Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dipankan001 (talk | contribs) at 04:53, 4 August 2012 (→User:Thine Antique Pen (public): Sign). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Autopatrolled

(add request • view requests)
Shortcuts

User:Vishal14k

Mostly, I create articles as I only add information to those topics of which I have good knowledge. Exhaustive list of my contributions can be seen here. I have taken one article to GA status and I am fully aware of Wikipedia guidelines. I am also a contributor to Hindi Wikipedia, Commons and Wikiquote. I want this permission to be granted to me so that new page patrollers have lesser articles to patrol. I assure everyone that I will not misuse my status. Thanks and regards, Vishal14K | Talk 18:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Non-administrator comment) Articles such as Midtown Grand, one of your recent creations shows lack of reliable sources, as the only two sources are the hotel's website and TripAdvisor; both not neutral, but TripAdvisor is also unreliable. I would also suggest structuring articles better, for example on Midtown Grand, all of the current content there could have been included in a single section. In Old Courts Commercial Complex, Hisar, the article name is not boldened in the lead, which it should be. Other than that, this user has created 51 pages, with all of the most recent having references, however some include unreliable sources. ⇒TAP 18:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello Thine Antique Pen! I know I have used primary sources in some of the articles but in those cases I have used very basic information so that it remains neutral and I think in that way it can be used. And in case of citing TripAdvisor, I think it should not be even called as a reference as I have not said that Midtown Grand is the best hotel in Hisar but I said that it was adjudged as the best by TripAdvisor. I think in that case citing TripAdvisor itself would be the best option. Please let me know what you think. Thanks and regards, Vishal14K | Talk 03:08, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess I need some more experience while writing new articles. Now, I leave this decision completely in the hands of more experienced editors. Whatever decision they take, I will heartily accept. Thanks and regards, Vishal14K | Talk 18:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done There are a number of somewhat concerning articles in Vishal14k's creation log. I have concerns over the sourcing of several (e.g. Action Group (conglomerate), Agroha Dham, Bekarar, ELitmus, to name just a few), where the sources provided do not meet the criteria required at WP:GNG. I fear that, at present, his articles still need to be manually patrolled. That said, Vishal, please do continue creating and improving articles; you may not be ready for autopatrolled just yet, but you are still creating plenty of worthwhile content. Just watch the sourcing! Yunshui 雲‍水 13:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ajsinclair

I nominate User:Ajsinclair for autopatrolled status. He has created more than 50 new articles, and he does very good quality work. I have been reviewing his new articles, and I want his articles to no longer appear in the new articles list. --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Question: I don;t want to nitpick, but Sheriff-substitute is unsourced. Can you please clarify? Thanks, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 23:43, 16 July 2012 (UTC).[reply]
 Comment: Source has been added. Although, more would be good.--Chip123456 TalkContribs 18:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment:User:Ajsinclair has made changes to improve the article and sourcing.--DThomsen8 (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done The third article I checked, Magdalen King-Hall, appears to be a copyright violation from this website. The article was created on July 3. We will need to continue to review article creations by this user. I will be doing some spot checks to look for further similar problems. -- Dianna (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dipankan001

The user is trusted. The user has one FL and one DYK under his belt. I don't think that there are any serious issues about his articles, and he can be granted the rights. Rest is on the community. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 12:19, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
information Administrator note I declined Dipankan's request last time because of concerns over unreferenced material/copyright issues. That was about a month ago. Keilana|Parlez ici 15:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issues had been solved and you said to reapply in 1 month. BTW though I did not nominate myself, I feel I'm good to go. Dipankan (Have a chat?) 11:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm glad you did reapply, I just wanted the patrolling admin to know why I did what I did last time so they can check. :) Keilana|Parlez ici 17:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tachfin

Created 81 sourced and correctly formatted articles and at least an equal number of categories/template. Tachfin (talk) 21:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Already done confirmed by KingpinBot (talk · contribs) (this user currently has the autoreviewer flag. Admins: remember to use a {{done}} template or alternative so the bot knows what the intended result is) - KingpinBot (talk) 12:00, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ramesh Ramaiah

I have created resourceful 50 articles. Ramesh Ramaiah talk 02:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In your article Zoe D'Amato, the entirety of the section "Life and career" (two rather large paragraphs) is copied word-for-word from this website, without any indication that the original author of the text has freely licensed it. This appears to indicate that you do not understand the requirements for writing articles on Wikipedia.
Similar problems with Murugappa Polytechnic College, copied from this website.
See WP:COPYPASTE. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done, per copyvio concerns above. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
i'll never make that same mistakes again, Thanks for your information. Ramesh Ramaiah talk 14:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:BarkingFish

Have been on Wikipedia now for over 7 years, recently starting to move into article creation and translation and currently working NPP. Never actually realised my edits were not autopatrolled, and I would like to ask for this to be done, since I feel I can be trusted to edit correctly and in accordance with policy.  BarkingFish  02:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) User has only created 21 articles [1] (According to the Pages created tool) Cheers, Riley Huntley talk No talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here. 03:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I never realised that you needed to apply to have your edits autopatrolled - I thought that this was something like rollback, where you were granted it after a while. I know my article creation count is low, and that's because I spend 90% of my time working NPP or RC patrol, and grabbing things that really shouldn't be on here - I'm starting to burn out though, and wish to expand my article creation work. I don't do enough of it, and I feel I should be doing a whole lot more - but to still have my edits patrolled after 7 years? Damn.  BarkingFish  03:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are misunderstanding the concept of autopatrolled. Your edits do not need to be autopatrolled, it is just to help reduce the work load of New Page Patrollers. Yes, users are granted it after awhile but that is if the user has the need for it often. In your case, you have only created 3 content articles this year and in my mind it doesn't show that you really need it. "wish to expand my article creation work." - The right does not help you with your article creation in any ways. "but to still have my edits patrolled after 7 years?"- Having 21 articles patrolled over 7 years of time is not a large amount of work. I suggest you create more articles and request the right again. Please also include references and inline citations. Feel free to read the autopatrolled page if you haven't already. Cheers, Riley Huntley talk No talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here. 03:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC) :)[reply]
I am misunderstanding nothing, Riley. Since I'm laying off on the cleanup side of WP, I am going to be submitting new articles at a rate of knots for quite a while now - I need a change. The autopatrolled right will reduce the workload on the NPP'ers, which they will be noticing as I shift up a gear. The right indicated that the user "can be trusted not to submit inappropriate pages", and although it does also state "submits them often enough that it is better to mark them pre-emptively", it is better that I apply now rather than annoying the NPP with my buildup as I work through a large list of translations and stuff I am going to be bringing in.  BarkingFish  03:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I accept your argument about your volume of articles created, and look forward to seeing you move into more creation work. However, of those articles you have created so far, there are a few which raise concerns, and which I would not be happy allowing through NPP unpatrolled. For example, Zoological medicine, and Helme Heine have external links but no inline references at all, whilst Peter Maffay has only two (not particularly good) sources cited, neither of which you added. Baby-Notarztwagen has no external links or references at all, nor does Carmen Kurtz. I appreciate that you're translating these from the German, and that some were created way back when the notability criteria may have been different, but I'm still not comfortable with your created articles being autopatrolled at this time. Create/translate another 30 or so, with appropriate references, and I'd be happy to re-review. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking anyway, Yunshui - allow me please to clear up a couple of those. Zoological medicine was created only as a stub while I was making a new stub category, well over 6 years ago - the fact that it remains without refs after over 6 years is not necessarily down to me. Baby-Notarztwagen was only created yesterday, and the German article has no references or citations whatsoever, leaving me to find appropriate material to support the article, and Carmen Kurtz was stubbed by me to clean up a redlink on here, and I requested translation to finish that work - I bought in the base of the article from the Spanish Wikipedia, where there were (at the time) also, no references. I don't mind bringing in translations, but it's annoying when the criteria are so different, that one wikipedia can have no refs whatsoever, and another needs to be verified to the hilt. Thank you anyway.  BarkingFish  14:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thine Antique Pen (public)

Thine Antique Pen has created 61 articles under this username. I dream of horses (T) @ 22:45, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to change your decision. His main account has the autopatrolled right. It's difficult for NPPer's to review 500 articles/day. Also, "historic reasons" is not a good term to use here. If you refer to hat collecting, he has stopped it long before, now he's a changed, good editor. Please review your actions -- Dipankan (Have a chat?) 04:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Autopatrolled&oldid=505690254"