User talk:MattieTK

Gratitude

Thanks for the revert on my userpage!--Xnuala (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Counter Vandalism Unit?

Hey, I dedicate most of my time on Wikipedia to reverting vandalism (you got there just before me on reverting San Francisco 49ers) and noticed that you were part of a 'Counter Vandalism Unit'. Could you tell me more about this please? Thanks. -Bottlecapninja 20:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

If he does it again, mention this case in your report. It'll show a longer pattern of only vandalism. The only reason I didn't do an indef time was he only showed two edits, so I did 48 hours. I'll be gone 24-28 June on vacation.Rlevse 22:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Rent-A-Cop

Hey Mattie, I just saw your discussion with the Wikipedia admins about you putting the PROD notice back on my user page after I removed it to contest it. I'm glad they talked some sense into you.

It's okay, I forgive you for vandalizing my page, hunnybear.

XOXOXO

Do you ever give up? After a 48hr ban I'd expect you would but obviously not Mattie^TK 11:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Striking your vote

Hello MattieTK,

Thank you for your interest in the Wikimedia Board Election. The Election Committee regretfully informs you that your previous vote was received in error and will be struck according to the election rules, described below.

The Election Committee regretfully announces today that we will have to remove approximately 220 votes submitted. These votes were cast by people not entitled to vote. The election rules state that users must have at least 400 edits by June 1 to be eligible to vote.

The voter lists we sent to Software in the Public Interest (our third party election partner) initially were wrong, and one of your account was eventually included to our initial list. There was a bug in the edit counting program and the sent list contained every account with 201 or more edits, instead of 400 or more edits. So large numbers of people were qualified according to the software who shouldn't be. The bug has been fixed and an amended list was sent to SPI already.

Our first (and wrong) list contains 80,458 accounts as qualified. The proper number of qualified voters in the SPI list is now 52,750. As of the morning of July 4 (UTC), there are 2,773 unique voters and 220 people, including you, have voted who are not qualified based upon this identified error.

In accordance with voting regulations the Election Committee will strike those approximately 220 votes due to lack of voting eligibility. The list of struck votes is available at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/List_of_struck_votes.

We are aware of the possibility that some of the people affected may have other accounts with more than 400 edits, and hence may still be eligible to vote. We encourage you to consider voting again from another account, if you have one. If you have no other account eligible to vote, we hope you reach the criteria in the next Election, and expect to see your participation to the future Elections.

Your comments, questions or messages to the Committee would be appreciated, you can make them at m:Talk:Board elections/2007/en. Other language versions are available at m:Translation requests/Eleccom mail, 07-05.

Again, we would like to deeply apologize for any inconvenience.

Sincerely,
Kizu Naoko
Philippe
Jon Harald Søby
Newyorkbrad
Tim Starling

For Wikimedia Board Election Steering Committee

• Sorry :( Must have missed that in reading the regulations Mattie^TK 16:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Reverting vandals as you warn?

I just reverted Paplr's edit to Sage and looked up the talk page to warn this user, only to realize that you had warned this user about the same edit 20 minutes ago. Could you please make sure that you actually revert the edit that you warn about? Thanks, and have a nice day, Lisatwo 21:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

My apologies Lisatwo, I swear thought I saw the article already reverted, which is why I placed the warning (thinking the user was not informed). I will double check next time. Mattie^TK 21:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hodgepodge

I just wanted to know how the tool was working for you. Any suggestions or complaints? Thanks. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• It's a very useful compilation, the only way I personally can think of improving it in it's current state is to add a configuration page where users can alter global settings. Don't know if this is possible or not :) It truly is a great piece of kit though, thanks Mattie^TK 16:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

What sort of things would you alter? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 16:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• I would like at time to disable some of the mods that are included, or change the function of some buttons, i understand the button at the top right disables it entirely, but at times I'd just like to remove a section so another mod can be used instead. This would improve the usability of the compilation as users are not forced to use all the included mods. I understand this is kinda counter-intuitive, hope you understand the issue :D Mattie^TK 17:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hi, that was really interesting work; however, I wasn't able to create the new page before creating the link. Subsequently amended and in progress. Thanks anyway.

A3276988 13:55, 7 October 2007 (UTC)