Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer

New page reviewer

(add request • view requests)

Zindor

Zindor (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

• Looking for permanent granting of NPR user-right. Pinging Rosguill as temp granter. Thanks Zindor (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)) and has 172 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot ^talk 20:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I have to offer a bit of a mea culpa here--I miscalculated the amount of time elapsed since Zindor had been blocked on their prior account, and should not have conferred the original trial period. Following the guidelines strictly, I should have waited until early November. That having been said, having reviewed their AfD record and their reviews over the past two weeks, I think they've done good work and would normally grant permissions at this point. I'm thus going to let another admin make the final decision here. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Rosguill: Here is my problem. Government College, Kodanchery reads like an advertisement, and is debatable G11. The user only seems to know three modes of review (notability, references, and stubs) while not tagging other issues. Plus several things in the curation log are stuffers (redirects, disambigs, etc). Given there are not even 50 entries in there, I hesitant. Add the block history and number of administrative hands involved with the user, and I'm extremely hesitant. My recommendation is don't grant anything over another 1 month trial or a tad more if the user needs it, request a certain amount of legitimate reviews, require going beyond the three tags I listed, and encourage usage on BLPs or more policy heavy articles to show they can be granted permanently. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Inclined to agree with Amanda on this one. I would suggest another month or two on the project to get some experience, and reapply in Nov when the normal time would be appropriate. Primefac (talk) 00:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

AmandaNP, Primefac I think that Government College, Kodanchery is a bit of an unfair one to ding them on given that their first action there was to draftify the article (IMO the correct call, although I'm not sure why they prefaced their comment with "A1"), only for that to be reversed by another editor who admonished them. That having been said, the rest of your concerns are valid, so I'm going to agree to mark this  Not done for now, but am willing to grant another trial run in November on request. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@Primefac: As you noted yourself when you moved me back into active AfC reviewers, the block had nothing to do with the userrights. Indef doesn't typically mean a stripping of userrights and I fail to understand why I'm getting treated like a leper here. There was no prejudice against my access to these tools in either the community or un-block discussions. Yes I have to use NPR tools in a wider array of topics, Rosguill pointed that out to me, but I can't do that without access to the tools. If you'd like me to apply other tags, then I'll do so. I've been around for 15 years, I can distinguish between actual promo and the combination of Indian English and mild fancruft present in the government college article: if that's G11 i'll eat my socks. There's a disparity between NSCHOOLS and AfD consensus regarding degree-awarding institutes, certainly for India-related articles. I was towing a hard central line, but being familiar with AfD outcomes I fully understood why SD0001 moved it back into mainspace, and it would have been a waste of time for us to hash it out.

I've demonstrated enough competency to at the very least be granted another trial. Discretion could easily be used here to grant a trial from today onwards.

If i'm not back in good-standing i guess I shouldn't even be helping out at the Teahouse? Nick Moyes, thoughts?

@Zindor: Thank you for the ping. When you signed up as a Teahouse host, I did take a look at your mainspace edit count. It thought your mainspace edit count was a little on the low side for some new hosts, but I didn't want to put you off by turning you down. To be quite frank, absolutely nothing I've seen you do or say at the Teahouse, thus far, has caused me any concern whatsoever. You have just the perfect welcoming, helpful style we need, and your answers have all been pretty sound. We have another host who is a reformed vandal (now making excellent contributions) plus another very long standing host who has just got themselves indeffed for incivility and personal attacks. So you're doing just fine - don't be downhearted. And do please stay! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I made mistakes, apologised, was welcomed back. I was granted Perm NPR in the past; now I can't even get a trial? All this hoop-jumping feels punitive. Have I become less competent since the decision to permanently grant me the NPR tool was made?

Thanks all for looking it into this, but between you could you muster the strength to extend my trial please. Regards as ever, Zindor (talk) 14:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Ah well, Rosguill I don't think I "admonished" them – or at least that wasn't my intention. It's definitely not a G11 either, perhaps AmandaNP is not accustomed to the weird situation we have surrounding Indian colleges – being degree-awarding institutions, they're almost always considered notable, but there usually aren't any good sources to write with. What I do is to just leave them, even removing the fluff isn't usually worth the effort as that does little to "improve" the article. – SD0001 (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

SD0001 I just meant that you advised them against it, wasn't trying to imply that you were too harsh _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

I may not be accustom to notability claims at AFD in the current climate, I admit that. But that is not my argument, my argument was that it had promotional material in it and read like an advertisement. I mentioned it is borderline G11, and hence why I haven't deleted it. I'm thinking some tags about the promo and the fact that the sources are all primary sources weren't applied. Page review is not a simple process and there is a very detailed guide on it. But Zindor mentions they don't want to hash this out which I agree. I have multiple other points made.

Usually people who are caught socking have to wait six months for the standard offer, but your violating an active block through most of July goes contrary to the sockpuppetry policy. So no, apologies alone don't get you your previous standing back. You have to earn that trust back. Also, I see there are 7 years since it's creation, not 15. Besides, tenure doesn't mean you automatically get userrights.

Also, good standing for say checkuser rights and good standing to edits are two different things. I use that to illustrate the point that good standing is also different for NPR. Someone can be an editor but be creating a lot that gets deleted at AFD eventually. Doesn't mean they are going to be blocked or in a bad standing as an editor, but there certainly aren't good for NPR. So no, that doesn't mean you need to stop helping at the teahouse.

As for if you get a trial or not, I did not opine on that and left my original recommendation of what should be done at most. I think that still stands with this commentary. My final comment is punitive would be not letting you edit. Preventative and caution is ensuring you won't abuse privileges given moving forward. If you really have issue our three opinions after further comments, you can try AN. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

@AmandaNP: "Debatable G11" and "borderline" are two different things, let's not gaslight here. It doesn't read like an advert. While I'm not in the business of making generalizations, new Indian editors are typically extremely enthusiastic about content addition. Even if there were flowery words about the subject, that does happen in Indian English, which for some speakers comes out unintentionally poetic. I would copyedit prose like that for neutrality, but I wouldn't be slapping down promo tags for it. That would be mis-characterizing the situation.

Promo sticks out like a sore thumb, and i'd happily tag it, rephrase it or nuke it; whichever fits the situation.

I have 15 years of tenure, yes there are seven on that account, and no i've not socked before the event you note. I've never abused the NPR privilege, nor have I given indication that I would.

I'm well aware that you didn't opine on the matter of an NPR trial, and I wonder why you even bothered blessing us with your opinion.

The strawman you created about an editor who makes sub-standard content is left wanting, and I question its relevance to this discussion.

I see two opinions about perm NPR, and a recusal. No indication was made that i'd be unsuitable to continue my trial. We all edit at our own pace and do what we can. I'm not saying that apologies alone gets standing back, but it's clear I'm a net positive editor, so how does an arbitrary time period play into this?

Not granting a user-right to a capable editor is preventing them from editing, and is punitive.

The idea of bringing this to the cabal inner fortress sounds interesting. Naturally I'll let you know if I decide to bite that carrot. All the best, Zindor (talk) 20:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

If you are going to throw around comments like you wonder why I even commented in the first place, then I'll just step back and not reply, because clearly there is no value for me or you contributing to this discussion. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Hughesdarren

• Hughesdarren (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

My access to NPR rights has just expired, looking to have them returned. Thanks. Hughesdarren (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Hughesdarren (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done it's been a year and access was revoked - can't see a reason to keep this temporary. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thankyou. Hughesdarren (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Synoman Barris

• Synoman Barris (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I believe I have establish a track record since I’ve been able to review over 100 pages since granted trial period. I will be going on a short Wikibreak next month and would want to avoid my first edit after the Wikibreak to be here. I have followed the guidelines of the NPP flowchart while reviewing, I am also farmiliar with renaming articles (due to extensive participation in RM) and I am also an AFC reviewer. I also have a clean record with the deletion processes I.e AFD and CSD from my logs. I am thereby requesting for indefinite extension of this user right to my account. Best regards Megan☺️ ^{Talk to the monster} 22:13, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Salvio giuliano (expires 00:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([1]). — MusikBot ^talk 22:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

User:TheBirdsShedTears

• TheBirdsShedTears (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I want to try this right to help reduce the NPR backlog. I have a good understanding of notability and have draftified many newly created non notable pages. I think i have a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, and can identify paid and poor quality sources. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done TheSandDoctor ^Talk 07:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

User:CptViraj

• CptViraj (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I want to help patrolling uncontroversial redirects and pages in File, Wikipedia, User, Draft, Talk namespaces. @Previous request. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 05:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done TheSandDoctor ^Talk 07:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Jiv arshu

• Jiv arshu (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · curation log · patrol log · AFD stats · AFC stats · CSD log · PROD log · Draftify log · Mainspace edits · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I would request you to grand me the NPR right, I am sure that i will not do any mis-use of any rights which are given to me from your side. Thanks! Blue Birds(talk) 14:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)