v t e Requests for permissions
Common	Autopatrolled AutoWikiBrowser New page reviewer Page mover Pending changes reviewer Rollback
Uncommon	Account creator Confirmed Event coordinator Extended confirmed File mover Mass message sender Template editor
Logs	Archived requests Approved requests Denied requests System rights log
Special	Administrator Bot Bureaucrat CheckUser and Oversight Edit filter helper Edit filter manager Interface administrator

Template editor

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

(add request • view requests)

Shortcuts

See Wikipedia:Template editor 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.
Please note, most templates are not protected and can be edited without this access.
If a template you frequently edit had its protection level recently changed, ask the protecting admin if lowering the protection level is an option.

User:Pkbwcgs

Pkbwcgs (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) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I would like the template editor right so that it can assist me when closing TfD discussions. Sometimes, I have closed TfDs on template-protected templates and I had to make an edit request to remove the deletion template. Instead, it would be easier for me to close any TfD discussion through consensus even if the template is template-protected. I have be registered for over 1 year, I have more than 1,000 edits, I have more than 150 edits to templates and I have one self-requested block in the last six months but zero behavioural blocks and 3RR violations. If this is declined, it's okay as I will continue taking part in closing TfD discussions and request three to six months after. However, this right will make things easier in closing TfD discussions that relate to template-protected templates. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Guidelines review:

Y (guideline: >1 year, applicant: 2)
Y (guideline: >1000 edits, applicant: ~27k)
Y (guideline: >150 template edits, applicant: ~200)
Y (guideline: !<6 months, applicant: ~12mo, with a self-requested block 5 months ago)
N (guideline: 3 sandboxes, applicant: ~0)
N (guideline: 5 requests, applicant: 5, but all were simple)

Primefac (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC) Updated 14:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note, I have only run the numbers and not taken an opportunity to look through their TFD closes. As a former NAC-TFD closer, I'd say if their closes are good they should get the perm to allow them to better act as a closer, so if someone beats me to that review and thinks they're decent then count this as a "support" from me. Primefac (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Regarding XfD, their XfD stats look excellent and their closes/relists seem fine as well. Also, this isn't that much of a concern, but the granting guidelines ask for "significant" requests; if "significant" is supposed to mean the requests must be technically complex, I don't think any of the requests so far meet that standard. Enterprisey (talk!) 22:35, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point, I've updated the numbers above. Primefac (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@There'sNoTime: do you have any comments on the prior indef block you placed here? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:46, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pkbwcgs: is your ((Semi-retired)) banner meant to be humorous, etc or are you planning on being away? — xaosflux ^Talk 22:47, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Xaosflux: I have removed it, that was from a few weeks ago but I forgot to remove it. Pkbwcgs (talk) 06:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is a young editor who seems to have grown up a lot in the last year and who also has the potential to be a huge asset to Wikipedia. In late 2016 they were making multiple edits which unintentionally broke formatting of pages. User:Jackmcbarn may be able to comment further. I would be inclined to disregard this unless there is any evidence of more recent disruption. The recent block self-request worries me slightly. I think the editor is trustworthy but I wonder if they have the technical awareness required for the role. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:09, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding technical prowess, mentoring could be an option (I'd be happy to do it, if decided). Plus we have the capability to temporarily assign perms, I's say to grant the perm. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 15:50, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pkbwcgs:: I'm willing to do a 60 day grant if you are open to work with @Bellezzasolo:, convertible to permanent with Bellezzasolo's recommendation after at least 50 days (or you can always reapply here for general review). — xaosflux ^Talk 18:40, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also support either that or a commitment to only use it for TFD closures until such time as they find a need to start performing technical edits. Either way, definitely support a temp 50/60 day trial. Primefac (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac and Xaosflux: For the time being, I will only commit to using template editor for TfD closures only. I also agree to receive mentoring from Bellezzasolo on the technical side of templates and making templates work. After at least 50 days, I will come back here to reapply for it permanently after receiving mentoring. I agree to the two-month trial. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 19:31, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]