User talk:Worm That Turned

User	Talk	Articles	To Do	Toolbox	Subpages	DYK	Awards

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message!

I'm moving into a period of low activity. Do not expect a rapid response from me.

This user is stalked by friendly talk page staplers.

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Wiki Women

Hi Wrom, Sarah buzzed me about the WWC blogging project[1]. I wrote an article on meta, can you have a look through when you have time before I screw anything up again, thanks a lot! [2] --RexRowan (talk) 07:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me :) (close paraphrasing, not close paragraphing) otherwise, you're all good. And thank you for the kind words about me. Worm^TT(talk) 08:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Yay! Thank you very much! And you are welcome, you deserve all the credits and more! I will work on the park article in a little while. I think I will look around for more sources if I can find any. :D --RexRowan (talk) 08:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll try to get round to it today. Unfortunately I'm dealing with a crisis or two at the moment ;) Worm^TT(talk) 08:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Do we all have to write one of these profiles of ourselves? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it's aimed at promoting really helpful women on the encyclopedia. And... I think your colourful signature and feminine name (Jen) has got you in that group :P Worm^TT(talk) 08:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

/That's a joke right? Favourite Final Fantasy character + my age 3 years ago = Jenova20.

Do they think i'm a transexual man born a woman? ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Would you believe that not everyone has played FF7? I know! It's madness! It's not the first time I've seen you referred to as female ;) Worm^TT(talk) 09:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, i remember someone else doing it too in an argument i think and i warned him/her against making assumptions.

FF7 was brilliant. I've got the new one on my to-buy list right after i get Resident Evil 6 =P Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 10:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you ever see [3]? I remember being astounded by it. Which FF were you planning to buy? I really need to play XIII-2 a bit more... Worm^TT(talk) 10:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it is XIII-2. I still have an achievement to finish on XIII before i get the sequel. They made at least 1 film of FF7 right? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 11:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children, yep. Very pretty, but a forgettable story ;) XIII I couldn't get a few of the last acheivements... I just didn't have the dedication. One of the problems was beating two really mean baddies on top of a small plateau - can't remember the sort, but they had some sort of shield. Anyway, XIII-2 hurts my head, it's all about time travel and I've started changing the future, meaning that I have the choice to go to the original future or the changed future... and aaaaargh! Worm^TT(talk) 11:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Argh! Spoilers! *Covers Eyes*!!!

I have only 1 achievement missing from 13 and it's for owning every item. I messed up somewhere and accidentally sold one and will have to go back to a previous save to undo that. It's not a massive amount of work but i needed a break. I'm now working on Binary Domain and Lost Odyssey (which was created by the makers of FF) ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've given nothing away :) Worm^TT(talk) 14:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Except for the part about time travel, which could bring back 2 characters who were lost at then end of 13...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok... I've given nothing away that isn't revealed in the first few minutes of the new game - better? Worm^TT(talk) 14:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I suppose i can forgive that since because of you we won a category at Wikipedia Takes Coventry ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the FF7 link you posted, it introduced me to this very useful template:

• {{citation needed span|text=|date=}}

Thanks again ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

If you like it... you better suggest it isn't deleted! {{citation needed span}} is being considered for merge here Worm^TT(talk) 09:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm one step ahead - I already did Dave =P But thanks for bringing it to my attention ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

A former adoptee of yours...

...would like you to know that you're "misleading new editors and sending them down the garden path". Seriously, if you've got anything that will be more effective here than what's already been tried, it'd be much appreciated - if he doesn't get the point soon someone's going to say something we're all going to regret. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! I got a different impression about how wp works for your mentoring lessions, now that I am been trashed (personally attached repeatedly) because of a general comment I made on a talk page. A group ganged up on me. Is wp meant to be collaborative, or do sole articles get special treatment? MathewTownsend (talk) 03:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

For context, if you're up for it, see here and here. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

This is obviously difficult, because this is where theory and practise collide. In the beautiful utopia that is a wiki, there are no vested contributors, everyone has equal right to edit an article placing their opinions in and changing how things work. It works very well with a small community, working on a small number of topics with a common goal. This is vaguely what I teach in my adoption school, as it's meant to be the starting point.

What it doesn't take into account is the size of wikipedia, the diversity of opinions out there and most importantly that we are dealing with people, volunteers, who work bloody hard to get articles to featured status. Take me, for example, I've worked bloody hard on Doom Bar, it's my pet project. I know how upset I would be if someone appeared and changed that article significantly, and it's not even a featured article. Yet there are editors who have invested much more of their time and efforts into writing articles, articles that people are interested in reading, articles that have been decided to be the best there are on wikipedia. Should they not feel a little pride that the article has been acknowledged as such? So, yes, a little ownership does creep in - not ownership to the extent that any edits made by an un-approved editor are automatically reverted without consideration (and I'd be interested to hear of examples of that), but ownership to the extent that someone who knows the article inside out, having read all the sources over the period of months or years, knows very quickly if an edit is "wrong".

So, Mathew, yes, I effectively have lead you down the garden path, the reality of the situation is different to the ideology that I discuss in my mentoring. However, the mentoring is sufficient to allow you to function in the encyclopedia, but finishing it does not make you a perfect Wikipedian. The further you delve into Wikipedia, the more unusual situations you find and you need to use the skills you have learned along with your own judgement to handle these situations. I have to put it to you - do you think you've used the skills I imparted when you made this edit? Do you believe you were assuming good faith, discussing civilly? You labelled the editors who have written articles as "divas", suggested that editors are only arguing with you because they are emotionally involved. Worm^TT(talk) 12:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

(response to Worm) I'm certainly not criticizing your mentoring of me. I learned a great deal and had subsequently the confidence to do an enormous amount of editing and reviewing.

As for the current issue, I do think I was assuming good faith because nothing I wrote is untrue and I think everyone on the Ownership page knows it. But I guess that what I said is not supposed to be acknowledged. I didn't realize the word "diva" had so much negative meaning on the Ownership page and that some editors there are so sensitive to the wording I used. I admit I was ignorant. I've seen editors say they are "divas", and I've seen the word used frequently so I didn't realize that it's verboten. I meant what I said but, in retrospect, I should have worded it better. I was under the impression that wp was a collaborative project so I'm surprised to see the degree that it isn't. The Ownership page is only for veteran FA editors to have an opinion. I still think it's a good suggestion for wp to have a section, a literary magazine or whatever, where FA ownership is allowed for those who prefer not to edit collaboratively but to edit alone or with a few chosen others, since so many seem extremely resentful of wp policy that "anyone can edit". That was my suggestion but I expressed it wrongly. The reaction certainly was a wakeup call for me.

Also, I didn't realize that my ignorantly removing a link to Simple page with POV, or accidentally making a minor formating error would be met with severe chastisement and personal attacks. I over reacted and have repeatedly apologized.

I suggest that you alert your adoptees to the very real dangers of editing on wp and that the Five pillars don't apply necessarily to all. And for newbies not to be surprised by incivility and personal attacks, e.g. no personal attacks doesn't apply to all editors so they don't feel like they're being mugged. Perhaps a practice lesson on how to respond to attacks when other editors misinterpret your motives and assume your motivations are bad e.g. assume good faith isn't followed by all veteran editors.

Also, perhaps a lesson on all the "code" words that are commonly used by longtime editors, that make it hard for a new editor to understand what's going on. I was criticized severely for not understanding obscure edit summaries on the Ownership page and for somehow not having the opportunity to leave an edit summary, even though I explained my edit on the talk page. It seems my ineptness put me under suspicion of some devious motivations. These are just ideas, but if editor retention is really an issue, then new editors need to know these things so they won't be surprised that there are areas of wp that are unwelcoming to newbies and that the newbie state will be held against them.

The depressing part is that I'll always be a newbie, no matter how much I contribute, as there will always be editors who have contributed more by virtue of having been here longer. So I'll always be a second class citizen. No way out of that! MathewTownsend (talk) 15:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I didn't feel my adoption covered everything either, but then i believe it would have been impossible to with how much there is to learn and the depth some of it reaches. Can it be improved? Sure...but i'm happy with what i was taught and the way it was taught, more so considering i have a learning difficulty and yet i've still passed and am actively training someone else up. I consider it be just showing someone the ropes, since no one is going to be able to cover everything as it's impossible.

I also think i could quite possibly have been blocked by now had i not been mentored so THANKS Dave! ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy

Dave, there is so much I would like to do but I am too old and too set in my ways for such levels of patience. You do it not only to bridge my own shortcomings, but for the the entire Wikipedia community. A miserable barnstar from one admin to another is a reward too modest, but we don't have anything better for all your hard work mentoring those who refuse to give sheer dedication its true respect. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Sheer dedication might be a bit of an overstatement but I appreciate the sentiment. Thank you very much for taking the time to write this Kudpung, it means a lot. Worm^TT(talk) 07:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

RfA Nomination

I would be honored if you could write a nomination statement for my RfA when I or you feel I'm ready for it. Do you accept writing a future nomination?—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 17:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I am always willing to write a nomination for someone I feel is ready. I'd be happy to, but I'd have to feel you could reasonably pass. Worm^TT(talk) 18:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I know. I certainly won't pass now. Especially with the recent AfD activity I've been doing. But I'm glad to know that.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 16:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Test complete

I finished the test.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 17:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Bump bump.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 16:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I'll do my best to mark the two that need marking today. Worm^TT(talk) 07:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

About my restrictions...

The thread you started about the subject was just archived... Do you want to unarchive that with a future timestamp to prevent rearchival until it is closed or just interpret this as the restrictions being lifted as requested? Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 00:10, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd assume the latter. I put the request forward and there was no dissent, so I think we can assume that's consensus by silence. I notified a few editors who I thought might hold legitimate concerns, but only one commented and they did not have an issue. I'll update things for you today :) Worm^TT(talk) 07:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Heh, of course I'd assume that it's not lifted until formally lifted - in order to keep one's nose clean. I'd wait until WTT formally goes in and closes it :-) dangerouspanda 10:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I've already formally lifted it here. Barts1a has given his talk page watchers a last chance to comment, but I don't see any problems with counting these restrictions as lifted. It's what you'd expect really - if an editor is causing problems, lots of people weigh in to complain, if not, people don't. So when removing restrictions, silence is a very good thing. Worm^TT(talk) 10:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thanks so much for your mentoring and your good judgment and everything about you, helping me keep on the straight and narrow! (DR is settled) MathewTownsend (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Dannyboy1209

I just wanted to alert you to this[4], seeing that you have had a lot of experience in dealing with this editor. Trusilver 23:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) IP blocked already. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Cheers. I don't really think I've got "a lot of experience" with him, but he needs time away from the encyclopedia. Worm^TT(talk) 09:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Grammar question

Hi Dave, i'm not so good with this kinda thing so can you tell me which of these edits is the right one? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 21:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe it's the latter, but don't quote me on it... It's not my strong point. Worm^TT(talk) 09:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

CVUA

FYI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

commented there Worm^TT(talk) 09:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Timeshift9's user page

I came across a userpage belonging to Timeshift9 which has clear vios of WP:NOTBLOG and possible WP:UP#POLEMIC vios. The recent MFD was just closed as a week keep, the closer pointed out that "large chunks of content are problematic". Should I launch an RFC/U to try and get the user to be forced to remove the problematic parts of the page or should I take it somewhere else such as WP:DRV? Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 09:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding RfC/U, have you tried to sort this with the user personally? If not, you're not really qualified to start an RfC/U. What's more, it's an unpleasant process, which I don't approve of except in very rare circumstances. DRV is more appropriate, as you disagree with the outcome but it's been closed for all of 20 minutes. I'd recommend you give the user a little time to accept the changes, or see if someone enforces them, before you run round shouting for change. Worm^TT(talk) 09:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright. I'll wait for a few hours and then if the remaining WP:UP#POLEMIC content is not removed then i'll launch a DRV. Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 09:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd recommend 24 hours at least - and some serious introspection as to whether this really matters. Timeshift has accepted the vast majority of the stuff removed, is it really a big deal that he has some opinions on politics on his talk page? Worm^TT(talk) 09:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

It's kind of a big deal because it's continued existence would require WP:UP#POLEMIC to be amended to say that a small amount of content that runs fowl of WP:UP#POLEMIC will be allowed on userpages. I will wait 48 hours or so... Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 09:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You needn't keep linking the guideline, I do know it well. That argument is rubbish by the way, we don't need to explain every situation on a policy, common sense and IAR come into play. The guideline, if you've read it, states that "Excessive" unrelated content is not allowed on user pages and is talking about "very divisive or offensive" polemic material. Those opinions do not appear to be very divisive, offensive or excessive to me, especially since it's been trimmed down. So I ask again, why kick up a fuss? Worm^TT(talk) 09:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

• What the hell is this? Are you trying to make a point? Worm^TT(talk) 09:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, it isn't disruptive on their userpage so it shouldn't be disruptive on mine either. If it is disruptive on mine then it is also disruptive on theirs. Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 09:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

    You might want to look at the behavioural guideline I linked to. In fact, I'll quote it for you to make it easier, highlighting the important factors to make my point. When one becomes frustrated with the way a policy or guideline is being applied, it may be tempting to try to discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, applying it consistently. ... Such tactics are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. Now, I ask you again, are you just trying to make a point, and would you like me to follow through with the recommendations at WP:POINT? Worm^TT(talk) 10:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

    I have removed the content. Fine then... Let WP:UP#POLEMIC go unenforced for editors such as User:Timeshift9. Let them run amok and violate as many rules and break as many pillars as they please! They have a high edit count so we can't enforce the rules on them! Barts1a / Talk to me / Help me improve 10:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

    Barts1a, I suggest you go and have a cup of tea and calm down. I've explained why I don't feel it violates POLEMIC above. It has nothing to do with their edit count, which I am unaware of. You asked for my advice, and I've given it - there's no need to make accusatory comments against Timeshift, or those disagree with you. Worm^TT(talk) 10:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Autism Cymru

Hi Worm, Carole and I have finished an article on Autism Cymru, we want you to check whether the logo rational is ok for us to use the image. Also, we are preparing for DYK, our hook is 'Did you know that Autism Cymru worked with the Welsh government to develop the first national autism online community?' Thanks a lot! :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 09:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you can do better than that on the logo rational, it doesn't meet the Threshold of originality, so it doesn't need to be regarded as non-free content. Check out the logos of other companies which have only words in their logo, try and use one of them. Also, it would be good if there was less whitespace on it. I'll have a look at the rest of the article in a bit :) Worm^TT(talk) 10:12, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to eavesdrop but are these two in line with policy on external links?:

• On Just Giving
• On thebiggive.org.uk

They appear to just be donation websites... Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 10:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Those two should be removed IMO. Worm^TT(talk) 10:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Done! :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 10:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if you are going to use that hook fact, you will have to back it up better with independent reliable sources. Of the three Wales Online sources supporting that paragraph, the only one of them that supports the hook is written by an employee of the organisation (Hugh Morgan). The two inline refs that you have immediately after the hook fact (one of which is basically a recycled press release anyway, and therefore not independent), don't mention the hook fact as far as I can see.

Also, be careful of using phrasing like "to affect the service delivery" ...

What's a "national online community"? If I spend half an hour setting up a forum site with some free software, and declare it to be an online community for particular people in a particular nation, is that the same thing? Or is it the discussing it with the nation's government that makes the difference? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 11:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, will look for some other independent sources. There's another fact we can use as a hook: 'Autism Cymru developed the first concept of a government led national autism strategy and encouraged the Wales Government to enforce it.' How's that? --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 11:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to nitpick at your good work Rex but i believe around half of your external links for this article are either more appropriate for the article on autism itself or a violation of WP:External links. Especially the Facebook and Twitter ones. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 11:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Not at all, it's better you help me correct it now than later. :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 12:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I didn't know this conversation had taken place here and already nominated the article at: Template:Did you know nominations/Autism Cymru. I'll go back an ensure that we're got proper secondary sourcing for this in the article.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think i got 'em all but "Awares" may also be a violation...Dave may be better for checking that one. The others were mostly unrelated to the organization directly or campaigning. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I added a citation from the BBC (already in the article, it was just further down) and another from the European Free Alliance.

Regarding the removal of external links: Can you help me understand why the Emily's Ball and Holly's Ball were eliminated - I get that they're campaigning for donations - but it's a good site to explain the story. For instance, how is: [[5]]

If we remove the Autism Initiatives external link, then I think we should start a new article for Autism Initiatives.

Can you help me understand why this would be deleted? Wales Autism Research Centre (WARC)

Mostly, I'm just checking in because I'm just trying to better understand why the external links were removed.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

For example, I use WP:External links#Links normally to be avoided for direction--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's campaigning for donations which i am certain is a breach of parts of either WP:Advertising, WP:External links or both. It's a touching story but i don't find it appropriate for the external links section, especially since they're profiting directly from these sob stories and Wikipedia is helping them by including them. I'll recheck though Carole. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You're kind of funny! It sounds like you've got a pretty clear impression of why Emily's Ball and Hope's Ball should not be included. No need to check.

How about WARC and Autism Initiatives? Since Autism Cymru's goal is to work through partnership for change - and they are key partners - it seems like it's good to add them. Again, just trying to get clarity more than anything else. It may be that the best resolution is to an create article for Autism Initiatives - in which case the point is moot. (i.e., would be removed cause there would be a link to their page in the article.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I hold no personal opinions on this organization and "sob story" probably wasn't the best choice of words but then that doesn't change the fact that they do not contribute to the article and are there solely to pull on heart strings and attract donations. I can't see either of the two stories being usable as anything in these articles, except maybe as a source, and then they would likely be challenged as primary and unreliable sources. Most of the removed external links are unusable as external links anywhere on wikipedia as they're purely promotional, and the campaigning and advertising links too.

WP:External links and WP:Advertising are in more detail if you fancy a read. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think I just need to drop this for the moment, it sounds like you have very strong opinion and I'm not learning anything new at the moment. It's really our own personal opinions about whether a non-profit is established soley to collect monies, if so, anything on their site would be considered advertising / collecting for monies. In this case, I think that they do much more for people than collect monies - just as I believe that the Red Cross and other non-profits do more than just collect donations, but that's just my personal opinion - others may not agree. I'll sort out later if it makes sense to write an article about Autism Initiatives that can be linked to, ensuring that it's notable before doing so, but it's not terribly important at the moment. Folks can figure out on their own how to look up Autism Initiatives - it's just my nature to try to be helpful, it doesn't mean I'm right.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

That's really your choice, i'm not trying to push an opinion across other than these links weren't appropriate and are in violation of WP:Advertising. I could have left them in by all means but that does not mean someone else won't remove them when they stumble across them.

Collecting money or not though these guys will get free traffic from us from link spamming them and that's not on and it's why removed multiple links. Dave/Worm is the best to ask if you want another opinion. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 16:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I think keep WARC, Autism Initiatives and Europe-Autism. They are key partner non profit organizations and I don't think there's any violations there. Worm, what do you think? --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 16:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, Rex ignored all rules and did what a ninja had to do. Meeting adjourned. Anyone else has further discussions please comment on the article talk page. --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 16:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Maths Sidetopic

Cool. I'll give it a stab!

Also the maths questions on your page...10 cents and 47 days? Thanks and have a nice day ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:23, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

5 cents... the other one is right though. Worm^TT(talk) 12:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hehehe, Worm is the maths lord! :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 12:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

"A bat and ball cost a dollar and ten cents. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?" - How exactly do you get 5 cents from that without the ball and bat costing a dollar and 5 cents???

Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps this will help - "Bat + Ball = $1.10", "Bat = Ball + $1"... so it's got to be 5c. (If it was 10c, the bat would be $1.10, and the total would be $1.20). Worm^TT(talk) 12:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Nope, still don't get it. My understanding is: Bat + Ball = $1.10. Bat = $1 so Ball = $0.10.

I've reread it about 10 times but that's my understanding...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahhhh. Right. No, the Bat costs $1 more than the ball ;) Worm^TT(talk) 12:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

...But if the ball is 5 cents then together they cost $1.05 since the bat is only $1 more? ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

No, the bat is $1 more than the ball - which means the ball is $0.05 and the bat is $1.05, do you see? The total is $1.05 + $0.05 = $1.10. Worm^TT(talk) 13:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

But the middle of the question includes "The bat costs a dollar more than the ball", not "The bat costs a dollar and 5 cents more than the ball"??

Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll drop you a nice table on your talk page Worm^TT(talk) 13:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)If the bat is $1.05, and the ball is $.05, then the difference between the two is $bat - $ball = $1.05 - $.05 = $1.00, so the bat is a dollar more than the ball. In your version, Jenova, the bat is $1.00 and the ball is $.10, so the difference between the two is $bat - $ball = $1.00 - $.10 = $.90, so the bat is only ninety cents more than the ball. Rearranging it, you need $ball + $1.00 to be equal to $bat. Worm's version works out to $.05 + $1.00 = $1.05, which is fine, but yours works out to $.10 + $1.00 = $1.00, which is not correct. Does that help? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

That's gibberish lol! I know you mean well but i may not get this one...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, hoepfully Worm's chart will help; I'll leave it in his capable hands. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Good answer Writ Keeper, though probably not for someone with dyslexia/dyspraxia! I've moved it to Jenova's page because I've had enough of the maths on mine! Worm^TT(talk) 14:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I can see my mistake now, i was reading it wrong and my brain was sticking an assumption in every time that $1.10 was the price for a bat and ball, and not $1 for the bat and 0.10 for the ball. Thanks for trying guys ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:12, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry guys, I was having a nap. These are my answers:

The first one. I assumed Bat=X and Ball=Y. Then I layed two simple equations: X+Y=1.10 & X=Y+1, then I brought the second one into the first one which turned out to be (Y+1)+Y=1.10, then I got 2Y=0.10, then Y=0.05, so X=0.05+1=1.05

The second one: Assume the pond as X. 2^48=X, which means 2's 48 times powered fulfill X. Then half the pond would be X/2, so divide 2 by both sides which is 2^48/2=X/2, then 2^(48-1)=X/2, which means at day 47 the function fulfills half X.

It has nothing to do with your IQ, all humans try to go for mental short cut when do mental maths, the article accompanies the questions is here: [6] --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 14:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

As you'll see even when i figured it out (with help) i can't describe it so easily...Oh well, that was a fun hour. Please no more maths today...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Syntax highlighting

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive239#What happens to proposals that.../. I seem to recall that you're a dab hand with CSS and js. I'm not suggesting you actually do it for us, but you may have some suggestions for the best approach for a script. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't go so far as a "dab hand", I know a bit about it :) However, that's an eeek situation to me. It would be lovely to have highlighing in the editor windown, but it's just a standard textbox (I think), and that's the problem. To have automatic parsing, you would have to fundamentally change how MediaWiki works, and a script to do it (which should be possible, but I don't know) would take a long time to load, especially on really long pages. If it's got that much support, and I can understand why, I think it might be a case of passing it to the foundation/devs to do (who will probably say "yes, we're doing something similar" and forget about it) or pass it to someone who writes scripts/fixes bugs routinely. Worm^TT(talk) 10:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Turnbull Thomson Park

Hi Worm, I just wanted to give you a heads up that RexRowan and I started a page User:RexRowan/Turnbull Thomson Park/notes just to take a few examples from the User:RexRowan/Turnbull Thomson Park article in progress and work on WP:Close paraphrasing.

It was a follow-up to work we did on Autism Cymru - to work on some examples. Feel free to jump in.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

First Test

Hi Dave, just thought I'd let you know that I have answered/attempted the first test you set for me. So, fingers crossed I did good, although I'm not that positive bout it. Jenova20 seems to think I've done a good job on them, but I suppose we'll see what you say! BlueStars83 (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I had a second go at that third question. Don't think I'm anywhere near right though, this synthesis issue(if that's what it is) is something I don't understand at all! BlueStars83 (talk) 18:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

My signature!

Do you notice anything different about it?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 03:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

You've switched to C678... I can't say I think it's a great idea. I considered doing the same by linking through to User:WormTT, but decided that on hover over it would imply that I'm someone I'm not. It also leads to potential abuse of your signature (by redirecting the userpage elsewhere), you may want that fully protected. However, I don't think it's against policy despite the difficulties. Worm^TT(talk) 07:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

That's not all that's changed. Take a look at User:Cyberpower678/SignatureStandard. The signature is now smaller than ever. Now compatible with HTML5.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 11:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Very good :) By the way, there's a bit of a debate at WT:SIG which you may want to look in on, since it concerns limitting user signatures Worm^TT(talk) 11:13, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I just quickly glanced at it and its running on no consensus right now. I also have a disclaimer on User:Cyberpower678/SignatureColorKey. Now compatible with HTML5.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 11:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

You can go ahead and fully protect those to redirects. Now compatible with HTML5.—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 17:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Slavery

I'm very curious why the European settlers did not slave on the indigenous people in New Zealand to grow economic crops or do farming for them like they did with the Africans? It seems only Africans became slaves among all the indigenous people in the world, including New Zealand, North America and Australia. Why is that? --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 11:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

The New Zealanders were and still are mostly fishermen, while Africans have a lot of farmland and farming experience. It would be like hiring chefs to build roads, it won't work very well and they have better uses. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Oddly about 4 different answers came into my head, and I was about to start checking to see which one might be right. I didn't even think about this answer! Worm^TT(talk) 12:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

There's also the issue of money and how you value a life. Back in the slave days the Africans were selling their own kind into slavery and i doubt New Zealanders undervalued a life enough to do that. At the end of the day i suspect it was down to plain racism against the Africans and their high birth rate just made them a better choice economically. Hope that helps ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, I think population density had a lot to do with it. Expansionist countries, be it the early USA, the British in the Antipodes, or Nazi Germany, always had more of a focus on depriving native peoples of their land (to farm it themselves) than on enslaving them. Africa was indeed unusual, in that it already had a history of enslaving other Africans for hundreds of years, and hence developed an export economy in slaves to be shipped elsewhere. (Although they also weren't actually indigenous to the places that they ended up working.) Incidentally, I think some parts of Australasia and the Far East, and even the western USA, used large quantities of imported Chinese labour rather than actual slaves.

However, it's not true that "it seems only Africans became slaves" - in fact a young Cornish lad called Thomas Pellow (redlink needs fixing) was one of about a million Europeans enslaved in the Barbary slave trade.

You might get a greater variety of answers (and more political correctness, or not) on the Reference Desk. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh no, I don't want passionate editors to give me a nose bleed. I think the model they run on the India case is the most cunning, let the local governors collect tax from their subjects and then hand it over to the colonist for personal interest. I think many conquers used this strategy including Julius Caesar and Genghis Khan. Am I right? Is that what common wealth means, a country runs by another country? --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 13:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I just found out that common wealth members have equal status. --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 13:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I think what you're describing sounds more like a Puppet state. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:10, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's it. Thanks a lot! Are you taking on the new maths challenge? :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:03, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I've worked out the answers but not put them down :) my head aches from the earlier ones ;) Worm^TT(talk) 15:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Worm, that's the side effect after my medication started kicking in, I got a little carried away. :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

D'oh, I just realized I know nothing about politics. I hardly understand any of these governing states mechanism. --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

$1.65 for a bat and $0.65 for a ball, 15cm, skipped (i can't easily do algebra) and 15 correct, 15 wrong. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:18, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Well done Jenovasan! Congratulations! All your answers are correct! You have passed the test! :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

you get a big ol' thumbs up for me. And the Bit Bat one is poorly phrased. There's two answers, depending on whether they are on different lines, and one is "impossible"... Worm^TT(talk) 15:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Really? I got "but". Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that's if it's all on different lines (Bot is zero, But is 2xBit, But - Bot = But). Which is what I assumed it meant, because all one line... is impossible because "But" is never defined. "But Bit" is... Worm^TT(talk) 15:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Needs some semicolons. You can take some of mine, I've had enough of them for several lifetimes.Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Dave if you take a look in User:Jenova20/Images i took you can see an image of one of your adoptees in Weston Super-Mare =P

I got permission to upload it first ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 17:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Oooh, is that a Time Crisis 2 gun? Jealous much. Worm^TT(talk) 07:19, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it is actually.

He's struggling with WP:Synthesis in your adoption as you've likely noticed. I've tried explaining it simpler but he's not quite grasped it yet. More examples might help...Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Adopt-a-user overhaul

Hi Dave,

I've started creating some subpages in my userspace in which to work on updating the Adopt-a-user project (should you wish to have a tinker, please feel free; they're all under this prefix). One I'd particularly like you to take a look at is User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adopter message, which I'm planning to drop onto the talk pages of all the currently listed adopters. If you wouldn't mind just checking the wording and confirm that you're happy for me to do this, I'll get started. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 08:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I'll work on the editors who have requested adoption. I've added a suggestion that they keep an eye on the project for upcoming changes, the more the merrier. Worm^TT(talk) 08:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Right, I'll start spreading the word. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:55, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that's everyone on the current adopters list notified, barring me and thee. Took ages; I should have used a bot... Yunshui 雲‍水 09:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Good-o. I see there's already been a few signups, which gives me a little hope. I'm up to D on the adoptees, but have cleared out a few. Worm^TT(talk) 09:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I've delisted or offered adoption to a few as well; it's looking less cluttered over there now. Like your standard message, by the way. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I've got through all them. Well that's a good start - there's only around 25 people for adoption now. Just need to actually sort the adoption pages next... Worm^TT(talk) 10:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been playing around with a copy of the main adopt-a-user page here; it's nowhere near finished with but you are welcome to edit it as well (saves having multiple drafts in different places). I'll create drafts for the other principal pages as well, they'll appear here. Same offer/request applies, feel free to mess about with them all you want. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've made potential changes to the text of User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Landing page, User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adoptee's area and User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adopter's area; mostly fairly minor stuff intended to streamline the text a bit. If you could look them over and make changes/suggetsions when you've got a minute, that would be grand. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been keeping an eye on your changes on my watchlist, haven't seen anything I'd consider problematic. As the project is currently inactive, I don't believe there's any problem with boldly adding your changes (I've been making a few directly). Go for it, if there's any problems, they can be tweaked afterwards. Worm^TT(talk) 07:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

User:RickWilliams75

Hi again. I've replaced the {{adopt me}} template on this user's page - one of the conditions of his unblock is that he gets himself a mentor, so I added him to the Users seeking adoption category to facilitate the process. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 08:55, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd just spotted this and was in the process of putting it back! Totally my fault, rushing things. Sorry! Worm^TT(talk) 08:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

No problem; if I got a trout for every time I had to go back and revert myself I could give up bookselling and become a fishmonger. Albeit a highly specialised one... Yunshui 雲‍水 09:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the message :D

Thanks for the message, and it actually reminded me to remove the tag, I had completely forgotten that it was on my page. I have learned along the way and no-longer require adoption, and as such have removed the tag :D thanks again NotinREALITY 10:27, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

That's great to hear :) If there's every any more I can do to help you out, please do let me know. Worm^TT(talk) 10:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually, where is the template and/or location of my reference, I cannot find any templates for this on my account :D NotinREALITY 10:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

You had sneakily hidden it at User:NotinREALITY/Discussion. It still showed up on the category though! Worm^TT(talk) 10:34, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahh found it, thankyou very much for the help :D NotinREALITY 10:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

No problems, good luck for the future. Worm^TT(talk) 10:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Adopt

Yes, I'll do! Thanks! --Tito Dutta ✉ 10:51, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Bodged edit

Hi Dave, i've managed to mess up a reference in this edit and i can't fix it (i've tried for the last 15 minutes). Can you sort it and comment on the rewording i created? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Either there's 2 errors there or i create another when i try to fix it...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Worm^TT(talk) 12:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Not quite, the text from the reference is actually in the paragraph. See the big hyperlink? That's meant to be a reference. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Did Worm get it? I'm looking at the article but not sure as to exactly what you're referring to. Ryan Vesey 13:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe I did :) Worm^TT(talk) 13:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

He's got it now Ryan, you're too late to the party =P

Thanks again Worm ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

---

I also require information on how i merge User:Jenova20/Born This Way Foundation with Born This Way Foundation since it was originally merged into the Lady Gaga through a consensus or a no consensus for deletion (i don't remember which). Do i need a new consensus to move this article from my user space or just a requested move of multiple pages? Born This Way Foundation is currently a redirect. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm. That's interesting, the article is in a significantly different shape than it was. I would recommend it be brought across on a history merge... I'll have a think and get back to you tomorrow about it :) Worm^TT(talk) 15:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't the social links be deleted on gaga's page? --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

In the external links section? I could certainly see that point of view, but it'd be a lot of effort to persuade the people who edit the article ;) Worm^TT(talk) 15:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I just realized a coward posted a sticker on it saying it has links do not fit policies but did not delete them, hehehe, hilarious! --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Are we talking about the Lady Gaga article? Editors there are too fanatic for even me to get an edit in. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Why bother. There's much more fun things to with your time. For example, go to todays XKCD and "click and drag"... it's... big. Worm^TT(talk) 15:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I take that back actually, my legacy lives on...I added her signature to the infobox =P

ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I like her anyway, but she will have to drug me to convert me to be a fan. Some people really have powerful charisma, charming quality. Maybe I will create an even weaker sticker mentioning the guy who posted the sticker failed to edit himself, lol! --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 15:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I took the social networking external links out but i'm not so sure the others are a violation. Hopefully that will get the ball rolling now...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Just to be sure, social networking EL's are okay if they are official; however, WP:EL#Minimize the number of links gives you a reason to remove those that you removed. They were already linked from the main page of her website. Ryan Vesey 15:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that confirmation Ryan =D I'll try and remember it for the future.

Thanks again! ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Park

I found a website for each club. Have a look now and see if there's anything else needs to be changed User:RexRowan/Turnbull Thomson Park --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 13:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I think the park article is pretty much done. There's some nice images on TigerTurf website but copyrighted. I'm going to move it to article space now if it's ok. --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 14:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you could leave it for the time being, so I can double check :) Worm^TT(talk) 14:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure! Dangerous panda said some of the clubs need to be removed if not very notable. --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 14:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Worm That Turned. You have new messages at TParis's talk page.
Message added 17:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

v/r - TP 17:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Dan Penteado

I'm sure you know this man Dave, if you look carefully you will also notice he has three birth years in this stub article!! Your recommendation? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

And it wasn't exactly difficult to find his age...via BBC.

So if he's 40 there then was his birth year 71 or 72? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

As always, I remove birth years if they contradict. It's a lot less harmful to have no birthdate than incorrect one(s) Worm^TT(talk) 08:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

And he could be born in 71, with a birthdate after July, or in 72 with a birthdate before July ;) Worm^TT(talk) 08:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I've got around the issue =P and rewrote the article with some more information. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Roger Bamkin?

Isn't this the guy from Wikipedia takes Coventry? ...Not very often i see someone in the news i've actually met...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 18:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep :) and Gibraltarpedia is what we talked about! Worm^TT(talk) 18:10, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahh...I'm not gonna be seeing your name in the news too then am i? ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 18:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I would love to get paid by Wikipedia to go around taking photos. :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 18:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Ha ha! Me too! Help me out with the Dan Pentiago guy then, i can't work out his age...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 20:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

1972. Are you ready to take on the food challenge? :D --RexRowan^忍(Ninja signal) 07:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure, i skipped breakfast and BlueStars83 can vouch for my excellent cullinary skills. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Zero contrition from Rtmcrrctr

Not that it's surprising, given how things went. But please, be very clear that he's gotta shape up. Honestly, I started the RFC/U instead of asking for a ban because I thought it would be a suitable forum for various editors from outside the article to give him guidance. And I did so in good faith, at what I perceived to be the suggestion of TParis (though apparently he was referring to Arzel, I clearly saw Rtm as the worst offender on both edit warring and AGF; Arzel just repeatedly asserts that well-sourced material is UNDUE, which is wrong but not breaking any rules in my book). I specifically didn't go straight for a ban, even though he continued the edit war even after the article was under probation, because I didn't want to be biting the newbies. Well, that sure didn't work out well. I honestly wish you good luck picking up the pieces. But I fear that this result may just end up being an extreme case of WP:ROPE. Homunq (talk) 02:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Could you give a look-see to AIV? Got a couple reports there that needs attention. Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm a touch busy at the moment, so can't really get into anything, but that doesn't look like vandalism to me. Remember, vandalism isn't just adding incorrect info, but incorrect info with intent to harm the encyclopedia. I get that you disagree with the information, but it doesn't look like vandalism to me. Worm^TT(talk) 08:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Dave i've thought of donating this part of my noob test for your adoption if you will have it?

I think it emphasizes pretty well the differences:

• Helpful Unhelpful Vandalism

Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

@Worm: It wasn't just incorrect information, it was inaccurate information. The anon reverted back to titles of networks like "SciFi Channel" (now just "Syfy") and "Fox Reality Channel" (no longer on the air). That could be considered harmful to the project as it was intended to disrupt (or harm) those reading that page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)