They seem to have stopped, but I'd call these most likely(?) good-faith and manually performed (albeit probably with a bunch of open tabs). Either way, I'd recommend warning before reporting here unless the user is still active. --slakr\ talk / 17:09, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
They seem to have disclosed their connection on their user page, though they're doing a bad job of keeping the list of articles updated. Izno (talk) 19:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, not seeing vandalism here. Making edits Magnolia677 doesn't like doesn't constitute vandalism pbp 20:09, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
This is absurd. I have written multiple featured articles, featured lists and good articles. My edits were made entirely in good faith. FlightTime has also blanket reverted several unrelated articles that I painstakingly copyedited.—indopug (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
It is rarely appropriate to report someone with over 30k edits to WP:AIV, FlightTime. Izno (talk) 19:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
It's more rare for an editor with ~30K edits to remove half of a infobox across many articles without consensus. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@FlightTime yes, and there are talk pages for that. Please employ them in the future instead. Izno (talk) 19:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
@FlightTime Did you see what was in those infoboxes? Excrutiating in-universe minutiae. In any case, how does good-faith actions (which my edit summaries clearly show they were) ever constitute vandalism? Why are you reverting some light copyediting I did as "mass content removal"?!—indopug (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 03:00, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 23:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
This username matched "4chan|8chan|reddit" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 01:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Note on file these are typically names created as part of campaigns either from within or against one of these sites -- DQB (owner / report) 01:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Note on file The word troll may imply an intent to disrupt Wikipedia - but that is not certain. Please use discretion to determine if this is a violation or not. -- DQB (owner / report) 16:10, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
This appears to be someone's name. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 03:27, 16 July 2025 (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) 08:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
WikiAdvisor (talk·contribs·deleted·filter log·SUL·Google)• (block · soft·promo · cause ·bot·hard·spam·vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a misleading username. "WikiAdvisor" comes across as quite misleading, especially for newer users who might wrongly assume the person is an admin or has some kind of elevated status. It gives off the impression of authority that they do not actually have, which can be confusing. Aleain (talk) 07:52, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
But users like Wikimaster 3 or WikiGuru100 (blocked for socking, not UAA) are not violations while they appear to also be like WikiAdvisor. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. Please discuss this with the user first, and consider opening a community discussion at Requests for comment/User names if they disagree with your concerns. I see the reason this was brought here, but I don't think it is serious enough to warrant a no-warning block for a username that has existed since 2018. Vanderwaalforces I don't think those two examples are a similar situation. There is no official position of "guru" and "master" here, those terms are often used to suggest experience with something. "Advisor" could be a position. 331dot (talk) 18:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
@331dot Thank you, but either ways I still think it isn’t a violation. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. Please discuss this with the user first, and consider opening a community discussion at Requests for comment/User names if they disagree with your concerns. I can see other ways that this username could be read; the user has not edited about the Washington Post or even linked to it. To no-warning block for a username there must be a clear connection between the edits and the name. 331dot (talk) 18:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. I'm not seeing how this is offensive, I think they confused creating an article with creating an account. Certainly not offensive enough to block with no edits, unless I'm missing something. 331dot (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Place requests for protection increases at the BOTTOM of this section. If you cannot find your request, check the archive of requests or, failing that, the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.
Replace this template with:
{{Contentious topics/Arab-Israeli talk notice}}
Currently the edit notice says that the article is related to the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole, while the template on talk page says that only parts of this article are related to the said conflict.
By changing this, the information consistency between the article's edit notice and the talk page notice will be kept.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Requested this permission ~2 months ago, denied because I was mostly creating auto-notable stubs. I think I have expanded the types of articles I create, including well-sourced local pages or biographical entries where I take time to source subjects that do not inherently meet a generic notability criteria. (I still do create auto-notable pages sometimes, but those no longer make up the majority of pages I create.) As a new page reviewer, I got good experience with the notability guidelines reviewing articles during the backlog drive WP:MAY25, and also participating in AfD. Thought about requesting again as I have run into a few of my own pages while reviewing pages that are in topics I contribute to/am interested in. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
Also wanted to mention that if I am unsure of a subject's notability, I will utilize WP:AFC for my own articles occasionally Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autopatrolled declined in the past 90 days ([1]). — MusikBottalk 02:20, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
7-year vet of the site, multiple GANs and DYKs, 51 mainspace articles created of which 49 are live (G6 and G7 deletions for the other two). Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:54, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello there, my respect to you! I would like to request for getting autopatrolled rights because I contribute interesting articles to both English and Simple Wikipedia. I have over 700 edits, which is over the requirements, and my account is over 3 months old. If I get autopatrolled rights, I will never forget this appreciation I got and I will continue contributing to Wikipedia, and I will also continue to take responsibilities for my actions. Thanks! Waiting for a feedback. :-) VictorNingthemcha (talk) 13:06, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for autopatrolled declined in the past 90 days ([2]). — MusikBottalk 13:10, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
I have been on Wikipedia for more than a decade, and I truly feel that it is one of my great passions in life. I have more than 30,000 edits, and I am credited with more than 300 articles that are not Redirects or Disambiguation pages. (I personally take credit for more than 100 of these, which did not originate as Redirect pages.) Although I continue to propose Draft pages to this day when I am not 100% confident myself about notability, I frequently go straight to the mainspace and have made a number of articles that have been significant in some form or field, with my particular focus being on film industry and electoral politics pages.
Recently, I redirected a few thousand Supreme Court of the United States cases to the case volumes in which they were listed. It was a large-scale project for me, but in the end it was decided that redlinks would be better for promoting caseload knowledge, something that I agreed to and I believe will continue to service our Wikipedia community. For this reason, it might appear that I have a large number of deleted pages, but this is almost exclusively due to this particular project; I had an edit deletion rate of less than 2%, and I had not had a page that I created taken down in years, not since I was a far more novice editor. (You can read more about that SCOTUS discussion here.)
I believe that being autopatrolled will continue to allow me to contribute to the Wikipedia community, and that is why I am reaching out to ask for permissions. I am happy to answer any questions or improve any articles that I have created if there is anything noticeable that needs help. Although I have long been looking to increase my permissions and role in the community, I quite frankly have always had impostor syndrome stop me from asking, but a bit of encouragement from Liz made me try. Thank you so much! PickleG13 (talk) 20:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
I'm not inclined to grant autopatrolled so soon after the SCOTUS redirect deletions, but won't object if another admin wants to grant it. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your honest feedback, voorts. Although I hope that an admin decides to grant it, I have been on Wikipedia for a long time and I will continue to for a long time to come no matter what. Please let me know if you ever need help with anything, whether it's a full-scale project or a simple clean-up. PickleG13 (talk) 21:47, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
I was granted a two month trial for this. Have created 100+ articles with 10K+ edits and will continue to do so. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Dr vulpes (expires 00:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBottalk 23:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to request Autopatrolled rights for my account. I've made 74 articles, mostly BLPs. None of my articles have been deleted, and all are above stub-class. I have also recently had two DYK hooks approved and I make sure to create talk pages for my articles. I hope to cut down on the NPP backlog as I continue to create. 24Anonymous (talk) 03:20, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
The Mainline Times & Suburban article, the PA Prep Live article (which differs from the previous one with a new interview) and the O'Colly article. While I recognized that the O'Colly's independence might be questionable due to its connection with Oklahoma State University, I betted on the multiple articles (2, 3) written by the website to prove WP:GNG. I also do feel comfortable utilizing Articles for creation when I feel that notability might be a bit less concrete, as I have for Taylor Hansen and, more recently, Darielle O'Brien. 24Anonymous (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
After some reflection, I am choosing to withdraw my application at this time. It was a rather impulsive decision and I think I will give myself some more time before trying to obtain Autopatrolled in the future. I apologize for any inconveniences caused. ::Request withdrawn24Anonymous (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Regular article creator and Did you know? contributor who demonstrates understanding of the notability guidelines on a number of topics. No copyright violation troubles, and spot-checks for text–source integrity do indeed check out. Note their creation Not-deer was deleted at AfD earlier this year; I'm not inclined to give this too much weight here as it seems to have been a notability edge case, and experienced participants in that discussion gave reasonable arguments both for and against deletion. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I have created over 25 new articles that meet notability guidelines and follow Wikipedia standards and guideliness. I am familiar with Wikipedia’s core content policies (NPOV, V, NOR) and believe that being autopatrolled will reduce the workload on new page patrollers. Thank you in advance Lanceloth345 (talk) 12:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Hey Lanceloth345, could you comment on why Petrit Malaj was deleted a few weeks ago, and what you improved when you recreated it? (Courtesy ping for Sphilbrick, who deleted under CSD G12.) Similarlly with Gjesti, which is currently in draftspace. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 13:08, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Page Petrit Malaj was recreated again in neutral way + more sources, becouse first version had some words "sounding" not neutral at all, (my fault) as per draft:Gjesti lacking notability it's under review but explained at talk page of draft page reasons why he is notable ect. (also partecipating other editor in discussion). Lanceloth345 (talk) 13:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I've created 117 articles so far, all of which are live. I mostly write on topics related to history, architecture, and caves. Thanks for considering my request. JesusisGreat7☾⋆ | Ping Me 08:56, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
There are no outstanding requests for the confirmed flag.
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.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Hello, I've been active in tackling relists and closures on XfD logs, and am requesting the page mover right to be able to cleanly move pages to userspace or draftspace when there is consensus to do so; I sometimes encounter discussions like that during my log runs. Granting the page mover right would lighten the workload for admins having to do additional housekeeping (i.e. deleting redirects) or more closures. Thanks for considering this request. Left guide (talk) 07:33, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
The current AfDs for Luke McCormick and Harbor Miller I see as having consensus to draftify, and the QClimate chart TfD is one I recently closed as a move to userspace. Perhaps that might help gauge my judgment in using the page mover tool. Left guide (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Done. I wasn't aware of the request here when I granted Left guide Page Mover and Rollbacker rights. They've proved themself as a trustworthy, experienced editor, and are very familiar with P&G. Their work around the AfD circuit will benefit from having this permission. Owen×☎ 12:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I am active with cleaning up disambiguation pages, which are often malplaced. Almost all of my RMTR requests end up smoothly going through, and I have had several RMs that I knew had consensus and would have closed, if I could. I believe I have demonstrated good judgement in RM discussions, and will use the permissions to improve the encyclopedia. Thanks. Ivey (talk - contribs) 16:44, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I have several yrs of experience in wiki creating pages n expanding stubs as well as streamline existing ones. i fulfill all requirements for this right. i request to be granted this right.
07:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC) Bonadart (talk) 07:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Not done per lack of demonstrated need and insufficient experience with moving (12 distinct moves, 0 RM's, 0 RM/TR requests). ~ Jenson (SilverLocust💬) 02:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
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’d like to request pending changes reviewer rights. I’ve been active for over a month now and have made 700+ edits, mostly focused on improving article tone, adding reliable sources, fixing formatting issues, and cleaning up drafts. I’ve created and improved a number of articles, particularly in biographical and cultural topics. I’m familiar with key policies like WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:COPYVIO, and I aim to contribute more to content maintenance through reviewing edits on protected pages. I’m careful with sourcing and would use reviewer tools with that same level of care. Cognifex (talk • contribs) 11:39, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had an account for 29 days. — MusikBottalk 11:40, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
I believe I fulfill all of the criteria for gaining permission. I have a pretty long history of editing, and I am trying to step up my editing game! I am trying to branch out in what I do so although this backlog isn't heavy, I would like to help out. Coulomb1 (talk) 01:38, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Requesting access to assist with the backlog in helping to ensure pending edits meet the criteria of the Wikipedia policies & guidelines. Eulersidentity (talk) 10:13, 17 July 2025 (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 requesting rollback in order to better fight vandalism. This is my second request attempt, with my first being over a year ago; it was rejected because my work patrolling recent changes was deemed too sporadic. Despite my patrolling of recent changes admittedly still being somewhat sporadic, I have come across two separate instances when having rollback rights would have allowed me to better contribute to the project (here and here). I consistently make sure to notify editors when reverting their edits, and I feel that I have a good track record when it comes to identifying vandalism in order to use rollback rights responsibly. Thanks. Leafy46 (talk) 05:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Hi - I've been patrolling the edit filter log for a few months and have had a few problems recently with the log occasionally disallowing Twinkle rollbacks, especially on unreferenced numeric changes. Am requesting MediaWiki rollback rights to avoid this in future. Thanks. Epsilon.Protatalk 22:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Former admin, lost my mop for inactivity. I'm trying to get active again, and since I spend a lot of time doing CV work, rollback would be helpful. –Darkwind (talk) 12:34, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
I’ve spent the last few days patrolling the edit log and reverting vandalism manually, but now I would like to use learn to use tools like Anti-Vandal and Twinkle instead of just manually doing it myself. GiraffeLover19 (talk) 14:31, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
For the last 6 months I have been working on vandalism through recent changes and by also viewing the abuse log. I've encountered some situations that I have cleaned up that having the rollback permission would have saved a tremendous amount of time
I believe that I meet all the requirements outlined to receive the permission, and by receiving the permission it would allow me to contribute to the great cause of keeping Wikipedia free from vandalism. Bntlyprce (talk) 16:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has 188 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBottalk 19:40, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Increasing number of edits into the template space after being an article contributor for years. Running across more protected templates, such as Infobox gymnast, for which I'd need access. Already have much experience editing and creating templates, as well as sandbox to production edits. GauchoDude (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Not sure if I'm supposed to reply to this or not? Clearly well surpass the vast majority of guidelines and a few short on some. Please advise if you have any further questions for me? GauchoDude (talk) 22:29, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
You can if you want. It's easy to run the numbers, just didn't have the bandwidth to do a full review. Primefac (talk) 22:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
Few questions for you:
Do you intend to edit LUA modules?
Do you intend to contribute to the other associated areas (contentmodels, edit notices, etc. Basically anything other then templates build on wikitext)?
Do you understand that in general, most changes to highly used templates should be proposed and tested first - as opposed to the standard WP:BRD process? (note: it is generally acceptable to promote tests to the primary page after a reasonable time so long as there is no objection).
