|
User talk:KoshVorlon/Archive 2
Organised crime, unreferencedI put up the tag on the page for organised crime, and allthough organised crime does not want to be written about, every article in Wikipedia needs sourcing, in complience with the verifiability policy. If you haven't already, it's a good read, and it shows how articles in Wikipedia should be sourced, and also what information should be included. Throughout your editing in the future, realise that this is a core policy of Wikipedia, and all aritcles should adhere to it. Especialy the first line there is something to remember! Martijn Hoekstra 18:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC) October 2007Welcome to Wikipedia. It would be appreciated if you would not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Mexico City Airport People Mover. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Martial BACQUET 18:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC) I'm sorry but I don't see where this article is a stub? It's redacted with capital letters and seems to be a joke. Please excuse me if it is not, but afd templates mustn't be removed as you did. Martial BACQUET 18:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC) As you wish. But for me, this article meet criteria for speedy deletion. Maybe it could reach a good article but it won't if it's written in capital letters. I'm not a native speaker of English no more but I don't write in capital letters. So do what you wanna do with this article, I'm just going to remove capital letters into to. Martial BACQUET 18:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 3 "Dude, check you signature " .
signaturePlease don't take this as a criticism or a slight, but I would recommend you remove the line breaks from your signature. It's generally considered undesirable per WP:SIG. Thanks, and happy wiki'ing. - Che Neuvara 18:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 4 " Deletion blues " . Deletion problemsHi KoshVorlon! You've recently tried to nominate for deletion two articles, List of Jewish American musicians and Samnaun. There were problems with both nominations that I've cleared up, but at the price of closing the one discussion I could find. Specifically, the problems were that the List one was malformed on the page and on the discussion so I couldn't tell exactly what you were trying to do, whilst the Samnaun one didn't appear to have a discussion at all that I could find. The Articles for Deletion process can be a bit tricky, so you may want to follow the step-by-step guide at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion. I recommend keeping a tab or a window open with it in as you nominate an article. Completion of all steps is required or User:DumbBOT, a robot that polices Wikipedia deletions, will notice and request assistance (that's how come I'm here). There's a long and detailed guide to Wikipedia deletion at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion that may help give you pointers on what we do and don't delete. It's quite a read, but worth doing if deletion is something you see yourself being involved in. You're welcome to restart the AfDs for either article (following the How-To guide), although I'd also suggest you check Wikipedia:Lists for advice on Wikipedia listmaking; and the criteria for speedy deletion for the geography article. I hope this helps. Happy editing! ➔ REDVEЯS was here 08:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Calling people namesRe: this: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Punkmorten 07:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Liszt CompositionsThere's no way this is going to get deleted. You might like to withdraw this AfD before it starts snowing. Nick mallory 12:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
In response to your post on my talk page, please become familiar with the following statement from WP:NOT#DIR: Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic, for example Nixon's Enemies List. And this isn't at all a list of "loosely associated topics", but multiple compositions very specifically associated with the list topic of a famous composer. If you're a trained classical pianist as you say are, you would know that. As stated in the AfD, if you'd like to change WP:NOT#DIR to eliminate all lists, you have to make your case at the WP:NOT talk page, not on specific articles as you are only wasting time of editors (notice that you're the only one in this AfD who wants to delete this article?) as you efforts are looking more like an example of WP:POINT or trolling. --Oakshade 21:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC) C H A P T E R 7 The point is? or Friendly note from Martijn
Really, what's the pointHiya, Kosh. You seem to be having a lot of fun in Wikipedia recently, but your main aim seems to be disrupting and confusing. Maybe it's a good idea to step back for a moment, and think about your motives for editing wikipedia for a while. You might be able to mildly disrupt a lot of people and pages, but the project will probably go on, and nobody will take much notice. Could you explain why you edit Wikipedia, and what your aims are? I'm sure there are more productive ways to accomplish that than the path you have taken now. (And do give this a nice chapter. I do like your chaptes.) Martijn Hoekstra 13:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC) C H A P T E R 8 Oh Shennandoah, I long to see you... North River (South Fork Shenandoah River)If you truly feel this river is non-notble, send it to AfD as your added notability tag has been repeatedly removed. I am well aware of the notability guidelines. Perhaps you are unaware that WP:NOTE provides for common sense exceptions, like for towns or geographical features. WP:OUTCOMES are examples of those. As WP:NOTABILITY states, "it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. " You're failing to understand this. --Oakshade 18:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Oh, an perhaps you didn't notice, the EPA is a reference in the article. --Oakshade 18:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Fall out boy, you will be blocked from editing. Excirial 18:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Well, looks like that article was just plain nonsense. The origional longer article was just one big attack, and the edit that almost cleared the page was of the same caliber. Guess we just ended up ping-pong reverting the two vandalism articles. I marked it for deletion nowm should be removed shortly :) --Excirial 18:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Geber_(crater)Which guideline does it fail to meet? Its a lunar crater, not a pop star, company, etc. —— Eagle101Need help? 19:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Indeed, please read WP:N to see how notability is defined. Cheers, WilyD 19:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I have noticed that you have replaced the template again, and I went hunting for your rational. I found it digging through your contribs on User talk:WilyD. If that is what you think, I suggest that you nominate the page for deletion, and let folks figure it out there, rather then revert warring. 3RR is an upper limit on disruption, please lets talk it out. Thanks. —— Eagle101Need help? 19:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Holes in the ground can get right notable, eh? If you need an appeal to common sense, I'll tell you pretty plainly it's almost impossible for find four reliable sources for something that isn't notable. WilyD 20:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I'm not the author, I think its notable, its astromical data, that is not found anywhere else and is a useful collection of data. In addition the subject of the moon is a rather important one, though there are of course other astrological items. My suggestion is again, to stop adding the tag, and instead simply nominate it for deletion and come to a final result to the article. In addition I should note that if you want the author to respond, I would suggest you leave a note to him, rather then rudely templating the article that he put his time and work into. There are humans behind these account names. —— Eagle101Need help? 20:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
June 2011I recognize that you feel strongly about cyberbullying and inappropriate use of Wikipedia to further a political campaign. Please stop creating redundant deletion processes. The article is being kept and it is not good for you to be the one who constantly proposes deletion. If deletion is the right result, somebody else will notice and make a proposal. Continuing your campaign further will start to look like WP:POINT. Please don't go there. Thank you. Jehochman Talk 18:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC) Edit summariesI'd like to recommend you follow the guidelines at WP:ES (especially those at WP:REVTALK) when reverting vandalism. Pointy edits may be considered disruptive by some editors, and using edit summaries that don't accurately describe what you are doing makes extra work for the rest of us (who had to check exactly what you did). If I hadn't known your history regarding the santorum stuff, I would have blocked you as a possibly compromised account. Syrthiss (talk) 18:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC) KoshVorlon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Sarek of Vulcan is involved already, so he shouldn't have been the one to block. @-Kosh► Talk to the Vorlons►Markab-@ 18:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC) Decline reason: This edit is worthy of an indefinite block; you're lucky this is only a week. If you want, I'll remove Sarek's block -- but then I'll insert one more suitable. Your call. --jpgordon::==( o ) 19:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The Enquirer may not be reliable in your eyes, but there should be a citation to indicate why it is not reliable. The Huffington Post has reported the story; Slate is mentioning the story; and People magazine is citing an unidentified source who has corroborated that "Chris Hansen and Kristyn and have been hooking up for months." The Enquirer's credibility has been strengthened as it broke the story of John Edwards and his love child and the infidelities of Tiger Woods. I would like to mention a denial by Mr Hansen, but I am unable to find one. It is ironic for someone who sets stings was stung and is unwilling to issue an immediate denial. His stung parties face a camera, so should he. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaHealuh (talk • contribs) 22:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC) August 2011
A barnstar for you!
TreasuryTag againI see he was demanding my last IP be blocked, and that I was described as an "IP hopper". Hopefully the fact that my IP has switched despite the last one not being blocked is enough to convince them that I am not doing it purposefully. Anyway, I don't want anyone to think that we're socks :P, but could you ask him to explain why exactly he was demanding other admins block me? It's not really fitting behaviour for an established editor to go around "baying for blood" (as the quote goes...). If you'd rather not post the message for me I'll ask that Egg Centric chap to post it as well. 94.2.240.29 (talk) 17:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Please think harderYou can't possibly be seen as a neutral closer. If that isn't obvious to you, then you may not have the judgement necessary to close any discussion here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC) |} The Dating GuyPer the discussion on talk:The Dating Guy, which you clearly failed to read, I encourage you to revert your vandalism. You are behaving inappropriately in failing to pay attention to consensus and agreemen and encouraging the WP:CANVAS behavior of a badly behaved editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.109.127.141 (talk) 17:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC) License tagging for File:Wiki background.jpgThanks for uploading File:Wiki background.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information. To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:06, 15 September 2011 (UTC) Licensing</nowiki>
Please comment on Talk:W. B. YeatsResponding to RFCs
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:W. B. Yeats. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible. You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 16:35, 20 September 2011 (UTC) ThanksHello Kosh. I had to drop you a note saying how much I admire your pointing out to Dweller that he did not fail in his attempt to mentor TT. It is also a wonderful coincidence that I am rewatching B5 at this very moment and, thus, I enjoy your username and signature immensely. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 07:18, 5 October 2011 (UTC) Running up that HillI saw you reverted the edit sourced to Twitter, which I had done before you, but I have to ask, did you not see the previous argument on the Talk page? If not, please go back and read. I nearly got blocked and the administrator restored the Twitter-sourced edit in the end. It was a drama. But I agree with you completely. I just hope it doesn't start all over again!--TEHodson 22:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC) "Outing removed"I'm afraid that this edit is kind of silly, since User:Cazedessus not only uses the same last name as Camille Cazedessus, Jr., but states on his user page that he won the 1966 Hugo award for his Edgar Rice Burroughs fanzine. That's not ambiguous. There is only one person who won the 1966 Hugo award for ERB-dom. --GRuban (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
No summary revertHello. I noted this edit as an un-summaried revert of a perfectly good edit. Would you be kind enough to explain your rationale please? After all, I was making the article comply with WP:DASH, WP:HEAD and more. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC) Characters of Persona 4Please don't make huge reverts in Characters of Persona 4 just for a nickname. You removed a large number of references and reverted the trim of a large number of details.Tintor2 (talk) 20:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
TinTin++Yup, that's me. --Scandum (talk) 02:39, 18 January 2012 (UTC) OopsThanks for spotting my massive fail here... I stand trouted, sigh. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC) KoshVorlon, I'm sorry, but I didn't think this template was very helpful, even if many might deem it funny. For vandalism, I always think that a warning should be enough. I noticed that you only used it in May and November of last year, and I hope you won't reintroduce it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC) Tag team vandalism on that article, it seems, so my rollback appeared to introduce further vandalism that you caught. I had to go back a day to a version without such shenanigans. If you don't mind, I'll remove your vandalism warning from my talk page, as being a false-positive? Rails (talk) 19:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC) Thank-you for removing anonymous alteration to my user-pageNo way to figure out why this person makes peculiar additions there: has previously done so and been corrected by another also operating in Wikipedia registration. Odd behaviour given that observations supposedly by me are false and I am on the other side of the world. Ah well. Masalai (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC) Lost Nigger Gold MineWhat do you mean "all references point back to the wiki", and why does a man who was 14 in 1887 fall under our Biographies of Living Persons policy? Ironholds (talk) 17:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC) MOTDs (This space for rent)You may have noticed over the past few days that the MOTD that you link to on your user page has simply displayed a red link. This is due to the fact that not enough people are reviewing pending MOTDs here. Please help us keep the MOTD template alive and simply go and review a few of the MOTDs in the list. That way we can have a real MOTD in the future rather than re-using (This space for rent). Any help would be appreciated! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC) VandalismSorry, whats rong???Peter in s (talk) 22:52, 11 March 2012 (UTC) Talkback Message added 16:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC) POV edit warringCome on, Kosh, you know better than this and this. Leave it, ok? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC) WikiThanks You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.19 (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2012 (UTC) Old spice yet againSee this. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC) Cla68Please do not modify other people's user pages, as you did at User:Cla68. The exceptions for situations when this are appropriate (see WP:USER for more info) are fairly narrow and should be obvious to most editors; the fact that many people at ANI find the message to be acceptable clearly indicates that the community does not think this is an obvious case. As such, the more general principle allowing user's broad discretion over their own userpage applies, until such time as there is a consensus otherwise. Thanks. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:41, 26 April 2012 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2012 (UTC) May 2012 Your recent editing history at Wikipedia talk:User pages shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Nobody Ent 17:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
That's just the thing, ScottyWong,, WP:SOAP is the current consensus, and already answers this question. The RFC was not needed , and in fact, is the wrong place for this. They needed to be on WP:NOT looking to change WP:SOAP, as this is what they'd need to do. It already ran it's course and was closed. (not at this point, of course). YOu follow ? ‑KoshVorlon| Angeli i demoni kruzhili nado mnoj... - 18:25, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
I agree completely with you, but your attempts to close the discussion are clearly disruptive. Just stop. You're not helping at all. --Onorem♠Dil 20:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC) Spelling...On your user page, you might want to change Burecrat's Noticeboard to Bureaucrats' noticeboard
The Spell-Checker Song: Owed to a Spell Czech Her My revertHey KoshVorlon! I just thought I'd let you know that I did revert your edits to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Avicennasis with this edit. The arbcom decision only topic banned him from a namespace beginning with Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/, not from Wikipedia:requests for adminship/. The arbcom decision did allow for Malleus to be banned from an RfA but that takes the action of an administrator. There is a discussion going on at ANI if you care to take part. Ryan Vesey Review me! 17:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Personal attacksYou are never to tell another user to "fuck off" again. Period. Hipocrite (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
May 2012
Re AFDNever revert an AFD that was closed by an administrator because you don't agree with the closure. If you disagree with the closure take it to the admin talk page or WP:DRV per proper guidelines, do not revert again. Secret account 20:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Edit war on AFDStop edit warring over the closure of that section at the AfD. I will block you both if necessary. WormTT≡talk≡ 13:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Please see the above ANI report regarding you. postdlf (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC) Indentation on talk pagesHi. Could you try to get your indentation right in talk pages: it makes them hard to follow when the indents are wrong. In general, you need to put the right number of colons at the start of each paragraph of your comment, or use <P> to start a new paragraph. Thanks. Dricherby (talk) 12:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC) "damn" on my talk pageWikipedia is not censored. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC) TalkbackMessage added 14:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. regarding the warning. The Determinator p t c 14:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC) PopularLooks like were are both popular HERE for THIS. I have to say that I don't really like sharing the spotlight, but I will let you take all the credit for this one. :) --Morning277 (talk) 14:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC) Inaccurate accusations of vandalism, and destructive edits labelled "copyedit"I don't know what you're up to, but in this edit which you labelled "copyedit", you undid several corrections which User:Mogism had made, and then accused him/her of vandalism, and similarly for Level 42. I think you owe them an apology, and you need to take more care with your edits and accusations. PamD 15:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC) Reply on my talk page, copied here for clarity: Pam, Actually, Mogism removed several lines of text under the premise of "Copyedit". (I'm running Lupin's antivandal tool and any changes made are highlighted immediately (Yes, it still means I have to read them ). ) He broke at least one sentance by this removal. I didn't call his edits vandalism, I reverted as "copyedit". I left him two non-templated mesesages explaining that he was removing text and that he needs to slow down. No big. (As a matter of fact, I happen to know he's running fast, the two messages I left him were very close together, he responded first to one, that about 5 mins later, he responded to the other. So, no , no applogy is needed, nor did I accuse him of vandalism, just moving too quickly with the AWB. "....We are all Kosh...." <-Babylon-5-> 15:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC) Heads up, this is what I'm talking about. His "copyedits" are producing this kind of a result (he's removed about three lines of text under the edit summary "typo fixing". (I didn't communicate with him about this at all....I wanted you to see what I'm seeing, because I get you see differently ) File:06122012_wiki.jpg
Sure, but check the image, you'll see what I see. (Left click on it, and check the highlighted section ). − "....We are all Kosh...." <-Babylon-5-> 15:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I use this tool (and it's not my own, by the way) a lot, and if there was a bug with it, why aren't there more instances of me falsely reporting vandalism? Truth is, there isn't. I tagged Mogism the first time with the test message template the first time, however, the next edit removed text out of a paragraph that rendered it unreadable -- I tagged him again with a slightly stronger template to get the message across. I supplied you with a screenshot and your reply indicated you didn't even look at it. You need to look at all available evidence and then make your conclusion. I showed you what I saw, if you not interested in looking at it, ok, I can't make you look at it. All evidence points to no bug in the tool (it's Lupin's by the way ) and that he made at least two edits that pulled text out where it was not needed , with an edit summary that didn't even come close to what he purported to do. I don't know if you're his mentor or not, and just for the record, I'm not interested in turning this into an "I'm right - you're wrong match ". I , again, stand by my posts on his page and believe no appology is needed. "....We are all Kosh...." <-Babylon-5-> 16:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
You need to exercise a litte more careYou recently left a warning on No More Mr Nice Guy's talk page, falsely alleging that he has violated a 1RR restriction. That RR restriction clearly says 'Reverts of edits made by anonymous IP editors that are not vandalism are exempt from 1RR'. You should probably remove or otherwise modify your warning. They think it's all over (talk) 17:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Dr. StrangeHi, Kosh. I'm afraid I'm not following: Wikipedia itself is free use. Clearly, I could not copy from the website RecalledComics.com. But it's perfectly permissible to use Wikipedia and in fact it's sensible in that it keeps same-topic content consistent. I could see nowhere on the copyright-policy page anything about not using the same wording in two Wikipedia articles. I'm not entirely sure that you're correct. But might be wrong. If you could point me in the right direction, I'd be happy to investigate further before going back to Doctor Strange. Thanks, --Tenebrae (talk) 00:45, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC) Don't do that againIt's an ArbCom page. The clerks will remove anything they feel is inappropriate. You are not a clerk. Black Kite (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
KoshVorlon's misuse of the hat template has been a recurring problem. His history of improperly removing others' talk page comments also goes way back, and complaints about it can be found throughout his talk page archives. postdlf (talk) 18:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotSuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC) Wikipedia User 72.14.77.206I see that you had given this guy User_talk:72.14.77.206 a "last warning" a while back to stop vandalizing pages. Well, they are back to their old tricks again recently. I don't think I've seen a constructive edit from this IP address at all in recent months. I'll leave it to you as to what to do next. Thanx. Guy1890 (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC) Whack!
— PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 06:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
|
