This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.

VandalProof

We need to be more careful with the approvals of VP. Recently there have been a number of users that were approved who should not have been. I appears that as long as the user has +250 edits you approve. while that is one factor in approving there are others and Im not sure that your looking into them. I do not mean to insult you but I would like to take over the VP approvals completely for a while to ensure that there are no errors in approving. If you would Like I can go over the details of what to look into besides the edit count if you wish. Betacommand ^{( talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

If you dont mind Id like to take over the approvals since there have been concerns by several people about the recent approvals. Cheers Betacommand ^{( talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about taking so long to get back but Im done hogging the VP mod task and just a reminder please be careful who we approve as one of our approvals went rouge shortly after approval and after I removed there access they turned vandal. Hope we avoid any more like that. Cheers Betacommand ^{( talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

VandalProof

That was quick! Thanks for the prompt response, RHB 01:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Free Republic

...And yet you state you "assume good faith".....( EnglishEfternamn 02:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC))

Why did you delete my section header in Talk:Free Republic?

All that other stuff was not part of what I wanted as a simple "To Do" list to coordinate edits. Thanks. -- BenBurch 06:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the clarification on my talk page. At first I had no idea why EnglishEfternamn was so confused.

re: VP

Mm, I see. I replaced my comment on betacommands' talk page -- froth ^T 01:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh I know, I just wanted to be as accurate as possible -- froth ^T 02:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

VandalBot application

Hi there.. I applied to use VandalBot earlier and was denied due to a too-low Mainpage editcount (had 247). My count is above 250 now. If you check out my edits, you'll see a do a lot of spam/vandal policing on pages I watch. I really could use the help. Please reconsider my application. Izaakb 03:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU!

Thank you for the message you left on my user page. It was quite helpful, and I greatly appreciate your time and effort. I feel comfortable with the present situation, and the solutions which were promptly executed seem quite satisfactory. (If I change my mind, I will contact the named parties.) It is a pleasure not only to be able to contribute to Wikipedia Articles, but to know that help is there when needed! Although I lack the technical expertise to solve some problems (for myself, let alone for others) I enjoy contributing more than my musical knowledge, by correcting faulty spelling and grammar, awkward wordings, etc. Thanks again! Prof.rick 04:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't explode!

I see you're explosive. Might I suggest talking to a bomb squad? ~ Topaz ^{♪ ♫ ∆} 07:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this edit OK?

Hi, Prodego! After reviewing your comments on my User Page, I realized you provided a link which could lead to private information, through a means with which most Users are unfamiliar. I therefore edited out the link. I hope you don't mind! (Of course, there are still means by which any User could locate private information, but removing this link seems to reduce the likelihood of such.)

As a general rule, is it OK for a User to edit his own User/Talk pages? (In such cases as this, or abusive/insulting messages?) I'd really like to clear my User/Talk pages of crap!)

Please don't be explosive! I'm still learning! THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HELP! Prof.rick 07:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Privacy Policy

You said: "Yes, we have one, and yes, there was a possibility it was violated (by me), in revealing information from the "From:" header of an e-mail to me. However, based on discussion with an arbitrator the release was acceptable, due to the user using his last name in a sockpuppet and first in his primary account. In addition there is a precedent on this from the Squidward vandal."olor="darkgreen">talk]] 17:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah ha. Live and learn. Anyway, this was a pretty clear case of sockpuppetry even without that information. -- Yamla 17:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:User message box

Sorry it took me so long to respond. No I will not use it. But i just wanted to know how it worked thats all. -- Darkest Hour ^Talk• _contribs 19:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

HA!

hahahahahahahahahahahahah! Joking with you! OMG that's classic! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah! My message box is meant to be a joke! --Regards, Darkest Hour ^Talk• _contribs 19:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for tolerance and tip!

Thanks for "forgiving" the changes to my user pages! Also, thanks for letting me know that we have considerable freedom in removing comments from our own user pages. (Occasionally pointless arguments and inappropriate remarks appear, sometimes to the detriment of the quality of the encylopedia. It's great to learn that it's usually OK to remove them.) MUCH APPRECIATED! Wikipedia is "a better place" because of helpers like you! Prof.rick 03:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

And thanks again!

YOU ARE TEH WORST PERSON EVER! I AM GOING TO SUE YOU IN ALASKA! (Cool stuff!) Seriously, thanks for even more tips and a friendly welcome to Wikipedia. If only ALL Wikipedians could experience such a helpful and friendly start! I hereby nominate you for a Wiki-Welcomer award! Best, Prof.rick 03:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)