Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Page semi-protected
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RFP)

Shortcuts
"Wikipedia:RFP" redirects here. For requests for protection, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.

Archived requests

Administrator / Bureaucrat / Checkuser / Oversighter
Rollbacker
Patroller
Transwiki Importer

Permissions

See also: Wikipedia:Administrators

There are many kinds of special permissions that users can be granted. These include:

  • Rollbacker is a user who can quickly revert changes by other users. See Wikipedia:Rollback feature.
  • Flood is a very short-term permission that a user can get from any administrator to make lots of small edits in a row. When using the flood permission, a user’s edits will be hidden by default from Special:RecentChanges.
  • Patroller is a user who can review new pages that other users make by marking them "patrolled". Any pages a patroller makes do not have to be reviewed by others.
  • Administrator (also called an "admin" or "sysop") is a user who can delete and protect pages and block users. Admins can also grant the rollback, flood and patroller permissions.
  • Bureaucrat (also called a "crat") is a user who can grant and revoke the admin and bot permissions.
  • Checkuser is a user who can see private information about editors (for example, their IP addresses).
  • Oversight is a user who can hide private information from everyone except other oversighters and stewards.
  • Transwiki importer is a user who has use of the import tool to move pages here from other projects. This is not to be confused with importer, who can upload XML files using the import tool.
  • Importer is not granted on this wiki.
  • Uploader is a user who can upload files locally on this wiki. This permission is granted temporarily and will be removed once the task is complete.
  • IP block exempt is a right given to trusted named users who may edit from an IP address that would otherwise be blocked through no fault of their own.

Adding a new request

Rollbacker

You must be an active member of Simple English Wikipedia, preferably with some experience in reverting vandalism.

Rollback must never be used to revert in edit wars, or to remove good-faith changes. Use the undo feature for this, and give a reason. Rollback does not let you give a reason when reverting. It must only be used to revert bad changes. It can and will be revoked if misused.

Click here to request rollback.

Flood

Requests for the temporary (short-term) flood permission should be made on an administrator’s talk page, on the #wikipedia-simple connect IRC channel, or at the Administrators' noticeboard.

Uploader

Requests for temporary (short-term) file upload permissions should be made on the Administrators' noticeboard. An administrator should be notified once the uploads are done so that the permission can be removed.
Image uploads are not allowed, this should only be requested for uploading other media (such as audio clips)

Administrator

Please read the criteria for adminship before nominating another user or yourself, to make sure the nominated user meets the criteria for becoming an administrator. You may want to look at the archives first so you can see why other people’s requests have succeeded or failed.

Administrator tools are there to better help the community. They do not make certain users better than others. To nominate a candidate for adminship, please follow these instructions:

  1. In the input box below, replace USERNAME with the username of the person you are nominating for adminship.
  2. Complete the fields given to you.
  3. Once the user has accepted, add {{Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/<insert name of person nominated>}} underneath the Current requests for adminship heading below, at the very top of the list.
  4. Optional: Add {{rfa-notice}} to the candidate's userpage.

Notes: This is not the place to get "constructive feedback from others", if you want feedback from others in a less formal environment, please see Simple Talk. If a candidate is successful, an administrator or bureaucrat should add them to MediaWiki:Gadget-HighlightAdmins.js.


Bureaucrat, Checkuser, or Oversight

For the bureaucrat, checkuser, or oversight permission, a user first needs to be an administrator. There are special requirements at Wikipedia:Criteria for adminship for these users.

Current time is 07:11:11, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Purge


Current requests for rollback

None at this time

Current requests for patroller

User:Cactusisme

Hello, I am requesting for patroller rights today. I have created over 70 articles in this wiki. I am familiar with this wikipedia's policies, including those about copyright infringement, biographies (notability) and if a source is verifiable. My most qualified article is probably Max Maeder. I patroll new pages regularly. If you have any issues please let me know. Thanks. Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 07:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme:  Not done On this wiki, the patroller right includes autopatrol. That means articles created by patrollers don't appear as needing to be patrolled. I just looked a some of the articles you creates and they did need patrolling. Some of the issues I saw were:
  • Article not categorized
  • Complex language
  • Reference display not properly formatted
Not only do those things mean that the articles you created needed patrolling, but you might not recognize the issues in other articles you look at. So for now, I'd say to work on creating better articles here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. BRP ever 06:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Current requests for transwiki importer

None at this time

Current requests for adminship

RiggedMint

RiggedMint (talk · contribs · count)

End date: 11:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)


Hello people, I will be self-nominating and would like to volunteer as admin. Over the past 2 days I've thought about nominating myself for admin, it was hard for me to decide, but now I am confident that I want to volunteer for it. While I am not as active, I will be trying to get more active (due to the school year). I am also very familiar with the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia, and I have always learnt from my mistakes over the past 4 years, I can take criticism of my work and try to improve based on it. I know the responsibilities and duties of admins, it’s honestly quite a big role to leap in. I hope to tackle some few points that aren’t as looked-at on by admins as of current, and those points are:

  • Anti-Vandalism, specifically at noon-afternoon, I've noticed admins aren’t as active during those hours (especially in my timezone, which is UTC -06:00.)
  • Midnight-Early morning work (11 PM-4 AM). This also relates to the anti-vandalism work as said above.
  • RfDs, I’ve noticed there’s been a bit of a backlog of deletion requests that needed to be closed weeks ago.
  • General help to others, I also want to help others edit and build a good encyclopedia, I also want to help them avoid certain things (like edit warring, CoI, etc.); generally, I want to be a good mentor, like others that have been a (pretty much) mentor to me.

Overall, I want to volunteer due to simplewiki needing more admins. I want to say that I am pretty productive in my work, I have done thousands of edits pertaining to anti-vandalism work, I have also improved a lot of articles and made a lot of articles. (Though I have not made as much as others did), I can answer any question you all would like to ask. Thanks, RiggedMint 11:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Self-nomination. RiggedMint 11:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support good candidate. BZPN (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC) Changed to oppose. BZPN (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. One of the easiest Supports in my life.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support If there is more admins in Wikipedia, it will be much good work in Wikipedia. And I will choose support for that. thetree284 (talk) 18:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Experienced Editor Raayaan9911 01:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong support Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 01:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC) Changed to Support Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 12:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose sorry, but I have to change my vote after your reply. You are undoubtedly a good candidate in many aspects, but your answer to my question is not satisfactory (from an experienced user, I expected a slightly different answer). BZPN (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I also see that you are not very involved in creating new articles. You only have 23 articles created, several of which have problems. Also, as a patroller, you only marked 14 pages as reviewed. BZPN (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I did clarify in the actual nomination message that I had not made as many articles as others did. I will say that I am more involved in anti-vandalism. RiggedMint 23:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's right, but don't you think an admin should be versatile? Fighting vandalism is an extremely important job, but an administrator is expected to know the basics and participate in the regular editoral activities. Each administrator has at least several dozen articles and also participates in regular editoral activities. I think that it is simply a contribution without which it is difficult to go further. But anyway, good luck with this RfA. You will surely be a good admin. BZPN (talk) 23:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    An admin should be versatile, yes. I absolutely think so, and I am improving and I've been more focused on creating and improving articles. But thank you for the insight. RiggedMint 00:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose - This wiki has a rather tenacious history with QD A4 in particular (1, 2, 3, 4, most likely many more in our ST and AN archives), and unfortunately the understanding of the QD policy below was incorrect. While I admit that RfDs with long/in-depth discussions are comparatively rare (especially on a small wiki like this), which means less reference material, after looking at the answers given below (especially to Griff's questions) I don't think that you are quite ready for that step yet. I recommend reading through the archives of Wikipedia:Deletion review, particularly those from 2022 onwards. Chenzw  Talk  01:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I see, so A4 is based on how if they claim to be notable or not? And also, thank you for the insight, I will try to improve on that matter. RiggedMint 01:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose An admin requires somewhat more experience than the other editors. RiggedMint has so far created only 25 articles. However, this user has actively played a role in preventing vandalism on this wiki. Zjui3r (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose because they incorrect QD policy, Unfortunately i changed support to oppose in this vote. Not experience editor yet Raayaan9911 14:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hi there. I honestly was not very aware of your contributions to this project, but through my research I have been very impressed with your work in vandalism cleanup. A few questions relating to that work:

  • Quick deletions
    • What sort of articles are eligible for deletion as A1?
    • When considering a A4 deletion, what would you consider in deciding whether to delete
  • RFDs
    • How do you determine notability when deciding whether an article should be kept or not?
    • How would you approach the closure of this RFD?
    • Is it appropriate to close a RFD in which the majority of commenters disagree with the outcome? If so, when?
  • Nominating statement - In your statement, you mention that as a UTC-6 administrator that is frequently active, you would help fill in the gaps of coverage. We have recently added two UTC-6 administrators, and looking at your activity, it has been infrequent. Why do you feel your life circumstances have changed to allow the community to trust that you will actively volunteer in your role?
  • LTAs - A LTA is using multiple IPs to vandalise the article on griffins. What action would you take as the responding administrator?

Thank you for all your work on the project and good luck! Griff (talk) 00:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your questions,
1. I would define A1 articles as "Articles that don't qualify as a stub"; for example, the creator is talking about something else that does not relate to the article.
2. I consider A4 deletions as "Subjects that aren't even notable or just not notable for RfD"; for example, a person who creates an article about themself.
3. Onto RfDs, I determine the notability of the subject through the actual sources themselves, other existing Wikipedia articles (if there even is one), and some searches on the web. If the articles notable enough, I would
keep that certain article.
4. I would approach it with the artist himself, is he notable first? A quick search and a flipthrough of other wikis would say he's notable. Now onto the articles and the artworks, are they notable? And it would look like most of the artworks are pretty notable, but not notable enough to be seperated articles. I would close it as merge to the artist, because of the reasoning listed, and because most of the consensus voted merge.
5. If the article is outright very notable. Or if the article just needs improvement and is notable.
6. If I can't fulfill the role then I can't, but if you saw my total edits per year, 2024 has been my most active year, and I hope to continue it and try to be active. It's just that I've been stuck with the problem of school, in which I hope to work around. I also didn't know they were UTC-6, that's a mistake on my part.
7. Rollback or Undo the Article to the latest non-vandalized revision. It also depends on what the LTA is on; if it's a proxy, VPN, or a created user, then it should be a indefinite block. But if it's a normal IP address, then it should be blocked up to a few days or sometimes weeks. They also should be ignored and not to be interacted with. RiggedMint 01:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are also welcome, I hope to do more for years to come. RiggedMint 01:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clarifying on question #2, after reviewing deletion requests, my oppose votes, and other stuff, I'll redefine A4 as "Something that has no claim to be notable, like adverts, jokes (should be labeled as A3 anyways for that one), and fake dompanies, products, people, or media." If that article does have a source, but it's suspicious to if it's actually notable, then it should be sent off to RfD. For example, there was an influx of entrepeneur articles from Asia way back in 2022-2023 (some examples here, here and here) most were written like adverts, but still had sources. RiggedMint 10:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'd like to ask you a question about permission requests: what criteria would you use to consider a patroller request, and what criteria would you use to consider a rollback request? When would you grant these permissions without a request? Thank you for your time. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Criteria for Rollbacker and Patroller is you have to be an active member of Wikipedia, particularly with experience in those lines of work on Wikipedia (Like Anti-vandalism and Articles). For granting them without a request? I actually had never seen it done so I can use it as an example. The closest thing to that would be getting nominated for admin. RiggedMint 19:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to ask a follow-up question based on your previous answers to Griff's questions - assuming that there is no RfD in progress, how does an editor judge/determine the notability of a subject? In particular, how do we judge/determine notability of a person vs a movie? Would there be any differences? Chenzw  Talk  16:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People, living or dead, has to be determined notable based on how well-known they are in-general, how well-known their awards are (if any), and how historically significant his/her achievements are and were and other criteria. Movies are to be notable based on how well-known they are, if they were historically notable, if they had a major notable award awarded to the movie... etc. But still, both would have to follow WP:GNG. RiggedMint 19:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Current requests for bureaucratship

None at this time

Current requests for checkusership

None at this time

Current requests for oversightership

None at this time

Current requests for removal of rights

None at this time
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions&oldid=10009969"