Open main menu

Request for global (un)block

Historic continuing falsification by two accounts and a static home-IPaddie

Status:    Done

and by cu on nl-wiki confirmed sockpuppet

and added the static home-ip addie:

Belong to a dutch youngster that perpetuates in a very dangerous kind of vandalism, namely presenting real looking but often wrong information on historic articles on nl-wiki en-wiki de-wiki pl-wiki it-wiki fr-wiki, no-wiki and sv-wiki. It is gross scale falsification of data, adding real looking but wrong "facts"

nonsense for the most part removed and each time placed back by him - glatisant and mvdleeuw went to wiki-fr to remove it

Thank you - this is the worst kind of vandalism there is and efforts to deal with it on nl-wiki only lead to blocks getting longer and longer (currently six months), blocking of the sockpuppet but he simply when blocked continues with IP-addie and accounts on other wiki-versions. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 12:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Both accounts are globally locked, IP globally blocked. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 12:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

88.249.208.186

I oppose this ban I have been given. Why? Well because it is not my fault that non-members can edit the pages. Is it so hard to force people to be members in order to be able to edit? No. Then you should do it. I, here am just representing the average person, but you fellows, you who control this system are failing to control us. Shame on you. Oh by the way, I love wikipedia I watch it every day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.249.208.186 (talk) 01:10, 5 February 2010

You're not globally blocked because you're not logged-in, you're globally blocked because instead of making useful, positive contributions, you made nonsense edits[1]. We have people not logged-in who make useful contributions quite often, so we're not going to prevent them from contributing simply because you can't control your urges. Kylu 14:41, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I have been blocked globally

Does that mean I have lost web access to the whole planet? Is that fair? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 96.61.45.141 (talk) — Dferg (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

The number of pages Wikimedia hosts probably number in the mere hundreds of millions. That's an insignificant percentage of the Internet, let alone the entire world. J.delanoygabsadds 02:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Unblock for Mr. man account globaly(I considerate discrimination)

We did not let me on any project, I think this is discrimination. Sometimes I feel like you Advertising. I know I can find all sorts of clones, but not here not leave me alone? Come on, 3 months, but 6? Please all hard to unlock my ip even to contribute as anonymous. They are my last power, please do not discriminated against me so. --79.118.29.196 14:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You've just been on here making clones and trying to nominate long-standing pages for deletion, among other things. This does not make for a very persuasive case for removing your block. You would be correct, however, in determining that we do discriminate (see definition 1) against people who abusively use clones on WMF projects. I've added a local six month block on the IP due to local disruption. Others are welcome, as always, to comment on the action. Kylu 17:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

unblock

I request unblock of IP 193.206.126.34 because it's part of 50 computers in a national library in Italy where thousands different persons connect every day: 1 year global block is by user:M7 for insults but from solo guy in single language. I would like edit for support your project but it's impossible because this IP is static in all computers here in national library; evidence: see http://toolserver.org/~chm/whois.php?ip=193.206.126.34

This is a long history not only on it.wiki, but also over en.wiki and simple.wiki. Canvassing, insulting, SP creation, impersonating, POV pushing, etc. See IVO/Pio/Darius/Tamburellista/ etc. Ah, http://toolserver.org/~luxo/contributions/contributions.php?user=193.206.126.34 this link is much more interesting than a mere whois. For admins, see also http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribui%C3%A7%C3%B5es_eliminadas/193.206.126.34 --M/ 17:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Insulting, harassment, massive sockpuppeting, systematic violation of the second wiki's pillar. On it.wiki I saw just two or three constructive edits from the ip. Maybe library's sysadmin can disallow the vandal to edit on wiki but that's not a problem of us. --Vituzzu 18:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

82.227.172.214

IP used to make vandalism on several wikis. Has a great list of blocks: fr, es, pt, tg, th, ja, ko, pl, uk, it. Was already globally blocked once and is back now.Teles (talk / pt-wiki talk) 05:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

  Done, the IP is remarked Spam/Abuse see http://toolserver.org/~chm/whois.php?ip=82.227.172.214 --Shizhao 09:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for global (un)lock and (un)hiding

Spambots

Status:    Done

Please lock the hereby listed accounts as confirmed sockpuppets of the UGG spambot account:

Thank you, — Dferg (talk) 12:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

  Done es:Drini 13:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Mr. man

Status:    Not done

Hello! Please, i request unblock for global block of Mr. man. I promise that in future I will become quiet and I will not do that. I wish Mr. unlock global account man. Thank you.--79.118.29.196 12:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Why should we believe what you say? You continued socking even after being blocked in the Romanian wikis. Pmlineditor  12:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Do not lie sir. I swear this time. I was wrong and I admit fault. Vărog if you sir, unlock me. Thank you beautiful.--79.118.29.196 12:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Maye we can give him a chance, the last one. I have seen doing good job at Romanian Wikinews in the last week. I don't know. --Romihaitza 12:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Please... I speake the sysop job. Thank you. --79.118.29.196 12:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Didn't he have a last chance already?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:44, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, he did? I was only told that he was blocked now and what for. I didn't know that he was granted a last chance. -Romihaitza 15:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
He did have a lot of chances at the Romanian Wikipedia and continued doing the wrong job. I am having daily discussions with him via IM and I do not notice any improvement of his thinking. Of course, despite: “I swear that I quench”.
Personally, I support young contributors, but I also oppose the ones who do not show good faith. Minisarm 17:47, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Now, I strongly oppose. User:Sirty is a clone of User:Mr. man and User:Ervin C. -- he told me this evening (via IM) he translated Stewards/elections 2010/Guidelines/ro and I was very surprised about that. He lied once again and he does not deserve any tolerance. Minisarm 18:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Please kinly! No block me! Please! Thank you! --Sirtytalk 18:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
This request is   Not done. The user has a history of sockpuppeting and has not shown willingness to change, as evidenced above.--Shanel 12:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
For the record, after having this unblock request rejected here, he came lurking at Romanian Wikitravel (yes, I know it's not part of the officially supported Wikimedia projects). Basically, the same modus operandi: created a Mr. Man account, a couple of administrative edits, and got an email from him asking for adminship. Once he got blocked, he wrote a message on the talk page of the same IP begging to behave... but no, I've seen his actions back at ro.wiki. --Vlad 15:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Another clone: User:Taill.--Minisarm 19:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Requests for global permissions

Global rollback for Jyothis

I work in swmt and in fighting vandalism and I am a regular in #cvn-sw. I am an admin in ml wikipedia, wikisource and BC in wikibooks. Thanks!--Jyothis 14:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Support - Well-known and active user. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Hm, although I was going to support that request I was unluckily not really convinced when looking at the stats of luxo's tool which mostly showed creations of user pages. Could you please add some examples of your crosswiki work? Thanks, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
DerHexer, some of the edits (like page tags) may have already been deleted. Here are some that I could find - here, here, here. --Jyothis 23:21, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
  • IIRC, I have seen Jyothis constructively working for SWMT for some time already, so IMHO he should be granted the status, although maybe he will not need it anyway, since he runs for steward... Best regards, --geimfyglið :^╡ 14:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Agreed, active and trustworthy. Sj+ help translate 04:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  • yes, user has good experience and cross-wiki activity. —Innv {ru-ws} 05:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support - Can use the tools and I trust him with them. --Erwin 08:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I trust him with this. Pmlineditor  12:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Although he doesn't have many cross-wiki contribs, his recent actions persuaded me he's the right candidate for the GR tool. --Mercy 13:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I support this fully. Has my trust. Razorflame 14:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I only see user pages being created, hardly any reverts. Sorry, but that's all I can see of the global contribs. --Bsadowski1 22:35, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I see plenty of reverts, but they're also active in cross-wiki matters, even if it's not shown in their contributions. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
  Promoted[2] Kylu 14:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for the trust and support. --Jyothis 14:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Seewolf

Since a big deal of my cross-wiki edits are manual rollbacks of vandal edits, global rollback would be useful. --Harald Krichel 17:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

  •   ok, but of course not insulting/private user names as you know. —DerHexer (Talk) 17:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Endorse - Active and unlikely to misuse the tool. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support trusted Wikimedian. --Church of emacs talk 18:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   jup looks fine. --თოგო (D) 18:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support - trustworthy user who surely knows how to use the tool. -Barras talk 19:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support --WizardOfOz talk 19:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   ok, no problems. —Innv {ru-ws} 01:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support - Sj+ help translate 07:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Sure Pmlineditor  11:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  • whynot sure James (T C) 20:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Done, rollback granted. --Erwin 09:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Egmontaz

I'm a bit new to SWMT so any objection due do that fact will be understood in advance, but I'd like to make my request now so I can do the job better and if I fail to know what and when should I do. I normally idle at cvn-sw for some time daily and enjoy countervandalism and being helpful. I've done 2-3 huge mistakes at the beginning in an alphabet I didn't understand (and hopefully managed to revert it myself immediately and apologize) and since then I am very cautious when dealing with any non latin, greek or cyrillic alphabet. If in doubt I prefer contacting a local admin. I have a pretty good experience of patrolling at my home wiki (el.wiki) where I'm patrolling rcs for over ten months and have reverted a considerable amount of vandalism and pure experimentation. --Egmontaz talk 11:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

  • Agreed, he doesn't have several months of experience, but I have seen him doing good work at SWMT. I   endorse this request for GR. Pmlineditor  10:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Plenty of experience and cross-wiki edits. –Juliancolton | Talk 20:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • whynot seen him doing good work and would be valuable with the tools. James (T C) 20:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support, his SWMT work seems to be fine --Church of emacs talk 20:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support Why not... --WizardOfOz talk 20:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • An active and experienced user willing to help. --Mercy 20:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, wny not. —Innv {ru-ws} 05:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Sure. --Erwin 10:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Acknowledging his SWMT Work --Jyothis 15:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Little experience Corruptcopper 15:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Corruptcopper, Egmontaz is not running for steward, his contributions show well, that he knows how to revert. On the other hand Your comments now look to me like a little childish reaction on the comments You got in Your voting, I hope I am wrong. To Egmontaz, his crosswiki-contributions are recent but seem fine, thanks for helping, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 15:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Of course. Glad to have him aboard. Wutsje 17:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Would do good work. Support Razorflame 18:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support, although I wondered why you have no local flags. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support and   Done--Nick1915 - all you want 08:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you all, I'll try hard not to let you down. --Egmontaℨ 08:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Hercule

Hello,

For a reason I ignore, Crochet.david has vandalized my user page on many wikis (like hr.wikipedia for exemple). I would need the rollback flag to revert this. If possible, I request the flag immediatly, for a short time (time to revert, I'll inform steward when finish so it can be removed for waiting the end of this consultation).

As I'm member of SWMT and making many global patrols, the global revert flag could be usefull, so I also request permanent flag.

Regards

--Hercule 13:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

It seems that Crochet.david has been running a malfunctioning bot. The reasons for editing your user page are not clear to me, but in any case it is not plain vandalism. I suggest just asking him to repair the errors. Temporary access to global rollback will not be granted. --Erwin 14:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Ok, he corrected this. So this request is a normal request of global revert flag. --Hercule 15:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Hello Hercule, how about contacting Crochet.david and asking him to revert these edits with his bot (should be unproblematic and easier than revert them by hand), I can't see much involvement in SWMT-work by Your part, please feel free to provide links if You feel I am wrong, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 15:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • @ Birdy: Looks like he is not interested to answer. --WizardOfOz talk 17:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
hello,
I contacted Crochet and he corrected his errors.
about my cross-wiki activity, most of my actions are tagging pages to delete because reverts are fastidious. I also help with sosop status as on wuu.wikipedia, ace.wikipedia and, in the past, on co.wikibooks
Regards
-Hercule 20:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I'd say "not done" and close that request, okay? —DerHexer (Talk) 09:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
yes, please!--Nick1915 - all you want 10:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
As it seem nobody agree my request I don't oppose. Even if I don't understand why. --Hercule 10:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Mainly for what you've asked: you requested a global access (temporarily) just for reverting a page on hr.wiki and we don't give a temporary global flag; for a permanent right, I second birdy' view: imho you have not enough activity in SWMT' matters--Nick1915 - all you want 11:51, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I have few reverts in SWMT works because I don't have rollback button... So I prefer just taging the pages to delete.
I'm trusted enough to be sysop on 2 small wikipedias where I don't speak the language. I think it's enough to be sure I won't abuse this tool.
Really I don't understand why I can't be granted this functionality (temporary request is withdrawed). But I don't oppose it his close as not done, because I see I won't be given the status.
--Hercule 17:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I've never said that you're not enough trusted or inactive, but I've noted that your cross-wiki edits are mostly fossilized before the end of 2009... if you'll demonstrate a renewed engagement, I'll support you next time! --Nick1915 - all you want 17:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I think it's strange to need to show a current need to have a permanent status. Maybe will I make more crosswiki patrols, but it would be easier if I had the tools.
I close the request, because my goal is not to change the rules. --Hercule 18:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for MisterWiki

Hi. I'm working on #cvn-sw and this feature would be very useful against vandalism in the SW's. I would appreciate if you give it to me. Thanks in advance. --MisterWiki 21:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

  •   No. You're blocked on three big wikis (namely commons, es and en). There is surely a reason why you were blocked there. Furthermore, I don't see real xwiki activity. Please first use the undo button for a certain amount of time. -Barras talk 21:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
  • OK. I'll wait some more time... --MisterWiki 21:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   no and   Not done withdrawal--Nick1915 - all you want 09:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Dalibor Bosits

Hi, i'm reverting vandalism for some time now, some of my first global reverts are dated from 2008, i could probably be more efficient with the rollback tool :). For info, my irc nick is Haley. --Dalibor Bosits © 17:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

  •   Support It was on the time. --WizardOfOz talk 17:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Reverting vandalism/spam cross-wiki for a long time already & trusted user. Thanks for helping, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I know this user personally, and he has never made a mistake with the rollback tool. I trust him with the global rollback tool. Razorflame 18:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Voting for giving the access to tools is not a place for demonstration of a friendship. Friendship is yours personal thing. Global wiki-tools are serious thing. Kubura 23:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - He wasn't patrolling regularly on his home wiki, although he's the admin there. And now he wants to have this. Why'll we give him the tools that he won't be using? [3] (I've ran this tool on Feb 11, 2010, 0:34 CET. According to that tool, in last 30 days on hr.wiki he made alltogether 12 patrollings. These are his recent edits on hr.wiki hr:special:contributions/Dalibor_Bosits (total), [4] (main namespace: with 250 contributions per page, his "oldest" is almost 15 months ago, Nov 5 2008!, see the page bottom) (viewed Feb 11 2010 in 0:41 CET). Laaknor's tool maybe isn't so prompt, but please see his patrollog [5]. This day (Feb 10, when he applied) he made a bunch of patrolls. But before? See the frequent and long gaps. Very inactive user. Kubura 23:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
    Kubura, it is all about the crosswiki activity of the user, not his activity on his home wiki. Try to look at the bigger picture. Razorflame 23:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Kubura this is not Homewiki, and has nothing to do with hr.wiki. :) Your should first create an global account and then try to do what he has done globaly... oh sorry i forgot de.wiki and your CW edits. Dalibor is a trusted user, has made lot of anti-vandal edits, is a bot-owner, his bot has made a lot of edits across the wikies, he is daily few hours on cvn-sw... Thats what we are looking for: active members of SWMT! His patrollog on hr.wiki haven´t any weight for his good global work :). Just amusing such opposes from a user without any global anti-vandalism contributions! --WizardOfOz talk 18:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
    • WizardOfOz, stick to the topic. Dalibor Bosits is the topic here, not me. FYI, I won't create global account, at least not now. I have my reasons. My work is not less worthy because of that. Regarding de.wiki, I'm glad that you've mentioned that. Users shold now how they (on de.wiki) treat the opponents and opposer's arguments. Behaviour in style: "block the opponent, and then it'll be my way". Anybody interested can see that. That way all other opponents are intimidated. True is that that group of usurpators cannot push their personal attitudes on other wiki. projects, because they're beaten with arguments. Arguments that they blatantly ignore on de.wiki. Please see [6]. See section "Schämlich" and "Massaker von Škabrnja". Kubura 23:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support Great work, sufficiently trustworthy, would benefit from the tool. Lauryn Ashby (d) 00:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

*  Oppose Corruptcopper 13:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC):

  •   Support After having looked through the contribs across all of the wikimedia wikis I feel that this user will be suitable for global rollback, my appologies just having a bad day in my real off wiki life. Corruptcopper 14:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  • This isn't a vote. Please explain your objection. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support I trust him with the tool; seems good. Pmlineditor  14:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Support Seen him doing a good job on my home wikis. --Mercy 19:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   yes per above-Nick1915 - all you want 20:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
  • support, per Lauryn. —Innv {ru-ws} 09:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   supportDerHexer (Talk) 09:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
  Done --FiliP ██ 00:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Global IP block exempt for Liangent

I have ipblock-exempt on enwiki, zhwiki and commonswiki to bypass the firewall. I don't want to apply for more individually so I want this global right for convenience. Thanks. --Liangent 07:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

A global IP block exempt is not equivalent to multiple local ones. A global IP block exempt only allows bypassing of global blocks and not of local blocks. I'm afraid you will have to keep applying for local exempts when necessary. --Erwin 08:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I want a global torunblocked. --Liangent 08:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Like I said: there is no such thing. You will have to request local exempts. This request simply can not be done. --Erwin 09:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
According to Special:GlobalGroupPermissions/global-ipblock-exempt, users in this global group can have the right "torunblocked" on all wikis. This is what I'm talking about. --Liangent 06:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Aye, if it is torunblocked that you need then I think I'd support this as a reasonable request from an established user. It does appear that you would get that, of course you would not bypass local blocks but most wikis do not place those on tor nodes. James (T C) 07:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
  Done - as James says, a reasonable request by a user in good standing. - Andre Engels 15:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. --Liangent 14:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Dusti

I have 7,000+ edits on en.wp and have had rollback for quite some time. I understand from some talks with others that Global Rollback is held under a slightly tighter leash than local rollback rights. I want to point out the following (and make a request or two): 1. Please take into account that I am a respected member of the Meta community and have NEVER been blocked for misuse of my editing privileges. There is a block on my account at en.wp however that was due to some misunderstandings of my School Administration at the the time and I was actually unblocked once I graduated High School. Rollback was removed from my account on en.wp once for a misunderstanding between a Sysop and myself, however after some discussion we both reached an agreement and it was returned. The reason for this request is that I am wishing to branch out of my little bubble at en.wp as a vandal fighter and work on other Meta Projects. I understand all of the extra little bits that come with Global Rollback, and I will use with extreme caution and care. I respect the tools, and only use when actually necessary (Like they should always be treated). I am simply asking for a vote of confidence and am willing to be scrutinize here. I was recently introduced to the SWMT and plan on working with them regardless of the outcome of this request. Thanks for the consideration and feel free to ask any questions. I will answer ASAP. Dusti 07:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't really see a true x-wiki need for global rollback. Where are the x-wiki undos? It's not about trust, it's about need. Sorry, but I,personally, oppose fr33kman t - c 07:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
In response, I don't necessarily "need" global rollback, I agree 100%. Rollback is never actually needed by any users, other than Sysops generally. It is more about allowing a user to become more effective in a battle against Vandalism. I feel, generally, that Rollback (with the exception of Global due to additional bits being granted) should be given to a user who wishes to fight Vandalism and has a good track record in their edit history. Global Rollback being put aside because of suppressredirect and how you can mark edits you rollback as bot edits. This opens up the array for abuse, however, what I am trying to say is I feel that I have proven myself trustworthy enough through my long term use on en.wp with rollback and no block history. Dusti 07:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, but global rollback is a very wide right. It is generally given to those who have quite a few undos on quite a few different wikis. You have tended to stick to a few wikis; wikis that you could just ask for rollback on, and likely get it. I have no issues in trusting you, but I just don't see the need. In other words, I don't see you actively reverting vandalism on lots of different wikis. fr33kman t - c 07:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I respect that, and thank you for bringing that up. I agree that I have a few wikis that I do stick to, but as I said above, I am branching out, going into territory. I appreciate you stating that you have no issue trusting me, and that does mean a lot to me. What I am simply stating is that this will make my work a LOT more easier than the undo. What I can do is hit rollback, revert a ton of vandalism in seconds, rather than going through and hitting undo, undo, undo. In that time saved, I can be looking for a sysop to block a vandal. I feel that the biggest concerns with Global Rollback are: "Does this user know what they are doing?"; "Can this user benefit from this tool?"; "Have they DEMONSTRATED their knowledge of the Rollback function?"; and more importantly, "Can they be trusted?". I feel that I have met all of those concerns. Dusti 07:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - This appears to be an attempt to gain yet more flags (see enwiki rights log). Also, per Fr33kman. Tiptoety talk 08:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I really don't appreciate the comment "To gain more flags". If you look at the rights log, you will see that I was granted Rollback, I went into account creation and needed that flag. I went on a wikibreak so the ACC flag was removed (rightfully so), and upon returning, I asked for the AC flag to be reposted as I started back up at ACC. How is that trying to gain more flags? I really dont appreciate your bad faith remark Tiptoety. Dusti 08:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I already spoke to the stewards about it. Someone else has the username Dusti on dewikibooks and nowiki. I was told that its okay for now (those wont be included in the global permissions but just to make a note of it, and try to get usurped at some point if those accounts do not edit). I apologize for failing to mention this. Dusti 09:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the info. Pmlineditor  09:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • No crosswiki activity = no need for GR. GR is given out to users who are active in cw antivandalism. Trust is important, definitely; however GR is not for each and every "trusted" user. Suggest helping out at SWMT.   Oppose atm. Pmlineditor  09:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Comment: more than 98,5% of your edits in en-wiki. Please add cw-activity and send new request later. Regards, —Innv {ru-ws} 00:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 01:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Not done no consensus--Nick1915 - all you want 08:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Global rollback for Hosiryuhosi

I participated in SWMT recently. When I was going to perform undo by Wiki that did not become "autoconfirmed user" when I worked on SWMT, CAPTCHA operated by having included URL in an object of undo and was not able to perform undo efficiently. In addition, undo does not have good efficiency when the same user edited it than twice. Because I wanted to work on SWMT efficiently, I applied for Global rollback.Hosiryuhosi 17:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't see you as having Rollback anywhere, is that correct? Are you aware of its functions/use/policy? Are you also aware of the additional bits handed with Global Rollback? Dusti 17:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, but with only 1200 edits on a few projects, I don't see a need for GR at the moment. I suggest becoming more steadily active at SWMT for a while. Good work so far! –Juliancolton | Talk 17:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
You only got voiced in IRC today - I'd suggest gathering a history of good work before such a request.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I understood it. I apply again after acquiring experience more. Thank you. Hosiryuhosi 18:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
  Comment: you have rollbacks in some wikis, but your main activity in ja-wikis. Please save your cw-activity and submit new request later. Regards, —Innv {ru-ws} 00:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Mike--Nick1915 - all you want 08:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
  • No, doesn't have enough experience yet --Church of emacs talk · contrib 13:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above. I'd like to see more experience fighting vandalism on various projects first. Sorry, FASTILY (TALK) 05:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
  •   Not done, withdrawn and no consensus. —DerHexer (Talk) 14:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)