Wikipedia talk:Rollback policy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 RFR 2 Rollback - Downfalls To Inexperienced Users 3 Concern over "No requirements" 4 Giving the tool to a sub-account

[edit] RFR

Qualified user rollback is timely and politic. It should be the 1-admin, 15-min process used at RFR while it was semi-protected on or about January 9, 2008. Qualified user rollback is the highest reward:risk new feature/policy available for shaping defender:vandal odds. It satisfies users like myself who could be a more useful around the place, but aren't adminish. Thanks in part to the several revert scripts available, interest is high and the qualified user base is substantial. Qualified user rollback diminishes the need to choke off anon edits, and I for one am convinced that anon contributers need to be encouraged to edit to the maximum extent practical. Reduced processing overhead versus scripts is a nice dividend on a fundamentally sound feature. Whatever rollback policy is worked out, a semi-protected WP:RFR should be part of it. -- Paleorthid (talk) 07:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback - Downfalls To Inexperienced Users

Rollback has a very big disadvantage in its easy to game the system particulary when two inexperienced users are fighting a pernicious vandal in that a page can often be left with the real vandals sole intent like changing a name or replacing a word with an obscene one.

The option (to hand out to non-sysops) is on Wikia and I certainly wouldn't hand it out their like candy and most wikia sites are far less objective than Wikipedia. The Undo feature largely went unnoticed when it was introduced to all users, but I think that is something too I would avoid using on wikipedia. Vandalproof and Twinkle work very well for most users on WP and as long we have those RCers then this could eventually blow up in our faces. Bpeps (talk) 11:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Concern over "No requirements"

I admit I'm coming to this discussion late, but I believe we need to require at least one thing of anyone with the rollback option: that they have a valid address in their "Email this user" field.

People make mistakes, or make controversial decisions. If user X makes several controversial rollbacks, but cannot be reached because she/he is off-wiki, this only complicates matters. A valid email would not solve this problem of communication, but it would help. And IMHO, anyone who wants to be taken seriously as a Wikipedia user -- including Admins -- should have email enabled. -- llywrch (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Giving the tool to a sub-account

I, an admin, have been dealing with the uncategorized categories. Edits there have been filling my contrib page, making it harder for me to find other things there. I'm considering using a separate account for that task. When I choose to do it, may I give it the rollback ability? Some of the uncategorized categories are merely vandalized versions of previously categorized categories. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)