As a rough guideline, administrators usually require editors to have made more than 500 useful non-botlike edits, and to have been active in the last thirty days. Patrollers and License reviewers don't have to request this flag.
Hello @Tô Ngọc Khang: : You're actually in the wrong place. If it's just a matter of cropping images, you only need Autopatrol permissions. Then you can use the Commons:CropTool and thus don't have to re-upload an image from an external source. Another advantage is that CropTool creates a link for you even after you've created it. Therefore, please request Autopatrol permissions, but I don't think it should be a problem to grant them to you. Greetings, זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes09:45, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a matter of a block from last September for copyvio. I'm not against granting, merely feeling cautious about it. Abzeronow (talk) 18:47, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mình hiểu, mình yêu cầu cấp vì mình muốn có thể tải lên phiên bản tốt hơn của hình ảnh trên. Hình ảnh đó sau khi cắt khung đã bị mất độ phân giải nhiều hơn dự kiến. Nhưng Ziv đã nói rằng mình đã nhầm chỗ, và có vẻ là vậy. Tô Ngọc Khang (talk) 14:49, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I should note that this request was originally in the wrong section. I moved it to this section so autopatroller could be discussed. Abzeronow (talk) 19:29, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I would like to know if it is possible to obtain the "autopatrolled" status, I have modified in the last year and a half of presence on Wikipedia numerous pages with positive feedback and at the moment I need permission because I am working on the modification of some maps and it would be useful to directly overwrite the files rather than requesting authorization for each file, furthermore I should meet the requirements for the assignment of the status. Thanks for your attention and have a nice day. Thank you, MAGGLGG (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sound recordings are often trickier than other media because of multiple copyrights. In the case of this 1941 sound recording, Dizem que sou um mau rapaz, the composition may be public domain (would need confirmation on who composer was). Francisco Alves died in 1952 so his performance rights would be expired. So it does indeed appear to be public domain in Brazil. But since 1941 sound recordings are still protected in the United States until 2042, they aren't PD in the US yet. Abzeronow (talk) 18:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Leonardo Cirrus Thank you for applying. Your edit count here is way below the rough guideline of 500 non-botlike edits. I would advise you to get somewhere near it without any red flags and demonstrate some experience. In the meantime you can request to overwrite files at COM:OWR. Shaan SenguptaTalk06:17, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm doing paid editions for my employer La contemporaine. I am right now adding metadata, categorizing images from my institution that have been uploaded by several users. I often come across images for which I have a better resolution version (exact same media). Having the autopatrol rights would make it possible for me to upload better versions. If my editcount is deemed too low, I can provide by mail my personnal username with +2500 contribs, active since 2006. Thanks in advance. RenéLC (talk) 04:36, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am a trusted Wikimedia user, I have made over 4k contributions to Wikimedia Commons. The permissions would grant me the ability to overwrite existing files that may need cropping, the lack of that blocked me from making needed edits before. Thank you. MemicznyJanusz (talk) 14:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I occasionally create or improve vector graphics for Wikimedia Commons. Here is list of my works so far: /wiki/User:Jooja Would really appreciate it if I'm granted the right to update existing vector files. Thank you. Jooja (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That was not the case, as I already explained back then: that edit was part of a series, and the cosmetic part was minimal. I do not need it tho. I just offered my availability to help, my experience and my knowledge of semi-automated systems like AWB. If you need help, here I am. Daniele Fisichella13:00, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I would like to request Patroller rights on Wikimedia Commons. I have experience in categorizing and marking items for deletion on Commons, which I believe demonstrates my commitment to maintaining quality content uploaded by contributors on Wikimedia Commons. I am quick at spotting vandalism and handling it appropriately whilst always assuming good faith to uphold community guidelines and ensure friendliness inside the Commons community, I have also reverted promotional vandalism on high-profile pages, including licensing help pages across Wikimedia Commons. My efforts have been recognized and appreciated by other community members. With these skills and experience, I can contribute effectively as a Patroller by reviewing new uploads and edits, and, help keep Commons a reliable and trustworthy repository. Thank you for considering my request! Sev6nWiki (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be willing to consider granting autopatroller when you get more edits. The recent enwiki block also makes me a bit cautious (but since Commons was not part of that, it won't effect your application). Abzeronow (talk) 18:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll contribute more until then. I understand that the English Wikipedia block is something that could make anyone cautious, but I've learned alot from it. Sev6nWiki (talk) 05:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I would like to kindly request rollback rights on Wikimedia Commons. I currently have the autopatrolled user right here on Commons. I also have experience using the rollback tool, as I hold rollback rights on both the English Wikipedia and Wikidata. I would like to use the rollback function to more efficiently revert obvious vandalism and unambiguous policy violations. I am familiar with Commons policies and understand the appropriate use of this tool. Thank you for considering my request. Best regards, Igor123121 (talk) 09:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Igor123121 thank you for applying. I would note that I see (little to) no anti-vandalism work by you here. Zero use of twinkle to revert and only a few uses of Undo, that too for self revert. Regarding you having the rollback tool elsewhere, you got it on enwiki on 24 June 2025 & wikidata on 1 July 2025. I also can't understand how much experience you've gained with zero uses of the tool on both till now. Also you got Autopatrol on 29 June 2025. So getting this all along, I am sorry to say but it looks like you are on a hat-collecting spree. Also a rollbacker is expected to be using edit summaries all the time to explain their actions. Your edits show that you lack here to. Only automatic summarise are there. Shaan SenguptaTalk13:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GreenMeansGo the edit summary thing is a small part of my response. I know automatic edit summary is added by the tool but somethings require an explanation and a habit of adding edit summaries is good. That's what I wanted to say. Shaan SenguptaTalk14:57, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shaan Sengupta: @GreenMeansGo: Of course, I understand. What I meant is that the very fact that I hold permissions on such major wikis proves that I know how to identify vandalism and deal with it effectively. The rollback tool is merely a convenience designed specifically for that purpose. I am applying for rollback rights because it would significantly simplify my work in fighting vandalism. I contribute to many wikis, so I don't always have time for extensive recent changes patrolling. However, I believe that over time I will have more availability and will be able to revert vandalism more efficiently also on Wikimedia Commons. Igor123121 (talk) 14:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Igor123121 just bcoz someone holds some right on other wiki isn't solely enough to get rights locally. If we could see some anti vandalism work from you here, it would be all good. Shaan SenguptaTalk15:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shaan Sengupta: I understand. If it's important, I can work on it for a week or longer and then tag you under the request so you can evaluate my contribution and whether I’m able to effectively identify vandalism. Igor123121 (talk) 15:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Igor123121 I am not in a position to evaluate. It's just that I watch this page and express my views where I can to help. At the end of the day, its the admins who have to decide. Shaan SenguptaTalk15:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is relatively little vandalism on Wikimedia Commons, which means I have fewer opportunities to perform revert actions or corrections. As a result, my contributions in fighting vandalism are limited. Igor123121 (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't show your work here I have nothing else to say. It also looks like hat-collecting so keep that in mind too! Bedivere (talk) 17:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a rough guideline, administrators usually require editors to have made at least 1,000 useful, non-botlike edits or a large amount of justified renaming requests at Commons before they will consider granting the filemover right.
I would like to request the filemover right because I want to help more on Commons, and it seems to me that the filemover right would be a great way to do that. I know I have barely made any rename requests, but I have read the guideline well and properly- if rejected, then someone suggest where it might be easy to find files needing renaming? Also most of my uploads were very early, so I just uploaded them with their name from flickr- I now know that I should chosen way more informative names for them. Thank you. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making RR's for some of my flickr uploads right now(maybe I should do it for all of them, but they are many, and most are unlikely to be used). I will also try to find other images to show that I understand all the rules and not just rule 2. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:38, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoctorWhoFan91, as you said as well as what I can see, you have just one renaming request till date. I would suggest you make some more successful requests and gain some experience. We can keep this open for (maybe) a week if you are willing. Shaan SenguptaTalk15:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah- I was going for concise as it's likely only chess editors will use these files. Perhaps your way is better- I made the latest RR your way. Thank you. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see some good renaming, and some renaming that tends to initialize Doctor Who and series that may not readily identifiable as from Doctor Who. So I feel ambivalent about granting. Abzeronow (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been trying to have a balance of conciseness and informative- hence the initalisation of Doctor Who- looks like it is a short form for something- and so even a non-fan can look in the description for more information. Even the guideline states that we shouldn't try to fit everything in the title, as that's what the description is for. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 12:05, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the guideline states that we shouldn't try to fit everything in the title. Agreed. But that doesn't mean that the name doesn't help in identifying the subject in the file. This is exactly what I flagged earlier. Shaan SenguptaTalk12:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it does identify the subject enough- it's from something DW, which is most likely some kinda of media- so any person can check in the description what media it is. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also say that I changed up the chess renames when you stated that they weren't informative enough to a non-fan. No such change was asked for by any filemover in any of my requested moves- so given what info I had- I assumed it striked a balance. You can see I do not abbreviate location names if I ask for a move of file that involves non-fictional elements- as any abbreviations might be confusing given the high number of locations in the world. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In 2024 and 2025, we organized several photowalk events as a team, and I uploaded more than 1,000 photos for each event. Since I contribute a large number of uploads, I occasionally make mistakes in file naming. Having the filemover right would be helpful for correcting these issues more efficiently. Thank you. Sadrettin (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I often upload files, and just recently had a need to rename a few uploads. Then I also discovered the backlogs which I could actually assist with by having this user right. Thank you. King ChristLike (talk) 09:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also: Autopatrolled users. 
Not done for now, edit count too low. Abzeronow (talk) 21:28, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
_01.06.2000.jpg){kind=link}
_01.06.2000_(Higher_resolution).jpg){kind=link}
Strong oppose @NikolaIlincic5 removed @Abzeronow's message confirming granting autopatrol at Revision as of 08:32, 3 July 2025. This request was also placed in between other discussion that I had to fix. The user also added a bogus admin rights grant notice on their TP (that I just removed), vandalism and COM:SCOPE warning on TP. This is more near to NOTHERE. Shaan SenguptaTalk 10:01, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Support this suggestion. Incall talk 19:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
![[3]](/w/index.php?title=File:Nadelprodukte_Prym,_Zinkh%C3%BCtter_Hof.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=958264422){kind=link}