 03:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I've considered adding references directly next to DOB, which I did at my two most recent BLPs: Mike Kim and Lee Joon-ho. If birth information is not 100% verifiable, I play it safe (eg. Lee Seung-yoon). Per WP:DOB, links to websites maintained by the subject are generally permitted so I included Kim Na's personal website which states birth year as 1986 in the external links section. I created Son Se-bin over 5 years ago when I was much less experienced, so I don't quite recall which exact source I used for DOB (birth year seems to have been present in Star Today), so I've just amended that. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 04:22, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Ah I've misinterpreted that personal website policy, though it does fall under WP:ABOUTSELF, I've now also directly sourced it. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 04:39, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

• Kjansen86 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I am autopatrolled and an NPP reviewer; I would actually like to nominate User:Kjansen86 to be autopatrolled. I just reviewed and cheerfully accepted almost a dozen perfectly-formulated articles on Zoroastrian texts, and they have made more than 25 overall. Looking at their talk page, this appears to be an experienced and effective editor. Checking their AfD stats, I find one (successful) AfD that they initiated, indicating an awareness of notability. We may as well take them out of the NPP backlog. (This is my first time nominating someone else so if I did it wrong, please let me know!) ~ L 🌸 (talk) 21:17, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoreviewer" user right. — MusikBot ^talk 21:20, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@LEvalyn: I went ahead and adjusted the nomination so it reflects who's actually being discussed, hope you don't mind! For future reference, you can use the "add request" link at the top of this page and replace the {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} with whichever user you're nominating. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:42, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I really appreciate your fix for this nomination and your tip for next time! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 23:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@LEvalyn: Thank you very much for the positive evaluation of my work on Wikipedia. I really appreciate it. Kjansen86 (talk) 08:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

• -Verso- (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

78 live articles, (64 of which is start class, 5 Cs, 8 Stubs). Only one was deleted which is from 2018. All of the articles are well-sourced. I think this user is good enough for Autopatrolled Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 04:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

• Hteiktinhein (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello, I have created over 30 articles, none of which have been deleted. I am well-versed in Wikipedia's notability guidelines and currently assist new Burmese editors. I focus on creating articles related to Myanmar that need to be written, including those covering current events. Granting me autopatrolled rights would help reduce the backlog of articles awaiting review. Feel free to ping me if you have any questions. Thank you for your consideration. Hteiktinhein (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

• Fade258 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello Admin! I have been regularly creating articles and I'm also familiar with WP:AUTOPAT and Wikipedia policies. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

• MerlinVtwelve (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hallo! I've created 46 articles, and have been editing Wikipedia since 2010. How time flies! merlinVtwelve (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

• Phantomdj (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hi, I have created 118 pages and would like to have autopatrol rights, please. Thanks. Phantomdj (talk) 01:46, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

• Owais Al Qarni (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I have been actively contributing to Wikipedia for the past five years and have created over 150 articles. I strive to produce well-sourced, high-quality content on topics such as Bayan al-Quran, Mamunul Haque, and Deobandi fiqh, and I have also improved existing articles like the one on Zakariyya Kandhlawi. While I understand that the Autopatrolled user right is not necessary for editing, I have noticed that the page review process can be significantly delayed, with some of my pages taking 6–12 months to be reviewed. As a New Page Reviewer for the past two years, I actively participate in wiki forums, including AfD, and none of my articles have been deleted in the past three years, which I believe demonstrates my understanding of notability and other relevant guidelines. I believe I am eligible for the Autopatrolled right, which would help reduce the backlog of unreviewed pages. Additionally, I have held the Autopatrolled right on Bengali Wikipedia for the past five years. Thanks. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 04:02, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Huligan0 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

This user has created a huge number of articles, mostly to do with football in Switzerland. A cursory review shows that the articles often need copyediting and could use more inline citations, but the subjects are consistently notable and the articles are generally well-researched and -referenced, so I don't see much for NPP to do here. Toadspike [Talk] 15:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done When you say articles often need copyediting and could use more inline citations, that's the exact opposite of what autopatrolled is for, especially the latter issue. Schwede66 21:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Schwede66 I'm not going to push you to reconsider, but if you don't mind, I'm going to rant a bit. I realize it's been discussed elsewhere and there's no clear community consensus on what "clean" articles means, but I think this is a very clear case where the core functions of NPP are unnecessary and our AP standards reveal themselves to be a romantic fantasy of how patrolling should work. The articles are notable, there are no two ways about it, and they contain a huge number of sources. Take their most recent article, 1961–62_Swiss_Cup, which has 26 sources in various locations; this seems about average for this user. They are not a native English speaker and they put their refs in weird places – so what? An NPPer would, at most, slap on one or two useless tags that will take years to get fixed, if ever; more likely they will punch the review button as fast as they can, while sighing in relief that for once they aren't reviewing AI-generated UPE garbage, and move on without taking any action. These articles even have categories, (auto-generated) shortdescs, and aren't orphans. What more do you expect an NPPer to do here? Toadspike [Talk] 00:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

The prose of the first two sections of 1961–62 Swiss Cup is completely unreferenced. I would prefer a reviewer to tag that, Toadspike. Not so much so that some random editor fixes that over the next few years, but to communicate to the article creator that unsourced prose isn't ok, so that hopefully they will change their practices. Huligan0, would you mind adding inline referencing to your articles so that there aren't unreferenced sections? Schwede66 00:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand. The unfortunate reality is that tagging is not a mandatory part of the NPP process, which nowadays means it basically isn't part of the NPP process, especially when inline citations are generally not required. I clicked on three of these cup articles at random earlier, each of which was marked as patrolled by a different reviewer without any edits or tags. (I don't remember which articles they were but I'm sure you can replicate the experiment.) I think our best bet is to encourage editors like Huligan, as you have now done, to make specific improvements to their creation habits, but then to accept that NPP isn't serving any purpose here. Toadspike [Talk] 01:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Huligan0, could you please comment? Schwede66 03:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, sorry, but I have only just noticed this conversation a couple of hours ago. In the meantime I have read your conversation and all the notes concerning autopatrolled. I notice some critic in this discussion and would, therefore, like to clear a fact or two before I start: I was born and breed on the south coast of England, attended school there and studied Business Studies in college there and completed my appenticeship there, so I am indeed a native English speaker, and yes I have lived in Switzerland for about 50 years, so perhaps my English does not always reach the highest level any more. However, further in the critic you state that I put refs in weird places. I do not understand this remark, please explain. To my feelings; my aim is (and been since 15 years) to improve the coverage of Swiss football in the English Wiki. I have writen all the FC Basel seasons, have added some 500 or 600 FC Basel players in this time. I have added all the Swiss 1. Liga seasons and modified all the Nationalliga seasons as well. I am now completing the Swiss Cup seasons. I have always added as many sources as possible and think I have done pretty well. But, I do not want to become an admin. No nothing like that. I am too old for that, how much longer may I live? I am pround to think that someone nominated me to become an autopatrolled editor. However, I would not be disappointed if this was not accepted. All I want to do is continue my project and improve the coverage of Swiss football in the English Wiki. If you have a suggestion or two on how I could improve my edits, then please let me know, any suggestion would be welcomed. I send you friendly greetings from Basel --Huligan0 (talk) 22:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Left guide (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I'd like to remove the link List of NBA regular season records (and its redirect NBA records) which was added en masse by a user in 2023 to hatnotes and "see also" sections across articles in a manner that is unreasonably tangential and irrelevant. Doing it manually would be far too arduous for me. I believe the AutoWikiBrowser right would be a valuable asset in helping me do this. Thanks for considering this request. Left guide (talk) 07:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:29, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• VortexPhantom (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

• ExplorerofSpace (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello, I am already autoconfirmed, but I was wondering if an administrator could add me in the conformed user group so a template on my user page will display that I am apart of the autoconfirmed user group. Thank you for your consideration. ExplorerofSpace (talk) 22:57, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

 Already done (automated response): This user already has the "autoconfirmed" user right. — MusikBot ^talk 23:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Tashmetu (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I had my EC revoked last year by the arbitration committee. I have since completed the required 500 substantial edits to the best of my knowledge. I applied about a month ago and was refused because I didn't clearly understand the requirements. But hopefully this time I got it correctly. Tashmetu (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for extended confirmed declined in the past 90 days ([26]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([27]). — MusikBot ^talk 14:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

@Xaosflux hey, sorry for tagging you. I just noticed you are the only active admin on this thread and I was wondering if you can look into my request or let me know who I can contact to have it looked at. Tashmetu (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Tashmetu, the ArbCom remedy requires that Tashmetu shows that they have made 500 substantive edits; all I can see is a statement that you did. While I think it doesn't mean you have to provide a list of all the contributions (that would be hard to review and pointlessly redundant to the full list), I personally think you should explain at least in some detail how you improved the encyclopedia since the revocation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Fair point, I assumed there would be some process for this but I will do my best to explian. So I have worked mostly on the history side of Wikipedia, contributing to the "years in France" series and "years in Iraq " series, writing articles, adding details, events, and references. I have a huge library of history books so I thought that's the best use of my resources. I also try to create and enrich pages of notable Iraqi figures, though not as often because it's harder to find reliable sources for these. One of the issues I ran into while editing Iraqi history pages, because they are more recent, is the continuous topics keep coming up, like it's hard to talk about Iraq in the 90s without mentioning Kurdistan! This one of the reasons I would appreciate having my confirmation reinstated. Tashmetu (talk) 16:20, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• IdanST (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I had my ECP revoked 5 months ago. Since then, I've made hundreds of meaningful edits and currently have 806 edits. IdanST (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([28]). — MusikBot ^talk 18:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello IdanST, please describe the meaningful edits and what you'd like to use the permission for. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey, some of the edits I've made were focused on tidying up articles, such as List of snipers (you can check the history). These edits involved a major overhaul: adding sources, removing false or unsourced information, and fixing sentence structures. I've also made substantial edits to other articles, such as Embraer C-390 Millennium (you can check the history), Tilhas Tizi Gesheften, Oradour-sur-Glane massacre, Ayi Silva Kangani, alongside dozens of other articles where I've made meaningful, though not as extensive, contributions.

You should be aware that most of these edits are the result of my work translating articles to the HE Wikipedia, as you can see here. Since my ECP was revoked, I’ve translated over a hundred articles. While reading the English articles before translating them into Hebrew, I also fix any mistakes or make improvements wherever I see the need. IdanST (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. IdanST, I'll grant the permission. This is neither an endorsement of your contributions nor an invitation to edit extended-confirmed protected pages or topics. It also does not affect your topic ban from the Arab–Israeli conflict. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks ~ ToBeFree. With this ECP granted, I at least have some chance of getting my topic ban lifted. I will request that soon. IdanST (talk) 18:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

IdanST, if that is the reason behind the request, I'll revoke the permission again. Again, this doesn't affect your ban and is not an invitation to edit extended-confirmed topics. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry, that's not the only reason. I'd also like to edit extended confirmed articles in general (not related to the topic ban). I'd really like to contribute, and as you can see, I've made over 10,000 edits across Wikipedia projects just in the past six months. IdanST (talk) 08:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Okay, no worries then, IdanST. I understand that appealing the ban is tempting but I recommend waiting with this for at least half a year and not mentioning the extended confirmation as a reason for the topic ban appeal. This hesitation is because I didn't evaluate the quality of your edits and think extended confirmation should be granted even if someone makes 500 bad edits that are all reverted. Of course, people will notice that you are now extended-confirmed, and they can use that as a reason for themselves when supporting your unban, but this reason shouldn't come from your appeal text, I think. For example, the point shouldn't be "I was banned for not having permission and ignoring this; now that I have the permission, I can't ignore a lack of it anymore". The point should be "I was banned for not having permission and ignoring this. I will not ignore such restrictions anymore. If I am prohibited from doing something, I won't ignore that restriction in the future". You see the difference? 🙂 ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:36, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

 Already done (automated response) by ToBeFree. — MusikBot ^talk 19:40, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Truth Layer 123 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I was on Wikipedia for around 6 months, why is my account not yet marked as Extended confirmed? Truth Layer 123 (talk) 17:12, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Your account will be automatically marked as extended confirmed once your account is both at least 30 days old (you already meet this) and you have 500 edits. stwalkerster (talk) 17:18, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done you have not yet met the requirements. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:58, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• FarmerUpbeat (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I believe that I should have Mass Message Sender permissions as I am WP:X’s newsletter (Ichthus)’s chief editor, and I will be sending various newsletters to the people of WP:X, as I have already done. Having this permission will help me fulfill my duties. Thank you! Benedictions, FarmerUpbeat (talk) 11:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

@FarmerUpbeat have you requested any mass messages be sent out yet? It's generally expected you have a few successful requests at Wikipedia talk:Mass message senders#MassMessage Delivery Requests before requesting the permission yourself. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

@Elli I have :) Benedictions, FarmerUpbeat (talk) 12:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• GreenRedFlag (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I am retired and enjoy using my free time to contribute to Wikipedia and make it more enriching. GreenRedFlag (talk) 17:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and your interest in this permission. Unfortunately, I'm not seeing enough of a track record of edits that demonstrate a sufficient knowledge of the relevant guidelines, particularly WP:N. At Waleed A. Alrodhan you have expended a significant amount of effort to rewrite an article that is nevertheless now facing a thus-far-unanimous call for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waleed A. Alrodhan. Please consider reapplying after getting more experience with page creation and deletion.  Not done for now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I admit this was confusing for me. I looked deeper into information about this individual and found details that didn’t align with his profession. At times, he appeared to be the dean of a faculty, then an associate professor, and later even the author of a fiction book. Eventually, I decided to stop updating the page, and I regret spending so much time on it, as my goal was to remove it from AfD. As a result, it was not a good selection. Nonetheless, I appreciate your suggestion—I’m learning every day. GreenRedFlag (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Twistedmath (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I'm still unsure if this is the right time for me to apply but, I trust my gut enough in this situation. I'm a current student in the CVUA, currently going through a trainer switch. I've taken the past several weeks to familiarize myself with CSD and AfD. Although I haven't written any articles, I do like to take the pride on looking at ongoing AfD's, which has helped in my study in different polices.

I also do a good amount in copyvio work, using CopyPatrol. I work well with other editors and I hope to reduce the NPR workload.

I love to welcome new users, when I come across them, as I member of the welcome committee. I'm civl and I always apologize and fix my mistakes with haste.

I've never been blocked, nor any restrictions, although I've made a few mistakes (i.e accidental reverts, which only really happened in the beginning of my RCP experience), which I fixed, apologized, and most importantly, moved on.

I only took the pride to apply (even though I wanted to before) because of the May 2025 backlog drive. I'm eager to help in the backlogs and, I also think this will be a great chance for me to connect with other editors.

If you don't feel as if I'm ready, I understand and I'm OK if I'm placed on a trial aswell. Thank you! twisted. (user | talk | contribs) 22:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

A trial run seems appropriate,  Done for a month after which you may reapply _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Cactusisme (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I am currently an AFC reviewer and is familiar with the deletion processes such as AfD, PROD, and CSD. I would like to help clear the backlog. I believe I meet the criteria for this right. Thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions and your interest in this permission. Having reviewed the discussion of your past block and unblock, I am not quite ready to confer new page reviewer permissions. Among other issues, the crux of your former block was harassment of other editors in retaliation for an editing dispute. New page review is a workflow that is going to inevitably put you into conflict with other editors, some of whom will be inexperienced and will respond with hostility that you will then be expected to respond to calmly and/or ignore. I'd like to see a longer track record of editing and discussion participation to demonstrate that any issues dealing with disputes are firmly in the past.  Not done for now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• GarethBaloney (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I was once a Wikipedia editing noob. Now I want to help others to get their articles approved, as well as how to fix them. I will be happy to review new pages!. GarethBaloney 22:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 151 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot ^talk 22:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest, but you don't appear to meet the WP:NPPCRITERIA.  Not done for now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Iljhgtn (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

There are some categories that might warrant moving that I cannot currently without this permission. For tangentially related details, I have a 98.9% AfD match rate, have made 63,500+ edits, and have been editing for a couple years now and am familiar with the page move policy and guidelines. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn even though the permission gives you the technical ability to move categories, category moves should still go through WP:CFD/WP:CFDS. Do you have uses for the permission other than moving categories? Elli (talk | contribs) 02:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Sure, for helping draftify of new articles etc. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

The scripts: User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft and User:Mr. Stradivarius/gadgets/Draftify both look like they would be particularly useful. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• The Seal F1 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello. I would like to request this permission. I'm reviewing the Special:Recentchanges, & I often see articles protected by the pending changes protection. I've read the both necessary articles about this feature and am familiar with the most important policies, including WP:BLP, obviously. Besides, I got the rollback a couple of weeks ago, so I can use it if necessary. The Seal F1 (talk) 09:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Destinyokhiria (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello, I would like to help reduce the pending changes backlog. Destinyokhiria (talk) 21:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Chippla360 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Holla, It’s been over a month since I last requested for Pending changes right, I’m sure I meet the requirements now, I actively patrol the recent changes feed and I want to help. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 21:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([29]). — MusikBot ^talk 21:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• SKAG123 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I have been editing Wikipedia for over 2 years and have made over 5,700 edits. I’ve also been reverting vandalism using twinkle for a while so I am familiar with the guidelines. SKAG123 (talk) 23:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Lionel Cristiano (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello, my first request was not done a year ago, I am reapplying today. I have read the review guide. Sometimes I look at the pending changes but I cannot accept good edits. Leo^talk 16:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Yovt (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

• Mohammad Umar Ali (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hi, I have been on Wikipedia for over a year and have made over 1k edits. I mostly edit and monitor history articles. Several articles are sometimes disrupted knowingly or unknowingly by editors for which I have to revert. Having Rollback right would make the patrolling work easier and help to combat vandalism. I am aware of most of Wikipedia polices (WP:OR,WP:NPOV,WP:RS,etc.) I have also authored few articles like Bajirao I see [30]. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 07:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

 Not done I don't see any counter vandalism work or reports to AIV. With a couple months sustained activity reporting and reverting vandalism, your chances would be much better. Katie^talk 22:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• AllCatsAreGrey (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello, I am requesting rollback permissions as I would like to utilize tools such as Huggle, which require this permission. I have been actively patrolling recent changes using a custom filter and have consistently notified users whose edits I have reverted. Thanks, – AllCatsAreGrey ^(talk) 20:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Fneskljvnl (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hi, I have been on wikipedia for a few years & I've made over 1600 edits on the english wikipedia, and I've made over 7700 edits on wikimedia commons. I have reverted many vandalizing edits on a varierty of articles, and I've left many notices of these reverts on their talk pages. I've also made a few pages, mostly redirects, but I've also created other articles, including List of Agriotes species, Choristostreptus, and 1854 in Mexico. Having rollback privileges would make it much more efficient for me when undoing vandalism. No matter the decision, thanks so much! -‪Fneskljvnl🪱 (Contributions, Talk) (stay silly forever) 02:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Như Gây Mê (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hi, I'm a long-time user on Wikipedia (have experience with rollback rights on my home Wiki), recently I'm actively using support tools to prevent cross-wiki vandalism (including enwiki). I'd like to be granted rollback rights on enwiki to make it more convenient to rollback here. Thanks! Halley ^{luv Filipino ❤} 10:56, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• Nahida (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Reapplying. When I applied around 2 weeks ago I didn't have that many mainspace edits and was declined based on that (but given PCR) - [[31]]. I haven't used PCR that much, but I've made contributions elsewhere with CSD, AfC and files. I still believe Rollback will improve my ability to fight vandalism on Wikipedia. I'm fine with waiting longer though if I need a bit more experience elsewhere. Nahida 🌷 15:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([32]). — MusikBot ^talk 15:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

See above. Nahida 🌷 15:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Faster than Thunder (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I've been fighting vandalism a lot, and would like to make the process more efficient in the case of obvious vandalism so that I will not need an edit summary to revert many disruptive edits by a single user. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 15:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I have used a similar feature with Twinkle, but am prompted to add an edit summary. "Vandalism" doesn't require a summary, but only affects the most recent revision. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 15:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Effectively canvassing for your RfRollback in an ill-fated RfA nom that you then transcluded against policy does not speak well to your suitability. While that doesn't directly go to rollback-related policies, the main thing we worry about with rollback is people rushing into things without understanding what's going on, and this sure seems like that. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 07:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

I was going to say much the same thing. FTT seems to be rushing things already; we don't need to enable them to go even faster. I'm also unimpressed with the lack of acknowledging recent errors, and worry that there will be a similar lack of concern if they roll something back with no edit summary incorrectly. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done per concerns expressed above. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Destinyokhiria (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello admins, I’m requesting rollback rights so that I may contribute more efficiently to counter-vandalism work using Twinkle. Destinyokhiria (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Fade258 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hi. I would like to request for rollback rights to fight and detect the vandalism and revert unconstructive edits more easily. I am familier with the relevant policies related to vandalism and also with WP:Rollback. Thank You ! Fade258 (talk) 08:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Rahmatula786 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Hello 🙏 My temporary rollback rights is expiring soon. I’ve used rollback right responsibly to revert vandalism. Would kindly like to request permanent rollback permission to continue this work. Thank you. Rahmatula786 (talk) 07:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary rollback rights by ToBeFree (expires 17:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot ^talk 08:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• ExplorerofSpace (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I am request this right because lately, there has been a lot of vandalism during the evening to night hours. I could not revert all of it because I had to click the article, go to view history, and undo. With this, I could much more easily revert vandalism. Please note that my account is pretty new, but I had an account before with around 1 year experience; that account was when I lived in Chicago, the reason I cannot access the account is because I forgot the username and password (it was a created a while ago). Thank you for your consideration of this request. ExplorerofSpace (talk) 21:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Do you administrators see this? ExplorerofSpace (talk) 02:22, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Permission requests appear to be currently backlogged. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 13:18, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Skratata69 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

Reason for requesting rollback rights. Have undone multiple vandalism attempts on K. Chandrashekar Rao and Revanth Reddy. Having the rollback permission will be helpful to quickly revert multiple edits. Skratata69 (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• JesusisGreat7 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{( · · · · · · · · · )}

I would like to request rollback rights for my account in order to prevent pages from vandalism etc, Thanks! 👑 Jesus isGreat7 👑 | 📜 Royal Talk 17:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([33][34]). — MusikBot ^talk 17:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)