User talk:Vox Rationis

how do you do it...

I decided today to try my hand at vandalism reversions using the "recent changes", and I was fairly quick, but 4 out of 5 have already been reverted by you by the time I click history! Number one, kudos for your tireless effort, and number two, how are you so quick(as I might want to speed up my process as well)...Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!--Vox Rationis 02:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, trying to revert vandalism through Recent Changes is quite slow. I've written my own software to help me; others use similar software, or scripts from within their web browser. User:AzaToth seems to be using something called "TwinkleFluff" that works in a web browser, you might want to ask him about that – Qxz 02:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what a hell you did

But you certainly blanked some content on [Josip Broz]. I was not blanking anything but cleaning garbage and organizing the discussion page and I guess you thought you had to screw me up so I have to waste time writing this instead of working on wiki. Now that you totaly screwed up the history, I can't figure out how to reviwe the content that dissapeared after your rev. What a waste of energy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gbajramo (talk • contribs) 06:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

Reverts

Actually as an admin I have access to "Rollback" which allows for a one-button revert, though you're generally only supposed to use it on vandalism. It produces the edit summary. There are scripts, but I have never used any of them.

Good job on the reverts and warning. Guettarda 14:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The Unicist Research Institute

The The Unicist Research Institute had been blanked by its original author. The rule book says that this can be taken as a request to delete.

For future reference please note that if you put an {{AfD}} tag on an article you must complete the other two stages of the AfD process. -- RHaworth 00:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

'bot stub-tagging

Actually, last night I only tagged 72 stubs, since at that point it was on a "trial run": I think that some people from another cleanup project were doing a significant amount of stub-tagging, too. (I'm tagging a few more now, though.) There seemed to be general agreement at WT:WSS about tagging the 'hidden backlog' with stub, but if you have any comments about doing that, or about the rate at which they're being done, you might want to weigh in there. I agree that it would be good if the 'bot could also sort the stubs, but a) it can't, and I don't know of any plausible way it could be done; and b) even if it could at 99% accuracy, I'd get more negative feedback about the 1% error than positive about the correctly-tagged rest.

BTW, I hope you don't mind me saying so, but retagging from {{stub}} to {{bio-stub}} is pretty minimalist as far as stub-sorting is concerned. Just about every country has a <country>-bio-stub, and it's also desirable to tag someone with their occupation/source of notability. Otherwise, Category:People stubs would get as over-large as Category:Stubs very quickly. Alai 13:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Yes I just noticed this great project wikipedia. Though I'm scared if there are any Serbs here; I don't see them so far so so far so good.