Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Denied/December 2008

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 02[edit]

User:Shploom[edit]

I revert any vandalism I see, although I would like a way of being able to actually seek it out, rather than just randomly stumbling upon it. I rely on Wikipedia for many things and wish to give something back to the Wikipedia community for their hard work. Thanks. Shploom (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. Sorry, but you need more experience, both overall and in vandal fighting. Come back in a few months with some more contributions and experience. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:28, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gowilhi[edit]

I am tired of people being afraid to look things up on Wikipedia because they know anyone can vandalise it. Its great that now there is something to get rid of vandalism quicker than ever! Soon I hope everyone will be able to trust Wikipedia for all information needed.(~JDM~) (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but with under 150 edits it's hard to grant. Please use WP:UNDO and reapply in a couple of weeks. Pedro :  Chat  23:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Stevencho[edit]

This is an ingenius feature! I have spent months going to recent changes, then finding vandalism, going to the older page, reverting the vandalism, then saving. But if I were allowed permission to use this rollback feature this would equip me with access to furthur and faster fight vandalism. I thank deeply whoever invented this program. Stevencho (talk) 03:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I appreciate your tenure on WP but rollback is a powerful tool and I'd prefer to see a lot more recent activity specificaly using WP:UNDO as a tool Pedro :  Chat  23:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kirachinmoku[edit]

I would like to use huggle to undo vandalism. I was told to come back in a months time, and its been roughly a month, so here we go again! Kira Chinmoku (talk) 13:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Though ive just looked at the history, apparently its only been a week or so. Gosh, it sure feels like a month! Kira Chinmoku (talk) 13:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Please see here where User:Ioeth told him/her to stop requesting as it was classified as Forum Shopping and to come back in a month, not a week. From,
Limideen 16:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Forum shopping. Continued requests will likely result in the a very long wait to ever get them. -Djsasso (talk) 16:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Paulkappelle[edit]

i would like rollback rights, i've been very active in fighting vandalism. i know im only around with an account for a short while but i have understood the policies for rollback. thanks, Paulkappelle (talk) 15:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I'm sorry, and please don't think your hard work so far is not valued but, you only have a day and a bit and less than 100 edits. A bi more time (a week or so) to demonstrate your accuracy in using WP:UNDO would be a good idea. It would also be helpful to WP:WARN editors when you revert vandalism. Pedro :  Chat  15:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)\\[reply]

User:Emarsee[edit]

I am currently using Twinkle to revert vandalism edits, but Twinkle is currently too slow to revert vandalism edits. I wish to use the Rollback feature to increase the speed of reverting vandalism. Emarsee (Talk • Contribs) 02:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I regret to disappoint you, but this warning from an admin is too recent. Edit-warring is not compatible with rollback permission. Please, apply a month or two later. Ruslik (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:MHLU[edit]

Revert nonproductive language. It's faster than the undo feature. MHLUtalk 19:29, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should not be approved until a good explanation for this is given. I'm not prepared to grant a potentially disruptive tool to someone caught sockpuppeting. Another admin may wish to review this however and see if my WP:AGF has gone AWOL. Pedro :  Chat 
[1] --MHLUtalk 22:05, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest you solicit input from someone in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to grant rollback requests. I'd also note you should reference this page when asking. I'm also puzzled that you indicate on your user page you are semi-retired but still need this tool. Pedro :  Chat  22:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This was caused by opened computer + distrust of the Wikipedia community. I will never trust the Wikipedia with this obscene manner again. MHLUtalk 14:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Don't you think sockpuppeting is jocular. MHLUtalk 19:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done -Djsasso (talk) 16:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 03[edit]

User:T*85[edit]

Have been using twinkle and think I could do a better/faster job with rollback T*85 (talk) 02:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not done. You have less than 500 contributions. You need more experience. Please, apply a month or two later. Ruslik (talk) 08:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Singularity42[edit]

I've been contributing for a while now, mostly on pages related to Canadian law, etc., and some of those pages are prone to vandalism. While it's straightforward enough to revert the occasional piece of vandalism, sometimes a number of vandalising edits take place before I can revert them, making it easier to just rely on an editor who already has the rollback feature. With the rollback feature I will be able to more proactive in protecting articles from vandalism. Singularity42 (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I'm sorry, but even including your acknowledged IP contributions you have barely 100 edits. Your use of WP:UNDO seems okay, but I'd like to see a bit more before granting a relatively powerful tool. Please don't think you work is not valued - it is - and I urge you to carry on and pop back here or ask me directly in a couple of weeks. Pedro :  Chat  21:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 04[edit]

User:45Factoid44[edit]

I now a have some background in Vandalism reverting and would like to use Huggle(a more efficient and functional took than Twinkle in my opinion from what I've read) which requires this privilege as a pre-requisite to use. --User:45Factoid44
 Not done I have concerns (primarily) because of recent concerns with your identification of vandalism and (secondarily) because you have been blocked w/i the last month. Please apply again in a week or two to allow you to demonstrate more clearly that you can identify (and revert) vandalism. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the third or fourth time in a row...Thank you. Considering that you say this every time no matter what my situation has happened to be, I will not be applying again. Huggle isn't worth is the bureaucratic nightmare neccessary for the added conveinance. And for the record if page blanks and blatant gibberish and swearing(what I've reverted most recently with Twinkle) aren't vandalism, then I don't know what is. Good Day.96.5.66.240 (talk) 20:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, the previous denial by User:Pedro was on October 9, before either the block or the concerns I'm referring to (see here). --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My reverts since the block can be defined exactly as stated above with one exception which was rescinded immediately. I also have per my talk page and discussion linked to via talkbacks administrator support in turning over a new leaf since the block. There is no reason with a resume of numerous and increasingly more efficient reverts why this should be such an issue. It's plain as day what I do and do not define as vandalism by that resume and if there were doubt I spelled it out above. 45Factoid44 (talk) 21:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I want a second opinion based on the above and if I am again denied I'd like to request the details of what a path to future approval would look like on my talk page so there would be no questions. Thanks. 45Factoid44 (talk) 21:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 05[edit]

User:Ja_1207[edit]

i want to revert the vandalisms in the Survivor Philippines article when the main editor in there is not present, i do not vandalize, nor make major edits, i just check grammar and spellings in different articles... Ja 1207 (talk) 13:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done While you have been making good contributions, you only have 84 total edits to Wikipedia, and from your contribs, I can see that only 3 of those were using the undo function. I can't, in good conscience, grant such a powerful tool to an editor with so little experience. Please reapply later when you have more. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 14:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
well, ok, thanks anyway...i've came up of a similarly faster way of undoing vandalism...though it doesn't say that i "undid" such edit...--Ja 1207 (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 06[edit]

User:Jake Wartenberg[edit]

I would love to be able to use Huggle! Jake Wartenberg (talk) 19:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Unfortunately, you have less than 250 edits, which is far too low. Your contributions have been fine so far. Keep participating in vandalism fighting and apply again after a week or two. Ruslik (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 07[edit]

User:Fastily[edit]

I mostly tag images which are in violation of Wikipedia's image policies but I also look at the pages delinquent images are linked to and remove any vandalism I see. The rollback feature would be very helpful to me in performing this task. Fastily (talk) 04:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done As far as I can see you do have nearly no experience in reverting vandalism. I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience in this area before reapplying. —αἰτίας •discussion• 12:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
{{tl:Done}} Ruslik (talk) 12:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We reviewed this user's request simultaneously and I had already assigned rollback to them, when I discovered that you had already denied the same request. I think we can live with the fact that wikipedia will have one more rollbacker? Ruslik (talk) 12:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you reviewed this user's last 500 edits back to March 2008, as I did, before you decided on this request? When I did this I found barely a revert of vandalism. Granting rollback to users with little experience is just okay, but granting it to users, which have nearly no experience is not okay. Especially not if the request was declined already. —αἰτίας •discussion• 13:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I reviewed. I checked several reverts that I found and detected no problems. I guess we have different standards. I want to apologies again, but I did not know that you already declined this request. If I had known I would never have given the rollback. However, in my opinion, it would be unfair to remove rollback several minutes after it was granted. Ruslik (talk) 13:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a note, it might be helpful to point to the reverts. I can't say I found any in the last 500 contribs. PeterSymonds (talk) 13:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See [2], [3], [4] and [5]. Ruslik (talk) 13:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)
@PeterSymonds: I reviewed the last 500 edits very carefully and there exactly two reverts of vandalism (on the same article): 05:11, 8 April 2008 and 05:11, 8 April 2008.
@Ruslik0: While there are different standards, there are sill some guidelines/principles. I may cite Wikipedia:Requests for permissions: “Users who do not demonstrate an understanding of what constitutes capable vandalism fighting, either because they have no or little history of doing so, or show a poor ability to discern between good and bad faith edits will not be granted this right.” The two reverts I named above do clearly not constitute such a history. Therefore, if you don't remove rollback yourself, I regret that I will have to bring this to the noticeboard. —αἰτίας •discussion• 13:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
@Ruslik0: Just to correct what you wrote above: Two of the four reverts you name above are evidently not reverts of vandalism ([6], [7]). —αἰτίας •discussion• 13:43, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PeterSymonds asked for examples of reverts in general. As to vandalism you missed this [8]. I will remove rollback if you continue to insist (it was my error after all). However I think this user is able to distinguish vandalism from good-faith edits. So I ask you to reconsider. Ruslik (talk) 13:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Seriously, do you want to argue about whether the user has 2 or 3 reverts of vandalism? I don't want to. Regardless of whether User:Fastily has 2 or 3 reverts of vandalism, both can't constitute sufficient experience to get rollback. —αἰτίας •discussion• 14:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I removed rollback. However I strongly disagree with your interpretation of necessary prerequisites for rollaback. Ruslik (talk) 14:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I don't think this is my interpretation. As long as I have been an admin I always helped out here (Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback) and therefore I think I can say from my experience that it's a rule that users with such a little experience in reverting vandalism are not granted rollback. However, if you don't believe me it would be completely okay with me if you ask for a review at the noticeboard. Best wishes, —αἰτίας •discussion• 14:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 08[edit]

User:hintss[edit]

to use huggle for vandalism reverting Hintss talk 06:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but you recently got blocked for overly enthusiastic use of hot-cat and I can see something similar with Huggle happening. I can't see any evidence of WP:UNDO use - you should use that to demonstrate active vandal fighting for the time being then reapply. Pedro :  Chat  13:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 09[edit]

User:Mythdon[edit]

To fight vandalism more efficently —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 19:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done - I would like to see a more consensus-based approach to your interactions with other users before granting rollback. You selectively edited out a 3RR warning from your talk page just this week, and I see a tendency to "shoot first, ask questions later" which might not be so helpful to the project if you had rollback at this time. I also don't see a whole lot of vandalism fighting in your history to judge by.  Frank  |  talk  20:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 10[edit]

User:Rmhs15[edit]

I'm unbiased and listen to both sides of the problem before making a decision. I believe all Wikipedia articles should be neutral or if it's not possible, mention both sides. I have witnessed vandalism before and all I been able to do is undo, which simply turns into an "undo war". Rmhs15 (talk) 17:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Very few edits so far. And even less that are reverting vandalism (based on edit summaries). Please continue to use undo for a few weeks to build up a history that we can judge you on. And looking further into some edits you might want to familiarize yourself with WP:3RR. -Djsasso (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 11[edit]

User:Vinni3[edit]

Help revert vand. on Club Penguin and on its talk page. Vinni3 (talk) 08:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, I think you need more experience using WP:UNDO on general vandalism. If you're just keeping an eye on one page then the ability to quickly revert bad edits is less important. Perhaps you should try a bit of Recent Changes Patrol and then feel free to reapply. Pedro :  Chat  09:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 12[edit]

User:Chhe[edit]

To be able to quickly remove vandalism from pages I frequently contribute to. Chhe (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done As far as I can see you do have nearly no experience in reverting vandalism. I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience in this area before reapplying. —αἰτίας •discussion• 16:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 13[edit]

User:Wikipedian2[edit]

I have a strong desire to protect the community of Wikipedia, Unfortunatly Vandalism destroys the community and I want to clamp-down on the vandals firmly, effectively, quickly and fairly using Wikipedia's tools and to make a statement that the community is not accepting of Vandals and others that want to "hurt" Wikipedia. I am a volunteer of the Mediation Cabal so I have a clear view of what is vandalism and what is actually a constructive edit or dispute, Thank-you. Wikipedian2 (talk) 20:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done You do have nearly no experience in reverting vandalism (and —with less than 100 contributions— your overall experience on Wikipedia is quite low as well). I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo before reapplying. —αἰτίας •discussion• 20:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 14[edit]

User:Sdkochman[edit]

I would like to help combat vandalism and such in order to make Wikipedia the best encyclopedia it can be! Sdkochman (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but with 26 edits you do neither have enough overall experience on Wikipedia nor enough experience in reverting vandalism. I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience in this area before reapplying. —αἰτίας •discussion• 12:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:fangfufu[edit]

I want to do some more patrolling. I have been doing some spellchecking. I have been using Wikipedia for quite a while now. I want to contribute more. Fangfufu (talk) 03:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly I think you should gain some more experience in reverting vandalism using tools like WP:TWINKLE or WP:UNDO. Secondly you should be more careful when reverting. Therefore I would not grant rollback this time. However, another admin opinion would be appreciated. —αἰτίας •discussion• 12:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I agree, I didn't even notice that when I did it. With rollback permission I probably cause more trouble. I don't think I have reverted that much vandalism anyway. How do I withdraw my application? Fangfufu (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done User withdrew. @Fangfufu, it will now be archived by a bot. Feel free to reapply when you feel more comfortable with reverting. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Clorox[edit]

Vabnalism is all over the place. I see it, then I'm annoyed that I don't have revert rights. I don't feel like manually reverting. This would help a lot. --Clorox (diskussion) 19:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done As far as I can see you do have nearly no experience in reverting vandalism. I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience in this area before reapplying. —αἰτίας •discussion• 19:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:samtar[edit]

So I can use Huggle to revert vandalism Originally posted to example template. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done With 16 edits in the mainspace (and no reverts at all) you do not have enough experience for rollback, sorry. —αἰτίας •discussion• 19:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 15[edit]

User:kilbad[edit]

I actually already have access to the account creation interface (see: http://stable.toolserver.org/acc/users.php?viewuser=334) but do not find myself part of the account creator group under my user rights link (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&limit=1&username=Kilbad); could someone add me to this group as well? kilbad (talk) 04:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done You don't need access to the user-right as there are enough account creator to override anti-spoof and also you aren't hitting the 6 a day per IP limit for creating accounts, which is why the right was originally created. The Helpful One 00:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 16[edit]

User:Zuzzerack[edit]

I have seen many "vandalized pages in my wikipedia "life". I would like to help wikipedia faster by instead of Ctrl + C ing, using the rollback feature. Zuzzerack 21:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 Not done I'm sorry but with under 100 mainspace edits and no real use of WP:UNDO I can't grant this right at the moment. PLease show some evidence of accurate vandal fighting using the undo tool and please re-apply soon. Pedro :  Chat  21:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 17[edit]

User:mr. moose[edit]

I enjoy reverting vandalism, and I am a long time Wikipedia user. Mr. moose (talk) 03:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done With less than 50 edits, we can't really tell if you will effectively use this tool or not. Spend more time editing and reverting vandalism, and come back. Generally, administrators want to see evidence of vandalism "fighting" over the course of hundreds of edits. either way (talk) 03:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 19[edit]

User:Frankie0607[edit]

I want to improve the quality of wikipedia articles fast, and stop vandalism from happening as quickly as possible Frankie 00:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 Not done While the few edits/reverts that you have now look fine, you simply do not have enough of them. I recommend that you continue using the undo button and maybe even try Twinkle, get some more edits (~300) and reapply in a few months. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 00:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dcollins52[edit]

I would like to revert the vandalism and I am avid in edits, and am part of WP:WC Dcollins52Tell me what you think 20:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done As of this time, you only have six edits to articles and no vandal-reverting experience. Practice reverting vandalism with the undo feature for a week or two, and come back then. Good luck. Acalamari 22:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 21[edit]

User:Riotrocket8676[edit]

I love using Wikipedia, and I wish to start using Huggle to fulfill my commitment to the CVU and my commitment to Wikipedia as an editor. Manually editing and old school style is a pain, and I want to devote my time to Wikipedia. Thanks! Riotrocket8676 (talk) 16:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Your account is quite new and you do not have a history of reverting vandalism. We need to know first how you would use it. Please use the undo function for awhile first. You could also try twinkle.—Sandahl 16:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ive already been denied. im really confused. Riotrocket8676 (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 22[edit]

User:Electoral_Collegian[edit]

Recently, I have taken to editing Wikipedia recent revisions and reverting vandalism. The Rollback feature would be a great addition to my anti-vandalism arsenal. Being a rollbacker would save me time in reverting edits, thus allowing me to remove me vandalism quicker. Electoral Collegian talk • contribs 22:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Please be more careful when reverting. — Aitias // discussion 23:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 23[edit]

User:Urbanrenewal[edit]

I wanted to see if I could request rollback priveleges. Although I consider myself primarily an author and editor of articles, I actively monitor a broad universe of finance and company related articles which are sometimes subject to vandalism and other repeated and blatantly unproductive editing. I have been historically reverted these type of edits however as I continue to take more responsibility for articles in this section, it would be preferable if I had the ability to rollback certain edits when appropriate. Please let me know if there is any additional information I can provide. Thanks. |► ϋrbanяenewaℓ • TALK ◄| 04:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. I just don't see that you are doing any vandalism reversion at present. If you do more work in this area, come back again and request it. I should note that you seem to be very active in the business/finance area, well done on that.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:K50 Dude[edit]

I work with Speedy Deletion articles quite a bit, and working with Wikipedia is enjoyable, and I know vandalizing isn't. Someone suggested it to me a while ago, and I would simply like to be able to get rid of vandalism easier instead of putting lots of Speedy Deletion tags up instead (while the article could be good later). K50 Dude ROCKS! 06:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done You currently only have ~300 edits, and none of them are vandalism reverts. I ask that you try using such tools as the undo button or twinkle, then come back in a months time and re-request the flag. Tiptoety talk 06:20, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rhodes416[edit]

Was Previously a rollbacker until semi-retired. Now back and requesting rollback to be flagged back again? --Rhodes 416 11:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done I'm sorry but based on this edit several days ago, I can't justify giving rollback. either way (talk) 12:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pft have it your way then. Rhodes 416 20:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I also didn't know that you look at all contibutes when granting rollback lol. What high standards for a simple tool. Rhodes 416 20:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 24[edit]

User:Noah Salzman[edit]

I do a fair amount of vandal fighting. I'm hoping rollback will be a little faster than Twinkle which can get pokey at times. —Noah 22:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Sorry, but due to this edit rollback can't be granted this time. Please be more careful when reverting vandalism in the future. — Aitias // discussion 23:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 25[edit]

User:Bsadowski1[edit]

I know I don't have enough edits, but I would like to use Huggle to help revert vandalism (I need the rollback flag to use it). I believe that Twinkle is a little slow and looking at recent changes and going to the difference page and selecting revert (vandalism) takes time. I will continue to do what I'm currently doing with looking for pages to revert (people are faster than me). I will use it appropriately. Bsadowski1 (talk) 08:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done With 22 total edits and one revert you don't have enough experience for rollback, sorry. — Aitias // discussion 13:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 27[edit]

User:allmightyduck[edit]

I would like to help Wikipedia by reverting vandalism, the rollback tool would allow me use of HUggle, and also save me time undoing bad edits. Allmightyduck (talk) 03:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done With 6 edits in the mainspace and no reverts at all you do not have enough experience for rollback. I may recommend using tools like Twinkle or undo in order to gain some experience before reapplying. — Aitias // discussion 03:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 31[edit]

User:Until It Sleeps[edit]

I just began using the ACC Interface, and anticipate that I will very soon hit my limit. Until It Sleeps 06:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done You have only made 2 accounts to date, so you're not hitting the limit again. Feel free to request again when you hit the limit. The Helpful One 10:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Denied/December_2008&oldid=1146641543"