User talk:A8UDI/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

My Talk Page

Editing my own talk page is not vandalism. Why don't you chase after some one actually vandalizing articles read by users. I am not committing vandalism. --71.80.121.0 (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

A common misconception I'm afraid. A8UDI 23:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not the same user of this IP address as the one who was committing vandalism. It is dynamic IP address. See DHCP.

--71.80.121.0 (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

sorry then. A8UDI 23:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Just commenting, since I saw this discussion: Per WP:BLANKING, the IP can remove warnings from their own talk page - removal is acknowledgement that the warning was read. The only items that user's are not permitted to remove from their own talk page are: declined unblock requests and confirmed sockpuppetry notices (while blocks are still in effect), as well as miscellany for deletion tags (while the discussion is in progress) or, for anonymous editors, shared IP header templates. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that. He was removing a banner that was from a company that seemed like he was trying disguise his IP or something.. but it's dynamic or whatever and he explained that and I apologized. A8UDI 13:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Let us edit

The title says it all. People have grown out of the editing phase since at first it sounded so unreal that there was an incyclopedia out there which you can change without hacking. Now, it is up to the users of Wikipedia to edit the material back with the correct information. RMuhammed (talk) 01:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC).

I have no idea to which you are referring. What article? A8UDI 01:12, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

???

why there's vandalism in page serbo-greek relations? You claim there 8000 killed Muslims, but it is prooved in trials it is not truth!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.87.199.107 (talk) 12:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

here for verifiability, not truth. A8UDI 12:22, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

How to view your number of contributions

I saw on your first page your number of contributions was changed from 10,000 to 11,000. I'd like to know where I can find my number of contributions so that I may be able to put it on my page too. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 00:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Easy. Click on 'my preferences' at the top and it say it right on the main panel. Also check out the tool server here. :) A8UDI 00:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :D Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Image

Hello A8UDI, why did you revert me? I followed the instructions at the policy page. I don't understand the warning. Fixieboy (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Most likely a mistake. Im still getting used to new software, don't take it personally. :) A8UDI 03:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok ok. I was just confused. Fixieboy (talk) 03:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Blade runner

I've semiprotected it for 1 hr only - sorry, I was bashed recently for "excessive" semi-prot use and the article is on the main page. I am on-line another 8 hrs and will keep an eye on the article. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:21, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I'd say at least a week would be appropriate for the amount of vandalism that page has been receiving.... It's unbelievable.. A8UDI 04:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I hear you. In my science-related WP field I don't semiprotect for less than a month, but under the recent circumstances, I better go step-wise: 1 hr then wait/see, etc. Featuring on the main-page is a usual hell for RCP. Cheers. PS I love that movie. Materialscientist (talk) 04:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah ok. lol :) I have no idea what it is... i should see more movies.. 04:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

1965 United States occupation of the Dominican Republic -- your recent edit

Hi, I am not sure of the proper procedure to follow but I noticed that the recent changes to this article seem like vandalism. Your change to remove someone's childish comment 'idiot' is good but if you look at older revisions you'll see that the changes made in the past 24 hours are vandalism of this article. I think that possibly your revision is giving some unintentional credence to the vandal because it does not revert their improper revisions. I was going to revert this article back to the October revision by GoodOlfactory because that contribuuter has respected credentials (as do you). Since I am just getting started at editing on Wikipedia I am looking to you for guidance. The person who inflated the numbers of casulaties and added inappropriate content seems to be vandalizing this article. I think that their changes should be removed and they should be reported for vandalism. This vandal should be neutralized. What do you think? Best regards... Andy12983 (talk) 10:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I am now (as of very recently) using javascript program to revert vandalism. It does not yet allow me to view the history of the page to revert to a previous version. However, in your preferences, you can install Twinkle and it has a rollback option that allows you to restore any version of a page. As far as vandalizing-- the rule of thumb is that they typically get 3-4 warnings for less severe vandalism and one warning for severe vandalism. Check out User:A8UDI/Rollback to learn more about the warning system and rollback. A8UDI 11:59, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Zhang Ziyi

Hello. You left me a message regarding the article Zhang Ziyi. I believe that 章 and 張 are homophones and not homonyms. Therefore, I think you should not have reverted my edit. 174.23.200.167 (talk) 12:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

You can undo my edit, misclick A8UDI 12:38, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! :)

Someone vandalized my Userspace! I must of really made someone angry. But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! --Meaghan ^{the vanilla twilight} 14:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

no problem! A8UDI 16:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Please be more careful

Please be more careful in your editing. You removed a G11 tag that I put on the spam article Resurrection, Liverpool and templated me with a notice that my edit was not helpful. Warrah (talk) 16:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

sorry, mistake. .. But I am getting better with this! Thanks for bringing it to my attention. A8UDI 16:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I also reported the article's creator to WP:UAA for spamming. Warrah (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Sareh

SAREH IS NOT SARA OR SARAH!!!!!

why do u have to redirect it ????? Just because they look alike ,(if you can close your eye on the"E" part sarEh)it doesn't mean they are the same name !!!! I know you don't know persian and that is why you can't realize how different Sareh and Sarah are pronounced and thats why you think its all the same ! but I am persian and I know what I am doing so just don't redirect it plz in persian sara is pronounced as SAAARAAAA(one sylabel) sareh is SER-EHHH (2 sylabells)how can you think these are the same ?!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssokoot (talk • contribs) 17:02, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my talk page (and there was me getting all excited about the new messages *wry grin*). Kind regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

HAHA! There, there A8UDI 18:35, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I use Internet Explorer, so I can't use Igloo, besides, I'm not sure about the whole IP<—>User name thing. Thanks any way, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, was gunna say I use firefox but sorry bout the ip. A8UDI 18:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem . I've got Huggle if I want. Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

re:talk pages

You Warned user 64.85.131.57 and they reverted your warning. I reverted his revert and they reverted me. I also found an earlier warning that had been reverted. Lilly 19:26, 4 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilly granger (talk • contribs)

Page history; compare versions of warnings. OR, even easier, just give a Final warning or only warning (4IM). Then all u need to do is report them to wp:aiv if they do it again. A8UDI 19:29, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and attention It's okay! As long as you are not redirecting the article again I am happy! Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssokoot (talk • contribs) 20:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I would like a consensus vote on the Letterman article.

Because by sheer bullying by an editor for some reason it hasn't been categorised in the sex scandals as it should have been. Before I commence any discussion with you though I would like to know if you are a Muslim or not. If so please don't reply to this comment because I find it futile and unproductive to engage in discussions with Muslims, all the more so when a sex scandal with women being victimised is involved. 149.254.58.44 (talk) 22:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Um, excuse me? What does religion have anything to do with David Letterman being categorized as a "sex scandal"? Your comments make me believe you have an agenda. See WP:NPOV. Thank you A8UDI 22:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

lol

naughty naughty... :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

ya, I'm badass like that 8) A8UDI 02:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

It would have disappeared after the protection lapsed, but makes sense. :) Hugs, @Kate (talk) 02:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

ya, I mean, it looks odd to say "please leave a message" but then not able to edit it :P A8UDI 02:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even think of that, but you're totally right. I guess I'm just soured on IPs trying to talk to me. ;) Hugs, @Kate (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

:D A8UDI 02:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for patrolling user pages and reverting vandalism on mine. Regards, Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 03:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

absolutely A8UDI 03:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Ag dog

About this user, usually blocked users are allowed to make comments on their talk pages. It wouldn't really help to revert or block his/her talk page at this point, as long as they don't make a personal attack or something like that. Let him talk about how he's being "abused". Evil saltine (talk) 03:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello, A8UDI. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding potential igloo issues. The thread is A8UDI. Thank you. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 03:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Nothing to do with igloo. He keeps inserting original research. A8UDI 03:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

In that case, never mind. Still, they had a reasonable excuse for not notifying you so I thought I'd do it. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 03:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate it though. A8UDI 03:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The AN/I case may be marked "resolved," but I had something else to say there, and I'm repeating it here so you won't overlook it. This incident with "Fixieboy" was not an isolated incident. Please stop issuing vandalism warnings for edits that aren't vandalism. If the program you use to issue warnings (apparently you are using Igloo, which is still in alpha testing according to its information page) is automatically using the vandalism template for all warnings and does not let you override the defaults, then stop using that program. (Most automated-warning programs around here allow the user to override defaults.)

I checked into that ANI because your name had popped up on my watchlist a couple of hours ago, and I was perplexed to see that you had issued a vandalism warning (diff) to a newbie for an edit that was a clear case of good-faith original research. Issuance of incorrect warnings like that way is not a responsible or effective way to communicate with newbies. To make matters worse, when that newbie came back and repeated the inappropriate edit, the editor who reverted it (also using an automated program) assumed that your warning was valid and simply increased the level of the vandalism warning. Those were bad edits, but they weren't vandalism, and the editor surely had no idea why s/he got that misguided warning. Can you see how using an automated tool in this manner can be harmful (and possibly even cause more damage than they correct)? --Orlady (talk) 04:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. A couple of things:

• I literally just started using igloo within the last 2 days. I realize that I take full responsibility for my actions but I am still getting the hang of it. This brings me to my next point
• I was unaware I can override the warning system. Before using igloo I used RB and twinkle but as you can imagine, it's much more laborous, but indeed, it is more effective. Had I known this was possible, I would have used the unsourced template, not the vandal (default) one.
• I see in the diff link that I issued a level 1 warning-- this does assume good faith, per wp:utm.
• I agree that automated tools can be worse but most of the time, especially at night when vandalism is most flourishing to the point that even my talk page needs to be protected. . . I'd say the automates tools are by far a net positive.

Again, thanks for the feedback and if something again pops up, do let me know. -Tom A8UDI 04:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking about this and replying. I appreciate your commitment to vandal-fighting, but good intentions do not excuse mistakes or make them away. Furthermore, if you are not familiar with the automated tool you are using, you should not be using it in "real" space yet -- or you should be hand-checking every edit and correcting any problems you find. You've been here plenty long enough to have seen that Wikipedia talk space is full of admonitions about the pitfalls of automated tools -- you (not the tool) are responsible for what the tool does when you are the one running it. There's no sin in making mistakes (everyone makes mistakes), but you won't get much sympathy if you blame your mistakes on the computer instead of owning up to them and trying to fix the results when something goes wrong.

The level 1 warning does assume good faith, but good faith is not the issue here. Messages on user talk pages, whether templated messages or manually created messages, are supposed to be communication. When you issue a templated message that doesn't make sense, it doesn't matter whether or not you assumed good faith, because you aren't communicating. In this case, what the newbie had added was historical information about his or her family's farm, "sourced" with the note "reference was my knowledge passed down from my father; the shelby farm is in my family." Telling a newbie user that this type of contribution was "unconstructive" does not give them the first clue what was wrong with it. Telling that user that the edit was "unsourced" via Template:Uw-unsourced1 (as you say you would have done if you knew it was possible to do so) also would not have helped, since the user had gone to the effort of identifying his/her "source". Rather, this user needed to be clued in to the fact that personal knowledge is not an acceptable basis for the content of Wikipedia articles.

The purpose of issuing warnings (particularly "good-faith" warnings) is not to terrorize newbies into toeing the line, but rather to communicate. The templates exist to reduce the work involved in communicating, not to eliminate the need for human judgment. If you want to help Wikipedia by issuing warnings about bad edits, you need to be careful to make sure that your warnings are appropriate communications. --Orlady (talk) 05:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I will be more mindful of that in the future. I just want you to know that I regularly do help new users, very frequently here, so you don't have a negative image of my actions. I digress, but again, I'll be more mindful. OH, now I remember that edit.. I was a bit reluctant ... I felt compelled :[ .... I'll really be more mindful. A8UDI 11:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

PS- that now 'retired' user left a message above in the "Image" section.... I already explained I was using new software... I'd think that once I already told him that i'm likely to make mistakes now he would assume that i'm still working on it... I dont think ill use it as much anymore... A8UDI 11:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up - SPI

You've been named as a suspected sock by a new editor at this SPI. Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 04:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the guy being accused of socking, and we're both victims here. Don't worry, I've posted my rebuttal, and I think you should clear your name too. Thanks. --Eaglestorm (talk) 06:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Um,... was going to say, you're not going to find anything on me... A8UDI 11:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No doubt, just wanted you to know. It's been deleted as a bad faith move. Regards, Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 17:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you A8UDI 17:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:BITE

I noticed Jayron and Orlady snarling at you re: WP:BITE over the whole Fixieboy/Igloo thing. Don't let it get to you. Sure it was a bit unfortunate, but it's obvious you meant no harm. Some people around here take the whole "think of the NOOBZ" thing way too seriously. As for Fixieboy, well the speed with which he chucked the teddy out of the pram and scrambled his password suggests he's a personality we might well do without. ;) Crafty (talk) 05:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia administrators have an annoying habit of thinking that policies and guidelines exist for a reason. --Orlady (talk) 05:51, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Relax baby - try some tea. :) Crafty (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree w/ Crafty. If you are going to get that upset over one minor error from me using a program.. I dont know what to say. I have helped many new users even over the past couple of days. A8UDI 11:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009-NPOV

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Greenhouse gas. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.--CurtisSwain (talk) 08:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

This is not a POV edit. Please read UTM or try looking at the diffs before issuing warnings. A8UDI 11:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. I was referring to this edit, which I see now (duh!) was done by another user and reverted BACK TO your previous revision. My apologies. Please understand that I am a bit dim-witted.--CurtisSwain (talk) 19:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. A8UDI 12:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Iz in ur page

Vandalizin and shitz! Soxwon (talk) 18:38, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

don't you love how I have an ANI, sockpuppet investigation, a WP:BITE, and a NPOV "warning" all in a row? Oh, and they're all over nonsense, except the ANI and maybe the bite, but only to a very small extent. ... Not like I've helped 3 or 4 users within the last week alone or anything.. Oh Wikipedia, how I love thee A8UDI 18:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of lulz, that last edit got me a vandalism warning. Soxwon (talk) 18:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

(blushes) Sorry... --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

bahaha *hug* A8UDI 18:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Seriously tho, I think we need to be more careful with the anti vandalism tools. A8UDI 19:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

As I said on my and Soxwon's talk pages, I thought it was vandalism. I've seen worse and better spelling, so I decided to take him at his word (I've never consciously met Soxwon before, so didn't know what to expect). Some vandals do genuinely say "I've just passing through to vandalise your page." Assumed he was one of them and I've now apologised on all three related talk pages. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No hard feelings, no worries. What I do when I'm unsure if I do some "background checking" ie- is it an IP? Is the user new? How many edits have they done? *Have they been warned previously?* From this, it's clear as day who is just being funny and who's being disruptive. thank you for patrolling my page any way ;) A8UDI 19:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Usually I do do that. This time, I did, however, move too quickly, even if I was thinking that it was obvious vandalism. I'll make doubly sure to check contributions next time. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 21:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Lolcat pedant says, "That should be 'I iz in ur page'." —Aladdin Sane (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, A8UDI. You have new messages at Coffee's talk page.
Message added 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Coffee // have a cup // ark // 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Uh.

Was this a mistake, or am I missing something? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=329996874&oldid=329996756

 fetchcomms☛ 03:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that vandalism? It looks like a type of page blanking... A8UDI 03:41, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm on a screw-up and piss everyone off streak. A8UDI 03:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind...

Having a talkpage stalker :) Soxwon (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

absolutely not. they seem to be infatuated with this page lately A8UDI 13:23, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, A8UDI. You have new messages at Coffee's talk page.
Message added 08:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Coffee // have a cup // ark // 08:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent revert to List of Best-Selling Books

Tom,

I don't understand why you reverted my last edit. The previous poster had included a mistranslation of their citing reference which was confusing and misleading. I corrected their error by inserting the original quote in Portuguese from their reference and adding an English translation. You have restored their original error. On top of that, I received a "not helpful edit" personal message on my Talk page.

I am a frequent editor of this and related pages and I always try to observe scrupulously Wikipedia rules, so I was perplexed by your revert.-- David

The diff link is: [1] Fragesteller (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

It appeared to be text not in english (was going a bit too quickly). The warning was automatic per a program I was using.. but I am not using it for a while and will learn to use it only for vandalism. Sorry for that. A8UDI 16:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009

Sorry about the editing on Education in France. This is my school's IP address so the IP address is used by more than 1 people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.38.114.3 (talk) 10:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Reason for Edit, then Revert?

Can you explain the message you left, then reverted from my talk page?

• Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Canadarm2, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A8UDI 19:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Morning277 (talk) 19:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Because it was a misclick.. so i quickly reverted both edits :P.. I see your a fellow vandal fighter to. Have you tried wp:igloo? A8UDI 20:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

• It happens. I just started Huggle a week ago. Trying to revert obvious vandalism before moving on. Morning277 (talk) 20:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

ya. it's hard to refrain from reverting edits that r more than just vandalism. . .A8UDI 20:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Patmatt123 (talk · contribs)

It seems, that while I was trying to give another warning for this account, you gave him a final warning, which unfortunately screwed up my uw-vandalism2 warning. Is this a Twinkle/Huggle mechanism? _{Boeing7107isdelicious|SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN} 02:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably was an edit conflict. Yea, I was using twinkle. A8UDI 02:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I did not see an edit conflict notice, but when it completed all it came up with was your final warning. _{Boeing7107isdelicious|SPRiCh miT meineN PiloteN} 02:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

That occasionally happens, and your edit just gets lost. Not sure if it's a software glitch or what. Kate (talk) 03:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it's on purpose. It is rarer than the alternative: An edit conflict for which one gets notice. It's good too, because without this unfortunate-but-minor-and-rare artifact, we would not get as much editing done as we can otherwise. Try to calculate or imagine the scope and magnitude of edits-per-second that occur on Wikipedia, then imagine you're the server computer that has to handle it all. There are simply cases where the software has to 'not care' and settle on what may be considered a shrug, and drop the edit. The programmers programmed it this way, and I'm quite impressed. In computer-speak the ability to grow and still function at all is called extensibility. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 04:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Numbers

Spell out single-digit whole numbers. Use numerals for numbers greater than nine.

http://www.grammarbook.com/numbers/numbers.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.68.130.33 (talk) 14:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, Wikipedia has its own format wp:ordinal. You are correct... and If I wasn't stuck on my iPhone I'd say I probably owe an apology.. A8UDI 15:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

igloo

(sniggering) Still having issues with it then? :P --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Screw you! I am getting better.. I swear! A8UDI 15:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

(laughs) You do seem to be warning yourself a bit less. xD --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

=) yessir. A8UDI 15:28, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Tom

I am just working on the article entitled, Anti-genre and noticed that user:A8UDI has just made a comment about changes I have made to the article. I just wanted to know which of my 20 or so minor edits from today where wrong, and why?

The edits I made today include finishing the section on Anti-genre in literature. Fixing a few other sections. Trying to find a senior editor to review this article and get rid of the "This page is a new unreviewed article," box. Also, I found four relevant images to insert: (1) first section on dada: famous Dada pipe picture (2) examples in music: Roland 909 drum machine pic (3) examples in literature: Nietzsche pic

I just got a message that all these changes have been reverted back to an older version of this article and thus the five hours of editing I have done today are all gone. Really wish I had saved some backups. Anyway, I sort of would like to (1) re-introduce these changes, and (2) know the criteria as to why they were changed. Or at least, re-introduce the changes that are acceptable and know why the others are not. For fear of one bad grape we have set fire to the entire vineyard.

My only intention is to make this article as clear and informative as possible so any editing advice is greatly appreciate. I am new to wiki-editing but have done extensive reading through a lot of the "ikipedia: " info to try and bring myself up to speed. Thanks. --Skychildandsonofthesun (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Okie doke! Lemme review your contribs and check it out ... A8UDI 21:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks tom: can I go back and add all the changes that I think I can remember first? For example, the insertion of images, etc.? --Skychildandsonofthesun (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

hey, they seem to all be back now. You are a wiki-wizard! how did you do it? My job now is to find sources and get the references all indexed and cleaned up. p.s. thanks TOM! --Skychildandsonofthesun (talk) 21:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

A couple of things I want to tell you. I reverted because I saw break (</br>) like 10x next to each other. It looked like vandalism. Another thing-- Wikipedia saves everything. I mean everything. It logs everything. As far as losing something, yes an article may be deleted, but only by an administrator and only in certain situations. Check out the history function and how it works, Wikipedia:History_tool <--there. If you need anythign else don't be afraid to ask and thanks for being so nice! A8UDI 21:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, wrong link!! haha OH! And check out User:A8UDI/Rollback to learn more about reverting. A8UDI 22:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again Tom: very helpful. Going to do some more reading on these wikipedia help pages + further edits to Anti-Genre. I'll certainly ask any further questions I have. And in terms of staying on wikipedia, I am not going anywhere. I love wikipedia!! --Skychildandsonofthesun (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Those welcome links next to the cookies will help guide you :) A8UDI 22:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I saw that!

Nice try at the revert on my talk ;) Beat you! Keep up the good work though :) --Shirik (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

hahaha it's so embarressing!! Now igloo thinks you're a vandal!! haha oh god... A8UDI 22:50, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

RfA thankspam

Hello, A8UDI! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice. KV5 (Talk • Phils)

Western NY

Yep, I'm from Geneseo in fact! I take it you're from western NY as well? :-) --bdesham ★ 05:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

re: Your Message

Hi Tom, I've left a response to your message(s) on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 19:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Tom, I've left another warning reply on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 19:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Patrol

Hi, I'm on Recent Changes Patrol right now and your sig keeps coming up in vandalism reverts. How are you beating me to the vandalism so fast? By the time I see something, you've already fixed it! I'm not complaining, I'm asking seriously...how do you home in on vandalism so quickly? I'm just scanning recent changes and manually checking pages edited by unregistered users. Seems like slow going. If you have any suggestions, I'm all ears. Thanks. ɳoɍɑfʈ ^Talk! 19:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Huggle or Igloo. @Kate (parlez) 19:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I prefer wp:igloo (because I use a mac and it's much simpler). No installation and it's easy but you need authenication--- but be careful! I've gotten into trouble for having too much of a trigger finger :x... but all you do is press "q" and it automatically reverts an edit and warns the user. I'll put up a screen shot in my Rollback page for you actually...A8UDI 19:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Tom! Very much appreciate it. I've sent a request in to be added to the alpha test. ɳoɍɑfʈ ^Talk! 19:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done Check it out: User:A8UDI/Rollback#Gallery A8UDI 19:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Nice! As soon as my edit count is up, I'll request rollback rights. Right now I just have to "undo." ɳoɍɑfʈ ^Talk! 20:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Did that page help you? Does it explain everything ok? I'd like newbie feedback please! Although how the hell did you get your page so nice so fast? A8UDI 20:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

198.111.16.35

I've already gone to WP:AIV, and the problem should be alleviated soon. Happy editing. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Stan

thank you

thank you you are not intrudeing at all. i am happy for your thougts. 68.17.232.180 (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. If you need anything let me know. A8UDI 22:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I hate to be a bitch..

But this is a copyright violation. It shows the Safari web browser interface, which is copyrighted by Apple. There's a bunch of useful information on taking screenshots at Commons:Screenshots, should you need more information. @Kate (parlez) 22:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

DAMN! Ok, you can take down the other pix on User:A8UDI/Rollback... sigh..they were really good too. I don't know how to delete or request deletion of pix... (i did it once a while ago) A8UDI 22:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

All of them? I can do that in thirty seconds. Just be sure. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure, just add {{db-g7}} to all of them and an admin will be along shortly to delete them. Again, sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Thanks for being so understanding. :) @Kate (parlez) 23:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I actually have class right now (I know, it's bogus) and have to go soon.. =/ I can't tag them atm. A8UDI 23:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks sweety :) A8UDI

Sorry, Tom. I'm in a relationship already. But I swear... if I'd known you felt this way about me... (sobs) --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

lol :)

RfA Thanks

MrKIA11 (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Web_based_presentation_tools Article

hi,

thanks I think you can propose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_based_presentation_tools for deletion. After reviiewing ... actually it is almost the same as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_conferencing_software and the categories are quite strange. I noted some comments to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Web_based_presentation_tools

cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.189.152.27 (talk) 12:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done WP:PROD'd for deletionA8UDI 14:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Pinetree Secondary School

I am an old student of Pinetree i would like to have my name on the page.

Thanks

Tyler M Zanatta —Preceding unsigned comment added by TMZ23 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Are you in any way noteworthy? Do you have your own article? If not, your name should not be there A8UDI 20:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hanley Vandal

I'd just report them straight to WP:AIV right now. Just my opinion.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 21:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

it's fine, one last chance. A8UDI 21:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Bannerbomb

Bannerbomb is a different page than BannerBomb and so I redirected it to that as it is more applicable than general Wii Homebrew 134.134.139.73 (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

mm ok, thanks A8UDI 22:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

why man?

why man. just trying to tell the truth but you won't let me. Why?

I have no idea. A8UDI 22:50, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Solapsone

Hello Tom! I think that this edit was meant to be a clear {{-}} so I added this. Since then he is doing some good edits. So I changed your warning into a welcome template. Best Regards, --HappyInGeneral (talk) 22:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah ok. Best to AGF then. A8UDI 22:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

hi, I think this must be a misundestanding, because I am in the middle of an reconciliation process moderated by wjhonson. Please coordinate with him. Look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wjhonson bestv regartds AChim —Preceding unsigned comment added by AchimKoerver (talk • contribs) 23:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

The linguist in you might find this interesting. — SpikeToronto 00:28, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually I was looking through that the other day... and that chart actually makes sense. sad, I know lol A8UDI 00:32, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Random input but is there some odd convention done in the past that marked any of these articles notable? Um. Yeah. The entire "see also" list. Why do these exist? That_that_is_is_that_that_is_not_is_not_is_that_it_it_is went through an AfD a year ago that was a non-admin close in under 24hrs with "it's clearly notable" as the best talking point in the discussion. I'd have just AfD'd it anyway but I figure there has to be some other story behind these ..... oh, and cheers on the random vandalism earlier! One of them vandalized the article about Al Gore and messed with the section regarding Futurama. I was disgusted. Block warranted! ♪ daTheisen(talk) 05:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I'd say it's notable because they are weird grammatically correct sentences :P... I don't see why not. And thanks :) A8UDI 17:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

My, my

You ARE popular. Oh well, at least you have a pretty userpage :). Soxwon (talk) 04:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

its like oeiw wepu4p3oh43g l;ksndf osdgb !! lol A8UDI 04:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

AND the gift of eloquence I see :D Soxwon (talk) 04:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I wish i could could have powers like Mickey Mouse at the end of that Southpark "The Ring" jonas brothers episode. raawwrrr A8UDI 04:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

...Link? Soxwon (talk) 04:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, but you can watch'em for free you know :): http://www.southparkstudios.com/. Soxwon (talk) 04:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

oh wow, its season 13 number 1. A8UDI 11:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

:)

Cool cookies, how did you edit my page so quick? :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by GvidoR (talk • contribs) 16:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I wanted to give you cookies. PS- since I see you are writing your first article, consider using the Article wizard. A8UDI 16:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

"Vandalism"

You have reverted two of my legitimate edits and issued warning messages. Please be a little more careful before you press the revert button. After a couple of hours of new page patrolling the last thing I need is friendly fire from the recent changes patrol --Chuunen Baka (talk) 16:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I was being careful. I saw the <!--- ---> around the categories without an edit summary and it looked like vandalism. A8UDI 16:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I have my prefs set so that I have to leave an edit summary and both of my rv-ed edits had summaries. Homan Potterton was 'rm example.com' and National Human Rights Council of India was 'wikify'. Looks like your igloo is getting too hot! --Chuunen Baka (talk) 16:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

(psht) :P I do go too fast for my own good.. on many things, I do admit... I am working on it though ;) A8UDI 16:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Stabyhoun

Hello,

You marked one of my edits (as 85.113.255.104) as "not constructive". Being the long time owner of a friese stabij and dutch, i do not see how mentioning the breeds reputation for stubbornness and vigilance (which also appears on the dutch and german articles) can be considered "not constructive". They are, after all, traits for which the breed is renowned and loved. A stabij that is neither stubborn nor vigilant, is a poor example of the breed. Do not forget, this is not a "pet-breed", but a allround farm-dog. Therefore kindly remove your inapropriate comments from the userpage. Kleuske (talk) 16:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I removed the warning, however this is original reseach and is not encyclopedic. I apologize for the false warning and should have given the NOR warning so I apologize for that but it is original research. A8UDI 17:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

They are accepted traits of the breed! Any owner will tell you that! Any good kennel will tell you, if they're woth their money. I am very much tempted to say very nasty things, but instead i'll ask where you get your knowledge from. Kleuske (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:OR A8UDI 17:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Consider it read. I'm a Wiki-regular since 2006. So? Where do you get you knowledge from? Kleuske (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm a cat person! If you can't source it, it's OR that's all there is to it! Try using google and see if you can find any good articles or your own research from like a news organization or a magazine to source it. A8UDI 17:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

• [2]
• [3]

Want more? Google delivers 512 pages on the combination of "Friese Stabij" +Koppig And leave comments on my userpage alone. Kleuske (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

AN/I

I have started an AN/I discussion about your warnings here [4]. Ridernyc (talk) 17:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

And you need to stop. Claiming you do "more good than harm" is not an adequate defense. Please consider this a polite but firm final warning - you have been warned about this enough. You're clearly intelligent enough to differentiate between good faith edits and vandalism. Tan | 39 17:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

k

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6