This username matched "Used 1 instead of i attempting to skip filter: (..)\1\1\1\1. Violating string: hiiiiiiiiii72" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 11:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file internal repetition -- DQB (owner / report) 11:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Do be aware that some users who use this string may genuinely be autistic - please be careful and make sure you are dealing with a vandal/LTA first -- DQB (owner / report) 16:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file The word troll may imply an intent to disrupt Wikipedia - but that is not certain. Please use discretion to determine if this is a violation or not. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
We need evidence of the thing they are promoting. They've not promoted anything called that. It could be LLM or LLC Agency from Texas?Secretlondon (talk) 14:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Not a violation of the username policy. Stage names and pen names are permitted except when they imply that the editor is a specific living person they are not. Consider filing a report at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 16:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent spam of outlets/scam websites since unprotection. Had a look, would appear that the real website is pellepelle[.]com and they seem to be aware of a spam problem. Also suggest pblocking Mariaanjan1998 or an outright indef. Pahunkat (talk) 16:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: All direct pages related to South Korea and South Korea Tourism should be put in semi-protect or protect ASP, the South Korea goverment wants to use wiki for publicity and break the impartiality bias of wiki[[1]] Meganinja202 (talk) 23:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from IPs. Most new users don't know what guestbooks are anyways. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Repeated IP edits treating website placeholder text as meaningful announcements. Another editor's warning on IP's Talk page was ignored repeatedly. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 04:39, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
Sorry, unregistered users cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. Please create an account in order to request user account permissions.
I've been active at recent changes for more than 3 months to help revertvandalism and report AIV, which is successful. Rollback rights need access to a counter-vandalism tool. HirowoWiki (talk | contribs) 01:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
A few concerns:
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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.
Respectfully, RodRabelo7 (talk) 10:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. If what you say is true, then why haven't you sought to be unblocked at ptwiki? -Fastily 02:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
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.
I hope I have answered your question.
Best regards, RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
Automated comment This user has had 1 request for rollback declined in the past 90 days ([3]). — MusikBottalk 21:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
I didn't, I just realized. Sorry for any confusion that I made. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 21:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC) What I meant was I didn’t assume good faith and check what the IP was referring to. I will assume good faith even more from now to prevent things like this from happening again. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 21:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
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. [4]
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)
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)
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)
I am back requesting rollback rights, after a long wikibreak. I use twinkle for sending the warnings, and either the IRC chat or recent changes to monitor for edits that seem to be needed a review. I practiced using huggle to test how it would suit me (without rollback rights, of course), and I think it would make fixing vandalism much easier. if you check, I have a good track record of notifying after an undo-edit, excluding when another editor beats me to the chase. please notify me of any concerns you have, and I will attempt to respond in a timely manner Megabits000 (talk) 03:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment This user has 150 edits in the mainspace. — MusikBottalk 03:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
(that is a one, not a two. i think im going to start sleeping again)
Request withdrawnMegabits000 (talk) 04:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Requests for permission - account creator
There are no outstanding requests for account creator.
