Hello. At the suggestion of one of our admins, I have decided to apply again for Rollback rights.
Why I Want The Position I am currently one of the most active users on this wiki, and anticipate continuing to be active in the future.
Things I Bring To The Table I am good at spotting and removing bad edits. I think I have a good eye for what to look for to hone in on bad edits, either edits made in bad faith or simple mistakes (new user with no previous edit history editing a popular page is something to look out for, for example). While the Rollback ability is not necessary to correct bad edits, it may allow me to do it a little more quickly.
Also, now that Rollbacks have the right to remove the M4R template from stories as they see fit, I think I can be useful in this regard as well. I use the M4R a lot myself and I believe I am a good judge of quality. However, I have also been known to stand up for articles that have been marked for review that I believe should stay, by stating my reasons in the comments and cleaning up any grammar errors in the mean time. Overall, I think I would be a good judge of when the M4R should stay and when it should proceed to deletion.
That said, on my previous application it was brought to my attention that my judge of quality standards may be still be a little shaky. Therefore, if given the position I plan to ask for a second opinion from staff the first few times I try to render a "verdict" on M4R pages.
Finally, I believe I have a strong working knowledge of the written and unwritten rules on this wiki, and have been known to advise new users when they are in danger of getting banned.
I. Must have been active on the wiki for two months.
I have been consistently active or semi-active here since at least December of last year.
II. Must have 450 edits on articles, or 25 cases of undoing vandalism.
As of June 2018, I have 565 article edits, out of 1,160 total edits. I have reverted probably at least a couple dozen cases of vandalism if you count Delete and M4R template vandalism and spree vandalism.
III. Must be familiar with the wiki naming conventions.
I know the basics, such as that titles should not be in all-caps, most words should be capitalized with the exception of some articles, prepositions, and conjunctions. Single articles, prepositions, and conjunctions should probably be capitalized especially if they are long ones such as "about" (or "from", depending on if you follow the four-letter or five-letter rule), but in certain cases, such as a short preposition preceding a short article, it is optional to leave both lowercase, but not just one. In general I think it's easy enough to see what looks right and go from there. Also, titles should not be italicized, and use of quotation marks, bold font, italics, special characters, etc. should be used with discretion (in the case of bold font, probably never at all).
However, there are some things I admit I'm still unsure of, such as whether authors are allowed to include their user names in their titles (as in "A Mountain in Chicago by HopelessNightOwl"), which I've seen done on occasion.
Due to the fact that the naming conventions are precedent-based rather than written as far as I know, this may be my greatest weakness as a Rollback. I'm still a little unsure of what the prevailing rule is concerning capitalization of articles that don't occur at the beginning of a title (e.g. Jeff the Killer or Jeff The Killer) for example. I've seen some users M4R a story for having "the" or "a" be capitalized in the middle of a story when honestly it looks fine to me either way.