Hi Isaiah. I noticed your edit here reverted two edits using rollback, but the edits reverted did not appear to fit in with the criteria for edits that can be reverted using the functionality. Please note that rollback should only be used in cases of obvious vandalism, or to revert your own edits. In all other circumstances, the edit should be manually reverted and an explanation provided in the edit summary. When in doubt, it is better to revert manually with an edit summary.
In this case, the edit was not what we would consider obvious vandalism, and should have been reverted manually with an explanation provided. This is to ensure that the user being reverted knows why they are being reverted. Thanks, —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:53, June 5, 2018 (UTC)
Re: Infobox SimEdit
The new infoboxes haven't been formally rolled out yet. But there's also nothing stopping people from using them, since the intent is that we will eventually be migrating to them. The new infobox rollout has been on a sort of informal hiatus because so many of us have been busy in real life. But AFAIK we still intend to do it sooner or later. -- LostInRiverview talk · blog · contribs 16:16, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
- It's pretty much ready to use now. We've been waiting on the rollout until we can convert the rest of the "old style" infoboxes to the new style, then we intended to roll all new infoboxes out at one time. But there's no reason we can't implement Infobox Sim ahead of time. -- LostInRiverview talk · blog · contribs 16:21, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
Message from Thelevitatingscot Edit
I am concerned about your use of a rollback on the aforementioned page. The revisions you reversed appeared to be in the best interest of the page and brought it up to encyclopedic quality. Could you explain your reasoning, please? It is also worth giving a reason for reversing the changes in the history. Thanks.
Misuse of rollback toolEdit
Isaiah, it has been brought to my attention that you used the rollback tool on an edit that did not constitute vandalism. As stated on The Sims Wiki:Rollback, rollback is to be used, "To revert obvious vandalism and bad-faith edits, where the reason for reverting is obviously clear." The edit you rolled-back showed no signs of being vandalism, so it appears that your use of rollback in this case was incorrect. The rollback page goes on to say, "Use of rollback in other circumstances, such as to revert a good faith edit you simply disagree with, is likely to be considered misuse of the tool."
As a member of The Sims Wiki's moderation and administration team (which includes all rollbackers, content moderators, administrators and bureaucrats on TSW), you are held to a high standard of conduct. By my view, it appears that in this case, you have failed to meet that standard. I want you to understand that misusing rollback, or any other tool given to you to help in the moderation and administration of this wiki, is a serious offense that may result in the loss of rollback rights. It appears that you have been warned on at least two prior occasions (once by an administrator/bureaucrat) about the improper use of rollback; this message marks the third such warning.
Please reply (either here or on my talk page) and explain to me your choice of actions in this case. I want to hear your side of things before I decide how we should proceed. LostInRiverview ( Administrator) • Contact me here • 19:34, February 25, 2019 (UTC)
- This is the edit I was talking about -- LostInRiverview talk · blog · contribs 20:07, February 25, 2019 (UTC)
- While I appreciate your concern for the project, even if such an edit warranted a reversion, it should have been reverted manually with an appropriate edit summary, and not with the use of rollback. From what I can tell, the edit was made in good faith—a misguided edit can still be made in good faith—so that would warrant either revision or a manual revert with an edit summary, but it should never be reverted using rollback. If in doubt, at the very least revert with an explanation. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:30, February 25, 2019 (UTC)