| Revision as of 06:32, 1 January 2025 view sourceLemonademan22 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,092 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:13, 22 January 2025 view source SilverLocust (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators25,313 edits →User:Cmrc23: extendedTag: Reply | ||
| (85 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <noinclude>{{Short description|Place to request rollback rights}} | <noinclude>{{Short description|Place to request rollback rights}} | ||
| {{pp-semi-indef}}{{pp-move-indef}}{{WP:PERM/Nav}}{{WP:PERM/Backlog}}<!-- do not remove, managed by bot --></noinclude> | {{pp-semi-indef}}{{pp-move-indef}}{{WP:PERM/Nav}}{{WP:PERM/Backlog|none}}<!-- do not remove, managed by bot --></noinclude> | ||
| ===<span id="rperm-rollback"></span>Rollback=== | ===<span id="rperm-rollback"></span>Rollback=== | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| <!--Please do not edit the section above. Place new requests below. Thanks.--> | <!--Please do not edit the section above. Place new requests below. Thanks.--> | ||
| ====]==== | ====]==== | ||
| *{{rfplinks|1= |
*{{rfplinks|1=Cmrc23}} | ||
| Hello, I was temporarily granted rollback permissions to see how I do, and they are due to expire on the 27th. I believe I have been diligent and careful with this permission, and I only use it when necessary. I always warn users and I create discussions on article talk pages where necessary. ] 14:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| I would like to request rollback rights to combat vandalism more efficiently. I am an experienced recent changes patroller and I understand that the rollback should be used mainly for clear cases of vandalism. I am committed to using this tool responsibly. ] <small><small>]</small></small> 12:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :{{comment|Automated comment}} This user was temporary rollback rights by {{no ping|Pppery}} (expires 18:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC))<!-- mb-temp-perm -->. <!-- mbsig --><span style="font-family:sans-serif">— <b>] <sup>]</sup></b></span><!-- mbdate --> 14:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::{{Reply|Cmrc23}} It looks like you're using generic rollback even on edits that aren't ''obvious'' ] (where vandalism is defined as being "deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a 💕") or other ]. For example, while ] might be vandalism, it could also be based on good-faith belief that the source is unreliable. Similarly, ] doesn't seem to be of obvious vandalism. Going forward, would you include the reason in the edit summary when reverting any edits that don't fall into one of criteria 1–5 at ]? ] ] 18:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::I was a little hasty with those two in particular, but I will make sure. I presumed my warning on their talk page was enough, but I try to not use it when it's not necessary (again, was hasty there, apologise) ] 19:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::::{{done}}. Extended by 1 month. ] ] 04:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ====]==== | ||
| :Hi {{u|NXcrypto}}, please undo ] and respond to {{u|Worldbruce}}'s concern. It doesn't look like the worst kind of edit warring I've ever seen, but {{u|Worldbruce}} was concerned about it without being involved in the reverting, so you should probably take a moment to address their concerns instead of throwing them away. The edit summary of ] indicates that their primary concern is you not (yet?) using the article's talk page. If that's true, perhaps change it or announce that you are not longer interested and ] from the conflict. ] (]) 22:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *{{rfplinks|1=Footballnerd2007}} | |||
| ::Reverted and replied on both venues, talk page and article talk page. Thanks. ] <small><small>]</small></small> 00:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| I’m requesting rollback tool to help with vandalism fighting more effectively. I’ve been active in counter-vandalism work and have a good understanding of policies like ] and ]. While I’ve made mistakes in the past, I’ve taken the feedback onboard, slowed down, and focused on making more accurate judgements. | |||
| Rollback would allow me to handle clear vandalism more efficiently without cluttering edit histories. I’m committed to using it responsibly and only for obvious cases of vandalism, leaving more complex issues for discussion or reporting. | |||
| ⚫ | ====]==== | ||
| I asked for rollback rights back in November but was turned down with the reason given was I need more experience first. I'm here two months later to once again ask for rollback rights as it would make what I do a lot easier. Although I don't edit Misplaced Pages purely to revert vandalism, I come across my fair share of it or unsourced claims and stuff to that degree that need reverting. So I am once again asking for rollback rights as I took the previous advice on board. ] ] 6:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for considering my request. ] • ] ⚽ 17:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:13, 22 January 2025
Place to request rollback rights| Requests for permissions | |
|---|---|
| Common | |
| Uncommon | |
| Logs | |
| Special | |
Rollback
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions. (add request · view requests) Shortcuts Please review Misplaced Pages:Rollback before making a request. Successful applicants will usually have:- At least 200 mainspace edits.
- At least a month of experience patrolling Special:RecentChanges.
- No recent history of edit warring.
- A track record of consistently notifying editors when reverting their edits.
User:Cmrc23
- Cmrc23 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)
Hello, I was temporarily granted rollback permissions to see how I do, and they are due to expire on the 27th. I believe I have been diligent and careful with this permission, and I only use it when necessary. I always warn users and I create discussions on article talk pages where necessary. Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 14:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Automated comment This user was granted temporary rollback rights by Pppery (expires 18:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)). — MusikBot 14:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Cmrc23: It looks like you're using generic rollback even on edits that aren't obvious vandalism (where vandalism is defined as being "deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a 💕") or other categories of rollback that don't need an explanatory edit summary. For example, while removing a reference might be vandalism, it could also be based on good-faith belief that the source is unreliable. Similarly, this rollback doesn't seem to be of obvious vandalism. Going forward, would you include the reason in the edit summary when reverting any edits that don't fall into one of criteria 1–5 at WP:ROLLBACKUSE? SilverLocust 💬 18:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was a little hasty with those two in particular, but I will make sure. I presumed my warning on their talk page was enough, but I try to not use it when it's not necessary (again, was hasty there, apologise) Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 19:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Done. Extended by 1 month. SilverLocust 💬 04:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was a little hasty with those two in particular, but I will make sure. I presumed my warning on their talk page was enough, but I try to not use it when it's not necessary (again, was hasty there, apologise) Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 19:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Cmrc23: It looks like you're using generic rollback even on edits that aren't obvious vandalism (where vandalism is defined as being "deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a 💕") or other categories of rollback that don't need an explanatory edit summary. For example, while removing a reference might be vandalism, it could also be based on good-faith belief that the source is unreliable. Similarly, this rollback doesn't seem to be of obvious vandalism. Going forward, would you include the reason in the edit summary when reverting any edits that don't fall into one of criteria 1–5 at WP:ROLLBACKUSE? SilverLocust 💬 18:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
User:Footballnerd2007
- Footballnerd2007 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)
I’m requesting rollback tool to help with vandalism fighting more effectively. I’ve been active in counter-vandalism work and have a good understanding of policies like WP:VAND and WP:AGF. While I’ve made mistakes in the past, I’ve taken the feedback onboard, slowed down, and focused on making more accurate judgements.
Rollback would allow me to handle clear vandalism more efficiently without cluttering edit histories. I’m committed to using it responsibly and only for obvious cases of vandalism, leaving more complex issues for discussion or reporting.
Thank you for considering my request. Footballnerd2007 • talk ⚽ 17:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)