|
Okay, welcome to my talk page. Why are you here?:
- You have a question for me: No problem. Click here to post me a message, and I will answer it as soon as I can.
- You would like me to look at a dispute. Post me a message, I'll try help out.
- You have a complaint, regarding me or someone else: Post a civil message below, stating your concerns. Personal attacks will be removed.
- I archive messages every 50 headings.
|
Purge
I was browsing through pages and noticed an anomaly (sp?). The page Claudia Zacchara was deleted, but during the deletion debate, a recently found out sockpuppett and the originator of the debate were used to gain an unfair advantage in order to get their way. In recounting the "votes", it would be a tie, which would mean no consensus and therefore the article wouldn't have been deleted. I think that something should be done to rectify this problem and that the page should be restored so that there can be a fair debate over whether the article should be deleted or not without sockpuppets.--Lan Di (talk) 03:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest you notify the deleting admin about this, and see what they say about it. If that's unsuccessful, you can take it to deletion review. There's really not a lot I can do to help, sorry. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 04:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll be offline now until tommorrow afternoon western time. I'll think it over. BTW, you have an exact same thing as Tiptoety. Anyway, I'll tell you tommorrow. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk) 04:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, just something I need to mention. I've seen your article work and vandalism patrol, which is a good thing, and you should keep at it. However, I'm concerned you may not be familiar with our deletion policy. Generally, we should try and give unique answers to AFD !votes. While "per nom" votes aren't prohibited, they generally show that the user may not be familiar with our deletion policy. Additionally, closing AFD's as a non-admin has rather strict guidelines, this concered me a bit. You can have a look at the guidelines here. I'd generally advise to steer clear from AFD, at least for a little while. I'll teach you the deletion policies, don't worry. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 01:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- About the assignment, I don't know how the formatting came that way. Sorry. Can you fix it? Also, your going to put the answers on my adoptee page, right?--RyRy5 (talk) 01:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm going to butt in here and say "thanks" to Steve for taking the time to help RyRy, who I know has every potential to be one of our very best users, but needed a little guidance (unfortunately, "time" is one thing I can't offer right now, or I'd have stepped up myself). Steve, thank you, and Ryan, thank you for being willing to listen to Steve. He's a user that I trust, and I've always thought his actions wise. This is a great partnership, and one that I'm pleased to see develop. - Philippe 02:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have revised the article extensively since you voted in the AFD, and invite you to reconsider. --Dhartung | Talk 09:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hola,
Has edited again. If not vandalism, then what should be done? I'm a bit stumped - adding info on a living person with a source of 'Richard Ofshe personal knowledge' stretches WP:AGF, as does refusing to engage on their talk page at all. Do you have any advice or suggestions? I can keep reverting I suppose, but I wonder if I'll get hit with a 3rr. BLP/N? WLU (talk) 16:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry- I blocked this user (12 hours) because I failed to read a message closely enough and didn't see that you had already declined it. I didn't intend to wheel-war, and see the logic in your position; if you decide to unblock I won't be mad. The best outcome in any case would be to engage this person in dialogue... -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
| Vandalism 1.1 assignment
|
- 1 What is vandalism?
- A Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia. It's differentiated from other unconstructive (good faith) edits by the bad faith inherent in said edits. It is something bad that is done to a page such as blanking an article, adding nonsense to a page (especially articles), ect. More info can be found at WP:VANDALISM.
 Correct
- 2 List 3 situations where an edit which could be considered vandalism, may not actually be vandalism.
- A 1. When a user adds info to an article that doesn't seems accurate. Example:You add false info to someone's bio that is not harrassment, nonsence, and the truth, but the user didn't know. 2. When someone creates an article that has only random words and letters that are not attacks is not vandalism. 3. New users sometimes make test edits to articles, project space, ect. that are only random letters, words ect. That is not considered vandalism. However, you should inform the user about it and suggest using the WP:SANDBOX or suggest the user creating his or her own if the user isn't an IP address.
 Partly Correct - I would have liked more coverage on the other types of edits that are often considered to be vandalism, yet are not vandalism, such as personal attacks, violating the NPOV policy, or edit warring. While they are an area for concern, these reports would belong at WP:ANI, rather than WP:AIV
- 3 What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes?
- A Good question. There are many actually. The most common ones are when the edit summary says "Blanking the page" or "Replaced content with (Whatever nonsense)". It can be also be told on how many kilobites were lost. For example: Not many people would remove 5000 kilobites from an article, so most users would check to see if it was vandalism. Correct
- 4 How do you revert vandalism?
- A If you have rollback, you can simply click "rollback" on the diff screen. You can also "undo" vandalsim by clicking "undo" on the diff screen. Then you click "save page" to revert it. Again, you can also revert vandalism by TW, VandalProof, ect. Correct
- 5 What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page?
- A Easy. I would use {{subst:uw-delete}}. If it was the users second warning, you put {{subst:uw-delete2}}, ect. But if the user already has a final warning, you would report it to the WP:AIV. Also sometimes you should add {{subst:uw-test1}} if neccessary. Partly Correct - Blanking content or all content from a page can be acceptable if the page is in violation of our WP:BLP policy, or if it is a user blanking a page in their own userspace.
- 6 What warning template would you use if a user add the words "i really hate wikipedia!" to an article?
- A I think it's uw-attack. But if you don't know what to use, you can really just put uw-vandalism|PAGE NAME. Partly Correct - {{uw-attack}} is for personal attacks directed at a user. {{uw-vand}} of some level would be more appropriate here.
- 7 How do you add an article to your watchlist?
- A You click "watch" on the top of the page. Partly Correct - Can also add a page to your watchlist by clicking the "watch this page" tickbox near the field for the edit summary, just above the "show changes" button.
- 8 If you misuse such tools as WP:TW or WP:VPRF what could happen?
- A You can be blocked if you used it intentionally. I think you will just loose the privilege of having it if it was a good faith edit.
 Wrong - Misuse of these tools, regardless of whether it is intentional or not, can result in a block.
Well, I think I did well. Maybe one wrong.
|
Note: You have missed a question, please check the questions again. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 02:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done --RyRy5 (talk) 02:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I fixed Q2. I didn't know you couldn't copyright the answers.--RyRy5 (talk) 02:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Graded it. 2 marks for correct, 1 mark for partly correct, no marks for incorrect. I graded it as 10/16= 62.5% Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 03:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt it but did I pass? If I didn't, do I take a similar version?--RyRy5 (talk) 03:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, you didn't pass. I will write new questions. Don't rush through the lessons, there is no rush to complete your adoption. Generally, my area on expertise on Wikipedia is vandalism (not vandalising), but how to differentiate between vandalism, and edits that are not vandalism. This is something I can tutor you one in higher detail, however I suggest you move on to a different lesson for now. Don't rush. There is no hurry. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 03:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand. But I would like to take the test sometime tomorrow. I am a little busy today. Also, about the AfD's. I don't say "per nom" anymore. I usually say "Non-Notable" or "Fails (Whatever it fails)." Also, are you saying that I shouldn't participate in AfD's for a while?--RyRy5 (talk) 03:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I, in good confidence, do not believe you would be ready for the Vandalism test tomorrow. We need some one-onj-one time where I can teach you in greater detail. Additionally, I think I'll merge Vandalism 1.1 and Vandalism 1.2 together. I would much rather you know the vandalism policy very clearly, than rushing through it. Like I said, there is no rush. Additionally, regarding the AFDs, I think you should probably stay away from performing non-admin closures for a while, I feel you may not be perfectly clear with our non-admin closure policy. I'm not saying stay away from AFD entirely, just tr to slow downh a little. It's quality rather than quantity that is important. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 03:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, please fully reply to that comment. I don't see problem with you !voting on AFDs, just, as I sais, remember it's not theamount of AFD edits that you make, but the quality of said edits. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 03:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I will stop closing AfD's until you say I'm ready. So how will we do the one-on-one to teach me. And I think that merging those is a good idea. But will it count as 1 required or 1 required and 1 optional?--RyRy5 (talk) 03:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, sorry about the extensive delay, I was out at a resturant with someone. Anyway, the one-on-one sessions might be on IRC, or a IM program, or even an external wiki. Whatever is best. I'd think an external wiki would be best, as I have one. Regarding whether they would be optional or not, I think that the merged lesson would be required. It wasn't required by Tiptoety, but I feel people that do RC patrol must be extremely familiar with our vandalism policy, and I feel I am a very competent person to teach you that. AFD clsoing, I'll ket you know when I think you are ready. Please reply to the whole comment soon. 05:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- Have you ever heard of the test wiki? That should be the perfect place to train, for me being an admin there. I understand that it should be required. I do intend to revert vandalism in most of my time. Also, I have rollback and I don't intend to use it often until I have learned more.--RyRy5 (talk) 00:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Steve =]. I would just like to say happy birthday from me =]. I hope i got the right day. ^^. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 15:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Things have stalled. My understanding is that everyone is close to achieving a consensus except for JAF1979. I might be mistaken. It would be helpful if you could solicit everyone's views on the issue in order to clarify the current status. I have posted a proposal at this point, and would welcome any alternatives (or criticism). But it may take some time to get everyone to check in. Seeing as you have some authority, I would appreciate your assistance. Randomran (talk) 17:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, would you look at my request on the WP:24 talk page, we need the to-do list linked also, so I don't have to put what needs to be done on the talk page.--Lan Di (talk) 23:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing... Give me 5 minutes. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 01:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Image uploaded, and link added to the to-do list. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 02:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I was wondering. If a user blanks one section, is it vandalism?--RyRy5 (talk) 01:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It depends on what content they are blanking, if it is possibly libelous or questionable content in which has no source the removal of that questionable content is not vandalism. But if they continue to remove it after someone adds it back they could be involved in a edit war, which can result in blocking. If the blanking appears to remove good, quality, and sourced content or is so large that the only intent is to disrupt the article, than it can be considered vandalism and reverted as such. Tiptoety talk 02:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for answering. I will be aware of that in my RC patrol. Cheers. Oh, Steve, you can answer too if you like.--RyRy5 (talk) 02:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Tiptoety for answering, but RyRy5, please have a look at the comments I have left further up the page, that you haven't replied to yet. As you didn't pass the Vandalism 1.1 test, you will need to re-do it. However, for me, a sound understanding of the vandalism policy is essential for me to be able to graduate you in confidence. Like I said further up the page, I intend to mentor you on vandalism in higher detail, as people who do vandal reversion must hve a sound understanding on of the policy. And also my comment up the page on AFDs. Thanks, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 02:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to ask around about my "experience" with RC patrol, if you just want to be sure I'm capable ;) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 03:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, absolutely not. As the policy defines, sneaky vandalism is hard to notice. That diff was blatant vandalism. What is it in your contribs you want me to check? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 00:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it said somewhere that adding something to the edit summary that isn't true, like saying "reverted edits", is sneaky vandalism. In this case, the IP used "spelling error" which definently is trying to cover the IP's edits. Anyway, I would like you to see all the reverting I did yesterday and today.--RyRy5 (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have created my account. I have also left you a question. BTW, please answer the question above this section.--RyRy5 (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will be at your wiki. Any comments before I go?--RyRy5 (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, none except that I'm very tired :) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 14:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll head to your wiki. Oh, and you can take a quick break anytime you'd like.--RyRy5 (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Steve... making sure you've seen this: [1]. - Philippe 00:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the response. That's an interesting idea for mentorship. I'm glad you're on top of things. :-) - Philippe 01:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Replied on my talk page.--RyRy5 (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm planning to make it a DYK so I would like your utmost help and opinions. Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can I ask why you also asked [2] and [3]? Really, in editing Wikipedia, it's more about editing independently. While we can guide you, we really can't do the work for you. I hope you understand. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 23:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I understand. But how about asking others for their opinions on something?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 01:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, it just came across as you were seeking me to help write it. I'm happy to have a look over it, but I'm not sure if I can actively contribute to it. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 01:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot something. The article is in the verge of a major edit BTW, and I only did about 20% of it.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then, hang on. Busy for a minute. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 01:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have noticed that both you and RyRy5 tell each other "I've replied on my talk page," or such. Do you know about the talkback template? It's much easier, by me, anyhow. Happy editing. Basketball110 23:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is considered vandalism, right? If so, what template shall be used?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 05:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's vandalism. Personally, it's not overly severe, and it was the IP's 3rd edit, however their first warning. I'd have issued a {{uw-vand1}} warning. However, they've already been warned. We don't warn twice for the same vandalism edit. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking {{subst:uw-defam1}}. Enigma message 05:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, maybe. But it's really minor vandalism, seems a little trivial to go that way. It seems to be more vandalism than anything, I guess you really could go either way. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Most people in general simply warn for vandalism and don't use the other templates enough. :D Enigma message 05:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, true, very true. I just thought the vandalism was generalised, but, like I said, I was happy to go either way. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all of your comments. I just asked so that I would know what to do in the future.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 05:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When you update your status, can you please say "online", "offline", ect. on the edit summary? Also, if necessary, you should give an explanation of what you will be doing while online, alerting me if you would answer quickly or something. Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 07:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My status is updated by a bot. I just changed it once myself because I was busy. With all due respect, is it really necessary for me to give an explanation of what I do online? I mainly do mediation, template work, AIV patrol, and co-ordinating the huge mess that is WP:24, as it's been inactive over 6months and I'm trying to pick up the pieces and fix it up. I'll still be here when you have questions to ask, feel free to read ahead in the lessons, they're still open for you to do. :) Perhaps the one on user permissions? Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 07:27, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand now about your status. And I was planning to start another lesson. I will take my time and I'll try my best to pass.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 07:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
{ec} Okay, great. I'd strongly suggest the permissions assignment, read over it slowly. There is no need to rush yourself. And, remember. In your own words. Don't copy/paste the answers, okay? :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 07:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One other thing. When are you going to add my graduation assignments/goals at the bottom of User:Steve Crossin/Adoption/RyRy5?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 07:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you didn't manage to pass the Vandalism lesson yet, I don't think I should add it. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 07:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Steve. I don't reply to emails about wiki stuff outside on wikipedia itself, so I'm sorry for the delay in responding. I'd be willing to accept whatever arrangement you feel is necessary to get past this deadlock. I think it's unfortunate that mediation has failed to bring about consensus on the issue and that we have to appeal to higher power, but if that's where we are, than that's where we are. Thanks for all help. Tiamuttalk 09:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, would you be able to add your name here? That would be most helpful. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 09:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Will do. Thanks again. Tiamuttalk 10:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have finished reading it. I will do the assignment at User:RyRy5/Sandbox3. I will alert you when I have completed the assignment. Any comments before I begin?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 00:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, feel free to begin. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Finished. I did my best. It may look a little confusing and unorginized.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Y Good work, I'm happy with that. Now, just make sure that you keep doing these in your article writing. That's the important thing here. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I learned a bit more doing that. I learned what all those icons do. Most of the time, I manually do things instead of those icons. So I passed, right?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 02:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm glad you learned something from this :) Yes, you have passed this one. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you notify that here?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 02:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing... Already working on it Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nice new list you put on my adoption page. BTW, am I your 1st adoptee?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check out ALL the links. It's rather elaborate. There's a link to the completed lessons and all. Also see your gradebook. Rather elaborate. Yes, you're my first adoptee. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see. But is Vandalism 1.1 and 1.2 supposed to say "optional"? Also, what template should I use to warn an IP who did this?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 00:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
{{uw-vand1}}. Let me check the lessons. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good. I think I will read one of the optional lessons, as I need at least two completed, right?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 00:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes correct. However, why don't you do the permissions assignment? I think it's best if you get that one out of the way. There's a link to the "Adoption Center" in my navigation bar. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, as I do need to learn some more about that. I will start the assignment soon. And I noticed that adoption link a little while ago. BTW, do you plan on having more than 1 adoptee at a time?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 00:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's highly unlikely, I'm extremely busy with the 24 Wikiproject, which is a huge mess that I'm trying to co-ordinate and fix. Right now I'm cleaning up after a bad page move, which I reverted. I have to fix all these. It's not simple to fix, it needs to be done in a precise way. Let me know when you're ready to do the assignment, and I'll create a section on your lessons page. But, do not rush. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at this, the IP added nonsense to the article. He then reverted it. Should anything be done if this ever happens again?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- {{test-self}}, or just give them a standdard warning. Sorry to but in, Steve. · AndonicO Engage. 01:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks you. I didn't even know there was a template like that.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's alright Andonic. I wasn't actively editing Wikipedia, I've been doing template work here, I'm a sysop there. He's right of course. It's {{test-self}}. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will begin reading the lesson now. As always, do you have any comments before I begin?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do. Take your time. Read it thoroughly. And, don't copy the answers from the lesson, or from anywhere else. Answer them in your own words. Do not rush. You are not racing anyone. You can start now. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 01:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, for the clean-up assignment, I think I cleaned up Jeremy Owens. Feel free to check. I will continue permissions the assignment.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, I saw. The lesson requires 15. Pick 15 from the category mentioned on the lesson page, then let me know when you have done all 15. Focus on the permissions assignment for now, then tell me when you're ready to take the lesson. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 01:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I passed (yay)! BTW, your template doesn't work.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What template doesnt work? Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right. The assignments won't be here in the future. I'll nuke it from here. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. And about the cleanup patrol. Does Jeremy Owens count as one out of the 15?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does count, as it had a cleanup tag on it. In future, try to pick ones from the category I showed you. Additionally, when you do the deletion assignment, we are going to spend a lot of time on that. I want to be 110% sure on this assignment with you, as there have been concerns I feel about AFDs, and speedy deletion criteria, so we will go over things that aren't in the lesson. Your full adoption page is here. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. But I will have to take a break from assignments for today.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Take your time with this adoption. I don't want you to rush it. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am. I'll probably just study some vandalism lessons, but not take it until I'm ready which should be in a few weeks to aout a month or two, since I'm having some difficulties about vandalism.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note, there is no real need to tell everyone about your assignments, like here. This isn't about proving anything to anyone, it's about you learning. Okay? I'd also like to teach you more about vandalism, I would recommend at least a few weeks before re-doing the Vandalism 1.1 assignment, I'll write new questions for it. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:19, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. And sure thing. Take your time teaching me. You've been a great adopter so far. Well, I'm going to be offline soon. So I'll talk to you tommorrow afternoon-ish (UTC).--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then, I will see you tomorrow. I'm glad I've been able to help so far. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 05:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Assignment
Lesson moved to here Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I also will put copies of your lesson on your adoption page. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed that on my watchlist. Please answer my comment above Assignment. Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. But I try to keep it at a minimum. Don't worry, I know why we're here and that this is not a myspace. But it's good to do stuff like this on occasions. I'm also trying to keep a minimum of 5 edits per renovation.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW, you have a message at my talkpage.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 01:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I gave myself a new rule that I would only update that every 500 edits starting from that diff you gave me.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 02:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess so. I'll consider it.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 02:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I do it every 500; too tired to check my math, but I think after 250,000 edits, I'll have to update because of my updating. Probably wrong... too tired to think. Ah yes, and sorry for interrupting again, Steve. I think I'll unwatch this page before it becomes a habit. · AndonicO Engage. 02:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Andonic, probably a good idea to unwatch this page. ;) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also doing that. But is there any specific reason?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Err, yes. I don't wish to sound condescending here, but I think an adopter should look over them, rather than a current adoptee. I'm not sure on his adoptee skills, although I know he's adopted many adoptees, however I'm not sure how closely he adopts them. I generally take on only a few adoptees at a time, as I teach them quite closely, as in, with the lessons and such. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. Just to let you know, I know Casey906262 in real life but that shouldn't be a big deal, right?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, that shouldn't be a big deal at all. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I have a question on something. When writing/improving an article about a biography or any situation where a person's name is used, you should always use the person's last name, right?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's generally correct. If you're slightly unsure, you can have a look in the Biography Manual of Style. I was rather sure, but I double checked myself. ;) Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thats how I thought of it too. Well, I will see you tommorrow. Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 05:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be more than happy if you took over the mediation at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-26 Joint (building). I've tried to make some progress so far, but I'm not sure both parties are really interested in what I have to say. I'll let you read over the material so you can decide where to go with it. I guess I'm not experienced at mediation, so it would help to have someone who knows what they're doing. Thanks. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very well then. I'll go about notifying both parties that I've "officially" accepted it, and I'll go from there. Still reviewing the content at the moment. I'll keep in touch. Thanks for your efforts so far. For the record, I'm not exactly what you would call an experienced DR person, however, I have a variety of methods for dealing with disputes. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You're A-OK by me. Go ahead and mediate. Best, --Achim (talk) 03:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
|
Steve Crossin...Thank you for participating in my nomination for adminship. Your comments have shown me those areas in which I need improve my understanding. I hope that my future endeavors on Wikipedia will lead to an even greater understanding of it. If you wish to further discuss the nomination, please use its talk page. Stop by my talk page anytime, even if it is just to say hello. Have a wonderful day! - LA @ 05:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Steve...There is no reason for me to be uncivil to you for your reservations about my ability to use the tools for which I was nominated. As Keegan said in the nomination, it is no big deal. Hope your day is going well. - LA @ 13:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know you weren't being uncivil :) I was just pointing out I felt sorry that I had to oppose, but, anyway. :) My day is going OK, I eventually finished all those nasty redirects. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 13:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
could you please adopt me? It is ether you or this other guy Tennislover1 (talk) 20:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello. Steve, I hope you think hard about this.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 21:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, what other guy? Who else is adopting you? Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 22:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hersfold Tennislover1 (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm a little busy to adopt another adoptee, but have you looked at the adoption centre? There are many other people that would be able to adopt you. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 22:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to tell you, Tennislover1, User:Hersfold is currently not adopting as told on my talk page just 3 days ago.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 23:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are a good adopter. Your technique isn't the most commonly used, but it is effective. Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 22:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hersfold has the same adoption program, I just run it a bit differently. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 22:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I saw you commented on User talk:Basketball110, saying if your a good adopter, yes, you are a great adopter!--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 23:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thanks a lot. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 23:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of what [perhaps] you've seen or noticed, what do you think of my adoption, furthermore my editing (better not here, but here). Basketball110 My story/Tell me yours 02:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Steve, nice to be of acquaintance!
I just would like to say that my reason for changing the template image (the orange ! mark) is because of a recently held discussion at Article Message box was to standardize all ambox images. I changed the 24 image out of courtesy since I though that what I did was an improvement. If, however, my 24 image change was not beneficial, please, do not hesitate to revert back. Thanks, and sorry for any inconveniences. -- penubag (talk) 00:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's alright with changing the template. Could you self revert the image for me? Also, if you could join the project in any way, I'd appreciate it, I need some techincal aid. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 00:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem, I've reverted the image back to its original state. However, I feel that I'd be of little use to the project. I've watched the 24 series a while ago and know some basic plot details, but that is all; besides, we don't need plot. If you need any template coding, formatting, image creation, or anything of technical aspect, please, don't hesitate to contact me for whatever minor it may be. I'm open to help. Thanks! -- penubag (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't need plot at all. Well, if there is plot info, it needs to be minimal and sourced, and in addition to real world info, like on Martha Logan. I decided to re-start the project and co-ordinate it's efforts, well, I have a good head on my shoulders, so to speak, and I feel I can improve this project quite a lot, it just needs support, something I've been lacking a bit, except from a select few people. Could you help me fix this error? I want the article list (the coloured one) aligned left, and the Class box aligned right, but next to each other, and not overlapping the next heading. The origninal colour table is here. That would be really helpful. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 01:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done anything else? :) On second note, my edit summary had a typo, but the tables should be fine. Cheers!-- penubag (talk) 01:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, just wanted to let you know that you needn't revert Image:24DNTV.svg back to the original version so many times. One revert sets the image back to its original state. The reason why you didn't (or don't) see the changes is because the image is stored in your browser cache (which is a temporary storage place to lower loading time.) All you have to do is bypass your cache to see the changes. You can also purge the image at Commons if that doesn't work (afterwards bypass your cache again). Hope this clarifies. -- penubag (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I was aware of that actually. I just reverted it once, as I wanted the alternate image you made, and then restored the current one. Thanks for letting me know anyway. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 15:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, great just making sure. By the way, I edited the 24 image again. I hope it's better than before, please revert if you don't like this image either. I checked and the change doesn't interfere with any existing templates. Cheers -- penubag (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A 24 project award? How's this? :) -- penubag (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it's roughly based off of the newer 24 logo used on the box art [4] -- penubag (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, that image was actually the original 24 image, if I recall correctly. The new image is th yellow 24 one :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 23:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the round one is actually the newer one. I bought all the series (except the last one) and the first two (or three) are the yellow one. The later ones are all the round logo. Just a note, I'm going offline so talk to you later. -- penubag (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Editing from a hot spot (meaning I won't reply for a while): Do you want me to make the 24 yellow on the star, or do you like how it is? -- penubag (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you could make it like the 24 text (yellow, digital looking), I'd really appreciate it. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New barnstar image
- Okay, I found some time and I made a 'digital' barnstar for you! here it is :) -- penubag (talk) 00:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 02:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, if anything, it underlines them. And as with all such process pages, you shouldn't really change the title of anything that's been nominated during the discussion period,a s it simply makes more work for everyone later. Grutness...wha? 02:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again - you wrote: Mind explaining the issue to me? That would be helpful. Also, I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar with Category:UNKNOWN. Mind fixing your mess? And, I don't see the issue there? Explain that too.
There's no mess. The "unknown" indicates that there needs to be debate on exactly what the new title should be, since the current title is clearly not in keeping with normal Wikipedia category names - as such, that template indicates that there is a debate taking place and where the debate is taking place (it also clearly says not to remove it while the debate is taking place - I've put it back).
General explanations... I see you've read what I wrote about the stub category at SFD. Basically stub categories and Stub-Class categories deal with similar things, but whereas Stub-Class and other assessment categories are used by individual WikiProjects, general stub categories are used across the whole of Wikipedia. To stop there being tens of thousands of them and to try to keep them uniform and useful, several strong guidelines have been set up, such as only creating categories once the number of articles on a subject reaches a certain number, and making the stub template names conform to a set pattern. Which is pretty much what the main problems were with 24Stub, and it really did look like a WikiProject talk page banner would be doing almost identical work in this case.
As far as Category:24 articles consisting mainly of plot information is concerned, the main problems are the name, which is not standard Wikipedia naming (especially since the parent categories do0n't use the name Category:24, but rather Category:24 (TV series), and the fact that it looks like again its intended as a WikiProject category, in whihc case it shouldn't have been in the Category:24 (TV series) parent anyway, but rather in a WikiProject category (have a look at the way a similar category, Category:Astronomy articles needing expert attention, is parented, for instance - it's a hidden category and not in the main Category:Astronomy navigation category). Grutness...wha? 07:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can change that, if you check the history log [5], you will see that I didn't add that category. How about, I change the sub category, and we decide on a name? Let's not have this debated over, let's just decide and fix it up. And sorry if my message to you was a bit uncivil, im under a bit of stress right now. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 07:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No offence taken, and none intended on my part either, though with my comments on both the stub template and this I could understand if you were concerned (no, I'm not on a vendetta against your WikiProject!). The best thing to do is probably let the process continue - if the category name is changed it'd need some sort of comment at CFD anyway. Simplest thing to do is to add to the debate at CFD yourself and hopefully we can come to a quick decision as to a new name. The main problem is the lack of the "TV series)" qualifier in the name, which isn't a particularly controversial change. BTW, I did explain the reasons for the proposed change - over at WP:CFD, which is linked from the template. That's standard practice. Follow that link and you'll find those comments. Grutness...wha? 07:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I sort of felt like you were against the project a bit, I've been jumpy ever since the MedCab case was announced to be closed, which means a lot of our articles could be merged. I'm doing my best to rewrite the articles, but there is only so much one editor can do. :) Anyway, I assume you mean this discussion? I can head over there, however I'm unsure what alternate name we could make it. You are right, it is a Wikiproject 24 category, feel free to add this one too, we should probably rename that too. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 07:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's the discussion I mean. I've added the other category you mention to it and suggested that the best thing might be to merge them into one category called Category:24 (TV series) articles requiring expert attention (like the astronomy one I pointed out above). If that sounds reasonable, or if you can think of a better idea, it'd be good if you could comment at the WP:CFD discussion - input from people involved in the WikiProject is very useful in cases with project-specific categories like this. Grutness...wha? 01:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
|
|
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
|
| All of the hard work you have put in and all the work you have put into improving Wikipedia, through your endless contributions. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
The Minor Barnstar
|
| The endless reverts, minor POV changes and general grammar fixes that make wikipedia the high quality encyclopedia it is today 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
The Anti-Flame Barnstar
|
| Mediating and calming down hot headed users and keeping your-self cool during mediation and while in a potential conflict situation. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
The Invisible Barnstar
|
| For just wanting to get things down and not really minding weather there is anybody noticing, as long as you know you what you have done has made an improvement. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
Bright Idea Award
|
| An awesome Idea that is just simply brilliant {{AIV}}, may you carry on with your gems of wisdom and great ideas. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
Bronze Wiki Award
|
| Keep up all of the good and tireless work that you have done to Improve the quality of Wikipedia content. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
Mediation Award
|
| You are truly the greatest of all of the mediators on Wikipedia, if there is any conflict you should allways be top of the list to mediate. 11:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
|
- Those are from User:Lucy-marie's other hand, in case you were curious. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have decided not to use my actual account to give awards due to the mad people who hound my actual acount, consider this an award account.--12:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barnstar-Giver (talk • contribs)
(blushes) Thanks a lot. There's no way I deserve all of those. I had to revert the edit to the icons however, it broke my browser. :( I'll try redevloping it so it can have more icons without affecting my browser. Thanks a lot lucy. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 12:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Phillip Bauer.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing... Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 12:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done I feel so silly, I forgot to add it to the article after I uploaded it. Well, I'm probably sillier, I'm replying to a bot. :P Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 14:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Steve,
I am trying to remove the following template from my article on the My Hero Project:
This article or section appears to have been copied and pasted from a source, possibly in violation of a copyright.
Please edit this article to remove any copyrighted text and to be an original source, following the Guide to layout and the Manual of Style. Remove this template after editing.
I assure you there is no copyright issue. I am currently trying to figure out the best way to add the internal links and references and I hope to have them up by the end of the day. Thanks, in advance, for your help. Roughcopy (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's best not to remove tags like those. Where is the original source of the article? The article needs to be wikified and you will need to cite your sources. I hope that helps somewhat. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks... that's a good start. To answer your question about the original source, this is an original article, researched and written by me. Roughcopy (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you will have issues there. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not the place for original thought. I'm not sure what you can do here, I can move it to your own userspace if you want. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 17:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not original thought at all. It is a well researched article that contains facts that are easy to verify. Please take another look at it and let me know how to proceed. Thanks! Roughcopy (talk) 17:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Do you think this article is ready for DYK nom? I have just been told "yes" but would like your opinion too. Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see your fixing the article.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 03:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am. This ref [6] is unusable, very vague. It gives results similar to a search engine, like Google. You'll have to be more precise with that one. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I will try improve those points you added to the article suvh as the verification template and the one you just said. Do you think it is ready (soon) for DYK?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think so. I converted the references into a better format, did a basic copy edit. A few of the references are a bit vague, and an infobox of some form could help, or an image. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to add a few images tommorrow. But I think that infoboxes and images are not in the DYK criteria. Also, is there a chance that if there is a "verification template" on an article, can it be still become a DYK?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't try to rush the DYK. Work on finding the more precise source, vague sources are a killer at DYKs. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well said, and I'll try not to rush. Refs are important to articles. Well, I'll be offline soon. Any comments before I go?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, none really :) You did well on the article. Don't get a big head though. :P Seeya later. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. See you tommorrow. :) (Wow, I never used a face symbol in months) Cheers.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See this discussion: [7]--Filll (talk) 14:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Steve Crossin. I'm sorry that I have to trouble you one again. You know, the debate of tibet during the Ming Dynasty has changed to the article Tibetan history in the Ming Dynasty. Everything goes well until a moment ago. I spent hours' work adding the scholars' aguments, but User:Bertport has undone all. I don't know how English Wikipedia deal with this totally vandalist act. I'm really dead since I've suffered this kind of persons for weeks. I beg you to intervene this time for tackle the endless random undo. Thanks. --LaGrandefr (talk) 16:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone and warned the user. I'm afraid I can't do much more here. I'd suggest if the issue persists, to take the issue to the administrator incidents noticeboard. I'm afraid I can't personally intervene in this case, there is insufficent dispute depth for me to step in. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am flabbergasted. If you look at the quality of the article, and you look at the quality of User:LaGrandefr's edits in both the main article and the talk page, you'll see that User:LaGrandefr's edits are tantamount to vandalism. Several users have tried repeatedly to reason with him and advise him, but he generally seems not even to understand what is going on. It looks to me like some mixture of ill will and incompetence on User:LaGrandefr's part. As such, I reverted his edits today without comment, as is commonly done to unconstructive edits.
Bertport (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both of you, don't blindly revert each others edits. Pursue dispute resolution. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How can people confound right and wrong? Steve, please have a look at the page, each argument has been well sourced by me, but deleted by Bertport without explaining the valid reason. What does Vandalism mean in English? I'm confused. I beg User talk:Bertport once again not to undo the edit randomly. Regards--LaGrandefr (talk) 16:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, normally I would, but I cannot at the present time. I have several mediation cases that require my constant attention. One in particular needs my immediate attention. I've requested on IRC that someone looks at it. In the meantime, look over the dispute resolution process, try an RFC maybe. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please go right ahead. Add any details you want. My objective is to find the editors that want their details on the list and remove the others. Useight (talk) 06:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like you edit between about 22:30 and 17:30, which is about 19 hours. Don't you ever sleep? :P Useight (talk) 06:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- LOL! I sleep occasionally :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 06:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's UDT (also known as GMT). So I guess you're about in the middle of your editing, while I'm getting near the end of mine. It's 12:43AM here. Useight (talk) 06:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, great :D Yes, I'm in the middle of my editing. It's 4.45pm here :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 06:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It has been nominated for DYK already by User:Milk's Favorite Cookie. I cleaned up the article a bit.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 06:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 06:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the history, you should see I reverted an IP's edit twice. If I revert the article again today, will I violate the 3RR rule?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 16:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, you're fine. Reverting vandalism is an exemption to the three revert rule. You reverted vandalism. 3RR doesn't apply there. As long as it's clear vandalism, then the 3RR rule does not apply. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That was part of the 3RR I didn't understand quite well.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 16:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Um, what do you think of an edit summary like this?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 16:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not good, but it appears they were frustrated as their edit that was useful was being reverted. That edit summary is not excusable, but understandable. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 16:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I read it but I didn't see the assignment. Did I miss something?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 23:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. There's no assignment for that lesson. I thought exactly the same thing when I was adopted. :P Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's funny. :) So I really passed, right?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, well, that lesson isnt a pass/fail one. Its more a Done one. And, erm, people have raised concerns with me about your permissions assignment, and after reviewing, there are quite a few errors in it. So, just have a look over it again and fix any mistakes you made. The mark you got will stand however, I marked it poorly so it's my fault there. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 04:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at it.--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what's wrong with the assignment. Can you explain it to me?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 04:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What is an auto confirmed account? An auto confirmed account is a new user account that is les than four days old (UTC). During thiose four days, those users are unable to recieve rollback permission, move pages, edit semi and protected pages, and be granted any other kind of permission. Basically, you have the rules as an IP address or un-registered user.
You misread the question entirely, it asked what an autoconfirmed account is.
What does checkuser enable a user to check? Check if an account is a sockpuppet of another account, IP, and bot. It should only be used if necessary.
Bot is irrelevant. All checkuser does is compare an IP and find the users who have used that IP, or compare 2 users, or find the IP an editor is editing from.
There were a few other ones, but they're not overly critical. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll read it over again tommorrow. I'v been busy lately. BTW, Baseball uniform passed. I just need a responce from the admin I recently contacted. You can look at Template talk:DYK at the May 1st thread. Comments?--RyRy5 (talk ♠ wikify) 05:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've been extremely busy too. Mediating 4 cases [8] [9]
[10]
[11] as well as co-ordinating a WikiProject, a huge task. There's more obviously, but that's the bulk of it. Dont forget that reporting to AIV is only when they vandalise past a final warning, I saw this. I think you should listen to Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly/Episode 09, specifically part 3 and 4. I discussed vandalism there, and rollback, I think it would teach you something. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 05:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the Barnstar Steve!
The Helpful One (Review) 11:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Due to an immediate personal emergency, I will not be able to make the lecture. I am so sorry for the short notice. Circumstances are completely unexpected. Vassyana (talk) 14:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, OK Vassyana. I hope everything is OK :( Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 14:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sovereign Grace Ministries
Please note that I have now added the link to the much-discussed website by former SGM members. I believe this is what was agreed - is that OK?
Look2008 (talk)
![[4]](http://members.tripod.com/makeitsomarketing/PIC24JACKBAUERFORBLOG.jpg){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}