User talk:Nsaa

Please stop reverting my contribs in "Georgia"

Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.245.186.56 (talk • contribs) 2008-08-11T18:45:43 (UTC)

The article Georgia (U.S. state) is about the United States of America state named Georgia, not the country Georgia_(country). Please the material there as I already have stated at your discussion page. Nsaa (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

No Problem

It's okay. Thanks!--Master of Pies (talk) 22:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Reverting

Hi. Just thought you should know that here you reintroduced vandalism that an anonymous user had removed and warned them for it. Thanks -- Gurch (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahh... I'm really embarrassed. This was a really stupid edit by me. Nsaa (talk) 22:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ricky K

I'm a bit confused on this edit to Ricky K. I'm not seeing how the main editor requested deletion. Care to enlighten me?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

My fault. I've used the wrong db-template. Nsaa (talk) 22:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Just glad to know I'm not completely losing it! :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Greece August 2008 newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the WikiProject Greece newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 10:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

stop vandalizing Leander Paes article

In 2008 he has won the MIXED DOUBLES not the MEN's DOUBLES so stop putting 2008 as a win on the biotable, section "doubles". Next time i'm reporting you for 3RR+vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.196.206 (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Please don't remove content (my first revert) and don't use language like "FUCKING RETARDS, IN 2008 HE HAS WON THE MIXED DOUBLES NOT MEN'S DOUBLES, THIS SECTIONS IS MEN'S DOUBLES" (my second revert, and I won't do it again even given your language in the following revert comment). Nsaa (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't remove any content, that was not my edit dumbass. Check it. 62.57.196.206 (talk) 03:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You're correct that my first revert was not your IP (62.57.196.206 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)), but the second and last revert was reverting your language (not proper for most people). Why did you indicate that I've going to break {{Uw-3rr}}? Nsaa (talk) 07:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Because you reverted my edit 2 times in a row. One more and you could've been reported for the 3RR rule. 62.57.196.206 (talk) 11:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I've only reverted you (ip 62.57.196.206 once). See the articles history. Although I've removed bad language ("FUCKING RETARDS") in a comment afterward (but not reverted you). Nsaa (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

True, I was also wrong. So excuse me. 62.57.196.206 (talk) 21:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Hayleyjubilee's articles

Nsaa, please be a little more cautious when labelling a brand-new user a vandal. While the contributions of Hayleyjubilee (talk · contribs) may not be of much long term use to the project, labelling this user a vandal certainly does not assume good faith. While certainly COI and notability problems were there, I don't believe that any of this was bad faith vandalism. Before winding up on AIV, someone should have taken this editor aside and explained the COI and notability policies and explained why they shouldn't arbitrarily remove maintenance templates from articles.

Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, caknuck _° is geared up for football season 19:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Aggree. He should have got a {{welcome}} message in the first place, so it would have been easier for him to read about some basic principles. Nsaa (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Tried to handle a similar case in a better way. Nsaa (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Much better. Having done it myself before, I know it's easy to fire off a template or two when on Recent Changes patrol, especially when using Twinkle or similar add-ons. Admins fall into that trap too, issuing indef blocks in short order to new accounts making goofy edits. Let me know if I can help with anything else. caknuck _° is geared up for football season 22:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanx a lot for advice. I will post on your talk page (Questions arises all the time, so it's nice to have someone to ask :-). Nsaa (talk) 22:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm at your disposal. Cheers, caknuck _° is geared up for football season 23:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Moreton Pinkney article

Hi! Hope you don't mind me bothering you with a fairly trivial question! I'm pretty new (or at least.... pretty sporadic in my edits!). I made a few changes to the entry for Moreton Pinkney the other day. I notice that you, and a user (IP only) have made some subsequent edits. I'm trying to understand the revision history. As far as I can see, a lot of spurious content has gone back into the (tiny!) article. It's got a few spelling errors, and unverifiable content. It looks to me like someone is deliberately messing with the piece, but I am a real novice at this. I'd appreciate it if you could have a quick look at it for me and translate what is going on. Was I right to remove the spurious content on 3rd Sept, and replace it with a little (accurate!) information or should I have left it? I don't want to start an editing war - but I don't quite understand the edits which have been done since I last looked at the article. Thanks for your help! --Jothelibrarian (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

There's seems to be some Wikipedia:vandalism to the page. I tried to revert but didn't remove enought (as you pinpoints). The current article looks quite ok? You can see all the edits done by going to the page history and compare each edit. You can also make a earlier version the current one by pressing the date/time in the history listing on the edition you want to make as the current. don't be affraid of doing edits and revert Vandalism. Just be aware of the Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule. If someone adds material that is not verified you can alwasy add the citation needed template {{fact}}. Nsaa (talk) 22:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Your cleanup on 3 september looks fine to me! Nsaa (talk) 22:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, and for checking my work. Another kindly Wikipedian removed the vandalism shortly after I posted to your talk page. I'll keep an eye on the article, and try and add some more (useful!) content. I'm also curious to see if the same user keeps adding nonsense to the entry. The whole vandalising-the-wikipedia thing baffles me frankly, can't see why anyone would want to do it! Anyway, thanks again for your help. --Jothelibrarian (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Amanda

Having taken a quick look about it would appear that the IP's definition is better than what was there. Amanda at Wiktionary gives the same meaning as do several websites. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 23:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes You're correct on that. My last revert was a mistake. Nsaa (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Simple Green

Please do not revert back the changes I have made to the Simple Green article. As an employee I know exactly what ingredients are and are not in the formula. Earlier attempts of monitoring this article and trying to play fair and unbiased have only allowed more blatant ingredient lies - including one time by a competitors company. Since this is a Simple Green article I am not going to address the false statement about the current VOC policy of the California Air Resource Boards with regards to trigger spray bottles. If you have any further questions, you can direct them to me. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunraven (talk • contribs) 2008-09-10T16:05:23 (UTC)

In the Simple Green you removed the {{reflist}}. I will not edit do more edits on the artiole, but try to back up the article with good third party sources, see WP:CITE#CHALLENGED Nsaa (talk) 14:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the direction, I will do as you suggest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunraven (talk • contribs) 16:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Gotta Kick It Up!

I have left a message for the editor on their talk page. A good way to approach this is that if they have not responded to prompts in the edit summaries, then try to engage them on their talk page or the article talk page (a better choice for anons using more than one IP address). Typically, getting into an edit war over maintenance tags is regarded as silly, so if it goes back-and-forth more than once or twice, it's best to take a step back and try a new approach, such as getting a third opinion in the matter. (Asking a neutral admin/experienced editor is a good idea.) I hope this helps. caknuck _° is geared up for football season 20:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop reverting my comments about calthorpe park school"

These comments about participation about the recent channel four show are true and i know this because i have talked to some members of Calthorpe school — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisbranchtree (talk • contribs) 2008-09-12T16:29:35 (UTC)

I've done reverts on Calthorpe Park School because {{Advert|section}} was removed. Please do not remove this without discussing it in a comment or on the articles talk page. It would also be nice if you add references to the section. Nsaa (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Inflation

Please be more careful. Your edits here looked like vandalism, but you probably just feel asleep on your keyboard or something. lk (talk) 08:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Ohhh ... that was my worst edit ever (hopefully). Thanks for notifying me and reverting it. (I was probably on my way on reverting this one [1]) Nsaa (talk) 08:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

SHINY!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For beating me too many times to count at reverting vandalism. Thanks for your work! Remember to Be Bold! -- RandorXeus 19:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)