An example of one of the fabulous free images available at Wikimedia Commons.
I first registered this account - my first - April 20, 2007. Since then, I've gotten involved pretty deeply in AfD work. I see it as a chance to triage articles that are flawed, but may yet have potential.
If you need access to a Wikipedia article that has been deleted, ask me. If it's not a copyright violation, libel, or personal information, and has not been deleted as a suspected biographies of living persons violation, I will userfy the article for you.
I maintain a sock account AVPW primarily for use on public networks. In the event of a compromised account, I specifically request any administrator to honor a request from AVPW to block this account, and absolve you in advance of any repercussions.
No edits since being warned. Re-report if this user continues vandalising or spamming after sufficient warnings. Daniel Case (talk) 03:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Declined. I don't think this editor is the kind that filter's meant to catch, although their edits are problematic for other reasons. But let's let the AfD take care of that. Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
No edits since being warned. Re-report if this user continues vandalising or spamming after sufficient warnings. Daniel Case (talk) 04:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 02:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 17:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 17:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. -- DQB (owner / report) 17:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Used ee instead of ey attempting to skip filter: ghey. Violating string: maisiemcghey" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 18:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file obfuscation of "gay" -- DQB (owner / report) 18:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 04:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: This user who requested protection has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done. @Magentic Manifestations:@Remsense: The edits do not appear to be vandalism, the editor has not been warned a single time on their talk page, and the revert edit summaries are severely lacking. The editor has even tried to start a talk page discussion and has been completely ignored. Please read WP:BITE too. Even if the edits are bad for other reasons, protection is almost certainly not the next step here. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 17:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: This user who requested protection has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Checking to see if protection is necessary. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Unregistered user is re-adding copyvio tag to article. My personal assessment is that the tag is unwarranted. Furthermore, the copyvio claims were addressed with good faith by User:Skitach. Unregistered user leaving unwarranted warnings on User:Skitach's talk page. Further assessment of copyvio claim is welcome. el.ziade (talkallam) 17:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Skitash did nothing to address the copyvio and neither did you. They're all clearly laid out on the talk page and the only thing he did was blank that page. The warning for removal of a copyvio tag on Skitsh's talk page was completely warranted. 2001:8F8:1D2E:CA72:0:0:42A7:AD01 (talk) 02:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Declined The IP has pointed out fundamental policy problems. After thanking them, more care needs to be taken to clean out the obvious copyvios that the IP clearly set out on article talk. Several of those points have been refactored but it is likely that the ideas and phrasings are still too closely following a source. Think of it this way: if you were an academic assessing an essay, what would you think after seeing the source? Johnuniq (talk) 03:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done. I'm in agreement with Johnuniq here. @Skitash:@Elias Ziade: Please read the copyright violation tag where it says Please do not remove this notice or restore blanked content until the issue is resolved by an administrator, copyright clerk, or volunteer response agent.Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: For the last week, an IP editor has been deleting information from CKY (band) under the false pretense that the information is incorrect, despite being back by a source. The user also falsely adds the deleted information to CKY (film series), making that article incorrect. The user has received numerous warnings over edit warring as been instructed to bring their issue up on the article's talk page but continues to just delete the info instead. If both articles could be temporarily semi-protected, that would help. NJZombie (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Non-stop disruption, particularly aimed at altering the sourced result in the infobox. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruptive editing and continued sockpuppetry. Fred Zepelin (talk) 02:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. and PC extended to six months. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
To any admin wondering: this is Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nipponese Dog Calvero, same goes for the other four pages listed below. They are using autoconfirmed-gamed sockpuppet accounts to continue the disruption on the pages after they were semi-protected. — AP 499D25(talk) 03:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
New URL
Change from chat.openai.com to chatgpt.com 122.104.176.219 (talk) 06:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
(Not an Admin but...) The main url is chat.openai.com, chatgpt.com redirects you to there. No reason to change it Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 14:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Protected by Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Protected by Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I am making a request on behalf of myself, as I sometimes create new articles pretty often (mostly New Brunswick-related). As of right now I have 66 live articles, and I have expanded plenty more. I have had a few deletions: two articles when I was brand new to editing & one list I created in mid-2023 (due to not completely understanding WP:BLPCRIME at the time). Otherwise, my articles have been pretty straightforward and vary in quality, with most being Start/C-class by the time I publish them. I had a little bit of a rough start when it came to "notability knowledge", as many do, but overtime I have grown to have an understanding of WP:GNG and WP:MOS when writing articles. Thanks, B3251 (talk) 11:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Done I've looked through your last 10 articles. You produce clean articles and nobody comes along and does tidy-up work. The obvious area for improvement is with date formats. Often, you use mdy dates in the prose and you consistently use dmy dates for referencing. Not sure why you do that but it's not a good idea. Settle on one date format and then stick to it. And with regards to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Loblaw boycott, I'm unconcerned about that; the worst that will happen is a merge. Good work! Schwede66 08:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree that I need to get into the habit of adding the "Use mdy dates" templates. The reason why I use dmy in referencing is due to just being used to Wikipedia's automatic dmy-setting retrieve date for referencing. B3251 (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I have created at least 25 articles that follow WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG about singers and albums. I am familiar with WP:C, WP:V, and WP:BURDEN in my articles, without copying content without permission, and I make sure my info is sourced in any articles I created. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 12:00, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done There's always a little bit that others have to clean up when you finish with an article. Nothing major: DEFAULTSORT, dashes, categorisation. But to walk away from such a version is just not good enough. It wasn't just tagged for bare URLs but also as an orphan. And when someone came and fixed your bare URLs for you, you removed the bare URLs tag but didn't attend to the referencing mistake that the other editor had introduced. For autopatrolled, articles need to be cleaner. Your editing seems a bit rushed. With a little more care, you could qualify for autopatrolled in no time. As an aside, removing unpleasant messages from your talk archive is not something you should do. Schwede66 09:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I recently noticed this user, Princess of Ara. An editor who works mainly on Nigerian related articles and others. While trying to appreciate the user's effort, I got in love with the lovely articles, well sources, written from a volunteer in good faith and now, I am requesting that she be granted the auto patrol user right. It'll also help reduce heavy backlog of NPP. Thanks for your consideration! Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 08:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I have created 75 articles, primarily focused on Sinophone cinema and fantasy literature, with 2 currently undergoing GAN. All of my articles have been promptly reviewed, and none of them have been deleted or marked for maintenance. I am requesting autopatrolled rights to alleviate the workload of the patrollers, especially those who actively review film articles and have reviewed the majority of my articles, allowing them to allocate more time to address articles that truly require attention. As a side note, I am a veteran editor on Chinese Wikipedia, having authored over 200 articles, including a dozen featured and good articles. While I fully understand that there are differences in policies and MOS across different Wikipedias, I believe this demonstrates my credibility and knowledge in assessing article quality.— Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
I frequently create articles on notable subjects, having authored 530 articles, with the majority facing no issues. Only three were deleted, mainly due to changes in election results affecting their notability. I'm requesting autopatroller rights to ease the burden on other editors reviewing my articles and help reduce the backlog of new article reviews. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 23:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
There are no outstanding requests for the confirmed flag.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Requesting page mover rights for my frequent work on video game character articles, many of which involve writing up an article on a userpage to later move to where a previous redirect may exist and working alongside other editors towards this end. Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
I would like to have page moving rights because of many company articles with incorrect article names with their correct names being the redirects. WiinterU 00:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
I often move articles in a space (China and Chinese-related topics) where there are specific naming conventions that are uncontroversial moves, sometimes requiring #delete-redirect.
I often move pages around in my userspace, and #suppress-redirect would perhaps clutter the U1 log less. Remsense诉 23:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Hello, I'am applying again for Pending Changes Reviewer, as it was felt by a person who reviewed this that my request was "all over the place" and that "I didn't understand that PC rights are". I don't think that's fair.
I was simply just giving my experience and of having done 632 edits on Wiki involving mostly updating critical information, having been an Editor since Feburary 2021, and being familiar with Wiki Guidelines & Copyright and understanding the importance of making sure the info on Wiki is correct, and preventing Vandalism. And other requests saying that exact same stuff were approved, so not sure what to say but, I'am aware of the importance and privliege of this permission, and would like my request to be considered fairly, as it did not feel like that was the case the first time, based on the response that I got. Sunnyboi18 (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([1]). — MusikBottalk 14:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry you think my decline of your request was unfair, I did read it, and I gave my honest impression of it. Just Step Sidewaysfrom this world ..... today 22:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Well, you're "honest impression" was more of a commentary on me personally rather than my experience and work I've done. So once again, it does not seem like this is being processed in a fair and unbiased manner. Especially when requests have been approved with very little language in them with regard to their background or experience, or with the same amount of/less edits as myself. Sunnyboi18 (talk) 09:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I have a history of cleaning up grammar, removing and refactoring uncited content and fixing citations. I'm hoping to maybe expand my editing scope a bit. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi. I recently got Rollback rights, so I thought it would be nice to have PCR rights as well. The main reason I would like this right is to further deal with vandalism, and accepting good edits. Although the pending changes backlog is not as high as... some other backlogs I could mention, I would still like to help with reviews. Thanks for considering my request! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I have been reverting vandalism as an account for about a month now, and have familiarized myself with Twinkle as well. Also note the 20,000 edits, mostly anti-vandal, that I made as an IP. Lynch44 (talk) 01:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 22:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
If you consider me not fit for rollback due to this, then I am more than willing to wait further if necessary, and I will try to be more efficient in warning others in the future. Lynch44 (talk) 01:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I've neither approved nor denied your request. But I would like to have a conversation on why you haven't been notifying editors after reverting their edits. Is it because... you didn't know you needed to, you've been acting too quickly without giving proper attention to each revert, etc? -Fastily 05:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Part of it was me assuming the edit was so minor that an edit summary would be sufficient (like the second diff), or, just not giving a warning or notice because I did not feel there was a specific one that could fit. Again, I will try to warn or notify all editors when reverting them in the future. Lynch44 (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, please ensure that you are always leaving notifications. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 00:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Understood. Moving forward, I promise to notify all editors when I revert their edits, good faith or not. Lynch44 (talk) 01:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks for confirming, Done -Fastily 21:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I'm re-applying for Rollback rights a month after my previous was declined. During the past month, I've actively patrolled RecentChanges, reverting bad-faith edits and warning editors with Ultraviolet, and increasing my edit count to over 6500. I've also gained a thorough understanding of relevant policies, such as WP:VAN. In addition, I was granted AfC reviewer and NPP rights.
The main reason I would like Rollback rights is to revert vandalism and disruptive editing quicker and easier, as well as the usage of more advanced tools such as AntiVandal and Huggle.
Thanks for considering my request! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([2]). — MusikBottalk 14:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
The user addressed that above. Not helpful. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/$ 14:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
@TheTechie: Please don't tell the bot which auto comments about past declines that it's not helpful. Additionally, please try to avoid commenting on other's applications unless you believe there's something relevant a reviewing admin should know that they're unlikely to find when evaluating a user. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 22:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
@Fastily Thank you for asking. The first edit in question was in good faith, so I thought there was no need for a warning. However, the second and third edits are indeed my mistake. However, most of my reverts come with a warning (e.g. 1, 2, 3) but I'll still make sure to warn editors whenever needed in the future. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 23:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 00:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I promise to always warn or notify editors when reverting their edits, no matter if it is good-faith or not. Thank you for the heads-up. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Great, thanks for confirming Done -Fastily 05:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello! For about the past month, I've been patrolling recent changes and have gotten to know Ultraviolet well as I consistently warn users who make unconstructive and bad-faith edits. I am requesting rollback rights to further enhance my patrolling by using tools such as AntiVandal which will speed up the process greatly and Huggle which is a helpful tool to have to combat vandalism. Rollback also makes my reverts faster and more efficient allowing me to respond faster and better. Wiiformii (talk) 15:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 00:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
@Fastily Hello, these edits were mistakes on my part, although the large majority of the rest of my reverts come with warnings using Ultraviolet (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) Thank you for bringing it to my attention and I will make sure to appropriately warn users in the future. Wiiformii (talk) 01:59, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 21:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
I understand. I will always leave warnings in good faith or not. Thanks for letting me know. Wiiformii (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Est omnino difficile iudicare inclusionis meritum cuiusdam rei in encyclopædia cum ratio sciendi quid populi referat incerta sit, sed nihilominus aliquid encyclopædiam dedecet
It is generally difficult to judge the worthiness of a particular topic for inclusion in an encyclopedia considering that there is no certain way to know what interests people, but some topics nevertheless are not fit for an encyclopedia.
This motto reflects the desire of these Wikipedians to be reluctant, but not entirely unwilling, to remove articles from Wikipedia.
Committed identity: 5e0a9af339f30221a08fa86264cf1a81e3637ef17bd7ba87260c63b0fea3cdb0b55f545f061dd97184aa4061626c8c41b7237f4b18ccfdd096bff83e92ce9fc5 is a SHA-512commitment to this user's real-life identity.
Wikipedia editor
This is a Wikipediauser page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Xymmax.
I copied this source code from someone's user page I liked. I did not save the name. Thank you, whomever you are.
