Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KingpinBot (talk | contribs) at 17:46, 9 May 2013 (Moving 2 reviewer request(s) to archive (1 approved : 1 declined)) (bot edit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Reviewer/Article Feedback Reviewer

(add requestview requests)


Though I think it's excellent for the wiki, I've been frustrated with the pending changes system on multiple occasions, both in not being able to approve others' well-meaning edits (or disapprove them, often still assuming good faith) and not being able to edit "activated" (not sure of the proper term) articles in the conventional fashion. I feel as though I've proven myself in my capabilities to revert vandalism, but I recognize that my edit count is conspicuously low, and I spend a while searching the "approved" archives for someone who was granted reviewer rights with an edit count on the same order of magnitude as mine; I found two. Feel free to add 122 to my edit count for my previous account. That seemed overly long-winded; my apologies.  — TORTOISEWRATH 02:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) Can you point out which Pending changes protection article you have worked on. I went through your contributions of past one month and could not find even a single such article.--Vigyani (talk) 10:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was recalling from memory. I know it's happened in the past, though I don't believe it's happened in the last month. It just annoys me occasionally, and I think without reason; I couldn't name a specific example of how the pending-changes system has affected me in the past. Were I granted reviewer rights, I would use them mostly to approve others' edits (which I do often wish to do), rather than to edit myself.  — TORTOISEWRATH 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've come across a pending-changes edit a few times, and been a little jarred by not being able to deal with it; though the backlog is often small, I'd love to help at Special:PendingChanges. Ignatzmicetalk 18:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done INeverCry 18:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My contributions are mainly anti-vandalism related so I know what vandalism is (and what it is not). I intend to continue protecting WP as best I can and believe that I can be trusted with reviewer rights. Thanks. Jschnur (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done INeverCry 22:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reason for requesting Reviewer rights Lawinfo187 (talk) 23:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are 759 Articles For Creation, I'd like to help clear the backlog.

(Non-administrator comment) You don't need the reviewer right for approving articles for creation. As an autoconfirmed user, you can do it already. smtchahal(talk) 01:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done as you apparently don't actually know what this right is for. As correctly pointed about above it has nothing to do with reviewing AFC submissions, but that is an area where help is urgently needed and welcome, and you don't need any advanced rights or permissions to just begin helping out with it. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Frequent editor of Africa, LGBT, economics, HIV/AIDS, and other articles. The List of Countries by GDP (PPP) article was pending changes protected at my request after numerous vandalism attempts from IP users. AfricaTanz (talk) 00:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Having created an account in 2009, I've only been contributing actively for just over a year. During this time I have expanded several articles, created one and more recently find myself spending a lot of time patrolling RC, specifically countering blatant vandalism. As such, I believe reviewer rights would be a helpful addition. Robvanvee 08:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Yunshui  11:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]