Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to FFmpeg, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
Hello, and thanks for your anti-spamming activities. Wikipedia really needs this. I would also recommend adding a warning to the users' page each time you revert their spam or vandalism, using the spam or vandalism templates. It is quite useful, especially with anonymous IP addresses, because, as the Administrator intervention against vandalism page says, a user must recieve a sufficient number or recent (i.e. in the last couple of days or so) warnings before they can get blocked. Therefore, each time someone adds a spam to Wikipedia and does not recieve a warning (or the warnings are not recent—like one warning from November 2009 followed by another warning in March 2010), it gives them a free ticket to add yet another piece of spam. So a spam1 template should be followed by a stronger spam2 warning, followed by spam3, and finally spam4, the last warning. Then, if it doesn't help, the user should be reported and blocked from editing. I guess our favourite spammer Shibohui will be blocked pretty soon...— J. M. ( talk) 10:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Martinezale You're kidding right? the same link with http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVS_Video_Editor "?Type=sct=inc&ct=Wiki&cid=165". I respect your "guidelines for external links", I just restore it to the original author website link. you can check the history of this article. I don't add the excess link. My link actually pointed to some unique content. If my link "violated" terms, show me that you have some integrity and remove those others as well. — Martinezale ( talk) 19:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the article is a mess. My previous comment still applies. "It's very hard to do anything about someone whose work is obviously well-intentioned and whose edits are a mixed bag. Really all one can do is roll back the bad edits & clean up any detritus left in his wake. One of the disadvantages of how Wikipedia is set up." - Jmabel | Talk 16:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:
Regression Tester, I'm confused. You state that you like my edits, but remove them. As a professional video editor AND leader of a software testing team, I'm qualified to state unequivocally that the software violates Windows standards as well as video editing norms, and every single statement I made in that edit was factual. I can walk you through them, if you'll download a copy of AVS video editor and skype me at RipplingBeast. Those goofballs have been permitted to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform, and if left as is, the article is blatantly false by omission. Further, "intended for beginning video editors" is pure opinion and the entire article cites no external PUBLISHED source. Also, IIRC, there should be NO article on Wikipedia which does not reference published (as in, paper) sources, and AVS Media has made a fetish out of staying hidden and out of the print media.
So, what's going on, here? Do you work for AVS? Do you care about the objectivity of Wikipedia articles? Do you care about their factual content? Everything you deleted was stone cold fact, even the adjectives like "frustrating." What's going on? RipplingBeast ( talk) 02:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
You are welcome, of course. Please help watch the page so they do not creep back. Promotional use of Wikipedia is systemic. Miami33139 ( talk) 23:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Nvidia PureVideo. Users who
edit disruptively or refuse to
collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. What are you doing?!!?? Stop edit warring please! I would have blocked you but am leaving this note instead. If you break the WP:3RR once again, you will be blocked. Wifione ....... Leave a message 04:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, why do you keep deleting the redirect tag that redirects from Elecard Group to Elecard, this is basically one and the same company and everybody knows that company as Elecard, not as Elecard Group. The info is basically identical, and there is no point in keeping two identical pages up to date. So would you please let this page redirect to Elecard? Vicadin ( talk) 08:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi again. As you might have seen in the Elecard page discussion tab, I have proposed the two pages for a merger. DMacks agreed that they should be merged. Is it okay to put a redirect tag here on Elecard Group page or I should do it in a different way? Thanks. Vicadin ( talk) 08:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
KRAUT, Geh zur hölle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.59.200 ( talk) 23:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " K-Multimedia Player". Thank you. -- SF007 ( talk) 18:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree that KMPlayer is non-notable and that it has clearly violated copyright on multiple occasions. I think the full depth of it should be included in the article, however. Original Research does not seem to apply to the sentence I have added. The only reason KMPlayer can use the GPL and LGPL code in their product is by following those licenses. And the authority on how to properly follow those licenses is the very lawyers and techies who wrote the licenses as well as the FAQ guidelines for those licenses, the FSF. 98.14.114.27 ( talk) 22:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello!
I you actually looking up in applications, those using lower case chars everywhere. This RFC reference is incorrect in that detail.
Please look up the other formats descriptions on Wikipedia .mkv .mov .mp4 or .mp3, all of them in lc, for a reason.
Regards Csendesmark ( talk) 23:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Never mind, I'll edit out. nobody pays me to look after it... Csendesmark ( talk) 23:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you've used rollback at Comparison of screencasting software quite a few times, to revert the good-faith addition of content. Please only use WP:ROLLBACK for vandalism, per that page's instructions (i.e. "editors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed"). Good-faith edits that are problematic should be fixed or reverted with a different method, eg using the "Undo" link, so that an explanatory edit summary can be added. Much thanks. – Quiddity ( talk) 19:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
SimpleScreenRecorder is a very new article. I added a reference to it from a Comparison of screencast wikipage, and I was wondering if you can tell me what wikipedia guideline I can use to look into about new articles being reference-able.. Thanks Swestlake ( talk) 19:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi.
I am in a hurry, so sorry for the curtness of the message. Anyway, please check the FFmpeg download page because unlike what you said, it seems there are binaries available for download.
In addition, Template:Infobox software specifically says "avoid specifying vague phrases such as Cross-platform (or its redirect, Multi-platform)". I am surprised no one has ever registered an objection.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 14:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello. You recent edit is not correct because Michael Norman and Fred Kerley have not run under 31s for the 300. http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_300ok.htm Ear-phone ( talk) 21:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to FFmpeg, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
Hello, and thanks for your anti-spamming activities. Wikipedia really needs this. I would also recommend adding a warning to the users' page each time you revert their spam or vandalism, using the spam or vandalism templates. It is quite useful, especially with anonymous IP addresses, because, as the Administrator intervention against vandalism page says, a user must recieve a sufficient number or recent (i.e. in the last couple of days or so) warnings before they can get blocked. Therefore, each time someone adds a spam to Wikipedia and does not recieve a warning (or the warnings are not recent—like one warning from November 2009 followed by another warning in March 2010), it gives them a free ticket to add yet another piece of spam. So a spam1 template should be followed by a stronger spam2 warning, followed by spam3, and finally spam4, the last warning. Then, if it doesn't help, the user should be reported and blocked from editing. I guess our favourite spammer Shibohui will be blocked pretty soon...— J. M. ( talk) 10:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Martinezale You're kidding right? the same link with http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVS_Video_Editor "?Type=sct=inc&ct=Wiki&cid=165". I respect your "guidelines for external links", I just restore it to the original author website link. you can check the history of this article. I don't add the excess link. My link actually pointed to some unique content. If my link "violated" terms, show me that you have some integrity and remove those others as well. — Martinezale ( talk) 19:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the article is a mess. My previous comment still applies. "It's very hard to do anything about someone whose work is obviously well-intentioned and whose edits are a mixed bag. Really all one can do is roll back the bad edits & clean up any detritus left in his wake. One of the disadvantages of how Wikipedia is set up." - Jmabel | Talk 16:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:
Regression Tester, I'm confused. You state that you like my edits, but remove them. As a professional video editor AND leader of a software testing team, I'm qualified to state unequivocally that the software violates Windows standards as well as video editing norms, and every single statement I made in that edit was factual. I can walk you through them, if you'll download a copy of AVS video editor and skype me at RipplingBeast. Those goofballs have been permitted to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform, and if left as is, the article is blatantly false by omission. Further, "intended for beginning video editors" is pure opinion and the entire article cites no external PUBLISHED source. Also, IIRC, there should be NO article on Wikipedia which does not reference published (as in, paper) sources, and AVS Media has made a fetish out of staying hidden and out of the print media.
So, what's going on, here? Do you work for AVS? Do you care about the objectivity of Wikipedia articles? Do you care about their factual content? Everything you deleted was stone cold fact, even the adjectives like "frustrating." What's going on? RipplingBeast ( talk) 02:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
You are welcome, of course. Please help watch the page so they do not creep back. Promotional use of Wikipedia is systemic. Miami33139 ( talk) 23:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Nvidia PureVideo. Users who
edit disruptively or refuse to
collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.
In particular, the three-revert rule states that:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. What are you doing?!!?? Stop edit warring please! I would have blocked you but am leaving this note instead. If you break the WP:3RR once again, you will be blocked. Wifione ....... Leave a message 04:41, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, why do you keep deleting the redirect tag that redirects from Elecard Group to Elecard, this is basically one and the same company and everybody knows that company as Elecard, not as Elecard Group. The info is basically identical, and there is no point in keeping two identical pages up to date. So would you please let this page redirect to Elecard? Vicadin ( talk) 08:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi again. As you might have seen in the Elecard page discussion tab, I have proposed the two pages for a merger. DMacks agreed that they should be merged. Is it okay to put a redirect tag here on Elecard Group page or I should do it in a different way? Thanks. Vicadin ( talk) 08:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
KRAUT, Geh zur hölle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.59.200 ( talk) 23:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " K-Multimedia Player". Thank you. -- SF007 ( talk) 18:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree that KMPlayer is non-notable and that it has clearly violated copyright on multiple occasions. I think the full depth of it should be included in the article, however. Original Research does not seem to apply to the sentence I have added. The only reason KMPlayer can use the GPL and LGPL code in their product is by following those licenses. And the authority on how to properly follow those licenses is the very lawyers and techies who wrote the licenses as well as the FAQ guidelines for those licenses, the FSF. 98.14.114.27 ( talk) 22:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello!
I you actually looking up in applications, those using lower case chars everywhere. This RFC reference is incorrect in that detail.
Please look up the other formats descriptions on Wikipedia .mkv .mov .mp4 or .mp3, all of them in lc, for a reason.
Regards Csendesmark ( talk) 23:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Never mind, I'll edit out. nobody pays me to look after it... Csendesmark ( talk) 23:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you've used rollback at Comparison of screencasting software quite a few times, to revert the good-faith addition of content. Please only use WP:ROLLBACK for vandalism, per that page's instructions (i.e. "editors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed"). Good-faith edits that are problematic should be fixed or reverted with a different method, eg using the "Undo" link, so that an explanatory edit summary can be added. Much thanks. – Quiddity ( talk) 19:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
SimpleScreenRecorder is a very new article. I added a reference to it from a Comparison of screencast wikipage, and I was wondering if you can tell me what wikipedia guideline I can use to look into about new articles being reference-able.. Thanks Swestlake ( talk) 19:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi.
I am in a hurry, so sorry for the curtness of the message. Anyway, please check the FFmpeg download page because unlike what you said, it seems there are binaries available for download.
In addition, Template:Infobox software specifically says "avoid specifying vague phrases such as Cross-platform (or its redirect, Multi-platform)". I am surprised no one has ever registered an objection.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 14:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Regression Tester. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello. You recent edit is not correct because Michael Norman and Fred Kerley have not run under 31s for the 300. http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_300ok.htm Ear-phone ( talk) 21:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)