User talk:Ryulong

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Archives
February 2006 – June 2006 July 1 — July 20, 2006 July 21 — July 24, 2006 July 25 — July 28, 2006 July 29 — July 31, 2006 August 1 — August 5, 2006 August 6 — August 16, 2006 August 20 — August 23, 2006 August 24 — August 26, 2006 August 27 — August 31, 2006 September 2006

---

When I find that the conversations or issues discussed here have either ended or resolved, they will be inserted into my archives at my own discretion. --Ryūlóng

• For any new users or anonymous users who cannot edit this page due to actions by other users that lead to the semi-protection of this page, please leave me a message here, and I will get back to you as soon as I can. Ryūlóng 18:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

---

User:Z_the_Alien

Not vandalism, as you pointed out. Seems like a young user. Maybe you could mentor a bit. Tyrenius 23:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Mentoring is something I am not good at/have time for. >_> Ryūlóng 23:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, but good faith editing is not vandalism, so not for AIV.

Tyrenius 23:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Copied from AIV

• 68.185.243.91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Unconstructive edits right after block expired --Ryūlóng 23:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

  I don't understand the article enough to work this out. Is it a young person trying to do useful edits perhaps, or deliberate interference? Tyrenius 23:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

  The user has been continuing to make unconstructive edits at various articles that I watch, and was blocked yesterday for repeating his actions despite several warnings issued to him. He is trying to be helpful, but his massive amount of unhelpful contributions (linking to non-existant pages, making redundant edits) make him harmful; think of him like the Spongebob/Power Rangers version of MascotGuy. Ryūlóng 23:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Protection

I keep all protected pages on my watchlist, and will unprotect when necessary. In this case it was going to be a couple of hours until that guy went to bed. -- Samir धर्म 02:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

What about extending the block on the IP? He doesn't look apologetic. Ryūlóng 02:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed he doesn't look apologetic. I'll keep an eye on him tomorrow -- Samir धर्म 02:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

How about downing the protection to semi-protection? Ryūlóng 02:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

He's blocked, his page is protected, I'm undoing the page protection in a bit. I don't see the issue. -- Samir धर्म 02:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, this isn't an issue. I don't like sprotecting pages in general, and particularly not IP talk pages. -- Samir धर्म 03:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Ryūlóng 03:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

This wasn't vandalism ...

Why did you make this edit? That wasn't vandalism, the user was correcting the usage of the adverb. --Cyde Weys 05:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Because "reported" and "reportedly" are two different things. Ryūlóng 05:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the revert you did, but it's inappropriate to call it vandalism.--Father Goose 05:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It didn't look like vandalism at all. It looked like a comment "in good faith". Mefanch 05:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I have been dealing with users who have been editting the article as such for the night. Still, there is a difference between a "reported dead" and "reportedly dead". I was wrong in tagging it as vandalism, yes, but the revert was justified. Ryūlóng 05:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That is fine. I know things get vandalized here a lot. That was one of the reasons I went right to the history of this page when I heard on the news. However, it looks like he made a typo or just mest his words up. Now he has a tag by you on his talk page insinuating that he is a Vandal. If anyone checks him now, they will see that and might think ill of him, when it looks like he was making an honest contrib. It would be polite to note on his page that it wasn't truely vandalism. Mefanch 05:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I will downgrade the warning I had issued him (if it was bv, I will more than likely make it a t1, and give him a welcome thing). Ryūlóng 06:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

And done. Ryūlóng 06:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You also gave a vandalism warning to Harwood for this edit. Reverting the edit was certainly appropriate, because the claim was not backed up by the source; but calling it vandalism seems dubious. Kickaha Ota 06:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That one I would call vandalism, perhaps a t2 or a v2 would be better depending on what I gave him. Ryūlóng 06:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Recent vandalism at Miles "Tails" Prower

Thanks for helping out with reverting it; I didn't notice that it had gotten hit by two vandals in a row. I've warned both of them with Template:Blatantvandal so that they can be blocked the next time they vandalize. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 05:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 05:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)