No edits since being warned. Re-report if this user continues vandalising or spamming after sufficient warnings.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 11:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on
the blacklist. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Promotional? 2" on
the blacklist. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case --
DQB (
owner /
report) 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the
archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of
unsourced or poorly sourced content – Addition of unsourced and false film names is back since previous IP's block expired.
Krimuk2.0 (
talk) 06:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last
8 days.—
cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 06:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – I've had to remove CTOP content, and vandalism is present. This article isn't looking too great. — Your local
Sink Cat (
The Sink). 07:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Theleekycauldron. Semi, for a month.
Favonian (
talk) 11:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent
MOS:GENDERBIO violation. Probably due to the subject competing in gender division linked to his birth sex.
Hariboneagle927 (
talk) 11:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Some LTA is constantly re-creating an attack page at this title. —
AP 499D25(talk) 12:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade
full protection to
template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the
archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{
Edit protected}}, {{
Edit template-protected}}, {{
Edit extended-protected}}, or {{
Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
I want people to know more about Russians in Japan, which I'm part of since I'm a Japanese citizen with a partial Russian ancestry. By adding slightly few more or maybe even just one more, and writing a lot more about us, I think it's more than enough to make people understand a lot about what Russians in Japan is. By the way, the page dedicated to Russians in Japan is very outdated when I checked it just to let you know, so please let me edit it at bit. Trust me when I say this, I'm sure I can make it look a lot better(not saying that your edits on that page wasn't helpful and bad). Thank you so much!Don't worry! I already got a lot of informations about Russians in Japan from a lot of trustworthy websites.
RikuOka0222 (
talk) 05:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
@
RikuOka0222:Declined – This page isn't currently protected.
Lectonar (
talk) 06:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Really? But it's saying that it's protected, if you can double-check if it's protected or not, that helps a lot👍
RikuOka0222 (
talk) 09:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
It isn't protected now (I tried editing it while logged out, and it worked), and was never protected here on English language Wikipedia. You also already made edits to it by yourself. Do you have the right page?
Lectonar (
talk) 10:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
The page hasn't been protected. Rather, RikuOka0222, your edits are being reverted because they do not cite any sources. You cannot make a personal observation in a Wikipedia article, you must cite a reliable published source. ~
Anachronist (
talk) 11:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Protected by
Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Protected by
Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Has created roughly 30 articles by my count; only one stub, my spotchecks found nothing concerning.
Diverging Diamond (is
Queen of Hearts's alt;
talk) 19:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Is there any indication that the user wants autopatrolled? I don't want to throw rights at someone who would prefer that their creations be reviewed by NPP/AfC. —
Red-tailed hawk(nest) 10:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
@
Red-tailed hawk: Unlike other PERMs, third party nominations for autopatrolled are welcome (preferred even), because it's primarily a tool used by NPP to manage its workload rather than a tool used by the holder to edit. If someone really doesn't want it for some reason, they can of course ask for it to be removed. –
Joe (
talk) 11:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
@
Pppery: A user was approved with this exact request, so I thought it was sufficient. I literally copied and pasted it. But OK. I saw AWB has an option to merge duplicated references, which is what motivated the request. This is something I've done in the past and it's annoying to do manually. I expect to learn about the other features as I use it. --
Un assiolo (
talk) 16:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
The distinction between that request and this one is that they have 20 times as many edits (and correspondingly more experience like having written several FAs, not just raw edit count) as you so I applied less scrutiny to their requests than I do to a user with less experience. The point of providing a specific task is to ensure both that you know what AWB is, you aren't
hat collecting, and you aren't planning to do something like make mass cosmetic edits in violation of
rule 4, etc. That response convinces me on all three fronts, so Done* Pppery *it has begun... 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
It is very useful for searching/modifying same string/link/name on many articles when required. I am using it already for ro.wiki. --
itineris55 08:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Done I would have preferred a more specific description of what you were going to do with AWB, but I'm just going to assume your experience from rowiki will carry over and ou'll do something reasonable. But do keep in mind
WP:AWBRULES, which might not be the same from wiki to wiki.
* Pppery *it has begun... 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I will use AWB to tag
galaxy-related (and other astronomical objects) with the appropriate talk page banners (WP:ASTRONOMICAL OBJECTS), and will use it to tag "Weather of _____" with the corresponding task force talk page banner tags. I can also use it for typos on long
tornado articles, which tend to have misspellings in them.
Sir MemeGod ._. (
talk -
contribs -
created articles) 05:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Not done; no reason given. This will be granted automatically when you meet the requirements listed above. stwalkerster (
talk) 16:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
You need to meet both the 30 day requirement and the 500 edits requirement. At the moment, you've only made 73 edits. stwalkerster (
talk) 23:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
There are no outstanding requests for the file mover flag.
File mover
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I want to reduce the massive backlog. I have been looking at the new pages patrol feed sporadically for the past two months and the backlog keeps increasing. I want to play a part in reviewing the articles.
HRShami (
talk) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello there, I am interested tn helping out in new page reviewing as there are very large articles backlog and love to do so. Xegma(talk) 07:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Question, though I am not an administrator, I see that you have published accepted AFC submissions, even if they lack citations or are in need of some fixing. And some have orange banners on them. Why is this? —
48JCL 01:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
@
48JCL: As they should. The
standard at acceptance at AfC is that the article would probably survive an AfD. Nothing more. Declining a draft for surmountable problems like a lack of citations or pretty much anything covered by a cleanup banner is inappropriate. –
Joe (
talk) 08:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I spot checked the 4 most recent accepts and they had lots of citations at time of acceptance. Feel free to link to the specific draft accepts you are concerned with. A complete lack of citations is a valid draftification reason and valid AFC decline reason, but I am not seeing that here. A major lack of citations such as entire paragraphs missing a citation (and also not supported by any
WP:GENREFs) could be a valid decline reason (
WP:V is policy after all). But it may also be reasonable to accept a draft that is mostly cited and just missing a couple citations, such as
Draft:Norah Fulcher. –
Novem Linguae (
talk) 13:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I would like to request new page reviewer rights to help review newly-created articles and lower the backlog. I have accepted lots of drafts at AFC and participated in many AfDs with deep discussions to exhibit my knowledge of notability, as I was advised previously. Thanks!
Waqar💬 19:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days (
[1]). — MusikBottalk 20:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
I see you found the IP at AfC who submits soundtrack articles (41 accepts of soundtracks it looks like). I'm glad to see you've started to accept drafts at AfC, instead of just declining (a ratio of 1 accepted to 348 declined at the time of the last application). I do still have concerns about your experience at AFD, given that, of your last 40 votes, all but 2 of them were pile on votes where the result had basically already been decided based on the number of votes for the conclusion you chose. You accepted one piece of criticism from me, your lack of accepts at AfC, but you do still appear to be pile on voting. Honestly, I'm not sold, but I'll leave it up to someone else whether they want to grant you a trial or not.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 18:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. I understand your points, I've made lots of contributions recently, and I hope I will be granted a trial to demonstrate my willingness to contribute positively. Best,
Waqar💬 07:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to say that I've been working so hard for the past couple of months. I've made so many contributions to AFCs, I've reviewed over 1,160 articles (accepts: 138, declines: 670, and the rest either rejected or speedily deleted) so far. I'm also actively patrolling the new page feed, adding maintenance tags, and tagging articles for speedy deletion like A3, A7, and G11. I've drafted more than 200 articles that either lacked reliable sources or needed additional sources. In the AFD discussions, I voted on more than 150 pages. Without considering the no consensus results, 98.6% of my AfD's were matches, and even though the votes were assumed to be piles on voting, most of my recent votes were very detailed and specific and weren't pointing towards anyone, but I will accept their valuable advice and try my best to make improvements at AFDs as well. Having said that, I believe that all those contributions exhibit my hard work and dedication. I hope I get a chance to at least prove myself by patrolling new pages, and I would be more than happy to help with the backlog. Thanks for your time and consideration.
Waqar💬 18:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I was given a trial for a few months and would like to renew my permissions. I have made good use of my permissions by fixing new pages and applying CSD whenever necessary.
Florificapis (
talk) 22:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was
granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Joe Roe (expires 00:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 22:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I have been editing for over 7 years and I plan on using this permission in order to help with discussions on
WP:RM and deal with cross-redirects for articles that should have more disambiguated titles.
KingSkyLord (
talk |
contribs) 12:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting page mover rights: I want to have my page mover rights extended, as I contribute to RM/TR. Was given 3mo trial and it will end on August 20.
ToadetteEdit! 08:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was
granted temporary page mover rights by Robertsky (expires 00:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 08:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I was granted pagemover rights nearly a month back, but due to mistakes on my part, the rights have been now revoked. So, I am requesting the rights again on Primefac's advice, explaining why I made the mistakes and how I shall avoid those mistakes going forward.
On 5 July, Liz
told me at my talk page about the terrible quality of my page swap on
Polish–Russian War (1609–1618) which I had moved after closing an
an RM discussion in the talk page, and that I had left a dozen broken redirects that she had to clean up. This mistake was due to my inexperience, as it was my first page swap. Following that, SilverLocust recommended me
User:Ahecht/Scripts/pageswap to prevent such issues, which I have been using ever since, and there have not been any more such errors.
On 8 July, SilverLocust informed me about
MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES after I moved
Polish–Russian War of 1792 to
Polish-Russian War of 1792. I was not aware of
MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES at that time, and since then I've taken up the task to fix other article titles violating it as well. I had been aware of and had read the
WP:Article title policy, but I had not completely read through the
WP:MOS at that time. I've completely familiarised myself with the guideline now and hence hope to minimise mistakes I might make relating to that.
On 30 July, I moved
British Indian Army to
Indian Army (1895–1947) after which Celia Homeford informed me that the move had been unilateral, following which I immediately proceeded to check the talk page of the article for previous RMs,
which I did find and had resulted in the move of
Indian Army (1895–1947) to
British Indian Army. I hadn't checked the talk page before swapping the page and thus had not been aware of this RM when I had swapped — a mistake on my part. I had checked the
WP:COMMONNAME of the article and sought to make the article title
WP:Consistent with other historical army related articles like
German Army (1935–1945) for instance. I should've checked the talk page and it's archives for any previous RMs and discussions before making the swap. That is what I usually do before making a move or a swap, but this step had slipped my mind in this case. In future, I shall make sure to always check the talk page and the archives for RMs and discussions regarding the article title without fail before making a move or a swap.
I've learnt from my mistakes and hope not to repeat them. I also aim to minimise any chance of any other mistakes on my part.
PadFoot (
talk) 17:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days (
[2]). — MusikBottalk 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been doing RCP for a little while now, and recently started NPP. I believe I could assist in patrolling recent changes to expand on my anti-vandalism work. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 06:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I've been doing patrolling for a little while now, and recently started seriously devoting time. I believe I will submit myself in patrolling recent changes in contributing to anti-vandalism work. Thanks
Fsrvb (
talk) 19:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had an account for 4 days and has 22 edits in the
mainspace. — MusikBottalk 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been patrolling recent changes for a while now, using Twinkle to warn members. I have over 200 mainspace edits, and I'm extended confirmed with over 700 edits total. I've also been doing NPP for a little too. I'd like to use rollback for more advanced tools such as Huggle and AntiVandal. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 06:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently
warn editors when you revert their edits. Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -
Fastily 10:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I reviewed your contributions from last month and found these within seconds:
1,
2,
3. I'll repeat what I said above: it's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -
Fastily 08:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
I’m unsure why I forgot to add a warning for those, @
Fastily, considering Twinkle automatically opens the talk page, but I usually warn members, and tools like Anti-vandal or Huggle would probable negate me forgetting warns. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 10:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
No worries, thanks for your honesty. Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting
good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -
Fastily 23:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
No problem, I’ll definitely try to leave warnings for every revert I make. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 02:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
I've been recent changes patrolling on and off with Twinkle, and more recently Ultraviolet, for years now, and would like to try Huggle's more advanced tools. I have over 1.4k mainspace edits, no history of edit warring, and consistently and appropriately notify editors whose changes I revert. P1(she/her,
talk/
contribs) 04:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Not done I noticed you make a handful of edits, and then drop off for months at a time. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month consistently patrolling
RecentChanges (
Twinkle &
Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are always
warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks,
Fastily 08:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I am a frequent editor and creator of templates and modules, and I have encountered several instances where having the template editor permission would be helpful. Many of my requested edits on protected templates have been performing minor visual fixes or fixing small bugs with the template's logic. For these uncontroversial edits, having to submit a request and involve another editor feels unnecessary, considering the nature of the requested edits. In other cases with more significant changes, going through the edit request process works fine for the most part, but I like to be able to avoid the process because of the backlog the edit queue can have at times and the added potential confusion added by having to request technical changes. Because of this, I'd much rather be able to have a standard discussion on template talk pages, if necessary, followed by implementing the agreed upon changes myself rather than having to request someone else to implement the changes. In the near future, I plan on exploring adding support for the new dark mode to more templates and being able to implement these changes on protected templates myself would be of great help. In the future, I would also like to use my technical knowledge of wikitext and Lua to help with processing the template edit request queue.
Also, I acknowledge that I performed what ended up being (unintentionally) disruptive templates several years ago. Since then, I have learned a lot about collaborating with others on Wikipedia and being mindful of the impact template edits can have on articles across the wiki. Since then, I have been much more careful with the edits I perform, as these past experiences have shown me the dangers of not doing so. With the template edit permission, I intend to take from these past mistakes, and I will follow the best practices to ensure the template edits I perform are well-tested, agreed upon, and non-disruptive. I find that now I am very cautious with my template edits, and I always create thorough test cases (e.g.
Template:Jcon/testcases) before performing changes. –
BrandonXLF (
talk) 19:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
After looking at your contributions I'm inclined to grant, but would like to know if
Primefac,
EdJohnston, or
Galobtter (admins who were involved with the placing and then lifting of your sanctions) have thoughts.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 01:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Brandon has definitely matured as an editor since their first go-round with this permission. I've been burned in the past but let's say I'm cautiously optimistic.
Primefac (
talk) 12:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Done for a three-month trial period. Feel free to request again in October and assuming there weren't any issues in the meantime, I'll be happy to grant the permission indefinitely.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 18:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
No edits since being warned. Re-report if this user continues vandalising or spamming after sufficient warnings.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 11:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on
the blacklist. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 09:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Promotional? 2" on
the blacklist. --
DQB (
owner /
report) 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case --
DQB (
owner /
report) 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the
archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of
unsourced or poorly sourced content – Addition of unsourced and false film names is back since previous IP's block expired.
Krimuk2.0 (
talk) 06:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last
8 days.—
cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 06:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – I've had to remove CTOP content, and vandalism is present. This article isn't looking too great. — Your local
Sink Cat (
The Sink). 07:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Theleekycauldron. Semi, for a month.
Favonian (
talk) 11:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent
MOS:GENDERBIO violation. Probably due to the subject competing in gender division linked to his birth sex.
Hariboneagle927 (
talk) 11:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Some LTA is constantly re-creating an attack page at this title. —
AP 499D25(talk) 12:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade
full protection to
template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the
archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{
Edit protected}}, {{
Edit template-protected}}, {{
Edit extended-protected}}, or {{
Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
I want people to know more about Russians in Japan, which I'm part of since I'm a Japanese citizen with a partial Russian ancestry. By adding slightly few more or maybe even just one more, and writing a lot more about us, I think it's more than enough to make people understand a lot about what Russians in Japan is. By the way, the page dedicated to Russians in Japan is very outdated when I checked it just to let you know, so please let me edit it at bit. Trust me when I say this, I'm sure I can make it look a lot better(not saying that your edits on that page wasn't helpful and bad). Thank you so much!Don't worry! I already got a lot of informations about Russians in Japan from a lot of trustworthy websites.
RikuOka0222 (
talk) 05:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
@
RikuOka0222:Declined – This page isn't currently protected.
Lectonar (
talk) 06:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Really? But it's saying that it's protected, if you can double-check if it's protected or not, that helps a lot👍
RikuOka0222 (
talk) 09:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
It isn't protected now (I tried editing it while logged out, and it worked), and was never protected here on English language Wikipedia. You also already made edits to it by yourself. Do you have the right page?
Lectonar (
talk) 10:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
The page hasn't been protected. Rather, RikuOka0222, your edits are being reverted because they do not cite any sources. You cannot make a personal observation in a Wikipedia article, you must cite a reliable published source. ~
Anachronist (
talk) 11:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Protected by
Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Protected by
Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Has created roughly 30 articles by my count; only one stub, my spotchecks found nothing concerning.
Diverging Diamond (is
Queen of Hearts's alt;
talk) 19:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Is there any indication that the user wants autopatrolled? I don't want to throw rights at someone who would prefer that their creations be reviewed by NPP/AfC. —
Red-tailed hawk(nest) 10:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
@
Red-tailed hawk: Unlike other PERMs, third party nominations for autopatrolled are welcome (preferred even), because it's primarily a tool used by NPP to manage its workload rather than a tool used by the holder to edit. If someone really doesn't want it for some reason, they can of course ask for it to be removed. –
Joe (
talk) 11:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
@
Pppery: A user was approved with this exact request, so I thought it was sufficient. I literally copied and pasted it. But OK. I saw AWB has an option to merge duplicated references, which is what motivated the request. This is something I've done in the past and it's annoying to do manually. I expect to learn about the other features as I use it. --
Un assiolo (
talk) 16:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
The distinction between that request and this one is that they have 20 times as many edits (and correspondingly more experience like having written several FAs, not just raw edit count) as you so I applied less scrutiny to their requests than I do to a user with less experience. The point of providing a specific task is to ensure both that you know what AWB is, you aren't
hat collecting, and you aren't planning to do something like make mass cosmetic edits in violation of
rule 4, etc. That response convinces me on all three fronts, so Done* Pppery *it has begun... 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
It is very useful for searching/modifying same string/link/name on many articles when required. I am using it already for ro.wiki. --
itineris55 08:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Done I would have preferred a more specific description of what you were going to do with AWB, but I'm just going to assume your experience from rowiki will carry over and ou'll do something reasonable. But do keep in mind
WP:AWBRULES, which might not be the same from wiki to wiki.
* Pppery *it has begun... 20:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I will use AWB to tag
galaxy-related (and other astronomical objects) with the appropriate talk page banners (WP:ASTRONOMICAL OBJECTS), and will use it to tag "Weather of _____" with the corresponding task force talk page banner tags. I can also use it for typos on long
tornado articles, which tend to have misspellings in them.
Sir MemeGod ._. (
talk -
contribs -
created articles) 05:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Not done; no reason given. This will be granted automatically when you meet the requirements listed above. stwalkerster (
talk) 16:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
You need to meet both the 30 day requirement and the 500 edits requirement. At the moment, you've only made 73 edits. stwalkerster (
talk) 23:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
There are no outstanding requests for the file mover flag.
File mover
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I want to reduce the massive backlog. I have been looking at the new pages patrol feed sporadically for the past two months and the backlog keeps increasing. I want to play a part in reviewing the articles.
HRShami (
talk) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello there, I am interested tn helping out in new page reviewing as there are very large articles backlog and love to do so. Xegma(talk) 07:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Question, though I am not an administrator, I see that you have published accepted AFC submissions, even if they lack citations or are in need of some fixing. And some have orange banners on them. Why is this? —
48JCL 01:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
@
48JCL: As they should. The
standard at acceptance at AfC is that the article would probably survive an AfD. Nothing more. Declining a draft for surmountable problems like a lack of citations or pretty much anything covered by a cleanup banner is inappropriate. –
Joe (
talk) 08:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I spot checked the 4 most recent accepts and they had lots of citations at time of acceptance. Feel free to link to the specific draft accepts you are concerned with. A complete lack of citations is a valid draftification reason and valid AFC decline reason, but I am not seeing that here. A major lack of citations such as entire paragraphs missing a citation (and also not supported by any
WP:GENREFs) could be a valid decline reason (
WP:V is policy after all). But it may also be reasonable to accept a draft that is mostly cited and just missing a couple citations, such as
Draft:Norah Fulcher. –
Novem Linguae (
talk) 13:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I would like to request new page reviewer rights to help review newly-created articles and lower the backlog. I have accepted lots of drafts at AFC and participated in many AfDs with deep discussions to exhibit my knowledge of notability, as I was advised previously. Thanks!
Waqar💬 19:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days (
[1]). — MusikBottalk 20:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
I see you found the IP at AfC who submits soundtrack articles (41 accepts of soundtracks it looks like). I'm glad to see you've started to accept drafts at AfC, instead of just declining (a ratio of 1 accepted to 348 declined at the time of the last application). I do still have concerns about your experience at AFD, given that, of your last 40 votes, all but 2 of them were pile on votes where the result had basically already been decided based on the number of votes for the conclusion you chose. You accepted one piece of criticism from me, your lack of accepts at AfC, but you do still appear to be pile on voting. Honestly, I'm not sold, but I'll leave it up to someone else whether they want to grant you a trial or not.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 18:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. I understand your points, I've made lots of contributions recently, and I hope I will be granted a trial to demonstrate my willingness to contribute positively. Best,
Waqar💬 07:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to say that I've been working so hard for the past couple of months. I've made so many contributions to AFCs, I've reviewed over 1,160 articles (accepts: 138, declines: 670, and the rest either rejected or speedily deleted) so far. I'm also actively patrolling the new page feed, adding maintenance tags, and tagging articles for speedy deletion like A3, A7, and G11. I've drafted more than 200 articles that either lacked reliable sources or needed additional sources. In the AFD discussions, I voted on more than 150 pages. Without considering the no consensus results, 98.6% of my AfD's were matches, and even though the votes were assumed to be piles on voting, most of my recent votes were very detailed and specific and weren't pointing towards anyone, but I will accept their valuable advice and try my best to make improvements at AFDs as well. Having said that, I believe that all those contributions exhibit my hard work and dedication. I hope I get a chance to at least prove myself by patrolling new pages, and I would be more than happy to help with the backlog. Thanks for your time and consideration.
Waqar💬 18:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I was given a trial for a few months and would like to renew my permissions. I have made good use of my permissions by fixing new pages and applying CSD whenever necessary.
Florificapis (
talk) 22:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was
granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Joe Roe (expires 00:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 22:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I have been editing for over 7 years and I plan on using this permission in order to help with discussions on
WP:RM and deal with cross-redirects for articles that should have more disambiguated titles.
KingSkyLord (
talk |
contribs) 12:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting page mover rights: I want to have my page mover rights extended, as I contribute to RM/TR. Was given 3mo trial and it will end on August 20.
ToadetteEdit! 08:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was
granted temporary page mover rights by Robertsky (expires 00:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 08:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I was granted pagemover rights nearly a month back, but due to mistakes on my part, the rights have been now revoked. So, I am requesting the rights again on Primefac's advice, explaining why I made the mistakes and how I shall avoid those mistakes going forward.
On 5 July, Liz
told me at my talk page about the terrible quality of my page swap on
Polish–Russian War (1609–1618) which I had moved after closing an
an RM discussion in the talk page, and that I had left a dozen broken redirects that she had to clean up. This mistake was due to my inexperience, as it was my first page swap. Following that, SilverLocust recommended me
User:Ahecht/Scripts/pageswap to prevent such issues, which I have been using ever since, and there have not been any more such errors.
On 8 July, SilverLocust informed me about
MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES after I moved
Polish–Russian War of 1792 to
Polish-Russian War of 1792. I was not aware of
MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES at that time, and since then I've taken up the task to fix other article titles violating it as well. I had been aware of and had read the
WP:Article title policy, but I had not completely read through the
WP:MOS at that time. I've completely familiarised myself with the guideline now and hence hope to minimise mistakes I might make relating to that.
On 30 July, I moved
British Indian Army to
Indian Army (1895–1947) after which Celia Homeford informed me that the move had been unilateral, following which I immediately proceeded to check the talk page of the article for previous RMs,
which I did find and had resulted in the move of
Indian Army (1895–1947) to
British Indian Army. I hadn't checked the talk page before swapping the page and thus had not been aware of this RM when I had swapped — a mistake on my part. I had checked the
WP:COMMONNAME of the article and sought to make the article title
WP:Consistent with other historical army related articles like
German Army (1935–1945) for instance. I should've checked the talk page and it's archives for any previous RMs and discussions before making the swap. That is what I usually do before making a move or a swap, but this step had slipped my mind in this case. In future, I shall make sure to always check the talk page and the archives for RMs and discussions regarding the article title without fail before making a move or a swap.
I've learnt from my mistakes and hope not to repeat them. I also aim to minimise any chance of any other mistakes on my part.
PadFoot (
talk) 17:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days (
[2]). — MusikBottalk 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been doing RCP for a little while now, and recently started NPP. I believe I could assist in patrolling recent changes to expand on my anti-vandalism work. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 06:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I've been doing patrolling for a little while now, and recently started seriously devoting time. I believe I will submit myself in patrolling recent changes in contributing to anti-vandalism work. Thanks
Fsrvb (
talk) 19:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had an account for 4 days and has 22 edits in the
mainspace. — MusikBottalk 00:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been patrolling recent changes for a while now, using Twinkle to warn members. I have over 200 mainspace edits, and I'm extended confirmed with over 700 edits total. I've also been doing NPP for a little too. I'd like to use rollback for more advanced tools such as Huggle and AntiVandal. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 06:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently
warn editors when you revert their edits. Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -
Fastily 10:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I reviewed your contributions from last month and found these within seconds:
1,
2,
3. I'll repeat what I said above: it's important to leave a notification for every revert you make. Are you aware that we have tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -
Fastily 08:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
I’m unsure why I forgot to add a warning for those, @
Fastily, considering Twinkle automatically opens the talk page, but I usually warn members, and tools like Anti-vandal or Huggle would probable negate me forgetting warns. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 10:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
No worries, thanks for your honesty. Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting
good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -
Fastily 23:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
No problem, I’ll definitely try to leave warnings for every revert I make. Thanks,
Lordseriouspig 02:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
I've been recent changes patrolling on and off with Twinkle, and more recently Ultraviolet, for years now, and would like to try Huggle's more advanced tools. I have over 1.4k mainspace edits, no history of edit warring, and consistently and appropriately notify editors whose changes I revert. P1(she/her,
talk/
contribs) 04:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Not done I noticed you make a handful of edits, and then drop off for months at a time. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month consistently patrolling
RecentChanges (
Twinkle &
Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are always
warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks,
Fastily 08:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I am a frequent editor and creator of templates and modules, and I have encountered several instances where having the template editor permission would be helpful. Many of my requested edits on protected templates have been performing minor visual fixes or fixing small bugs with the template's logic. For these uncontroversial edits, having to submit a request and involve another editor feels unnecessary, considering the nature of the requested edits. In other cases with more significant changes, going through the edit request process works fine for the most part, but I like to be able to avoid the process because of the backlog the edit queue can have at times and the added potential confusion added by having to request technical changes. Because of this, I'd much rather be able to have a standard discussion on template talk pages, if necessary, followed by implementing the agreed upon changes myself rather than having to request someone else to implement the changes. In the near future, I plan on exploring adding support for the new dark mode to more templates and being able to implement these changes on protected templates myself would be of great help. In the future, I would also like to use my technical knowledge of wikitext and Lua to help with processing the template edit request queue.
Also, I acknowledge that I performed what ended up being (unintentionally) disruptive templates several years ago. Since then, I have learned a lot about collaborating with others on Wikipedia and being mindful of the impact template edits can have on articles across the wiki. Since then, I have been much more careful with the edits I perform, as these past experiences have shown me the dangers of not doing so. With the template edit permission, I intend to take from these past mistakes, and I will follow the best practices to ensure the template edits I perform are well-tested, agreed upon, and non-disruptive. I find that now I am very cautious with my template edits, and I always create thorough test cases (e.g.
Template:Jcon/testcases) before performing changes. –
BrandonXLF (
talk) 19:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
After looking at your contributions I'm inclined to grant, but would like to know if
Primefac,
EdJohnston, or
Galobtter (admins who were involved with the placing and then lifting of your sanctions) have thoughts.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 01:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Brandon has definitely matured as an editor since their first go-round with this permission. I've been burned in the past but let's say I'm cautiously optimistic.
Primefac (
talk) 12:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Done for a three-month trial period. Feel free to request again in October and assuming there weren't any issues in the meantime, I'll be happy to grant the permission indefinitely.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 18:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
