Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Page mover
Page mover
User:Wikishovel
- Wikishovel (t · th · c (RM/TR · RMs) · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci)
I do a lot of categorization and tidying of new pages, and sometimes need to move new pages with unnecessary or misspelled disambiguation. Page mover permissions allow me to avoid leaving implausible redirects. I was granted temporary page moved on 29 August, and have had no complaints so far, but the trial has expired today: could this permission be renewed please? Wikishovel (talk) 09:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure here. A lot of those are plausible redirects and moving Vendolite vending machine to Vendolite (for example) without a redirect seems likely to confuse a new editor. Wil leave up for some more admin opinions. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- HJM is right, Vendolite vending machine was a plausible redirect, and should have been retained, apologies for that. Some of the others they're concerned about may have been related to obvious sockpuppetry or subtle vandalism. Page mover would certainly have been helpful during my vandalism cleanup of this mess yesterday. But if the rule is "plausible redirects should be retained, pending admin intervention for other problems", then I'm happy to stick to that. How about a 30-day short leash, to demonstrate? Wikishovel (talk) 05:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Done for another 30 days. If you haven't already, Wikishovel, I'd suggest reading WP:PMRC: basically, don't suppress the redirect unless it would have met one of the criteria for speedy deletion if retained. Redirects are cheap, so it's generally best to err on the side of caution when it comes to suppressing them. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:21, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- HJM is right, Vendolite vending machine was a plausible redirect, and should have been retained, apologies for that. Some of the others they're concerned about may have been related to obvious sockpuppetry or subtle vandalism. Page mover would certainly have been helpful during my vandalism cleanup of this mess yesterday. But if the rule is "plausible redirects should be retained, pending admin intervention for other problems", then I'm happy to stick to that. How about a 30-day short leash, to demonstrate? Wikishovel (talk) 05:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
User:MicrobiologyMarcus
- MicrobiologyMarcus (t · th · c (RM/TR · RMs) · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · CSD log · rfar · spi · cci)
Two reasons, but I'm not sure they rise to the level of needing this hat. First, I'm a reviewer at WP:NPP and I've been aware of this right for some time, weighing whether or not it's worth it for me to ask. The reason it's relevant is because as a NPP reviewer, sometimes I have the need to draftify things and I'm frequently leaving behind cross-namespace redirects with deletion tags that I think are just leaving behind more work for admins to do. It's not a lot but I do consider that you guys probably need less, not more tedious and menial work to do.
Second, I'm coming across instances more often writing articles where I am trying to move pages from the draft space (recently completed Draft:The Bear (The Bear)) to main space, where I would like to be able to do it over a redirect. Again, not a large reason, but would be nice to be able to do without waiting for admin eyes.
That's all really. Two minor reasons for this hat, but they are use cases specific to how I'm editing. Thanks microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 19:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)