Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights/RFR archive/Trip391

< Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights | RFR archive
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for rollback that was successful. Please do not modify it.

Trip391 (8 admins + 11 users/3 users/1 admin + 2 users)

Two-week deadline from first request, voting ends September 15, 2013

Support
  1. I'm proud to nominate Trip for Rollback because I genuinely feel there is no one who deserves the recognition and increased responsibility more than he does. The users who frequent IRC on a daily basis can attest to the fact that there probably isn't anyone right now who does more to fight vandalism on a regular basis. He is constantly bringing ongoing vandalism to the attention of admins on IRC, to the point that I can say myself that it gets annoying. :P It seems like he's always the first one to spot trouble, and I feel that he's gotten enough seasoning under his belt in the trenches that we can trust him with the Rollback button. Trip was the WOTM this past August, and during the nomination one of our users went out of his way to try and sling mud at Trip for committing the heinous crime of making a mistake, which, as I pointed out at the time, I thought was unfair and overly critical. Since that time, this same user has again antagonized Trip by attempting to draw him into an edit war, which was both petty and deliberate. The user had to make sure he got in the last word by dictating to Trip that he wasn't to revert him again, but to Trip's credit, he took the high road and let it be rather than further inflame the situation. I'm sure this user will again make a shameful attempt in this nomination to paint Trip as an overbearing, reversion-happy monger, but I hope you'll see Trip for the good-natured, well-intentioned RC patroller that he is. Trip makes mistakes, just like we all do, but his are few and far between. As a late-night user, he will only bring an added layer of security to the wiki's editing during that time. And, hey, if you haven't noticed, our list of non-admin Rollbackers is pretty short right now. We need some more people. Who better than Trip? Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 05:48, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  2. My name is Fred, and I support this nomination. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 05:50, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Honestly, nobody is perfect. Nitpicking and trying to find ways to undermine Trip, who has matured a great deal since his WOTM nomination, is just silly. He is an IRC regular, a friendly helpful person, and he is very cooperative. He always keeps his cool, even on IRC. I am proud to be supporting his receiving candy nom. Menkooroo, ever since his WOTM nomination, you seem to never give Trip a chance or a break. Try to see who he is as a person and user. He is not a troll, an unhelpful person, nor is he revert-happy. Everyone makes mistakes and Trip has shown that he is very capable of handling vandalism outside of your negative examples. JangFett (Talk) 12:18, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  4. Absolutely. Trip is one of the most helpful and friendly users I have ever come across. Sure, he has made mistakes, but everyone here has made mistakes at some point or another. The important thing is that he learned from those few mistakes. I believe Trip deserves rollback, and can definitely be trusted with it. Keep up the outstanding work. Supreme Emperor (talk) 12:48, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  5. IFYLOFD (Enter the Floydome) 16:50, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  6. I was going to vote for Trip anyway, but I can't help noting that Menk's oppose rant is impressively long-winded for something posted less than 30 minutes after the nomination, so I consider it extra incentive to vote for Trip. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 17:41, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  7. Exiled Jedi Oldrepublic crest (Greetings) 18:38, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  8. Gal-icon OLIOSTER (talk) 19:22, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  9. Nahdar Vebb (talk) 20:11, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  10. Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 20:14, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  11. Byzantinefire 20:22, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  12. 501st dogma(talk) 20:24, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  13. I'm okay with this. — DigiFluid(Whine here) 21:34, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  14. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 21:35, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  15. I decided to re-consider my position and interacted with Trip in order to understand him more. The final product of my "experiment" was pretty positive. Now, make it worth, sir! Winterz (talk) 21:50, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  16. Absolutely, positively, without a doubt, yes. Those who have come before me have already said most of what I could say. I will merely say per Tope and Culator. In addition, my overall thoughts on the matter can be seen in the WOTM link Tope provided. As for Trip himself, I will be more than happy to see him as a Rollbacker.—Cal JediInfinite Empire (Personal Comm Channel) 02:24, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
  17. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 14:34, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
  18. Trip's countervandalism work on the wiki is admirable; giving him rollback would help him in this endeavour. 1358 (Talk) 09:38, September 8, 2013 (UTC)
  19. I'm confident that Trip will put rollback abilities to good use, and that he will also ask for advice/input from others when necessary. CC7567 (talk) 00:44, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Attacking me before I even post? That must be a new record, Tope. I miss the days when RFR noms were actually about the user being nominated. Anyway, knowing when not to revert is even more important than knowing when to revert, and I don't believe that Trip has realized that yet. I've seen him default to reverting when simply fixing a redirect was the proper course of action, revert due to not being able to grasp the concept of precedent, and revert talk page comments under the banner of "vandalism" that were in fact legitimate, good-intentioned answers to existing, unanswered questions on the talk page. In that last case, he was one edit away from violating the three-revert rule before he was warned about it. That's why I told him not to revert again; to save him from breaking the rule. What worries me the most is this, however --- the belief that creating articles by filling in redlinks is an action that should prompt a warning to stop. If Trip is that unable to distinguish between helpful and harmful edits, then no, I don't believe he deserves rollback. Menkooroo (talk) 06:13, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
    Honestly, Trip is a good user and a wonderful contributor (not only in reverting but he has also amazed me with his quality-nominated articles), however, I've noticed Trip doing some rather questionable reverts (Menkooroo cited some but I know of others), sometimes even when necessary content was added but required some more "Wookification" whereas Trip simply reverted it for lacking quality. Considering this, I believe he still needs some more experience before I can personally support his nomination for Rollback rights. Cade, in terms of reverting, was like him at first and he was also a considerable contributor but eventually he reached a more "reasonable stance" and made the whole Rollback rights' nom deservable. I'm sure Trip can get there too, just not "today". Winterz (talk) 15:32, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
  2. I also think it's too soon. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 03:45, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Nothing here against Trip, with whom I never shared any bad blood, but the evidences provided by Menkooroo make me think this promotion would be premature. --LelalMekha (talk) 15:31, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Trip is a great user whom I supported for WOTM. He does a lot of good for Wookieepedia and is certainly active in patrolling for vandalism and the like. The only thing that gives me pause here is some of the questionable reverts that have been pointed out in the section above. Rollback is a different animal than WOTM and most importantly requires the ability to discern what is helpful vs. what is harmful. Trip mostly has this down, but the few mistakes he does make cause me to think twice here. Trip is certainly a net positive to Wookieepedia and very much so, and there is no evidence that rollback would be abused, so I will stay out of the Oppose column, but I'm not sure at this moment that he is entirely ready for the responsibility of rollback. I'm sure he'll get there soon, but I'm not quite ready to support right now. —MJ— Comlink 00:31, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
  2. First of all, Tope, I love ya but I don't know how you can "sling mud" at Menk and get away with it. Second, I agree with MJ absolutely 100%. Fe Nite (talk) 00:40, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
  3. I know I've been away some time, which is why I tried to look hard before participating to this discussion. I think it just isn't the time yet for Trip because of the reasons said above, but I'm not opposing either as there's so many of us who do reversions without comments, set them minor etc, like this edit here. – Tm_T@Wookieepedia:~$ 05:25, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
    • Sorry about that. The edit summary I typed was: "Leia didn't say "Good skies!". Luke said "Chandrila Skies?", but it was in reference to a shuttle by that name.", but I guess it got deleted when I clicked 5.3 Factual correction, which also didn't show up in the RC I see. Trip391 (talk) 06:33, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
      • For future reference, selecting any of the "standard summaries" automatically erases anything in the edit summary field (just one reason why I don't use them). :) —MJ— Comlink 01:19, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
Optional candidate Q&A
  • Thanks for the nom Tope and sorry about the annoyance. If this lets me help keep Wookieepedia the most accurate, and informative database on Star Wars anywhere, I will use it to the best of my ability to keep it vandalism free. Not only does everyone on here care about the content, but our readers trust us to be accurate as well. Sometimes, even the writers of canon look to us for advice! And it goes without saying, being granted Rollback will not determine whether I revert vandalism, because it will always..... create a "disturbance in the Force", if you will. Trip391 (talk) 06:11, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
Comments