Jump to content

User:Winhunter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Winhunter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) joined Wikipedia in 12 April, 2005 and became an administrator on 4 September, 2006.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)


Articles I...

[edit]

Created

[edit]

Expanded significantly

[edit]

My other accounts

[edit]

My bookmarks

[edit]
Wikipedia

Wikipedia

[edit]
Category

Category

[edit]
Misc

Misc

[edit]
Tools

Tools

[edit]
Dashboard

User:Xenocidic/dashboard/users User:Xenocidic/dashboard/users

Immediate requests Entries
Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages 0
Wikipedians looking for help 0
Requests for unblock 16
Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests 40
Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests 66
Wikipedia template-protected edit requests 9
Wikipedia fully protected edit requests 0
Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests 97
Requested RD1 redactions 3
Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations 2
Candidates for speedy deletion 42
Open sockpuppet investigations 55
Click here to locate other admin backlogs

Purge the cache of this page

Administrative backlog

[edit]
Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review
Requests for unblock
SPI cases awaiting administration
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/TB2
Wikipedia:Closure requests
Template:Did you know/Queue
Template:DYK queue/backlog
Wikipedia:Files for discussion
Wikipedia:WikiProject Open proxies
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
Wikipedia:Requested moves
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/New page reviewer
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations
Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention
Wikipedia:WikiProject History Merge
Wikipedia:WikiProject Open proxies/Requests

WP:AIV

Reports

[edit]

Bot-reported

[edit]

User-reported

[edit]
Partially blocked from Leonard van Veldhoven for a week. PhilKnight (talk) 09:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

CSD / PRODs

[edit]
Candidates for speedy deletion Entries
Attack pages 0
Copyright violations 2
Hoaxes 0
Vandalism 0
User requested 1
Empty articles 0
Nonsense pages 1
Spam pages 4
Importance or significance not asserted 1
Possibly contested candidates 10
Other candidates 37
The following articles and files have been proposed for deletion for around 7 days:
Deletion backlog

This box:
Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently
Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently
Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently

Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – 3 items

Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 112 items

Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review – 109 items

Requested RD1 redactions – 3 items

Proposed deletion – No backlog currently

WP:UAA / WP:RFPP

[edit]
Usernames for administrator attention


Bot-reported

[edit]


User-reported

[edit]
Requests for page protection


Current requests for increase in protection level

[edit]
Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
Shortcuts

Place requests for new or upgrading of article protection, upload protection, or create 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.


Germany's Next Topmodel season 20

[edit]

Reason: User:DDKay does not cite sources or references when undoing work of others. This user persists on actively not p[roviding commentary on decisions to reword/remove/undo work of others. Medium-high level of vandalism. KingdomNone91 (talk) 21:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

I did and he wants to ignore what I say. The top 200 on GNTM are semi-finalst. In germany they never call the casting round semi-final, because semi-final is the episode before final. He translate the german atricle literally into english, but that is the problem. The articles say only that they cast 100 men and 100 women for the first episode. They never said, that those big group is the final cast. They always call semi-finalist constetants or cast. That don't mean that those are the final cast. Here an example from season 7. There where chosen 50 girls for semi-final and where also called cast or constetants. https://www.bravo.de/germanys-next-topmodel-2012-das-sind-die-50-kandidatinnen-329333.html Those 50 girls where also not the final cast, only because of that. It was the top 25 who became final cast. It is also a wrong information to show the big list of 200 people as final cast and saying that they are the final cast, when even he don't know. So far it is only a list of 200 people. Prosieben webiste also show pics where some of the 200 people having casting numbers, which means the first episodes are castig episodes, where the 200 people will be reduce to the final cast. DDKay (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
This article relates to an old season and is not relevant to the current season. This request relates to the 20th season. Thanks. KingdomNone91 (talk) 21:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
It is relevant, because it shows how german article call the semi-finalst. And they call them the same way from 2012 to 2025. So it is clear that they don't mean or call the top 200 final cast. It is also said that the first episode will be casting round for the 100 women and the second episode will be casting round for the 100 men. DDKay (talk) 21:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Another excample. This site say: "Sobald die Kandidatinnen für 2025 feststehen, werden sie hier bekannt gegeben." in english: "As soon as the candidates for 2025 have been determined, they will be announced here." Means the final cast is still not chosen. You can find it, when you scroll all the way down. Germany always use the words constetants or cast. No matter if it is still casting or final cast. Means: If they write "the 200 constentants", is not the meaning for final cast. DDKay (talk) 21:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
I also talked with him before and explained that at him. He told me, he is fine to mark the list as semi-finalst, but change it after that back to final-cast again and again. Seeing here, when scrolling all the way down: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KingdomNone91 DDKay (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
This was due to sources citing the inclusion of a final 200 cast and not as semi-finalists. This article, [2]https://www.promipool.de/tv-film/gntm-2025-kandidaten-kandidatinnen-sendetermine-jury-alle-infos-zur-show, explains that several hundered applicants were invited to a casting, where then 200 were chosen to particpate. This is evident that the 200 are final and not semi-finalists. Regardless, the user continues to undo/revoke work without citing sources as per original request. KingdomNone91 (talk) 21:40, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
German is also my mother language and I read a lot of aticle. They never wrote anywhere that those 200 people are the final cast. They always wrote that the female models and male models have they own episodes in the start or call them constetants, which don't mean final cast. DDKay (talk) 21:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
This is not the point of this request. The point is not citing references instead you are surmising or making note of your own accord. This is not how Wikipedia operates. You are required to back up your decisions/notes with references of which you do not. This is the basis of this request to protect this page top stop the vandalism of which you are taking part in. Thanks. KingdomNone91 (talk) 21:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
I also read in this link. They never wrote that the final cast are those 200 people. It starts with the enumeration of the guest judges, than the theme song, then they wrote "Heidi Klum revealed in an Insta Live interview that several hundred models were cast for the 20th season. “We cast 100 men on the first day, 100 women on the second day - and we have mega guest judges,” said the international star with a grin. In a first trailer you can see some of the models. This year, too, there are no limits when it comes to gender, weight and height. The first of Heidi Klum's models were announced at the end of January." ---> there is nowhere the part where they say the 200 people are the final cast, only that they casted 200 people --> The ones for the first episodes, where they will be seen in TV. Also they only say that there are no limits of age and so on, also not an information about final cast. The last sentence means, that they came two poster. One with 12 men and one with 13 women and because of the poster we know a part of the final cast, which also don't mean that all 200 people are the final cast. Then they tell some names from the people from the poster. There is not any single word about "All 200 people are the final cast". This is just his interpretation of the the article, but not a true fact. Then that article say the dates for the episodes, where the live final will be and which winners GNTM already have. Also not a part where they say that all 200 people are the final cast. DDKay (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Automated comment: This user who requested protection has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 22:09, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Note: Reverted the requestor's withdrawal and removal of this request (I had already actioned it). arcticocean ■ 22:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
User(s) blocked for breaches of WP:3RR. arcticocean ■ 22:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Marian Rivera

[edit]

Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. FMSky (talk) 03:13, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Arunattu Vellalar

[edit]

Reason: High level of IP vandalism by ip users.This page is in danger of being tarnished.Minakshi Pillai (talk) 04:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

+1 Reason: this page has been recently vandalized by some people, who claiming their own opinion and using unprofessional words like, sudra, labors, slaves to attack a community for his personal feelings and without any refernece and talk doesn't even come to disscusion page to talk about this nor with with me, this guy also vadalizing the other article related to this community like Kodikaal Vellalar and List of Vellalar sub castes Mr.fakepolicy (talk) 04:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:56, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
    please verify the information first before made any decision Mr.fakepolicy (talk) 04:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment) Note: Article should be ECP'ed under WP:GS/CASTE. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:26, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

+2 Reason: High level of IP vandalism by user mr.fakepolicy who happens to be a sockpuppet user. Minakshi Pillai (talk) 07:52, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 07:57, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

CGTN Spanish

[edit]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Block evasion. Jfire (talk) 04:57, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Silambarasan filmography

[edit]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – From IPs and new accounts. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Hang Tuah

[edit]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 06:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Death of Mihir Ahammed

[edit]

Reason: IP Vandalism Spworld2 (talk) 07:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Women in the United States House of Representatives

[edit]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism picked up again immediately after last protection expired. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:08, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 09:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Alliance 90/The Greens

[edit]

Reason: Constant edit waring over the political position in the infobox. Helper201 (talk) 08:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Austrian Empire

[edit]

Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Remsense ‥ 论 08:30, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Jarvis Johnson (YouTuber)

[edit]

Reason: Continued addition of unreferenced "model" occupation in a non-encyclopedic way by various new or IP accounts. Strugglehouse (talk) 09:15, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Current requests for reduction in protection level

[edit]
Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
Shortcuts

Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.
  • Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
  • 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.

Shortcuts

Dragon Age: The Veilguard

[edit]

Reason: Protecting admin is okay with this being revised per here. Full protection was deemed unnecessary due to the edit war stopping, so requesting semi-protection. BMWF (talk) 00:06, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Flagging that this editor is forum shopping as after the first admin (Daniel Case) declined to lift the ECP, they went to RPP for a review where a second admin (Pppery) also declined to adjust the PP, and then went to a third admin's (Isabelle Belato) talk page who also declined. The RfC that we're both involved in is still ongoing and the ECP stopped an edit war. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

[edit]
Request a specific edit to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
Shortcut

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.
  • Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
  • Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
  • 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.
Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests


User Talk:Modernist

[edit]

The user seems to make a lot of rollbacks without explanation in cases where the edit doesn't seem to be obvious vandalism. If they explain their rollback in the edit summary then it would have been fine. I wanted to ask the user to explain their reversion to my edit, but their user talk page is locked. 128.193.154.187 (talk) 23:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

That text doesn't really summarize what's in the body, nor does that one bit seem significant enough for lead; please get consensus on talk, per Schazjmd (talk · contribs) who reverted you before Modernist did. I would presume the same rationale applies since you reverted Schazjmd. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 02:06, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Not done – Question has been answered and talk page discussion initiated. Favonian (talk) 09:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Handled requests

[edit]

A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.

Protected edit requests

0 protected edit requests
v·h
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
Updated as needed. Last updated: 08:25, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
9 template-protected edit requests
v·h
Page Tagged since Protection level Last protection log entry
Template:Infobox sports league (request) 2025-01-25 22:16 Template-protected (log) Modified by Primefac on 2018-02-23: "high-risk template with 2000+ transclusions"
Template:Post-nominals/GBR (request) 2025-01-30 07:35 Template-protected (log) Modified by Ivanvector on 2019-10-25: "Highly visible template: change to TE protection per request and consensus"
Template:Infobox Korean name (request) 2025-02-01 00:33 Template-protected (log) Modified by Primefac on 2018-02-23: "high-risk template with 4000+ transclusions"
Template:Very long (request) 2025-02-01 09:18 Template-protected (log) Modified by Mjroots on 2021-02-10: "Highly visible template: Per req at WP:RFPP"
Template:Db-imagepage (request) 2025-02-01 17:35 Template-protected (log) Modified by Oshwah on 2019-06-15: "Used by Twinkle and Huggle to warn users. This is a high risk point for potential large-scale disruption if vandalized."
Template:Baseballstats (request) 2025-02-03 07:52 Template-protected (log) Modified by Mark Arsten on 2013-10-18: "Allowing Protected Template editors"
Template:Infobox officeholder (request) 2025-02-03 08:29 Template-protected (log) Modified by Mark Arsten on 2013-10-18: "Allowing Protected Template editors"
Template:Airport codes (request) 2025-02-03 23:49 Template-protected (log) Modified by Fuhghettaboutit on 2013-11-02: "Enable access by template editors"
Module:Infobox gene (request) 2025-02-04 01:55 Template-protected (log) Modified by GorillaWarfare on 2018-05-12: "Highly visible template"
Updated as needed. Last updated: 07:23, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

WP:PERM

Requests for autopatrolled

Autopatrolled

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Ojsyork

[edit]

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)

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)
@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)

User:SDGB1217

[edit]

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)

User:C1K98V

[edit]

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)

 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)
Could you please point to where the date of birth of Gautam Vig is referenced, C1K98V? Schwede66 08:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
Sorry, which reference states the date of Vig's date of birth? I cannot see it. Schwede66 18:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
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)
@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)
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 [3]. 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)
(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)

User:Walco1

[edit]

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)

User:S-Aura

[edit]

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)

User:बडा काजी

[edit]

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)

 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)

User:Иованъ

[edit]

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)

User:Feralpearl

[edit]

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)

 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)
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)

User:GanzKnusper

[edit]
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)
Requests for AutoWikiBrowser access

AutoWikiBrowser

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.


User:Yeshivish613

[edit]

It would be helpful to use this tool so I can quickly do otherwise tedious tasks. In the past I've spent a lot of time adding a new navbox to a bunch of pages, this would make it a lot quicker. Yeshivish613 (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Smallangryplanet

[edit]

Sometimes I kill time waiting for tests to run at work or similar by doing WikiGnome activities and/or fixing various small errors, so it would be nice to have access to this tool. Thanks in advance. Smallangryplanet (talk) 00:36, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
There are no outstanding requests for the confirmed flag.

Confirmed

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
Requests for extended confirmation

Extended confirmed

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:MediaGuy768

[edit]

I am an aviation industry member and expert and would like to edit some articles involving aviation and add maps, clarification in some text, and even existing photos to some areas. MediaGuy768 (talk) 05:03, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done None of those things require Extended confirmed. If any articles you wish to edit are protected, you can request edits on the talk page. Donald Albury 14:11, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Boutboul

[edit]

Arcticocean requested that, "If [I] wish to gain [ECR] again, the onus would be on [me] to prove that trust has been regained." To address this challenge, I would like to respond to the two concerns raised:

1. "You have added translated content from other Wikipedias without attribution."
2. "You have artificially split your article contributions into separate edits to more quickly reach a high edit count."


1. Translated content without attribution

In October 2024, I misunderstood the rules regarding proper attribution for translated content. Since January 2025, I believe I have consistently included proper attribution in all my edit summaries, as demonstrated in these examples: here, here or here.


2. Split article contributions

Regarding this concern, I would like to clarify that my first 350 edits, made between 2006 and 2013, occurred before the 500 edits rule was introduced (2016). These edits could not have been intended to meet a requirement that did not exist at the time.
I acknowledge that I intentionally split my contributions to reach the 500 edits threshold, only for the remaining 150 contributions needed to meet this target.
However, since then, I have made over 700 additional contributions (~1200 in total) without splitting them. This can be seen in my average edit size, which is approximately 350 bytes and aligns with averages observed among contributors, including administrators.

I hope this explanation demonstrates my commitment to addressing the concerns raised and regaining trust. Michael Boutboul (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 2 requests for extended confirmed declined in the past 90 days ([4][5]) and has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([6]). — MusikBot talk 15:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Tashmetu

[edit]

Hi, My Extended confirmed permission was revoked last December because the arbitration committee deemed my contributions to be majority minor edits. I have since made between 150-200 edits that are more substantial, I would like to now appeal and have my permission restored. Tashmetu (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([7]). — MusikBot talk 15:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
 Not done. The AC said you could appeal after 500 substantative edits. Furthermore, many of you additions are adding citations to one WP:unreliable source: www.catholic-hierarchy.org. Could you revert those changes and add reliable sources instead. You can install User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter to help you identify unreliable sources if you cannot determine reliability yourself. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I thought the 500 is in total and includes my previous edits before my permission was revoked, because they weren't all minor edits. I will try to fix the reference issue, I had no idea. unfortunately to make my edits more substantive I kept making several changes per edit and so simply reverting them won't be possible . But I'll try anyway, thanks for the advice. Tashmetu (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
That is a good point. According to Xtools, you've made some 220 non-minor edits. However, I see you've tagging edits as WP:minor that are not according to Wikipedia's definition. For instance, this edit where you added a source should not have been marked as minor and was substantative instead. Please have a look at what should be marked as minor in its guideline and adjust accordingly. If we instead look at edits of >20 bytes, we get to ~310 edits. We're still a bit too early for regranting the permission in my books therefore. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Not tagging adding references as minor edits is something that I should have known about since I've read the page you mentioned but slipped my mind as I was being extra cautious of being accused again of gaming the system. Thank you for the advice, I'll work on learning from my mistakes and sorry for wasting your time. Tashmetu (talk) 19:31, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Respublica-23

[edit]

Reason for requesting extended confirmed rights I'm the alt of Scratchinghead and im requesting the ec for this. If not, then it's okey and i will get rid of this account and switch to just using my main one. Respublica-23 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Respublica-23: could you confirm this from your main account? Happy to grant it when that's done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Okay ☢️SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 16:07, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Upon looking a bit deeper, why did @Respublica-23 claim to be a new user when they created their user page ([8]). That seems dishonest if this is a WP:VALIDSOCK. Could you explain why you have need of a second account? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
I would normally be inclined to just say "meh" and grant the user right anyway, but the account this is an alt of had EC removed for cause in December and only got it back a few weeks ago. That, combined with the concern brought up by Femke, makes me question if this is a good idea. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 21:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
To be honest i dont really need it, I could be fine without it So I withdraw my applications Respublica-23 (talk) 14:49, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
backup account Respublica-23 (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Eh i put up a random description
Since I read the policy on valid socks I changed it to "alt of scratchinghead" Respublica-23 (talk) 14:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
 Not done While I agree that "meh" is usually the right attitude here, I don't think the benefits outweight the potential negatives here. A backup account is not one of the reasons given in VALIDALT. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:05, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Poil

[edit]

Hi. My name is Stéphane. I'm an "old" editor, I started editing in 2005. You can see my profile and contributions on the French wiki : poil and fr:Special:Contributions/Poil. Today, sophisticated tools, which didn't exist 20 years ago, are here to help for the translation from fr to en (among others). I'd like to use them, to translate the page I recently wrote.

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I had to make a special request for adding 2 references to Elbit Systems Talk:Elbit_Systems, maybe you can help with this too?

Having a bit more "privileges" would allow me to be more efficient as an editor.

Thank you !

Stéphane Poil (talk) 02:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Requests for new page reviewer

New page reviewer

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Rodney Baggins

[edit]

I've been Wiki-editing since 2018 and have become a familiar face on the snooker project. I'm accustomed to creating articles and redirects, and I'm fully conversant with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I've co-nominated three articles for FAC (all promoted) and contributed to many other FACs. I've been a pending changes reviewer since May 2020, and I like to think I am fair and neutral in any discussions that I get involved in. With over 24,000 main space edits to my name, I've been quite an active editor over the years, and I think I could make a useful contribution as a New page reviewer. Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had this permission revoked in the past 180 days ([9]). — MusikBot talk 05:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Ignore the bot, I misclicked. :( Sohom (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

User:ViridianPenguin

[edit]

I've been editing for over five years with 2.2K mainspace edits, which includes over 30 new articles. In May 2024, Clovermoss gave me a three-month trial of the NPP permission, and I got the reviewer barnstar in that month's backlog drive. I sparingly used AFD and CSD during my reviewing, but that is mostly because when I found deficient articles, I spent the time to make them passable, rather than sending them for draftification/deletion. When I did propose content for deletion, I generally received community consensus to do so. I am seeking the permission for permanent use, but another trial works too! ViridianPenguin 🐧 ( 💬 ) 18:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

 Done (till May 3rd) I'm not seeing a lot of patrols to go off here, so I'm hesitant to grant rights indefinitely, however, whatever I do see, I do like it, so I've given another 3 month trail to do more reviews :) Sohom (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

User:DoctorWhoFan91

[edit]

My trial of 2 months is ending soon, so I would like to be granted the permission permanently. I know that I have made mistakes while reviewing (though nothing close to egregious), so in case it would be another trial, I can ask later, as I might or might not be busy this month. And thank you for providing me the trial, it's been fun, trying to help Wikipedia through npp. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Hey man im josh (expires 00:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 21:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
 Done (till 3rd April) Sohom (talk) 05:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Hounaam

[edit]

Dear Wikipedia Administrators, I would like to formally request the permanent assignment of the New Page Reviewer permission.

Since being granted this role on a trial basis, I have actively contributed to reviewing new pages, particularly those related to Iran, Persian language, and Persianate culture areas in which I have both expertise and a long-standing editorial commitment. In addition to evaluating new articles, I have assisted other authors in completing their work, providing guidance when they were unfamiliar with Wikipedia's guidelines. In cases where further intervention was needed, I took the initiative to edit the articles myself to ensure they met the necessary standards.

I believe my trial period as a New Page Reviewer have demonstrated my dedication to maintaining and improving Wikipedia’s content. I remain committed to collaborating with fellow editors and ensuring that new articles align with Wikipedia’s guidelines.

I appreciate your time and consideration. Best regards, Hounaam (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Rosguill (expires 00:00, 8 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 11:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:ZyphorianNexus

[edit]

I've been using the NPP rights on a temporary basis for about a month and a half, during which I reviewed around 170 pages, tagged articles with necessary cleanup tags, and nominated a few for deletion. Overall, I believe I've been thorough in my patrols and would appreciate the opportunity for an indefinite renewal of my NPP rights. ZyphorianNexus Talk 03:21, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Joe Roe (expires 00:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot talk 03:30, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Electricmemory

[edit]

I would like to be granted new page reviewer rights on a temporary basis to more easily review/curate redirects and to work through the page review backlog. Despite my account not having existed for 30 days I believe I can handle this appropriately. Electricmemory (talk) 08:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had an account for 13 days and has 370 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 08:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Requests for page mover

Page mover

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Bluetime93

[edit]

I have been a regular contributor to both the Turkish and English Wikipedia for many years. Based on the experience I have gained throughout this period, I aim to make more high-quality and sustainable contributions. I am particularly interested in articles related to transportation and believe that these articles require regular monitoring. My primary objectives include updating incorrect or incomplete content, performing page moves when necessary, and ensuring that these articles comply with Wikipedia standards. In this context, I am requesting the "page mover" right to address content deficiencies and errors while also helping to reduce the workload of other administrators. Thank you for your attention and support. --bluetime93 💬 11:16, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 1998 total edits. — MusikBot talk 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
 Not done, fails minimum criteria. Primefac (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Requests for pending changes reviewer

Pending changes reviewer

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:BryceM2001

[edit]

I have lots of experience in the WP:TW scale of reverting edits, and wish to continue this through WP:PENDING BryceM2001 (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 92 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 20:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not at this time due to limited editing experience but please do apply again later. Dr vulpes (Talk) 19:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Ali Beary

[edit]

I'd like to request pending changes review rights because I am familiar with the policy and this would help me with my vandalism patrols. Furthermore, I am currently trying to accept a request, but I do not have the permissions. Thanks! Ali Beary (talk2me!) (stalk me?!) 13:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

@Ali Beary Given your recent WP:CUTPASTE move, I'd like to see a little more time for you to demonstrate your knowledge of Wikipedia policies and procedures before granting additional permissions. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
@Ahecht, ah, apologies. I didn't realize a "request moves" page existed, and I do not have move or merge permissions. I was simply undoing something that wasn't correct... hence why I requested move perms earlier so I could fix it. Ali Beary (talk) 12:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Requests for rollback

Rollback

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Protobowladdict

[edit]

I am requesting rollback rights because I spend most of my time on Wikipedia reverting vandalism, and I would like to help fight vandals more effectively. I have made some mistakes, but I mostly have a good understanding of Wikipedia policies, and I try to always WP:AGF. Rollback will also allow me to use tools like AntiVandal. Thank you. Protobowladdict (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Vineyard93

[edit]

Some newbie editors contain IP address not their username editing wrong and fake information even if is not the area origin. Vineyard93 (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done User:Vineyard93. I don't understand your request. You don't need rollback to revert fake information. If you encounter vandalism from IPs, you can warn the users. When they persist after sufficient warnings, you can report to WP:AIV. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Rahmatula786

[edit]

I would like to request rollback permission to help combat vandalism, particularly in Nepal-related articles, which I frequently come across while patrolling recent changes. Having rollback rights would allow me to efficiently revert obvious and disruptive edits, improving the quality of affected pages. I always assume good faith and am careful when reviewing edits. If I am uncertain whether an edit is vandalism, I do not revert it. I am also familiar with Wikipedia’s warning templates and know when it is appropriate to report persistent vandals to WP:AIV. I believe rollback will be a valuable tool in my efforts to maintain Wikipedia’s integrity, and I will use it responsibly. Thank you for your time and consideration. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Xiphoid Vigour

[edit]

I'm requesting this right to revert vandalism from the all the articles on Wikipedia, especially India related articles. I'm also patrolling recent changes from when I started i.e. almost a month. Please remember to ping me if done Xiphoid Vigour ༈Duel༈ 05:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 187 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 15:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Heeheemalu

[edit]

I have been actively combating vandalism on Wikipedia for some time, especially Taiwan related articles. I regularly monitor recent changes and undo obvious vandalism while ensuring that good-faith edits are not mistakenly removed. Having rollback rights would allow me to revert vandalism more efficiently, especially on high-traffic pages. I am familiar with Wikipedia’s policies on vandalism, edit warring, and proper rollback usage, and I will use the tool responsibly to help maintain the integrity of the encyclopedia. Heeheemalu (talk) 12:57, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:ScrabbleTiles

[edit]

Hi, I would like to request rollback rights as I have been patrolling on Wikipedia for a while, finding vandals, and I would like to have the ability to use rollback to revert their edits more effectively (as I have had a couple where I had to undo lots of small edits and it took up lots of my time). Thanks, ScrabbleTiles (talk) 16:01, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has 76 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBot talk 18:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
 Not done Hello User:ScrabbleTiles. Usually, we expect users to have at least 200 edits to mainspace. I would like to see you understand warnings a bit better for isntance before giving rollback. At User talk:OKTO on 6, you have a level-1 warning and only warning in rapid succession. Of course, a second warning can't be an only warning, so a level-2 warning would have been more appropriate (or none, as they may not have noticed the first warning immediately). In the meantime, you can already install WP:Twinkle to combat vandalism more effectively. You're on the right track, so feel free to come back in a few weeks when you've hit the threshold. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for that. I went straight to 4 because their edits were very disruptive and I didn’t see any constructive edit coming from them but in the future, I will be more forgiving. I will request again once I have reached the threshold. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Pbritti

[edit]

I've been involved in combatting low-intensity disruption and vandalism for a while. I've recently encountered an increased level of sustained socks, LTAs, and contentious topic disruption. Having rollback would be just another tool in the toolkit, as I've enjoyed the luxury of Twinkle for a couple years. An even more streamlined approach to combatting disruption is always nice, though. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:LightlySeared

[edit]
I'm requesting rollback to help me revert vandalism better. I've been using Twinkle for a while now, but in a few cases the proper rollback toll would have been more useful. I think I only revert blatant vandalism, as I prefer accuracy over volume. Mainly, it would be another tool in the kit. LightlySeared (talk) 10:04, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Requests for template editor

Template editor

[edit]
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.

User:Raph Williams65

[edit]

I request that I be given a right as a template editor, to edit templates protected. Am sure my edits will be pleasant to everyone, I have a strong password as required. I promise to respect the guidelines on editing templates. You can revew templates I my self have created here... – Raph Williams65 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done, you haven't met the guidelines for granting or demonstrated a need for this permission. The format in which you requested this also does not give me confidence that you will use the necessary level of care in, for example, checking a page's instructions (documentation in the case of a template) before editing. If there is a template you are unable to edit, please just use an edit request for now. SilverLocust 💬 13:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

User:Cocu15

[edit]

I have been working on creating and expanding articles related to baseball and softball teams, mainly from Latin America and Europe. Since these articles heavily rely on Module:Sports color, which is protected, to properly display team colors in infoboxes and other tables, I would like to request the rights to edit this protected module. I have requested several edits to this specific module in the past; however, I believe it would be more efficient if I could make these edits myself.

In the past, I have created and worked on different modules and templates related to other topics that interest me, such as public transportation and other sports (e.g., Module:Adjacent stations/Mexico City Metro, Module:Adjacent stations/Prague Metro, Template:Liga de Fútbol Americano Profesional, Template:Hiroshima Toyo Carp managers). If administrators would consider it appropriate, I am also open to a temporary grant of editing rights to continue improving these articles.

Thanks in advance. Cocu15 (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Standard Guidelines review:
  1. Green tickY (guideline: >1 year, applicant: 10)
  2. Green tickY (guideline: >1000 edits, applicant: ~9800)
  3. Green tickY (guideline: >150 template edits, applicant: ~650)
  4. Green tickY (guideline: !<6 months, applicant: N/A)
  5. Red XN (guideline: 3 sandboxes, applicant: 0)
  6. Green tickY (guideline: 5 requests, applicant: 6)
Primefac (talk) 08:02, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
I'm on the fence a little here; while there are non-trivial edit requests, there doesn't seem to be any indication that interests lie outwith a very small group of pages.
The subpages of modules like Module:Sports color are just variables, any vandalism to the templates will only cause an error output, not propagate any serious harm to the main pages. I wonder if dropping the protection level of those supbages to ECP, similar to Module:Political party would be more effective since these types of modules seem to be heavily requested by folks wanting to update them. I speak personally here that not having the political party module protected has been a huge save of my time and effort as I only need to double-check new entries rather than spend ages answering edit requests. Primefac (talk) 08:02, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
    Category tracker

    Immediate requests

    [edit]
    Category Entries
    Wikipedians looking for help 0
    Requests for unblock 20
    Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages 0
    Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations 2
    Candidates for speedy deletion 46
    Wikipedia fully protected edit requests 0

    Deletion

    [edit]
    Category Entries
    Articles for deletion 595
    Templates for deletion 115
    Categories for deletion 272
    Wikipedia files for discussion 73
    All redirects for discussion 453
    Miscellaneous pages for deletion 7
    Possible copyright violations 28
    All articles proposed for deletion 237
    All files proposed for deletion 14
    Unsorted AfD debates 3
    All files with the same name on Commons 112
    [edit]
    Category Entries
    Orphaned non-free use 357
    Unknown copyright status 60
    Unknown source 23
    No non-free use rationale 2
    Replaceable non-free use images 15
    Disputed non-free use images 49

    Page protection

    [edit]
    Category Entries
    Protected 10
    Semi-protected user and user talk pages 1,274
    Fully protected user and user talk pages 449
    Protected against vandalism 4
    Protected talk pages of blocked users 34
    Semi-protected 2,295
    Arbitration 500/30 restricted 0

    Cleanup

    [edit]

    General cleanup

    Category Entries Percentage
    All pages needing cleanup 34,498 0.5
    All articles needing rewrite 6,094 0.09
    All articles needing expert attention 1,338 0.02
    All Wikipedia articles in need of updating 40,469 0.58

    Reference problems

    Category Entries Percentage
    All pages needing factual verification 11,311 0.16
    All articles with unsourced statements 539,546 7.76
    All articles lacking sources 69,024 0.99
    All unreferenced BLPs 5 0
    All articles needing additional references 478,264 6.88
    All articles needing references cleanup 4,651 0.07
    All articles lacking in-text citations 105,774 1.52
    All articles with dead external links 281,332 4.05

    Image cleanup problems

    Category Entries Percentage
    Image files for cleanup 17 -
    Wikipedia files lacking a description 135 -
    Wikipedia files with unknown source 19 -

    Other problems

    Category Entries Percentage
    All articles to be merged 1,199 0.02
    All articles to be split 835 0.01
    Unsorted Stubs 0 -
    Stub categories 19,310 -
    All uncategorized pages 597 0.01
    All orphaned articles 54,704 0.79
    All articles needing copy edit 2,301 0.03
    All articles with style issues 19,292 0.28
    All Wikipedia articles needing context 2,768 0.04
    All articles that may contain original research 16,581 0.24


    Miscellaneous

    [edit]
    Category Entries
    Requested moves 426
    All Wikipedia neutral point of view disputes 6,765
    All accuracy disputes 15,762
    Articles with invalid ISBNs 1
    Articles with invalid ISSNs 4
    All articles to be expanded 65,901

    Special pages

    [edit]
    Maintenance reports Information
    Broken redirects
    Dead-end pages Dead-end pages
    Dormant pages Dusty articles
    DoubleRedirects Double redirects
    Lonely pages Orphaned articles
    Long pages
    New pages New page patrol
    New pages feed Page curation
    Protected pages Protection policy
    Short pages
    Uncategorized Categorization
    Uncategorized cats
    Uncategorized templates
    Unused categories
    Unused files (images)
    Unused templates
    Without interwiki links
    Most interwiki links


    Sub-page listing

    [edit]

    Hong Kong

    [edit]
    Hong Kong skyline at night

    Misc

    [edit]
    Delete Keep Neutral Oppose Support Note Template



    Multi-licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License versions 1.0 and 2.0
    I agree to multi-license my text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under Wikipedia's copyright terms and the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 1.0 and version 2.0. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under the Creative Commons terms, please check the CC dual-license and Multi-licensing guides.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Winhunter&oldid=1190483781"