User talk:Loren.wilton

Hello! On Wikipedia, I spend a lot of time patrolling recent changes. If, while doing so, you believe I have made a mistake, please note:

I am only human, I sometimes make mistakes. Edits I revert, I generally revert as they appear to be vandalism of some sort. If you believe I have made a mistake, just undo my edit, and leave me a message pointing it out to me here. Please don't leave me a template message, if I've made a bad edit, chances are it was a mistake. And, if I have reverted your edit, whether vandalism or a mistake, please don't abuse me with vandalism here. It will be quickly reverted.
I am not here everyday. If you leave me a message and I don't respond immediately, don't panic! I will get back to you the next time I am online and see your message.

Welcome!

Hello, Loren.wilton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Rigadoun (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFR

User:Kushan I.A.K.J/New Rollbacks School/Welcome

Assassination of Franz Ferdinand Flagged for Copy edit

Please list the run on sentences you have found on the discussion page of the article and I will try to straighten them out.Werchovsky (talk) 02:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the edits to the article you made a couple days ago and they are good. As you pointed out on my talk page, in the discussion section of the article, we may still have some points of disagreement.

The primary point of disagreement is that I believe the article should be written using college level english. I recognize that on Wikipedia there are many young readers, but this is a subject, based on my own personal experience, of more interest to college educated adults. To see how the subject might be handled when written using high school english I looked at my children's 10th grade world history text. The effect of the dumbed-down language and the effort to capture the children's imagination was to create a text which was in parts false, and in other parts misleading; frankly it was a travesty. Some of the ideas in the wikipedia article go beyond what the average high school student has the patience to understand. Take the section "Serbia's 'Warning' to Austria-Hungary", for example. The "warning" was for the purposes of "plausible deniability" by Pasic, but of course Pasic never admitted this, so the historians and the article are forced to wander the labyrinth of conflicting statements and let the sophisticated reader arrive at the proper conclusion on his own. I think if we can settle on using college level english most other issues will be easy to resolve.Werchovsky (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SCH

I've noticed that you've added our schools tag to several pages which we hadn't found before. Thank you! Adding new articles is one of the most important things to our project. If you intend to continue, I encourage you to join our participants list and watch for discussion on our talk page. We would be glad to have you, and welcome to the Wikipedia community! Also, if you would have a look at the assessment you can also get a better Idea of how to rate articles. Feel free to post any questions you may have to my talk page. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am fine with the production line, but would much prefer that you rate none of them. That way our Assessment team can make the ratings. Adam McCormick (talk) 05:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should I avoid even the Stub rating and leave it blank completely? Making a choice of Stub or Start seems pretty straight-forward, yet I see this missing on dozens of articles. I'm more than happy with leaving any higher rating to someone else. Loren.wilton (talk) 05:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better to just leave the template blank. If you just post "{{WPSchools|class=|importance=|needs-infobox=}} " to any school page you find, we'll take care of the rest. The rating is missing on over 2000 articles, but unrated is easy to find where incorrectly rated is very difficult. Adam McCormick (talk) 05:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through your contributions and corrected a few starts mislabeled as stubs. Once again, thank you for adding all of these tags. Adam McCormick (talk) 06:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff to tag

All of those are good to tag.

School districts, lists thereof, lists of schools, schools, disambiguations of school pages, pages about types of schools, and awards for schools are all great to tag.
Things not to tag would be educational styles, grading systems, colleges/universities, educator pages, educational programs.

Those might not be exhaustive lists, but I hope that helps Adam McCormick (talk) 06:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV

Hiya - I've blocked the IP vandal you listed at WP:AN a little while ago, but in case you didn't know there's a specific page at WP:AIV for reporting vandals - more admins monitor that page, so the vandal is more likely to be dealt with quicker. Thanks! _GB^T/C 08:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's a little confusing at first sight, but there are two templated messages already on the page which should help you. There's one for reporting IP vandals (as with this one), and one for reporting registered vandals (ie. people with usernames). The formatting would be :

{{IPvandal}} Vandalism past final warning _GB^T/C 08:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

or

{{Vandal}} Vandalism past final warning _GB^T/C 08:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replace the IP address / username bit, add your reason, pop it at the bottom of the list and you're off! _GB^T/C 08:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Beat me to the revert several times already in this hour. :) Good job. Cheers, Midorihana^{~いいですね? はい!} 06:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Talk-AIV

Hello, I saw this comment on the talk page, and I was wondering what template you were referring to? As far as I recall, there was never a * {{IPvandal|address}} description" section in the template. Cheers. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 04:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boy, my mind must be rotting. I could swear that there were two templates mentioned on that page, one for IP vandals and one for username vandals. I even remember using the IPvandal template several times. Yea, come to think of it, look half way up this page at the section titled WP:AIV. After receiving that answer a few days ago I think I have memories of going there and seeing those two lines in the green template box and thinking "Gee, how simple. Why didn't I notice this before?" Loren.wilton (talk) 04:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the message. I just got caught up with clerking ;)Steve Crossin (talk to me) 05:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HEY! Did you copy my message? From the top of my talk page. :P Steve Crossin (talk to me) 05:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry, I meant to mention I stole that from you and made some small tweaks (like changing the name in the edit link). I thought it looked rather nice, and having had this page vandalized about 8 times yesterday... Loren.wilton (talk) 05:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I'll just have to steal it back off you ;) I like the look of that border :D Steve Crossin (talk to me) 06:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		As I'm watching recent changes, you seem to be the editor-every single time, making the revert. Slightly irritating that I keep getting beaten, but there is no doubt you earned this one. Good job :) Steve Crossin (talk to me) 08:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider also warning vandals

Thank you for reverting vandalism on Wikipedia. Could you also please consider using our vandal warning system [1]? First offenses get a "test1," then a "test2," followed by a "test3" and "test4." At the end of this, if the vandal persists, he or she merits blocking for a period of time. If you do this, it will greatly help us in decreasing vandalism on Wikipedia. Much thanks, -- Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 13:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently using the latest Beta of Huggle, and I don't completely trust the warning mechanism yet. It also seems to be a little weak in letting me pick the kind of warning that will be issued, but putting up templates by hand is too much of a pain to deal with.

I do warn sometimes. I let the first one go unwarned since it cuts down on the vandalism on my talk page, and then if I see second vandalism by the same person (and often to the same article) I start warning them. Most vandals seem to be kids that only make single bad edits, which doesn't seem worth warning about. Loren.wilton (talk) 13:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You also reverted one vandal who included personal information in one article. In those cases you should always warn them. I went ahead and reverted his second edit, and warned and reported him. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 13:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK

Understood...in my case...I prefer doing warnings by hand. I use the following and patch and paste the notices. Thanks for your help. Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 13:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{userinfo}}

==Editing concerns==

#{{subst:uw-test1}} --~~~~

#{{subst:uw-test2}} --~~~~

#{{subst:uw-test3}} --~~~~

#{{subst:uw-test4}} --~~~~

HP SPaM

Please take a look at what you're reverting. This article is a nonsense article created by a vandal, and I was just calling a spade a spade. Who's the vandal, the guy who does the graffiti or the guy who washes it off the wall? 74.234.39.218 (talk) 14:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hum. It is a very well done spoof, but on reading more than the first part it becomes obvious that it is a put-on.

Blanking the article is really not the right solution here, since that tends to look like vandalism at first glance (and why I bit you by mistake here). The thing to do is either request speedy deletion by putting a {{db-nonsense}} tag on the front of the article, or by proposing deletion of the article with a {{prod}} tag and a description. This article is perhaps a little large for easy consumption as nonsense, so I'll try for prod and nonsense both. ~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loren.wilton (talk • contribs)

You forgot to end the <nowiki> tag above which resulted in the four tildes above not converting into your signature. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 16:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having found this tagged for speedy deletion, I deleted it. At the request of the article's creator, I looked into the situation and found sufficient evidence by Googling to convince me that this subject exists and is not a hoax. I definitely have concerns about the article, but I have restored an earlier version of it and outlined those concerns on the talk page and for the article's creator. I have left a note for the anonymous IP whose comments are above suggesting that if s/he has further concerns about the validity of this article, the way to go would be to submit it to articles for deletion. However, I wanted to say that I appreciate that your work was done in good faith and I do apologize for what may have been a hasty deletion of the tagged article without digging more deeply into it. If you have any comments or concerns, or would like to suggest a different path for the future of this article, I would be happy to hear what you have to say and grateful for any further efforts you cared to put into this article. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get a clue

I am not a vandal. Is it possible that some of the other editors out there not only have the ability to read, but that they actually exercise this skill before throwing around accusations of vandalism? Please read this sequence of posts:

HP SPaM

Hi, the recent edit you made to HP SPaM has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Loren.wilton (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the note that I left on your userpage. In fact, what I was doing was exceptionally constructive; I was fighting a major vandal, which is what you purport to spend your time doing. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 14:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the fact that that link became a redlink so quickly vindicates my actions. Apologies accepted. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 15:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at what you're reverting. This article is a nonsense article created by a vandal, and I was just calling a spade a spade. Who's the vandal, the guy who does the graffiti or the guy who washes it off the wall? 74.234.39.218 (talk) 14:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hum. It is a very well done spoof, but on reading more than the first part it becomes obvious that it is a put-on.

Blanking the article is really not the right solution here, since that tends to look like vandalism at first glance (and why I bit you by mistake here). The thing to do is either request speedy deletion by putting a {{db-nonsense}} tag on the front of the article, or by proposing deletion of the article with a {{prod}} tag and a description. This article is perhaps a little large for easy consumption as nonsense, so I'll try for prod and nonsense both. ~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loren.wilton (talk • contribs)

I have restored this article because, upon the request of the article's creator, I found sufficient evidence to make it reasonable to me to assume that the topic actually exists. I suggest that if you still have problems believing in the existence of this entity, the way to go would be to submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What sources? There are none listed in the article. Oh wait, there's one external link, and in the article it links to, there is not one single solitary reference to HP, Hewlett-Packard, SPaM, or anything like that. This is total bullshit, and you're being scammed, giving some punk vandal the laugh of a lifetime. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 19:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a dedicated editor. I'm a reader, and only take action when I see something obviously aggregious like this. I have absolutely no idea what the procedures are for getting an article deleted, nor do I have the time or inclination to learn. You, however, are supposedly an expert, with superpowers. Isn't it your job to take care of people so obviously vandalizing this encyclopedia? 74.234.39.218 (talk) 20:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're walking. Thanks for sharing -- I don't really need you to tell me what my job here is. By the way, the word you were looking for is "egregious". Accounting4Taste:talk 20:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to HP SPaM. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Zenlax ^T ^C ^S 19:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get a clue, and read some article history before you start making accusations. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 20:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to HP SPaM, you will be blocked from editing. Df747jet (talk) 20:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

* Notice that none of these Johnny-come-latelies has provided that they actually read the content of the discussions that preceded my edits. One editor's thoughtful response consisted of correcting my spelling error on a talk page. How petty can you get? Talk about avoiding the real issues. Another of these "editors" took the time to remove my reply from his talk page--I guess he doesn't like it when discussions get "intense". I will give Accounting4Taste credit for at least pausing and thinking about the issue, even if he did get totally punked by this vandal. But everyone is calling me a vandal, when I'm the one removing the graffiti. Could you people please get a clue and look into things before you label someone a vandal? I'm the only one here actually defending the sanctity of this encyclopedia; the rest of your are mucking around in procedural crap while you allow this vandal to make a laughingstock of you all. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record

The comment below is the one that supposedly constituted a personal attack.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to HP SPaM. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Zenlax ^T ^C ^S 19:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get a clue, and read some article history before you start making accusations. I am no vandal. 74.234.39.218 (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can anybody explain this to me? I may come across as harsh, but why should I not be when I have been falsely accused of vandalism? All I do is make a terse suggestion that the editor do some more investigation before accusing another of vandalism. This is a "personal attack"? What is going on here? 74.234.39.218 (talk) 21:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]