Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback

Rollback (add request)

User:Levonscott

• Levonscott · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · auto edits· logs · block log · rights log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

I have asked once before and been denied because I had only done 4 edits in the article namespace, but I am back with more experience under my belt this time! Levonscott User talk:Levonscott User:Levonscott 04:59, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Excellent, you now have 7 edits to articles. That's a noticeable improvement, an addition of 75% your previous value! With hard work, I can assure you that you will gain the rollback button. Good luck, --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 05:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

N Not done and not likely to be done Please contribute to some articles and revert vandalism before re-requesting. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with the decision to reject the request; but I believe the replies we've given might just be perhaps too harsh... Wifione ^Message 03:06, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed my rather-too-snarky comment. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:50, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Iuio

• Iuio · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · auto edits· logs · block log · rights log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

Hello, I have come here seeking rollback rights as one of the activities I have prominently involved myself in is reverting vandalism where I find it, especially in vandal heavy articles like those pertaining to Deadliest Warrior and its episodes, particularly when a new episode is aired. I note such vandalism reversions on my edit summaries. I'm aware that my usage of them is low, but am making a conscientious effort to increase that, particularly in regard to major article shaping edits. I just haven't been making many of those in a while. Anyway, when reverting vandalism, I have usually left messages on the talk pages of those responsible for such edits to inform them. I see vandalism as a whole as a serious problem afflicting Wikipedia, and am willing to do what I can to help out. One way I believe I can be more efficient in that task is by having rollback rights. I may not be as active as many others here on Wikipedia, but have been a registered user since 2006 and did edits anonymously for at least a year before that. I also take the time regularly to check up on and familiarize myself with Wikipedia regulations to see if there is any significant change in the way we handle things. It's one way I keep myself atuned with the latest on the site. That being said, I thank you for taking the time to read my request and regardless of whether it's accepted or not, wish you a good day. Iuio (talk) 19:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done Malinaccier (talk) 19:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

User:AwamerT

• AwamerT · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · auto edits· logs · block log · rights log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

well, it could help me and makes it more easy to improve Wikipedia Sean ^{(Ask Me?)} 00:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) I only counted three reverts, some admins want a little more history to look at and on the other hand some will grant on tenure alone so it looks a little 50-50 :P. Good luck. Mlpearc powwow 01:19, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Calabe1992

• Calabe1992 · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · auto edits· logs · block log · rights log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

I am a previous rollbacker, with more than 6200 edits. My rollback privileges were previously removed here due to this edit. As my edit history shows, I do not use rollback to edit war, but in this case reverted an edit that was very blatantly made against consensus. This falls under the rollback guideline, "To revert obvious vandalism and other edits where the reason for reverting is absolutely clear." My main activities on Wikipedia are just that, reverting vandalism, mainly using Twinkle and Huggle, if I can get it back. Calabe1992 (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

{{not done}} I understand. But my opinion is that you were wrong in using rollback. You may believe that the reason for using rollback is absolutely clear to you - as you believe the editor was going against what you believe is the consensus opinion of 3 editors against one. But neither is consensus clear to me (in context or in the majority) nor do I believe rollback can be used to revert to the consensus version in an editing dispute. Looking at the edit warring that commenced on the page, consensus had not been determined, at least not through the edit warring - which only proved that consensus was being aggressively questioned. Beyond editing, consensus can be determined only when talk page discussion commence (and conclude) on any particular topic. Nothing similar to that had occurred in this particular issue. In your reasoning, you also ignore the psychological and perceptual aspect of using the rollback feature, which certifies the rollbacked editor immediately as either a vandal or one whose edits have zero, or close to, worth - therefore deserving no response. In the future, I request you to never use rollback whenever in doubt - and never during edit warring situations, irrespective of what one may believe is the consensus. If your request here or on your talk page had included an acknowledgement on these lines, I'm sure Reaper or any other administrator would have reconsidered. I'm sorry for this, but I am rejecting your request currently. My suggestion to you is to not get disappointed, or become vindictive on this and to work on reverting vandalism with the same enthusiasm as you may have shown earlier. You're a good editor. Let this not put you down a bit. Come back after a fortnight with a clear acceptance of the issues and with evidence of having continued on your anti-vandalism drive. I'm sure, you'll be back with us on the rollbackers' list too soon... Feel free to contact me at any time for any assistance. Wifione ^Message 17:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done by Reaper post assurance by editor. Wifione ^Message 17:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Albe ni

• Albe ni · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · auto edits· logs · block log · rights log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

Hello, I am Albe_ni from german WP, there partially known as N.A. I would like to ask you for rollback rights, because I'm fighting against Vandalism in the german WP, but sometimes there is "not enough vandalism" for all german vandalism hunters, so I'd like to help you to remove that using Huggle like I do in german Wikipedia. You might say that I haven't enough edits in this english version of Wikipedia, but maybe you'd like to have a look on my german contribution page, where you can see that I wouldn't do sth. wrong with those rights. Of course here I would act even more carefully that I do there. Greetings from german Wikipedia, --Albe ni (talk) 17:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 Not done Please revert 50 or so instances of vandalism, remembering to issue appropriate warnings. Report repeat vandals to WP:AIV, as described at WP:R Van, and then return here to re-request rollback. We will then be able to determine your ability to use rollback. Twinkle may also help you when you revert and warn vandals. (It adds a rollback link and a few other helpful tools like a menu-based warning system.) Happy editing! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the feedback. It would have been better with Huggle, but so I try Twinkle, seems also to be a good tool. Greetings, N.A....my talk (user pages are on german WP) 18:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)