Misplaced Pages

User talk:Swarm: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:42, 19 July 2015 editSwarm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators32,772 edits →Question, re: Pending changes reviewer status: cw← Previous edit Revision as of 00:33, 21 July 2015 edit undoSoham321 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,262 edits →Uninvolved Admin: new sectionNext edit →
Line 50: Line 50:
Hi again, Swarm! Quick question – is there any "minimum qualification" for being granted ] status, like there is with ]? Or will anyone who has demonstrated they're not a vandalism account be granted Reviewer status upon request? I'm looking at the 'Becoming a reviewer' section, and I'm not seeing any mention of a specific "minimum edit count" or anything, but I was wondering if there's any "informal" qualification that's used here. Thanks in advance! --] <small>(] • ])</small> 18:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Hi again, Swarm! Quick question – is there any "minimum qualification" for being granted ] status, like there is with ]? Or will anyone who has demonstrated they're not a vandalism account be granted Reviewer status upon request? I'm looking at the 'Becoming a reviewer' section, and I'm not seeing any mention of a specific "minimum edit count" or anything, but I was wondering if there's any "informal" qualification that's used here. Thanks in advance! --] <small>(] • ])</small> 18:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
:Not really; the spirit of the law is essentially that pending changes reviewer should pretty much be granted to anyone who can be trusted to edit normally. Any responsible editor who wants it should be granted it without issue. There are no special qualifications such as minimum edit count or previous experience. ] ] 03:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC) :Not really; the spirit of the law is essentially that pending changes reviewer should pretty much be granted to anyone who can be trusted to edit normally. Any responsible editor who wants it should be granted it without issue. There are no special qualifications such as minimum edit count or previous experience. ] ] 03:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

== Uninvolved Admin ==

Hi Swarm,
I would request you to consider giving your opinion, as an uninvolved Admin, on an ARCA discussion featuring me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_Imposition_of_an_Arbitration_Enforced_Sanction_against_me_by_Bishonen ] (]) 00:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:33, 21 July 2015

Template:Archive box collapsible

This is Swarm's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Swarm is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.
This user is fallible and encourages other admins to be bold in reverting their admin actions.
~~~~Swarm signs their posts and thinks you should too!

Swarm
Home —— Talk —— Email —— Contribs —— Awards —— Dash

My RfA

Pavlov's RfA reward

Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Oppose so you get only one cookie, but a nice one. (Better luck next time.)
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC).

Question, re: Pending changes reviewer status

Hi again, Swarm! Quick question – is there any "minimum qualification" for being granted Pending changes reviewer status, like there is with Rollback? Or will anyone who has demonstrated they're not a vandalism account be granted Reviewer status upon request? I'm looking at the 'Becoming a reviewer' section, and I'm not seeing any mention of a specific "minimum edit count" or anything, but I was wondering if there's any "informal" qualification that's used here. Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Not really; the spirit of the law is essentially that pending changes reviewer should pretty much be granted to anyone who can be trusted to edit normally. Any responsible editor who wants it should be granted it without issue. There are no special qualifications such as minimum edit count or previous experience. Swarm 03:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Uninvolved Admin

Hi Swarm, I would request you to consider giving your opinion, as an uninvolved Admin, on an ARCA discussion featuring me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_Imposition_of_an_Arbitration_Enforced_Sanction_against_me_by_Bishonen Soham321 (talk) 00:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)