Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback

Rollback

(add request • view requests)

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

Administrator notation templates

This template is used to answer requests for permissions, especially the rollback user right. ::{{subst:RFPR|option}} ~~~~ The second (unnamed) parameter is optional. It can be omitted or used to specify the admin when marking a request as already done or the number of edits when declining due to inexperience. Result Code Normalized code  Done ::{{subst:RFPR|d}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|done}} ~~~~  Already done by {{admin|X}} ::{{subst:RFPR|ad|X}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|alreadydone|X}} ~~~~  Revoked ::{{subst:RFPR|r}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|revoked}} ~~~~  Not done ::{{subst:RFPR|nd}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|notdone}} ~~~~  Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. With only {{{X}}} edits to the mainspace, I don't think you have sufficient editing experience yet. Take a moment to check out what counter-vandalism is at WP:CVU, and if you decide you'd like to get involved, you can enroll at the Counter Vandalism Academy to learn more. ::{{subst:RFPR|exp|X}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|moreedits|X}} ~~~~  Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. I see you just also applied for Pending Changes Reviewer. Let's see how you get on with that first and then we'll take another look again when you've made a few more edits. ::{{subst:RFPR|rvw}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|alsorequestedreviewer}} ~~~~  Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. This is not what Rollback is for. Take a moment to read Wikipedia:Rollback and if that's what you would like to do, you can then check out the Counter Vandalism Unit to learn more. ::{{subst:RFPR|nrb}} ~~~~ ::{{subst:RFPR|notrollback}} ~~~~

User:Technophant

• Technophant (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)
• formerly Stillwaterising (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I was a member of Vandal Patrol, a rollbacker, and an avid Huggle user with my former account, User:Stillwaterising. With that account I had over 2,500 pages edited, most of which were from patrolling. I'm trying to recover my reputation with this new account and I feel that getting involved with new users, warning unconstructive edits, and trying to identify and retain promising new editors could really help me interested in editing again. ~Technophant (talk) 00:13, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. Please note that blocks, bans, and topic bans apply to the person, howe3ver many accounts they have. That indef block was only 30 days ago and strictly speaking any admin would be within thier rights to block this account too - and still might - for block evasion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done There has not been, to the best of my knowledge, any allegation of abuse of either rollback or reviewer user rights. The user's former account was blocked on a TBAN violation, he cleanstarted a new account which was blocked for evasion but unblocked following lenghty discussion. There is no legitimate reason to deny the user having the user rights follow to his new account. I would be wary of restoring reviewer per the fact that the user is under a TBAN, which casts doubts on his ability to review the edits of others if he can't properly review his own, but there is no reason not to restore Rollback for the purposes of patrolling (while respecting the TBAN, of course). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 02:54, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Salvidrim! Thank you so much, I won't let you down! I already have Huggle compiled and now signed-in and I'm eager to start familiarizing myself with the new version. I have re-read the policies on where Rollbacker is to used, and when not and how to correct mistakes if used accidently. It wasn't my choice to lose the Reviewer flag. I'll ask for it back later. Most of the vandalism is with sports teams I've never heard of and BLPs of persons I've also never heard of. If there's a questionable edit inside my topic area I'll skip it and let it be reviewed by another patroller. ~Technophant (talk) 03:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

In any case, as I'm sure you're aware, your edits will surely be under particular scrutiny for some time. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:08, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Param Mudgal

• Param Mudgal (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

Hi there, I wanted to request for Rollback Rights so that i can use WP:Huggle and WP:STiki to remove vandalism a little faster from Wikipedia. I have read WP:Rollback and i have addressed the previous concerns told to me by the administrators.I request this right in Good Faith for only removing vandalism from Wikipedia.Thank you. Param Mudgal (talk) 06:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

For reference: previous decline 10 days ago. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 07:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello Param Mudgal, when you say you have addressed the previous concerns, could you please tell us how you have done so? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 07:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi,User:Demiurge1000, Last time i had applied here i had failed to warn or notify appropriate users, since then i have covered up that mistake, i have tried to guide and inform other users about their mistake so that they contribute in a good way for wikipedia.I have reverted edits which were vandalism and i have also removed unsourced information which was added to the article by some editors.Meanwhile, i have resolved some WP:POV issues on some articles.Thank you very much for your question.I hope you were able to get your answer.--Param Mudgal (talk) 08:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done Examining your contributions over the past ten days, I see that you're now using very informative edit summaries and are correctly notifying users of wrongdoing after reverting their changes. There are but very few edits I'm not fully content with, such as this one, which should have been marked as good-faith. Here the editor likely added the word "disastrous" to describe the Suvla Bay Landing because thousands of people died. It appears you interpreted it as the editor claiming the subject, Frederick Stopford (who is not living), as doing doing a disastrous job commanding the offense. Because you can't be assured which context they are referring to, you should assume it was the good one. Either way the word probably didn't belong there, and this is clearly an honest mistake and/or mislabeling on your part. That being said, overall I think you can be trusted not to misuse the rollback tool. For good measure I will monitor your account activity for the coming week, but I have a feeling you'll do just fine. Be careful with Huggle and STiki, don't go too fast. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)