This user uses American English, but is appalled at its rapid and continuing deterioration.
"There's" with a plural subject
This user knows that "there's" with a plural subject is a pervasive grammatical error. There'sThere are too many people making this mistake. Don't be one of them.
couldn't've
This user believes that couldn't've would make a perfectly fine word.
Dear Mojoworker, thanks for your kind words on my talk page, including your good faith and advice to make me a better Wikipedia editor. I wish the best to you and yours, AnupamTalk 16:51, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Not a violation of the username policy. Real names are permitted except when they imply that the editor is a specific living person they are not. Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 05:32, 19 April 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.
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Pending-changes protection working as intended; disruption not heavy enough to warrant semi-protection. Lectonar (talk) 11:35, 19 April 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.
}} 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.
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"
I've been editing for nearly 20 years and created thousands of articles, and this makes it easier for other editors by marking the pages as patrolled by me (so they don't show up on the unpatrolled list). ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([1]). — MusikBottalk 17:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Only because it was part of the admin package. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done. Keeping it brief to avoid unnecessary drama: this right is generally not given to paid editors. – Joe (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
@
Join WP Japan
! 17:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
The arbitration decision says otherwise. We can't just ignore it. – Joe (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
@
Join WP Japan
! 16:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe: What's the strong need in this situation? The concerns are obvious and clear based on the recent drama, and, based on the outcome of recent events, it makes sense to decline the request. Your pages will be reviewed by a member of the new pages patrol team at their earliest convenience. This perm is mostly to reduce the load on them, which is nothing to get upset about. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Hey man im josh: I disagree. I'm being refused a permission that's generally easy to receive based on a decision made based on alleged evidence ArbCom refuses to disclose to me. I can't imagine what there is to get upset about. </sarc>
Regardless, go ahead and cancel this request. I have better things to do with my time. ···
Join WP Japan
! 16:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe: There's nothing to cancel, the request was declined by Joe Roe already. Additionally, based on your recent creations, it doesn't appear that granting you AP would be really doing much to reduce the backlog. I can't imagine what there is to get upset about. – I guess waiting for your articles to be indexed by Google is a terrible plight to deal with, but luckily the perm doesn't affect your ability to contribute or operate on the site in any way. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@
Join WP Japan
! 17:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe: Seems like you're the one being the ass here. In case you're unaware, having your articles indexed by search engines is essentially the only benefit of the autopatrolled user right, which is why I mentioned it, not because of some accusation you're assuming I'm making. See Wikipedia:Autopatrolled#Function for further information. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@
Join WP Japan
! 17:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe: I did not intend to be any type of accusation or dig and I could have been more careful about my wording to avoid the insinuation. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like access to make typo error fixing edits to the wiki, as existing tools I have perms for don't let me filter for those. -REDACTED403 (talk) 05:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to improve my workflow with copywriting on Wikipedia, as finding typos can be tedious and AWB can help with this. Can't stop the stopr (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
You have 81 edits, which is well below both (very lax) minimum standards we have for this tool. Primefac (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm an autoconfirmed user. There are times when a file title needs changing but currently I'm unable to do that. Mcljlm (talk) 14:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Requesting a trial period of a month or less (dealer's choice) to address the backlog. I was previously granted this permission last summer but resigned them after a request to do so stemming from my repeated draftification of articles on potentially notable subjects that were created by disruptive editors (a more detailed accounting of that can be found in the discussion that took place on my talk page). Essentially, I wouldn't do that again, instead following the current NPP best-practices of leaning on more procedural alternatives like PROD, AfD, and improvement tags. I have a good amount of experience in AfC, have participated in a decent number of AfDs, and have a strong track record with my own article creations. I can provide additional context or affirmations of understanding of the current NPP standards as requested. I would prefer a trial period of at least two week so that my use of the permission can be observed and critiqued with enough examples. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Done for a one-month trial. – Joe (talk) 06:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I've got some experience at AfD, both participating and nominating. I have also written one article which was approved at AfC and got C-rated. I also have relevant experience in anti-vandalism, which shows I always try to be friendly to newcomers and I am always open to being corrected. I'd obviously be happy to have it granted on a trial basis. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
@
WP:NEXIST. That's a common enough mistake but it's the kind of thing we'd really like to be sure people have squared away before they start reviewing new articles with less supervision. Not done for now, sorry. – Joe (talk
I have made many constructive edits to Wikipedia, and have a decent amount of experience in Articles for Creation, and I have approved AfC reviewer for nearly 1 year. I have had no controversy thus far while working in this area. I mainly want to focus on patrolling the backlog of redirects, but occasionally I would also review articles. I also know my limits, and only work in the areas I am confident in, or I seek help. I am big on assuming the good faith of editors and pointing them in the right direction if their efforts are misguided, as I often do at AfC. aaronneallucas (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm nearing the end of my trial period just as the May backlog begins and I'd like to keep my permissions to participate. I've been intermittently active with new page patrol and I think my page curation log should show fairly uncontroversial activity and AfDs with consensus for my proposals. Reviewing the log myself there are two articles I marked as reviewed but were later deleted, but both appear to have been deleted for G5 (created by banned user) and not for notability or other content reasons. Dan • ✉ 06:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Spicy (expires 14:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 06:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm coming to the end of a two-month trial, and write to request that this access be extended. I've worked on NPP and, as asked, AfD. Many of these AfDs have been my proposals, which has been a helpful learning experience! Klbrain (talk) 09:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 10:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
On 13 December 2023 I was granted a 3-month new page reviewer rights trial, which expired on 12 March 2024. I reviewed 5 new articles in 2023, and 8 new articles in 2024. My habit is to spend a lot of time on each article, helping to expand them sometimes, and helping to bring some of them to DYK - which is why I did not attempt to achieve high numbers of new page article reviews.
Being overloaded with WP research (some for my local Civic Society, which wanted WP articles on several historical subjects - all for free of course) I have had to miss out on new page reviews for a while. I was also needed to help with the recent DYK review backlog. But I would like to get back to it. So if you think that I have been useful so far, please would you kindly extend or confirm my new page reviewer rights? I have added my name to the May 2024 new page review list, but would like confirmation that I am still a valid member of this working group. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC) Storye book (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Done, trial extended for another 2 months. Thank you for volunteering and thank you for the work you're putting in! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much - much appreciated. I look forward to continuing with this, when I can. There are some great new editors out there, writing some good stuff. Storye book (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello! In December of 2023 I applied for New Page Reviewer Rights and given a 1 month trial period then again in January of 2024 I was granted 3 months. I am here today to apply for permanent rights. Over the last 90 days I have reviewed 370 articles. A short background on myself I've been on Wikipedia for over eight years and have created 47 active article on EN Wikipedia. I have strong knowledge of the policies that a NPP reviewer must follow and how each article should be treated. I would like to to continue to help decease the large article backlog currently on Wikipedia. I would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you! Grahaml35 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 17:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to participate in the upcoming backlog drive. I have done a trial period before. Knowledgegatherer23 (Say Hello) 17:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
as well as taking part in more contentious deletions. Obviously still learning but have experience of quite a few different outcomes now such as redirect, merge and transwiki options. Orange sticker (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I'm volunteering to help in patrolling new pages on Wikipedia. Over the months I have stayed here, I've learnt much on relating with editors including the early mistakes I did at first; those have improved my person. It's also pleasing participating in the May drive. Thanks for considering me.— Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 15:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to start start volunteering to help patrol pages across the Wikipedia site. I've been on the site for quite some time, sometimes I may make some mistakes around but it has led me to create more pages and overall be a more active person. I find it pleasing to help Wikipedia more and make it a more pleasing, friendly and diligent environment of people. Thank you for looking through, and hope whoever sees this has a blessed day. NYMan6 (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I often move pages when globally renaming editors and when working on articles. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([2]). — MusikBottalk 17:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Only because it was part of the admin package. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Global renaming overrides page mover anyway, the right isn't required for that. Black Kite (talk) 23:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done per Black Kite. You already have this right. -Fastily 03:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Black Kite, I seem to recall (and pppery can I believe back me up on this) that it is generally frowned upon to use Global Renamer rights on enWiki for generic page moving; I genuinely cannot remember the user but there was a GR a couple of years back who had to get PGM because of this. That being said, I just checked the last two years of move logs and see nothing that indicates article-space moves that would require PGM, so the GR tools are likely sufficient here for user-renaming-related moves. Primefac (talk) 12:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I think you've conflated Global Rename and Global Rollback here. * Pppery *it has begun... 14:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm an Articles for Creation reviewer and I need this right to make things easier. One of my recent submission reviews needed a move without redirect, but I couldn't as I didn't have that right yet. There have been many such incidents and will be in the future. I wish to be granted this right and I believe I meet the requirements now (was declined previously). Thank you. X (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC) X (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for page mover declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBottalk 19:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done, as I am not seeing a regular need for this right. One RM participation and no RM/TR requests, and a single need to delete a redirect (which upon further review was not even necessary) does not indicate a habit. Primefac (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I am requesting this right for the following reasons:
) To perform non-controversial page moves
) To undo incorrect/non-discussed controversial page moves
) To help move discussed moves
) To be able to move my sandboxes into articles when they are ready (as some are currently redirects)
) To assist with moving categories
) To help others with moving pages
I have participated in various requested moves and I have performed some myself in order to acquire to naming conventions (both within pages in the main space and from my sandboxes to the main space), and I have also started a few move discussions too. I know about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, including naming conventions, and I often take part in AFD and other discussions, and I also have created articles and categories. I am happy to answer any questions or do a trial run. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done for now, as I do not really see a large need for this permission. You have barely a dozen article-space moves in the last two years, and while you do have a reasonable amount of RM participation I don't see much in the way of closing those moves (which you do not need this perm for doing). In other words, you say you want to continue doing a half-dozen different things, but I don't really see any evidence of you doing them now. Primefac (talk) 11:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
@
John McBain (One Life to Live) to meet the correct naming conventions, but I am unable to do so as a redirect for the latter already exists. Regarding #4, there is a lot standing in the way of me moving multiple pages from sandboxes to the main space if the redirects already exist. Yes, it is possible to ask admins to delete the redirects or move the pages, but this often takes a while and adds more work to me and the admins and that is partially why I was requesting it. Regarding closing the moves, I have actually never had the chance to as they have nearly always been closed by other editors beforehand (and also, I have been told by other editors that it is discouraged to close moves which you comment on). Had I had the permission, the amount of articles I would have moved in the past 2 years would be much higher (both my own articles and others, including undoing undiscussed/controversial moves). Hence, that is why I suggested a trial run in order to illustrate my need for the permission and how I would do it correctly. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk
) 15:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm not going to go point-by-point through your arguments, but generally speaking we don't grant this permission because someone might find it useful, we grant it because they have demonstrated that they have been going through the proper (non-perm'd) channels and it's getting to be tiresome for them. So far you have said that it would be nice to be able to do all of these things, but as of right now you do not appear to be doing all of these things.
As a minor note about "moving sandboxes" - if there's a redirect, just edit the page and overwrite it. Unless there were multiple editors editing your sandbox, there is no reason to move the entire page. Primefac (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
There are a number of articles on my watchlist that require pending changes to be reviewed. This would facilitate reviewing those changes and approving or declining them as appropriate. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done According to the review log, you haven't used PCR since May 2022, nearly 2 years ago. As such, I'm not seeing a legitimate need to grant you this right. Please feel free to make a new request if you become active in RC patrol. Thanks, Fastily 20:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
With two years of dedicated service and prior receipt of reviewer rights twice, I respectfully requesting this right again. My intent is to assist in reviewing pending changes and lightening the workload for fellow editors. I remain committed to upholding Wikipedia's standards of accuracy and reliability. Granting me this privilege again would enable me to contribute more effectively to the platform's mission of disseminating knowledge to the world. Grabup (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Can I get a reply? 4 days passed but not recived any reply. Grabup (talk) 12:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
I can't say I'd use this often and am not intending to patrol, but a number of the pages on my watchlist have pending-changes protection (even by my request) and I do sometimes see good edits to them awaiting acceptance. I am accustomed to filtering out vandalism, test edits, unsupported edits and the like, and to following
WP:BLP (though a lot of my watchlist's deep in ancient history and mythology). NebY (talk
Reason for requesting rollback rights
Hi! I would like to have rollback rights, because I keep seeing persistant Vandalism in articles, I usually warn editors and or IP users about that and I use Twinkle for that too. And I usually revert vandalism but It usually doesn't work properly because of my computer problems. Thanks!
Not done See the notice at the top of this page. You've barely made any contributions to the mainspace, let alone done any anti-vandalism work. -Fastily 02:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks and I completely understand, as soon as I get more edits in the main space, I will try again. Neko Lexi (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Mainly want them so that I can use a lot of the anti-vandalism tools, many of which are unusable/much more annoying without rollback. Also a few instances where in actual rollback would be helpful. I have done a lot of anti-vandalism work. I had 5 reverts at the very beginning that were problematic (my thinking is explained at my talk page), but I think I've gotten more aware of the policies and there has only been one other issue with my reverts since, which was caused mostly by the fact that I didn't realize there was an ongoing edit war, just saw an edit summary of "." removing content, and reverted.
I have read Wikipedia:Rollback and understood it. I know what is intentional disruptive editing/vandalism, and a good faith mistake. For example, a typo is usually an honset mistake, and blanking a page is usually intentional, particularly if done repeatedly.
Done a lot of anti vandalism work. I have like 140 edit to the user talk space, vast majority of which are warning for bad edits. Searching "revert" brings up 120 results in my contributions, the vast majority of which are me reverting vandalism.
Thank you and have a nice day! Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
'Successful applicants will usually have: at least a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChanges."
Your account was created on 28/03/2024 - less than one month ago, which already means you have not met that point well. Furthermore - I see several editors & administrators have had to remind you several times about your mistakes. While I am not implying you are a vandal or a problematic user of any sort - are you sure additional privileges are something you feel as if you're ready to undertake this early? Synorem (talk) 00:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done given the many, many complaints/warnings on OP's talk page. Me Da Wikipedian, at this point you're closer to being blocked than securing elevated permissions. -Fastily 00:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Okay, wow! What should I do to improve/when would it be appropriate for me to come back @FastilyMe Da Wikipedian (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
(non-admin comment) Do some decent editing, patrol RC for a month+ and do well to the point where admins are not on your back. That's my advice. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$ 21:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
"Do some decent editing" could you please define. Could this means for counter vandalism work or non counter vandalism work@TheTechieMe Da Wikipedian (talk) 00:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Like get experience. Sorry if that wasn't clear. If you want any more info, ask me on my talk page; I don't want to clog up this thread. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$ 01:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I am TheTechie. I was suggested by User:Synorem to become a rollbacker as I, at least in their words, am encouraged to apply for rollback. I meet the requirements as follows:
As of this writing, I have 448 undeleted mainspace edits. 448 > 200
I have been patrolling recent changes for a month+.
I have not edit warred recently (frankly, I don't remember edit warring at all since I got this account)
I consistently notify editors when I revert their edits which appear to be vandalism, and where there would be an obvious need to do so.
Requesting permission because of these reasons. Thanks --- thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$ 01:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm curious why you felt it was appropriate to add yourself to add yourself as a CVUA trainer when you clearly lack the necessary experience (and then respond very defensively when Cassiopeia correctly called you out for it). There's also a lot of recent warnings/complaints on your talk page concerning basic understanding of our policies/guidelines. I'd prefer that requesters have a good understanding of these things before assigning them advanced permissions. Perhaps you'd like to comment on that? -Fastily 23:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I didn't think there was an edit count associated with it.
About the threads on my talk page on your permalink:
WP:MAINPAGE was for April Fools.
Ok, I agree that my CSD nominations are a hit or miss. I thought the Mama Lion wasn't very notable due to 3-4 sources. I will note that PROD/AFD is the way to go next time.
About the CSD for the Gen Beta page, I reached an understanding by talking (politely) with other edits on whether G4 would apply. I told them that a comment was made during the AFD saying we could use G4 to create recreations, and after another admin told me to keep the page, I didn't re-tag it.
About my signature: When pigsonthewing inquired about my signature, I was simply waiting for a third opinion. I agreed to change my signature after I had heard from a third opinion. And when Yamla asked me to remove the background from my signature, I complied.
About CVUA: I didn't mean to sound defensive. I just was trying to understand. And in this diff I complied after the user explained to me. I did not re-add my name.
About the signature of Nate: I read that you cannot have a name that is not similar to your username, which is why I brought it up elsewhere. I'm sorry if I sounded rude, but I've had a long day today and can't bother having any more problems. Maybe I'll take a wikibreak if need be.
Thanks, but I get the impression that you're still very green around here and still have a lot to learn. Totally fine though, we all were at some point, however I think you'd benefit from more experience before applying for advanced permissions. Keep up the good work, and consider reapplying in a month. As such, closing as Not done. -Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting rollback rights:
Hi! I am Vestrian24Bio; I have been editing on Wikipedia for almost 2 years now, I have made 2000+ edits and I have already reverted 200+
vandalisms, mostly using Twinkle. See my contributions here
.
Now, having the Rollback permission would be more helpful in patrolling vandalisms and it would grant me access to using the AntiVandal thus, making it easier to fight vandalisms. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 04:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Reason for requesting rollback rights. I have at least 200 mainspace edits, frequently warn users, and no edit warnings. However, I do not yet have a month of experience patrolling Recent Changes. I would like to request rollback rights because it would be easier for me to revert vandalism through View History. I have a habit of going back to View History after comparing edits, and having the Rollback user right would make it easier for me to revert edits on View History pages. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done I noticed you started actively reverting vandalism 4 days ago. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend more time gaining experience fighting vandalism before assigning you advanced permissions. Keep up the good work, and consider reapplying in a month. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits (I recommend using tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet which makes this extremely easy). Thanks, Fastily 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I will continue to revert vandalism for some time and warn users. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 21:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I've been patrolling Recent Changes for around a month or so, reverting any vandalism I come across, while also warning/notifying other users about their edits and why it was reverted. Having rollback would allow me to use AntiVandal, which is quite faster in reverting vandalism than RedWarn(the script I am using currently), while also allow quickly rollback edits without having to add a reason. That helps me deal with the edit and move onto other vandalism on the RC list. Some more info that you may want is that I have no warnings, no instances of edit-warring, joined 3/12/2024, which was around 36 days ago, and a near, if not perfect, track record in notifying users. Thanks - Muffin(Spreading Democracy, one edit at a time) 19:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I regularly edit templates while working on various articles on my watchlist, or when creating new articles that are part of something covered by a template. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([4]). — MusikBottalk 17:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Only because it was part of the admin package. ···
Join WP Japan
! 17:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think this should be controversial, but pinging JJMC89 for comment as they removed this permission earlier today — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Please run through
WP:TPEGRANT 5 and 6. I'm not seeing the need based on their recent template edits. — JJMC89 (T·C
) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
If you are willing to grant it it to me, fine. If not, fine. It's not worth my time to argue with you. ···
Join WP Japan
! 19:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done per JJMC89. -Fastily 03:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't understand this decision. The user easily meets criterion 5. There is nothing in the guideline that says the edits need to be "recent". I don't see how criterion 6 can apply because an admin would not usually be requesting edits to template-protected templates? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps you would be willing to discuss your decision, or would you mind if I overturned it? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree with JJMC89. Rights are assigned on as-needed basis. Given that OP's admin/crat bits were just revoked for cause, I think it's completely appropriate to be discerning here -Fastily 03:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
