User talk:Mattjones17

Gweek

Thanks for your additions to the Gweek article. The The Tallulah looked near completion, a couple of weeks ago.===Vernon White - T A L K . . . to me. 19:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! did not mean to do that to the RCP page! --Bbriggs1 (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, the removal of content was actual a rollback of his own edit to restore content blanked by an IP. Wait, that was confusing, let me try again: An IP blanked some stuff on Acrylic glass. Mattjones reverted the IP's blanking of content as vandalism (and he was probably correct in this case). Then, Mattjones undid his own revert. That was what you warned for. He actually left the article alone in the end, heh... --Jaysweet (talk) 19:16, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Jaysweet, I spent about 5 minutes deliberating over whether to rollback in the first place after your advice, when I did i set it as a non-vandal rollback to be safe. Then I chagned my mind and decided to undo what I had done. I don't see this is disruptive at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattjones17 (talk • contribs)

No prob, I am glad to see you are being more careful. I think in that case it was okay to revert, as the IP had not given any explanation in the edit summary for the removal of content. What I was mostly disturbed by previously is that in the other cases, the edit summary had clearly explained why the content was being removed. As long as you check the edit summary, I think you will be less likely to make severe mistakes.

By the way, please try to remember to sign your posts with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks! --Jaysweet (talk) 19:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive edits will get you blocked

Things like this, even though you revert them, are disruptive and will get you blocked. I just want to make sure that you're sufficiently warned so that you aren't surprised. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have your talk page on my watchlist now and I noticed that 88.105.205.39 (talk · contribs), who is clearly a vandal, removed the above comment from this page. I've restored it for you, but you can delete it if you wish. Regards. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]