Sorry,
unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please
create an account in order to request user account permissions.
A couple of days ago, you were
warned about misleading edits summaries wrt
this edit. Please explain, in your own words, why this edit was inappropriate.
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?
I forgot to leave a warning message. Also, I made a misleading edit summary and not a typo.
HirowoWiki (
talk |
contribs) 21:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Moving forward, what will you do ensure that you are always leaving a notification? Right after your last reply, I noticed that you failed to notify an editor after making a
this revert. What exactly do you mean by "made a misleading edit summary and not a typo"? Like I said, both the contents of the edit and edit summary are inappropriate. Can you explain why? -
Fastily 06:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I've
undid the last edit; they should leave a warning message. I changed the template with uppercase letters like {{pp|small=yes}} → {{Pp|small=yes}} and {{featured article}} → {{Featured article}}. The template shouldn't be changed in this article. Thank you for the explanation.
HirowoWiki (
talk |
contribs) 07:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Why are you being so evasive with your answers? I'm not asking you trick questions or attempting to embarrass you. Please re-read my reply above and answer the questions please. -
Fastily 05:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I will ensure to leave a warning message after reverting your edit. The misleading edit summary referred to providing incorrect information in the summary, which did not accurately reflect the changes made in the edit. This can be misleading to other editors who check the edit history.
HirowoWiki (
talk |
contribs) 08:04, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting
good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor; I recommend using tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet which makes this extremely easy. 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? And it sounds like you're not familiar with
WP:COSMETIC changes, which capitalizing template translcusions falls under. The community frowns upon such edits, so please also acknowledge below that you won't be making such edits in the future. -
Fastily 09:36, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Leave warnings for edits, use tools like
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet for easy notifications. Avoid
biting newcomers and explain reverts with talk page messages. Refrain from
WP:COSMETIC changes like capitalizing template transclusions.
HirowoWiki (
talk |
contribs) 11:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Right, those are things that I'd like you to do moving forward. Can you please state clearly that you, HirowoWiki, will be doing these things? -
Fastily 02:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I've been patrolling recent changes for almost a year now, and the rollback right would mean I could start using Huggle for that, as I've been meaning to do for a while now.
Sneezless (
talk) (
contribs) 21:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Not done I noticed you make a handful of edits, and then drop off for months at a time. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month consistently patrolling
RecentChanges (
Twinkle &
Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are always
warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks,
Fastily 06:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the tips. I'm already using Redwarn for warnings, but did you notice any particular times when I didn't properly warn users? I've been using the ProblemWelcome and WelcomeIP templates instead fairly often, since most editors I'd otherwise use a warning template on are new editors.
Sneezless (
talk) (
contribs) 13:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Sure, here's a few from the past month:
1,
2,
3 -
Fastily 05:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I have been active on RCP over the past month. I would like rollback for the particular case where a vandal persistently vandalizes the same page. It takes time to load via Twinkle and is frustrating when my attempt to revert fails because the vandal or someone else has made more edits. I believe rollback will save me time and make my efforts against vandalism more effective.
Air on White (
talk) 03:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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 05:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I do not warn users in what I assume to be legitimate content disputes, as warning would be patronizing and unconducive to discussion. The user who added the name of one of
Pat Morita's grandchildren appeared to be acting in good faith; I reverted not because he was vandalizing or disruptive, but because the person did not have his own Wikipedia article. The argument here is not about vandalism, NPOV or BLP, but simply a content dispute about what is proper to include in the infobox. Meanwhile, in the case of
Matthew Heineman, that was the third edit by a user who added BLP violations who was hopping to a different IP for every edit. It is useless to warn such a user, who I had already warned twice on two different IPs, just as it is useless to further warn a user who has received a level 4 warning and is still vandalizing. My failure to warn the vandal on
The Chris Moyles Show was a mistake on my part, possibly because I forgot after I restored the page to remove vandalism by multiple IPs. I hope this helps you understand my editing process.
Air on White (
talk) 06:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
If you take a look at my contributions, it will be beyond obvious that I am aware of Twinkle and am regularly using it to warn users.
Air on White (
talk) 06:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
It doesn't matter whether it's "a dispute" or a good faith edit: you need to leave a notification. I can't stress enough the importance of notbiting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting
good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor; I recommend using tools such as
Twinkle or
Ultraviolet which makes this extremely easy. 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 09:36, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Roughly a month ago, I requested to be granted rollback rights. The administrator who responded,
Fastily,
asked me to patrol recent changes for a month before requesting the permission again. Having done so, I believe I am now ready to become a rollbacker. As mentioned in my previous request, I've been a rollbacker
on Commons for quite some time now – over a year –, understanding how the tool works and the risks associated with it, and committing myself not to misuse it, under the risk of losing it temporarily or permanently, and even being blocked.
Having patrolled recent changes for this month,
with over 700 reversions in the main domain, I'm now more confident than ever in distinguishing between obvious vandalism, non-constructive changes, and good-faith edits, for example. I always make sure to notify editors after reverting their edits, so that these newcomers are not "
bitten" (e.g.
1a,
1b,
2a,
2b,
3a,
3b,
4a,
4b,
5a,
5b). Sometimes I even notify and guide them without reverting their edits; that's why I currently have a bit more
warnings on user pages than reversions in the main domain.
I also have
a constant presence in
Administrator intervention against vandalism, with a considerably high success rate (that is, the ratio between blocked accounts and reports). Of the more than 20 accounts I reported there (ignoring the IPs), only one was not blocked, for reasons I now understand well, so these will not be repeated. I have even opened
a checkuser request as a result of my anti-vandalism activities (although this request was deleted in favor of
one created later, I don't know precisely why).
Therefore, I would like to finally become a rollbacker. As mentioned
before, I would like to have access to semi-automatic tools, namely Huggle, which would greatly facilitate my anti-vandalism work, making it more efficient. I enjoy patrolling recent changes, and rollback rights would certainly make my life easier.
Yes, unfortunately it is true that I am currently blocked on my home wiki. I was blocked there due to an administrative decision. At the time, there was suspicion that I was a sockpuppet of some long-term abuser. I was associated, among others, with someone named
Quintinense. There was a certain
wikihounding surrounding my edits, which I perceived as harassment and tried to respond accordingly. This eventually led to a discussion where the majority of participating administrators supported the block. Needless to say, I have nothing to do with this account I was associated with, which has even harassed me here on this project (Quintinense →
Pórokhov →
Ertrinken: harassment
here,
here, and probably
here, to mention just a few).
Trying to be succinct so that you, unfamiliar with the specific Wikipedia in question, can understand the issue, what I can say is that people change, and today I have a completely different view than I did almost two years ago regarding the dynamics of a collaborative editing environment – a view that is constantly evolving, by the way. I always strive to improve as a person and as a user, and I believe my activities not only here and on
Commons, but also on
Wiktionary and Wikisource (in
Portuguese and
French), demonstrate my good faith towards Wikimedia projects.
I am open to further questions if you believe they are necessary to better clarify the issue.
Recently, I came across the essay "
Unblocks are cheap" here on enwiki. I would say it summarizes my opinion regarding unblocking, which apparently is not shared by some administrators on ptwiki. If I were unblocked there today, I certainly would not persist in the behavior that once led to my block. However, it is difficult, being blocked on ptwiki, to convince the administrators there that I am acting in good faith. It is a
catch-22.
For this reason, I try to demonstrate my good faith in other projects. In this process, I confess, I have grown more fond of enwiki than ptwiki, but I still aspire to be unblocked there because my editorial interests (namely Tupi–Guarani languages, especially
Old Tupi; e.g.
1,
2,
3,
4,
5) are more relevant to the Portuguese-speaking world than to the English-speaking one. Hence, if developed there, they would better reach their target audience.
Got it, thanks for the explanation. Aside from the block at ptwiki, your contributions at enwp look good. For what it's worth, I'm all for second chances, so keep up the good work. Done -
Fastily 20:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I am requesting rollback rights so I can revert vandalism faster. I've been using Twinkle and reverting vandalism for more than a month now and I finally feel like it's the time. Around last month I've requested Rollback rights but it got declined because I had limited experience in reverting vandalism. I now have over 200 mainspace edits, reverting for more than a month now, and only
this that might count as edit warring. Having rollback rights would give me access to tools such as
AntiVandal which will help me revert vandalism easier.
Myrealnamm (
💬talk ·
✏️contribs) 21:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh, and yes, constantly warning users about their edits (unless they've vandalized past their fourth or 4im warning, and then I'll go to AIV).
Myrealnamm (
💬talk ·
✏️contribs) 21:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days (
[2]). — MusikBottalk 21:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm concerned by
this complaint on your talk page. Do you still think the edit referenced here should have been reverted? Please explain your reasoning. -
Fastily 02:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh. I'll explain that:
If I recall, what happened was I didn't see their edit summary and I only saw the edits that were blanking content. So, to answer your question, I shouldn't have reverted those edits because there were reasonable explanations for blanking. That was my mistake. Are there any other problems?
So help me understand: if you knew you made a mistake, then why did it take 5 days (during which you ignored the IP) and me calling it out here for you to rectify it? -
Fastily 20:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't, I just realized. Sorry for any confusion that I made.
Myrealnamm (
💬pros ·
✏️cons) 21:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I am a German Wikipedian and have been active on enwiki as 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.
[3]
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)reply
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)reply
Hey, hope you're all doing well. I have created 54 pages so far. And also fighting vandalism by IP and other new users on Resenchanges. But I face problem in using Twinke to undo an article which has been attacked by different IPs. So, one has to face a lot of problems in that. This is why I want rollback rights, thanks with warm regards!
Youknowwhoistheman (
talk) 09:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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 20:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply