 | This user may have left Wikipedia. Enviroboy has not edited Wikipedia since February 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
 |
This is the place to contact Enviroboy. Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). New sections go at the bottom of the page. To start a new section, create a ==new heading== or simply click here. Thanks. |
Enviroboy or whoever you are what is your issue in me telling the truth on DFDS pages? Have you ever travelled with them? I have numerous times!! So much for "Freedom of Speech" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.59.90 ( talk) 22:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
On "Murphy's Law":
Anecdotally, it has also been suggested
who? (primarily by those in the technical support field) that some individuals appear to manifest a Murphy Field. When these individuals are around systems that function normally, the systems suddenly fail or operate erratically. On the other hand, it is often noted that computer maintenance technicians seem to exhibit an anti-Murphy Field: computers that malfunction in their absence tend to run smoothly when one tries to show them what the problem is.
citation needed Auto mechanics have long been suggested to have a similar effect on misfunctioning automobiles.
You reject the addition of the last statement as "unconstructive"? On what basis? The entire para is by its own distinction, anecdotal, and the addition confirms that tech support is hardly the only field it's been noticed in. As a matter of fact, it predates modern "technical" (i.e., electronics in general and computers in specific) areas and devolves down onto complex machinery indicates that it applies, as one might expect, to complex systems as a whole. There appear to be people around whom complex systems fail in a statistically questionable manner, while others, often people who have taken on the overarching mantle of "repairman", seem to possess the alternative.
In short, the minor addition is constructive by suggesting that the quality extends outside merely modern technical fields, and has been noted for much longer than the last 20-30 years.
"I'm sorry you couldn't figure that out for yourself, and I couldn't explain it in the pithy limitations allowed me by the comment line." >:-/ —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.250.195.181 (
talk •
contribs)
- Sorry about that and thanks for pointing it out. I undid my revert. I'm can't quite remember why I pushed the revert button in the first place but I'm sure it had something to do with the subsequent edit.
Enviroboy
Talk
Cs 22:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- NP. Sorry if I seemed huffy, it didn't seem to make any sense to me, at least not by the explanation given. ;-P -- 24.250.195.181 ( talk) 11:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.121.28 ( talk) 05:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your work on Some Enchanted Evening (The Simpsons). It really improved the article. Keep up the good work. -- Maitch ( talk) 11:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Review of Spoken Article Bart the Genius
Hi again, I've now completed a review of your recording for Bart the Genius, see the review here. Thank you for the great work!
I've also had a quick listen to your first two recordings and only have a couple of comments. Your plosives have improved, as they were much more noticeable in Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. In that same recording I noticed a few places where the audio level changed and I think I heard a few clicks; which implies that you either improved your editing or you did Bart the Genius in one take!
But really, all three of your recordings are really well done and I hope you continue to contribute with spoken articles.
By the way, your first file has the "correct" template in place: this one mentioned here. Including this template puts it on the list of unreviewed spoken articles and enables a reviewer to mark it as reviewed. Your two later files, however, don't have this template. Not only are they not in the "to be reviewed" pool ( which is here), but I can't add "reviewed=yes" to Bart the Genius, so that it is added to the reviewed recordings category. It isn't critical to have the template in place, but it will help for completeness of the project.
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns about the review. If you think I've missed something, I probably have, and am willing to change it. Maedin\ talk 18:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks so much. I really appreciate your input. I did improve my editing over the couple of days since I recorded the first one - I got used to the "silence selection" button. In fact, I'm considering rerecording Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. There are maybe dozens of cuts in Bart the Genius but I'm glad they were transparent. The biggest difference was perhaps that I did that article in one sitting so I never moved relative to the mic.
- I have a few technical questions about uploading and some other things that will be posted on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. Thanks again. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- I will also have to re-upload Bart the Genius after I fix the quote I screwed up. I have no idea how that one slipped and it's very strange that I didn't catch it before uploading. It is thankfully an easy fix. Enviroboy Talk Cs 05:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Its the Cookie Monster (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Its the Cookie Monster ( talk • contribs)Hi. I noticed you are in a content dispute on the McMaster University article. Is it something we can talk about on the discussion page? I already talked to the IP. ~ SunDragon34 (talk) 08:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
WHY did u remove my complaint???? is this a conspirasyy?? I WANT TO COMPLAIN i hav been racially abused u know that is a crime right?? u are an ACOMPLISE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tal-ġonna ( talk • contribs) 04:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I reverted your edits because you attacked other editors. Enviroboy Talk Cs 04:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Message added 00:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SchuminWeb ( Talk) 01:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there :D Yes I did. I noticed there was a vandlebot, can't recall where but someone had already placed an alert, I thought I would do the favour and change it to 1. I'm Really sorry if I caused any trouble for you there. -- Jamesooders ( talk) 07:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
No Problem, Thankyou very much for letting me know I appreciate it. :D -- Jamesooders ( talk) 07:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage!
Oldlaptop321 (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Oldlaptop321 ( talk) 23:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello Enviroboy, thank you so much for reverting the vandalism, that would have taken me all night to put everything back that everyone (including myself) had contributed. I really appreciate it because I did not know how to do that reverting myself.
NovellaGirl ( talk) NovellaGirl (Emily) —Preceding undated comment added 07:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC).
Consider this your gentle cluebat treatment for reporting cluebot for vandalism. — Werdna • talk 13:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you've made edits to University of the Philippines (UP) and UP–related articles and thought you might want to support our recent proposal to create the WikiProject University of the Philippines. We've recently revamped the proposal and started a drive to push the approval of this project. We have a lot of articles that may be under this project and we would like assistance and support for its approval. Hope we'll have a very positive response. Go Fighting Maroons!
P.S. You can look at the preliminary drafts of the project in here. Thanks!-- The Wandering Traveler WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT! 04:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm nominating an article you have worked on for deletion. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian cult (2nd nomination). Borock ( talk) 05:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
...for reverting my user page. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 04:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Yep I know Im in an edit war. But it's for a good reason, really. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cid Campeador ( talk • contribs) 20:58, 1 July 2009
- There's no such thing as a good reason for an edit war.-- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 21:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- I opened an SPI regarding this editor at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cid Campeador. Enviroboy Talk Cs 08:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Adam Lambert straw poll on including/removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section
Hi, this may seem rather trivial but I'm trying to gauge community consensus on including or removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section on the Adam Lambert article which you have been in some way recently involved. The poll is here. Your time is appreciated. -- Banjeboi 21:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I only reverted vandalism to the article so I'm not really involved in editing it.
Enviroboy
Talk
Cs 05:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- No problem I was trying to neutrally inform those who may be interested, unfortunately it looks like the effort os wasted but at least I tried. -- Banjeboi 04:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Lethwei
The editor,
Hightrees (
talk), has made five edits to the
Julia Camoys Stonor article in which s/he blanked out the entirety of the article. S/he had his/her edits reverted first by
Cluebot (
talk), then by you, and finally by me. Each of these reversions of vandalism was followed up by a warning to his/her
Talk page. The last of these came from me and was {{
Uw-vandalism3}}, a level three warning given that it was his/her third warning. A look at his/her
contributions suggest that the account may have been created solely for this purpose as these page blankings represent his/her first, and only, edits. How does one proceed now, consistent with
WP:VAN,
WP:AIV, and
blocking for persistent, disruptive vandalism? I’ve never actually made a report to the higher-ups. Do we have to wait for {{
Uw-vandalism4}} or {{
Uw-vandalism4im}} warnings to be issued first, before making a report to the powers that be?
Thanks! —
SpikeToronto (
talk) 18:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- In this case, I would wait for the
{{ uw-delete4}}warning because Hightrees' edits did not involve very nasty vandalism (such as personal attacks or libel). The edits are not severely disruptive or uncivil. It is possible that this is a new editor that has a problem with the article's content and just does not know how to deal with it. If the blanking continues without explanation or attempt at discussion, I would report it as a vandalism-only account to WP:AIV. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I used {{ Uw-vandalism3}}. Should I change it to {{ uw-delete3}}? Or, just leave it? Thanks for the response and advice! — SpikeToronto ( talk) 22:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Leave it. The
{{ uw-delete2}}warning already advised Hightrees to explain the blanking and the two level3 warnings are almost identical. Your extended warning is very concise and to the point. If there is more vandalism from this account, I might go straight to WP:AIV instead of posting{{ uw-delete4}}. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again for explaining the approach to me. We’ll both keep an eye on it then, shall we? — SpikeToronto ( talk) 23:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
...for reverting the latest attack on my user page. Appreciate the help! Best to you, Jusda fax 03:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Judging from your userpage history, you appear to have a lot of fans. Enviroboy Talk Cs 06:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Enviroboy … FYI, I have opened an issue at WP:AN/I#User:MichaelQSchmidt2009 about this vandal who popped up a few hours ago, and whose edits you have reverted … I have a suspicion as to their identity, but I am reluctant to point fingers without any proof (not being an admin, I cannot check IP addresses). Happy Editing! — 138.88.125.101 ( talk · contribs) 07:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like the account was indef-blocked. Thanks for the heads up; I did not realize it was that sinister. Enviroboy Talk Cs 07:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
|
The Userpage Shield | |
| I do hereby award this Barnstar to Enviroboy for his selfless efforts to fight vandalism, specifically by protecting my user page and others from weird, creepy vandalism. I think it takes a special kind of person to go out of their way to protect someone else's userpage, and I applaud you for taking the effort. Please accept this small token of my appreciation. Nutiketaiel ( talk) 12:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. I always try to remove those annoyances whenever I encounter them. This was a simple troll so I should have gone straight to AIV but the weirdness confused me. Enviroboy Talk Cs 20:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello Enviroboy, Multixfer has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the
WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you also from me, for the quick revert of the threatening vandalism on my userpage. Well done! <>Multi‑Xfer<> ( talk) 08:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Look, I'm new to Wikipedia & I'm making an article for my friend, PLEASE don't delete it, I keep editing it to make it better, I'm just gonna ask you nicely, PLEASE DON'T DELETE IT! I spent ages writing it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.137.18 ( talk) 23:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
In relation to edits made to Lethwei
Nor is acting superior in rhetoric when you do not cite why my decision is wrong. Another administator impersonator.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama ( talk • contribs)
- Show me the diff in which I attempt to convince you that I am an admin. Enviroboy Talk Cs 05:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Beware of 3RR, even if you are reverting vandalism. Take it easy, Drmies ( talk) 04:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
...uh, I don't remember editing the article for Antoine Augustin Cournot. What exactly did I edit? I've never even heard of the guy. 203.206.47.61 ( talk) 01:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC) Sutter Cane
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) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:919C:3374:9C7D:689C:FE1D:589D ( talk) 08:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
|
| This user may have left Wikipedia. Enviroboy has not edited Wikipedia since February 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
|
This is the place to contact Enviroboy. Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). New sections go at the bottom of the page. To start a new section, create a ==new heading== or simply click here. Thanks. |
Enviroboy or whoever you are what is your issue in me telling the truth on DFDS pages? Have you ever travelled with them? I have numerous times!! So much for "Freedom of Speech" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.59.90 ( talk) 22:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
On "Murphy's Law":
Anecdotally, it has also been suggested
who? (primarily by those in the technical support field) that some individuals appear to manifest a Murphy Field. When these individuals are around systems that function normally, the systems suddenly fail or operate erratically. On the other hand, it is often noted that computer maintenance technicians seem to exhibit an anti-Murphy Field: computers that malfunction in their absence tend to run smoothly when one tries to show them what the problem is.
citation needed Auto mechanics have long been suggested to have a similar effect on misfunctioning automobiles.
You reject the addition of the last statement as "unconstructive"? On what basis? The entire para is by its own distinction, anecdotal, and the addition confirms that tech support is hardly the only field it's been noticed in. As a matter of fact, it predates modern "technical" (i.e., electronics in general and computers in specific) areas and devolves down onto complex machinery indicates that it applies, as one might expect, to complex systems as a whole. There appear to be people around whom complex systems fail in a statistically questionable manner, while others, often people who have taken on the overarching mantle of "repairman", seem to possess the alternative.
In short, the minor addition is constructive by suggesting that the quality extends outside merely modern technical fields, and has been noted for much longer than the last 20-30 years.
"I'm sorry you couldn't figure that out for yourself, and I couldn't explain it in the pithy limitations allowed me by the comment line." >:-/ —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.250.195.181 (
talk •
contribs)
- Sorry about that and thanks for pointing it out. I undid my revert. I'm can't quite remember why I pushed the revert button in the first place but I'm sure it had something to do with the subsequent edit.
Enviroboy
Talk
Cs 22:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- NP. Sorry if I seemed huffy, it didn't seem to make any sense to me, at least not by the explanation given. ;-P -- 24.250.195.181 ( talk) 11:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.121.28 ( talk) 05:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your work on Some Enchanted Evening (The Simpsons). It really improved the article. Keep up the good work. -- Maitch ( talk) 11:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Review of Spoken Article Bart the Genius
Hi again, I've now completed a review of your recording for Bart the Genius, see the review here. Thank you for the great work!
I've also had a quick listen to your first two recordings and only have a couple of comments. Your plosives have improved, as they were much more noticeable in Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. In that same recording I noticed a few places where the audio level changed and I think I heard a few clicks; which implies that you either improved your editing or you did Bart the Genius in one take!
But really, all three of your recordings are really well done and I hope you continue to contribute with spoken articles.
By the way, your first file has the "correct" template in place: this one mentioned here. Including this template puts it on the list of unreviewed spoken articles and enables a reviewer to mark it as reviewed. Your two later files, however, don't have this template. Not only are they not in the "to be reviewed" pool ( which is here), but I can't add "reviewed=yes" to Bart the Genius, so that it is added to the reviewed recordings category. It isn't critical to have the template in place, but it will help for completeness of the project.
Let me know if you have any questions or concerns about the review. If you think I've missed something, I probably have, and am willing to change it. Maedin\ talk 18:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks so much. I really appreciate your input. I did improve my editing over the couple of days since I recorded the first one - I got used to the "silence selection" button. In fact, I'm considering rerecording Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. There are maybe dozens of cuts in Bart the Genius but I'm glad they were transparent. The biggest difference was perhaps that I did that article in one sitting so I never moved relative to the mic.
- I have a few technical questions about uploading and some other things that will be posted on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. Thanks again. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- I will also have to re-upload Bart the Genius after I fix the quote I screwed up. I have no idea how that one slipped and it's very strange that I didn't catch it before uploading. It is thankfully an easy fix. Enviroboy Talk Cs 05:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Its the Cookie Monster (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Its the Cookie Monster ( talk • contribs)Hi. I noticed you are in a content dispute on the McMaster University article. Is it something we can talk about on the discussion page? I already talked to the IP. ~ SunDragon34 (talk) 08:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
WHY did u remove my complaint???? is this a conspirasyy?? I WANT TO COMPLAIN i hav been racially abused u know that is a crime right?? u are an ACOMPLISE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tal-ġonna ( talk • contribs) 04:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I reverted your edits because you attacked other editors. Enviroboy Talk Cs 04:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Message added 00:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SchuminWeb ( Talk) 01:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi there :D Yes I did. I noticed there was a vandlebot, can't recall where but someone had already placed an alert, I thought I would do the favour and change it to 1. I'm Really sorry if I caused any trouble for you there. -- Jamesooders ( talk) 07:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
No Problem, Thankyou very much for letting me know I appreciate it. :D -- Jamesooders ( talk) 07:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage!
Oldlaptop321 (
talk) has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Oldlaptop321 ( talk) 23:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello Enviroboy, thank you so much for reverting the vandalism, that would have taken me all night to put everything back that everyone (including myself) had contributed. I really appreciate it because I did not know how to do that reverting myself.
NovellaGirl ( talk) NovellaGirl (Emily) —Preceding undated comment added 07:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC).
Consider this your gentle cluebat treatment for reporting cluebot for vandalism. — Werdna • talk 13:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you've made edits to University of the Philippines (UP) and UP–related articles and thought you might want to support our recent proposal to create the WikiProject University of the Philippines. We've recently revamped the proposal and started a drive to push the approval of this project. We have a lot of articles that may be under this project and we would like assistance and support for its approval. Hope we'll have a very positive response. Go Fighting Maroons!
P.S. You can look at the preliminary drafts of the project in here. Thanks!-- The Wandering Traveler WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT! 04:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm nominating an article you have worked on for deletion. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian cult (2nd nomination). Borock ( talk) 05:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
...for reverting my user page. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 04:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Yep I know Im in an edit war. But it's for a good reason, really. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cid Campeador ( talk • contribs) 20:58, 1 July 2009
- There's no such thing as a good reason for an edit war.-- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 21:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- I opened an SPI regarding this editor at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cid Campeador. Enviroboy Talk Cs 08:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Adam Lambert straw poll on including/removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section
Hi, this may seem rather trivial but I'm trying to gauge community consensus on including or removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section on the Adam Lambert article which you have been in some way recently involved. The poll is here. Your time is appreciated. -- Banjeboi 21:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I only reverted vandalism to the article so I'm not really involved in editing it.
Enviroboy
Talk
Cs 05:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- No problem I was trying to neutrally inform those who may be interested, unfortunately it looks like the effort os wasted but at least I tried. -- Banjeboi 04:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Lethwei
The editor,
Hightrees (
talk), has made five edits to the
Julia Camoys Stonor article in which s/he blanked out the entirety of the article. S/he had his/her edits reverted first by
Cluebot (
talk), then by you, and finally by me. Each of these reversions of vandalism was followed up by a warning to his/her
Talk page. The last of these came from me and was {{
Uw-vandalism3}}, a level three warning given that it was his/her third warning. A look at his/her
contributions suggest that the account may have been created solely for this purpose as these page blankings represent his/her first, and only, edits. How does one proceed now, consistent with
WP:VAN,
WP:AIV, and
blocking for persistent, disruptive vandalism? I’ve never actually made a report to the higher-ups. Do we have to wait for {{
Uw-vandalism4}} or {{
Uw-vandalism4im}} warnings to be issued first, before making a report to the powers that be?
Thanks! —
SpikeToronto (
talk) 18:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- In this case, I would wait for the
{{ uw-delete4}}warning because Hightrees' edits did not involve very nasty vandalism (such as personal attacks or libel). The edits are not severely disruptive or uncivil. It is possible that this is a new editor that has a problem with the article's content and just does not know how to deal with it. If the blanking continues without explanation or attempt at discussion, I would report it as a vandalism-only account to WP:AIV. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I used {{ Uw-vandalism3}}. Should I change it to {{ uw-delete3}}? Or, just leave it? Thanks for the response and advice! — SpikeToronto ( talk) 22:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Leave it. The
{{ uw-delete2}}warning already advised Hightrees to explain the blanking and the two level3 warnings are almost identical. Your extended warning is very concise and to the point. If there is more vandalism from this account, I might go straight to WP:AIV instead of posting{{ uw-delete4}}. Enviroboy Talk Cs 22:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again for explaining the approach to me. We’ll both keep an eye on it then, shall we? — SpikeToronto ( talk) 23:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
...for reverting the latest attack on my user page. Appreciate the help! Best to you, Jusda fax 03:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Judging from your userpage history, you appear to have a lot of fans. Enviroboy Talk Cs 06:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Enviroboy … FYI, I have opened an issue at WP:AN/I#User:MichaelQSchmidt2009 about this vandal who popped up a few hours ago, and whose edits you have reverted … I have a suspicion as to their identity, but I am reluctant to point fingers without any proof (not being an admin, I cannot check IP addresses). Happy Editing! — 138.88.125.101 ( talk · contribs) 07:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like the account was indef-blocked. Thanks for the heads up; I did not realize it was that sinister. Enviroboy Talk Cs 07:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
|
|
The Userpage Shield | |
| I do hereby award this Barnstar to Enviroboy for his selfless efforts to fight vandalism, specifically by protecting my user page and others from weird, creepy vandalism. I think it takes a special kind of person to go out of their way to protect someone else's userpage, and I applaud you for taking the effort. Please accept this small token of my appreciation. Nutiketaiel ( talk) 12:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. I always try to remove those annoyances whenever I encounter them. This was a simple troll so I should have gone straight to AIV but the weirdness confused me. Enviroboy Talk Cs 20:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello Enviroboy, Multixfer has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the
WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you also from me, for the quick revert of the threatening vandalism on my userpage. Well done! <>Multi‑Xfer<> ( talk) 08:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Look, I'm new to Wikipedia & I'm making an article for my friend, PLEASE don't delete it, I keep editing it to make it better, I'm just gonna ask you nicely, PLEASE DON'T DELETE IT! I spent ages writing it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.137.18 ( talk) 23:31, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
In relation to edits made to Lethwei
Nor is acting superior in rhetoric when you do not cite why my decision is wrong. Another administator impersonator.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama ( talk • contribs)
- Show me the diff in which I attempt to convince you that I am an admin. Enviroboy Talk Cs 05:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Beware of 3RR, even if you are reverting vandalism. Take it easy, Drmies ( talk) 04:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
...uh, I don't remember editing the article for Antoine Augustin Cournot. What exactly did I edit? I've never even heard of the guy. 203.206.47.61 ( talk) 01:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC) Sutter Cane
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) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:919C:3374:9C7D:689C:FE1D:589D ( talk) 08:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)