Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

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

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

Archived requests

Administrator / Bureaucrat / Checkuser / Oversighter
Rollbacker
Patroller
Transwiki Importer
Temporary account IP viewer

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 (autopatrolled). See Wikipedia:Patroller.
  • 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.
  • Temporary account IP viewer is a right given to trusted users that allows the user to see the IP address of a temporary account user.

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)

Temporary account IP viewer

Requests should be made only by active, trusted users who are active in antivandalism and New Changes patrolling. This right has restrictions on its use which users must be aware of prior to requesting it.

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 23:48:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Purge

Current requests for rollback

PieWriter

Hi, I’d like to request rollback rights to help deal with vandalism more quickly. I’ve been active in monitoring recent changes and reverting disruptive edits (), and I’m familiar with using tools like Twinkle. I understand rollback is meant only for clear cases of vandalism or unconstructive edits, and I’ll use it carefully and responsibly in line with Wikipedia’s policies (I have also read WP:Rollback). PieWriter (talk) 10:45, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Done -Barras talk 13:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Barras talk 13:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Current requests for patroller

None at this time

Current requests for temporary account IP viewer

CountryANDWestern

Requesting TAIV access now that I have reached the 6 month standard. This will be useful for me in vandalism and recent changes work. I acknowledge the guidelines for its use at the WP:TAIV and related Meta pages. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:08, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--BRP ever 13:23, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. BRP ever 13:23, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravensfire

I am asking for the Temporary Account IP Viewer permission. This would be helpful on patrolling, dealing with vandalism and some of the more disruptive IP ranges that hit articles I patrol. I have read and understand the requirements and responsibilities of this persmission. I have recently been granted this on EN Wiki. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 18:55, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Meets minimum WMF requirements and shows a need. You will need to agree to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy in your preferences to access the tool. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 21:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 21:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Garsh2

I'm requesting the IP viewer tool to help identify vandals across multiple temporary accounts. Although I am just coming back from a break, I did RC patrol before the temporary account change and plan to continue now. The temporary accounts have made it noticeably more difficult to identify and report frequent vandals. I meet the WMF requirements and have read and understood the policy for the tool's use. Garsh (talk) 07:49, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Meets minimum WMF requirements and shows a need. You will need to agree to the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy in your preferences to access the tool. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 17:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 17:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Current requests for transwiki importer

None at this time

Current requests for adminship

CountryANDWestern

CountryANDWestern (talk · contribs · count)

End date: 16:55, 19 January 2026 (UTC)


Hi all! I'm nominating CountryANDWestern for the role of admin. He's been active for over 7 months now and has focused on New Page patrolling, anti vandalism work, RfDs/QDs, requests for checkuser and is extremely helpful with find long-term abuse cases. I think that he has shown a strong need for the tools and very much think he'll be a strong asset to the project. Please consider supporting this RfA. Regards, fr33kman 16:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance: Thank you for the nomination, Fr33kman. I accept. As he stated, I am active in the recent changes and new page patrols and have been involved in identifying and addressing different LTAs. I believe having access to the tools will help alleviate some of the burden on other administrators and allow others to focus on other functions of the project. As many of you know (or suspected), my account is a en:WP:CLEANSTART meaning that I edited previously under another account. I quit that previous account several years ago out of "boredom" with Wikipedia; when I returned this year, I chose to create a new account instead of resuming under that one as that one could be connected to my personal identity. The English Wikipedia suggests that when a clean start account applies for adminship that that user should inform the ArbCom to assure everything is "above board." As we have no ArbCom here, if the community feels it is necessary, I have no problem disclosing my previous account to a steward or similar functionary. CountryANDWestern (talk) 17:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support, C&W is one of the most active users here in the anti-vandalism space. I am sure they can greatly help with admin tasks. Ternera (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support, I have seen his huge vandalism efforts, I support his request for adminship as he has shown great attendance on removing disruptive edits. Thank you for your work The Great Epiphany (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Appreciate the support, but I note that this was your third edit on this wiki, so it'll likely won't be considered when bureaucrats assess consensus. Welcome to Simple, though! CountryANDWestern (talk) 20:26, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support I was initially unsure whether I wanted to participate in this RfA (nothing against the candidate, but it would have been an RfA to close rather than to vote in) but the response to BZPN's second question impressed me to the stage I would really like to support. I can also certainly attest to the large amount of work C&W has done in TBA projects and they are very much on top of it with socking spammers and those otherwise evading blocks, which will be very useful to the admin team. I find few of BZPN's oppose points actually relate to use of the tools and are hence quite uncommon historically in RfAs here - even the year requirement he mentions is not something strict, I personally got my tools after about 7 months of editing and only held patroller for a couple of months and got away without opposition, and yes I had quite a lot of work done, but C&W has certainly done well above what I am expecting to support an RfA candidate after this amount of time. The only bit I would like to add is about the cleanstart thing, given the level of work C&W has done, I can believe the reasoning they have provided though I was unsure at first. I'd say perhaps disclosing it to a functionary or an admin who has otherwise signed the confidentiality agreement would be a good idea. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 23:30, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It should be someone local to simplewiki. I'd suggest a checkuser. fr33kman 06:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh definitely. There is no reason for this to go global to stewards as we are more than capable of handling it ourselves. I don't mind whether it's a checkuser or an oversighter though. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 10:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason I suggested a steward was essentially to avoid "disenfranchising" a regular contributor here who would have additional knowledge others don't, so their vote would look different than others. I have now disclosed to Fehufanga as an oversighter. CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am pretty sure they emailed Fehufanga based on a comment below. PieWriter (talk) 10:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support I am quite new, so I’m not really familiar with this user, but by reading the above comments, I feel like this is quite a trusted user by the community and would do a wonderful job as an administrator. PieWriter (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong support i think it's experienced user. I would say this is extremely helpful for anti-vandalism. The user asked in my second question as obvious sock will be blocked immediately. Great job and you will be great admin in the future! Raayaan9911 02:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support --Saroj (talk) 04:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support fr33kman 06:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Trusted colleague --NDG (talk) 08:46, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support, a valued help to the project --M7 (talk) 08:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support I did have some concerns and asked a few questions via email to clarify things. Based on the answers, this appears to be a valid clean start, so I am happy to lean on this side. I am also impressed by the answers below, which further solidifies my support.--BRP ever 12:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  11. I also hesitated to support due to the clean start, while I also considered offering a nomination to CAW myself. However, after the disclosure to Fehufanga, I suppose he would have told us if there had been any problems regarding the clean start. CAW is doing an amazing job here. He is very active, and I'm sure he will make good use of the few extra buttons. -Barras talk 17:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. ShadowBallX (talk) 06:34, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Strong oppose. First of all, I must say that informing the stewards about your RfA start is very good practice, which in my opinion you should do. Getting to the point: you're not obligated to disclose your previous account. So, anyone who doesn't know what you did on your previous account just won't know - you're starting clean now. In that case, considering only eight months of the account age/activity on this "new" account and having held patroller/rollback permissions for only a few months, I'm discouraged from voting supportive. Furthermore, your article creation count is quite low, and some of them are of rather poor quality (e.g., many without sources, see this or this). Likewise, your substantive contributions to the main namespace are very low, as most of your contributions there are vandalism reverts. I also see minimal activity on e.g. PGA or ST. You don't use patroller permissions at all, so I can't say what knowledge you have about basic editing policies, or how experienced you are with content. An administrator should be versatile, while you only seem to focus on one area (but that's not a bug, of course). I appreciate your work on RC, but personally, I'd prefer you wait until your account is at least one year old. BZPN (talk) 18:27, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To respond to some of your concerns:
    • Regarding my use of patroller rights -- I never asked for the right and never really intend to use it. I understand how it functions and such; it's just not an area of interest.
    • Regarding my article creations -- Blanton Collier has three sources. I'm unsure why Mayville State University is missing its sources; I'll put it on my to-do list for the week to see why those sources didn't pop up through the translation. I think labeling my creations as "rather poor quality" is a huge exaggeration.
    • Regarding PGA -- there have been, by my count 18 PGA proposals since I joined. (2 of those 18 have been re-nominations as well). I have participated in 7 of those discussions and have left detailed reviews at several of them including Talk:1755_Cape_Ann_earthquake#PGA_review, Talk:Luis_Suárez_Miramontes#VGA_feedback, Talk:Ed_Gein#PGA_feedback, and Talk:Attempted_assassination_of_Ronald_Reagan#Some_GA_review_thoughts.
    • Regarding participation at Simple Talk: I think I've contributed a decent amount to conversations there and at WP:AN.
    • Regarding my overall main space participation: No, I have not created a ton of articles, but I have very active with Ferien's Total Backlog Annihilation projects. I have not contributed much to this most recent one, but this current task is more time intensive and I was busier on a personal and professional level lately. A quick search of my edits shows 400+ contributions to the TBA project just based on the times I used a relevant edit summary. I also have worked in some of the special pages to clear out things like Special:LonelyPages and Special:WithoutInterwiki (which I helped move below the 5000 article threshold). CountryANDWestern (talk) 19:10, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Just wanted to add that the Patroller user group on Simple is a bit different from other wikis. The primary reason the user group is handed out is so users can mark their own creations as patrolled, since we do not have autopatrol.--BRP ever 11:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • 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? I also have an additional content-related question: What do you think is the most common content problem with simplewiki articles (e.g. no sources, no infoboxes, very short articles, etc.)? Are there any content or editoral policies we could change to fix this? Thank you for your time. BZPN (talk) 18:38, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You already strongly opposed me before you asked these questions, so I'm not sure what weight you're going to put into these answers, but I will certainly answer them for the benefit of others as well:
    • Regarding permissions - For patroller, it's a sustained history of article creations that don't require intervention from other users. No hard and fast rule, but I'd personally want to see a few dozen articles over 3+ months. For rollback, it's a sustained history of involvement in anti-vandalism work; reporting to VIP, warning appropriately, identifying vandalism v. productive edits correctly. Again, no hard and fast rule, but a few months of solid work. Deference to those with experience at other wikis with those tools, assuming they're using it appropriately at both wikis. I don't plan to give someone a tool without either them requesting it first or having a conversation first (Hey, I've noticed you're doing a lot of solid work in the anti-vandalism patrol. You may benefit from the Rollback tool. Would you be interested?)
    • I think the most common content issue is that, because we're a small wiki, we're not well adept at addressing concerns with articles in specific areas as we don't have the editors who are well-versed in those topics or the structures in place that a bigger wiki would have like third opinion or mediation, or significant WikiProjects that have experts in those topics. I look at the edit war that's been going on at 2025 India–Pakistan conflict as an example of this; our "established" editors are less able to step in and assist because the nuances of the dispute require some additional knowledge of the content. I don't believe there's specific ways to address it in the confines of our wiki right now. I think another big issue is that our "driveby" editors, who create their first article and then don't come back, don't understand the concept of Simple English, so we have more complex articles sitting there. In terms of policies, the only way to address that, really, would be requiring autoconfirmed status (though we see plenty of people game the system on that).
    CountryANDWestern (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: You can disclose your past history by emailing the oversight mailing list. Thanks.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 01:03, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I would prefer to share it with just a single individual rather than multiple on a mailing list. Are you willing to accept the role of recipient of my disclosure via email? CountryANDWestern (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, just send me an email.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 04:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Sent. Thank you! CountryANDWestern (talk) 13:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I confirm that I have received CountryANDWestern's clean start disclosure. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 13:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Questions from Raayaan9911

  •  Question: Hello ConturyANDWestern. Here's the questions. You need to answer of those:
  1. If you see users are abusing rollbacker or patrollers rights. Would you consider warn only, warn first and revoke or revoke only?
  2. If you see multiple accounts that are easily to say it's same behaviour. Would you consider reporting to Checkuser or block per abusing muitple accounts?
  3. If you see block appeals that you're not sure. Would you handle block appeals or let other admins to review?
  4. If you see AI-generated articles that you're unclear to detect if AI or not. Would you consider delete the article or take to RfD? Raayaan9911 23:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    thank you for the questions.
    1. This is a difficult hypothetical as I can’t see exactly what the user is doing to ascertain the level of misuse. Since you’re using the word “abuse,” we can suppose it’s a high level of misuse, so an automatic removal of the tool would likely be appropriate. My preference would always be to talk to the user about their use of the tool and remind them of its guidelines for use and the ramifications if they continue to misuse.
    2. In the case of obvious socks, I would just block.
    3. Another hypothetical that is difficult to answer without knowing what the block was for and what the request is asking. I would likely engage the blocking admin for additional background and, if I was still unsure, defer to another admin to handle the request.
    4. Admin can’t directly delete an article for AI use. It needs to be tagged as such by two users first. If I saw an article tagged for AI deletion and didn’t see what made it obviously AI, I would likely ask the tagger(s) what they feel makes it that way. CountryANDWestern (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2026 (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=10710966#Administrator"