User talk:Nburden

EMU

I created a seperate article for a MINOR controversy which hasn't been reported on since the killer was convicted almost two years ago. I think you need to read the vandalism policy before you attempt to claim someone is committing vandalism again. Particularly, what vandalism is: "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a delberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. It is clear you didn't actually review my edits, otherwise you would have seen that I moved the information to its own article. It wasn't randomly deleted. It is simply such a MINOR issue it does not need a half-dozen paragraphs on the university page. In the future, please do not place warnings on people's pages regarding edits without actually reviewing what they did. Thank you. CraigMonroe (talk) 23:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This all would have been perfectly clear if you had used an edit summary, or the talk page. How is anyone supposed to know that you created a new article while looking at a diff with no summary, and a talk page with nothing addressing the split? As is, I thought you were just blanking the section, which would neatly fit the definition of vandalism. I'll admit that I didn't scour your contribs if you'll admit that an edit summary would have helped. Nburden ^(T) 04:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean an edit summary such as "created new page?" Maybe you should look at the edits again, as I said that in the first of my edit. So you are aware, all I am saying is you should take a good look at a person's edits before you assume they are vandalising anything. Thank you for removing the warning from my page. CraigMonroe (talk) 12:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try to see it from my side. An edit summary of "Created new page." for an edit that is only deletions smacks of vandalism (and trying to hide it on the recent changes page). Maybe you could have sain "Information moved to Laura Dickinson murder." or something to that effect. All I'm saying is that there was not much summary in your edit summary, and it looked like vandalism to me. Regardless, I'm dropping the issue, as the point is moot and the misunderstanding is, in my eyes, cleared up. However, if you have anything else to add, feel free. Nburden ^(T) 22:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please block the ip

hi, i noticed that you gave an ip a final warning for vandalism. please note this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Riverwood_High_School&diff=prev&oldid=329721361 where the word "penis" was spelled out by this person who is obviously a high school student. Brendan19 (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin. You should report the IP at WP:AIV. Nburden ^(T) 22:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if youre not an admin then why are you giving "final warning"s? Brendan19 (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because anyone can revert vandalism and warn vandals. see WP:VAND[1]. You'll notice that the IP you were worried about has been blocked. Nburden ^(T) 05:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]