Smashpedia:Requests for rollback

This page is for requesting that one is granted Rollback powers on SmashWiki.

What is rollback?
Rollback is a one click revert, when you rollback, you revert all of the last contributor's edits. You do not need to confirm this action, so it is good for reverting mass vandalism, e.g. page blankings.

Bureaucrats would probably give rollback to users they've seen reverting a lot; after every major vandalism spree, you almost always see two or three users in RC doing all the work &mdash; giving them a bit of extra tools for that seems like a good plan.

Rollback is not a special user status, it is only a tool to help with reverting vandalism.

You can recognize rollback on RC by the edit summary stored in MediaWiki:Revertpage.

How it works
How reverting a vandal works: They do the same thing, but Rollback is significantly easier and faster.
 * Without rollback rights:
 * 1) Open the history of a vandalized page and wait for history to load
 * 2) find the most recent version before the vandal's edit and go to that version and wait for page to load
 * 3) hit edit at that version and wait for page to load
 * 4) hit save, then move on to do something else in a different window/tab
 * Rollback method
 * 1) Go to the vandal's Contributions page and wait for it to load
 * 2) Ctrl+Click on all the Rollback links on that page, and move on to do something else in a different window/tab.

SCREENSHOT here of contribs page and possibly history page with rollback

Comparison to Undo
Every user has access to (undo) on the revision difference and revision history screens.

Differences:
 * Undo can be attempted on all diffs. Rollback can only be performed against the most recent revision of a page.
 * Undo requires choosing a particular range of revisions to undo. Rollback automatically targets all consecutive revisions performed by the most recent contributor.
 * Undo can undo a range of edits by different users. Rollback only affects an unbroken sequence of edits by the most recent contributor.
 * When performing an undo, additional edits may be performed in the wiki text, and edit summary may be edited. Rollback automatically revert to the version before the current contributor, and the edit summary cannot be altered.
 * Undo requires an additional "Save" click. Rollback is performed as soon as as the "Rollback" link is clicked.
 * When the original article contains a link blacklisted by the spam filter, a regular Undo cannot be saved until the link is removed from the blacklist or added to the whitelist. Rollback can directly "edit" the page back to the original version.

Similarities:
 * All the revisions that are reverted stay in the page history. The Undo/Rollback action effectively act as a new edit on top of the previous edits that brings the article to the state of a prior version.

When to use it:
 * Undo can be used for anything, including content dispute, as long as it doesn't break 1RV. It is expected that the edit summary is manually modified to explain content edits.
 * Rollback should only be used against obvious vandalism. Whenever good-faith can be assumed, rollback should not be used, and instead a manual reversion/undo should be performed. This is because rollback does not allow you to modify the edit summary to explain why you are reverting.

Rules

 * Only self-nominations are allowed.
 * All new nominees should post their name below as a in a level 3 header ( ===Username=== ). Underneath, the user should state why he/she would like to be granted Rollback powers.
 * Users who wish to support, oppose, or comment on the nomination may do so underneath the person requesting Rollback powers.
 * After sufficient time has passed to allow all users who wish to express an opinion the chance to do so, a decision will be made based on community consensus as to whether or not the request will succeed. Once a decision has been made, the discussion will be archived and moved to an appropriate subpage.

Archives

 * KP317
 * Pikamander2
 * Miles.oppenheimer
 * Shadowcrest
 * JtM
 * GalaxiaD
 * Charitwo
 * Toon Ganondorf
 * Defiant Elements
 * Blue Ninjakoopa
 * Smorekingxg456
 * Cheezperson
 * Oxico
 * MarioGalaxy
 * Y462

Gutripper
Yes I know I was a poor contributor at the start, but I really have changed. During my time as administrator of the Smash Arena, I learned a lot about how to get along with other users and about responsibilty. I have always tried to make good edits, and I do revert vandalism as much as I can. Rollback powers would not be wasted on me. I have a decent amount of reverts, and rollback would help me boost that number.

Thank you -- Gutripper Speak if you are worthy  00:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Votes/Comments

 * -Y462 says this person is smart and is working hard for smashwiki, even as we speak this person is editing countless pages. 100% for rollback for Gutripper. No, make it 200%. Signed by 264Y - (Discussion •  W h o Cares? )  05:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - I honestly don't see why not. He's active and makes decent contributions.  Blue Ninjakoopa  Happy Holidays 00:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You go girl! - My infamous remark plays back. 'Tripper deserves Rollback powers. -- Pikabro PIKA  CHU!  00:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Care to say why? Smore King  Hap py Holidays!  13:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Because he's active, mature, helpful and reverts vandalism when he finds it. Reverting isn't something you can just do, like editing. There has to be stuff to revert. Besides Smore, we know that you oppose Gutripper. You don't have to keep commenting on other people's support.  Pikabro PIKA  CHU!  23:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Even if I supported him, I would have given a reason and asked about yours. Smore King  Hap py Holidays!  23:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support:I don't get it...your an awesome user here who is great with handling the vandal wars we have sometimes, yet you don't have rollback already?
 * Sadly, people tend not to think I'm up for it.  Gutripper Speak if you are worthy 


 * Support - My friend, you have come a long way from the ignorant moron who told Fyre she was full of herself. Now you are making decent edits, reverting vandalism (which is the whole idea), are active despite huge commitments, and a mature contributor. I'm proud of your progress and I hope that you get this privelege. You deserve it. -- Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  00:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Why does he deserve it? Your reason doesn't really have anything to do with rollback.SZL (talk) 23:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that he will make a good rollbackr because he makes decent edits, is active, reverts vandalism and is mature. I said that. If you disagree, oppose him. -- Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  23:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Having fun changing your reason to make him seem stupid? Smoreking   2009 is coming!   22:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. "You're active, and you're not a vandal. IMO, those are the only things that matter." --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 01:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Pikamander2^ Mas  ter  man   Happy  Holidays!  !  01:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support He'll do good things with rollback.  Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 01:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Like...?[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T  01:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Revert vandalism. His edits are good in heart, and he will fight vandalism here when he gets the chance.   Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 09:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Reliable and trustworthy, but also Pikamander's (in)famous line. Miles ( talk)   02:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Decent guy. I haven't been here long, but from what I can tell, he is a great asset for fighting vandalism. Why shouldn't he get it''' -- The Steel Avenger  Taste my cold steel!


 * s'port ^^^  Ike's Best Buddy Merry! Christmas!! 
 * Yeah, you kind of need to put a reason. If "^^^" means the vote above yours, he didn't really put a reason either.[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T  01:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I actually did. If you had taken the time to read rather than rushing to get as much reasons to ruin this guy's chances. I have noticed that his has been the only one that you've dissected to question every vot they get.  The Steel Avenger  Taste my cold steel! 
 * Having fun changing your reason to make him seem stupid? You just added for fighting vandalism. You guys are just making SZL seem like an arrogant cock, and trust me, he isn't. Smoreking   2009 is coming!   22:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support As TG said, the old days of Gutripper going up and PAing Fyre are gone, and I believe that Gutripper has matured enough to turn a new page in his Smashwiki profile. He can only help with rollback, and will be very helpful to Smashwiki with rollback.  Fried  beef  1    Ho ho ho!   21:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I hate to be this guy, but you haven't really reverted much, so why would you need Rollback? Smore King  Hap py Holidays!  23:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * He's active, dude. Isn't that what matters? Anyone can revert, it's the activity that counts.  Blue Ninjakoopa  Happy Holidays 23:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I reverted vandalism on Clarinet Hawk's page from the stupid loser called Shit Ass Fuckers. Also, I was checking for his other vandalism, but it had already been taken care of. -- Gutripper Speak if you are worthy  23:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I still think SK shouldn't be so harsh with this oppose. You're also mature, something key to having rollback powers.  Blue Ninjakoopa  Happy Holidays 00:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Notice how I said this guy? That's because somebody(an admin, DE, Shadowcrest, etc.) is going to come by and notice that too, so I just wanted to say it. As with the message I've posted on Gutripper's talk page, he hasn't reverted much, and somebody's going to notice it. And if you think I'm being a dick right now, I'm sorry. Smore King  Hap py Holidays!  00:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Smoreking. Also, if there's not enough vandalism to revert in order for you to run, then wait until there is enough, and then run.[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T  23:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm just gonna say this as a third-party, and not as a pal/good friend/really cool guy that knows Gutripper. If you wait for enough vandalism (and we get plenty), why should he wait till the last minute to run if some vandal like Willy on Wheels come and mess everything up?  There's plenty of vandalism on SW, and we should have more vandal fighters.  Fried  beef  1    Ho ho ho!   01:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Allow me to rephrase. If there's not enough vandalism for you to revert, then wait until you have reverted enough, then run. OK?[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T  21:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Slight Support He got some more reverts, and he's reasonably active.[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T / O  13:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Pikamander & Smoreking. B AL τʀο  [  talk  ] 23:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. I refer to Pikamander's infamous quote. Heh...  MarioGalaxy Talk 03:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Slight Support. Gutripper is reasonably active and seemingly trustworthy. He has more than a handful of reverts; however, it's unclear from his contributions to what extent reverting vandalism is a part of his normal pattern of editing (i.e. it's unclear how dedicated he is to janitorial/cleanup tasks).  Overall, slight support.  –  Defiant Elements   +talk  21:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Support.Gutripper has more than a handful of reverts, which is good enough for me. He is also quite active. Y462 (T • C  • E ) 03:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Support ^Same reason as stated above^ and Gutripper is also an active contributer.-- MỸŠŦЄЯỸ ЊӘҒҒ   TALK  04:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

ParaGoomba348
Okay, here I go again. I have the skill. I am an admin or close to an admin on some wiki's. I've returned.

Votes/Comments

 * Oppose. no real reasons yet, and often throws fits that occasionally include vandalism. Xtrme   Enter   2009  01:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm not a vandal, X. ACOFL 21:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Slight Support Moody, but active. I'm wondering what happened to your other proposal...  Blue  Ninjakoopa  01:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose - Changed my vote because I was still in the mind of "friends deserve rollback". His reverts are low and he's constantly leaving/returning to SW. He's not very active either.  Blue Ninjakoopa Talk 16:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. "You're active, and you're not a vandal. IMO, those are the only things that matter." Just so you know, there is no apostrophe in wikis. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 01:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Slight oppose What DE said last time. Smoreking   2009 is coming!   02:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose. Essentially what I said last time.  A second look at at your contributions revealed that among your last 500 contributions you've only got a single single revert (not including two self-reverts).  There's simply no evidence that you have any need of rollback, nor that you would put it to any use.  –  Defiant Elements   +talk  04:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support He's active, not a vandal, and enthusiastic.  He does get moody, but giving him rollback is safe.  We need more vandal fighters.   Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 05:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support:Per Cheezperson. Besides, I think a VERY popular vandal target should have more vandal-fighting power, don't you think?Silvie (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * SupportHe's a good guy, and what's more, he's a vandal target. ROllback will really help him, and he would do well with it, I'm sure.  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c) 
 * I'm glad TG brought that up. A number of the vandals we get here take the names of "IHAETPARAGOOMBA348" or something like that.   Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 05:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You'll have to excuse me if I don't see how that's relevant. The fact is that, despite those vandals, he hasn't been reverting vandalism, so why should it have any bearing on his RfR?  –  Defiant Elements   +talk  05:48, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with DE (O.o). Cheezperson, we aren't building an army. Basically, you said that anyone can request rollback so long as they're active, which is not the case (though I've said otherwise before).  Blue  Ninjakoopa  06:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * SmashWiki talk:Requests for rollback. SZL's got a point. Smoreking   2009 is coming!   13:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * BNK is against me because he dislikes me. If someone could give me 3 examples of this user starting an edit war in the past month, I will change my vote.   Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 19:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * lol I LOVE you, I just like messing with your head. I'm not saying you shouldn't support him, I'm just saying you should find another reason than "We need more vandal fighters". What is this, Star Wars?  Blue  Ninjakoopa  20:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Slight Support Very active, but more reverts would boost this bid for rollback.  Fried beef  1    Ho ho ho!   20:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Pikamander2. Masterman   20  09  19:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral. The "leaving"/"returning" constantly ruins much of the positive reputation you'd earned in my perspective.  Miles (talk)   03:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Same as SZL.  Gutripper Speak if you are worthy 
 * Oppose He's had three(?) RfR's and kept apparently "leaving SmashWiki forever" only to return a few days later. He can be a tad moody, as stated above, and he lacks many reverts. And no, having vandals named after him does not mean he deserves rollback, he's never even on when the vandals are.[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T / O  13:44, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Fried beef1
From the pressuring of many of my friends on this wiki, I am running for rollback now. This would be a benefit, due to the fact that I am very active, made many vandal reverts to my name, and that I have not made any major disputes that will spark edit wars. This would be the farthest I shall attempt to achieve due to the fact that I see no point in me getting admin rights. Check this out if you still have doubts. Cheers!

Votes/Comments

 * Strong Support It's about time, Beef! Honestly, he's an outstanding contributor, a great friend, and is very active. Not to mention how kind he is. Go for it!  Blue  Ninjakoopa  03:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. That he's a "great friend" and "really kind" is really neither here nor there. That said, he is active, and a brief glance at his contributions reveals that he's got more than a handful of reverts, which is good enough for me.  –  Defiant Elements   +talk  04:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That was just plain unnecessary, dude. Not everything needs to benefit you. Think about other people for once.  Blue  Ninjakoopa  04:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh? I'm confused.  The only time I mentioned myself in my vote is when I said that the candidate meets my standards, which is essentially synonymous with my vote of "support."  If you're referring to my debunking of your vote, I disagree. While it wasn't strictly necessary in the sense that it wasn't related to the reasoning behind my own vote, far too many of the votes on requests for rollback (and on requests for adminship, for that matter) feature the same kind of specious reasoning, and I think it's more than appropriate (necessary, even) to address that fact.  That said, your vote also featured some legitimate reasoning, but my point stands.  –  Defiant Elements   +talk  04:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * By "suspicious resoning" you mean votes such as Pikabro's "You Go Girl" or other invalid reasons?  Blue  Ninjakoopa  04:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The word is "specious" (yes, I'm pedantic, get over it), which is to say, yes, since specious reasons, by definition, are false (i.e. invalid) reasons. –  Defiant Elements   +talk  04:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * SmashWiki talk:Requests for rollback. Yeah. Smoreking   2009 is coming!   13:48, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The word is Support. He's an excellent contributor, and I've seen some decent vandal fighting. Good for you.  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  05:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Support I knew you'd take my advice eventually. Active, good at heart, what else is there to say?   Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 05:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * About time. Support.  The Steel Avenger  Taste my cold steel! 
 * Reasons would help... Smoreking   2009 is coming!   14:50, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Everything I could say has been said.  The Steel Avenger  Taste my cold steel! 


 * SUPPORT! You have a bunch of reverts. Finally you ran! Smoreking   2009 is coming!   13:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You go, guy! You would make for an awesome rollback. Para Goomba 348 19:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Um, why? Smoreking   2009 is coming!   20:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Anyone who's been paying attention should see that Friedbeef would be another valued addition to our anti-vandal team. Miles ( talk)   17:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Everyone above me. Masterman   20  09  20:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You go girl You're a great user and you'd do well with rollback. And can Paragoomba348 please avoid ripping off my saying...  Pikabro PIKA  CHU!  05:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Why...? (Note:I am friends with FriedBeef, and I supported him, so don't say I'm trying to steer you away from Support.) Smoreking (T)  (c)  13:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Isn't it obvious? How many reasons can there possibly be? I would get sick of reading the same thing over and over. But, anyway, FriedBeef1 has a heap of reverts and is active. In the next generation of admins, I think we have one. Support.  Gutripper Speak if you are worthy 
 * Thank you, Gutripper, but I will not be going for admin rights.  Fried beef  1    1/26/09!   00:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * We'll see. :)  Gutripper Speak if you are worthy 


 * Support. "You're active, and you're not a vandal. IMO, those are the only things that matter." --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 00:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Support An amazing contributor, and he has high activity and a good number of reverts.[[Image:SZL.png|45px]] UP / T / O  13:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)