Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TruPepitoM (talk | contribs) at 08:58, 30 May 2012 (→‎User:TruPepitoM). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts

Rollback

(add request • view requests)


User:TopGun

I am a regular with 13000+ edits, well aware of policies and can differentiate vandalism & good faith edits. I have previously had rollback permission so I guess I don't need to justify that again. The permission was removed by an admin when 1RR restriction was applied to me in February on basis of presumed baiting. I was blocked for violating a 1RR which I declined to recognize as it was put on me by a single admin which was not in the scope of admin power, however it was later endorsed by the community when I took it for review and I have ever since followed it strictly respecting that consensus. I have never violated or been blocked for violating the community endorsed 1RR and have been using twinkle to revert vandalism. My use of rollback tool was also limited to only vandalism reverts. I think that's puts my reputation up to it and is enough to justify a reassignment - rollback works quicker than twinkle on my slow internet so it will help. lTopGunl (talk) 14:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Take up the revoking with Toddst1. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've left him a talkback for this page to keep it in one place. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Todst might take a while to respond here per AGK [1]. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's ok - it doesn't hurt to wait a little while. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:19, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand this request. You say you were blocked for violating 1RR which you "declined to recognize as it was put on me by a single admin which was not in the scope of admin power." What does that mean?
Beyond that, how does being a "regular with 13000+ edits, well aware of policies and can differentiate vandalism & good faith edits." align with so many blocks for EW? Toddst1 (talk) 13:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That means that I challenged that an admin may not impose 1RR and I was blocked for neglecting that. I was disclosing this. Anyway, I have given a load of reasons for my blocks which include hounding to get me to editwar but I'll not discuss those anymore. I however do justify that I've not been blocked after the 1RR (which is 3 months). PS. I was blocked for a short time over reverting a banned user - the block was reverted as I was rightly claiming an exemption to revert a banned user's trolling. The point being, any form of editwar on my part has ceased whatever the reasons may be on the other side. --lTopGunl (talk) 22:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) Saw this pop up on my watchlist. As you are well aware being a former rollbacker, WP:ROLLBACK is for quick removal of vandalism and other problematic edits. As you currently have a WP:1RR restriction imposed, I do not see your need for the ability to rapidly revert. Furthermore, the dispute you are currently involved in involves you reverting your own addition of tags to an article without reasoning. Finally, your response to why you have edit-warring blocks basically blames everyone else. These factors put together cause me to question your ability to utilize rollback in compliance with policy. N419BH 23:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1) 1RR does not apply to vandalism reverts, so your comment on that is self contradicting. 2) I've given a detailed reasoning on the revert of tags sticking to 1RR and that topic is in mediation - don't see how a content dispute comes up here. 3) The thing about my previous blocks is, that I don't want to discuss them anymore because of the very reason you said above... I don't want to go into an array of blaming - so I do not say anything to justify them, rather that I've not been blocked since 1RR was imposed (save the reverted one) so I don't see why I will edit war suddenly because I have a link that reverts faster on my slow net. --lTopGunl (talk) 23:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The 1RR restriction (and its associated block) were upheld both in your unblocks, and on ANI. You might still disagree with it, but the admin corps sure didn't. As such, arguing otherwise will not go well. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I didn't say that they didn't. I said there's no policy that lets an admin impose an editing restriction on his own - and that now that does not matter. If 3 months of editing with completely no editwar aren't enough to justify, then I rest my case. --lTopGunl (talk) 23:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best way for you to re-obtain rollback would be to seek community input on removing your 1RR restriction first. As the community endorsed the restriction, it's the community's prerogative to determine if it is no longer necessary. As for admins unilaterally imposing restrictions, they are empowered to do so under various Arbitration Committee rulings, but in general practice I am not sure if there is a specific policy permitting or denying such. I can tell you it is generally accepted practice that admins can utilize their judgment to restrict someone in ways other than blocking in order to prevent damage to the encyclopedia. Such would be considered a less harsh approach than removing someone from the project for temporary or permanent duration. N419BH 00:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was not under arbitration enforcement. I'm aware of the rest, but that's when they are equally challengeable. The purpose of mention was just disclosure and not to challenge it again. The 1RR does not hamper the ability to use rollback or restrict its usage. I'll like this to be closed as justified above whether in positive or negative. --lTopGunl (talk) 00:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't say it was. In any event it was challenged and the community determined it was valid and proper. As for this request being closed Toddst doesn't seem terribly interested in giving you rollback, and the original reviewing admin declined as well. I think your next step is to either step back and wait some more, or to seek wider community input. N419BH 00:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done 1RR is incongruent with Rollback Toddst1 (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Darth Molo

Reason for requesting rollback The Phantom Menace, Darth Molo (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I want to start using igloo. This is my new account and I have plenty of experience and edits on my old account. I've been with Wikipedia for years now, and I know the ethics and rules of Wikipedia. I can clearly see whether or not something is vandalism, and for that reason I am a New Page Patroller.

  • (Non-administrator comment)the admins here may not be fully convinced with your statement above as you have only 4 edits on articles. If you can sign here with your old account, then you will certainly have a stronger case based on your old account's experience-- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 06:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Please get some more experience reverting vandalism, then re-request rollback. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Derschueler

Reason for requesting rollback

Hello, Yesterday, a user has refused to give me the rollback rights. Today I reset some vandal edits, but without the "reset" button. It is very difficult, because other users are generally faster (with the rollback right I probably would have made ​​twice as many posts). As I said, I'm an experienced backer roll in the German Wikipedia. I ask you again to give me the rights, so I can more effectively fight against vandalism. Thanks and regards, — Derschueler (talk) – German Wikipedia 13:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tony Sidaway

This is a request for rollback privilege to be from my account. I don't use it and I want to avoid the risk of accidentally doing it on my smartphone. TS 15:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Rollback has been removed from your account. I note that you were one of the first people to have received the userright when it came out, though! :) Acalamari 15:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zymurgy

Have been making constructive use of TW for a while, would make constructive use of rollback. For info this is my second request - on previous one some weeks ago I was invited to use TW some more and apply again. Incidentally tried to make the 2nd request a day or two ago but request was deleted from page without decision - possibly by accident Zymurgy (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 08:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bmusician (adoption)

Legitimate alternate account of User:Bmusician. I would like this account to have rollback rights - in the rare case that I have to revert my own edits. My parent account possesses the rights. Thanks, →Bmusician 02:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming connection between both accounts. →Bmusician 02:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 08:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:O.Koslowski

I have more than 21k edits in de-WP, and I have already requested, received and used the rollback permission in Simple. Since I would like to use Huggle (during busy times of the day) to help combat vandalism, I hereby request permission to use the Rollback feature. O.Koslowski (talk) 08:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Acalamari 08:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Theopolisme

I have been editing Wikipedia for what feels like forever, and have learned a bunch- I was one of the first students in the Wikipedia:CVUA, for example... but now I want to be able to work faster... it is such a pain to use the basic undo/Twinkle functions, and rollback would be quite useful to allow me to revert vandalism in the most productive way possible! Thanks for your consideration! Theopolisme TALK 09:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yutsi

I'd like to increase the efficiency at which I do vandal fighting by using Igloo, but this requires the rollback privilege. yutsi Talk/ Contributions 17:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done  An optimist on the run! 23:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:TruPepitoM

With experience of reading thoroughly all of the policies and removing/reverting vandalism and can distinguish between vandalism and good-faith edits and being a regular,

I am requesting for a rollback feature. TruPepitoM (talk) 08:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback&oldid=495098781"