User talk:Bobherry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

User talk:Bobherry My TalkPage

Thank you for your guidance[edit]

I have changed my username per your instructions. I noticed that the spelling of Mary Rutherfurd Jay for the page I suggested was already changed to Rutherford with an "o" which is alarming because one of the reasons there is very little known about her is that people frequently spelled her name wrong!! So part of my research has been affirmatively locating and confirming the many articles about her that were buried or invisible because of misspelling. Would it be helpful to explain that in the body of the article? Many thanks JayHeritageCenter (talk) 10:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably not but you should confirm with someone else also. Have a nice day!Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 21:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


I'm sorry, did you have a non-douche reason for adding "poke her anus" back to the UFC 184 page? --Heitz669 (talk) 04:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

For warning ClueBot NG, here's a little something from me as a generous reward...[edit]

Information.svg Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 03:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Your signature[edit]

Bobherry, I've noticed that your signature contains bright colors that may be difficult for some people to read. I strongly suggest that you take a look at WP:SIGAPP and consider changing your signature's appearance accordingly. If you have any questions or need any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Happy editing! MJ94 (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


This help request has been answered. If you need more help, place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please make my signature white background, Bobherry Blue, Talk Green, and Contributions Red. Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 04:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Is this fine? Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done Thanks! Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 06:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes. Thanks I'll put it on tommorowBobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 06:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done may be a cleaner alternative, without mismatched HTML tags. Huon (talk) 14:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Important: Rollback Permissions revoked[edit]


I have temporarily revoked your rollback permissions based on multiple concerns regarding your use of the permissions. Specifically, this edit shows that you are not reviewing your reverts before performing a rollback. Accordingly, I am revoking your rollback permissions for not less than 3 weeks. Please re-apply to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback once you have reviewed the criteria for rollback. Thanks, Nakon 04:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I note in passing that I concur with Nakon's decision here. If you are going so fast that you're rolling back ClueBot and leaving templated messages on a bot's talk page, then you're going too fast to recognize valid edits. I encourage you to try this exercise: For each edit that you would ordinarily roll back, instead undo the edit and leave a handwritten message on the user's talk page explaining what the problem is with the edit. (This is vandalism, this is removing sourced material, etc.) It is harder, but it will help you to more thoroughly understand and articulate the problem edits you see. Risker (talk) 04:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Risker, technically he never reverted Cluebot, but cluebot did revert another user trying to remove a "bad" word" from that article in question..--Stemoc 05:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC) Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 05:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
This is a better example. Two reverts to reinstate material that was correctly removed. At least you figured out you'd made an error, but in the meantime the IP (a potential new editor) is being confused. Risker (talk) 05:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I have to point out that slapping a 4im as the second warning is inappropriate. Zhaofeng Li [talkcontribs] 05:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm in bed anyway I gave only because they tried to edit war me I'm tired Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 05:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Your relist at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hayrettin Karaoğuz[edit]

Hi, thanks for helping out at AfD, but please be sure to read relevant policies before relisting AFDs, especially as non-admins. Specifically, the policy writes, "debates should not be relisted more than twice. Users relisting a debate for a third (or further) time, or relisting a debate with a substantial number of commenters, should write a short explanation (in addition to the {{relist}} template) on why they did not consider the debate sufficient." You left no such explanation. It is important to read the policies before you begin to do work with them; your request to join AfC without meeting requirements, your addition to Gamergate against MOS, and this relist, along with your recent revoke of rollback leads me to believe that this is definitely an area you could improve in. Perhaps Kudpung would like to weigh in on this... Cheers, — kikichugirl speak up! 06:42, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate their enthusiasm, but with only 300 edits to mainspace Bobherry shouldn't really be doing any maintenance tasks at all. Instead they should be doing what most people come here for: to build the content of an encyclopedia. Most maintenance areas require at least several months on Wikipedia and at least 500 mainspace edits to really know how things work here. The one exception is reverting vandalism, with 200 mainspace edits a user can enroll at the WP:CVUA to learn how to do it. The AfD area is certainly far too advanced. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-10[edit]

16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-11[edit]

15:19, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-12[edit]

15:16, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-13[edit]

15:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Rollback Granted[edit]

So I have the links

Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg

Hi Bobherry. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 00:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Farva dying in the trunk[edit]

Yes its' unny but they wrote that. -- (talk) 02:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


Now will you object if I remove the needless warning?

Go ahead. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes. Have a nice day. Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 02:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-14[edit]

15:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

69th Infantry Regiment (United States)[edit]

I see were back to this. If you accidently look at the history of the article. you will find that the original page was about a federal unit. not the national guard unit. unfortuntly I cant seem to get that through the thick skulls of foreign statests. the commie who copied and pasted the national guard unit over the original article is why I dont wiki anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Important: Rollback revoked, again[edit]

After a further review of your edits, I have determined that you are not using the rollback tool appropriately. Accordingly, I have indefinitely revoked your access to this permission. Please take some time to review the relevant policies before re-applying for the right. Nakon 03:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

April Fools Joke at RfD[edit]

(Personal attack removed)

That was a little harsh SimonTrew. Though I share some of your dislike for April Fools activities on Wikipedia, calling another user "VERY STUPID" is taking it a bit far in the other direction. Sam Walton (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
(Personal attack removed) 
I don't much appreciate you being so hostile and especially don't appreciate you threatening to punch me in the face. Assume good faith and tone down the personal attacks. Sam Walton (talk) 15:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
You better watch it User:SimonTrew! You can be rude to me all day but when you start doing it to one of my friends (User:Samwalton9) that takes it to a whole new level. I highly recommend you reread WP:GOODFAITH Good Day Sir. Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 03:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Moosehadley[edit]

Hi Bobherry. Thanks for participating in community discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Moosehadley. In your comment, you linked to WP:NOTYET, a redirect to the often-cited essay WP:Not now, which may be insulting to Moosehadley's intelligence; Moose is clearly not a new editor and linking to WP:Not now is rather inappropriate. See Wikipedia:When not to link to WP:NOTNOW and please consider changing your comment. Cheers, --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 04:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015[edit]

Information icon Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Talk:Eastman Chemical Company has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please don't add all caps edit summery like that, rather, explain what you did on that page. TheMesquitobuzz 01:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-15[edit]

15:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)


I'm sorry my comments came across as so harsh to you, and for that I sincerely apologise. I think we were at cross purposes and it all went wrong, but the last thing I would want to do is offend anyone else, and I did, unwontedly, and for that I sincerely apologise. I have three rules in life: don't hit, don't lie, don't cheat. I can never quite decide if the last two are synonymous. So I would never hit anyone. I think we just were at cross purposes somehow and it went wrong.

Anyway I served my ban and a bit moreso as a kinda personal penance so I hope you forgive me for my mistake, all the best to you, let's make the encyclopaedia better. It was my birthday yesterday, I am 43. It seems an odd age to be. Si Trew (talk) 05:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology. I am sorry for making the joke TfD, I guess that was alittle overboard lol. Anyway Thanks again and Happy Belated Birthday. Bobherry Userspace Talk to me! Stuff I have done 14:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Not at all. I was out of order, thank you for taking it with such grace. Si Trew (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
WP:DYK stores up april fool's jokes which, as I said, are all true but twisty. I think once I got in a bishop or something who chained people together in bondage (married them), and spread the news around the town (listing the banns) and so on. So DYK I think is your outfit but I think they kinda store them up for it. I haven't been there recently, but a good DYK hook has to be kinda "twisty": absolutely correct in fact but draw people in. When i used to do it, they would get 3000 to 5000 hits a day. Si Trew (talk) 23:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-16[edit]

16:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-16[edit]

17:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Namespace editing restriction[edit]

Dear Bob, I'm afraid that in light of your high error rate in reporting edit warring, and on account of poor quality interventions which may make the situation worse, I'm going to ban you from editing in the Wikipedia namespace (every page beginning WP:, WT:, Wikipedia: or Wikipedia talk:) for a period of 3 months from today's date (the ban will expire at 00:00 on 15 July 2015). This is inclusive of requests for page protection (WP:RFPP), reports of vandals (WP:AIV) and offensive usernames (WP:UAA). The ban will also cover you leaving template messages for any other user for maintenance or behaviour reasons, and it will restrict you from requesting new user permissions for a period of 3 months. The ban will extend to reviewing Draft articles, but not assisting in the creation of new draft articles.

The ban will be enforceable with blocks upto and including an indefinite block, but I trust that will not be necessary. If you have any concerns about edit warring, vandalism or offensive usernames, you are encouraged to raise these issues with an administrator or the experienced editors who have helped you on IRC so far.

The ban, for the avoidance of doubt, is intended to encourage you to edit articles and to become more familiar with the processes integral to Wikipedia, before allowing you to again become involved with the maintenance of the site.

If you have any questions about this ban, please do not hesitate to contact me, either ping me or leave a message on my talk page. Nick (talk) 14:33, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-17[edit]

15:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-18[edit]

15:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Support request with team editing experiment project[edit]

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here:, I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

Tech News: 2015-19[edit]

15:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-20[edit]

15:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Tech News: 2015-21[edit]

15:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)