Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DeadlyAssassin (talk | contribs) at 03:36, 4 September 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts

Rollback (add request)


User:Jetstreamer

Not really concerned with vandalism up until now, when I started checking the “recent changes” page only to find that many articles were literally deleted. I recently reverted at least one of these cases. Likewise, many pages I'm watchlisting have been partly vandalised in the near past. Jetstreamer (talk) 16:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:51, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


User:Molestash

Reason for requesting rollback MOLEY (talk) 01:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC) I try to remove any vandalism I find and found many article I try to start to work on get vandalized.--MOLEY (talk) 01:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) I scanned the user's contributions, and the past 50 revisions don't contain vandalism removal (I think, I didn't check too carefully). --Σ talkcontribs 01:24, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean, Sigma? Anyway, it is  Done. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:27, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There weren't any edit summaries. How could I know what the user did? :P --Σ talkcontribs 01:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(cur | prev). —GFOLEY FOUR!— 01:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then what are edit summaries for? :P --Σ talkcontribs 22:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
+1, edit summaries are essential. — Kudu ~I/O~ 17:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


User:Kangaroopower

I would like to request rollback so I can better fight vandalism with Huggle. Thanks-- Kangaroopowah (talk) 18:49, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Remember, rollback is to be used on blatant cases of vandalism, and not good-faith edits. -FASTILY (TALK) 19:24, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


User:Shuipzv3

I would like to have the rollback feature so I can revert vandalism more quickly. Shuipzv3 (talk) 09:23, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. As a side note, if you wish to issue warnings more easily, you can also install WP:Twinkle. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


User:Nathan2055

I've been doing more reversion, NPP, and AfC (please see my CSD and PROD logs). I would like to step up to using Huggle to revert. I've included the old requests below. Thanks, Nathan2055talk - review 18:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Links to the previous discussions are [1] and [2]. --Nathan2055talk - review 19:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(non admin observation) I'd like to point out that most of your Csd were on your own pages with the other three on peer reviews. As for Prod -well I don't see your name on that list. Thanks, --Kangaroopowah (talk) 18:58, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I use PRODs more than CSD. More flexibility. There's an essay on that somewhere-can't remember what it's called. --Nathan2055talk - review 19:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(non admin observation) Sorry but I don't see anything in Prod and also you haven't reverted many articles, forgive me if I'm wrong, but most of you recent edits dealer with articles for creation. Thanks, --Kangaroopowah (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see sixteen prods and I have been working on AfC but have done over fifty reverts in the past. I also did a few today. --Nathan2055talk - review 20:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry my mind went crazy. Thought those were the overall prod logs for everyone. Sorry, --Kangaroopowah (talk) 20:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, that page is made by Twinkle when I prod something. --Nathan2055talk - review 21:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


User:Elsaltador

Some articles under my watch are being subjected to vandalism.For the purpose of maintaining accuracy and Wikipedia standards,this rollback feature would be of great help. Elsaltador (talk) 19:36, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(non admin observation) - Rollback is typically only given if you have experience reverting vandalism with undo. That typically means fifty reverts. --Nathan2055talk - review 20:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done due to lack of experience. As a side note, 50 reverts is the proposed number of undos that some admins suggest a candidate accumulates before re-requesting this flag; I prefer not to give a fixed number of edits, because such a threshold engenders an expectation that, once it is reached, rollback will automatically be granted, which is not the case. It's a judgement call that an admin makes on a case-by-case basis. I personally prefer to see a couple of weeks of consistent vandalism fighting. Salvio Let's talk about it! 20:38, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Davejohnsan

After my previous request for rollbacks right was denied, I installed Twinkle and since then have been using in combination with the Recent Changes page to fight vandalism. I am confident that I now have sufficient experience to resubmit my request. Davejohnsan (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:07, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:JCRules

I want permission for rollback so I can undo vandalism made from others. I have seen one edit that I rollbacked because of disgusting vandalism on James "Bud" Walton. I have undid 22 edits, but I am experienced with how rollback works and when to rollback. I know when to rollback good faith edits, and when to rollback edits of bad faith. And, yes, I do know that 50 reverts is the proposed number of undos, but I am full of experience with this feature. JC Rules! (talk) 22:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. I'm sorry, but I don't think you're experienced enough for the moment; I see you've just installed Twinkle. Please fight vandalism with it for a couple of weeks and then come back to request this userright again. On an entirely unrelated note, please try to use edit summaries, so that other editors know what your edit was about. Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On a slightly related note, you should not rollback good faith edits at all, unless you use an edit summary. Σ is not home (Leave message) 22:37, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fltyingpig

I have found the recent changes page and have been checking all the IP edits (and a few user edits) for vandalism. Often an IP vandalises a page through a series of edits, and the usual "undo" tool doesn't work, so I have to do it manually. Thank you for your consideration. pluma Ø 23:53, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done—An  optimist on the run! 08:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Frigotoni

I feel very good with popups as well as with Twinkle. I think I can better fight vandalism with this feature. I am mainly active as a patroller on .it wikipedia. Frigotoni ...i'm here; 09:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Plarroy

Reason for requesting rollback Plarroy (talk) 01:54, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Not enough edits to convince me the tool will be well utilised. — Joseph Fox 02:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Secret of success

I've been using twinkle for a month and have made quite a lot of useful reverts. When I requested this feature before, I was denied of it by an assigner who asked me to turn back more edits using twinkle which I have done. Now can I have it? Secret of success (Talk) 08:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Question: What are your views on warning users of disruptive editing ? Mlpearc powwow 15:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have fixed some links in this users link bar for this request. LikeLakers2 (talk) 23:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I revert an edit once or twice, if continuously made I report to an admin to block the editor. Will I get this feature now? Secret of success (Talk) 07:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done -FASTILY (TALK) 06:44, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wasell

Sometimes Twinkle is too slow, so the Rollback button would be a nice addition to my vandal fighting kit. Wasell(T) 15:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Harrison49

I have experience of dealing with vandalism and inappropriate edits, which rollback would help with reverting. Harrison49 (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:LikeLakers2

Twinkle is sometimes a bit slow, and its also sometimes better to use the real tool instead of a script. I can't count how many reverts I've made with Twinkle, but I know it is a lot. LikeLakers2 (talk) 23:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 10:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fages

For use of the established vandal-fighting tool Fages (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done due to lack of experience fighting vandalism. If you wish, in the meantime you can install Twinkle or Lupin, which make patrolling very easy. Salvio Let's talk about it! 23:57, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Saru786

I would like to request rollback rights due to articles on my watch list consistently getting attacked by vandalism. I patrol these articles for a majority of my time looking to undo any vandalism. The rollback feature would help me a whole ton by making it much easier to fix vandalism. I am experienced with the undo button. Saru786 (talk) 06:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. You have little to no recent experience fighting real vandalism here on Wikipedia. If you want the rollback tool, show us that you need it! Go to Special:RecentChanges and make 50 or so vandalism reverts, either with the undo function, or the userscript, Twinkle. Once you have done that, come back and request the tool again. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:12, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Avenue X at Cicero

Requesting rollback to help use Huggle. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you explain to the nice people of RfP why your permissions were removed? Ironholds (talk) 04:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to listen to the details of it from the guy who took it! Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 05:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Especially when he uses ahem as his edit summary. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 05:14, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained it 3 or 4 times; if you're unable to do so yourself, I personally oppose any new rollback rights (although it'd be unfair of me to actually make the decision). Rollback should not be given back to somebody who remains unable to understand why it was taken away from him in the first place. Ironholds (talk) 06:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Per above and per misuse only ~6 weeks ago. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aah...I seemed to forget Mr. I asked a question...well to start off, it wasn't even a "misuse" (Ironholds removed it saying "not using them correctly" and I still question the depth of info provided by his summaries). It was just that I correctly warned a user using Huggle, but regarding an incorrect page. I had a discussion with Ironholds, and he showed no interest in returning them. Also, I don't think that [rollback] rights should be taken away from a user who just screwed up half-a-time (technically it wasn't even an incorrect warning, just a warning regarding an incorrect page). Therefore, I question your very basis of rejection, which said "Per above and per misuse only ~6 weeks ago." 250 52nd Street (talk) 13:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's not why I removed them at all. I removed them because you made a statement that read along the lines of "any edit that isn't useful is vandalism", and nobody who believes that should be allowed rollback rights. I have so far explained this to you three times; if you cannot yet grasp it, you're either acting maliciously or stupidly. Ironholds (talk) 13:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To be precise, I said "but I believe that removing warnings from your talk page should be regarded as vandalism." And after I dream of horses (talk · contribs) reminded/informed me about the Talk page guidelines, I apologised about for warning the concerned user for removing warnings, to you (the fact that NgogWeTrust is a vandal and escaped due to double jeopardy is another case). But if you fail to remember that, I think its rather you who (in your words) "is acting either acting maliciously or stupidly." 250 52nd Street (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your response to I Dream of Horse's comments was to make the "removing warnings from your talk page..." point; for others, the conversation has been found here. So far you've claimed that it was for warning someone, and then when I pointed out your error, correctly identified why it was removed. Since it's clear you understand why it was removed, why claim any different? And yes, you apologised for the warning - you still maintain that "I have always found it easier to report users using Huggle and believe that removing warning templates misguides users who use Huggle", and until you can admit, on the first occasion, why it was removed (and accept that it was removed for legitimate reasons, and change your behaviour accordingly) giving you rollback rights is inappropriate. Ironholds (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Even IDoH told you on your talk page that she hoped that the removal led to an improvement in WikiBehaviour and "not a cynical retiree," and yes, I do still maintain, that a simple warning (like an im) for warning user on deleting content on talk pages, may have borne the same result, and the removal of rights (in my opinion, was an apple falling very far from the tree). Yes, I know that rollbackers have to perform exceptionally, but even we have the whole right to screw up. As I have said, I did screw up and learnt about policy, but the removal of rights, was too far. I have ~1000 vandalism reversions (and have hopefully made myself a trusted user) and I just screw up a single time, and boom! Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 16:53, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, you removed my rights saying I was "not using them correctly" which, if I correctly decipher, translates to "misuse of rollback rights." As I have already nullified that, the reason maybe because I warned the user for vandalism but on an incorrect page. Your summary does not say at all, that you removed my rights because "I fail to understand VAND...and should not be trusted with scissors." Considering that was the reason why you removed my rights, I unfortunately cannot give you the benefit of the doubt, just because of an edit summary. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As said before:  Not done and will not be done while you have this attitude. You need to discuss it with the revoking administrator. When he agrees, then I will erstore rollback. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect Reaper, could I know which comments you found "uncivil" or "full of attitude"? Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The horse is dead, put the stick down and back off. Ironholds' action may have been harsh, but it wan't unjust. Ever since, you have disingenuously tried to get it back and your attitude here makes me think you shouldn't hold any permissions and certainly isn't going to convince Reaper, Ironholds or myself (nor, I dare say, any other admin) to give you back rollback. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:39, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The action may not have been unjust, but the only thing I'm appealing is the harshness of it. I still believe that a simple warning/notice, would have sufficed. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 17:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it would, but the more you argue about it, the more I think Ironholds made the right call. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shanayujilover

Unusual vandalism of page may need to be restored to its origin Shanayujilover (talk) 01:47, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) I don't see many vandalism reversions from you. --Σ talkcontribs 02:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. You have little to no recent experience fighting real vandalism here on Wikipedia. If you want the rollback tool, show us that you need it! Go to Special:RecentChanges and make 50 or so vandalism reverts, either with the undo function, or the userscript, Twinkle. Once you have done that, come back and request the tool again. -FASTILY (TALK) 06:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:DeadlyAssassin

Would like rollback permission in order to help fight vandalism using Huggle. Deadly∀ssassin 03:36, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback&oldid=448329864"