Revision as of 02:32, 8 December 2007 editRadon210 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers20,275 edits →Nuclear history of Iran: reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:56, 8 December 2007 edit undoBlue5864 (talk | contribs)158 edits Menudo vandal deleteNext edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Menudo == | |||
You are correct in blocking the guy for deleting sourced Menudo stories ] Do not let other admintrators over ride you and allow this guy to bully you with legal threats.--] (]) 02:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{Editor review}} | {{Editor review}} | ||
{{User:Alexfusco5/template}} | {{User:Alexfusco5/template}} |
Revision as of 02:56, 8 December 2007
Menudo
You are correct in blocking the guy for deleting sourced Menudo stories Menudo Do not let other admintrators over ride you and allow this guy to bully you with legal threats.--Blue5864 (talk) 02:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
This user has asked for Wikipedians to give him feedback at an editor review. You may comment on his edits at Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Radon210. |
This is Radon210's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 |
Alexfusco5 (talk · contribs) |
Misplaced Pages ads | file info – show another – #53 |
Welcome to my talk page. Here are some tips to help you communicate with me:
- Please continue any conversation on the page where it was started.
- If I have left a message on your talk page please DO NOT post a reply here. I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
- Add or respond to an existing conversation under the existing heading.
- Indent your comment when replying by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
- Create a new heading if the original conversation is archived.
- To initiate a new conversation on this page, please click on this link.
- You should sign your comments. You can do this automatically by typing four tildes (~~~~).
Alexfusco5 is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
How do I set an image on a Misplaced Pages Page?
Hello, this is VGAfanatic. First of all, I wanted to thank you for the humble welcome you gave me as well as the picture of those cookies. If they were real, I would have surely thought them delicious. But my point is that the gesture was kind and I am glad you were so nice to me. For the second time, I thank you.
But now, I have an important question to ask you. The image you sent me and others like it: Do you know how I can set them specifically? I have read the web page on how to set it up, but do you know how I have to make the link for the image? If you have a liable answer, would you be kind enough to reply? If the answer is in the help page, would you be willing to tell me where it is?
Re:December
Thank you very much. I didn't know that!¤~IslaamMaged126 15:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- No Problem :) Alexfusco5 15:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
AfD discussion: Fictitous Presidents
Hello Alexfusco5,
I am relatively new around here, and am in the midst of trying to learn the ropes. My presence over at AfD was actually another editors suggestion as a way to learn more about deletion policy (long story short: I was involved in what I thought was a slam dunk deletion that ended up being saved, and I am trying to understand more about what the thinking on saving/deleting is).
In your recent comment, you mentioned a link to WP:NOT, so I went over there to check this out. For the life of me, I could not see what you could be referring to. Now I am not here saying "You are wrong". I am asking, from a standpoint of ignorance, what specifically you were referring to? Like I said, I am really trying to learn more about what people are thinking about in issues of deletion. Anything you could tell me would be deeply appreciated. (for the record, I'm not all that interested in this kind of stuff, so I have no strong feeling on the topic). LonelyBeacon 19:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, and Thanks for pointing that out, I meant to link to WP:NOTE. I will fix that in the AFD in one second Alexfusco5 19:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem .... really, I am just trying to learn my way around. I did go take a look at the notability section again (this was the page I looked at quite a bit when I was looking at another article (a month ago) trying to determine why it should be kept, when it was obvious to me that it should be deleted. Again, I was lost .... I think that I understand notability, but I'm always open to the idea that my viewpoint might not be the right one ..... there's always someone that has a different one that sees what I don't. I do hate to burden you, and please don't feel in anyway that I expect a speedy reply, but if you could explain to me what you are thinking, I think I could learn a lot. I am appreciative! LonelyBeacon 20:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fictional characters or in this case presidents are not always notable and after quickly reading the article I found no indication of its notability Alexfusco5 12:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem .... really, I am just trying to learn my way around. I did go take a look at the notability section again (this was the page I looked at quite a bit when I was looking at another article (a month ago) trying to determine why it should be kept, when it was obvious to me that it should be deleted. Again, I was lost .... I think that I understand notability, but I'm always open to the idea that my viewpoint might not be the right one ..... there's always someone that has a different one that sees what I don't. I do hate to burden you, and please don't feel in anyway that I expect a speedy reply, but if you could explain to me what you are thinking, I think I could learn a lot. I am appreciative! LonelyBeacon 20:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
wot r u on about?!
it was me that wrote that! not jeff! Iamandrewrice 20:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please tell me what you are talking about so I can help you or explain my reasoning Alexfusco5 20:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Your warning on my page
Please remove it, and if you removed my message to Whitstable, please reinstate it. It was not vandalism, and per policy you may not remove other's comments which are not vandalism from talk pages. Thank you. Jeffpw 20:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry the edit summary made it appear to be vandalism Alexfusco5 20:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Don't obfuscate. It was not just your edit summary. I know a vandalism template when I see one, as I give them out myself. Further, it is considered very bad form to template established users. Had you checked, you'd have seen I have over 7,000 edits and have edited for almost 2 years. I am sure you acted in good faith, but you caught me on a bad wiki day. Jeffpw 20:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not 'my' edit summary yours appeared vandalism and after investigating I realized you were editing a section called 'i did not vandalise!!!!!...' before I investigated it appeared vandal and there is a lot of vandalism and it is difficult to tell the difference at times Alexfusco5 20:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Alex, I've mentioned this to you a couple of times before; once, when you templated me, and again when you templated an established user, and that person became upset. Please read WP:DTTR. It is essential that you stop templating established editors. Mr Which 20:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have read it and the only reason I templated him was I thought he was relatively new Alexfusco5 20:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- How you could possibly have thought that is beyond me. I could see making that mistake about me (I'm not new, for the record), but Jeffpw is a very established editor, with a long track record, easily discovered. Before templating anyone, perhaps you should consider your methods. This is a recurring problem, with established users becoming upset with your liberal use of the WP templates. A simple note (personally written, not templated) to Jeff asking him about his edit would have cleared everything up, and shown much more respect for an established user. But established or no, editors (not necessarily anon IPs) are usually deserving of a short, personal note of some type. Additionally, shouting (ALL CAPS) in the edit summaries is also usually considered poor form. Mr Which 20:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I know, I was just getting frustrated because you are repeatedly telling me this. I did not check his backround because there are very few cases of an established editor vandalizing Misplaced Pages so I thought he was new. Alexfusco5 20:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- How you could possibly have thought that is beyond me. I could see making that mistake about me (I'm not new, for the record), but Jeffpw is a very established editor, with a long track record, easily discovered. Before templating anyone, perhaps you should consider your methods. This is a recurring problem, with established users becoming upset with your liberal use of the WP templates. A simple note (personally written, not templated) to Jeff asking him about his edit would have cleared everything up, and shown much more respect for an established user. But established or no, editors (not necessarily anon IPs) are usually deserving of a short, personal note of some type. Additionally, shouting (ALL CAPS) in the edit summaries is also usually considered poor form. Mr Which 20:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have read it and the only reason I templated him was I thought he was relatively new Alexfusco5 20:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Alex, I've mentioned this to you a couple of times before; once, when you templated me, and again when you templated an established user, and that person became upset. Please read WP:DTTR. It is essential that you stop templating established editors. Mr Which 20:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not 'my' edit summary yours appeared vandalism and after investigating I realized you were editing a section called 'i did not vandalise!!!!!...' before I investigated it appeared vandal and there is a lot of vandalism and it is difficult to tell the difference at times Alexfusco5 20:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Don't obfuscate. It was not just your edit summary. I know a vandalism template when I see one, as I give them out myself. Further, it is considered very bad form to template established users. Had you checked, you'd have seen I have over 7,000 edits and have edited for almost 2 years. I am sure you acted in good faith, but you caught me on a bad wiki day. Jeffpw 20:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Two things: perhaps there's a reason I've mentioned this to you a few times--you keep doing it; and, your reasoning is circular in that you say that you thought he was vandalizing because he was a new editor, and you thought he was a new editor because he was vandalizing. This is confusing, and leads to frustration from other editors, as it appears you only give a cursory scan to a given edit before reverting it as "vandalism". Additionally, from the message posted above, it appears Jeff didn't even make the edit you were trying to revert. Alex, again, I would encourage you to stop using templates on any registered account, as you're receiving numerous complaints. Tangentially, as it appears you would like to be an admin at some point, it's these kind of things that people cite in opposition at RfAs. I am saying this as someone who wants you to succeed and do well on WP, not as someone who wishes you ill. Regards, Mr Which 20:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not "because" he was a new editor. I thought he was a new editor because his edit appeared to be vandalism. I was going quicker than normal because I'm recovering from the flu. And about a request for adminship. I would not accept any nomination until at least May. Alexfusco5 21:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- That makes even less sense, as nothing about his edit "looked like vandalism." Alex, all I'm saying is please stop templating registered users. It takes perhaps 10 seconds to compose a one or two sentence note. As for adminship, this is the kind of issue that, if you don't clean it up, will derail any plans you may have, no matter what timeframe you're looking at. Regards, Mr Which 21:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- let me explain my thinking, The edit made had an edit summary that appeared to be vandalism. The edit looked like it was vandalism, although I now know it was not. Because a regular contributor rarely vandalizes (I only have seen this happen once) I thought he was new on the project so i gave him a {{uw-vandalism1}}. Had I noticed he was a regular contributor, i would have reverted my revert and apologized for my edit summary that said he vandalized. Please do not send me anotherWP:DTTR link message as I have read it and if I notice a regular user made a mistake I send a non templated message Alexfusco5 00:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would encourage you to stop templating all registered users, or--in the alternate--always, always, always, check the contribs to be sure you're not templating a regular when you place one. As for the link, you had shown no behavior that indicated you had read it, which is why I sent it to you again. As you have now explicitly indicated you have read it, I won't send it to you again, provided you actually do stop templating regular contributors. Mr Which 00:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- let me explain my thinking, The edit made had an edit summary that appeared to be vandalism. The edit looked like it was vandalism, although I now know it was not. Because a regular contributor rarely vandalizes (I only have seen this happen once) I thought he was new on the project so i gave him a {{uw-vandalism1}}. Had I noticed he was a regular contributor, i would have reverted my revert and apologized for my edit summary that said he vandalized. Please do not send me anotherWP:DTTR link message as I have read it and if I notice a regular user made a mistake I send a non templated message Alexfusco5 00:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- That makes even less sense, as nothing about his edit "looked like vandalism." Alex, all I'm saying is please stop templating registered users. It takes perhaps 10 seconds to compose a one or two sentence note. As for adminship, this is the kind of issue that, if you don't clean it up, will derail any plans you may have, no matter what timeframe you're looking at. Regards, Mr Which 21:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not "because" he was a new editor. I thought he was a new editor because his edit appeared to be vandalism. I was going quicker than normal because I'm recovering from the flu. And about a request for adminship. I would not accept any nomination until at least May. Alexfusco5 21:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Shared IP
This is a shared IP. I would suggest that you refrain from banning it just because you are not thick skinned enough to stand vandalism that is automatically reverted, either way.
- If you do not want to be blocked,create an account Alexfusco5 12:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom election
I want to sincerely thank you for your support. Unfortunately under 12 hours have passed in the election process and you are in a minority of 4 supports to 29 opposes, so my candidacy is clearly going nowhere and I have struck myself out of the election. Perhaps next time - thanks again. Stifle (talk) 11:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry my support didn't help much. Best of luck next year Alexfusco5 22:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the anti-vandalism work
Just wanted to thank you for your anti-vandalism work. A user called Sh000gun keeps trying to remove sourced information that is politically damaging to Bob Livingston, an American lobbyist and former congressman. I went to great lengths to document the information, and to present it in non-inflammatory language. It's very frustrating that this character keeps trying to erase this work periodically, while refusing to give any explanation, even after an RFC. Anyway, thanks for noticing.
Note that Sh000gun keeps trying to delete similar information on two pages--the Livingston Group and Bob Livingston. VonBrunmarck 04:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Again--thanks for your warm welcome. I appreciate it! I know how to revert vandalism--but the problem is that this character Sh000gun will wait a few weeks, then remove the inconvenient information. This has gone on for months now. I have tried, repeatedly, to engage Sh000gun in a conversation. But she/he refuses. Is there any way to put a stop to *ongoing* vandalism? Do I have to just keep checking back all the time to see whether Sh000gun has struck again? VonBrunmarck (talk) 00:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
not vandalising
Don't worry, I am doing some heavy edits to trim down on the biography and present the information in a more chronological way in the Elliott Smith article. I'm a longtime editor of the article that helped bring it to featured status and I'm not just deleting random blocks of text. ;) - Phorque (talk) 22:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I figured that out when I saw your talk page and was about to fix it, I'm sorry for indicating you as a vandal in the edit summary Alexfusco5 22:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Cheaspeake Tower
I'm 100% certain Chesapeke Tower by Jdlddw (talk · contribs) is a copyvio per I9, but can't find a source for it. Given that his first edit to the article involved the copying of the header of Misplaced Pages and including in citation brackets, it makes me suspicious of the source. Also of note, Misplaced Pages's donation counter is at 33,799, but his edit has it standing at 22,099. I'll do some searching around, but all of my queries here and at Google have not produced any fruit. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 02:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have added a prod to the page Alexfusco5 02:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- BTW I think you mean G12 Alexfusco5 02:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I cited the wrong one on a whim. Thanks, Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- BTW I think you mean G12 Alexfusco5 02:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism on Ecjmartin page
Alex, thanks so much for reverting the vandalism done to my userpage. While I might have caught it eventually, it was really nice to see that someone else was watching out for me and took care of it. I deeply appreciate your help!! Thanks again, Merry Christmas, and God bless! - Ecjmartin (talk) 04:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- No Problem at all. :)Alexfusco5 12:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Quick note on Kurt Cobain
Hi. I undid a vandalism warning you gave regarding an edit to Kurt Cobain. (It was to do with this edit ). No worries, I got confused in the editing there too, but I thought I better drop a note in case you were wondering. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 22:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note :) Alexfusco5 22:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Violet Pepper
Hey, sorry I meant to do preview and not save as I was just seeing how it looked :-/ not done this before, maybies I'll sleep on it and think of how to word it more constructive! thanx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angel havoc (talk • contribs) 22:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Welcome sign
I see! I didn't know you had to do it for that: I've always substituted for warnings though. Alientraveller (talk) 22:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem I thought it might have been an accident Alexfusco5 22:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
District of Herbert.
Huh? I'm changing the page to reflect the results of the recent election. Things such as:
- George's caption "is a candidate" to "was a candidate".
- Removing the "Lindsay retained seat in 2004" because him retaining it in 2007 superceeds that.
- Noting that because Lindsay retained the seat, but his party lost, it is no longer a bellwether seat.
If you took the time to read the page, you'd understand that.
Thanks for your interest.
Duggy 1138 (talk) 02:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, thought you were doing the typical delete random text Alexfusco5 02:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Nuclear history of Iran
The material I reverted was plagiarised from here. It would be alright to cite this material in a summarisable form, but the entire article should not be copy and pasted verbatim in to the article. --68.253.35.241 (talk) 02:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed your edit summary but could not find the source of it. Feel free to do it again as long as you list the website Alexfusco5 02:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)