User talk:Frankenpuppy

Welcome!

Hello, Frankenpuppy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Dog food. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• No biting
• No urinating on the floor
• How to chase vehicles
• 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! – Sadalmelik ☎ 09:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion

Please read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. This article fails under Crieta G5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.42.69 (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think G5 actually applies here - I have never heard that it is applied retroactively to the articles created before ban, nor I don't know whether this editor is actually banned (as opposed to merely blocked indefinite). Nevertheless, my warning to you was inappropriate, and I apologize for that. Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Haha, hello!

All the spamming coming from this IP is on a school computer in a computer lab. Happened to get warnings for what other people in the class are doing. 72.10.98.19 (talk) 13:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Well done!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Nice one, you're beating me to all the reverts tonight! :D Have a barnstar :) cf38talk 19:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! First star for a little puppy :) Frankenpuppy (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

How did the edit of Hugh Hefner fall into the category vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.71.179 (talk • contribs)

You mean this edit - it could also be classified as a test edit, but a warning is quite suitable nevertheless. Not constructive editing. Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

What are you using?

Are you using Huggle? You're kicking vandal ass! You're so fast! cf38^talk 15:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Huggle, yes - it's quite fantastic frankly. It makes it so easy... I generally give up if Epbr123 is around, though :) Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you protect the page please.

Eurovision Song Contest 2009. I made a request here, but I think it needs to be done immediately. Thanks. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, I'm not an admin. Try WP:RFPP, they often respond fast, too. Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Yea, that's what the link goes to, thanks anyway. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

• My bad, I'm still not used to reviewing these long links in Huggle! Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Errant warning

Hello. You warned me with this edit, calling my edit here a test. You then proceeded here to re-add in the vandalism that I had just removed, and I had to remove it again here. Useight (talk) 15:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Hah, first time this has happened to me, but I have heard of this! We were both Huggling, you may have pressed revert fractionally earlier than me, but nevertheless when I reverted the vandalism edit was still first on history. We then both used rollback on the history with the consequence that I rollbacked the vandalism back. Huggle then gave warning to whoever I rollbacked, i.e. you. Frankenpuppy (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it happens occasionally, they call them Huggle Wars. Useight (talk) 16:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Please be more careful

Hi Frankenpuppy. You did an incomplete job of reverting vandalism with this edit, and I had to finish the job.[1] Please be more careful. Incomplete reverts like this lead to people thinking the problem has been taken care of, and vandalism remaining in place. Thank you. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 15:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Uhh, I hate when that happens. Huggle only shows the diff for the last edit, which is normally fine. I just use rollback to get rid of all the edits this particular editor had done. Now, in this case there were two editors involved, probably a school class. Rollback only removed the edit by 207.42.49.185 while leaving earlier edits by 207.42.49.191 and still earlier edits by 207.42.49.185. Sometimes it's possible to spot these things while huggling, and open the article in browser. In this case not... sorry. In vast majority of reverts things go well, though (simply because it's quite rare that vandalism by multiple editors remains in article). Frankenpuppy (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Yo

		CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
		You make Wikipedia articles not suck, nice reverting. - Unpopular Opinion (talk) 18:21, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It's always nice that there are vandals around to revert, isn't it ;) Frankenpuppy (talk) 18:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Lambda Chi Alpha

When undoing vandalism, please ensure that you go all the way back to the last good edition. Thanks. Rklawton (talk) 18:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)