Human nomination requested (unsure why anyone would personally request autopatrolled for themselves; it gives no benefit to the person who receives it) so here goes: I've seen this user's articles at Special:NewPages and every article I've seen is well-referenced and on clearly notable subjects. All blocks seem in the distant past and none seem related to article creation. And just had a look through the recent newly created articles and they are all fine contributions that should not have to be patrolled. I would request that another admin (or Skier Dude again, if he is so inclined) to have a more in-depth review of this candidate. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've made 38 pages and have got over 4,000 edits. I am a reviewer and I am part of the new page patrol which I often help out. This tool will be very useful for me.WilbysuffolkTalk to me05:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It be useful because when I am moving the page to main space from my user space it will be alot less likly to get tagged etc when I am not finished moving it because it has little info. And the pages I make now all have references and are set out well. I make pages about New Zealand and English A roads at the moment. I NEVER make list of bus routes. WilbysuffolkTalk to me19:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of autopatrolled is to help lessen the load on new page patrollers by removing pages that wouldn't be tagged from the unpatrolled pages queue. It's not intended to help people avoid having their pages tagged. A better solution would be to work out the issues while the pages are still in your userspace. You can always ask for help before moving them into the article space. So, I'm sorry but Not done. Feezo(send a signal | watch the sky)00:52, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Has made 7 articles on Wikipedia now, been an editor since June 2010, and have over 3500 edits. Often helps out at New Pages Patrol and thinks this tool will be very useful. Rcsprinter(talk)18:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I created many articles, mostly albums, but also biographies of living persons. I am a new page patroller and none of the articles I created were deleted, except those which were deleted per my user request. ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T18:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I fully disagree with you. No, they are completely referenced; the external link to Allmusic is enough to make it as a source. I can not put a footnote for every claim. This will be simply stupid, as an external link can be simply put. Yes, feel free to continue to name more examples. Regards.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T09:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the decline- an external link is not a reference. External links are meant to supplement the article, in a way you might put books you didn't cite from but believe to be useful reading on the topic in a "Further reading" section. References, on the other hand, support an article's content. All of those articles Ironholds listed could quite rightly be tagged {{unreferenced}}. Courcelles09:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And I fully disagree with your position. As I said, the articles don't need any footnotes, because all information is from Allmusic. Stubs like these don't need footnotes. An external link can be a reference, if it is a stub; rather referencing each claim, it is more intelligent to put an external link. And no I won't search for any books or magazines to spend useless time if Allmusic contains adequate information. Regards.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T11:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
External links are not references, simple as; they serve completely different purposes. It is less intelligent to put a single link than inline citations given that it makes it far easier for somebody to stick in factually incorrect information, and it gives the layperson no way of verifying whether the information is accurate because, as said, external links are not references. Wikipedia:External links explicitly notes they are different things. Ironholds (talk) 23:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it would be useful to give me the permission since I know the policies well, and although I have created little articles in here (I will create much more, currently I am translating articles I created in es.wikipedia), I Have created many in the spanish Wiki (Where I have the autopatrolled flag[1]), some in the simple and many others in other proyects (but those do not count since they have different format (es.wikinews or es.wikiquote). Lcsrns(Talk)02:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have been on Wikipedia for some time now. I therefore kindly request the use of this feature. I trust that my track record in edits and articles created will prove that I am ready to accept this responsibility. User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 06:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not done long, but old, block log - would prefer a human nomination for this or the user requesting peronally. Skier Dude (talk) 16:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Question: Why will autopatrolled be useful for you? Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 06:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
