User talk:L Kensington

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, L Kensington, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 16:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The Anti-Vandalism Bastard

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Good job new guy...Keep up the great Anti-Vandalism work! Moxy (talk) 04:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

User 74.102.20.237

I have removed your final warning ([1]) from the user's talk page. As annoying as vandalism is, there is a set procedure to be followed.

1. General Note, e.g. {{uw-vandalism1}}
2. Caution, e.g. {{uw-vandalism2}}
3. Warning, e.g. {{uw-vandalism3}}
4. Final warning, e.g. {{uw-vandalism4}}

It seems that you issued 74.102.20.237 with an immediate final warning for his first edit, which was a page blank and the inclusion of silly rubbish. In this case you should have issued a level one for page blanking or a level one for factual errors: either {{uw-delete1}} or {{uw-error1}}. I removed your immediate final warning and issued the user with a caution for knowingly introducing factual errors ([2]) (you should have issed a general note, so mine should have been a caution). I have since had to add a warning ([3]).

If you want a user to be blocked then you will need to go to WP:AIV, and they will want to see a proper warning history. If there isn't one then the disruptive editor won't get blocked. It's like being in the police force: if you want to lock up criminals then you must follow procedure; otherwise they will get off on a technicality.

Obviously if very serious vandalism occurs, for example racial or sexual comments then you can issue an immediate final warning. Take a look at this page, it lists all of the warning templates. If you have any questions, then drop me a line. •• Fly by Night (talk) 19:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. L Kensington (talk • contribs)

I'll have to disagree with the user above (sorry for invading in on your talk page) - we shouldn't be giving out freebies to vandalize 4 times. Use your best judgement - if it appears to be a good faith contribution not in line - then issue a 1st warning. If it looks to be a deliberate attempt to damage the content - it can be appropriate to second warn, then jump to 4th or go to 3rd, then 4th (if the edits warrant it) - why waste your time with a particular vandal that doesn't take not of the warnings and keeps vandalizing? Just my two cents. Connormah^talk 20:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your input. L Kensington (talk • contribs)

But an immediate final warning was issued for a first edit. A first edit that simply blanked a page and added silly comments. You are free to issue immediate final warnings for things like this; but they are empty threats. No admin would ever block a user for a second, similar, edit. (This was the edit that was given an immediate final warning.) •• Fly by Night (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say that this particular time would be appropriate - rather I was trying to get at the reason you shouldn't always be going up with 4 for even severe vandals - it's all about good judgement. Connormah^talk 22:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

No-one ever said that an immediate final warning could never be warrented. As I said in my very first post on this page: "Obviously if very serious vandalism occurs, for example racial or sexual comments then you can issue an immediate final warning. Take a look at this page, it lists all of the warning templates. If you have any questions, then drop me a line." I would have hoped that the rule of common sense would have been applied to fill the gaps. The clear fact of the matter was that this edit did not warrant an immediate final warning. As such I took it upon myself to give a brief outline of the warning protocol. Having followed WP:AIV, I have seen many times that proposed blocks are rejected because proper warnings have not been given. (Obviously, some levels can be skipped in the case of repeat offenders, previously blocked users, very strong personal insults, etc.) Although: Can I just say that L Kensington does a really good job. I don't question his/her commitment or motives. I just thought s/he went in a bit strong and thought that a refresher was in order. •• Fly by Night (talk) 22:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, great job. Yes, I did recognize that that edit did not warrant a final warning. Good luck with the rollback. Connormah^talk 23:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I've reviewed the edit above - that could have actually been a second warning. Like I said, just use your best judgement - nothing is worse than the same vandal just wasting your time (where they could be blocked faster). Just my two cents. Connormah^talk 23:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Also as a sidenote - as you've been doing a great job recently - have you ever thought of requestting rollback, to enable you to use other automated (and a bit speedier ;)) tools, such as Huggle? I find vandalism patrol very easy with Huggle - it takes only the press of a key to revert and warn (plus when it gets to 4 warnings, it reports too, automatically). Connormah^talk 20:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I have, I just wanted to make more edits before I applied. I probably will ask for it now. Thanks! L Kensington (talk • contribs)

Sounds good. Keep up the great work. Connormah^talk 20:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

BTW, (not to hound you), but have you looked into Huggle? Connormah^talk 20:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I have. Actually, I already installed it on my computer without the proper knowledge of rollback at the time. I found out that I needed the rollback feature once I installed it (since I didn't read the documentation). It's a bit nerve-wrecking looking at the Requests for Permissions/ Rollback page. Especially knowing that I have only been registered for less than a month. L Kensington (talk • contribs)

It shouldn't be a problem for you - you have plenty of experience, and from what I can tell, you've got no pressing complaints regarding any mistakes. Good luck. Connormah^talk 20:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Congrats. Connormah^talk 21:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I'm glad we talked. You've been really helpful. I am really excited now that I have rollback permission. Thanks again. L Kensington (talk • contribs)

No problem. Connormah^talk 23:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here...

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Great work keeping an eye on the recent changes. ... discospinster talk 00:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I've been online reverting vandalism tonight and it seems like every time I go to revert something, you've beaten me to it! I see you've only been an editor for less than a month, which makes your editing skill remarkable. Keep it up! GorillaWarfare talk 00:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Userpage

Hi, I've blanked your userpage to remove a personal attack. If you want the page itself deleted, remove the <!-- and --> around {{db-u1}}, if not just make it how you want :) Pilif12p :  Yo  02:16, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me out, I'll request for the page to be deleted. Thanks again. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 02:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done. -- Cirt (talk) 02:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Cirt! L Kensington (talk • contribs) 02:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Now, for the future (as you are a vandal fighter, you are prone to personal attacks/vandalism on your userpage), if you wish to maintain no userpage, I can request that it be create protected, to keep those vandals from creating it with personal attacks. Connormah^talk 04:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Really? That would be great! Thanks for helping me! You are a great Wikipedia contributor! L Kensington (talk • contribs) 04:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I'll put in a request. Connormah^talk 04:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

So it shall be written. So it shall be  Done. --Jayron32 04:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron, and thanks again Connormah. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 07:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI, you could redirect it to your talk page (or I can do it for you since it's salted) so at least it doesn't show up in red. :) I can fully protect the redirect for you if you like. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. What do you think? Connormah^talk 21:05, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell, that would be great. Could you? I think it's a great idea. Thanks HJ Mitchell & Connormah! L Kensington (talk • contribs) 02:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I created the redirect, per the above comments - although I've only semi-protected it so far. That way you can update it yourself if you decide to create the page ... although if you want full protection, request it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed it now, and would like to thank you for your efforts, Barek. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 06:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Here ya go :)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I've been seeing ya around on the recent changes alot, Good Work! Dwayne was here! ♫ 04:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Admittedly

How do you revert so quickly; I mean, how are you prompted that it's vandalism? Obviously you don't just sit around and hit the revert button? do you? 75.25.175.232 (talk) 01:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Huggle.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

And this is just another one of your accounts Jeff? 75.25.175.232 (talk) 01:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I also use Huggle and I saw your edit and had something to contribute in response.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. At first I was like, who the heck just sits around and watches these article pages all day long. But it's far more interesting; someone that watches other peoples user pages and responds on their behalf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.175.232 (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Seriously Jeff? You just gave me one of these:

Please do not attack other contributors, as you did with this edit to User talk:L Kensington. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

for saying this: "And this is just another one of your accounts Jeff?"

On a use page that is not even yours. lol 75.25.175.232 (talk) 02:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Obviously.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Saying: "And this is just another one of your accounts Jeff?" constitutes an "attack" ?? Are you a sensitive guy? Niubrad (talk) 02:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

It appears to be an allegation of sockpuppetry. We take sockpuppetry very seriously around here.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

That is not even close to a personal attack. Connormah^talk 02:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me for joining in but that cannot be considered an attack. IJA (talk) 05:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

DB-Author

Hey L Kensington, please see Harvest 2000. If the only author of an article blanks it, reinstating what was there serves little purpose; the way to go is to add a db-author tag to it. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 04:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I will try to keep that in mind in the future. Thanks. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 04:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Same thing with Jojo Burger Tempest. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I did that one because the user removed the speedy deletion template. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 05:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought so, but it is still better to just re-tag it as db-author. Sometimes new editors will not know that they can request the article to be removed and just blank the whole thing. They wipe out the whole thing thinking that it is good enough. It is a fairly common practice. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 06:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Hi, --Extra 999 (Contact me + contribs) 05:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Degrassi (season 10), please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 21:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Erm, WP:DTTR? As far as I can work out, he only reverted an edit, then evidently decided it wasn't vandalism, so self-reverted. There's nothing wrong with that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

As the edit notice says, all unreferenced info on future episodes will be removed. It is most certainly vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 22:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, how about WP:DTTR? Everyone makes mistakes. Connormah^talk 22:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if three weeks counts as regular, but how else was I suppose to tell him? I deal with Degrassi fan, vandals multiple times a day, they've started to all blend together. 117Avenue (talk) 22:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Well he's racked up over 6k edits in those 3 weeks and, since he was using Huggle, he wouldn't have seen the editnotice. Perhaps you should be s little more understanding and a little less hasty with the template warnings? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Greetings!

Hello L Kensington, Wilhelmina Will has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Greetings, L Kensington! Hope you're having a good day! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Su

Just wanted to make my girlfriend blush, who was lying right beside me- I was going to edit it back out but you beat me to it... ridiculously quickly. bang up job you are doing.

Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.88.142 (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Golden Team

I am the principal author of "Golden Team" (GallopingMajor & OliverTwist88) please do not tamper with this article. I have been gradually writing this piece bit by bit since December 2005. Book references are cited on the bottom of the article, but I have yet to put in the right citations, which I will at the conclusion of my writing. This article is still under construction, references will be cited when I have finished. Thank you for you due attention and consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverTwist88 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please read WP:OWN. Nobody owns articles on Wikipedia. This is a collaborative project. Have you noticed the If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. under the 'Save page' button? If you don't want it to be 'tampered with', then please do not submit it. Thanks. Connormah^talk 05:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

"Nobody owns articles on Wikipedia." I was just about to say that. You have an absolutely brilliant mind. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 05:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Antalyaspor

Hi, I noticed you recently reverted an IPs edits on the Antalyaspor article. Just wanted to let you know it wasn't vandalism because the club changed their name to Medical Park Antalyaspor (see here, here and here). That's not why I'm bugging, as I believe he should have included references and whatnot, but the main reason I'm here is, how would I go about including it in the article? Should the article retain the same name, or have it moved to the new sponsored name? I've read around the site that including sponsor names in the article title are frowned upon (for articles pertaining to league and cup competitions). I thought it would be best to leave the page at Antalyaspor, but include the information in the lead and the infobox. Invisibletr (talk) 05:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Golden Team

The whole article is still a full draft, what it requires is me citing the appropriate citations from the 3 books used to build this article, until then it is wholly my work. When I am finished with it after 5 years of writing, anyone can have at it. Until then it is exclusively a draft, and I especially receive Englishmen and Germans who wish to tamper with its contents, no other nationalities are more prone to "reforming" this article. Please give a wide berth and latitude to this article till it is finished in the proper manner. Yours truly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverTwist88 (talk • contribs) 07:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

No it's not. It's public property now. Every editor on Wikipedia owns it. Not just you. That starts from the day the article is created. Even this page isn't mine, but rather a page about me. It doesn't matter if you created it. You released the article to the public. Anyone is free to edit it. This is an encyclopedia that is open to the public. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 07:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to seriously respectfully suggest that you take a look at Wikipedia's policy on article ownership. Your attitude towards other editors trying to fix article issues is undesirable. Connormah^talk|

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I think I need to get a faster internet connection, you are beating me to most of my reversions tonight! Great work! Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 01:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Is Huggle just that awesome?

Wow, I'd like to get me one of those. You are kicking butt out there, and at the speed of light, GREAT JOB! Marco Guzman, Jr  Chat  02:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Huggle is really much faster than twinkle. You'll love it. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 06:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Vandal Whacking Stick Award

I here-by present you with the Vandal Whacking Stick Award for keeping a cool head while being personally attacked by editors. Keep up the good job...we got your back. Moxy (talk) 02:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Fanboy and Chum Chum

Thanks for you continued and quick work stifling vandalism on the Fanboy_and_Chum_Chum page. Much appreciated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: July 2010

ClueBot never said it was vandalism, if you read the notice carefully. ClueBot said that the user was censoring content, and that Wikipedia is not censored. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 08:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Well I always think that when Cluebot says "reverting possible vandalism" on the history page, then the user can interpret it as being vandalism. I still think that the edits were in good faith. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 15:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please take note of the censorship policy. 71.126.71.197 (talk) 23:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha, yeah right, posting naked pictures of men on articles that are completely unrelated to the topic is called vandalism. Don't try to pull that one on me. Although Wikipedia is uncensored, that does not mean that you can post anything you want. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 00:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

I've been admiring your kick-butt work here and just read through your talk page. I'd be happy to give you rollback rights if you'd like. It's pretty clear that you're on board with policy and know what you are doing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but I already have rollback rights. Thanks for offering them to me though. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 04:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Cool, somehow I missed that. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your seemingly tireless antivandalism efforts, I give you this barnstar. --Monterey Bay (talk) 04:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I realy do question if L Kensington sleeps???Moxy (talk) 04:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Quite why we're indented this far, I'm not sure, but you;re doing a great job, mate! I just indef'd your latest talk page vandal. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Geoff Petersen

User talk:L Kensington Please Refrain from editing Geoff Petersen. He does not perform a fist pump, he Simulates Male masturbation. Craig Ferguson notes it quite frequently as "Pleasuring himself". While it may not be seen as appropriate, it is accurate. Thanks Rosing95 (talk) 20:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)Rosing95

User:L Kensington uses WP:Huggle to edit blatant vandalism. Those of us who do, normally use something call the duck test to revert those edits. Please bear in mind that when you are editing and adding terms that are sometimes used to vandalize (like "masturbation", "penis", and other sexual references), a vandal fighter such as L Kensignton might mistaken them as vandalism. I reassure you, it is not intended to erase honest edits. The notice might look ugly on your talk page, but if you add a comment under it, it shows that you are a good editor and willing to communicate. As a matter of fact, I got one of those recently! Thank you and happy editing. -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Chat  23:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Portuguese Argentine

I appreciate that you are fighting vandalism, but please don't get so caught up in it that you revert copyvio blanking as you did here. This is especially true if you have not examined the blanked text to be sure that there is not an actual copyright violation. Cheers. VernoWhitney (talk) 00:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

user 69.232.194.215

hey mate, thanks for banning this guy Owen214 (talk) 14:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)