From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Relatively new editor, wanting to use Huggle but it requires Rollbacker right. Eager to contribute to Wikipedia as much as possible and fight vandalism. Yong (talk) 05:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I haven't seen you warn any vandals at all, even though you've used the undo tool quite well. If you would like to find out where the warnings are you can follow this link. Minimac (talk) 13:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job using the undo tool! One thing I noticed (as stated above) is that you are not warning the vandals, you can follow the link above and you`ll find tons of warnings you may give out if required. I recommend using Wikipedia:Twinkle to revert and warn vandals. I do not think you will be getting rollback this time around, but I am sure you will in awhile after you revert AND warn vandals. Nice contributions! Hope to see you around! If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me by e-mail or my talk page.--Addihockey10e-mail 20:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I've soon forgotten about the fact that Huggle already has a warn button along with the rollback button, so we must have solved this warn problem anyway if he's going to use Huggle. Should we grant him this right? Minimac (talk) 07:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not done, I'd like to see a little more experience before granting access to Huggle. At the very least, warn vandals so you know what the warnings you'll be doling out with Huggle actually say and you can decide whether the default is the most appropriate. Fell free to ping me in a couple of weeks and I'll be glad to reconsider. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I've been reverting vandalism to selected pages using Twinkle, but it's grown tedious. I'd love to help fight vandalism without having to deal with Twinkle. Matthewrbowker (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi there :) While I applaud your contributions, I can only see about 5-6 vandalism reversions in your contributions. If I were an admin, I'd like maybe around 25-50 vandalism reversions using twinkle or "undo". Also, when reverting vandalism, please remember to add a warning to the offending user's talk page, a list of warnings you may give out can be found here. I hope to see you here again once you have a few more reverions - we don't have enough vandalism reversions to properly judge if you're responsible enough for the tool. Anyhow, keep up your great work! If you have any questions or concerns, do not hesitate to message me or e-mail me! Sincerely, --Addihockey10e-mail 15:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done Per the excellent efforts made since (perhaps as a result of) the advice given above. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:30, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- See [1]. The High Fin Sperm Whale 22:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have been using Twinkle for a little while now, and I do think I'm pretty good at reading the context of an edit in an article to see if it really is vandalism. I believe rollback could make things easier. Aaron north (T/C) 22:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. EdJohnston (talk) 14:00, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As a number of unregistered users have being adding infomation which is not needed and adding routes which don't even operate to a number of Airports and Airlines pages. Jamie2k9 (talk) 23:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (fixed report) Rollback is for people that are involved in patrolling vandalism, but you don't seem to be involved in that. If you want to be involved with that too, you'll want to consider using WP:Twinkle first. Regarding your request, I would suggest you report it to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if users are vandalizing the article. If there's a content disagreement, please discuss with other users on the article's talk page (you'll want to message them to notify them of the discussion). Netalarmtalk 23:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done. I see no contributions by you to article talk pages since July. If you get into controversies on articles, it is important for you to explain your thinking on the talk page. Please consider reapplying for rollback after you have done some vandalism reverts. Be aware that if you are in a dispute with good-faith editors, rollback must not be used to undo their changes. Rollback is only for vandalism and for a few other situations where no edit summary is expected. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:00, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Reason for requesting rollback Ymron (talk) 06:41, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have a large number of pages on my watchlist, and often, when I encounter vandalism, it is done by anonymous users over multiple edits. I often find I have to revert the changes manually, by removing the added text by deletion. I feel it would be easier for me to control vandalism on my watchlist pages, if I were granted use of Rollback. Naturally, I would use the tool when necessary, and not in excess leaning towards disruption; which is what I aim to halt in the first place.
- Done Dabomb87 (talk) 22:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have been starting to get into reverting vadalism but there are so many edits being made every minute that i takes quite a while to browse through a list. I use Internet Explorer 8 and Twinkle, Huggle, and other vandalism-reverting tools do not work on my browser. I would really appreciate it if you would grant me this privilege. Thank you, Glimmer721 talk 00:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There are a couple of reasons why some of the tools don't work on your server: Huggle does require the rollback right (And an internet connection too!) and also, Twinkle can only be run on a Firefox, Opera or a Safari web server. Minimac (talk) 07:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not to mention Google Chrome. I use twinkle on it without a issue. --Alpha Quadrant talk 20:38, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done The advice offered above is excellent, but I don't believe either editor was recommending against granting rollback, just making helpful suggestions. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have more experience with TW and still against vandals. Ready to step up to huggle. ChckMeOwt (talk) 07:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm concerned by your judgement made with this revert which you made very recently.
Please remember to read WP:VANDTYPES, especially the "Blanking, illegitimate" part to see what types of blanking are considered vandalism. Minimac (talk) 07:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC) Not a removal of content Alison made, sorry about that. Minimac (talk) 07:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done If you're reverting edits by respected administrators, I think you need a little more experience. I'm sure that wasn't the desired effect, but it is slightly indicative of an itchy trigger finger, which we've all had at one time or another. Ping me in a couple of weeks and I'll re-evaluate. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have done a decent amount of anti-vandal work with Twinkle, and am interested in trying out Huggle. However, Huggle requires rollback privileges. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:55, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done - Tiptoety talk 20:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I do occasional vandal-fighting with Twinkle and rollback would really help me revert vandalism a bit faster. Usb10 Connected? 23:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd like to use Huggle for monitoring of recent changes, but it requires rollback. I have rollback in ruwiki since February 2010 and actively use Huggle there. DerLetzteRegenbogen (talk) 07:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done While you may have Huggle use in the Ru project, your reversions on the English Wikipedia have lacked proper caution warnings/notices to the ip addresses whose edits you have reverted. Please reapply after multiple reversions using appropriate warning templates/notices. Use Twinkle till the next time. Wifione ....... Leave a message 11:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
