Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice is automatically updated by MusikBot (talk) and will hide when there are fewer than 3 requests and they are all under 7 days old.

• Ojsyork (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I've seen this editor's work on multiple occasions at New Page Review. Has created 208 pages, none deleted, more than 3/4 of them B-class. High-quality page creation with infoboxes, quality references with proper formatting, images, etc., requiring no cleanup by reviewers. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned that many of the articles on lifeboat stations don't meet GNG. After looking at a random sampling of them, most of them cite the Lifeboat Enthusiasts Society (of which Martin states they are a member of on their talk page), which appears to be an WP:SPS, and The Lifeboat, a publication of the RNLI, which is not an independent source. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Voorts I would have thought the same thing when I first encountered these articles, but there are several independent published sources on these lifesaving stations. Whenever I've done a BEFORE search on one, I always find GNG-qualifying sourcing. This came up in an AfD for one of Ojsyork's creations last year (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bamburgh Castle Lifeboat Station), which resulted in a "keep". Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• SDGB1217 (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Reason for requesting autopatrolled rights I have created almost 50 articles and whilst producing these articles I have developed my understanding of wikipedia policies, conformed with the rules for biographies of living persons and have improved the content and formatting of numerous articles. SDGB1217 (talk) 14:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• C1K98V (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hello, I have created 75+ articles, since I got autopatrolled mostly focusing on television series. For transparency, I'm still working on the feedback received from @Schwede66 in my last request. And I intent to keep doing the good work. Thanks for your consideration. Wishing the community a prosperous new year. C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 06:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary autopatrolled rights by Schwede66 (expires 00:00, 23 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot ^talk 07:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please point to where the date of birth of Gautam Vig is referenced, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Schwede66, I hope you enjoyed your vacation. I have sourced the DOB in the early life section as per WP:INFOBOXREF. I followed the editing style of Geniac, the way he improved Sheezan Khan and tried adapting the same. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 08:48, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had a fab wee holiday. I don't understand your answer. I see that there is one ref in the infobox, and that reference does confirm the date of birth, but it is attached to the spouse only. Could you please explain what you mean, and how the referencing confirms the date of birth, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schwede66 In the above mentioned article I have sourced the date of birth in the Early life section, see here. And the spouse's source is just about their marriage. I'm following the editing style of Geniac, the improvement he did in one of my previously created article see here. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 09:38, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, which reference states the date of Vig's date of birth? I cannot see it. Schwede66 18:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schwede66, I have used two sources for DOB, Colors TV and India Today. You can find both the sources in the Early life section. Hope it helps, if you still can't verify the birth date, you're most welcome to remove it. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 18:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@C1K98V Is it just me or the webpage you're linking to from colorstv.com is redirecting to a /mena/ directory making it impossible to see what you're talking about or citing. As for the indiatoday.in, you did not initially position the citation as of when Schwede66 started reviewing your request, you only repositioned the citation today. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vanderwaalforces, I'm not sure if the Colorstv website works outside of India. Let's wait for Schwede66 to confirm if they're able to verify it. I'm sharing a screenshot of the website for reference [1]. While searching for sources related to their academics, I found IndiaToday and added it later in the Early life section. I repositioned the named citation as I wanted to highlight it for Schwede66, so I left an edit summary too. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 03:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) I can access the colorstv source and confirm that it mentions Gautam Vig's date of birth. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Walco1 (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Concise, well-written and sufficiently articles, mostly with a royal or Church of England focus. I looked at an articles of theirs as part of NPP, and found it to be up to standard without editing. Others look reasonable too. Klbrain (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• S-Aura (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I’m requesting Autopatrolled rights for my account. I have contributed a significant number of edits, and my contributions are well-sourced and meet notability standards.

I believe this rights would help my workflow and reduce the load on reviewers. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 12:56, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• बडा काजी (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

The editor has written 176 articles, with only two being deleted. Their work is well-researched, notable, and meets the encyclopedic standards. Given their track record, I believe they can be trusted to patrol their own articles. Garuda ^Talk! 13:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I don't understand why this request was made. The user is not as active anymore on enwiki, I don't see them being a particular burden to enwiki patrollers. However, the articles look okay and they have a good track record so granting AP regardless. Sohom (talk) 14:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Иованъ (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

It is my 8th year of editing (4th with this account). I have written a number of articles of various types and none have been permanently deleted. I have made mistakes, but understand what they were and how to avoid them. About to publish many geography stubs (manually written, differing in content, not violating MASSCREATE - see Ledenice and Zapeć for examples). Ivan (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Feralpearl (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

As part of NPP, I've reviewed and article of there's, and then checked their other recent pages. They produce appropriately referenced, well-written, and appropriately formatted pages. Klbrain (talk) 18:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. User:Feralpearl, thanks for all your new articles, in general they look to be in decent shape. I'm not granting as I'm seeing too many instances of non-cited content, for instance on the date of death in Ann Harithas, and citations to ancentry.com, which is generally unreliable. You can highlight these unreliable sources to yourself using scripts such as User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter. Other very minor squabbles: per MOS:ORDER, external links need to come after references (Jeanette Vondersaar), you underlink your articles quite a bit, and leads of longer articles should be at least a few sentences long.

Feel free to apply yourself (including by leaving me a message on my talk page) when you've got another few articles under your belt: you're clearly on the right track! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions! I'll clear up the issues you've mentioned and take heed of your guidance in the future. Feralpearl (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• GanzKnusper (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

91 main space articles, 45 rated above stub, no deletions. I mostly create articles for albums or BLPs of musicians. GanzKnusper (talk) 09:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]