Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Autopatrolled

Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Shortcuts
Please read Wikipedia:Autopatrolled before requesting or nominating another user for this right. Applicants will not be granted this right if they have not created at least 25 new articles on the English Wikipedia, excluding redirects and disambiguation pages. These articles should be free of problems requiring the attention of patrollers. Note that this right will not help you create or patrol articles.

User:Golan1911

Meets the minimum criteria, and a random sampling of their creations doesn't raise any red flags. My only concern is their liberal use of quotations in reception sections, but I don't consider it an overly serious issue for this permission as the copyright reports come away otherwise clean; I've also started a discussion on their talk page about it. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hounaam

Dear Wikipedia Admins, I am requesting the Autopatrolled right to further support my contributions to Wikipedia. While I may not have thousands of edits or article creations, my work is rooted in careful research and learning from experienced editors. My focus is on Iranian early modern, modern, and contemporary art and culture, especially highlighting the stories of Iranian women often overlooked in history. I ensure all my edits are supported by reliable, academic sources, and I have a track record of accurate contributions with very few reverts. I believe that having the Autopatrolled right would allow me to continue enhancing the articles related to Iran and Iranian art and culture. Thank you for your consideration. Warm regards, Hounaam (talk) 22:53, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I greatly appreciate this opportunity, and I won’t disappoint! Hounaam (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:SafariScribe

I am requesting the Autopatrolled right, like any other editor, to help reduce the NPP work load. I have worked at AFC/NPP/AFD, and I've created good articles that would pass a deletion discussion if nominated. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 11:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: @SafariScribe: I'm a little puzzled here, I randomly picked like seven articles from your recent creations, and they were all dab pages, which generally aren't really considered when evaluating these requests. Could you maybe provide some examples of fairly recent content creations? Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 23:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Just Step Sideways, maybe you didn't see this ones: One Too Many (2022 film), A Requiem for Syrian Refugees, Lalita Tademy, Jabari Banks, and more to create at User:SafariScribe/Articles created. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 03:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Checking.... Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 18:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I think you are generally doing a good job getting articles started, but in pretty much every one of the articles you linked, I also see others coming along and fixing them up, correcting language/grammar/etc, and in one case a copyvio that had to be revision deleted. So, while it is great that you are expanding the project with new content, I think your creations would continue to benefit from being reviewed by others. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 18:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yut3117

They have created 60 Japanese-related articles, the majority of which are BLPs. None of them have been deleted, and no major issues were found upon my quick checks. Thank you. GrabUp - Talk 16:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 00:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ibjaja055

I have created 247 articles on English Wikipedia, covering a variety of subjects. I am currently a New Page Patroller and actively participate in Articles for Creation (AfC) and Articles for Deletion (AfD). I also enjoy turning the red links of notable recent deaths into blue, and I believe this right will help to reduce the workload at New Page Patrol (NPP). Thank you. Ibjaja055 (talk) 00:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 02:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:SCreditC

Hi, I have created 25 articles by 2021, none of which has been deleted. Recently, I created another 3 articles, and in total I have made 3200 edits (none of which has been deleted). These articles and edits are primarily about modern Chinese history, which I am familiar with. And I just realized I may have been qualified for the "auto-patrol" right for a long time, but never asked for it. Therefore, I'd like to ask to become an auto-patroller which hopefully will also save some work for the new page patrollers in the future. Thank you very much. SCreditC (talk) 03:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 02:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rubystaramaryllis

Meets minimum criteria, no articles deleted, no behavior issues Mach61 17:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is borderline... no deletions, but quite a high proportion of their articles have outstanding cleanup tags. I might have granted it if it was a self-request but as it is,  Not done. – Joe (talk) 13:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Originalmess

Meets minimum criteria (by a hair), no articles deleted Mach61 17:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haha hi, thanks. I'm not very active anymore due to the need to continue getting my life together but will probably return to creating articles someday. I occasionally review pages and always check GNG, policies, etc before creating articles. I have no interest in wasting time or causing trouble! originalmesstalk 07:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done – user hasn't created an article in two years. – Joe (talk) 13:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:StuggerMax

Hello, I’m requesting Autopatrolled rights to help reduce the New Pages Patrol workload. I focus on classical Greek topics and have translated many pages from the Greek Wikipedia, having created over 50 pages so far. With these rights, I could streamline my contributions and make the review process easier. Thank you for considering my request. StuggerMax (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, I see there were some issues with copyright and sourcing when you started editing, but they haven't reoccurred recently. – Joe (talk) 13:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yummifruitbat

I have returned to editing after a looooong wikibreak (life happens). Before that I was a reasonably active user in good standing for a couple of years and created quite a few articles only one of which was deleted (while I was on wikibreak so not around to add the additional sourcing, from specialist publications, that it needed to confirm notability).

I'm in the process of updating many out-of-date articles about carnivorous plants, including filling in large gaps in the taxonomy, so I have well over 100 new pages on my to-do list. To reduce the burden on NPP, I'd like to request autopatrolled before I start churning through those please. YFB ¿ 16:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Request withdrawn On second thoughts, I have the sense I'm about to receive some patronising / demotivating comments, so I won't trouble you all further. YFB ¿ 20:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(oh, edit conflict proved me correct)

Well, that's been a wikibreak of extraordinary length. Welcome back! As you will appreciate, Wikipedia has moved on in the 17 intervening years. I've had a look at the nine articles that you have produced since you've become active again. The expectation is that articles by autopatrolled editors are clean and don't need attention by others. However, that's not the case for the stubs that you produce, with recurrent issues being lack of categories, tagging for single source or orphan status, DEFAULTSORT missing for bios, and a variety of WP:MOS issues. I suggest that you keep a close eye on how other editors tweak your articles and if you take all those things on board, your articles will be clean enough for becoming autopatrolled in no time.  Not done for the bot. Keep up your good work! Schwede66 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hope that you don't perceive the words above as patronising, Yummifruitbat. Schwede66 21:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, yes I do. The combination of the manner of your review of my contributions, the edit summaries you used, and the points you chose to pick up on (dashes and subtleties of date formatting; missing linebreak before stub tag; an incorrect accusation of including an unsourced DoB in a BLP where the date was actually ref'd but the ref wasn't repeated directly alongside the date; downgrading another reviewer's assessment from 'Start' to 'Stub') led me to decide to withdraw my nomination as I already felt patronised and demotivated. You replied to my query on your talk page (about the DoB comment) in a way that implied I might not be able to figure out why you, an Admin active on this backlog, were suddenly reviewing my recent contributions. Your comment here reads as though my additions have been borderline worthless. 'The stubs you create', 'recurrent issues', 'lack of categories', 'tagging for single source or orphan status' (the latter both transient one-offs). My understanding was that NPP was supposed to catch and address articles with major issues - BLP problems, serious POV/COI, GNG, WP:NOT, vandalism - not trivial issues of formatting? Perhaps I had the wrong end of the stick. Either way, the net effect is that I feel pretty bitten / tag-bombed and strongly regret placing a request here. YFB ¿ 22:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to hear that you feel like this, Yummifruitbat. However, I have to respond to those accusations:
  • combination of the manner of your review of my contributions – I've reviewed all of your articles created since you became active again last year. What is wrong with that?
  • the edit summaries you used – when I review editor contributions for autopatrolled, I try to be clear and informative so that it's helpful to the editor going forward. Which edit summary or summaries did not sit right with you?
  • the points you chose to pick up on (dashes and subtleties of date formatting – whenever I review an article, I run a couple of scripts that fix dashes and date formats. You may notice that I have not commented on dashes or date formats above, and in fact, I don't think I ever have as part of a review. I do not consider that relevant to autopatrolled flags.
  • missing linebreak before stub tag – that's something that's useful to know; it wasn't like that 17 years ago. Are you suggesting that you don't want to know when you are editing outside of what MOS prescribes?
  • an incorrect accusation of including an unsourced DoB in a BLP where the date was actually ref'd but the ref wasn't repeated directly alongside the date – thank you for posting about that on my talk page. I acknowledged that I did misunderstand that and proposed a way to resolve this. Isn't that normal editor interaction?
  • downgrading another reviewer's assessment from 'Start' to 'Stub' – I downgraded the assessment because it was wrong; Andreas Fleischmann is a stub and very far from being start class.
  • tag-bombed – I didn't place a single tag, so how can you possibly feel "tag-bombed"?
As I said before, what we are looking for at autopatrolled is editors who can consistently produce clean articles that don't need attention by others. If you have further thoughts on my responses, please don't hesitate to bring them up. Schwede66 00:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I won't leave a long reply here as it doesn't seem appropriate to clog up this page. I recognise and accept that you have not intentionally patronised me, and to be clear I'm not accusing you of anything (apart from the DoB thing which we have discussed and resolved). What I've intended to describe above is the impression that your approach to the review gave me as a returning editor - and it did give that impression, whether or not you intended it, otherwise I wouldn't have been in the middle of withdrawing my request when you posted your response. I will explain more fully on your talk page. YFB ¿ 01:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Autopatrolled&oldid=1251851993"