Wikibooks:Requests for permissions/Geoff Plourde

+Reviewer
I have had a Wikibooks account for some time now. Although I have been forced by real life commitments to be sporadically active, I believe that I can be invaluable to Wikibooks as a reviewer. Inspection of the user list reveals that only three users have this bit. While all three appear to be active, there is simply too much work. The oldest page on unreviewed pages dates back to December 2007, a time period I consider to be far to great. On outdated reviewed pages, the oldest page has been waiting for 58 days. These timeframes pose a serious inconvenience to good users, who are stuck looking at an ugly gray unreviewed sticker indefinitely. By granting me reviewer status, I would be able to help clear out what appears to be a massive backlog.

With regards to my English skills, I have consistently scored in the advanced range on any standardized test I have taken. Last year, I took AP English Literature and Composition, qualifying for college credit. When coupled with my five year experience as an administrative assistant, I believe that this shows I have the skills necessary to judge composition.

As to quality, I am a voracious reader, reading everything from caselaw books to technical manuals. I am privileged in that my family's personal library (5,000+) includes authoritative texts on many subjects, which I could use as a baseline when reviewing for quality and comprehension.

By making me a reviewer, I will be able to assist the other users in decreasing the turnaround time for reviews which will make Wikibooks more accurate and accessible to all. Geoff Plourde (talk) 03:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Symbol comment vote.svg Comment You already have editor status, which should allow you to take care of the majority of the pages on that list, with the exception of any that are rated at the featured level of quality. Only a reviewer could sight those pages.  That's about the only difference between an editor and a reviewer.  Also keep in mind that any administrator also has the privileges associated with a reviewer, even if they're not explicitly in the group.  So you should actually be able to help pare down that list already. -- Adrignola talk contribs 03:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Correct, but there are many featured pages which are still awaiting a quality review. I can only sight these pages, not rate their quality. Geoff Plourde (talk) 03:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * He makes a convincing case and has done good work here. --Jomegat (talk) 04:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Geoff has made many good contributions to First Aid, which is a featured book. Many of those pages are rated with the featured level of quality and he cannot review them without the reviewer flag.  Providing him with this ability will be giving a helpful contributor the tools he needs to reduce the burden on others and his contributions show that he is responsible. -- Adrignola talk contribs 12:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This request was made at my suggestion & since there is some agreement to do this already, consider it [[Image:Yes_check.svg|15px| ]] Done. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 17:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you everyone who supported this nomination. I will not forget your trust and mandate. My talk page is open to any and all featured book requests. Please feel free to ask me to review any of them! Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:38, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

+Rollback
As I continue to work down the list of unreviewed pages and outdated reviewed pages, I have come across a few instances of vandalism. Unfortunately, real life commitments limit my activity online. Each time I have to stop and go through the undo process takes up time that I could put to use reviewing pages. In the short time since I received the reviewer bit, the average wait for anonymous edits to be reviewed has dropped from 144 to 34 hours. The average for outdated pages has dropped to 18 from around 50 hours. With the rollback bit, I am confident that I could bring these times down even further and perform more reviews in the limited time I have available. Geoff Plourde (talk) 19:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * --Sigma 7 (talk) 03:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * For me, rollback is a "lower" privilege than reviewer - if we trust Geoff to review (and I do) then he can be trusted to rollback. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 20:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Chazz (talk) 06:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Symbol support vote.svg Support When reviewing a page where there's been a single edit and it's obvious vandalism, rollback can be a useful tool to combine with reviewer. -- Adrignola talk contribs 12:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)