Insufficient recent activity to warrant a block. The account has been mostly inactive for multiple years, and no reason to block it unless it continues disruption. Also, please make sure to warn the account if it resumes. The Night Watch(talk) 05:40, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
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)
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 disruptive editing – Persistent edit warring between multiple accounts and IPs. Air on White (talk) 09:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: there have been numerous edits coming from anonymous or unsigned accounts, which often include biased tone with an unreliable sources WP:DE. Currently, the page is unprotected, allowing anyone to make edits without restrictions. Hence, it is crucial to ensure the protection of this page. Newpicarchive (talk) 10:01, 28 May 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 10:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Almost all edits to this page are getting reverted. This is nothing but disruption. Please semi-protect indefinitely. (I wrote this page years ago about a thousand-year old events, and there isn't much new information that needs to be added. Most edits are just WP:POV edits.). Kautilya3 (talk) 12:51, 28 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.
Hello everyone.
I kindly ask you if it is possible to make a specific section of the "Fortune Global 500" page non-editable and specifically "Breakdown by country/territory".
I kindly ask you to read the talk page of the page.
In the last month there have been continuous attempts at editing CONTRARY to the fundamental principles of Wikipedia.
Specifically, the SOURCE cited "Global 500". Fortunes. Retrieved October 23, 2023" EXPLICITLY indicates that, for 2023, the United States is first with 136 companies and China is second with 135 companies.
Some editors continue to change the figure to indicate that China has 142 companies. In fact, they add 7 Taiwanese companies to the 135 companies in China.
However, this is contrary to what is reported in the SOURCE and allows a POLITICALLY MOTIVATED SUBJECTIVE POINT OF VIEW to prevail.
Taiwan is considered a territory and therefore its companies should not be added to those of China.
I therefore ask you to leave the data for 136 companies for the United States and 135 for China unchanged and ineditable.
This request is driven only by technical considerations, relating to RESPECT for the principles of Wikipedia and not political ones.
In fact, Taiwan is not a de jure country.
@Chrisques5: Protection is page-level and cannot be done for specific sections. Even if this were possible, you requested this on the page for requesting edits for the page. You want to request protection at WP:RFPP/I. —Jéské Courianov^_^vthreadscritiques 23:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
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've been patrolling recent changes for almost a year now, and the rollback right would mean I could start using Huggle for that, as I've been meaning to do for a while now. Sneezless (talk) (contribs) 21:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done I noticed you make a handful of edits, and then drop off for months at a time. While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd like to see you spend at least a month consistently patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are always warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 06:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips. I'm already using Redwarn for warnings, but did you notice any particular times when I didn't properly warn users? I've been using the ProblemWelcome and WelcomeIP templates instead fairly often, since most editors I'd otherwise use a warning template on are new editors. Sneezless (talk) (contribs) 13:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Sure, here's a few from the past month: 1, 2, 3 -Fastily 05:46, 26 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)
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 ([2]). — 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?
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. [3]
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)
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)
Requests for permission - account creator
There are no outstanding requests for account creator.
