Ed-Tech Press, also known as "Scientific E-Resources, is a Wikipedia mirror. They print copies of books that are just Wikipedia articles. Per WP:CIRCULAR, we should never cite them in articles. Unfortunately, these books are listed in Google Books, and there's no obvious warning on them. I've inadvertently cited them twice recently. While I really appreciate reversions like this one, it seems like this is an area where an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Could we please have an abuse filter set up for this string:

|publisher=Scientific e-Resources

which should catch most {{cite book}} uses? If it would be great if it could produce a warning message like "Ed-Tech Press and Scientific E-Resources are Wikipedia mirrors. They are not reliable sources and should not be cited in articles per WP:CIRCULAR." I think that the 'warn' setting should be sufficient. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you making this request - this publisher is just the worst. There is deliberately no attempt to identify the nature of the copied materials; it's just a straight up scam. There are three things I usually search for: "Ed-Tech Press", "Scientific e-Resources" (which is typically displayed when a google books link is resolved in a template), and the URL of "edtechpress.co.uk". I do agree with the warning being sufficient as I don't recall this ever being used on-wiki by a bad-faith actor. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. Possible filter code for catching this could be:

page_namespace == 0 &
!contains_any(user_groups "bot", "sysop", "extendedconfirmed") & (
   mirrors := "(?:\|publisher\s*\=\s*(?:(?:[Ss]cientific [Ee]\s?-\s?[Rr]esources)|(?:Ed\s?-\s?[Tt]ech [Pp]ress)))|(?:\|url\s*\=\s*edtechpress\.co\.uk)"
   added_lines irlike mirrors &
   !(removed_lines irlike mirrors)
)

I would create a log-only filter at first, and if it does well, ramp it up to warn. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I understand that starting as a long-only filter is common, and I've no objection. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing, Kuru, and PharyngealImplosive7: If there is consensus for deprecation, it could just be added to 869 (hist · log), which might be better than a new filter just for this. Most likely Deferred to WP:RSN. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 18:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@EggRoll97, I don't think that it should be handled through the RSP system. It's not a case of "deprecated at RSN"; instead, it's a case of "banned by policy" (Wikipedia:Verifiability#Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it being the most relevant policy). The deprecation message wouldn't be appropriate. Instead, I think it needs a message that is specific to Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Requires more information Do you have any diffs to go off of by chance for this? It would be helpful to see this being added in a diff to be able to test a possible filter on one. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 06:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure. Look at this one. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• Task: Reduce Redirect vandalism in Project namespace
• Reason: After my discussion with Suffusion of Yellow and seeing this search I noticed a consistent amount of vandalism (average of around 2-2.5 edits per day for the last 2 months), some get picked up by Filter 1151 but most aren't.
• Diffs: See search above.
• Code:The code for this I've been working on is at: /Projectspace Redirect blanking

Nobody (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Testing at 1318. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 19:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@EggRoll97 Made an update to the code. Nobody (talk) 11:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Implemented, still in testing. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 15:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@EggRoll97 Refined it a bit more. Nobody (talk) 05:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 15:05, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Update: No false positives since the last change. Nobody (talk) 06:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@EggRoll97 Eliminated another false positive. Please update the filter. Thanks Nobody (talk) 05:42, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Added. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 15:21, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Task: This filter would tag a diff if it removes the {{BLP-PROD}} tag without adding any new references, possibly distinguished if the edit does not add a <ref> </ref> tag.
• Reason: This filter would be useful in RCP and in the page history in general for abuse management, so editors can identify when the {{BLP-PROD}} tag is removed without adding references.
• Diffs: Many, most diffs of this kind are deleted along with the page, but I believe it is pretty self-explanitory

Lordseriouspig 11:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Convenience link: WP:BLPPROD. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Requires more information The use-case seems fine, as far as I can tell, but I'll need some diffs for these or at least pages to go off of. I looked through your prod log but all the removals of those tags that I can see are valid and have references in the article. Also likely would result in a lot of false positives if one was to remove the tag before adding the references, or to add the references and then remove the tag in another edit. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 06:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• Task: Test for a no-insertion one-line removal of / ?[Bb]lack ?/. Tag or only log articlespace edits by non-autoconfirmed editors.
• Reason: Some instances of this subtle POVPUSH may remain undetected for a long time. An EF can produce a list to review.
• Diffs: [1] [2]

142.113.140.146 (talk) 01:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Deferred to WP:RFPP, WP:AIV, and similar. The diffs provided are a singular IP, but that can be dealt with via blocks and protection. Generally the disruption should be somewhat widespread for a filter to have much effect here. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 06:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Here are more UCR diffs, all by different IPs: [3] [4] [5] [6].

Those IPs did not edit more than 2 articles so WP:AIV would say "insufficiently warned". In the [7] that I caught, the page was over a year old so would not normally qualify for WP:RFPP, and it was undetected for half a month. Those edits were reverted by multiple editors with long edit histories. This hit-and-run disruption is attempting to hide the alteration of POV. A tagging EF will have the effect of revealing the full extent of the damage. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 06:33, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• Task: Can something be done about the vandalism from changing IPs like the examples below with a recognizable pattern especially with their edit summaries?
• Reason: Continued vandalism from changing IPs
• Diffs: Some examples:
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2001:16A4:251:1C67:4DB7:6E66:2C56:70ED
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/46.184.122.159
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/46.184.120.17
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/46.184.122.114
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A02:88D:8030:53B:7CF9:FC9:D756:FBCE
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2001:16A4:23E:6404:F52B:32AC:7B9C:ABF3
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A02:88D:8030:53B:C03:E4D9:82F9:FE8F

Tehonk (talk) 05:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Tehonk, I'm not a regular here, but I'm pretty sure you are on the wrong page. For starters, have a look at WP:Vandalism#How to respond to vandalism. The § For beginners section on that page has a useful checklist: Assess, Revert, Warn, Watch, Report. Bottom line, if it really is vandalism, revert it and warn them at their talk page, using escalating template warnings, starting with {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}, then -2, -3, -4 and if it's still happening after a 4-level warning, you can go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism to report it. By the way, you can search all of their contributions for all three with a CIDR-range search: Special:Contributions/46.184.120.17/22; that will pick up all three IPs (as well as some unrelated stragglers from 2 years ago). HTH, Mathglot (talk) 09:34, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

There's no use in sending warnings to expired/old IPs Tehonk (talk) 17:29, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• Task: This filter would tag a diff it detects as purely intended to obfuscate the page preview (for example, a user adding a period . after an article's short description template), and send a warning after the behaviour is repeated.
• Reason: Diffs that add a period after the short description template entirely replace the contents of that article's page preview with the character, which makes the browsing experience more difficult for readers. I imagine that there are other methods of obfuscating the page preview, but this is the only one I know of.

This kind of vandalism is subtle, and difficult to catch at the moment. On one vandalism spree using this method, no existing edit filters flagged the IP's edits as suspicious until they began conducting mass-scale reverts.

• Diffs: Note that all of the pages targeted in this attack were on the main page at the time, and some of them weren't caught until over 40 minutes after the edit was made. See examples one, two, and three.

SupremeLordBagel (talk to me) 00:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• Godwyn247pp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – Continued disruptive OR edits. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

  Declined. This is not vandalism. It's a newbie editor making newbie mistakes. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

• 190.100.120.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Same edits continuing to disrupt the same page. Moved from this IP to 186.174.54.113. Please block both. Both are also based in Chile.  ${\displaystyle Jayhawker6}$【💬】 01:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
• 68.197.17.138 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – vandalism after final warning. MathXplore (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Backlog CLEAN!

• NyanThousand (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Requesting so I can help streamline small edits like typos, general maintenance, and so on. NyanThousand (talk) 12:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

• Sir MemeGod (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I will use AWB to tag galaxy-related (and other astronomical objects) with the appropriate talk page banners (WP:ASTRONOMICAL OBJECTS), and will use it to tag "Weather of _____" (and other weather articles) with the corresponding task force talk page banner tags. I can also use it for typos on long tornado articles, which tend to have misspellings in them. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 05:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

• Isaac Rabinovitch (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Hoping it will make nitpicky edit somewhat less tedious. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

• Manicjedi (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I lost this permission somewhat recently due to inactivity, but intend to resume using some of this tools in reviewing changes. Thank you. —Manicjedi (talk) (contribs)  12:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had their access to AutoWikiBrowser automatically revoked ([8]). — MusikBot ^talk 13:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• Global Donald (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I'm requesting AWB access because I create and aim to create a lot of pages, and manually adding links to the pages I created can take a lot of time. I already used it on Wikia a few years ago. My use of the tool might include other small fixes as well in the future if I see other struggles with the pages I created. --Global Donald (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC) Global Donald (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Anthony2106 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Reason for requesting autowikibrowser rights: I'm sick of making "find replace" edits, like this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this Anthony2106 (talk) 08:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Some of those edits left capital letters in the middle of sentences where there should be lower-case letters and changed WP:ENGVAR spellings. This edit did not change the rendered page, so it would be an invalid edit to make with AWB. Making such changes at scale is probably not a good idea. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• HRShami (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I want to reduce the massive backlog. I have been looking at the new pages patrol feed sporadically for the past two months and the backlog keeps increasing. I want to play a part in reviewing the articles. HRShami (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

• Xegma (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Hello there, I am interested tn helping out in new page reviewing as there are very large articles backlog and love to do so. Xegma(talk) 07:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Question, though I am not an administrator, I see that you have published accepted AFC submissions, even if they lack citations or are in need of some fixing. And some have orange banners on them. Why is this? — 48JCL 01:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@48JCL: As they should. The standard at acceptance at AfC is that the article would probably survive an AfD. Nothing more. Declining a draft for surmountable problems like a lack of citations or pretty much anything covered by a cleanup banner is inappropriate. – Joe (talk) 08:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I spot checked the 4 most recent accepts and they had lots of citations at time of acceptance. Feel free to link to the specific draft accepts you are concerned with. A complete lack of citations is a valid draftification reason and valid AFC decline reason, but I am not seeing that here. A major lack of citations such as entire paragraphs missing a citation (and also not supported by any WP:GENREFs) could be a valid decline reason (WP:V is policy after all). But it may also be reasonable to accept a draft that is mostly cited and just missing a couple citations, such as Draft:Norah Fulcher. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Could anyone please review my request ? It is already couple of days. Xegma(talk) 18:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Iwaqarhashmi (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I would like to request new page reviewer rights to help review newly-created articles and lower the backlog. I have accepted lots of drafts at AFC and participated in many AfDs with deep discussions to exhibit my knowledge of notability, as I was advised previously. Thanks! Waqar💬 19:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for new page reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([9]). — MusikBot ^talk 20:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I see you found the IP at AfC who submits soundtrack articles (41 accepts of soundtracks it looks like). I'm glad to see you've started to accept drafts at AfC, instead of just declining (a ratio of 1 accepted to 348 declined at the time of the last application). I do still have concerns about your experience at AFD, given that, of your last 40 votes, all but 2 of them were pile on votes where the result had basically already been decided based on the number of votes for the conclusion you chose. You accepted one piece of criticism from me, your lack of accepts at AfC, but you do still appear to be pile on voting. Honestly, I'm not sold, but I'll leave it up to someone else whether they want to grant you a trial or not. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I understand your points, I've made lots of contributions recently, and I hope I will be granted a trial to demonstrate my willingness to contribute positively. Best, Waqar💬 07:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to say that I've been working so hard for the past couple of months. I've made so many contributions to AFCs, I've reviewed over 1,160 articles (accepts: 138, declines: 670, and the rest either rejected or speedily deleted) so far. I'm also actively patrolling the new page feed, adding maintenance tags, and tagging articles for speedy deletion like A3, A7, and G11. I've drafted more than 200 articles that either lacked reliable sources or needed additional sources. In the AFD discussions, I voted on more than 150 pages. Without considering the no consensus results, 98.6% of my AfD's were matches, and even though the votes were assumed to be piles on voting, most of my recent votes were very detailed and specific and weren't pointing towards anyone, but I will accept their valuable advice and try my best to make improvements at AFDs as well. Having said that, I believe that all those contributions exhibit my hard work and dedication. I hope I get a chance to at least prove myself by patrolling new pages, and I would be more than happy to help with the backlog. Thanks for your time and consideration. Waqar💬 18:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• Florificapis (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I was given a trial for a few months and would like to renew my permissions. I have made good use of my permissions by fixing new pages and applying CSD whenever necessary. Florificapis (talk) 22:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user was granted temporary new page reviewer rights by Joe Roe (expires 00:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)). — MusikBot ^talk 22:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

• Rusty Cat (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I'd like to help out with the backlog at NPP. My previous experience includes many nominations of drafts under G1, G2, and G3, and a couple instances of article ratings and XfD participation. Rusty 🐈 03:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

• Pygos (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I would like to become a new page patrol to accelerate the page creation process, improve the quality of Wikipedia pages, and reduce the huge current backlog. I have a good understanding of what a qualified article would look like, and created around four articles like Organothallium Chemistry. I have also done various other editing, including merging Carbohydrate Chemistry into Carbohydrate. Pygos (talk) 06:35, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

• Aszx5000 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I was given a temporary NPP right that expired at the start of August here. I am willing to keep patrolling if my NPP work has been considered useful. thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC) Aszx5000 (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• AlexBobCharles (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I have been monitoring recent changes on pages for a while now AlexBobCharles (talk) 08:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

• Adriazeri (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I’ve been editing for a little while now, I’ve requested page protection and reverted edits which are not appropriate on various pages. I am pretty devoted to editing on Wikipedia and I have an extensive Watchlist so I think this permission would be useful. Adriazeri (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• Bexaendos (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I am well familiar with wikipedia policies. And in my spare time I am always on duty to combat any vandalism or violation of wikipedia policies. This right will serve me well. Thank you! Bexaendos (talk) 14:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• MSouvik01 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I've been monitoring the pages in Wikipedia for a long time. I try my best to review new changes, revert any vandalism and provide authenticity. This permission will help me review the pages more fluently. MSouvik01 (talk) 21:14, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• TheNuggeteer (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

Did all the requirements and patrolled the recent changes page for a rotating number of days. My account also meets all the requirements. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 09:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

 Automated comment This user has had 1 request for pending changes reviewer declined in the past 90 days ([10]). — MusikBot ^talk 09:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• Win8x (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I have been monitoring Recent Changes for around a month now and would like to use Huggle to help me do it, but this requires rollback. I just want to admit it here: at the start I did not always warn users but I do warn all the time now. Either way, thank you! win8x (talking | spying) 01:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Great, thanks for confirming. Could you please now go do some RC patrol in which you demonstrate how you will be notifying all users? -Fastily 03:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, but that's what I was already doing. My last like... 200/300 edits are all warned. But sure, I will continue to do so. Thanks! win8x (talking | spying) 04:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I see reverts from just a few days ago in which you failed to notify the editor (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Like I said, please now go do some RC patrol in which you demonstrate how you will be notifying all users. A few dozen reverts would be ideal. Confirm below once you've done this and I will re-review. Thanks, Fastily 04:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Done! Just to clarify, is a welcome message such as Template:Welcome-delete an acceptable alternative to Template:Uw-delete1, for example (if it's a new user)? Thanks. win8x (talking | spying) 23:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes that's fine. I did see you failed to notify an editor after making this revert today. Why? -Fastily 00:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I reverted myself back immediately after. I thought about it, and thought that the edit the user made was actually valid, just with formatting mistakes. So after reverting them, I reverted myself, and then fixed the formatting error. win8x (talking | spying) 00:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for the clarification.  Done -Fastily 23:21, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Wburrow (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I have been patrolling recent changes since late June and believe access to more advanced tools like Huggle would enhance my anti-vandalism work. I understand the importance of warning users after every revert and believe I have been consistent in doing so. Thanks for your consideration. Wburrow (talk) 17:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I see that you are failing to consistently warn editors when you revert their edits (e.g. 1, 2, 3). Why? It's important to leave a notification for every revert you make, particularly if the edit was made in good faith. Are you aware that we have tools such as Twinkle or Ultraviolet that make this extremely easy? -Fastily 22:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

For the edits you picked, I explained the reasoning for the revert in my edit summary instead of using a warning template on their Talk page because I felt that approach would come across as friendlier/less hostile. My understanding was that reverting required either a talk page warning or an explanatory edit summary, but it seems that understanding was mistaken, and I can commit to leaving a talk page notification for all future reverts. Wburrow (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Please ensure that you are always leaving warnings. I can't stress enough the importance of not biting the newcomers; if you find yourself reverting good faith edits, then it's especially important to notify the editor. 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 00:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I absolutely understand and agree with the importance of not biting the newcomers and promise to leave a notification or warning for every single revert. Wburrow (talk) 13:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming,  Done -Fastily 23:21, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• रोहित साव27 (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I'm Rohit Shaw27 and I'm here to request for rollbackers right because I believe to myself I'm eligible for these privileges and I understand privileges releated polices how it work on here and I'm also play my part as a rollbackers on other Wikipedia projects. Now I also like to work here. Thanks रोहित^Talk_with_me 11:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done You were brought to ANI in March 2024 for making too many mistakes while doing RC patrol. You then took a 5 month break, only resuming editing within the past week. Please spend a few months establishing a track record of constructive contributions before requesting advanced permissions. Also, please ensure that you are always warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 20:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• PerspicazHistorian (t · th · c · del · cross-wiki · SUL · edit counter · pages created (xtools · sigma) · non-automated edits · BLP edits · undos · manual reverts · rollbacks · logs ^{(blocks · rights · moves)} · rfar · spi · cci) (assign permissions)^{(acc · ap · ev · fm · mms · npr · pm · pc · rb · te)}

I have expertise in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, I will make sure to make Wikipedia a better source of verified facts. Thank You! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 15:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I reviewed your contributions and found little to no recent anti-vandalism work. If you're still interested in this tool then please spend at least a month actively patrolling RecentChanges (Twinkle & Ultraviolet can help with that) before reapplying. Also, please ensure that you are consistently warning editors when you revert their edits. Thanks, Fastily 20:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)