Hi, TheOperator here. I am applying for rollback because I have a lot of spare time on my hands, and I enjoy cleaning up pages/editing. I do go above and beyond the requirements for the position, and would like to put my literary skills to good use by helping out the community.
Must Have Been Active on the Wiki for 2 Months - I have been active for 2 months. October 6th 2013 is the day I joined.
Must have 200 Article Edits, or 25 cases where you have undone vandalism - I have 572 edits as of typing this. About 350 of the edits were, on articles, and about 50 of them were adding categories/MISC
Must know the wiki naming conventions - Jeff the Killer not Jeff The Killer- The Rake not the rake- Eyeless Jack not eyeless Jack- The Slender Man not The SlenderMan.
Thanks everybody for reading, I hope you consider me for the position, bye!
- Support -
- Neutral -
- Oppose -
Please sign your replies!
Support - Sure. I think this man has the minimal requirements. Maybe a trial period could be done?
Oppose - Well first off, you couldn't even follow all of the directions for putting up this application (okay, the voting template is up now, but there's still stuff you haven't done). Secondly, you don't help that much. Your edits are usually just a couple words and a good percentage of the time you edit incorrectly. Today, I went back through your edits and fixed a bunch of instances where you made content less proper. Also, you don't seem to understand protocol. A few days ago I had to removed the "Flagged for Deletion" tag that you added to a bunch of pastas. Not only that, but a couple had the reason listed as "boring." That's not a reason. I just have a feeling that giving you more responsibility and even the limited ability that rollbackers have would create more work for others. EDITED to add: Looking at your block history, you've had four bans in a little over a month. Two of them are for making unconstructive edits. Another is for a rules violation and "repeated and consistent failure to meet quality standards." If you can't police yourself on quality, why should you be allowed to rollback the work of others? ImGonnaBeThatGuy (talk) 20:24, December 5, 2013 (UTC)
Oppose - You have been a huge hassle for me in the past. Your tendency to post low-quality material is bad enough on its own, but your tendency to persistently repost it after I delete it has lead me to block you on at least one occasion.
You seem to struggle with learning very basic things, like not to add nonexistent categories to pages or not to submit unproofread pages. Your editing conduct may have improved somewhat, but you're going to have to drastically improve to redeem yourself in my eyes. Until I've seen some major change, I cannot trust you with any kind of user right. LOLSKELETONS (talk) 21:28, December 5, 2013 (UTC)
Support - I don't really have a reason to oppose. Socio can be pretty terrible to users on the chat, but does a rollback really need this? And he can definitely change, anyway. I suppose he has already. He has the requirements, doesn't he? We can do with some clean-up. Detonator coil, suitable for a small nuclear device
Oppose - Besides your edit history and what was laid out by IGBTG, I've seen many of your comments and some of your forum postings and I really don't feel so comfortable with you having that responsibility because I don't think you could handle it or otherwise you neglect the duty or abuse it. Noothgrush (talk) 16:11, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Per Nick.
Oppose - Per Skelly and IGBTG. I've seen your work, and it was riddled with mistakes in spelling, grammar, and sentence structure. Maybe try perfecting your writing skills before you ask to take on a job like this.
17:05, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - You seem like a good candidate. 17:21, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Well, despite the valid points that both IGBTG and Skelly have made, I do support. Although I do fear it may be too little too late. Anyway, it is clear that your attitude has SIGNIFICANTLY improved over the last few weeks, and I do trust that you can be consistent with your good new behaviour. Also, it's always nice to see a new Rollback. But seriously, hear my advice. Make constructive edits. Drastically improve the editing performance you once had. And do not abuse this responsibility, or I'll really just be more disappointed than anything that I put my trust into you. For now though, I do support, as I am one of those people who believes everyone deserves a second chance and nobody's reputation is ever fully tarnished :P
- 18:28, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Fair points have been made. Fact is, we could use a rollback. We have lot quite a few recently, and there are still vandals out and about. I fail to see how his actions in chat have ANYTHING to do with the site. I could be the biggest douche ever in chat, but the world's best editor.
Second, you say his correcting skills could use some improvement. Well then teach him instead of snubbing him. That won't help anybody.
Overall, even if some improvement is needed, I think this would be good.
"Never say never, cause limits, like fears, are often just an illusion" 18:45, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - you would make a great rollback 19:21, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Sure Thing dude- Vegeta565
Support - Sure. History shows again and again how nature points up the folly of men. (talk) 21:34, December 6, 2013 (UTC)