This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Edit requests This page is the within the scope of WikiProject Edit requests, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's edit request process and reduce the number of edit requests in the edit request queue.Edit requestsWikipedia:WikiProject Edit requestsTemplate:WikiProject Edit requestsEdit requests Wikipedia Help Mid‑importance This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp Mid This page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Most or all of the current partial block requests are by an editor who has since been banned from Wikipedia. Should these be processed as normal, or should they be procedurally closed? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that if you're 100% sure the edit is correct and properly cited (note that the editor in question was known for source misrepresentation which is one of the reasons they were banned) then implement it, but if you have any doubt don't hesitate to decline. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleared the backlog finally, since they aren't any other takers. I did the trivial requests (add an image, add an infobox), and declined everything involving substantive content or references. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Occasionally an edit request will be archived while still active, so it stays in the category (and the corresponding list). Is there an appropriate procedure for this? If there is, it should probably be mentioned on this page. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:04, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I patrolled I would either move out back to the talk page if I thought it would benefit from more attention, or just flip the switch on answered since there was clearly no consensus to implement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I went through the archived requests and closed them, except for one semi-protected request where I wasn't sure if/how it should be answered. If no one objects or beats me to it, I might add a sentence about this procedure to the answering instructions. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien I asked the same question at help desk! @ScottishFinnishRadish was kind enough to direct me to this thread, so I've updated the Project page to cover this - of course, anyone should feel free to adjust the wording as they see fit. OXYLYPSE (talk) 00:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should probably mention to move it back if you believe the request might be considered or you're going to handle it yourself and flip the switch if you believe the archiving was evidence that there was no consensus. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated, thank you for the steer. If it's still not quite right, I won't at all be offended if you rewrite it entirely haha. OXYLYPSE (talk) 00:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton for taking care of that. Looks clear enough to me. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could there be a template for editors who are blocked from an article but not its talk page? We usually ask these editors to make edit requests, but the existing templates don't seem accurate. 331dot (talk) 14:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a decent idea. I have a vague feeling that it might end up being abused, but if that's the case the block can be applied to the talk page as well. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "Making requests" section stated "If you add a request of several edits at once, too long, too complicated, or behind a paywall, editors might quickly lose interest or might not be able to help. In this case, there are more chances that your request might take a long time, be declined, or go unanswered." The construction of the first sentence was incorrect because it was missing an "is" for "too long" and "too complicated to follow, so I changed the first part of it to "If you add a request that consists of several edits, is too long or too complicated, or ...", but got stuck on the last part because an edit request isn't going to be behind a paywall. I suspect it's meant to cover the case of a source behind a paywall being cited to justify the requested change. The sentence should be further revised to clarify that; I might do that later but wanted to find out first whether anyone disagreed with my understand of the intention here. Largoplazo (talk) 17:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to take a crack at it. Largoplazo (talk) 02:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like for the following change to be made to this page:

The "Making requests" link does not work, because the R in "Requests" is capitalized. Lowercasing the R will make the link work. 100.7.34.111 (talk) 21:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thank you for spotting that! And yes, this is a great page to Make requests! Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 21:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]