This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MusikBot(talk | contribs) at 19:20, 7 January 2021(Bot clerking on 2 requests: archiving (2 approved) (0 open requests remaining)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:20, 7 January 2021 by MusikBot(talk | contribs)(Bot clerking on 2 requests: archiving (2 approved) (0 open requests remaining))
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
See Wikipedia:Page mover for the granting guidelines. Applicants should show some evidence that they generally meet the guidelines outlined there, and have a demonstrated need for the right.
I've been in Wikipedia in four years, and I've good experience of editing.
I've moved some pages in accordance with naming conventions. In one of my moves, I tried to do uncontroversial move to comply with the naming convention, but was occupied by a redirect. Such redirect had to be done with "round-robin" swap move, which only users with page mover right can do. I had to request on Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. This would solve this hassle if I have this permission, as long I can do within guidelines.
Comment: The moves I see mostly look sensible and non-controversial, except that the Skandiabanken/Sbanken mess should not have happened, and it was the second such move predicated on WP:OFFICIALNAMES, which Stylez995 should re-read. The gist of it is that WP does not put stock in what's "official", but what is most common in independent, reliable sources. When something has changed name in the real world, it often takes months or even longer for WP to catch up, and this is by design not by accident. Such moves should almost always go to full RM discussion, since people will want to provide WP:COMMONNAME evidence one way or the other. If the editor has learned this already, then I wouldn't have an concerns, I don't think. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 06:25, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SMcCandlish: On Skandiabanken / Sbanken case, I realised I did it by mistake, and I reverted my own move. But I've read the guidelines that I should consider discussing it at RM for this case. Regardless, this happened long time ago. Also, happy new year! --Stylez995 (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now. While I appreciate the discussion above (and ability to admit when one is wrong) there are very few moves that would have required suppression of a redirect, only one RM/TR request, and only one instance of participating in an RM (and in general, only about a dozen moves). If the need for suppressed moves, swaps, or other instances where this right would have been helpful increases dramatically, there is no prejudice against re-requesting access. Primefac (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to request access to page mover rights. I used to move pages whenever it's necessary and I recently enabled the swap script for myself in order to do page swapping when there's an existing page on the move target but still am not able to use the script because I don't have the access right to use it. Em-emtalk15:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now, while there are a reasonable number of moves, I'm not seeing any that required suppression of the redirect or even swapping. If that changes in the future there is no prejudice against requesting here again, but right now I'm not really seeing a need. Primefac (talk) 15:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now. While I appreciate the discussion above (and ability to admit when one is wrong) there are very few moves that would have required suppression of a redirect, only one RM/TR request, and only one instance of participating in an RM (and in general, only about a dozen moves). If the need for suppressed moves, swaps, or other instances where this right would have been helpful increases dramatically, there is no prejudice against re-requesting access. Primefac (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)