Wikidata:Requests for permissions/RfRollback/February 2023
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.
Jobu0101
Jobu0101 (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
As you can see I'm part of the Wikidata project already for about a decade and came recently across some incidences where the rollbacker right would be very helpful. One of my current projects is documented in User:Jobu0101/Verwaltungsaufbau Deutschlands where I deal with the administrative structure of Germany. Unfortunately, in the last months a few IPs (I guess it is all the time the same person) deletes claims I create. A discussion of this can be found in Wikidata:Project chat#Big rollback needed for German municipalities. Having the rollbacker right would help me to rollback the current and future attacks. --Jobu0101 (talk) 01:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- granted: trusted user, over 200k edits in Wikidata and about 100k in dewiki. @Jobu0101: I don't know this German topic, but I recommend not to rush rollbacking these German municipalities-related edits. Unless there is consensus or clear goal Estopedist1 (talk) 07:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
The Great Wikipedian
The Great Wikipedian (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hello, my name is The Great Wikipedian, and I would like to receive rollback rights.
Qualifications:
I am an autoconfirmed user that mostly reverts edits that add clearly false, rude, or copyrighted statements to entries. I have a decent amount of experience with my 150 high quality edits. I have also been thanked twice for my contributions of removing false/rude information. Lastly, an administrator told me that I should apply for rollbacker, so here I am.
The Need:
Recently, a user was rapidly adding false information, inappropriate images, and swear words to the page Q673. I tried to undo their edits as fast as I could, but there was a problem. They could vandalize faster than I could revert it. This has also happened to me with this user too. Both times it took an Administrator over 10 minutes to block the user. (which is fine, they are just volunteers:) However, this would be a lot easier if I had rollback. Thank you for your consideration. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 13:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- To Add to my qualifications, I recently used the IP Information tool to find two IPs vandalizing the same page. They have been blocked. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Discussion:
- While I don't generally oppose, I wonder why you did get blocked on a few Wikipedias. Care to explain? --Dorades (talk) 13:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. Rather new user (190 edits). Blocked indefinitely in enwiki. Edit warring with LTAs in Wikidata, e.g. at runes (Q82996) Estopedist1 (talk) 14:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)- Responses:
- I wonder why you did get blocked on a few Wikipedias. Care to explain? - Yes, well, this is a very long explanation, but I will give it. I edit from my school, Liberty Center Schools. At our school, we all use chromebooks and edit from the same IP. When a CU checked me, they saw that I was editing from the same IP on the same browser as another (blocked) user in our school. (no idea who) This is why I am blocked on ENWiki. That is the only other Wiki I have edited on, but when I logged in to other wikis they blocked me for cross wiki abuse. I am currently in the process of appealing through UTRS, and It appears I will be unblocked soon. Thank you!
- Rather new user (190 edits). - Yeah, I am somewhat new, but I have been here for a few weeks and know about when to use rollback and about WikiData policies. (See my qualifications)
- Edit warring with LTAs in Wikidata - Edit warring has exceptions (see WD:Edit Warring) including reverting vandalism is not edit warring. I was reverting vandalism, which is not edit warring. And the user is now blocked for vandalism. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 15:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- @The Great Wikipedian: structural comments are really good to read, thanks. But about enwiki block, then you used alternative user account (en:User:Cbauman12), which is not allowed. And where I can see pending unblocking request in enwiki? Estopedist1 (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: I never used the account (en:User:Cbauman12), and the unblock request is to prove this. You can see the pending request in this category under UTRS unblocks. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 16:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- @The Great Wikipedian: structural comments are really good to read, thanks. But about enwiki block, then you used alternative user account (en:User:Cbauman12), which is not allowed. And where I can see pending unblocking request in enwiki? Estopedist1 (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- I am not a fan of reverting persistent vandalism again and again and... Instead the user/IP should be reported at WD:AN and after they are blocked everything can be reverted. So if a user could vandalize faster than [you] could revert, you probably should not revert but report the user instead. --Ameisenigel (talk) 17:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, and I did report the user. However, If our goal is to protect Wikidata, why should we intentionally let vandalism and false information sit out for readers to read. This makes no sense to me and I stand by reverting the vandalism/false information. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 18:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- Of course we need to revert the vandalism, but sometimes it just makes sense to do it after the vandal has been blocked, if he is inserting the vandalism multiple times. --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, and I did report the user. However, If our goal is to protect Wikidata, why should we intentionally let vandalism and false information sit out for readers to read. This makes no sense to me and I stand by reverting the vandalism/false information. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 18:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- I will say this user has made good deletion nominations and reports of vandalous activity. maybe we should wait for the enwiki ban to be lifted but honestly rollbacker privs is a pretty low bar in my mind. BrokenSegue (talk) 07:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. (see my comment below) Rollback rights are very helpful, but not a big right, as you said. I also don't see a problem with giving me a small right like Rollbacker. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 12:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Comment by candidate:
- 1. Thank you @BrokenSegue for commenting: This user has made good deletion nominations and reports of vandalous activity. It means a lot.
- 2. In regards to edit warring with vandals as @Ameisenigel and @Estopedist1 pointed out, I will try not to edit war with vandals again, just wait till they are blocked, then revert. Thank you for teaching me this.
- 3. In regards to the English Wikipedia block, I want to restate that I am completely unrelated to the user. I don't want false accusations of sockpuppetry from another user, on a different Wiki to affect my run for Rollback here on WikiData.
- 4. I have read all the rules/policies surrounding rollback(and Wikidata) and will submit to them. If I fail to do this, I understand that my rollback rights need to be taken away.
- I hope this sums everything up well. If I receive rollback, I will use it well. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 12:44, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Votes:
On holduntil enwiki block is removed Estopedist1 (talk) 12:53, 1 February 2023 (UTC)- The ENWiki block is unrelated to me and Wikidata and may take months to resolve. Rollback is something I would need and use now. Please read my above comment. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 13:17, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support After the reply above --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for considering my points. The Great Wikipedian (talk) 13:16, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support After the reply above --Ameisenigel (talk) 12:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- I striked through my negative votes, but currently I am Neutral due to rather newbie status (first edits started on 30 Jan 2023)--Estopedist1 (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: Okay, Thanks. I completely understand. If there are no negative votes, just 2 positive and 1 neutral, can my request be approved by you or can you tell another admin to? The Great Wikipedian (talk) 19:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- wow, user:The Great Wikipedian tricked us really well. Per Category:Wikidata sockpuppets of Cbauman12 Estopedist1 (talk) 05:48, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- Honestly I'm still not convinced the right thing happened here. Cbauman12 had like 12 edits to enwiki. Most of the rest of the sock accounts have zero edits. The explanation of using a share IP sounds plausible to me. Whatever the case they are clearly a kid so it makes sense that they made some mistakes. But they did good things and could've been an asset to the community. Hopefully they'll come back when they're a little more mature. BrokenSegue (talk) 06:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- @BrokenSegue: Again, simply put, their explanation is inadequate to explain all the evidence I found.—Jasper Deng (talk) 14:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- Honestly I'm still not convinced the right thing happened here. Cbauman12 had like 12 edits to enwiki. Most of the rest of the sock accounts have zero edits. The explanation of using a share IP sounds plausible to me. Whatever the case they are clearly a kid so it makes sense that they made some mistakes. But they did good things and could've been an asset to the community. Hopefully they'll come back when they're a little more mature. BrokenSegue (talk) 06:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- wow, user:The Great Wikipedian tricked us really well. Per Category:Wikidata sockpuppets of Cbauman12 Estopedist1 (talk) 05:48, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: Okay, Thanks. I completely understand. If there are no negative votes, just 2 positive and 1 neutral, can my request be approved by you or can you tell another admin to? The Great Wikipedian (talk) 19:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- I striked through my negative votes, but currently I am Neutral due to rather newbie status (first edits started on 30 Jan 2023)--Estopedist1 (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not done I am outright declining this request not only because you are too new to the project but also because you are hat collecting (see Wikipedia:Hat collecting (Q20950429)). Wikidata isn't a video game any more than Wikipedia and other projects (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an MMORPG (Q11247649)). I also view your conduct as too immature for any advanced rights. In addition, as a CheckUser, I am concerned about the cross-wiki blocks you have for sockpuppetry.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Red-tailed hawk
Red-tailed hawk (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hello! I'm Red-tailed hawk. I'm an admin on the Uyghur Wikipedia, a small wiki, though I am most active on Wikimedia Commons and the English Wikipedia. I've been recently getting involved in cross-wiki antivandalism work using SWViewer after getting involved with cross-wiki anti-abuse work and edit filters on the English Wikipedia. I am familiar with Wikidata's rollback policy, and I would like to have the rollbacker right on this project in order to better combat abuse and revert vandalism that occurs here. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Granted: trusted user, ugwiki administrator, already rollbacker in enwiki Estopedist1 (talk) 06:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
The Last X
The Last X (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hello there! I am a very active user on Wikidata. I do a lot of vandalism reverts and reports to the WD:AN, which is why I am requesting Rollback. I believe that with Rollback, I could help the Wiki be vandalism-free. I currently use TwinkleGlobal's Rollback, but I would like real Rollback so I can use the tool SWViewer. Thanks, -The Last X. The Last X (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Comment it is quite amazing that within six days such experiences have acquired. @The Last X. I hope that this is not some kind of rights winning game like happened in recent case: Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/RfRollback/February_2023#The_Great_Wikipedian Estopedist1 (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: - I not trying to "win" rights. I am trying to get rid of vandalism, and want to use the tool SWViewer to do so. The tool SWViewer requires Rollback. This is the only reason I am applying. In regard to my experience, before creating an account I edited as an IP, which is why I am familier with WikiData. The Last X (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
{{Done|Granted}}
: really dedicated against vandalism in Wikidata. More power to your elbow, @The Last X! Estopedist1 (talk) 06:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)- @Estopedist1: Unfortunately, your hunch was correct; they are the exact same user. Marking the request as Not done for archiving purposes.--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:10, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: - I not trying to "win" rights. I am trying to get rid of vandalism, and want to use the tool SWViewer to do so. The tool SWViewer requires Rollback. This is the only reason I am applying. In regard to my experience, before creating an account I edited as an IP, which is why I am familier with WikiData. The Last X (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)