User talk:Fastily: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎RfA: thanks :)
Omega735 (talk | contribs)
→‎RfA: haha
Line 181: Line 181:
:Excellent idea. {{done}} -<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS">'''[[User:Fastily|<big>F</big><small>ASTILY</small>]]'''</span> <sup><span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><small>[[User talk:Fastily|(T<small>ALK</small>)]]</small></span></sup> 07:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
:Excellent idea. {{done}} -<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS">'''[[User:Fastily|<big>F</big><small>ASTILY</small>]]'''</span> <sup><span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS"><small>[[User talk:Fastily|(T<small>ALK</small>)]]</small></span></sup> 07:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::Thanks :) Speedy work! [[User:Equazcion|Equazcion]] ([[User talk:Equazcion|talk]]) 07:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::Thanks :) Speedy work! [[User:Equazcion|Equazcion]] ([[User talk:Equazcion|talk]]) 07:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
::Another censorship tactic. That's why sockpuppetry is a great idea —get into [[WP:ADMIN|the club]] and screw them from within. --[[User:Omega735|Omega735]] ([[User talk:Omega735|talk]]) 07:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:15, 17 October 2009

User talk:Fastily/header

I just wanted to let you know that I just undeleted Bannerman High School which you deleted as an attack page. The article was just in a vandalized state, so I reverted to an earlier good version. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

polaraudio.ogg

If you could Fastily, please delete File:polaraudio.ogg

It is an audio version of an article that no longer exists, and it is VERY out of date.

thank you, User99671 (talk) 17:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly!  Done -FASTILY (TALK) 17:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again!,

User99671 (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ronan Keating

Oh? Not constructive? You didn't read what you reverted to, did you? Why didn't you improve upon my friendly suggestion instead? You don't like the English language, it seems. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, just realised you're on Huggle: Of course you don't like language and actual editing. Good thing that's not a prerequisite to be an admin. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] OR? O... RLY? Ok, I'll play along. Should I cite an English grammar schoolbook? --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?? My edit happened with the sole intention of drawing the attention of someone knowledgeable on Keating; it happened with the good-faithed intention of improving the article. So, it's of course nothing like OR. And it is nothing like vandalism, which, last time I checked, consists of deliberate attempt[s] to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. I am far removed from any such intentions, as would be clear to anyone capable of admitting to their own misjudgement. --87.78.37.55 (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to point out that citing WP:OR in this case is a tad ridiculous ;-) Xavexgoem (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked this IP users contribs and found that he randomly changed dates on about 58 articles. I went ahead and did a full rollback on the latest contributions. Keep an eye on him for me thanks. --[[::User:Sidonuke|Sidonuke]] ([[::User talk:Sidonuke|talk]] :: [[::Special:Contributions/Sidonuke|contribs]]) 22:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. Cheers, FASTILY (TALK) 04:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism?

Hello, you left a message on my talk page stating that I committed vandalism on a wikipedia article. Could you please tell me which article, and which edit of mine was objectionable?

Thanks! I am signing with four tildes: bostonbrahmin 23:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bostonbrahmin20 (talkcontribs)

Thank you

Thank you so much, Fastily. I am very grateful that I can be trusted. - I intend on using Rollback only for Vandalism. Once again, Thank you very much. Rttam (talk) 00:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Stale WP:AIV report.

Hi Fastily. With this edit, you said you were removing a “stale report.” But, you also removed a report on an IP vandal that I had only filed one minute prior to your removing it, and the IP editor is continuing to vandalize. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fastily. You have new messages at SpikeToronto's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

warning to Mehrrunnissa

Hi, Thanks for such a prompt action! Would it be possible to revert it back before Mehrrunissa started the vandalism and when the administrators semi-locked it? The user has written that 10 million people (10% of Indian population) has been cannibalized!! Apart from the absence of any citation, the sheer absurdity of this statement should speak for itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salwa_Judum&action=history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_(Maoist)

Thanks again, Vinter-light (talk) 06:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

restoring pages

I sincerely appreciate your prompt action.

Vinter-light (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missed link of Mehrrunnissa's vandalism

I am really sorry to bother you again, but seems like I should have separated the links with space, as you have missed this one -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salwa_Judum

I also suspect that Keysvolume is same as Mehrrunnissa, as they did same kind of edits on two of the pages, almost at the same time - but I have asked for a checkuser and would wait for that.

Regards, Vinter-light (talk) 07:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you killed a map, here ;). Be careful when CSDing files on commons. -- Luk talk 08:39, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, you're not the first and that image has been annoying me for months (showing up on my bot as "image that should be orphaned manually")... At least I have uploaded it back to commons with it's "normal" name, I'll let the commons admins sort it all out :) -- Luk talk 07:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion decline

Can you expand on your speedy deletion decline of Category:Museums established in 1840? How is it exempt from WP:CSD#C1? 70.150.94.194 (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user has posted an unblock request, but didn't get it right; I have just fixed it for him, and would (rather doubtfully) suggest giving him another chance. Shortly before you blocked him, he posted on his user page what I might call a pre-emptive my-little-brother-did-it defence and said he was keen to contribute, and I told him "If nobody vandalises from your account again, you'll be all right, but the first time it happens again you will be blocked, and blaming someone else won't help." His few edits thereafter were not helpful but were probably in good faith. The reason I'm unenthusiastic about letting him loose is because I doubt whether he is really capable of making useful contributions - I think he's probably very young - and I really don't want to nursemaid him. I'll let you (or whoever looks at the unblock request) decide. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Fastily. You have new messages at Irbisgreif's talk page.
Message added 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I apologize. Irbisgreif (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Fastily. You have new messages at Talk:Insurrectionary anarchism.
Message added 07:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

respected sirs /madam

i had written my original aricles under tha name of maria riizvi

the thoughts were entirely mine i had even deleted the links and would like to know why it was not accepted thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maria rizvi (talkcontribs) 08:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keysvolume is reverting admin made changes on semi protected pages

user -Keysvolume[1] is making reverts of admin made changes, one of them done by you, on - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Naxalite&action=history - here he made changes after you reverted vandalism done by one user Mehrrunnissa, who is currently blocked and is being investigated for using sockpuppets.

This user is also vandalizing my talk page, indicating that I am a sockpuppet, which he knows is untrue, as I have been cleared off being a sockpuppet. I asked him to stop, and warned that I would report him for vandalism, he did not stop. He also has gone ahead to make reverts of another admin made changes on page - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salwa_Judum&action=history - here he reverted to his own version after Someguy121 did the same as above.

Please note, both these pages are under semi-protection and were vandalised by Mehrrunnissa, who being blocked cannot undo the changes. Keysvolume is now doing it instead. He is defying community rules of addressing the issue in the talk page instead of reverting a semi protected page. I also found out that these two users are under investigation for being sockpuppets.

Thanks, Oftenhurry (talk) 20:15, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I looked through Keysvolume's contribs and reverted any vandalism that wasn't already undone. I also left s/he a [warning as well. Hope that helps. -FASTILY (TALK) 02:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good Morning. Please note that you have been deceived by USer:Oftenhurry into blanking content from Neofascism and religion that I placed based on WP:Notable commentary.User:Oftenhurry has been placing far-left content on numerous Naxalite-related articles based on claims made by an Unreliable Source that is known for making anti-Semitic claims and perorations (see my post [2] for details, as well as this post by Jeff G [3]). I am a long-established editor with many edits to my name. Please avoid editing on behalf of sock puppets in future, thanks and cheers.Keysvolume (talk) 06:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please explain to me which wikipedia policy allows the promotion of the conspiracy theory that the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits is a "lie concocted by the Indian government" (compare your edits [4] to the article Kashmiri Pandits).Keysvolume (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Fastily, I am really sorry to have this silly altercation over in your talk page, but this user Keysvolume has been making bogus claims and lying left and right. Please let me expose him point by point. You can undo this later, if you like. Thanks for your help.

Claim 1 by Keysvolume - .User:Oftenhurry has been placing far-left content on numerous Naxalite-related articles based on claims made by an Unreliable Source numerous Naxalite-related articles? Please prove. The only one that is Naxalite related that I edited is the Salwa Judum page. One is numerous? Lie 1 Claim 2 by Keysvolume - deceived by USer:Oftenhurry into blanking content from Neofascism and religion that I placed based on WP:Notable huh? what neofascism and religion have I entered and where? Lie 2 Claim 3 by Keysvolume - based on claims made by an Unreliable Source that is known for making anti-Semitic claims and perorations Please prove. The links you gave to JeffG's page are written by completely different people - it is not by Ramchandra Guha. You think nobody would check the references so you can put any mumbo jumbo and people would buy it. Lie 3 Claim 4 by Keysvolume - Please avoid editing on behalf of sock puppets in future Prove that I am a sockpuppet. You asked for investigation, I was cleared, if you still keep calling me a sockpuppet, you are a liar.

You are a liar the 4th time in a paragraph of 5 sentences. That shows your editing history and I am becoming more and more clear about where wikipedia stands with such "long established" editors. I for one surely would not base any of my research on Wiki ever again. I will advice others too to do the same citing these examples. Oftenhurry (talk) 14:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE:RE:

I do apoligize, for what happend i know you made a mistake and i was wrong to over react to all of this. I am sorry i call you a liar and i mean that. I also do apoligize for removing the comment until the case was resolved. I have spoken to admins in the chatroom and they got the case cleared.


Cheers, --Dwayneflanders 04:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I, Jeff G., hereby award Fastily with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for outstanding achievement in countering vandalism.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jeff! :) -FASTILY (TALK) 06:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the quick block work here - but I realized after gave a level-4IM that he had created all those dozen or so articles before his first warning... so while they all do need to be deleted for G11 and G12, I wouldn't be opposed to them being unblocked if they request it... just my softer side showing through on this fine Friday.  7  06:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I really must protest your indef block of Gracefaithme. A block may be justified, but indef for what is essentially a false report is excessive. If you look at the edits to Carolyn Joyce Carty, you'll notice that most of them are clumsy attempts to improve the article. This edit can hardly be called vandalism as it only removed redlinks. Likewise this edit is his/her attempt to change a reference that s/he added. And unfortunately, Jeff G. has a history of labeling stuff vandalism that isn't and filing false reports. I should know - I've been a victim of his overzealousness. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keysvolume - vandalising again!!

This is getting out of hand and beyond any appearance of civility. User Keysvolume - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Keysvolume is reverting back on his talk page warning issued by you and is putting sockpuppetry charge on my page, when he has been repeatedly told that I have been cleared off any charge. He has done this on my page three times. No amount of warning and reasoning is working. What am I supposed to do? Why isn't he being blocked for slandering others when his charges have been proved to be wrong. Thank you for your help! Oftenhurry (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TJ Coletti

Hello, I received a message from you that the photo on this entry cannot be verified for copyright issues. This picture was taken by an immediate family member. There are no copyright issues with this picture. Please let me know if there are further issues. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolbyvet (talkcontribs) 03:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Perhaps you could semi-protect the RfA page? That might solve the problem. Equazcion (talk) 07:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea.  Done -FASTILY (TALK) 07:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :) Speedy work! Equazcion (talk) 07:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another censorship tactic. That's why sockpuppetry is a great idea —get into the club and screw them from within. --Omega735 (talk) 07:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]