Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Template editor
(Redirected from Wikipedia:PERM/TPE)
Template editor
- ImStevan (t · th · c (template space · edit requests) · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · templates created · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs (blocks · rights · moves) · rfar · spi · cci)
I believe that I'm a responsible editor with a lot of experience, and that I would make for a great template editor, especially in my areas of interest such as Eurovision, Geography and Vexillology — IмSтevan talk 13:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Standard Guidelines review:
(guideline: >1 year, applicant: 2.5)- (guideline: >1000 edits, applicant: ~3500)
- (guideline: >150 template edits, applicant: ~200)
(guideline: !<6 months, applicant: 3mo)- (guideline: 3 sandboxes, applicant: 0)
- (guideline: 5 requests, applicant: 3)
- Primefac (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Not done, fails multiple criteria. Primefac (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that regarding guideline 4, I was reverting (what I percieved as) vandalism on an article, that my block was only applied to that singular page, with overwhelming support for the reverts, and that I chose not to dispute it since it was only a 48h block. As for the 5th, I simply don't tend to edit templates using sandboxes, but by pushing edits directly. It really seems like a redundant requirement since not everybody's editing style is the same. No comments on the 6th — IмSтevan talk 22:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- 5 naturally leads into 6, because most TPE will request that a proposed edit be made to the sandbox before the change is implemented. If it is a trivial/"simple" change it is generally not counted towards 6 because sandboxing is unnecessary, and thus there is no demonstration of technical ability. Another thing that 5 and 6 demonstrate is that there is actually a need for this perm, not just "I think I might find this useful", because template screwups are probably the most widely-visible mistake one can make. In other words, the objective requirements get you a review, the subjective requirements determine whether your request is granted. If you do find yourself frequently seeing the need and making changes to protected templates, feel free to request again in the future. Primefac (talk) 10:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fair, thank you — IмSтevan talk 10:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- 5 naturally leads into 6, because most TPE will request that a proposed edit be made to the sandbox before the change is implemented. If it is a trivial/"simple" change it is generally not counted towards 6 because sandboxing is unnecessary, and thus there is no demonstration of technical ability. Another thing that 5 and 6 demonstrate is that there is actually a need for this perm, not just "I think I might find this useful", because template screwups are probably the most widely-visible mistake one can make. In other words, the objective requirements get you a review, the subjective requirements determine whether your request is granted. If you do find yourself frequently seeing the need and making changes to protected templates, feel free to request again in the future. Primefac (talk) 10:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that regarding guideline 4, I was reverting (what I percieved as) vandalism on an article, that my block was only applied to that singular page, with overwhelming support for the reverts, and that I chose not to dispute it since it was only a 48h block. As for the 5th, I simply don't tend to edit templates using sandboxes, but by pushing edits directly. It really seems like a redundant requirement since not everybody's editing style is the same. No comments on the 6th — IмSтevan talk 22:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Standard Guidelines review:
