The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A straight vote on
Wikipedia:Requests for rollback, since consensus is too difficult to judge on such a grand scale. Should non-admins have the "rollback" button tool, to undo edits without special tools like Twinkle? If so, in which format? Please vote below. Note that it is disputed whether this poll has any validity, see
this discussion on talk.
This vote will run until February 1, 2008, 00:00 UTC. Please refactor out drama, the best way to do that is simply sign your username and not add a comment. No drama, no muss, no fuss. This vote may help develop a true
consensus. See
[1] for more information.
For those favoring the option that gets most votes in the end, a delayed voting option is on the talk page
here.
I support non-admin rollback being implemented, through promotion by admins
--
lucasbfrtalk 11:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC) (I would support automatic promotion with a high threshold if there was a way to remove it without blocking a user)reply
I support non-admin rollback being implemented, automatically like pagemoves with no process (autoconfirmed)
Page-moves are granted to all registered users after four days - although rollback could be whatever time (days, weeks, months) is subsequently agreed.
Having the ArbCom decide on the result of a vote is an unnecessary extension of their powers. anyway, we just voted on this very recently; Arbcom could just as well judge that poll instead of having yet another one. Polling again and again is ridiculous.
Restore the rollcat to his rightful place atop this page!AmiDaniel (
talk) 11:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strong support. This is an urgent matter.
EconomicsGuy (
talk) 11:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strongest possible support. I'm outraged that this matter arose and it needs to be dealt with ASAP.
Equazcion•✗/
C •11:39, 11 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Restore otherwise I will have no other choice but to send Guido after you. And trust me, he will NOT be
WP:CIVIL. --
Pparazorback (
talk) 12:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
This injustice can not stand! Rollcat is angry. henrik•
talk 12:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
This needs immediate action.
Kusma (
talk) 12:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
restor rolcat to pruve we gots sens of hummer, plz? kthxbai
Kim Dent-Brown(Talk) 12:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose - I have no sense of humour -
Halo (
talk) 12:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Support the opposal of the removal It's the only thing keeping us all from killing each other. --
Closedmouth (
talk) 13:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Arbitration Committee ratification
Arbitrators, please sign below to ratify the vote between February 1, 2008 and February 10, 2008.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A straight vote on
Wikipedia:Requests for rollback, since consensus is too difficult to judge on such a grand scale. Should non-admins have the "rollback" button tool, to undo edits without special tools like Twinkle? If so, in which format? Please vote below. Note that it is disputed whether this poll has any validity, see
this discussion on talk.
This vote will run until February 1, 2008, 00:00 UTC. Please refactor out drama, the best way to do that is simply sign your username and not add a comment. No drama, no muss, no fuss. This vote may help develop a true
consensus. See
[1] for more information.
For those favoring the option that gets most votes in the end, a delayed voting option is on the talk page
here.
I support non-admin rollback being implemented, through promotion by admins
--
lucasbfrtalk 11:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC) (I would support automatic promotion with a high threshold if there was a way to remove it without blocking a user)reply
I support non-admin rollback being implemented, automatically like pagemoves with no process (autoconfirmed)
Page-moves are granted to all registered users after four days - although rollback could be whatever time (days, weeks, months) is subsequently agreed.
Having the ArbCom decide on the result of a vote is an unnecessary extension of their powers. anyway, we just voted on this very recently; Arbcom could just as well judge that poll instead of having yet another one. Polling again and again is ridiculous.
Restore the rollcat to his rightful place atop this page!AmiDaniel (
talk) 11:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strong support. This is an urgent matter.
EconomicsGuy (
talk) 11:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strongest possible support. I'm outraged that this matter arose and it needs to be dealt with ASAP.
Equazcion•✗/
C •11:39, 11 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Restore otherwise I will have no other choice but to send Guido after you. And trust me, he will NOT be
WP:CIVIL. --
Pparazorback (
talk) 12:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
This injustice can not stand! Rollcat is angry. henrik•
talk 12:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
This needs immediate action.
Kusma (
talk) 12:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
restor rolcat to pruve we gots sens of hummer, plz? kthxbai
Kim Dent-Brown(Talk) 12:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose - I have no sense of humour -
Halo (
talk) 12:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Support the opposal of the removal It's the only thing keeping us all from killing each other. --
Closedmouth (
talk) 13:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Arbitration Committee ratification
Arbitrators, please sign below to ratify the vote between February 1, 2008 and February 10, 2008.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.