| Revision as of 01:57, 6 January 2015 view sourceDocumentError (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,388 edits →User:Legacypac← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:58, 6 January 2015 view source DocumentError (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,388 editsm →User:LegacypacNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| ::::::Legacypac - you have been cautioned more times than it is possible to count about spreading claims of other editors "personally attacking" you, as you just did here in reference to me. You have also been repeatedly informed it is par-for-the-course to ping another editor when you discuss them (what you did not do when you just leveled this accusation against me). As ] noted, Rollback Requests is not the place for complaining about other editors. You have also been repeatedly cautioned about blanking pages, editing against RfC consensus and conducting unilateral moves of pages against consensus. You have filed more frivolous 3RR complaints against other editors than you have ever seen upheld (e.g. ). You have a penchant for calling people who have content disputes with you "pro-terrorist" and "anti-American," utterly outrageous behavior about which many of us are still befuddled your account has not been blocked over. () ]]] 23:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::::Legacypac - you have been cautioned more times than it is possible to count about spreading claims of other editors "personally attacking" you, as you just did here in reference to me. You have also been repeatedly informed it is par-for-the-course to ping another editor when you discuss them (what you did not do when you just leveled this accusation against me). As ] noted, Rollback Requests is not the place for complaining about other editors. You have also been repeatedly cautioned about blanking pages, editing against RfC consensus and conducting unilateral moves of pages against consensus. You have filed more frivolous 3RR complaints against other editors than you have ever seen upheld (e.g. ). You have a penchant for calling people who have content disputes with you "pro-terrorist" and "anti-American," utterly outrageous behavior about which many of us are still befuddled your account has not been blocked over. () ]]] 23:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::::Since the activities of editors are scrutinized when they request tools (as mine were above) it seems fair game to make a comment on the wisdom of granting of such tool that are restricted to trusted users. If I was wrong to do that then ] and I should both apologize. Happy New Year.] (]) 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | :::::::::Since the activities of editors are scrutinized when they request tools (as mine were above) it seems fair game to make a comment on the wisdom of granting of such tool that are restricted to trusted users. If I was wrong to do that then ] and I should both apologize. Happy New Year.] (]) 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::::::No. You know perfectly well what you're doing because this is your M.O. You ] against the latest new editor you've chosen to harass. I, an uninvolved editor, made a BOOMERANG observation about the name-calling you'd savaged him with. In response, you started throwing accusations against me '''without pinging''', as you just did here in RfP. This "take no prisoners," "scorched earth" style of interaction - in which you try to intimidate and kneecap editors not to "cross" you - is your hallmark. Many, many editors are sick of your unwillingness to behave with just a modicum of decency toward others here. For the ninth (yes, I'm counting) time - do not make false accusations (or any accusations) about me, or any editor, '''without pinging'''. ]]] 01:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::::::::No. You know perfectly well what you're doing because this is your M.O. You ] against the latest new editor you've chosen to harass. I, an uninvolved editor, made a BOOMERANG observation about the name-calling you'd savaged him with. In response, you started throwing accusations against me '''without pinging''', as you just did here in RfP. This "take no prisoners," "scorched earth" style of interaction - in which you try to intimidate and kneecap editors not to "cross" you - is your hallmark. Many, many editors are sick of your unwillingness to behave with just a modicum of decency toward others here. For the ninth (yes, I'm counting) time - do not make false accusations (or any accusations) about me, or any editor, '''without pinging'''. There are very few people who aren't closely watching your edits at this point so trying to "sneak one by" is unlikely to work. ]]] 01:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ====]==== | ====]==== | ||
Revision as of 01:58, 6 January 2015
| Requests for permissions | |
|---|---|
| Common | |
| Uncommon | |
| Logs | |
| Special | |
Rollback
 | Please familiarize yourself with Help:Reverting and Misplaced Pages:Rollback before making a request.Misuse of the feature, even if unintentional or in good faith, may give cause for it to be removed. |
| To make a request, please follow the instructions below:
NOTE: It is unlikely that users with fewer than 200 mainspace edits will be granted the use of this tool. Please consider enrolling at the Misplaced Pages:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy to learn more about handling vandalism.
|
Sorry, please be aware that unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
| Administrator notation templates | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
This template is used to answer requests for permissions, especially the rollback user right. ::{{subst:RFPR|option}} ~~~~
|
Done
User:DocumentError
- DocumentError (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 have more than 3500 edits and an unblemished edit history over several years. Recently I have dealt with a number of instances of promotional vandalism and it would be helpful to have rollback for those cases. I understand how Rollback works. DOCUMENT★ERROR 00:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Makro
- Makro (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 would like to expand my experience on Misplaced Pages and help keep it free from vandalism and copyright infringement Makro (talk) 14:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Acj1
- Acj1 (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 would like to help stop vandalism to Misplaced Pages! Acj1 =^.^= Say Hi To Me! 23:46, 4 January 2015 (UTC) 19:48, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Not done. Please see the notice at the top of this page. With only 10 edits to mainspace, I don't think you have sufficient editing experience yet. Take a moment to check out what counter-vandalism is at WP:CVU and when you have made 200 or so edits to articles you may wish to enroll at the Counter Vandalism Academy to learn more. — MusikAnimal 23:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: This will be my 367 edit. Acj1 =^.^= Say Hi To Me! 23:46, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Acj1: We generally expect 200 edits to the mainspace, or a sufficient recent editing history clearly showing you can identify what constitutes vandalism and good-faith edits. See WP:CVU to learn more. Thank you for your interest in helping fight vandalism. — MusikAnimal 00:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Can I come back when I've made enough edits??? @MusikAnimal: Thanks, Acj1 =^.^= Say Hi To Me! 00:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Certainly! Just file a new request at a later time, to help demonstrate your growth, include a link to this discussion: Special:PermanentLink/641027206. — xaosflux 02:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks!!! Acj1|Sign?|Say Hi To Me! 21:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Certainly! Just file a new request at a later time, to help demonstrate your growth, include a link to this discussion: Special:PermanentLink/641027206. — xaosflux 02:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Can I come back when I've made enough edits??? @MusikAnimal: Thanks, Acj1 =^.^= Say Hi To Me! 00:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Acj1: We generally expect 200 edits to the mainspace, or a sufficient recent editing history clearly showing you can identify what constitutes vandalism and good-faith edits. See WP:CVU to learn more. Thank you for your interest in helping fight vandalism. — MusikAnimal 00:05, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: This will be my 367 edit. Acj1 =^.^= Say Hi To Me! 23:46, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Tomandjerry211
- Tomandjerry211 (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 want to help revert vandalism on Misplaced Pages.Tomandjerry211 (talk) 23:42, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Administrator note This users request for pending changes reviewer was declined twice in December () — MusikAnimal 16:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
User:Legacypac
- Legacypac (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)
- Dealing with increasing numbers of POV vandals, especially on terrorism related articles. My reports have resulted in quite a few bans recently, looking for ways to speed up damage cleanup. Legacypac (talk) 05:52, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not done You seem to have had issues with edit warring in the recent past. Furthermore, looking at the edits you have undone over the past month, I see very few where rollback would be applicable. Reverting banned users is acceptable use, but mind you can use Twinkle to accomplish the same task. This decline is nothing personal, I just don't think you'll have much use for it given the controversial subjects you work, where many of the reverts would seemingly be expected to have an informative edit summary. Thanks for your understanding. — MusikAnimal 16:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- I have no issues with edit warring other then to deal with edit warriors. I recently stated using Twinkle, and without access to this tool it is hard to tell the difference. It almost sounds like this tool works like Twinkle and there is no real difference?
As far as offense, I am tempted to take offense at being denied the tool only because when I came here I noticed DocumentError was quickly granted the tool. That's not why I came here - just happened his request was on the page. If I am not qualified to do rollbacks then I strongly object to him being given this tool because of his frequent and outrageous personal attacks against me and general incompetince as an editor who can't see past his nationalist views and refuses to accurately read and reflect sources. While I generally ignore his crap I feel strongly he should not even be allowed to edit here at all, and certainly not with any extra rights. Legacypac (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2015 (UTC)- I can't speak for DocumentError, I did not respond to that request. If another admin wants to reverse my decision to decline yours, that is fine, but I stand by it. Personal attacks and rollback don't necessarily have a relevant correlation. When you have had issues with edit warring as soon as a month ago, that is a red flag by any standards. Correct, system rollback offers nothing more than Twinkle does. However the rollback user right allows you access to semi-automated tools such as Huggle and STiki. Misuse of Twinkle features could result in the same consequences as rollback misuse, but I'm not suggesting that will be the case with you. In fact, having a record showing what you've rollbacked with Twinkle using the three options ("vandal", normal rollback, and "good faith") is a good way to exemplify your judgement on when system rollback would be appropriate. — MusikAnimal 21:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ok cool. I've launched multiple edit warring complaints, and sanctions have resulted on the other users, but never been found to be edit warring. The complaints are just another way of dealing with disruptive users since I don't have admin tools. I don't believe my use of 3RR reports should be held against me. If Twinkle does the same job, I'll keep using it for now. It's pretty slick - used it to do a big long term vandalism rollback yesterday actually that would have taken forever the hard way. Legacypac (talk) 22:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Legacypac - you have been cautioned more times than it is possible to count about spreading claims of other editors "personally attacking" you, as you just did here in reference to me. You have also been repeatedly informed it is par-for-the-course to ping another editor when you discuss them (what you did not do when you just leveled this accusation against me). As MusikAnimal noted, Rollback Requests is not the place for complaining about other editors. You have also been repeatedly cautioned about blanking pages, editing against RfC consensus and conducting unilateral moves of pages against consensus. You have filed more frivolous 3RR complaints against other editors than you have ever seen upheld (e.g. ). You have a penchant for calling people who have content disputes with you "pro-terrorist" and "anti-American," utterly outrageous behavior about which many of us are still befuddled your account has not been blocked over. () DOCUMENT★ERROR 23:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Since the activities of editors are scrutinized when they request tools (as mine were above) it seems fair game to make a comment on the wisdom of granting of such tool that are restricted to trusted users. If I was wrong to do that then User:MusikAnimal and I should both apologize. Happy New Year.Legacypac (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- No. You know perfectly well what you're doing because this is your M.O. You filed an ANI against the latest new editor you've chosen to harass. I, an uninvolved editor, made a BOOMERANG observation about the name-calling you'd savaged him with. In response, you started throwing accusations against me without pinging, as you just did here in RfP. This "take no prisoners," "scorched earth" style of interaction - in which you try to intimidate and kneecap editors not to "cross" you - is your hallmark. Many, many editors are sick of your unwillingness to behave with just a modicum of decency toward others here. For the ninth (yes, I'm counting) time - do not make false accusations (or any accusations) about me, or any editor, without pinging. There are very few people who aren't closely watching your edits at this point so trying to "sneak one by" is unlikely to work. DOCUMENT★ERROR 01:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Since the activities of editors are scrutinized when they request tools (as mine were above) it seems fair game to make a comment on the wisdom of granting of such tool that are restricted to trusted users. If I was wrong to do that then User:MusikAnimal and I should both apologize. Happy New Year.Legacypac (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Legacypac - you have been cautioned more times than it is possible to count about spreading claims of other editors "personally attacking" you, as you just did here in reference to me. You have also been repeatedly informed it is par-for-the-course to ping another editor when you discuss them (what you did not do when you just leveled this accusation against me). As MusikAnimal noted, Rollback Requests is not the place for complaining about other editors. You have also been repeatedly cautioned about blanking pages, editing against RfC consensus and conducting unilateral moves of pages against consensus. You have filed more frivolous 3RR complaints against other editors than you have ever seen upheld (e.g. ). You have a penchant for calling people who have content disputes with you "pro-terrorist" and "anti-American," utterly outrageous behavior about which many of us are still befuddled your account has not been blocked over. () DOCUMENT★ERROR 23:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ok cool. I've launched multiple edit warring complaints, and sanctions have resulted on the other users, but never been found to be edit warring. The complaints are just another way of dealing with disruptive users since I don't have admin tools. I don't believe my use of 3RR reports should be held against me. If Twinkle does the same job, I'll keep using it for now. It's pretty slick - used it to do a big long term vandalism rollback yesterday actually that would have taken forever the hard way. Legacypac (talk) 22:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- I can't speak for DocumentError, I did not respond to that request. If another admin wants to reverse my decision to decline yours, that is fine, but I stand by it. Personal attacks and rollback don't necessarily have a relevant correlation. When you have had issues with edit warring as soon as a month ago, that is a red flag by any standards. Correct, system rollback offers nothing more than Twinkle does. However the rollback user right allows you access to semi-automated tools such as Huggle and STiki. Misuse of Twinkle features could result in the same consequences as rollback misuse, but I'm not suggesting that will be the case with you. In fact, having a record showing what you've rollbacked with Twinkle using the three options ("vandal", normal rollback, and "good faith") is a good way to exemplify your judgement on when system rollback would be appropriate. — MusikAnimal 21:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- I have no issues with edit warring other then to deal with edit warriors. I recently stated using Twinkle, and without access to this tool it is hard to tell the difference. It almost sounds like this tool works like Twinkle and there is no real difference?
User:Rationalobserver
- Rationalobserver (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 would like this user right so as to empower me to better defend the project against vandalism. I promise I will never use RB in a content dispute, or in any other inappropriate way. Thanks! Rationalobserver (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)