User:Thingg/dashboard
CAVEAT: all the |show= parameters have been set to 7 days.
AB = Administrative Backlogs
[edit]Administrative backlog
[edit]AIV= Administrator intervention against vandalism
Reports
[edit]- Brayden 1955 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 61 five times in the last 5 minutes (New user removing references, details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Warned user. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ali kanane (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 1361 (LTA 1361, details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 01:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Newyouktimes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 3 five times in the last 5 minutes (New user blanking articles, details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 02:16, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]- ~2025-32852-31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – On Draft:The Marianas Web (diff): Block evasion of Special:Contributions/Gomburza88. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- UrbanMonk Editor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – On Draft:Pedram Shojai: account is being used only for promotional purposes. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
CSD= Candidates for speedy deletion ; PROD= Proposed deletions
| Candidates for speedy deletion | Entries |
|---|---|
| User requested | 2 |
| Empty articles | 0 |
| Nonsense pages | 0 |
| Spam pages | 6 |
| Importance or significance not asserted | 1 |
| Other candidates | 25 |
The following articles have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
( source / chronological order / expired )
{{CSD backlogs}} 7 backlognav + 2 + 5 single cat
| BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
|---|
| Proposed deletion – No backlog currently |
|---|
Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – 2 items
Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 61 items
Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old – 20 items
Requested RD1 redactions – 5 items
Expired proposed deletions of unsourced BLPs – No backlog currently
UAA= Usernames for administrator attention ; RFPP= Requests for page protection
- ImMissWorldSomebodyKillMe (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
- IShowTrump (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, so please be careful when blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 03:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
This username matched "clinton|hillary|hilary|trump|drumpf|biden|obama|kamala" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 03:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Note on file possible reference to former or current U.S. president, VP, or candidate - please review -- DQB (owner / report) 03:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
User-reported
[edit]- ChristopherHadnagy (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – WP:IMPERSONATE. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 04:59, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- 45dogs, what is your evidence that this account is impersonating Hadnagy as opposed to actually being Hadnagy? A person cannot impersonate themself. Cullen328 (talk) 08:02, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- See WP:REALNAME - the onus is on the account holder to prove they ARE the person in question, not the reporter to provide evidence that they are not. WaggersTALK 08:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Waggers, I beg to differ. The username policy imposes no mandatory "onus" on editors to prove that their name is what they say it is. Where's that language? The wording used about blocking is "may" not "must". Real names are permitted. Impersonation is not. Lacking even the slightest indication of impersonation, I think that is an error to block an account. There may well be conflict of interest issues, but COI is not a username violation. Cullen328 (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Blocking is preventative not punitive. The convention is to block accounts that might be impersonating a famous person until we are reasonably sure they are not. WaggersTALK 09:27, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I do not accept that "convention" in the absence of any evidence or even a hint of impersonation, and I believe that "convention" you mention is not grounded in policy. By that reasoning, I could block any account that I think "might" cause disruption. Cullen328 (talk) 10:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Waggers, at the top of this very page, it says
Real names are permitted, except when the editor implies they are someone other than themselves, such as impersonating a notable living person.
Cullen328 (talk) 10:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC)- Nobody's disputing that WaggersTALK 11:46, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not looking for an argument, I'm just pointing out that most administrators would block an account reported here that carries the name of a famous real life person and has interacted with the article about that person (as this one has) without any assurance they really are that person WaggersTALK 11:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Completely agree with Waggers here. I'm quite surprised this is being disputed. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 11:52, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I've faced the same resistance from some admins. I wish the policy clearer and ironclad, so that there was no room for interpretation. I agree with Waggers and Jauerback too, FWIW. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- This was my understanding of policy as well, that names close to the names of notable people would be blocked out of caution. I do think its likely that this account isn't impersonating anyone, I just didn't know that it needed to. Should the wording be changed then? 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Isn't the username policy quite clear here? Per WP:REALNAME,
if a username implies that the user is, or is related to, a notable, identifiable or well-known person, the account may be blocked as a precaution against impersonation until the user's proof of identity is provided
(emphasis added). The operative word is "may", but that just leaves to admin discretion – it's completely supported to block an account preventatively. UpTheOctave! • 8va? 15:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)- In my view, the operative words are "may" and "precaution". Lacking any indication whatsover of impersonation, that precaution is not necessary, since authentic names are not a violation of the username policy. Cullen328 (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn't block someone if it's very clear that they are the person. Why are we forcing someone to prove they are themselves, when that's not our problem with them, our problem is self-promotion etc. Secretlondon (talk) 22:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- User:Lourdes might have a word with y'all on this[1]... GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 23:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn't block someone if it's very clear that they are the person. Why are we forcing someone to prove they are themselves, when that's not our problem with them, our problem is self-promotion etc. Secretlondon (talk) 22:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- In my view, the operative words are "may" and "precaution". Lacking any indication whatsover of impersonation, that precaution is not necessary, since authentic names are not a violation of the username policy. Cullen328 (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Isn't the username policy quite clear here? Per WP:REALNAME,
- This was my understanding of policy as well, that names close to the names of notable people would be blocked out of caution. I do think its likely that this account isn't impersonating anyone, I just didn't know that it needed to. Should the wording be changed then? 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I've faced the same resistance from some admins. I wish the policy clearer and ironclad, so that there was no room for interpretation. I agree with Waggers and Jauerback too, FWIW. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Completely agree with Waggers here. I'm quite surprised this is being disputed. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 11:52, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not looking for an argument, I'm just pointing out that most administrators would block an account reported here that carries the name of a famous real life person and has interacted with the article about that person (as this one has) without any assurance they really are that person WaggersTALK 11:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Nobody's disputing that WaggersTALK 11:46, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Waggers, at the top of this very page, it says
- I do not accept that "convention" in the absence of any evidence or even a hint of impersonation, and I believe that "convention" you mention is not grounded in policy. By that reasoning, I could block any account that I think "might" cause disruption. Cullen328 (talk) 10:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Blocking is preventative not punitive. The convention is to block accounts that might be impersonating a famous person until we are reasonably sure they are not. WaggersTALK 09:27, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Waggers, I beg to differ. The username policy imposes no mandatory "onus" on editors to prove that their name is what they say it is. Where's that language? The wording used about blocking is "may" not "must". Real names are permitted. Impersonation is not. Lacking even the slightest indication of impersonation, I think that is an error to block an account. There may well be conflict of interest issues, but COI is not a username violation. Cullen328 (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- See WP:REALNAME - the onus is on the account holder to prove they ARE the person in question, not the reporter to provide evidence that they are not. WaggersTALK 08:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. Normally I would agree with the blocking proponents in the discussion above, and I'd block this as an impersonation, but it is abundantly clear from the editing focus and the edit requests that impersonation isn't happening here. If it was a new account with just one edit in the article itself, I'd block, but the context now is pretty clear. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 00:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Anachronist Given the fact that all the edits are over a lawsuit, which can get very personal and attract bad faith actors. You can easily see how impersonating your opponent to make them seem bad could be an attractive option. The appearance of an individual editing Wikipedia to remove negative information about themselves, pretty much regardless of the merits of the edits, can look very poor. All username blocks do is force the editor to go through VRT. If they can't do that, then. Well. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 02:09, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- 45dogs, what is your evidence that this account is impersonating Hadnagy as opposed to actually being Hadnagy? A person cannot impersonate themself. Cullen328 (talk) 08:02, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Marvant (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 04:03, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Current requests for increase in protection level
[edit]- 2025 FIFA U-17 World Cup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2025 FIFA U-17 World Cup group tables (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Reason: High level of anons and new users disruptive editing. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 16:42, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Question: Can you point to some specific instances of vandalism/disruption? I see a very large number of edits and a quick scroll through the history didn't find anything obviously disruptive. RunningOnBrains(talk) 17:25, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Special:Diff/1321464696, ~2025-32426-65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), ~2025-32426-22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and ~2025-30846-88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Page was protected for a week until 9 November. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 19:31, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- It is ongoing now. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. for the article,- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. for the template. Daniel Case (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- It is ongoing now. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 18:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Special:Diff/1321464696, ~2025-32426-65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), ~2025-32426-22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and ~2025-30846-88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Page was protected for a week until 9 November. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 19:31, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Edit warring by temporary accounts to insert poor grammar and WP:OR. TylerBurden (talk) 17:42, 10 November 2025 (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 17:54, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. Underlying range blocked from Njörðr and Cronus for a week Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Dieter Lloyd Wexler 18:42, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only the two incidents in the last couple of days. Daniel Case (talk) 02:32, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – Requesting extended confirmed protection as per WP:KURDS. KurdeEzidi (talk) 21:45, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Extended confirmed protected indefinitely. Will leave CTOPS notice on talk page Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Kline • talk • contribs 22:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:08, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Indian subcontinent related and was already vandalized. [2] JaxsonR (talk) 02:44, 11 November 2025 (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 06:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not seeing anything worse than the usual edits on a breaking news story. Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: It was protected semi for 3 days. But has faced a lot of distruption and vandalism over the days from the suspected PR accounts running. Semi protection need to be extented for over a week as it has a section 'controversies' and is live دثلميح (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Left CTOPS notice on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – WP:CT/IMH article, frequently subject to drive-by disruptive edits as the protection log and recent edits would show. Gotitbro (talk) 06:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Extended confirmed protected indefinitely. Autologged at CTOPS; will leave notices on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Sugar Tax (talk) 08:42, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Constant IP vandalism, edit warring, and removal of information since 23 October. At least 3 separate IP addresses have been used. When one IP address is blocked or warned with a disruptive editing template on their talk page, another one is used. Aside from the recent vandalism, no other IP contributions have been made since July. Article should be semi-protected for at least a month. Katangais (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – WP:CT/SA article seeing a flurry of IPs/new accounts making unexplained reverts. Previously protected due to similar dsruptions. Gotitbro (talk) 14:49, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. All recent socks. Daniel Case (talk) 03:27, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism, including slurs. Doc Strange (talk) 16:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite template protection: High-risk template – A number of edits have broken transclusions. Given the high number of uses this warrants TE status. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:25, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There has been only one edit that may have caused problems since it was ECP'ed and it looks like a good-faith mistake. Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: IP vandalism (removal of prose, clubs from infobox, career statistics, categories, going against WP:FOOTY and heading standards), which has resumed today. Unregistered user(s) revert(s) previously made edits, with reasons such as 'trimming', 'removed unnecessary bits/excess information'. Issue was already raised a few months ago, but stopped shortly after a request to raise protection was submitted. KibolLP (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Two disruptive edits earlier today were the first edits to article in eight months. Daniel Case (talk) 03:33, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent disruptive edits by IP. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 20:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Question: What's disruptive about those edits? Those two labels have released works by The Album Leaf. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:23, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: We have an IP that keeps trying to delete "Conservative" from the lead. Can we get semi-confirmed? Snokalok (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:37, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from Australian-based temporary IP accounts. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:13, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Could you please restore the status quo for Humanitarian response to Cyclone Freddy and protect it to allow for a merge discussion to take place? An editor has been trying to BOLDly merge the humanitarian response article without discussion and has been reverted by both me and another person. I asked them to stop at Talk:Cyclone Freddy#Merged Humanitarian response to Cyclone Freddy, but they went ahead and replied and merged the article again anyways. Noah, BSBATalk 00:52, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Extended confirmed protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The Bushranger One ping only 03:21, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Long-term vandalism. Long protection history due to persistent vandalism. Several further instances of vandalism recently in the month of November. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 02:27, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 03:41, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:45, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
[edit]Before posting a request for unprotection, please discuss it with the protecting administrator first. You can create a request below only if you receive no response from them.
To find out which administrator protected the page, go to the page's edit history and click on the "View logs for this page" link (located underneath the page's title). The protecting administrator is listed in the protection log entry, next to the words "protected", "changed protection level", or "configured pending changes". If there are a large number of log entries on the page, use the drop-down menu near the top of the page and select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" to filter the logs accordingly.
DO NOT request a reduction in protection if...
- ...you are being prevented from editing the page. A desire to change content is not a valid reason for unprotection. Instead:
- If you can edit the article's talk page, use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to propose a change on the article's talk page. Include an explanation of the exact content that you want to change, and what the content will be afterward.
- If the article's talk page is protected, you may propose a change at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit.
- ...your reasoning for reducing protection is that the article has not been vandalized. That simply means the protection is working as intended.
- ...your reasoning for reducing protection is basically "a long time has passed" without supporting details.
- ...you haven't contacted the protecting administrator.
You may request a protection reduction below if...
- ...you want to change the protection level of a template or module from full protection to template protection. You may add the request to this page without having to discuss it with the protecting administrator first.
- ...you need to remove creation protection from a location where no page exists (redlinked pages) after a draft version of the intended article is prepared beforehand and ready to be published.
- ...you are proposing a trial reduction in protection for a page that has been protected for several years, provided the proposal is supported by evidence such as talk page activity, page views, page traffic, number of watchers, frequency of edit requests, and prior history of vandalism.
- ...the protecting administrator is inactive or has not responded to you in several days.
If you cannot locate your request, make sure to check the request archives to see if it's been moved there. Only requests that have been recently answered will still be listed here.
Current requests for edits to a protected page
[edit]Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here
Requests for specific edits should be made on the talk page of the protected article. You can create an edit request below only if the talk page is also protected, preventing you from adding a request there.
- You may add the appropriate template (
{{Edit protected}},{{Edit template-protected}},{{Edit extended-protected}}, or{{Edit semi-protected}}) to the article's talk page if you would like to request an edit be made. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed. - For edit requests being made due to the editor having a conflict of interest with the article subject (see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}template should be used instead of the others listed above. - Requests to move pages that are currently move-protected should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not on this page.
- This page is not for holding discussions regarding content. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit that you wish to be performed.
Otherwise, this is the correct place to use in order to add an edit request if you are unable to add one to the article's talk page. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to properly add a request.
Handled requests
[edit]
| 9 protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Updated as needed. Last updated: 20:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC) |
| 55 template-protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Updated as needed. Last updated: 04:05, 12 November 2025 (UTC) |
RFA= Requests for adminship
RFP= Requests for permissions
Autopatrolled
[edit]- TheRichic (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hello! I formally request the autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in English and Spanish, and I consider that, after so many years and hundreds of articles created on both wikis, i am in the position to say that I know the rules and styles. I've never cared much about user rights, but now that I've started a personal project (ambassadors of Spain and all its lists) to expand diplomatic information about my country, Spain, I'd like to avoid the workload that comes with reviewing articles that comply with our rules. Thank you. TheRichic .svg?lang=en){kind=small}
(Messages here) 11:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- @TheRichic: why is Francisco Javier Conde de Saro notable? voorts (talk/contributions) 01:20, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- ႧႤႧႰႨ ႾႠႰႨ (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hello! I formally request the Autopatrolled user right. I'm a regular user of Wikipedia, both in Turkish and English. I have contributed to the Turkish Wikipedia, particularly on the Tao-Klarjeti region. I have also started to transfer these contributions to the English Wikipedia. I think it would be good to reduce the workload involved in reviewing the items I have written. Thank you. --ႧႤႧႰႨ ႾႠႰႨ (talk) 15:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Aeternus (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I have been editing Wikipedia since 2006, have created numerous new articles, edited countless others, and am very familiar with its policies. Λeternus (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- Michelangelo1992 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I've periodically patrolled Michelangelo1992's articles, and consistently found them to be in good shape. Focused on books as a topic area and very clear familiarity with WP:NBOOK. He's created 135 articles. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Michelangelo1992: I'm a little concerned about overly lengthy quotations. Would you commit to summarizing quotations a bit more? Also, see MOS:SAID. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback! I’ve always trended toward direct quotes to avoid concerns for original research, but I can make an effort to paraphrase more in the future while still citing the original source. I’ll also try to be more mindful of WP:SAID. I thought I was doing fairly well with this, but I am always open to feedback particularly if you have specific suggestions relating to recent articles. Thank you! Michelangelo1992 (talk) 14:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- BenTanXiaoMing (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Have been creating several new articles recently, and I understand the policies and guidelines behind articles. BenTanXiaoMing (talk) 20:45, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
File mover
[edit]- EggRoll97 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hello all. So I originally wasn't really going to request this (rename media had, in my experience, worked pretty well, so there was no need for me to request file mover myself), but based on two of my file rename requests recently lingering for 4 days after the request before being moved, I think that's a fairly clear indication that it would be beneficial to just request the permission myself, considering I have demonstrated (at least what I see as) a need and am hopefully trustworthy enough. EggRoll97 (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Page mover
[edit]- Olliefant (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Would be useful for my work as an AFC reviewer, recently got in a small disagreement (See: here) where having page mover rights could have avoided the whole thing, I've been dragging my feet on applying for them on a while but decided to bite the bullet after it. Olliefant (she/her) 15:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer
[edit]- Wikieditor662 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I have over a 1,000 edits, and I would like to help out. Thanks! Wikieditor662 (talk) 01:18, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- CardboardLamp (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Hi, I'd like to be able to review changes since I, several times a day (usually), have a chance to look at the usually 1-3 changes, and review them and accept if good. I've checked Special:PendingChanges several times, and each time there are a few changes I could review if I had the right. Thank you, CardboardLamp (TC) 01:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
Rollback
[edit]- Seercat3160 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I've been patrolling recent changes for over six months, and I feel like I now have enough experience dealing with vandalism (and other forms of disruptive editing) to be able to make useful contributions in this area with the additional technical abilities and access to tools granted through the rollback perm. I've used Twinkle and more recently Ultraviolet extensively (though not exclusively), so I know my way around the general "one-click revert" paradigm, and I almost always use appropriate edit summaries and talk page warnings. If I'd benefit from any constructive criticism, please let me know. Seercat3160 (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Smallangryplanet (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Longtime recent-changes patroller, habitual twinkle user, did not realise I didn't have this right. 😅 It would make my counter-vandalism work much easier. Thanks in advance! I am travelling so there may be some delayed responses to any questions, at least from my usual time zone. Smallangryplanet (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Template editor
[edit]- Mb2437 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
Extensive history of editing templates, to be used for non-controversial tweaks and additions. MB2437 10:32, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Standard Guidelines review:
(guideline: >1 year, applicant: 3)- (guideline: >1000 edits, applicant: ~18k)
- (guideline: >150 template edits, applicant: ~300)
- (guideline: !<6 months, applicant: NA)
(guideline: 3 sandboxes, applicant: 0)- (guideline: 5 requests, applicant: ~2)
- Primefac (talk) 23:17, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- Standard Guidelines review:
Footer
[edit]Policies and links
DYK
[edit]| Count of DYK Hooks | ||
| Section | # of Hooks | # Verified |
|---|---|---|
| September 4 | 1 | 1 |
| September 8 | 2 | |
| September 9 | 1 | |
| September 12 | 2 | 2 |
| September 13 | 1 | |
| September 15 | 1 | |
| September 17 | 1 | |
| September 18 | 2 | |
| September 19 | 1 | |
| September 20 | 1 | |
| September 21 | 2 | |
| September 23 | 2 | |
| September 24 | 2 | 1 |
| September 25 | 2 | |
| September 26 | 3 | 1 |
| September 27 | 1 | |
| September 28 | 3 | |
| September 29 | 4 | 1 |
| September 30 | 4 | 1 |
| October 1 | 2 | |
| October 2 | 4 | 3 |
| October 3 | 2 | |
| October 4 | 1 | 1 |
| October 5 | 14 | 10 |
| October 6 | 8 | 8 |
| October 7 | 5 | 4 |
| October 8 | 5 | 2 |
| October 9 | 14 | 10 |
| October 10 | 6 | 4 |
| October 11 | 10 | 6 |
| October 12 | 7 | 6 |
| October 13 | 9 | 8 |
| October 14 | 10 | 6 |
| October 15 | 4 | 2 |
| October 16 | 8 | 4 |
| October 17 | 8 | 5 |
| October 18 | 8 | 5 |
| October 19 | 7 | 3 |
| October 20 | 8 | 4 |
| October 21 | 14 | 12 |
| October 22 | 7 | 6 |
| October 23 | 14 | 7 |
| October 24 | 9 | 6 |
| October 25 | 11 | 10 |
| October 26 | 15 | 11 |
| October 27 | 16 | 11 |
| October 28 | 12 | 8 |
| October 29 | 9 | 5 |
| October 30 | 9 | 6 |
| October 31 | 16 | 11 |
| November 1 | 11 | 9 |
| November 2 | 9 | 7 |
| November 3 | 15 | 10 |
| November 4 | 12 | 7 |
| November 5 | 8 | 4 |
| November 6 | 4 | 3 |
| November 7 | 10 | 5 |
| November 8 | 6 | 3 |
| November 9 | 7 | 4 |
| November 10 | 9 | 3 |
| November 11 | 6 | 2 |
| November 12 | ||
| Total | 405 | 248 |
| Last updated 02:08, 12 November 2025 UTC Current time is 04:19, 12 November 2025 UTC [refresh] | ||