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 Iwilsonp (talk | contribs) at 02:24, 10 February 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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}} ~~~~
Shortcuts

User:War wizard90

I already use Twinkle to rollback vandalism regularly, would like to have a rollback button to quickly revert obvious vandalism quicker than Twinkle. I have nearly 2,800 edits and have had an account since 2006. Full Disclosure: I have been blocked once for an incident not related to vandalism or edit warring. -War wizard90 (talk) 05:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. You seem to know what you're doing, and there's a lot of water under the bridge since the block. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:HackedBotato

I like to fight vandalism and rollback already with Twinkle, and this would be a really useful feature for me to have. Thank you for considering me! ~HackedBotato Chat with me ♽ Contribs 03:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done You have less than the desired 200 mainspace edits but you seem to have a good handle on what constitutes vandalism. Please be careful with any semi-automated tools. Thanks for helping out! — MusikAnimal talk 21:21, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:AKS.9955

Hi. I have over 1,900 edits and would like to use Huggle for fighting vandalism. Please approve. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:12, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done — MusikAnimal talk 21:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:SD0001

I have made over 900 edits as a registered user and some more as an unregistered user before that. I am confident that I can make optimum use of this user right. I am familiar with all major and minor Wikipedia policies and guidelines and fully understand what qualifies as vandalism and what does not, and the need to assume good faith. SD0001 (talk) 14:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) The user has got 22 reverts in all, 8 coming from Twinkle and rest from manual undo. Out of them, I find this troubling for rollback usage, as the summary mentions it "unconstructive". EthicallyYours! 07:00, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some clarification might be needed here. The edit was essentially a revert of this edit by User:Karthick229. After Yobot's edit at 04:07, 22 November 2014, Karthick229 made two edits, which were of course unconstructive. The former of them was reverted by Yobot at 13:34, 23 November 2014. The latter was reverted in the process of restoring the page to Yobot's version as of 04:07, 22 November 2014. I admit this was an improper method of reverting. It did not and will not happen in the future.
As for the number of edits, I wish to ask User:Ethically Yours as to how he arrived at the number of reverts made using the 'undo' option. If the edit summaries were taken into consideration, then were are a few reverts which I think may not have been counted (because I fully modified the edit summary), like this one and this one. SD0001 (talk) 13:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By reverts I meant all usages of the undo button and rollback button. I got the stats from Edit summary checker. That diff still doesn't warrant an explicit rollback use and in my opinion I'd have manually edited and/or contacted the user as to why he did so. EthicallyYours! 07:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but you haven't made enough reverts for us to properly evaluate your understanding of policy. Feel free to re-apply when you have a bit more experience with Twinkle. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:GaryColemanFan

There are times when some articles I watch are vandalised en masse. This appears to be a quicker way of reverting mass vandalism. I have 19,880 edits since joining in May 2007. In the interest of full disclosure, I have longstanding animosity with a banned user that pops up two or three times a year in an explosion of sockpuppets. I will not use this tool to revert edits from that user's sockpuppets. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:17, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done — MusikAnimal talk 21:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hogie75

Editor for over 5 years and regularly do manual rollbacks on abusers Hogie75 07:20, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 Done — MusikAnimal talk 21:30, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nahnah4

I use Twinkle, but Twinkle only enables half of what rollbackers does when rollbacking. I revert vandalism whenever I see them, so having this tool will be beneficial for me. Edit count: 4k. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 09:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done — MusikAnimal talk 21:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rikripley

I have encountered quite a bit of vandalism and infringements and would like to have the opportunity to help fix these violations and keep Wikipedia a relevant resource of information. --Rikripley (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but with just 169 edits to date, I don't feel you have enough experience. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:18, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Duonaut

I have more than 200 edits, I have fought vandalism quite a bit before, And Huggle and STiki could really help in finding vandalism without having to manually look for it, As well as the ability to use rollback if twinkle ever fails to load and there is clear vandalism. Duonaut (talk | contribs) 21:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Tiptoety talk 21:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Duonaut (talk | contribs) 21:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Iwilsonp

I have 900+ total edits and 500+ mainspace edits, most of which are reverts from vandalism. I would like to use this tool to aid in situations where one user has made many edits, but I don't want to just restore the page, as good edits have been made in-between. Thanks for considering. Iwilsonp (talk) 02:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Rollback&oldid=646439515"