Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"WP:PERM" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.

Administrator instructions

Requests for permissions
This page enables administrators to handle requests for permissions on the English Wikipedia. Administrators are able to modify account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, extended confirmed, mass message sender, page mover, pending changes reviewer, rollback, template editor rights and AutoWikiBrowser access.
Editors wishing to request a permission flag here should do so following the procedure below. Editors requesting permissions are advised to periodically revisit the requests page, as notifications will not always be given after a decision is made. To find out what permissions your account has, go to Special:Preferences, where your permissions are listed in the user profile tab under "Member of groups".
Requests for permissions are archived regularly, please see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Archive for an index of past requests.
Bot report: No errors! Report generated at 15:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


Permissions

Handled here

User groups

  • Account creator (add request · view requests): The account creator flag is granted to users who are active in the request an account process. The flag removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24 hour period. It also allows users to make accounts with names similar to other accounts. The account creator flag is only given to users who participate in the ACC process and may be removed without notice should a user's participation in the account creation process cease.
  • Autopatrolled (add request · view requests): The autopatrolled flag is granted to users who are active in the creation of new articles. This tool is granted so their creations are auto patrolled in Special:NewPages. Unlike other requests, any user may nominate an editor for Autopatrolled, even without that user's consent. A user who wishes to have this flag generally should have created at least 25 articles and must be trusted, experienced, and must have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia:Notability.
  • AutoWikiBrowser (add request · view requests): AutoWikiBrowser is a semi-automated MediaWiki editor for Microsoft Windows, designed to make tedious repetitive tasks quicker and easier. It is essentially a browser that automatically opens up a new page when the last is saved. When set to do so, it suggests some changes (typically formatting) that are generally meant to be incidental to the main change. Please read the quick guide on the main page before requesting permission. This is not a true user right, but access needs to be granted by administrators just like other permissions. If approved, your name will be added to the CheckPage. Users with under 250 non-automated mainspace edits or 500 total mainspace edits are rarely approved. You only need to give a reason for wanting AWB access if you do not meet these qualifications.
  • Confirmed (add request · view requests): The confirmed flag may be granted to new users who have not yet hit the threshold for autoconfirmed status. These are users who have not had both 10 edits and 4 days experience. People with this flag can upload files and edit semi-protected pages before hitting the autoconfirmed flag. Users requesting this flag must indicate clearly why they should be exempted from the customary confirmation period.
  • Extended confirmed (add request · view requests): The extended confirmed flag is normally automatically added to accounts, but may be added to legitimate alternate accounts of users that already have this access. An extremely small selection of highly contentious pages require this access to edit.
  • File mover (add request · view requests): The file mover user right is intended to allow users experienced in working with files to rename them, subject to policy, with the ease that autoconfirmed users already enjoy when renaming Wikipedia articles.
  • Mass message sender (add request · view requests): Mass message sender enables users to send messages to multiple users at once. This flag is given to users who have had made requests for delivery in the past, clearly showing an understanding of the guidance for use.
  • Page mover (add request · view requests): The page mover user right allows users experienced in working with article names to move them, subject to policy, without leaving behind a redirect. They may also move all subpages when moving the parent page(s). General guidelines include making 3,000 edits and 6 months of editing history.
  • Pending changes reviewer (add request · view requests): The reviewer flag is granted to users who are experienced enough with Wikipedia editing and its policies for contributing to the process of reviewing articles placed under pending changes.
  • Rollback (add request · view requests): Rollback enables users to remove vandalism much more quickly and efficiently than by undoing it. Users who do not demonstrate an understanding of what constitutes capable vandalism fighting, either because they have no or little history of doing so, or show a poor ability to discern between good and bad faith edits will not be granted this right. Also, it is unlikely that editors with under 200 mainspace edits will have their request granted. For a more detailed explanation of rollback and information about when it is appropriate to use the tool, see Wikipedia:Rollback. For information about the technical details of the feature, see here.
  • Template editor (add request · view requests): The template editor flag allows users to edit protected templates and Lua modules. General guidelines for granting include making at least 1,000 edits overall (with at least 150 to templates or modules), being a registered user for over a year, and having a record of successfully proposing significant edits to several protected templates. Users should demonstrate proficiency with template syntax and an understanding of the need for caution when editing heavily-used templates.

Handled elsewhere

Several permissions are requested and handled elsewhere:

Removal of permissions

If you wish to have any of your permission flags (except administrator) removed, you should contact an administrator. If you want your administrator flag removed, you should contact a bureaucrat.

This is not the place to request review of another user's rights. If you believe someone's actions merit removal of a permission flag, you should raise your concern at the incidents noticeboard.

Note: The bureaucrat, checkuser and oversight flags cannot be removed using this process page; those need to be posted at Steward requests/permissions. Stewards will typically not carry out such requests unless they come from members of the Arbitration Committee or a user who is requesting their own access be removed.

Process

Requestors

To make a request for a permission, click "add request" next to the appropriate header and fill in the reason for wanting permission.

Any editor may comment on requests for permission.

Administrators

Administrators are permitted to grant account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, file mover, mass message sender, pending changes reviewer, rollback and template editor flags to any user who meets the criteria explained above and can be trusted not to abuse the tool(s). For convenience, a bot will automatically comment with relevant data if the user does not meet configurable qualifications. Even if the bot does not comment, administrators should review the user's contributions and logs to ensure the tools will be used appropriately and check for any indication of potential misuse.

Once an administrator has granted a permission or decided to deny a request, they should add {{done}} or {{not done}} respectively under the request with their comments. If a user already has the requested permission, or is autoconfirmed and requesting confirmed, {{already done}} should be used. 36 hours after the last comment was made, the request will be archived automatically: approved requests will be placed here; declined requests will go here. See User:MusikBot/PermClerk/Archive for more information on archiving functionality.

Current requests

Account creator

(add requestview requests)

Autopatrolled

(add requestview requests)

User:Ascii002

I'm requesting autopatrolled right. I have created more than 80 articles not including any redirects or disambiguation pages. -- Ascii002 (talk · contribs · guestbook) 01:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
@Ascii002: I have a couple concerns. Four articles you've created were later deleted, and many others are stub articles with the same two copy-and-pasted sources, both of which are now dead. See Laxmi Prasad Pokhrel for an example of what I'm talking about. I don't see any pressing need for this right to reduce the load on new page patrollers, as you've only created one article in the past year. Did you have plans to ramp up article creation in the near future? The one recent article creation was Benisha Hamal, and some of the sources have questionable reliability, such as [1]. Widr, would you mind providing a second opinion? ~ Rob13Talk 08:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Agreeing with Rob. New page patrollers can easily handle your creations at this point. Widr (talk) 09:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done. Autopatrolled is designed to lower the load at NPP. It's not a user privilege or an award of any kind. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

(add requestview requests)

User:Hurricanehink

Been editing for 12 years, want to be able to move lots of pages in minimal time, primarily to clean up hurricane articles. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Already done (automated response): This user is a sysop and already has AutoWikiBrowser access. MusikBot talk 15:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink: See the above. As a sysop, you don't need to be listed on the CheckPage. ~ Rob13Talk 08:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, wasn't sure. I'd never gotten into the AWB world. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Joel Amos

I'm interested in starting to write Wikipedia bots. My current bot idea is to pull data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education's enrollment reports and update statistics on school and school district pages. My understanding is that having access to AWP would allow me to make smaller formatting edits in parallel. Joel Amos (talk) 04:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment This user has approximately 404 non-automated edits in the mainspace. MusikBot talk 21:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
@Joel Amos: With your last 100 edits taking us back to 2013 and the low overall number of non-automated edits noted by the bot above, I'm hesitant to grant AWB access. I'm willing to consider it if you have a solid reason to use it, but I'm not that convinced your proposed use would be positive. In order to use AWB to make general fixes, you would need to run your bot in AWB, but you'd need a separate program to pull data from an online website and process the article text. It's generally not advisable to run AWB genfixes as part of a bot task without reason to do so, as you're ultimately responsible for any genfix bugs that cause errors in your bot's edits. It's an extra potential point of failure that isn't worth it when the genfixes aren't needed for your edits. In your shoes, I'd be focusing on the actual program that completes the bot task, not learning AWB on top of that to make some minor fixes. What are your thoughts on that? ~ Rob13Talk 06:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13: I think I may have underplayed my interested in actually becoming a more active Wikipedia contributor on the whole, and not only interested in automation via bots. I am the type of editor who often makes repetitive edits and opens about 50 tabs. When I noticed I had almost twice the number of edits recommended for this tool, I figured I'd give it a try. (Also, maybe the term "non-automated" is just an unideal label, but I've never actually made an automated edit. Any edits appearing as such were a result of the above process). Aside from my bot idea, I've also thought about lots of other automated projects that may not require the development of a bot. For example, I would be interested in updating the sidebar staff information (e.g. superintendant, principal) of Pennsylvania schools. This information cannot all be gathered from one source and so would be better suited for AWB rather than a bot.--Joel Amos (talk)
Not sure how you'd use AWB for that. Unless you simply want to "general fixes" at the same time, which is good. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC).
X mark.svg Not done @Joel Amos: Pretty much what Rich said. At this time, I'm not comfortable granting access without a clear and feasible idea of how you intend to use AWB. Your suggested uses aren't something that AWB can really help with. AWB can't pull data from multiple sources, and it's only good at formulaic edits when it can use information on the article page itself to make changes. You're talking more about being able to insert new information on a page-by-page basis. This is useful work, but it's not something AWB is any good for. You'd probably find a semi-auto script similar to User:Technical 13/Scripts/helpOTRS.js to be most helpful for this particular task. The edits and experience gained from going that route would virtually guarantee that you'd receive AWB access if you required it in the future for a more suitable task. ~ Rob13Talk 08:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Petter Bøckman

Hi! I'd like to use the autobrowser for doing repetetive edits in the taxo-boxes on the Norwegian wikipedia. I was adviced by Norwegian WP admin no:user:Jeblad to apply for this tool. Petter Bøckman (talk) 14:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Petter! I think that you can use it on Norwegian Wikipedia subject to their rules. "This page is for requesting AWB Access for English Wikipedia only. Other projects have their own check pages and you should ask administrators there to add you." In many cases there is no check page.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC).
X mark.svg Not done I haven't looked at your contributions, so no comment on whether you'd potentially qualify for using this tool on the English Wikipedia. It is clear you intended to use the tool on another language Wikipedia, though, and we have no ability to grant such access. Check with your local wiki on their policies for AWB use. ~ Rob13Talk 08:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
This is a misunderstanding, I write a note on the thread on my user page at nowiki. Thanks! Jeblad (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Ok thanks, I'll take it up with the local admins. Might I suggest amending the wording on the description page somewhat? Currently, it can be interpreted as all users regardless of what language version they intend to use it on having to seek permission here. Petter Bøckman (talk) 12:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed

(add requestview requests)

User:SyedNaqvi1512

Hello, to whom it may concern I would like to add new content Pakistani related pages specially Shia's of Pakistan related pages, would need admin approval for editing the pages. I am former editor and would like to contribute to wikipedia with the books I have recently read and some data and statistics I have come across. Admin kindly help me out here since alot of things have changed on wikipedia. SyedNaqvi1512 (talk) 12:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 12:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done - Hi, and thank you for creating an account to edit Wikipedia. Although I fully understand your desire to dive right in, many of our articles are semi-protected because they are controversial, prone to vandalism, or other reasons. As a new editor with few edits, it might be wise to discuss your edits on the article talkpage in order to gain consensus for your edits, and then use {{Edit semi-protected}} to request the edit be performed. I only recommend this until you're used to the challenges of reliable sources, the biographies of living persons policy, and other similar policies. The good news is that fewer than 5% of Wikipedia articles are protected; this means that 95% of the articles can use your help right now! ~ Rob13Talk 00:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:DereticevSvetiVazal

Hi, I'm Milos from Serbia! I just want to edit some historical and geography pages and add maps. I want to upload animated gif images of Serbian wars. DereticevSvetiVazal (talk) 21:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done - If the file you want to upload is available under a free license, it should be uploaded to our free media repository, the Commons. You do not need any special permissions to upload there, and you can use the same username and password you use here. If it is not available under a free license, it should be requested using the Files for Upload process, which does not require any special permissions. ~ Rob13Talk 00:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Ajay Bains

Ajay Bains (talk) 15:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 15:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed

(add requestview requests)

File mover

(add requestview requests)

Mass message sender

(add requestview requests)

Page mover

(add requestview requests)

User:Fitindia

I often move pages during new page patrolling to fix naming issues, it would be nice if I could have this right as it can avoid unnecessary redirects created while moving pages Thank you- FITINDIA (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment This user has had an account for 182 days. MusikBot talk 00:42, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm leaning toward declining this, but I'd like comments from others. Specifically, I don't like the idea of using redirect suppression on new page patrol; quickly moving a page that a new editor creates due to something minor like a capitalization error and suppressing the redirect is likely to lead to confusion. I do not believe it falls under WP:PM/C#3 when the new editor didn't understand the mistake they were making and would likely have difficulty finding the new page. More generally, I have some concerns with your pattern of seeking permissions. You joined in February. Since then, you've filed four requests for rollback (granted in May), three requests for AWB (granted in August; by me, for transparency), two requests for autopatrolled (granted in May), and one request for pending changes (granted in April). That's a surprising number of requests for permissions in a very short amount of time, and this request for page mover two days after you meet the "6 month" criteria doesn't do anything to reduce my concern. Opinions from other administrators would be helpful. ~ Rob13Talk 06:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Thank you FITINDIA (talk) 07:02, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done Per the above withdrawal (hoping the bot will archive based on this template...) ~ Rob13Talk 08:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:MRD2014

I am requesting page mover rights because I have experience with moving pages in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines, and I have experience with requested moves. As a new page patroller, sometimes I have to move pages from the mainspace to either the userspace or the draft namespace, and I would have to tag redirects created by the page moves for speedy deletion under CSD R2. Being able to suppress redirects would come in handy with those moves. —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 17:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
@MRD2014: Can you comment on the potential for confusion when a newbie's page is moved? How would you mitigate potential confusion? ~ Rob13Talk 08:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13: For example, say a user creates Foo foo foo, but the title is supposed to be capitalized. I would move it to Foo Foo Foo and I would not suppress the redirect because that might get confusing. If Foo foo foo looks like a misplaced user page (having stuff you would normally see on a user page), then I would move it to their user page and suppress the redirect per WP:PM/C#6. If it does not look like it is ready to be an article, but it has potential, I would move it to the draft namespace and suppress the redirect per WP:PM/C#6. If it was unambiguously created in error (i.e. created in the wrong namespace), like they created it at Wikipedia:Foo foo foo or Template:Foo foo foo, I would move it to the mainspace (if it looked good for the mainspace) and suppress the redirect per WP:PM/C#3. I could leave a message as a courtesy to tell them what I did so they don't get confused. The move log will also appear above the editor when they go to the old title (The red box that says "A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted."). —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 12:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:KGirlTrucker81

I often move pages while doing NPP or RM for uncontervasal techinal moves. (I know that suppress redirect may confuse the newbies, but I'll not use that feature when moving pages created by new editors). KGirlTrucker81 talk what I'm been doing 17:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment This user has had an account for 164 days. MusikBot talk 17:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 Request withdrawn: Never mind, I'll just wait a few more days per the bot. KGirlTrucker81 talk what I'm been doing 21:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer

(add requestview requests)

Rollback

(add requestview requests)

User:Asqueladd

Although a greater contributor to es:wiki, I've being a editor to en:wiki since 2012. I have seen cases of users vandalizing on a first edit and then sticking on that vandalism on rampage, whether in the same page or in another entries. I think the Rollback right would be a great help for the fight against vandalism in that sense. I am familiar with the guideline regulating the use of this "permission". Best regards. Asqueladd (talk) 14:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Widr (talk) 15:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:FockeWulf FW 190

request for Rollback permission: I mainly edit articles in computing and several times have to revert several revisions from users which appear to attempt to use Wikipedia for tech support scams.

Most of my edits are non automated and require more time to revert vandalism then ones which would be automated. This would help keep reduce the time an article is online with misleading or vandalized content. FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Automated comment An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request MusikBot talk 16:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Widr (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Template editor

(add requestview requests)