User talk:Kvdveer/Archive2008

Hello

Nice meeting you and Thank you. --Bhadani (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apology of Vandalism

Hello, Mr. Van der Veer. I'm very sorry to vandalize page of North Korea. I'll never vandalize again. Thank you. --202.95.41.4 (talk) 12:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox river

Hi there and thanks for the message. I must have misread the links page, because I thought all of those river articles had Template:Infobox River. Anyway I have started changing them over and would be quite happy for any help. By the way could you explain what you mean't by a blacklisted link on my talkpage? Green Giant (talk) 15:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see, that was a link put there by an editor who was trying to convince me that it should be included in the external links at Hungary. Green Giant (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Open Source as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Open Source was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

Zginder^{(talk) (Contrib)} 02:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Kvdveer! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β^_command 17:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle User Category

Hi there. I have seen that you use huggle by the fact that you have automatically updated the huggle white list(it does this when closing huggle). I was wondering if you would add the category [[Category:Wikipedians who use Huggle]] to your user page so that it fills out and we know who actually uses huggle. If you do not want to you do not have to. I am also sorry if i have already talked to you about this or you no longer use huggle but i sent it to everyone that has edited the page since mid January. I hope we can start to fill out this category. If you would like to reply to this message then please reply on my talk page as i will probably not check here again. Thanks. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 18:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Message

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

·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 07:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC) --Koert van der Veer (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PAK

hi if you look at my edits they are not vandalistic shovon is a pro indian who only wants his point of veiw introduced look at the edit and then tell me whats so vandalisitic about it 86.153.131.193 (talk) 14:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC) i look forward to your response[reply]

I apologize for the confusion. Your edits, indeed, weren't vandalism. I accidentally posted the wrong message. The problem (as stated above) was the removal of section warnings. Koert van der Veer (talk) 14:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to apologize. He was just blocked a few hours earlier for vadalizing India-Pakistan related pages. Then he again logged in with another IP. This is really tiring! Sigh! And please make yourself familiar with the topic and the references cited before you revert an edit. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shovon is the one who needs to apologise for accusing me of vandalising when several editors have explained to him time again my edits are not vandalistic he doesnt seem to get that into his brain he did the same with longewala but thats now sorted 86.153.131.193 (talk) 16:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@anonymous: You should definitely learn something about the AGF policy. This editor is trying to protect a politically sensitive topic. Though you may not agree with him, it is best not to enter an edit war. Instead try to discuss the issue at hand on the topics talk page.

@Shovon: The edit I reverted was definitely not vandalism (aside from removing the section warning). They may have been POV, or even FACT, but not [[WP::VAND|Vandalism]]. Also, you seem to make a conflicting point: you are stating that I needn't apologize for reverting an edit, but also you state that I should have been doing more research when reverting. Koert van der Veer (talk) 06:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great speaker of Native Dutch!

Please Great Speaker of Native Dutch!

Go and review the GA candidate article Pier Gerlofs Donia for your Dutch-Frisian comrades at this Great Website! That is a Divine Order from Lord Jimbo Wales !

Last king of Frisia (talk) 10:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you attention, but my native language is not a religion. Koert van der Veer (talk) 10:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know man, I know! Bat still I want yao to go and take a lok whether or not you can get it for GA-class approved so that it will be good. It is our bestest aticle as of today. It is on WikiRelaes fertosn. ~ Last king of Frisia (talk) 10:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jouke de Vries

See here, I created a serious, well written, well refernced article on Jouke de Vries from the PVDA. How is that? This is to show that I am a valuable contributor to wikipedia. Last king of Frisia (talk) 11:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. That indeed looks like a valuable addition to Wikipedia. Thank you. Koert van der Veer (talk) 12:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mcsexton reported at AIV

Hello, I removed that one as, although the link add was questionable, it was not clear-cut vandalism. Also, the user had not even been greeted, let alone warned. I've given them a welcome and notified them of your reversion of their add. It is always important to notify and discuss. Blocking should only be used when all else fails or vandalistic intent is proven. Cheers, 13:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Something went wrong - I reverted his edits as Spam in WP:Huggle. I was not aware that he would be reported to AIV if I did so. I'll check (and fix) this in Huggle's documentation. I am sorry for the inconvenience I have caused. Koert van der Veer (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zebedee69 1983 not adequately warned

Hello, once again, this user was not adequately warned. His edits were not so rapid fire and egregious as to warrant a block without a full complement of warnings. I have final warned the user. Cheers, Dloh cierekim 13:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same story as above: I've reverted this one as "Removal of content", not intending to report it to AIV. Clearly Huggle is malfunctioning. I'll cease using it. Koert van der Veer (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC) --Koert van der Veer (talk) 11:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]