Misplaced Pages

:Adminship poll/I: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Adminship poll Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:32, 20 April 2008 editWizardman (talk | contribs)Administrators400,813 edits →Is rollback rights considered a success?← Previous edit Revision as of 20:36, 20 April 2008 edit undoDavidwr (talk | contribs)50,107 edits →Yes, it is a success: successNext edit →
Line 9: Line 9:
#Successful, but for the 5 rollbacks a minute limit which is too few. ] (]) 20:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC) #Successful, but for the 5 rollbacks a minute limit which is too few. ] (]) 20:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
#Has been very good. ] 20:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC) #Has been very good. ] 20:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
#Successful. It should be granted roboticly to established editors but revoked if the editor shows he can't tell the difference between vandalism and a good faith edit. ]/<small><small>(])/(])/(])</small></small> 20:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


====No, it is a failure==== ====No, it is a failure====

Revision as of 20:36, 20 April 2008

Is rollback rights considered a success?

Initially there wasn't much community traction to go ahead with it, but it did anyway. Do you consider it to be a success or failure now? Any lesson we can take from it in future policy-making regarding UserRights?

Yes, it is a success

  1. It works better than I thought it would. J Milburn (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. I think I initially opposed it when it was first brought up a couple years ago. But it was set up perfectly, and it's worked great. Grandmasterka 20:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. It hasn't turned into a bureacracy, it hasn't seen more than a few isolated incidents of misuse, and it hasn't turned into a clique of trusted users. Mr.Z-man 20:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. A complete success, excepting a few drama queens who think Twinkle is the same. As I said above, we should have RfAs like RfR. Majorly (talk) 20:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Successful, but for the 5 rollbacks a minute limit which is too few. EJF (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Has been very good. Wizardman 20:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. Successful. It should be granted roboticly to established editors but revoked if the editor shows he can't tell the difference between vandalism and a good faith edit. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it is a failure

  1. -- Naerii 20:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Twinkle offers a much better service with no prior registration. ...... Dendodge.Talk 20:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Others