Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:00, 19 June 2009

Although my editing is sporadic at best, I actively pay attention to both my talk page and my watchlist. If you want my attention, leave a message here and I'll get back to you.

Welcome

There you are, now your discussion page won't show as red either!

Seriously, thanks for improving the Newgrounds audio section, it looks much better now. I too am skeptical that Tom put the Audio section in primarily to avoid copyright issues- I will ask him!

If you are looking for something to do, maybe you would like to start a page for Tom Fulp. No, I don't know where a list of templates are, if I find out I will let you know- for now I go into somewhere where one is being used and copy it! Best Wishes,

IceDragon64 (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I should get into the habit of responding. I'll be contributing to Tom Fulp and Newgrounds whenever I come up with something worth adding to the articles. Until then, war on vandalism as always. LedgendGamer (talk) 07:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Abomination of Desolation

kriegerdwm: Yes, I believed I removed a link which was not hot (i.e., "Page Not Found")- if not this, then something else which I have no idea - perhaps insead of saying "Most" I may have changed some to "Some" but whatever it was I really can't find it - no biggie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kriegerdwm (talk • contribs) 08:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, are you 69.229.122.167? I took that to be an edit by an anonymous IP, and I saw an entire see also section missing under the diff, so I undid it, then revised my position when I saw it was added again then removed. If you had left an edit summary and made the edit with Kriegerdwm, I probably would have ignored it. Like you said, no biggie, the article lived. -- LedgendGamer (talk) 08:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you RE: Bylaw enforcement officer

Thank you for your efforts to revert vandalism on the Bylaw enforcement officer page. Large chunks of data appear to be vandalized through removal randomly. --Sonixelectronix (talk) 03:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I should start thanking people for protecting my user/talk pages. Thank you for spreading kindness. —LedgendGamer 03:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Genetic Engineering

Thanks for setting me straight about messing with the discussion page. As you can see, I'm new to this. Cheers mate Djadvance (talk) 05:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Finally, a polite new user. I'll give you a proper welcome template in a few minutes. —LedgendGamer 05:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Dark orbit

now this has been speedied and prodded and deprodded, it is time for you to consider whether to propose Dark orbit for WP:AfD. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

From here, it's starting to look similar to throwing the baby out of the bathwater. In addition to that, I'd probably come across as a bit of a dick if I jumped straight to AfD. I'll give anyone who wants to take a stab at the article a day to do something about the recommendations I made on the talk page, then I'll strongly consider sending it to AfD. Out of curiosity, why did you replace the speedy tag with a prod instead of simply adding a prod? As far as I know, online games count under {{db-web}}. —LedgendGamer 21:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The policy I am considering comes from WP:WEB with: Web content includes, but is not limited to, blogs, Internet forums, newsgroups, online magazines and other media, podcasts, webcomics, web hosts, and web portals. Any content which is distributed solely on the Internet is considered, for the purposes of this guideline, as web content. I considered this to be a game or software to which A7 does not apply. Also WP:GAMECRUFT applies. The AfD has an advantage of giving people the opportunity to explain their arguments. If you are the only one who wants to delete this, it will be revealed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

"But is not limited to". AfD it is. —LedgendGamer 01:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For beating me at reverting vandalism. I dream of horses (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —LedgendGamer 23:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Platipig

Why was this page marked for deletion? OtisJimmyOne 01:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I marked Platipig for G3 for the following reasons, in reverse order for some reason:

1. The log shows that it's already been deleted for G3.
2. Teamtaycob, the article's creator, has a record of creating unconstructive pages.
3. A quick google search made it clear that Platipigs don't exist. If it existed, there would be large amounts of news coverage, due to the discovery of a new species of Platypus-Pig hybrid.

That answer your question at all? —LedgendGamer 01:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, Mistake on my part I reverted the removal of the tag and the page was deleted. That result I found on Google was a blog which is not good enough. My Apologies, OtisJimmyOne 01:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I was bored anyways and I enjoy answering questions. —LedgendGamer 01:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thermometer

hey stop vandalising my fun on thermometer dude its just fun we dont mean to destroy the universe or anything we're just on crack atm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.145.72 (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Image deletion

Strictly speaking, that image probably doesn't fit any speedy deletion criterion, although some may find it qualified under a more liberal interpretation of the CSD. My main justification for the deletion was a mixture of Ignore All Rules and the Snowball clause. To answer your question, you would – in all likelihood – not have been able to tag that image for speedy deletion and have an administrator that was judiciously following the criteria delete it. The safest bet in the future would be to list such images at FfD, where they will be deleted when the time is over (perhaps sooner, as in this case). ÷seresin 03:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I was watching your talk page, you know. Anyways, that answers my question. Happy editing. —LedgendGamer 03:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

A Barnstar

For your quick save on the article Coast Guard this 27th day of May, 2009. It was definitely a righteous bust. I wish we didn't have to spend the time we do correcting anonymous posters vandalism. Thanks again for your help. Cuprum17 (talk) 23:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Ironically, if we didn't have vandals, I'd be out of a job here. Thanks. —LedgendGamer 23:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Newgrounds

I like and totally support your work on NG.

IceDragon64 (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't think I'm doing nearly as good a job as I should be. Content writing doesn't seem to be my strong point. You're doing well, too; the encyclopedia (in my opinion) needs good writers more than it needs good vandal fighters. —LedgendGamer 21:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Difference between G1 and G3

Hi there LegendGamer, nice work with NPP. Just saw you make a slight mistake at Matias trinidad, while the page does meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you used G1 which doesn't apply. G1 refers to a page which is pure gibberish (i.e. a random string of letters such as "gfdgffdg"), and doesn't apply to pages which are nonsense (e.g. "I was born in 1201 and am 12 years old and fought in the civil war"). For pages which are so clearly nonsense they could never be true, use G3. Also, G1 doesn't apply to bad spelling (so a page which contained "i was brn ni 1201 and am 12 yrs old and thought in teh civil wra" still comes under G3 and not G1). Anyway, keep up your work - Kingpin (talk) 06:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Although I can't remember exactly what that particular page contained, I know that - at the time - I was in a mindset of G1 meaning no meaningful content or history, in addition to patent nonsense. I think I interpreted no meaningful content to mean something that's clearly complete bogus. Thanks, I'll try to remember that and stick to {{db-hoax}} from now on. —LedgendGamer 21:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem, everybody makes the mistake due to the wording of G1, including me and even some admins ;) - Kingpin (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Wonderfully efficient response!

In a mere 1 minute, 8 seconds you reverted the vandalism I made. I commend you for the amazingly rapid response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.108.113 (talk) 04:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I spent a good 15 seconds staring at it, wondering what you were up to. Either way, you should probably stick to more constructive methods of doing experiments with vandalism in the future. Happy editing. —LedgendGamer 06:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Rollback and Misplaced Pages:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. –Juliancolton |  01:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. —LedgendGamer 01:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Not assuming good faith, Biting newcomers

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. I noticed the message you recently left to Perdidymis13. Please remember: do not bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkgirl9595 (talk • contribs) 21:35, June 15, 2009 (UTC)

I'll admit that I was a little harsh, but I feel that - given some of the user's edits - a warning was in order. Probably not a level 4im warning, but a warning nonetheless. We don't need policy shortcuts like WP:POO (which was recently speedied for G3), and some of the edits were pure vandalism. Childish play does not belong on Misplaced Pages. As for biting, there is a line between vandalism and newcomers trying to edit, a line that sometimes doesn't exist or is extremely blurred. I will never respect immaturity, and will always be tempted to bite those who can't conduct themselves in a mature manner. By the way, I would have appreciated it if you had written out that message instead of using templates. I've marked your comment as unsigned (please, sign your posts!). —LedgendGamer 23:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I was rushing and I've used templates instead of writing messages, and I forgot to sign my post as well. I understand what you meant by stating that this particular editor was acting immature and being disruptive, but however, I'm not completely certain that this user was purely vandalizing Misplaced Pages with bad faith, because they might not have understood all the rules of participating in editing Misplaced Pages. Pinkgirl9595 (talk) 01:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

You're right, pure bad faith in this case would be a bit of a stretch. I probably shouldn't have jumped to level 4im for what seems, in retrospect, a user's version of experimenting. —LedgendGamer 02:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Come on

It's only funny if you let it stay for five minutes THEN revert it. Come on lighten up. --The professor with the tinted glasses (talk) 23:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll ignore your fun until you target anything remotely important or frequently viewed, then WP:AIV it is. There's a line where fun becomes vandalism, and for many users, you crossed it a few edits ago. —LedgendGamer 23:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy deletion tag: Preeti Sahay

Hi LedgendGamer! I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on Preeti Sahay- because: the article makes a credible claim of importance or significance. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. decltype (talk) 05:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I was reluctant to tag that in the first place, it was more of an A1 than an A7. I expected it to be contested anyway, especially after the article was expanded after the tag was placed. Mistakes happen. —LedgendGamer 20:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Peter Costello

um why should I stop? I was removing subtle vandalism and improper synthesis of sources. the other user implied this politician was deliberately manipulating Misplaced Pages. LibStar (talk) 02:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, that comment was almost entirely directed at the other user. Don't worry too much about it. Just remember to take it to a talk page if he keeps it up, and it's generally a good idea to avoid using words like vandalism when dealing with stuff like this. Happy editing. —LedgendGamer 02:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

ok. no problems, I think for purposes of sufficient warnings, the word vandalism has to be used in order to report it. this user has a pattern of vandalism. LibStar (talk) 02:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Random

Do you get paid? 74.236.100.95 (talk) 05:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

No. By the way, you're not fooling anyone by not signing your insults. I'm still debating giving you {{uw-npa3}}. —LedgendGamer 05:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

R.E "Why don't you get an account?"

I had an account years ago which has long been abandoned, but I find IP editing to be less stressful. Also, as strange as this sounds, I think it's more private this way - even though it technically isn't. 124.185.196.182 (talk) 06:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it would be less stressful, without worrying about stuff like watchlists and public image and whatnot. Mind, you sacrifice all the awesome tools like enhanced recent changes, twinkle, rollback, friendly, etc. Either way, it's your call. Happy editing. —LedgendGamer 06:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 June 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 10:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Blanking

please do, when I attempted to delete, I got taken to the website. I did what I normally do in this situation, and tried to edit the url, but couldn't even see it. Basically I blanked because I couldn't see how to delete this one. Any suggestions? jimfbleak (talk) 07:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)