Jump to content

User talk:Ipatrol: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Check out my user page because...: Removed {{talkback}} trail
Line 44: Line 44:


[[User talk:24.62.114.248|24.62.114.248]] is apparently still a vandal, but I removed the other warning.--[[User:Ipatrol|Ipatrol]] ([[User talk:Ipatrol#top|talk]]) 00:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
[[User talk:24.62.114.248|24.62.114.248]] is apparently still a vandal, but I removed the other warning.--[[User:Ipatrol|Ipatrol]] ([[User talk:Ipatrol#top|talk]]) 00:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Well there is the problem with IP's that they can change to other people. That vandalism was not from me. I'm not sure if your were awear of that. I just moved into the city.I only edits subject relevent to me and my MBA at [[harvard]] But still your hasty acquisitions dont help wikipedia. actually bringing them a step back. why dont you once consider actually bringing someone thing valuable to wikipedia and make your own edits. instead of reverting everyone elses. it's a lot of fun. but you can still apologize. [[Special:Contributions/24.62.114.248|24.62.114.248]] ([[User talk:24.62.114.248|talk]]) 07:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


== Fixes ==
== Fixes ==

Revision as of 07:08, 6 November 2009

Contributions Logs Stats Files Chat
The Thanks for randomly editing my bot's userpage and adding another pretty button barnstar.
Exactly what the star says, thanks. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 03:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Delete Template:PD-law?

I'm thinking of TfDing {{tl:Template:PD-law}}, which you created. It's an orphan. Not sure we need this when we have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Public_domain#Dedications. OTOH, none of those templates are clearly for use by other than the author putting the image in the public domain. For example, PD-author says "The copyright holder grants..." (not 'has granted', so there's arguably an implicit 'hereby'.--Elvey (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I made the potato page but sure you can add to it to help me. this is my first page

No idea what you are on about

Luhanskteplovoz - you reverted my edits to my previous edits when I was signed in (I am also User:shortfatlad) - I was adding the correct russian (ukrainian) language abbreviations, as found in the rest of the article. It is not vandalism. Please be more careful before you ascribe the label of vandalism to an act. Thank you.83.100.251.196 (talk) 23:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you may remove the warnings, sorry about that.--Ipatrol (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, but be careful with that trigger! we're not all vandals honest :)
83.100.251.196 (talk) 23:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation

I don't appreciate how you instantly revert my edits to Interest Rates, I am only trying to make the article cleaner and more direct. Instead of just reverting articles blindly maybe you should actually make your own contributions. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 23:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I have some links to the specific revisions?--Ipatrol (talk) 23:55, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that User talk:81.154.52.65's edit here was vandalism, as you accuseon their talk page. S/he removed a duplicated heading and reflist, obviously added by mistake. You then removed their entire previous edit which had added substantial content. Please apologise to them for accusing them of vandalism, and be more careful in future. Thanks. PamD (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ipatrol&action=edit&section=153[reply]

This user, Ipatrol, likes to throw around the word vandalism with no evidence backing it. I think someone needs to be patrolling him. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 00:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look, there's a saying, "mistakes will be made." Going at 3 pages per second, some things slip or look odd. It's just a simple accident, no worries.--Ipatrol (talk) 00:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So perhaps you should slow down: falsely accusing people of vandalism is disruptive to Wikipedia. And please apologise to that user, as I asked. PamD (talk) 07:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sm deeply sorry for the issue, I'll ensure it won't happen again.--Ipatrol (talk) 14:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So please have the courtesy to go to their user talk page and either strike out your hasty comment or apologise for it (or both). PamD (talk) 23:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

24.62.114.248 is apparently still a vandal, but I removed the other warning.--Ipatrol (talk) 00:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well there is the problem with IP's that they can change to other people. That vandalism was not from me. I'm not sure if your were awear of that. I just moved into the city.I only edits subject relevent to me and my MBA at harvard But still your hasty acquisitions dont help wikipedia. actually bringing them a step back. why dont you once consider actually bringing someone thing valuable to wikipedia and make your own edits. instead of reverting everyone elses. it's a lot of fun. but you can still apologize. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 07:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixes

This "fix" went awry. BTW, shouldn't the dot be in front of the references tag? Debresser (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I guess AWB went a little awry, I'll file a bug report.--Ipatrol (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank you, for taking care of the follow-up. Debresser (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
rev 5595 update ref fixes to remove empty <ref>...</ref> tags. Rjwilmsi 23:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

Your recent AWB edit of Bell D-292 ACAP made a mess of the reference section. I appreciate it was done in good faith and I brought it up at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#References and the suggestion is that you may be using an old version of AWB. Thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 21:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hood Shooting

I believe that you reverted my edit on the Fort Hood Shooting in error. The number of perps was listed as 3, but the sources cited on the page all say 2. For that reason I removed the citation for the number 3 and requested a citation with that number. I also put this explanation in my edit summary.67.232.231.18 (talk) 22:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of deleting references, please use {{Verify source}} to indicate that something's wrong with the source.--Ipatrol (talk) 22:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I didn't insult any user. I made a comment about someone's mother. Where is this verboten? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.86.2 (talk) 01:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is is marked as forbidden here. Tl;dr: Don't insult or joke about others. And this says don't go messing around with pages if you aren't improving them in some way, degrading them is strictly verboten.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned, there is no policy against commenting incisively on users' mothers. I have no doubt, for example, that yours smell likes a month old can of open tuna fish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.86.2 (talk) 02:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check out my user page because...

At the very end, your user page is linked to it. It's a questionable honor. --I dream of horses @ 03:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

AHH! Go [1] --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 03:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]