Misplaced Pages

:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer: 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:Requests for permissions Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:05, 1 February 2015 view sourceATS (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,744 edits →User:EoRdE6: comment← Previous edit Revision as of 22:12, 1 February 2015 view source Beeblebrox (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators112,441 edits →User:EoRdE6: cmtNext edit →
Line 36: Line 36:
:I have read the policy on vandalism and understand what is and what is not vandalism. I am familiar with the basic content policies: BLP, NPOV, No original research, Verifiability and What Misplaced Pages is not and am familiar with Misplaced Pages:Copyrights. I have also read the guideline on reviewing. Routinely use TW to revert vandalism on many pages across many subjects. ''']'''<sup><small>(])</small></sup> 03:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC) :I have read the policy on vandalism and understand what is and what is not vandalism. I am familiar with the basic content policies: BLP, NPOV, No original research, Verifiability and What Misplaced Pages is not and am familiar with Misplaced Pages:Copyrights. I have also read the guideline on reviewing. Routinely use TW to revert vandalism on many pages across many subjects. ''']'''<sup><small>(])</small></sup> 03:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
:'''Comment''': May we have some assurance that ] was a learning experience? &mdash;]<b>&#47;</b>] 22:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC) :'''Comment''': May we have some assurance that ] was a learning experience? &mdash;]<b>&#47;</b>] 22:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
::{{admin note}} I fail to see how a deletion discussion is relevant here. I am however concerned that this user had their rollback permission revoked late last year and would be intersted in whatever comment they may have about that and what they have learned about vandalism since then. ] (]) 22:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


====]==== ====]====

Revision as of 22:12, 1 February 2015

Requests for permissions
Common
Uncommon
Logs
Special

Pending changes reviewer

(add request • view requests)
Shortcuts


User:Pishcal

I'm familiar with WP:VANDALISM and WP:REVIEWING and I have rollback permissions. Pishcal — ♣ 19:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
notdone As of your request you've had "rollback permissions" for all of 1 day - continue to work on antivandalism and feel free to reapply for this in a month. — xaosflux 15:16, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done as you were endorsed by another admin, see note on your talk page. — xaosflux 03:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

User:TheGoofyGolfer

I have made myself familiar with WP:VANDALISM and WP:REVIEWING and also have rollback permissions TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 22:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:31, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Peaceray

I have been around since 2010 & have about 7,500 edits. Please review my edits --- I think they speak for themselves. I did a GAR for Veterans Health Administration scandal of 2014 last fall. Peaceray (talk) 06:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Bosstopher

I've been doing quite a bit of editing on the Gamergate controversy article and haven't done anything too catastrophic in the past few months. Would be useful to have. Bosstopher (talk) 13:06, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Not done This permission is to help process the standard pending changes queue, and your request doesn't speak to that need. The article Gamergate controversy is currently the ONLY article on the entire project that has this restriction, and it is an extraordinary, temporary protection. You can lobby for changing that pages protection with the administrator that applied it or on the article talk page. — xaosflux 15:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

User:Orduin

I am familiar with WP:Vandalism, WP:Reviewing, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, WP:VER, WP:NOT, and WP:COPY. I have rollback rights, but have been using Twinkle since long before then. When I patrol for vandalism, and other unconstructive edits, I often come across valid edits to pending changes pages that reviewers often do not get to for some time. -- Orduin 20:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done. I've seen you at AIV enough times to be confident that you know what you're doing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

User:EoRdE6

I have read the policy on vandalism and understand what is and what is not vandalism. I am familiar with the basic content policies: BLP, NPOV, No original research, Verifiability and What Misplaced Pages is not and am familiar with Misplaced Pages:Copyrights. I have also read the guideline on reviewing. Routinely use TW to revert vandalism on many pages across many subjects. EoRdE6 03:28, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Comment: May we have some assurance that this was a learning experience? —ATinySliver/ 22:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
information Administrator note I fail to see how a deletion discussion is relevant here. I am however concerned that this user had their rollback permission revoked late last year and would be intersted in whatever comment they may have about that and what they have learned about vandalism since then. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Govindaharihari

I understand wp:vandalism and want to edit it out of the wikipedia, also accept and read Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. Reason for requesting Reviewer rights Govindaharihari (talk) 17:40, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 Not done. 158 article edits is a bit short of the level of experience expected before granting this permisssion, and you don't appear to have ever reported a vandal at WP:AIV. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)