Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback

Rollback

(add request • view requests)

User:Ankermast

• Ankermast (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

I am a German Wikipedian and have been active on enwiki as a vandalism fighter since April, mostly using Twinkle sind SWViewer and always warning editors after reverting their contributions. Currently I have made almost 800 Edits here, which mostly consist of vandalism control. On dewiki I am member of the CVU, have more than 17000 edits as well as rollback rights. [1] I would like to be granted rollback rights as they would allow me fighting vandalism more efficiently and faster. Thanks Ankermast (talk) 08:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 20:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

As I am using Twinkle, it becomes clear that the vast majority of my reverts are followed by a warning when looking at my contributions. Regarding your examples: 1. I restored an older version edited by two other users: an anonymous user which I did warn and a user which removed some of the vandalism by the IP, which I would not warn as this edit was constructive. 2. Here, the user removed the contribution by themselves except for a blank which I removed with restoring the latest constructive version. Here, as it seemed like a test edit and as the user removed it, I just removed said blank. 3. Out of hundreds of reverts, there are some cases in which I do not warn the editor. These are natural and I can’t do more than making the promise that like now, I am going to warn every vandal, to the best of my ability.

Best regards Ankermast (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of not biting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. If you don't want to leave a template warning, that's completely fine, but you do need to leave a talk page message explaining why you reverted the edit. Moving forward, could you please make a promise to leave warnings/notifications for every revert? -Fastily 21:06, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I make that promise. Ankermast (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming,  Done -Fastily 09:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Wolverine XI

• Wolverine XI (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^(notify)

For more than a year, I have been reverting vandalism on numerous wikis. I'm rather skilled at identifying vandalism. I have made over 8,000 additions to the English Wikipedia, 700 edits to the Simple English Wikipedia, and around 800,000 edits to Commons. I edit a great deal. I'm always here to keep the wiki safe—in fact, I've been editing every day since December 27. That being said, I require the rollbacker to aid in the quicker and more effective removal of vandalism in our articles. It will also allow me to use AntiVandal, which makes sporting vandalism more simpler. I'll be careful not to rollback good faith edits as that's against the rollback policy. Thanks, Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 18:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 08:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)