Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Extended confirmed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extended confirmed


I meet the criteria but am not in the extended confirmed group. Amisom (talk) 23:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This unblock discussion is relevant. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{{Not done}} FightStranger (talk) 13:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC) struck by stwalkerster (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
on what basis? Amisom (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FightStranger: Please leave this to admins to respond to these requests. stwalkerster (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amisom has made approximately 150 edits since their unblock in August 2021. Based on @ToBeFree:'s comment stating I have revoked extended-confirmation and rollback for now; you'll need to slowly re-build your reputation from lower than zero, I take this to mean that solely for the purposes of re-granting extended-confirmed, Amisom's edit count and account age requirement would be counted from the date of their unblock. Based on their recent editing history (namely to Talk:ICJ case on Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories), it appears that their underlying reason for wanting to regain extended-confirmed is to wade into WP:ARBPIA topics. That alone makes me nervous based on the unblock discussions that were had at the time, not to mention that edits like this one are edging closer to the WP:NPA line than I like. I'm also quite disappointed that the relevant information wasn't disclosed up-front. I'm not going to actually make the call at the moment in case either of the other admins or the remover of EC (ToBeFree) want to opine, but I'm leaning fairly heavily no on this request. stwalkerster (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the ping – wow, this permission request page is interesting at the moment. 🙂 One of the requesting editors above has been blocked, another's comments including the struck-through one turned out to be a sockpuppet's, and this request here lacks information others have fortunately provided.
I could wait for a fifth administrator's opinion, but Liz, Elli and stwalkerster all just explained their concerns instead of granting the permission, so I don't need to do the same; I can close this without feeling like being the single administrator making Amisom's Wikipedia life harder. Hello Amisom, it's been a while. I don't blame you for not mentioning what happened, both in the discussion at Talk:ICJ case on Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories and here; I'd even be (more) open to the request if it actually came >500 edits after the unblock. I didn't really think about "500 edits from now" when unblocking and was looking for a general rebuilding of trust, but stwalkerster has a point: Newcomers need to make 500 edits before gaining the permission, so 500 edits from your restart are a reasonable minimum to expect before a request. Please don't simply request the permission directly after having made 500 more edits, though. That's not the point. It doesn't work in this direction. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ToBeFree I see they are editing in the area and now have the standard ct alert. That does mean they need to stop, right? Doug Weller talk 17:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do I need to stop? Let’s be precise here Amisom (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. Doug Weller, I have only seen edit requests so far, although Special:Diff/1235840600 is indeed problematic. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ToBeFree As you can see above, the editor may be uncLear about what they need to avoid doing. Doug Weller talk 19:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw they are blocked. Doug Weller talk 19:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]