User talk:SlimJim: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:11, 14 August 2006

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting -- ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

"phi kappa literary society"/"i love order & discipline society"

this was meant to be a constructive edit as members of Phi Kappa (Philo Kosman)translate their name from greek to be "I love order & discipline." This is as printed in "Traditions of the Phi Kappa Literary Society" as published by Mirk (available in the archives of the University of Georgia) and in "College Life in the Old South" by E. Merton Coulter which is also listed as a reference on the bottom of the page in question.

-- 66.32.135.197 23:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC) ok then[reply]

Your VandalProof application

Dear User:Geneb1955,

VP is a powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.1 version has even more power. As such we must check each user before approval. Regretfully I have choosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and although we have a 250 edit minimum and you have to date 282 edits, only 172 of those were in mainspace and a fair percentage of those seem disambig pages or minor. I would really like to see more evidence of your experience dealing with vandalism (which of course you do not need VP to do). Perhaps try again in a couple of weeks? Thank you for your interest and hope to see your app in the not too distant future! - Gl e n ^T_C (Stollery) 07:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to add that you once removed a vandalism warning from your talk page (see this edit on 8 Jan 06). Removing warnings from your talk page is considered vandalism and is not well-tolerated by the Wikipedia community. You have to understand that we are seriously concerned that this tool may be used for destructive means, and though it may seem petty to make such a big deal about removing a {{test1}} warning, such actions raise serious suspicions about your intentions in using the tool. AmiDaniel (Talk) 08:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[Copied from User talk:AmiDaniel:]

It would have never occurred to me that removing a {{warn1}} from my talk would be construed as vandalism, but you are correct – it's on the vandalism link, provided in the warning. I took it as a polite warning and left it at that. At that point, what I knew of the talk page was taken from the tutorial listed on the main page. There is no mention of removing warnings being an issue. When I got the warning, I figured I knew what vandalism was and what the warning was for and haven't received a warning since. You would think that someone with subvercive intentions would receive multiple warnings, likely have been banned for a time - none of which pertain to me. My unsigned post of “ha ha ha” to an IP:Talk that had committed blatant vandalism was ill considered. It was also done before becoming slightly wikiholic. I have rectified that situation by returning it to my talk page. I take my status seriously and am working to improve wikipedia. That is why a good portion of my edits have been to disambiguate such an exciting topic as nasal. Again, does some vandal indicate by his behavior by performing such rewarding activities?

I have been using popups to revert blatant vandalism. I do this for articles even where I completely disagree with the topic because I'm interested in decent contributions, not juvenile antics, despite what the “ha ha ha” portrays (see Cynthia McKinney – interestingly enough, you and I reverted the same IP vandal User:71.10.160.198 6 Apr 06. It took some learning and in that case, I think I had a learning-curve misfire and reverted to the wrong version – but I ultimately got it right. That’s when I started using Vandal Fighter, but still find that it appears others were having an easier time reverting vandalism; to wit, the summary comments that yours displayed as referenced and CSCWEM (same article, subsequent reverts). That’s why I’m looking for an easier to use or cleaner tool. I don’t like using popups to revert because it references an article number and you have to constantly check to ensure you’re reverting to the correct article.

Regarding your comment on My talk in combination with the edit summary, I am left with a question. When you say “(→Your VandalProof application - Removing warnings = no vp for you)” do you mean forget about it (period), because I made a warning-removal mistake (early in my wikilife) – that’s it, it’s final? Is this something that you will reconsider at a later date? Has any of this further clarified what I am trying to do and what my intentions are? --Geneb1955 06:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me start by saying that my remarks in no way finalized that you would never be allowed to use VP. I should have made that more explicit in my remark, and I apologize. It would be quite extremist and absurd for me to "ban" individuals from using my app simply because they removed a {{test1}} notice, and that was in no way my intent. I merely wanted to let you know that many contributors, myself included, frown at removing warnings as such actions appear dishonest and unwikipedian. There's currently a debate going on about this very issue, and it's likely that we will soon see a policy change. Despite my earlier comment, I actually don't believe removing warnings to be an act of vandalism, though I do believe it should not be tolerated. And, as an aside, the edit summary was simply a really bad joke on my behalf that I never considered anyone would read (see Soup Nazi), and was in no way intended for you to read. Again, I apologize.

I've re-added your username to the approval holds list, as I am now, primarily as a result of your remarks, seriously reconsidering approving you, and I will likely reach a decision on it tomorrow. I do now believe that your intentions are good; however, you are still lacking the substantial evidence to prove this (i.e. your relative inactivity within Wikipedia), but I think I will likely make an exception in this case. I was actually in about the same boat as you when I began writing this tool, so I entirely understand where you're coming from. But anyway, I'm on my way to bed right now, but tomorrow evening I will have decided what to do (perhaps after some discussion with my fellow moderators). However, if you are rejected, I do strongly encourage you to resubmit your name in a couple of weeks, once you have more evidence to support your intentions.

Again, I apologize for the confusion and my accusative tone in my previous remark, and I will seriously reconsider this. I further would like to thank you for your civility and your convincing comments in this matter, and I hope none of this will discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you for your time. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to let you know that I have reconsidered your request to use VandalProof, and I have decided that you are definitely someone I can trust with this tool and, as such, have added you to the approved list. Thank you again for your patience and civility with me, and I apologize for the inconvenience. By the way, according to an updated edit count using my tool, you now have 221 mainspace edits and 384 in all namespaces, quite a lot for a day or two's work. Anyway, welcome to VandalProof, and if you have any questions or problems, feel free to contact me or post a message on the discussion page. Thanks. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YES

YES! Please help me. That would be so much help. Thank YOU Caf3623 02:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

     Thank you VERY much. That helped. Caf3623 02:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello SlimJim! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Kukini 15:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Tip toeing...

I actually noticed that you had been here, but thought you deserved a warmer welcome than you had in your history. Keep up the great work. I won't tell the vandals you are lurking. Kukini 06:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smoked Meat

Can you please explain what exactly was nonsense or vandalism regarding my edit in the article about the Smoked Meat? Please also see my comment in the discussion of the article. Groovebuster 13:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree

You asked me to contact you if I disagreed with your criticism. Well, here I am.

And yes, Kate Bush does allegedly have a huge pair of big hairy bollocks.

Jessica Tandy edit

For your information, I didn't remove any content from the article. I actually added the film title from which she won her Oscar in the succession box. But with you reverting it back, you removed it. So please refrain from removing content from Wikipedia, it is vandalism.Joey80 08:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! While editing some other pages, some editors pointed out that a succession box might not be appropriate in such instances as awardees (like in the Oscars). This is a winner in the next year does not necessarily succeed the winner this year (like calling this year's winner an "ex-Oscar winner"), like a head of a country or an institution. So I'm beginning to think that since a template was used to tie all the Best Picture winners, maybe a template can also be used to tie all the winners in the same category. What do you say? Of course, being a template, it means putting it at the bottom of a page, so that will not cause that much trouble.Joey80 08:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination)

You are invited to vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). All this is is ramblings/blog/rants about Bush. Not encyclopedic, should've been deleted long ago. Happy editing! Morton devonshire 20:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woodlawn

My edit to the Woodlawn article was not vandalism. 75.3.4.54 00:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But

Chuck Norris CAN believe it's not butter! Cuzandor 03:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with the page Domestic pig on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Brenden h ull 11:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

QWERTY

I'm not sure exactly what you did at QWERTY, but recently when you reverted vandalism a huge portion of the article was lost. See this diff between your version and the last good version by Magore. When reverting are you clicking on the date of the last good version on the history page and then clicking "edit this page", and then saving that page? That is the proper way to revert a page that has been vandalized, it makes sure you don't miss something if you try to delete vandalism or cut and paste from old version or something like that. Tnikkel 06:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure of what you are talking about--Yo Mama 5000 00:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC) I like your change.--Yo Mama 5000 01:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odd

I corrected a link to Boob McNutt, a genuine creation of Rube Goldberg, not obscene or any of that jazz, and was told that my revision had been undone. I can certainly understand why Rube's page is so broken if every time someone fixes links, a filter sees Boob and undos the changes. In any event, it seems I was directed to post here.

--24.176.58.85 02:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ian Botham

Thanks for your advice, Geneb. I'll do that if it gets changed again. And I'll try not to get exasperated too! Stephen Turner (Talk) 03:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reality television

I've sprotected this article for now. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 03:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Classic Rock

Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most like classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! RENTA^{FOR LET?} röck 01:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you ever so much for reverting my racist vandalism. I now know the error of my ways, and have found Jesus because of it. As a token of appreciation I have paypaled your e-mail address $7447.25. As a saudi prince I have no use for this money, and hope it brings you many camels. 66.109.192.130 02:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available

After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hey you

I hate you (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Qasqass (talk • contribs) )

My life is complete! --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 11:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense on Lion King II

Gi Geneb1955, thanks for helping to revert the nonsense and vandalism on The Lion King II: Simba's Pride. I appreciate your help. Bye --68.100.14.110 03:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed

I hope you do not mind, but I changed a test to test2 warning here, since it was the user's 2nd vandalism. With WikiLove, ~LinuxeristFile:Tux-linux logo.svg A/C/E/L/P/S/T/Z 03:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[1] Don't worry though, these things happen -- I'm not sure how Vandal Proof works since I don't use it, but you may have clicked on the wrong diff for your revert [2]. I blocked the offender (202.59.24.49) for a week because he's a persistent pest. Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 04:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what's the prob?

why does my wiki page need to be "cleaned up"? (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dck25 (talk • contribs) )

hey

this is just a school project. i'm in a graduate program and we are learning how to use wikipedia. we were supposed to use some html/wiki code.

Removal of article

Do you know anything about the removal of an article I was working on concerning Vince Peart . You had originally tagged the article then removed it after we discussed the issues. After a weekend break I have returned home to notice the whole article has been removed??

My appologies if you know nothing about the reasons, please accept that I made this assumption based on the fact that you are the only person I know of who was concerned with the article thus far. (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haystacks (talk • contribs) )

"phi kappa literary society"/"i love order & discipline society"

this was meant to be a constructive edit as members of Phi Kappa (Philo Kosman)translate their name from greek to be "I love order & discipline." This is as printed in "Traditions of the Phi Kappa Literary Society" as published by Mirk (available in the archives of the University of Georgia) and in "College Life in the Old South" by E. Merton Coulter which is also listed as a reference on the bottom of the page in question. (— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.135.197 (talk • contribs) )

Reply

Will do in future. Sorry. -Livingstond Livingstond 00:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could've used more cowbell

Hi Geneb, thanks for your question on my talk page. I hope your cruizin of the pedia was able to put you to sleep - if not then I guess you'll see this very soon. Thanks for your question on my talk page aobut More cowbell. I took a look at the article and I think the content there is fine. While it is true that we prefer content (such as pictures) to be GFDL, we do use content under the fair use principle as well. This gives us the right to use copyrighted material, under limitations. One of the main limitiations is that we must be using the content to illustrate an article. Another criteria relates to how much of the material we use.

Therefore, it was inappropriate for the copyrighted material to be on a user page, but it is OK for a limited amount of copyrighted material to be in an article, so long as it is relevant to illustrating the article, no free content is available under GFDL, etc.

You can find more about this at Wikipedia:Copyrights and that page has links to more pages that go into even more detail. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Best, Johntex\^talk 13:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radiohead Grammar

Hi there. Don't mean to sound like a fuddy duddy but please don't change "radiohead are" to radiohead is, in the radiohead article. The UK convention is to use the plural pronound for band names, "band are" for example, rather than the singular "band is" in US English. See Pink Floyd, Maximo Park and The Damned. As Radiohead are a UK band I think it's probably best to have it as the plural. Regards. hedpeguyuk 9:08 29 June 2006 (UTC)

No worries. It's just Wiki style, keeping things consistant that's all. I didn't mean to sound grumpy. I never said I was a Radiohead fan though! But, I am anyway. Although I've only really been taken note of their brilliance post-Kid A. I don't know why as I'm a such a big music fan, I just couldn't be bothered with them before then! Anyway, C'ya hedpeguyuk 10:05 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Paulannis

I read your report on the administrators noticeboard about this user. In my opinion his edits are not vandalism and he should neither be warned using the official templates nor blocked from editing. His edits, changing careen->career are at best a content dispute. Career is an acceptable near synonym of careen. I have removed your report from the noticeboard. Thanks, Gwernol 09:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but will abide with your determination. Career is commonly used as a noun. Careen was appropriate wording in every instance I reverted. I believe this falls under the MOS bullets 3 & 4, see also American Heritage Entries (usage note at careen) I will remove my warnings from the talk page. --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 10:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Career can be used as a verb or a noun. Even if we accept that careen is a better choice its still a choice and what Paulannis was doing was not vandalism. I'm not saying you shouldn't change his edits back, that may be the right choice, my point was you can't accuse him of vandalism for this. Gwernol 12:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My editing was not vandalism. I corrected the misuse of the word 'careen' in a number of entries. Careen (from the Latin word carina, signifying the keel of a ship) means to lean to the side. Its original and primary application is to vessels beached at low tide for repairs to the hull. Career, on the other hand, (from the Latin word carriara, signifying a carriage-road) means to travel at a headlong pace. I now see from the comments of others and from a brief search of the Web that in the U.S.A. 'careen' has been increasingly used to mean 'career' in recent decades. However, as Wikipedia is an international resource, I think it will be clearer to all if the traditional semantic distinction between the words is adhered to. Paulannis 14:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Thanks

No problem, sometimes you just need to fiddle with them a bit. Happy editing, Tewfik^Talk 04:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your sig

Your sig contains misspelling as Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism nYit which I just made redirected to Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit. It had more than 800 links appearing on wanted pages. However, I suspect you must replace the misspelling for your sig immediately.

Here is an error below:

[[User:Geneb1955|Geneb1955]][[User_talk:Geneb1955|Talk]]/[[Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism nYit|CVU]]

Replace it with:

[[User:Geneb1955|Geneb1955]][[User_talk:Geneb1955|Talk]]/[[Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit|CVU]]

Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit is direct to the same title, while Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism nYit is redirect to that. Just go ahead and fix your sig. What if any user could link to the misspelling titles that had red links, which there was nothing redirecting to an appropriate page? -- ADNghiem501 08:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Just wanted to send you a thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page! --Sopranosmob781 04:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

203.87.4.194

Hi Geneb, You posted this message to our IP addresses user:

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Golf, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Geneb1955Talk/CVU 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you please block editing by that IP (203.87.4.194)? Its our proxy's IP and students use it to stuff around with Wikipedia. I don't want to block the entire site, as I really like students to be able to use it, but vandalism is a real pain.

Thanks in advance, Dominic Fecteau - Network Administrator Highview College dfectea@highview.vic.edu.au -- 203.87.4.194 07:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes on the To Do List for Kelly Richey

I like your To Do List builds. How do we coordinate the work? I am very interested in polishing it with your suggestions. Thank you so much! (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliehermes (talk • contribs) )

oops...

Juliehermes 04:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Tonicolor2003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tonicolor2003.jpg. 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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome!

Hi Geneb - Thanks for your welcome message -- and helpful, informative reference tool! All the best, Figma 14:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rofl

roflcopter

211.30.42.240 10:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cruft Alert

One of my least favorite articles on Wikipedia is up for review. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel following the September 11, 2001 attacks I urge you to carefully examine Wikipedia's policies and rules, and then carefully consider whether you have an opinion on the matter. I certainly do. Your friend. Morton Devonshire^Yo

Fixing unbroken redirects

I have Christine Gregoire and was wondering why you were fixing the redirects? I point you towards Wikipedia's guideline to redirects which says Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. It costs a lot more resources to fix a redirect than it does to keep the redirect in the article.--Bobblehead 06:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yow! Thanks for pointing that out to me. I seriously thought I was working on tidying things up - but I see that's not the case. I'll find a more productive use of my time. Thanks! --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 06:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. If you want to help. Enjoy. Just add this to your monobook.js:

popupFixDabs=true;

popupFixDabsSummary='Disambiguation link repair - You can help!!';

Should work great. --Bobblehead 07:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS

I could use your help over at State terrorism by United States of America -- the editors over there are blatantly disregarding Wikipedia policy with respect to citing blogs and self-published sources. Thanks. Morton devonshire 17:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 318: / Line 318: @@
 :::popupFixDabsSummary='Disambiguation link repair - [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links|You can help!]]!';
 ::Should work great. --[[User:Bobblehead|Bobblehead]] 07:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
+==[[WP:RS]]==
+I could use your help over at [[State terrorism by United States of America]] -- the editors over there are blatantly disregarding Wikipedia policy with respect to citing blogs and self-published sources.  Thanks.  [[User:Morton devonshire|Morton devonshire]] 17:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)