| Revision as of 20:41, 2 January 2015 view sourceMusikAnimal (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Interface administrators, Administrators120,565 edits →User:FrB.TG: done← Previous edit |
Revision as of 13:11, 3 January 2015 view source Armbrust (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers326,108 edits Archiving 5 requests (1 approved: 4 declined) | rm redundancy, not backloggedNext edit → |
| Line 5: |
Line 5: |
|
</noinclude> |
|
</noinclude> |
|
<!--Please do not edit the section above. Place new requests below. Thanks.--> |
|
<!--Please do not edit the section above. Place new requests below. Thanks.--> |
|
<noinclude>{{adminbacklog}}</noinclude> |
|
|
====]==== |
|
====]==== |
|
* {{rfplinks|1=Lightbreather}} |
|
* {{rfplinks|1=Lightbreather}} |
|
:I would like to branch out into tasks that require other rights - specifically, tasks that have to do with reviewing edits and reverting vandalism. I believe I have a strong enough editing history to be helpful in both areas. ] (]) 00:57, 23 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
:I would like to branch out into tasks that require other rights - specifically, tasks that have to do with reviewing edits and reverting vandalism. I believe I have a strong enough editing history to be helpful in both areas. ] (]) 00:57, 23 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
====]==== |
|
|
* {{rfplinks|1=Lixxx235}} |
|
|
:I'm probably getting more active, and would like the +reviewer bit back. They were previously removed by ] at my request on IRC. Thanks. --]-] <span style="font-size: 60%;">]</span> 05:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::Ping to {{ping|Soap}}. — ] <sup>]</sup> 06:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{done}} Sorry, I granted this not realizing we were pinging Soap. As far as I can tell the user can be trusted. — '''] <sup>]</sup>''' 06:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::No worries, I was going to as well, but figured I'd give Soap a moment to look, they can always chime back in if needed. — ] <sup>]</sup> 14:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==== ] ==== |
|
|
* {{rfplinks|1=Tomandjerry211}} |
|
|
:I am re requesting to become a reviewer and I am now checking the edits at ] and understand what is unconstructive and constructive.Thanks. ] (]) 18:15, 25 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{non-administrator observation}} After being declined, please wait a while (normally a couple of months) before re-requesting. Pinging ], who declined the prior request. <span style="text-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.2em black">]</span> <small><nowiki>] ]<nowiki>]</nowiki></small> 11:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{not done}} Two notes unrelated to my decision to decline... You almost never use an ]. Providing edit summaries is not required, but ''']''', and would make analyzing your contributions much easier. Secondly, you seem to exclusively edit from the mobile interface, where ] is not functional. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, but be aware you will need to be familiar with the desktop interface in order to review any changes. I've again looked over your recent contributions I don't see enough evidence of an understanding of basic policy and guidelines. Please understand the pending changes reviewer right is not a "status" nor does it change the way you can edit. From what I can tell I truly don't think it would benefit you. Furthermore, I just don't think you have sufficient editing experience yet. Give it some time, and if choose to re-request, if you could please provide several ] of edits where you have reverted vandalism and/or undid an edit assuming good-faith, etc. Thank you — '''] <sup>]</sup>''' 03:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==== ] ==== |
|
|
* {{rfplinks|1=Arfæst Ealdwrítere}} |
|
|
:I have been a reviewer before and have never misused the associated rights. I would like to help in a low key administrative role: reviewer status being such a position. I wish to prove again that I can be trusted with responsibilities and I very much hope that you will let me be a reviewer again. <span style="background-color: #FF9933; color: #000033;">'' ]'' ]</span> 04:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{tl|onhold}} Pinging {{ping|Mike V}} who removed with note "per account concerns, please consult before re-adding". — ] <sup>]</sup> 13:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Consulted. — ] <sup>]</sup> 18:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{notdone}} Welcome back to the project. I did just approve and complete your rollbacker request, however would like to see a longer period of constructive editing now that you have returned, please continue to make positive contributions and re-apply for this bit in a month or two. — ] <sup>]</sup> 18:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
====]==== |
|
|
* {{rfplinks|1=115ash}} |
|
|
:I am really active in anti-vandalism work. I utilise Huggle and STiki to revert vandalism. Furthermore, I have done an equitable sum of WikiGnomes' contribution. With the ''Pending changes reviewer'', I will be able to review and acquiesce the pending changes as portion of my anti-vandalism work. --<span style="border:2px solid black;font-size:115%;background:blue">]</span>] 17:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{not done}} {{ping|115ash}} You are going '''too fast''' with STiki. Please explain why and were reverted as test/vandalism (along with many of your recent reverts). One explanation might be , where you seem to imply that any edit that shows up in STiki must be vandalism. This is not true, you make that decision, not the software. There is a ] revert button, although many of these edits I believe should be classified as ''innocent''. Please see ] and ]. At this time I don't see how you can be trusted to not reject constructive pending changes, and if you are not careful your rollback rights will be revoked. — '''] <sup>]</sup>''' 18:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
====]==== |
|
|
* {{rfplinks|1=SparrowHK}} |
|
|
:I've been a active vandalism reverter and I constantly check Recent IP edits for vandalism. I am quite familiar with Biographies of living persons, Neutral point of view, No original research, Verifiability and What Misplaced Pages is not. I believe that I have a reasonable editing history and I believe I would put this User Right to good use. ] (]) 12:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)SparrowHK |
|
|
::{{admin note}} I declined this request ], will defer to another admin. — ] <sup>]</sup> 13:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{nd}} Looking at your contributions so far, you have edited your own userspace more than you have edited articles, and I see no sign you have been active in removing ], which is what this tool is for. ] (]) 20:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
====]==== |
|
====]==== |
|
* {{rfplinks|1=FrB.TG}} |
|
* {{rfplinks|1=FrB.TG}} |
Done —