Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RfA)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived requests

Administrator / Bureaucrat / Checkuser / Oversighter


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 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, stewards and founders.
  • 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.

Adding a new request


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.


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.


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)


Please read the Criteria for administratorship 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 Editor Review. 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 Criteria for administratorship for these users.

Current time is 18:14:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)


Current requests for rollback


I want to use the m:SWViewer to hunt the vandals more efficiently. So I need the rollback to unblock this tool. I feel like I'm fully prepared for the rollbackers. Thank you.轻语者 (talk) 11:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
You should be able to use SWViewer to undo edits on this project without rollback. Also, you don't have that many reverts, and for most you dont give warnings for vandalism. So, I'll wait until you get more experience and we have more edits/actions to look at to base a decision on. Vermont (talk) 12:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
@Vermont: I tried to do some more undo work. Because I don't have rollback permissions on other wikis. I still can't use SWViewer. 轻语者 (talk) 02:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
See my comments on your proposal of Idiot for RfD. Macdonald-ross (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
You mistakenly put a vandlalised version of Idiot up for RfD. Evidently you did not check its history. You should not be given any permissions at present. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done - Per Other Admin Comments, Please establish your account for a little longer, and reapply then. -- Enfcer (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


I would like to request rollback on the Simple English Wikipedia. I currently hold rollback rights on the English Wikipedia. The reason why I would like this right is because I would like to revert vandalism faster and I would like to use Huggle on the Simple English Wikipedia like I do on the English Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 19:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • (Non-administrator observation) This user's very first revert and edit on this project was on 6 December, only two days ago. I don't think it would be appropriate to grant rollback permissions here with such low edit count. That said, quality is preferred over quantity. But I don't think you are familiar with this wiki much. @Interstellerity: If you want to help out with antivandalism here, please do. We have less volunteers here than English Wikipedia. You can add this wiki to m:SWViewer (definitely) and Huggle (likely) even without rollback permissions. Masumrezarock100 (talk) 00:13, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    On a closer look, they seemed to be familiar with reverting vandalism. I would not oppose if an admin grants them rollback. But I am not really sure if they are familiar with this wiki. My suggestion would be to keep reverting vandalism for a few weeks or so and then reapply. Masumrezarock100 (talk) 02:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    @Masumrezarock100: How do I add SMViewer to this wiki? Interstellarity (talk) 16:13, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    Just go to m:SWViewer and click "Launch online". You'll need to log in with your account using OAuth. Remember to use this tool you'll need rollback permission on atleast one project and this is one of tool we small wikis monitoring team members use. So unless you wish to be a member of SWMT, you might be better of using Huggle instead. (By the way I am editing this page using SWViewer, at the moment)Masumrezarock100 (talk) 16:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    @Masumrezarock100: Your instructions are confusing. I usually use Huggle when reverting vandalism on the English Wikipedia so I think I'll just stick with Huggle for this wiki. Interstellarity (talk) 16:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    Yeah, I never have been a good teacher. (: Masumrezarock100 (talk) 16:40, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @Interstellarity, 轻语者, Brian R Hunter: If you don't like to use Twinkle, I recommend to use fake rollback script by WhitePhosphorus for now. You'll be surprised seeing how much it acts like rollback. I use it on projects where I don't have rollback right. Better than Twinkle IMO. Works also on mobile if you have enabled "Advanced mode". Masumrezarock100 (talk) 19:28, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
    @Masumrezarock100: Thanks, I've been using Twinkle and it seems to work well though I am unsure of using its other powers. I'll have a look at fake rollback to see if it is better suited to me. If I get time I might write a script of my own, though I usually prefer the official mediawiki tools. -- Brian R Hunter (talk) 10:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 Done - User has rights on another wiki, and appears to know how to use the permissions. -- Enfcer (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)


When editing I always like to keep a live feed of Special:RecentChanges open to check new edits and quickly revert vandalism. Rollback rights would make the process easier and quicker with vandals that make more than one disruptive edit at once. Although I am fairly new to this wiki, I am not new to the Wikimedia platform with edits back to 2014 on the English Wikipedia (and no record of disruptive edits). I always make sure to provide an explanation if I am reverting an edit, especially when in good faith. I have moderation experience off of the Wikimedia platform also, and have served as an administrator on the Fallout game series wikis (1 2) for the past few years. Brantmeierz (talk) 01:04, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
(Non-administrator observation) The leaving summaries is good, definitely more people here need to do that, but keep in mind that when using rollback you will not be able to leave a summary (but you will still have access to the undo feature). Computer Fizz (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
@Computer Fizz: Yep, I just wanted to make it clear that I would still use undo and the change summaries when it's appropriate if I had access to the rollback tool. Brantmeierz (talk) 01:57, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
@Computer Fizz: but keep in mind that when using rollback you will not be able to leave a summary - that's not true! Adding custom summary when rollbacking is possible. You'll just need to append the summary parameter to the rollback link URL with appropriate value. There are plenty of scripts to let users add a custom summary when rollbacking. Masumrezarock100 (talk) 00:52, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
@Masumrezarock100: I know, but using a workaround like that is hacky and kinda ruins the point of rollback to begin with. Undo is the best way to revert with a reason. So I still tell people that you can't leave a summary with rollback as 99% info is the best way to not go on all day. Computer Fizz (talk) 01:05, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
I could also modify the block button to replace the selected editor's talk page with a unicorn; that's the nature of MediaWiki. The fact is, rollback is designed as a tool to revert vandalism with the single click of a button, not a faster undo tool, and therefore should be explained and advertised as something for which summaries cannot be added. Vermont (talk) 01:19, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
Worth noting too that rollback sends a different notification to the recipient. Might come across too strong if it's only a minor error that has been made. --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 15:28, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
@Caliburn: I tested it out, and rollback doesn't seem to give a notification at all. Computer Fizz (talk) 23:10, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done I am not seeing a lot of comments to vandals. Communicating and showing proper documentation is a main component and not seeing this done is a little concerning to me. Feel free to reapply after a bit, after you show where you know about the notices and are using them. -- Enfcer (talk) 17:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)


I would like to make reverting vandalism quicker and easier. Twinkle is sometimes slow and non-moblie, and huggle sometimes crashes for me. I had rollback on enwiki on another account. If you have any questions about my time enWiki , ask me and check out these links. Thanks rollingbarrels (talk) 09:00, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
  • (Non-administrator observation) Based on a random sampling of your undos, you seems to lack understanding what is vandalism and what isn't. This, this and this are clearly not vandalism. They are not useful edits, but for TW there are 3 options, you can have chosen to just revert with edit summary "was ok". In addition, the opening of this RFD where the creator had only just created the article shows too eagerness to press buttons which your rationale of reverting vandalism quicker worry me of unnecessary BITE. I don't care whatsoever happened on enwp but these are enough concerns that you need more time and experience to use rollback here. Regards, --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:13, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage:The RfD, if you'd look in the edit summary, was "Created on behalf of Aeroplane 82", as the user had only tagged the page without making a discussion. The edits you provided are vandalism, in fact, while the 3rd one is a bit of a bite, its still a bad change, so I used a lv. 1 warning (Neutral Faith) instead of lv. 2 (bad faith). rollingbarrels (talk) 09:39, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
IMHO, they are called test edits, not strictly vandalism. Lv 1 btw is assume good faith, level 2 is neutral, level 3 is then bad faith and etc. For every edit you made, they are yours and you should take ownership of it. For things such as Twinkle and Huggle, although they are semi automated, you are responsible for it. Likewise, if you help someone create RFD, you should at least see is the deletion reason they provided valid and likewise. Regards, --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:54, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done I don't think the above 3 diffs are an issue (and I would not fault a rollbacker who decided to use rollback for those diffs), and the RfD is more of a policy understanding issue (WP:BEFORE) which in my view should not be a veto factor. However, I would like to see a longer period of editing before I grant the right. Please apply again in a couple of weeks. Chenzw  Talk  10:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)


I have continued to make sure that I provide explanations for all of the edits that I revert. My last request failed because of a lack of communication after reverting edits (since I wasn't using Twinkle at the time). Since then I've familiarized myself with the various warning and user messaging tools it provides, and always leave behind appropriate messages (edit test messages, vandal/blanking warnings, etc.) when performing undos. Link to User talk namespace edits here, where post-undo messages are mostly those labelled with (TW). Brantmeierz (talk) 01:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Current requests for patroller

None at this time

Current requests for importer

None at this time

Current requests for adminship

None at this time

Current requests for bureaucratship

None at this time

Current requests for checkusership

None at this time

Current requests for oversight

None at this time

Current requests for removal of rights

None at this time