User talk:Special Cases

IP's, do not moan at my reversions, instead for the yank vandals, GOD SAVE THE QUEEN MY FRIEND! MWAHAHAHA! Template:Archive box collapsible

An observation regarding your one-sided "Warning"

I note, with great interest, that no such warning has been issued to the editor that knowingly lied about my contribution as "Vandalism".

My comment, "Your use of a complete lie in your edit summary found here. to describe my edit is beyond acceptable and is extraordinarily un-civil. My edit, restoring another Wiki-editors section heading, is well supported on the talk page - as you are well aware. Your characterization of it as "Vandalism" is frankly just posturing in an anything goes effort to Wiklawyer a win without regard to the merit of the edit. Gaming the system harms the project, your effort here is detrimental to all of us who seek a neutral resource and merely underscores the utter lack of intellectual integrity you quite obviously possess. The glaring lack of honesty, and its heavy-handed and intentional application were simply beyond the pale and pathetic." was a legitimate response to the mischaracterization of my legitimate contribution here.99.144.244.4 (talk) 15:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

99.144.244.4 (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

We both used a tool called Twinkle to warn you, and don't moan at the editor, it was a bot that did that. Go moan at an admin, they have powers to switch off bots that malfunction. Special Cases ^{Spit out your confessions,vandal} 15:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

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 revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was 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 grant you status nor 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 user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

huggle

Here is a good read on thatTalktome^(Intelati) 17:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Special Cases. You have new messages at MuZemike's talk page.
Message added 17:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

So, you have it enabled, but for some reason it just seems to be warning users, like you've been beaten to a revert but Huggle doesn't realize it. Try exiting out and restarting the program after it writes the configuration page for the first time. (A little box will pop up momentarily saying "updating configuration subpage" immediately after you close it.) The Thing // Talk // Contribs 17:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop vandalising Lewisham

Taken metaphorically, they could be seen as constructive edits. And damn, that was the speediest reversion ever. If you're that fast, I don't want to meet you in Lewisham on a friday night! 84.93.191.232 (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, you've obviosly never heard of huggle. It's better than twinkle! Special Cases ^{Spit out your confessions,vandal} 17:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

And it doesn't have that stupid police-looking icon which just encourages more vandalism, trust me. Your user page is hilarious. Might sound odd considering the circumstances but keep up the good work. 84.93.191.232 (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

No, it looks like a red beach ball. Aha, A vandal that I can already detect is not a teen Special Cases ^{Spit out your confessions,vandal} 18:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)