Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for rollback/Denied/June 2008

< Wikipedia:Requests for rollback | Denied

1

June 3

edit

rrcatto

edit
to assist my efforts to revert vandalism rrcatto (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done for now. You have no edits. Please spend a few weeks showing accurate reversal of vandalism and then re-apply. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm - how can you have no edits at all and an entry on the request for rollback page? Answer - this was requested by User:Richard Catto. Richard, can you clarify what you're after here? Pedro :  Chat  14:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just realised. ;) Bit of a dumb moment there... PeterSymonds (talk) 14:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, the only blue link for this user is rather interesting. Probably should be blanked. Parental advisory: don't let your children near it Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done The prime account has less than 100 edits so I'm marking this not done either way. Pedro :  Chat  14:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

StewieGriffin!

edit
I think I have proved myself further. Sockpuppetry has nothing to do with this. Especially not mine! Rollback could definately help me. If you want to know more about me see RADWP. Please see I have tried anti-vandalism, some of my reverts, wrong, I know!, but the majority are good. StewieGriffin! • Talk 15:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done It was agreed that you should wait a few weeks if not months. Your last request was only last week. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 4

edit

Spyfox5400

edit
Need it to deal with people vandalizing politicans pages, and especially with people putting racial slurs on Barack Obamas PageSpyfox5400 (talk) 02:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done - Simply not enough experience reverting vandalism, come back in a month. Tiptoety talk 03:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 6

edit

FireDreams4

edit

If you have ever vandalised on Wikipedia; you should be ashamed for life. Vandalism is basically a war against the Vandals and the Anti-Vandals. I am an Anti-Vandal for LIFE and nothing could change that. Please, help me rollback their cruel, cruel, ways of having "fun" so we can help stop vandalism once and for all! =D

  Not done unfortunately: after a look through your contributions, you haven't done any vandalism-reverting at all, and therefore, I'm unable to judge how you'll use rollback. Get some practice reverting vandalism using the undo feature first, and then come back in a couple of weeks. Acalamari 01:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pirkid

edit
I often find myself coming across vandalism when I access Wikipedia (sometimes from my own schoolmates, and find trying to undo major changes a big pain. I am looking towards this pretige so I can further my Wikipedia contributions, and any reponse would be appriciated. Pir (talk) 14:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done You have no history of vandal fighting. Develop some more experience using the undo feature and reapply in a few weeks. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 8

edit

Dagoth Ur, Mad God

edit
I'd like to revert some vandalism. I will not misuse this tool. Dagoth Ur, Mad God (talk) 09:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done. I'm afraid that as far as I can tell, you don't have enough experience to show that you can identify what kind of edits you would revert using rollback. If you want to acquire rollback, I'd encourage you to become more active in reverting vandalism to show that you understand exactly what the function should be used for. Alex Muller 10:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 9

edit

WikiPediaAid

edit
I would like to help Wikipedia combat and clean up vandalism as much as possible.
  Not done I see little to no vandalism reverts. Try using tools like WP:TW or the undo button to revert some vandalism and come back and ask for the tool again. Tiptoety talk 18:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just edit conflicted with you Tiptoety, and I actually was putting done on it, and I've given him rollback rights. I'll go change it back so we can further discuss. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was looking at this, and had come to the same conclusion as Tiptoety - very little in the way of vandal reversion. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 18:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Any progress on where to go from here, chaps? I'm not seeing any discussion on it; have I missed it? Anthøny 18:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to hear Keeper's reason for giving this user the rights before I make a decision. Tiptoety talk 18:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)I may have been too quick, but I saw a user that has been here (off and on) for 3+ years, with yes, a low edit count, but also a clean blocklog, useful contribs. I didn't see any red flags as far as userwarnings on his talk. Knowing how easily it can be removed if abused, I went ahead and granted the rights. I've since removed the rights in order to discuss. Other thoughts? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Like has been said before, every admin has there own requirements for granting rollback to users and mine include the requesting user having done some anti-vandalism work prior to requesting the rights (which I did not see). But if Keeper trusts this user with the rights I am not opposes the them having it. Tiptoety talk 18:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to them not having it either :-) My criteria for granting are admittedly lax - I look for clean logs, clean talkpage, time/edit count sufficiency. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My thoughts are that they should try doing some RC patrol for a few days and come back. I feel that it can be granted rather easily, but once it is removed for abuse or a misunderstanding it is much harder to get back and it always fallows the user in their rights log. I say mark in   Not done with no prejudice to re-request in a few days. Tiptoety talk 18:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Would you like to go to the talkpage of said user, or shall I? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I left him a quick note, feel free to add to it. Thanks for your help Keeper (as always). Tiptoety talk 18:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)(Indent) I was a little concerned about this edit at first, which seemed to be reverting a legitimate edit using a rollback type tool. However, other editors have also reverted possible vandalism from the same user on the same page. Whilst I also look for a bit of active vandal reversion before granting rollback, I'm happy to assume good faith in this case. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 18:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Not done after discussion.

June 10

edit

Amor amor

edit
To help fight vandalism with somewhat ease &huggle Amor amor (talk) 04:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done - I see little if any evidence of vandal fighting by ordinary means at present. I suggest doing some recent changes patrolling, and request again in a week or so. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 06:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 13

edit

Hanzo2050

edit
Give some help for "Great Hanshin earthquake" and others Hanzo2050 (talk) 03:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done - I'm afraid you don't have enough experience here to show what kind of edits you'll be reverting with rollback. This is especially important with an application like Huggle. Get some more experience reverting vandalism and reapply here in a few weeks. Alex Muller 06:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

zaukul

edit
I am interested in assisting with removal of vandalism using the huggle tool. Zaukul (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done Hi Zaukul. I noticed you've only made a handful of edits after about a one year hiatus? Would you perhaps return in a few weeks of editing so that we may have something recent to go on? Thanks. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahonc

edit
To revert vandalism, spam and other wrong information. Ahonc (Talk)   18:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, to be honest: I only found a few reverts in the last thousand edits or so, and in addition, I found these reversions of my edits (which were certainly not vandalism) using undo. Granted, they happened a little over a year ago, but still, I'm not sure here. I'd like more input from other admins first. Acalamari 18:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also looking...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pluses: Clean block log, been around awhile. Detractions: No real evidence of vandalism reversion, every edit marked "minor" whether it is or isn't. I would support rollback after a few weeks of solid vandy-patrol/approrpriate use of "undo", but perhaps too soon. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also concerned. Vandalism and spam, definitely, but wrong information may not necessarily be vandalism. Even if it's suspected of being a good faith edit, rollback should never be used. I would object to granting at this time, and advise the user to show clear evidence of understanding, and reapply after a few weeks. Just my 2p. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done Three hesitations = not done. Feel free to re-request after a few weeks of successful vandalism reversion using other methods like undo. thanks! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 14

edit

Der_Ritter

edit
Just hate vandalism, I'd like to help the crew fighting it...
  Not done Sorry, not enough activity or evidence of vandal fighting. Please apply when you have around 500 edits, and when you've shown clear evidence of vandal-fighting using the undo tool. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nappymonster

edit
I would like to help the fight against vandalism more efficiently, and a tool such as huggle would greatly help. In order to use huggle, I need rollback privilages. I'm currently helping against vandalism, though without software, it really isn't very effective. Nappymonster (talk) 17:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done. Thank you for your contributions. I noticed that you've only been "back editing" for a couple of days. Please get a few weeks under your belt showing that you can properly use the "undo" feature and make appropriate warnings on user talk pages. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please put new requests at the bottom of the page.

June 15

edit

bbriggs1

edit
I would like rollback to help combat vandalism. Thank you Bbriggs1 (talk) 18:49, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done - see previous request at Wikipedia:Requests for rollback/Denied/May 2008#bbriggs1. There have been few edits since that date, and little/no vandal fighting. Try doing some recent change patrolling for a while, and try again when you've got better experience with dealing with vandals. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 19:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 16

edit

Princess Rebel

edit
I really, really, want rollback so I can have a more economical way to fight against vandals (aka idiots)
  Not done for now; not enough evidence of vandal fighting. Please spend a few weeks using the undo feature and re-apply. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 17

edit

Alexnia

edit
Huggle--Alexnia (talk) 14:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done No evidence that you can use the rollback tool effectively over a reasonable time period. Not enough contributions to the project to suggest that we can trust you with this feature. Rudget (logs) 14:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SunDragon34

edit
I would like to be better equipped to fight vandalism. SunDragon34 (talk) 21:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done No significant history of vandal fighting. Suggest using the "undo" button to patrol vandalism for a few weeks, then re-apply. xenocidic (talk) 21:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 18

edit

Tratos the Great

edit
I am a reverter by heart, and Rollback will make that job easier. Ive only been here 1 day and already reverted vandalism on 10 pages Tratos theGreat
  Not done. As I mentioned on my talk page, it's too early to grant you rollback. Continue using the undo button and make sure it is actually vandalism you are undoing. xenocidic (talk) 16:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will.M.Thompson

edit
To allow me to revert vandalism quicker, and before you say no, I was here before, then blocked, but I have turned over a new leaf, and I have done nothing wrong. Will Thompson (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done I'm pleased you've turned over a new leaf. However, you need to demonstrate that you can use the tools. On this account, you currently have only a handful of edits, and no reverts. Please continue to actively edit for a few weeks, and then re-apply when you can show accurate use of the undo function. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 21

edit

User:Shine a lite

edit
Vandals keep adding nonsense or obscenities to an importnat medical article on lyme disease Shine a lite (talk) 06:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done - gain some experience at vandal fighting and recent change patrolling, and come back again when you have more edits (personally, I like to see about 500 or more) —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 07:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:a13ean

edit
I hope to use huggle in my project of preventing vandalism to high school pages.
  Not done Very concerned about some of your reverts. See here, here and here for example. This was not vandalism, and you've reverted during a dispute, which is not acceptable with rollback. Please read WP:ROLLBACK thoroughly and re-apply in a few weeks. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure! What would have been better to do in that situation? Thanks, A13ean (talk)
Make the edits manually, or engage in discussion with the other editor. Rollback is only intended for obvious vandalism Fritzpoll (talk) 20:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rollback is only for obvious vandalism. This editor (self evidently) did not use rollback. He used undo and provided additional edit summary information on the above examples. Reverting in a dispute is not so hot, but the editor clearly outlined his intentions rather than just hitting a button. Pedro :  Chat  21:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, my confusion was that I thought blanking COI tags, etc was vandalism but on closer reading, I guess it's not necessarily. Thanks again, A13ean (talk) 21:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 22

edit

User:Sennen goroshi

edit
so I can go on vandalism patrol Sennen goroshi (talk) 12:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As recently as March you had your second block for edit warring and were warned about edit warring as recently as May. I'm not sure that you will not inadvertently misuse the tool if you get into another edit war. Personally, I'd like you to show some evidence of keeping your cool by avoiding edit warring before we considered this. What do other admins think? Spartaz Humbug! 12:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Not done The block in March doesn't affect your position necessarily, but edit warring last month does. This is not acceptable, and use of rollback during an edit war is strictly not appropriate. Suggest waiting a few months before re-application. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
no problems.. thanks for looking at my application anyway. Sennen goroshi (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:frogger3140

edit
I have a Mac, but I make SVG files on the Windows XP. Anyways, am I qualified to use Rollback? —Preceding unsigned comment added by frogger3140 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 22 June 2008
  Not done, I'm afraid with only 166 edits (and over half of those to the user space) we can't judge how you'll use the rollback tool. Consider gaining some experience reverting vandalism with undo and then reapply in a few weeks. Alex Muller 22:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, off to take the break of page maintenance! --Ωfrogger3140Ω2 omega (talk) 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ro098

edit
I want the rollback feature so i can help revert vandalism to pages faster and easier than undoing the edit. I wish to have non-vandalized references as i refer to wikipedia a lot and doing this would help me make sure i have a reliable source.
  Not done Your article contributions reveal little evidence of vandal-fighting. Read up on vandalism, practice reverting using the undo feature for a week or two, and then feel free to re-apply. Good luck. Acalamari 23:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the only revert I found was this and the edit you reverted was not vandalism. I definitely suggest reading up on vandalism first. Acalamari 23:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 24

edit

User:Falconkhe

edit
Hi, can you kindly grant me permission for the rollback flag? Thank you in anticipation
Hi, can you kindly grant me permission for the rollback flag? Thank you in anticipation.--Falconkhe (talk) 08:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done You appear to be involved in an edit war at Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi - please reapply when you've sorted out editing differences there. Pedro :  Chat  09:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Miami33139

edit
Having rollback would make it easier to delete serial spammers that go to multiple articles. Miami33139 (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done Per the reverts I spotted, which were not all vandalism. This appears to be a good faith edit to improve the lead; and this was probably a good-faith question from someone unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies. And yet you reverted them without a summary. I suggest a few weeks of reverting clear vandalism, and undoing good-faith edits with the appropriate edit summaries. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 28

edit

User:Micov

edit
Tired of dealing with vandilism manually, and starting to use huggle. The program requires you have the rollback feture. Also, my account was blocked by mistake once by User:Pedro.
  Not done - I am not seeing a whole lot of work outside of your userspace. Get some more experience reverting vandalism and re-request in a month. Tiptoety talk 02:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

June 29

edit

User:Lykantrop

edit
It can be sometimes useful I think...--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 10:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  Not done I have concerns. This was not vandalism, yet you reverted without a summary. In general, I see some undos, but no reversion of vandalism. This leads me to believe that you don't fully understand that rollback is used for vandalism only. I suggest thorough reading about the rollback feature, and re-application in a few weeks. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I use "undo" knowingly also for undoing bad faith edits. Is it not allowed? Should I revert bad faith or wrong edits, which just need to be undid, a more complicated way just because they are not vandalism? Just because of a term in policy?--  LYKANTROP  ✉ 11:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're assuming bad faith. For example, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that user whom you reverted in diff cited above did that to "compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". Therefore, you should have provided a reason for your revert. The very fact that you don't understand what's wrong with your edits indicates that you shouldn't be given access to rollback, sorry. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 11:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bdog9121

edit

I am requesting the rollback feature because I would like to take part in the sucess of wikipedia and would love to be granted rollback so I could use Huggle. Thanks. Bdog9121 (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Not done Your account is too new for us to judge whether you can use rollback responsibly. Rudget (logs) 14:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How much older of an account do I need to have? Bdog9121 (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We, ideally, need around at least 500 contributions. Your account is only one/two days old, too young. (500 contributions should take an average user about 3-4 weeks). Rudget (logs) 15:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ok thank you Bdog9121 (talk) 15:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Rudget (logs) 15:19, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_rollback/Denied/June_2008&oldid=1248614466"