User talk:Wikipediarules2221

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Vandalism

Thanks :) - FrancisTyers · 19:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Haha

No worries. I'm using a slightly updated version of VP with precache rollback, which is probably why your vp gave the issue. =D. alphaChimp ^laudare 20:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Fred Durst

Why your reverted my edits in Fred Durst. My edits is not vandalism!

unblock

My IP adress has been blocked for things that I did not do or even know about. The reason I created a username was to prevent this from happening. Wikipediarules2221 18:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Yanksox for the following reason (see our blocking policy): exhausting patience with pure vandalism and manipulation of project aspect of Wikipedia.

Your IP address is 67.186.97.192.

OK, I've reblocked the IP to allow signed in users to not be affected, repost the unblock and message if you still get a problem. --pgk^(talk) 18:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Question

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_channels

does this mean people can't write where I'm editing from? 132.241.246.111 22:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I think so; however, I am a little fuzzy on the subject. My answer is yes, but you may want to ask another user for verification. Wikipediarules2221 22:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm an IP--I can't mark edits as minor

[1] 24.19.35.187 01:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Internal links tip

Thanks, Republitarian 02:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Kabosy.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Kabosy.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey WPrules (sweet username ;D), just a quick note to let you know I withdrew my RfA at 13/11/10. I appreciate your neutral !vote :) --james^(talk) 12:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

re: Thanks!

Riana has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

You're very welcome! If you have a spare minute, would you like to review me, too? I would love to have some input on my actions around here. Click the ER in my sig for a shortcut :) Cheers, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 01:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thanks so much for voting, Wikipediarules2221! Thanks so much for your support vote on my request for adminship! With a final vote count of (82/5/0), it succeeded, and I'm now an administrator! I am thrilled with the overwhelming positive support from the community, and sincerely thank you once again for taking your time to voice your opinion. Feel free to contact me with any comments/suggestions in the future! —Mets501 (talk) 03:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Goldom's RFA thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA, which closed successfully this morning with a result of (53/2/1). I've spent the day trying out the new tools, and trying not to mess things up too badly :). I was quite thrilled with all the support, both from the people I see around every day, as well as many users who I didn't know from before, yet wrote such wonderful things about me. I look forward to helping to serve all of you, and the project. Let me know if there's anything I can help you with. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 04:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

...no bother at all ;)

Hi there wikipediarules (or, as I should now call you, 2221 :), I'd be really glad to give you all the help I can.

Okay, so linking to an internal link (Esperanza, for example) is relitivley easy, when you know how. Let's take your sig, as a starting point :

• Wikipediarules2221

Now, let's say you want a green 'e' in there. Your sig, in raw form, would look like this:

• [[User:Wikipediarules2221|Wikipediarul]][[WP:ESP||<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Wikipediarul|s2221]]

All that code would end up looking like this:Wikipediarules2221.

Now, let's say you wanted a link to your talk (for explinations sake). You would just add a link in the area you wanted the link to appear.

• [[User:Wikipediarules2221|Wikipediarul]][[WP:ESP|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Wikipediarules2221|s]][[User talk:Wikipediarules2221|2221]]

Would look like this: Wikipediarules2221 (the 2221 comes up black because it links here, your talk).

Now, no one wants to write that out everytime you sign, so to make a sig like this appear when you add the four ~~~~ you must put the code (like the one created above) into a subpage (User:Wikipediarules2221/Sig, for example). Once you've done that, go into your prefeneces, look under the section signature in user profile. There add a link to the subpage like this: {{Subst:User:Wikipediarules2221/Sig}}. All you need to do now is click "raw signature" box, and everytime you put down ~~~~, you will get yur custom sig!!!

I know that was a lot of information, so please, if you didn't understand a bit, it didn't work, or yu have any more questions, get back onto me, and I'll try and help again.

Take care, and I'll see you around. Thε Halo ^Θ 00:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

...for the really nice usertalk message. I really was hoping that the RfA would do well, and I've been really overwhelmed by support of the community. Actually, I'm glad to receive Masssiveego's opinion. He's pointed out some decent issues from my talk page archives that I can possibly work on =). Regards, alphaChimp ^laudare 01:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thanks!!

Have a cookie!

Thank you so much for your kind words on my editor review. I'm so flattered that you took time out of your wikiday to say such nice things about me. :) I hope that I can bring a little brightness to Wikipedia, but also a little order - I guess I'm both the proverbial good cop and bad cop. :P Anyway, thank you so much for your kindness. It is deeply appreciated. :) Have a great day (or night, as the case may be), and drop a line if you ever need anything! Srose (talk) 01:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Mistaken

That was me Legolost, I can't edit on wikipedia any more, when I changed my preferences the format and layout complety changed, could you revert it, please, I cna't use wiki any more -- 219.88.55.91 04:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for my barnstar! Sorry about the revert races, although I'm sure there will be plenty of times in the future that you'll beat me to them as well. Keep up the good work yourself, and let me know if you ever need help with a vandal or two or eighty. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

File:Eraser closeup.jpg

Hi! You just nominated Gather.com for speedy deletion, giving the reason "advertisement article". This isn't a recognised reason to speedy delete, so the tag has been removed. There are other methods of deletion available, so if you still believe Gather.com shouldn't be on Wikipedia, you can consider WP:PROD or WP:AfD instead. Thanks.➨ ЯEDVERS 20:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Wangi/RFA

Thanks for your support on my RfA. Give me shout if I can be of help. Thanks/wangi 00:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

White House article

Hi, I noticed you reverted my edits to the White House article. I know this is a high profile article and I appreciate you paying attention to it, but please note that my contributions are my efforts at improving the wiki, NOT vandalism. I've reverted your reversions and hope you'll keep them there, barring a compelling reason to change them. Thanks!--160.39.213.168 22:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

High life

In the future, do not revert the removal of a WP:PROD tag. WP:PROD is meant for ONLY uncontroversial deletions, and is meant to be easy to object to. If you still want the article deleted, send it to WP:AFD. Mangojuice^talk 13:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks very much! I really appreciate. Did any specific thing prompt it? --Guinnog 02:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Mike Awesome

I just wanted to let you know that per the project of WP:PW, we have reached a consensus to remove sucession boxes for titles of wrestlers. I was not vandalizing. 69.209.105.235 23:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 66/11/5. I learned quite a bit during the process, and I expect to be learning a lot more in the days ahead. I will be taking things slowly (and doing a lot of re-reading), but I hope you will let me know if there is anything I can do to improve in my new capacity. -- Merope Talk 13:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the edit, but the section "History" with "Discovery of H2" and "Role in history of quantum theory" was entered muliple times in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.39.176.25 (talk • contribs)

VandalProof and VandalSniper

Hi again, and thanks for being so patient. First, I want to say that I greatly admire any program that stops vandalism here. Whether or not I prefer to use a tool doesn't say anything certain about its quality or usefulness. The people making these programs spent oodles of time conceiving them, coding them, and doing endless bug fixes, and they should be commended for this rather than called out for minor things one may find object to in their work. VandalProof in particular is responsible for possibly millions of protective edits to this site, and that is something to be regarded with appreciation and awe.

That said, here are the main things about the two programs that are important to me. First, on the VandalProof side, it allows for highlighting of changes within an automatically scrolling version of the recent changes list. That's a good, holistic method of watching out for vandalism, since it doesn't prefer certain pages in the listings; the most filtering I recall it doing is that of nonregistered users and minor edits. Therefore, there's not too much risk of preferential article patrolling. VandalProof also lets you do things like mark mistaken edits you've made, which then gives you the option of making an automatic notice of it in your userspace. This is a pretty good policy as far as full disclosure – I greatly support this kind of openness. VandalProof also does all the basic stuff you'd want, meaning reversions and the full range of test-x warnings, and is easily usable on any modern Windows platform. VandalProof also has a great mass-rollback feature ("VandalProof on Wheels") that VandalSniper doesn't. VandalSniper will have this functionality in the future, according to the developer, but only for administrators.

VandalProof, like VandalSniper, is certainly much faster than doing things manually. I should know this since I refused to get off my manual reverting kick for quite a while. I moved slowly from all-manual to Popups to VandalProof to VandalSniper. VandalProof is, as far as I can tell, the utility that first made RC patrol easy enough to be a popular task, which is a fantastic thing to be able to boast.

VandalSniper does not automatically update recent changes, but requires you to click a button instead. It also automatically scrolls and won't let you freeze the scrolling, which can get quite annoying when you have a lot of pages coming in over the "feed". Also, the embedded Mozilla browser in VandalSniper is a good, sturdy feature, but you can't use context menus or open new tabs with a middle-click. This means that for the most part you might as well be using Internet Explorer like VandalProof. These are really the only problematic differences between the two programs that I see, except for perhaps some layout problems; VandalSniper also has some window size issues that forces me to scroll down every time when viewing diffs in a small resolution. I don't personally miss the automatic refreshes at all; they can actually cause an irritating kind of race to check all the diffs listed before the page refreshes.

VandalSniper shines in pretty much every other way, though. Revert someone, and they go on your "hitlist". You don't have to revert someone to get him or her on there, either – you can just add the name to your list from a context menu that shows up next to every username on the page you're viewing. From then until you close the program, every single edit the user makes will be shown the moment it's made, thanks to the live IRC feed the program uses. You can do the same thing with pages just by adding them to your watchlist. While hitlists aren't saved when the program exits, watchlists stay and are refreshed from the server on an intelligent periodic basis. My watchlist has upwards of 4,000 pages on it at the moment and VandalSniper handles this without problems. The downside to this is that with enough watchlisted pages, one can just sit and watch the "watchlist" feed (that is, pages on your watchlist that pop up in the "Watchlist" tab of VandalSniper as they are edited) and thereby neglect the site-wide recent changes view. This causes a risk of preferential treatment to articles. On the other hand, the fact that instantaneous reporting such as this can do things like show you when your talk page is edited before you ever see an orange banner cannot be ignored. It's almost a kind of clairvoyance.

VandalSniper's selling point is by far its instant reporting of edits. The sooner vandalism or generally bad edits are reverted, the less risk of reversion over later good edits there is, and this also avoids the risk of the unwilling RC patroller to give up on reversion in lieu of doing tedious manual "partial reverts". VandalSniper is also noticeably faster for me on Linux than VandalProof has been on my Windows installations (though that's possibly the fault of old hardware and/or controversial differences in speed between the two operating systems that I'm certainly not going to theorize about any further here). VandalSniper gives a more complete range of easily-selected warnings, too. VandalProof has a decent range, but it's a pain to select non-standard warnings.

So, in summary, I would have to say that VandalSniper offers major speed advantages over VandalProof by design, and is easier to use in general. It has one gaping, critical flaw, though: it has a very limited possible userbase at the moment. It is designed in Linux through libraries that "should work" in Windows but have only been successfully built for Linux. The libraries in question are expected to be fixed to work with Windows at some point – this is a claim that's been made by the library project(s) maintainers for months now. I don't suspect the situation will change by the end of the year. Thus, VandalSniper is a wonderful, functioning, disturbingly fast program that will work for you if you have a good amount of experience with Linux and a lot of time to kill in resolving the legions of errors you will run across just in the process of installing it.

I prefer VandalSniper because it is designed around the concept of aggressive speed, while VandalSniper does basic RC patrol but is seemingly – forgive me – a little more watered down. VandalSniper clearly provides for a greater range of article inspection and lets you do it considerably more quickly. Sadly, VandalSniper's poor cross-platform support makes most of my argument in its favor moot; VandalProof will thus be the counter-vandalism community's favorite for some time to come, which I think is perfectly fine. It's not a bad program at all.

I feel it pertinent to also mention that VandalProof 2 is in the works as well. It does something neither VandalProof generation 1 nor VandalSniper do, which is shared patrolling. That means the job is split up between all users of the program, and this does have some obvious advantages. I do however have to say that the ability to watch certain "hot" pages, particularly those on the main page or at WP:MVP, should make one think twice before dismissing VandalSniper. VandalProof 2 does not appear to have plans for any form of the "instant notification" of VandalSniper, either, and while it may be obvious why shared, holistic recent changes patrolling is good, filtering is sometimes better or even necessary.

Again, VandalSniper allows for fast patrolling of pages en masse with almost every warning type you could possibly want, and is thus my clear favorite. However, since its operability outside of Linux is plagued by flaws in compatibility design, and because VandalProof is still more than adequate enough for the average non-Linux nerd counter-vandal, VandalProof is sure to remain top dog for some time to come. It doesn't really matter too much in my book what a person uses as long as they're trying to help keep the site clean.

Thanks for asking about this, and sorry for being long-winded. You're welcome to ask any more questions on my talk page if I've not been specific enough. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

File:Nuvola apps kfm home.png

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. NCurse work 15:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Thanks a lot

Thanks to you for understanding that was a good faithed review that was meant to be as truthful as possible. I am happy you have became an "independant voter" now, I have seen cases where people continue to stack even after having participated in hundreds of AFD discussions.

I was taught that, while many can edit an article about X-Men, CNN, New York or the Moon, few can edit articles related to your location, especially if it is african or south american. Unluckily, to do this you need to be "willing" to write those articles. While I could write about Argentina that hadn't been written yet, I am still not "motivated" to do that. Not that I am ashamed or anything, it is just that I prefer talking about things I am currently interested (as can be some fantasy books or video games) than in something I would feel more like a chore. It is good to see you are willing to write articles about things you know which haven't yet been mentioned in Wikipedia. I hold such editors in high esteem. Good luck! -- ReyBrujo 01:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)