Harry Potter Wiki:Requests for permissions

This page is used to request various levels of user access. See the archive and [ history] for old requests.

Rollback
These users are able to quickly revert vandalism.

ArrestoMomentum (second request)
As you can see, my first request was denied because only one person voted. It has now been a couple of months since then, so I have decided to request rollback rights on the Harry Potter Wiki once more. I feel as if I have now been part of the Harry Potter Wiki community for long enough to deserve rollback rights - seeing as I have made over 1500 edits and have been part of the Wiki for almost 6 months (which averages to almost ten edits per day). Nothing in my track record suggests that I am inactive or untrustworthy, and I am definitely going to be here long-term because Harry Potter is my passion and always will be. I would love to become an admin in the future but I am well aware that I will be needing more experience on the Wiki before I apply and I feel as if rollback rights is one important step towards that. Thank you all for your time and I hope you enjoy the rest of your day. -  ArrestoMomentum  &#124;  talk
 * I wouldn't recommend asking too often, or it'll look as if you are simply "desperate" for user rights. Personally, I think you should be a rollback, but I'd prefer the wiki to clear out the rollback flag from those who are clearly not active anymore on the wiki before promoting anyone else (plus, there really isn't that much vandalism that occurs that I don't notice :p) --Sajuuk 09:43, April 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * Asking too often creates the impression that you want rights to show off power, without really acknowledging what you will soon be responsible for. I have misused rollback many times in the distant past, and I am grateful that I very rarely misuse the tool nowadays, if at all.
 * @ SuperSajuuk - I think you mean "I wouldn't recommend asking too often", not "I would recommend asking too often". :P ―  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 10:06, April 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. Thanks for spotting that typing fail. :p --Sajuuk 10:22, April 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * How many active RB's do we have? User talk:BachLynn2317:01, April 30, 2016 (UTC)
 * According to Special:ListUsers/rollback, 4 rollback users edited in the last couple of days (this doesn't include myself as I have the Content Moderator flag, which includes the rollback user right by default).
 * The vast majority of users with a rollback flag haven't edited since January 2016 (and much longer before that). I believe all of these inactive rollbacks should be demoted since they're cluttering the list (not to mention creating the false impression that these users are active). --Sajuuk 17:07, April 30, 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't have an issue with allowing inactive users to retain rollback rights. It's not like with admins, where there's a strong case for removing sysop rights in the event of prolonged inactivity, since a vandal could do some real damage if they managed to hack into an inactive admin account. People do return from time to time, and making them all go through this process to re-obtain rollback rights would be creating an unnecessary headache.
 * Anyway, I'm for rollbacking ArrestoMomentum.
 * &#x2605; S t a r s t u f f  (Owl me!) 22:13, April 30, 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry I haven't weighed in, both this time and first time around; I think the first time, I didn't know him well enough to make an informed decision. But he seems like a responsible, trustworthy contributor. Voting for. -- Cubs Fan (Talk to me)  00:34, July 1, 2016 (UTC)
 * As this appears to still be open (?!) I also vote for --Ironyak1 (talk) 01:36, July 1, 2016 (UTC)

ArrestoMomentum
{{archive ArrestoMomentum - I would like to request rollback rights on the Harry Potter Wiki because I have made almost 700 edits, all with very positive intensions. Nothing in my track record suggests that I am untrustworthy and I feel as though, although I am still quite new to the community, I have a lot to offer in the future. Thanks for your time and all the best. {{unsigned|ArrestoMomentum}}
 * result={{U|ArrestoMomentum}} not granted rollback rights.
 * sig=--  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:55, December 21, 2015 (UTC)
 * discussion=

--  Seth Cooper  owl post! 20:50, December 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Normal Voting Policy applies. Only autoconfirmed registered users with greater than 20 article edits may participate in voting. If there is no clear For majority, voting will be closed when the allotted time (1 week) has expired, with no changes taking place. Voting will end 21:00 PM, December 20, 2015 (UTC).

For (+1)

 * 1)  Harry granger   Talk    contribs   20:55, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

Comments
❌, due to lack of majority. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 06:01, December 20, 2015 (UTC) }}

SajuukBot
Hi there. I know I have only been here for an extremely short time and probably don't have a strong enough "trust" relationship with the community here, but I've noticed that there are no active bot accounts on this wiki. The last time a bot account was used was in 2013, which is quite some time ago, with a few other bot accounts long before that. I'm not sure whether these accounts are used by active members or sysops of the community though.

I'd like to propose that my bot, SajuukBot, be granted a bot flag on this wiki. I've used this bot on a couple of wiki's where I've been a bureaucrat and have a knowledge of how to use AutoWikiBrowser. Note that my abilities of the bot are limited, but it can be used for certain tedious tasks.

Please use this section to discuss whether SajuukBot should be granted a bot flag for this wiki. Note that only Wikia Staff would be able to grant a bot flag so any consensus here should be emailed to Wikia at the contact form for them to perform the rights change. Thanks! --Sajuuk 16:32, February 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * This appears to be going un-noticed. I'll give this an extra week, but if nothing happens, this will just have to be abandoned. --Sajuuk 09:39, March 6, 2016 (UTC)
 * Bumping this up after a whole month. This might be a better discussion to bring to the "threaded forums" where people are more likely to notice. --Sajuuk 09:44, April 3, 2016 (UTC)


 * I vote for User talk:BachLynn2316:58, April 30, 2016 (UTC)

Administrator
These users are able to delete and protect pages along with blocking users.

Bureaucrat
These users are able to grant and remove adminship, and grant and remove rollback privileges.