Wikidata:Requests for permissions/RfRollback/August 2019

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Brror

Brror (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)

I'm a rollbacker in zhwiki. Recently I reverted some vandalism here, and I think it could be faster using rollback. Thanks. Brror (talk) 01:39, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

 Support These mw-undos only go back since 25 July 2019, but her knowledge of the rollback (test with the tag) on zhwiki is sufficient. Even if her rb are episodic, she falls into the second category: "have a strong history of combating vandalism on other projects" and her account is healthy. Good continuation. —Eihel (talk) 02:40, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

 Not done Needs more experience doing it on this project, on which vandalism doesn't necessarily look the same as on other wikis.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:37, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: Maybe we can give him a temporary flag. I think he has a lot of experience in combating vandalism. Regards. --Catherine Laurence 03:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

 Support +1 temporary flag (1 month). She just got more experience, so you can check her rb for that period of time, like a try. In my first intervention, I spoke about the legitimate request of the contributor regarding the policy of obtaining this right. @Jasper Deng, Catherine Laurence: —Eihel (talk) 03:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

And I don't think 416 editors on this project do not mean no experience. Regards. --Catherine Laurence 04:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Well... I promise I will only use it when I can confirm that an edit is a vandalism. --Brror (talk) 05:08, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

 Oppose Only 3 edits undo by this user and 375 edits on July 2019. @Brror: please get more experience on wikidata and involved ant-vandalism work. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Catherine Laurence: I don't see how my concerns would not apply if I gave them a temporary flag. Note that the policy requires familiarity with Wikidata specifically, not just a strong history of combating vandalism elsewhere (which I do agree is present here, to be clear). Thus I must stand by my decision, I'm afraid.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:43, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: In Chinese Wikipedia, this user is a trusted user. And I personally think that combating vandalism in wikidata is much simpler than wikipedia. We can consider giving him seven days of permission. When you find that he is abusing, you can choose to revoke the right immediately. --Catherine Laurence 06:48, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

No ZI Jony We count all the history: she has 39 undos (mw-undo tag and actually in July 2019) and she patrolled 85 pages. —Eihel (talk) 06:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Catherine Laurence: The user, in my opinion, has not yet demonstrated the requisite familiarity with Wikidata (having been here for just 5 days), and the policy makes no provision for temporary rights. While other administrators are free to disagree, I request that my decision be respected unless a substantial consensus is against it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:33, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Eihel as per XTools it's still showing 4 edits. However, I've requested to fix. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 08:56, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello ZI Jony, The "undo" are not the "automated edit". You confuse these two data. Your Maniphest in Phab is contradictory (because wrong). You have the opportunity to remove this task before it is taken care of. The only number 3 or 4 is for the number of page creation. For the summary of automated (and semi-automated) editions, it's here. For you to have a complete vision of the account and without the undos, you can look at her Wikiscan. Wikiscan shows for Wikidata that some reverts, including the tag mw-rollback . Wikipedially. —Eihel (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Warning: the mw-undo tag is only valid for the last 18 months (it's not indicated somewhere, so I specify). —Eihel (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

There is a single_tag issue identified by DannyS712, see this. MusikAnimal would like to fix, but it will take time. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 17:48, 1 August 2019 (UTC)