Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback/Archives/2017/April/Notdone

User:CopernicusAD[change source]

CopernicusAD (talk · contribs · count) (assign permissions)

I'm a rollbacker on en.wikipedia. Though I might not have enough edits on this wiki, I can make wikipedia a better place. See-[1] CopernicusAD (talk) 16:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - While you have the right on en.wiki, we do like seeing more activity on this wiki, prior to issuing additional rights. Please re-apply, once you have more edit history here -- Enfcer (talk) 03:38, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:L3X1[change source]

L3X1 (talk · contribs · count) (assign permissions)

Am a vandal cop on the en.wiki with 6k edits, would like it for when patrolling here, thanks L3X1 (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done -- not yet. You've made only three edits here. This Wikipedia does some things differently, and some of those things can be mistaken for vandalism if you're not familiar with them. I have a list of some of those things at User:Auntof6/Things I would like Wikipedia editors to know#Things we do here that might be different from other Wikis. Take a look at that list and do some more work here before asking again. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you. L3X1 (talk) 02:10, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Trunzep[change source]

Trunzep (talk · contribs · count) (assign permissions)

I've made lots of edits reverting vandalism and I have learnt from the previous mistakes I have made. I'll use the feature to strengthen and develop Simple Wikipedia. Purple Lamborghini¹⁷³⁸ 11:29, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user just marked three correct stub articles for deletion as nonsense. Seems pretty careless to me... --87.6.122.193 (talk) 11:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my talk page for more about this tagging discussion.--Crasstun (talk | contributions) 11:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where instead of acknowledging their mistake, Trunzep has made a pompous and unexplained demand for their edits to be left alone. --87.6.122.193 (talk) 11:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. I'm concerned that in the last couple of hours you've made this incorrect revert (and didn't warn/discuss with the user who made it) and also incorrectly reverted vandalism here. Considering these are 2 of the 16 edits you've made in the last few hours, I'm not granting rollback at this time. Only (talk) 23:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mahn the Derek edit was reverted by accident. The discussing one I am a High School student and I have limited time for that. Actually, I warn users in order. Please reconsider your decision. Regards --Purple Lamborghini¹⁷³⁸ 23:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you have limited time to discuss/warn users, then you should definitely not be using the rollback tool. Only (talk) 00:08, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Only, both on the concerns about inappropriate reverts and on leaving warnings. If you are reverting vandalism, whether by using rollback or in some other way, you need to be leaving warning messages for the users whose changes you revert. If you use Twinkle, it's very quick to leave a warning. If you don't leave warnings, the other users won't know what was wrong with their changes, and the admins won't be able to take action If they have multiple bad edits. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]