No vandalism since final warning. Re-report if this user resumes vandalising. Well, not final warning, but edits since then have not been reverted and I can't tell if they should have been. Daniel Case (talk) 18:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
No vandalism since final warning. Re-report if this user resumes vandalising. Last edit preceded the final warning. Daniel Case (talk) 18:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply an unauthorized bot. Do not block accounts in which the "bot" suffix arises naturally -- DQB (owner / report) 20:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 21:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Attempting to skip filters using multiple similar characters" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 21:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Multiple special characters can be contained in the same phrase, this rule detects when one or more occurs. -- DQB (owner / report) 21:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Low confidence There is low confidence in this filter test, please be careful in blocking. -- DQB (owner / report) 02:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "Used f instead of ph attempting to skip filter: long username without spaces. Violating string: adotcanmakethediphpherence" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 02:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Usernames containing this string are often promotional in nature - check if this is the case -- DQB (owner / report) 14:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "(admin|coordinator|bureaucrat|check *user|developer|moderator|oversight|steward|sysop|committee|staff)" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply a position of authority -- DQB (owner / report) 15:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Note on file Name may imply an unauthorized bot. Do not block accounts in which the "bot" suffix arises naturally -- DQB (owner / report) 15:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
This username matched "(my|your|his|her|their|big|huge)[ -]*(ass|arse|butt|bum|anus|azz|willy)" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 18:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. It's not clear how this is disruptive. There appears to be a language barrier with this person. Further, real names are allowed unless they imply they area person they are not. --Hammersoft (talk) 01:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
@Hammersoft If you search on Google, it throws up... similar vandalism on other wikis (and other websites) all the way back to 2022. – robertsky (talk) 12:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I think this is might be an LTA. Secretlondon (talk) 12:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I can't find any when I search, but yet I do recognise the pattern. Could you send me some links? Secretlondon (talk) 18:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy.. Meme usernames might suggest immaturity, but they're not against policy. Spicy (talk) 15:49, 3 July 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 vandalism – persistent unexplained blanking by multiple anon editors, and a new account. Wikishovel (talk) 17:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – New anon sock is back, just as the last protection expired. Wikishovel (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – New anon socks are back, just as the last protection expired. Wikishovel (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I'm not seeing this. Is there some diff you could point to that would show why we need to raise protection to ECP? Daniel Case (talk) 19:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued LTA vandalism since page protection expired yesterday. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ymblanter (talk) 19:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 20:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent improperly sourced contents addition by a Turkey editor with roving IPs. An admin has handed out IP blocks, but they keep coming back with new IPs. WP:DUCK as same article and same edits, but all from Turkey. Graywalls (talk) 18:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 19:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Likely sock edits and this was protected before. Shadow4dark (talk) 20:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 20:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Non-confirmed users keep adding non-referenced information to the article, most of which turns out to be wrong Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 20:30, 3 July 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.
Recently, I have reverted several edits on pages within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jainism and some in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism. In my view, there are very few active users with rollback rights working on these WikiProjects. I would want to volunteer to be one because of the sheer abuse of pages in these WikiProjects. Several users push their POV on pages in these WikiProjects since they are related to religion. People are adamant on their POV being correct. Mutual rivalry is common on pages in these two projects. I have boldly reverted edits that were clearly vandalism and those that pushed a POV and deleted the other, more-sourced POV on pages like Manatunga, Sivabhuti, Jain temples, Pavagadh, Hathigumpha inscription and some other smaller pages as well. I believe rollback rights would just make this job easier for me because on some pages, I have had to manually remove the content that vandalized the page. Rollback rights would just help me do it faster. RJShashwat (talk) 02:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done You don't need rollback to undo inappropriate edits. 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 00:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
I hereby tender my application for the distinguished role of Rollbacker, having accomplished a notable volume of contributions exceeding 500 edits and consistently demonstrated a steadfast commitment to maintaining the highest standards of content quality through the diligent reversion of vandalized pages. I am confident that my expertise and unwavering dedication render me an exemplary candidate for this position, and I eagerly anticipate the opportunity to further serve the community in this capacity. 2RDD (talk) 10:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
In your own words, would you please explain what vandalism is? Using that explanation, please evaluate whether the following edits are vandalism, and provide an explanation as to why or why not:
Hi, I've been at en wiki since May 2006 with 30,000 edits, around 59 pages created, and around 500 articles on my watchlist. I have used undo until now and most often leave notices on user talk pages, but I could do with rollback where there have been multiple edits by the same user, so that I can more easily and quickly provide an edit summary. Thanks. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 18:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I requested Rollback several months ago and my request was was turned down because I didn't have enough anti-vandalism in my recent editing history. I haven't been very consistently active for personal and family reasons so I don't remember the exact course of events after that. After I was turned down I tried filtering the recent changes feed based on suggestions I saw here. This is the latest example of why that hasn't been working for me:
The vandalism was done in multiple edits and part of it survived my revert [2].
I had figured out a way to warn users after my previous request was turned down but after a few months away I don't remember how I was doing it. I wasn't able to find a way to easily warn the user whose username is not clickable the way it usually is when edits are reverted.
I am not planning to use rollback for anything other than reverting vandalism. Is this process really necessary to get the Rollback privilege? Ben Azura (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
I believe that I meet the requirements for the rollback user right; I've read WP:RBK and WP:REVERT, have enough edits, try my best to consistently warn users, and I've been reviewing recent changes fairly consistently since around May. I think I have a good grasp of Wikipedia's main policies. I'm also currently enrolled in the CVU Academy. I use Twinkle and Ultraviolet but I would love to be able have full access to Huggle and have another tool to be able to stop vandals so I am requesting rollback rights. Thanks :D. GoldRomean (talk) 19:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Requests for permission - account creator
There are no outstanding requests for account creator.
