Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin

Reviewer

(add request • view requests)
Shortcuts

User:Asheshneupane95

I have been editing Wikipedia since very long time. I believe I have necessary knowledge to edit a Wikipedia article and I try to add summaries of the edit as much as possible so that one can know how the article is being improved. If I'm granted a reviewer permission I assure you that I'll review carefully and try to make Wikipedia better. Thank you! Asheshneupane95 (talk) 03:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. You have made a good number of article edits, which is great. However, I see no evidence that you have any experience at all in detecting and removing vandalism. So, you don't need this tool for the sort of work you have been engaged in. If you want to be a reviewer, get some experience reverting and warning vandals so that you have an established record to base a decision on. Or keep doing what you have been doing, secure in the knowledge that not having the reviewer permission is not preventing you from doing the type of editing you have been previously involved with. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:AddWittyNameHere

I am active in vandal-fighting and this occasionally takes me to pages with pending changes protection, mostly those temporarily under it for vandalism or returning socks, sometimes those long-term PC'ed or otherwise frequently under it. As a result, pages under pending protection end up on my watchlist with some frequency and on more than one occasion, I have noticed an edit that should be accepted well before anyone with reviewer permissions got around to accepting it. As a result, I believe I could make good use of the reviewer permission.
I have rollback permission since slightly over six months ago and despite frequent use of it—mostly through Huggle, through which I have to date made approximately 2070 edits, of which probably about half are reverts (the other half would mostly be talkpage warnings with some AIV and UAA reports mixed in)—I have received no complaints about my use of it, whether in its "pure" form (which I rarely use) or through Huggle.
At the time of this edit, I have been a Wikipedian for slightly over a year with a total of ~4100 edits made, with ~1950-2000 of them in article-space. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 07:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Matheweditking

I have experience in editing new pages . I have also made a large amount of edits against vandalism . I'm very active on wikipedia but I am not free everyday . With my reviewer status I will work against vandalism and unconstructive and incorrect edits against. Hope the wikiteam approves my status appeal. Matheweditking (talk) 13:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. You appear to have very different ideas that most of us regarding what constitutes a "large amount of edits" and being "very active". You have an account for about two weeks and made less than thirty edits. That is not enough of a record for us to even evaluate. But if I were to evaluate it, I would note that you have engaged in apparent vandalism yourself within the last few days, so giving you a tool to review other user's edits to detect vandalism seems like a bad idea. [1] Beeblebrox (talk) 16:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mosfetfaser

I have read and have an understanding of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reviewer#Becoming_a_reviewer Mosfetfaser (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:RGloucester

Now that pending changes protection has been applied to 2014 insurgency in Donbass, I'd like to be able to review IP edits there. I'm heavily involved in the article, and hence think I'm somewhat qualified to be doing that. I could understand if this request was denied on the basis that it is a "single-use" of the user right. If it is possible and appropriate, however, I'd like to be granted it. Please ask if you have any concerns. RGloucester — ☎ 18:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave this open for others to review, but I can't help noticing you were blocked within the last few days via arbitration enforcement for edit warring on that same article. You are certainly qualified in every other way for this user right, but the fact that you only want to use it to keep an eye on an article where it seems you have been at least part of the problem yourself doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Not right now, as you only want this for a single-use, and that single use is for an article that you have had recently had problematic edit with. You could request to have the protections changed from PC1 to SPP if you think that is approriate. — xaosflux Talk 20:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I personally requested pending changes, as I find that to be most appropriate. As far "problematic edits", that was a separate matter that would not affect my ability to judge the difference between helpful edits and vandalism. I've been here quite a while. That one "incident" had to do with grammar and WP:ENGVAR, neither of which have anything to do with the reviewing tool. Regardless, I think that my helpful contributions outweigh that incident. RGloucester — ☎ 20:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(To anyone clerking) Please leave on for three days, if another admin wants to come along and approve this anyway, I'll defer. — xaosflux Talk 22:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you think it is best that I don't have the right, I will withdraw my request. RGloucester — ☎ 01:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Silver gasman

I would like to review and help with the maintenance of articles. Thank you Silver gasman (talk) 20:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. The purpose of this tool is to help keep vandalism out of certain articles. I see no evidence that you have done any such work in the past, and your request does not lead me to believe you really even know what this is or have a need for it. You can probably keep doing what you are doing without it, but if you do some reverting and reporting of vandalism a future request will have a better chance of being accepted. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Universaldistructor

I would like to become a reviewer as i have been helped by wikipedia ll my life and i would like to do something for wikipedia now. I am now qualified in linguistic arts and want to become an active member in helping out wikipedia so that i can approve articles and do the suitable edits Universaldistructor (talk) 13:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Request moved here from Wikipedia talk:Requests for permissions. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 13:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) First, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry but I think you've misunderstood the purpose of this tool. This tool is used to help clean vandalism edits, rather than to "approve articles". You can freely contribute to most of the articles related to linguistic arts without any special permission, and if you meet the autoconfirm threshold, you can even edit the semi-protected ones. Looking forward to your contributions and happy editing! Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 13:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Per notes above, this user permission is not needed for the work you want to do. — xaosflux Talk 15:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Asheshneupane95

I have been editing Wikipedia since very long time. I have gone and have an understanding of [2] I believe I have necessary knowledge in detecting and removing vandalism. If I'm granted a reviewer permission I assure you that I'll help clean vandalism edits, and try to make Wikipedia better. Asheshneupane95 (talk) 03:18, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: - An extraneous header or other inappropriate text was removed from this request. —LucasThoms 03:24, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?&oldid=619271848

Leave a Reply