This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
There is a persistant vandal in the Hulk Hogan page who constantly reverts the agreed upon posistion of Hogan's vitalstatistics. I saw you use vandalproof on a revert. He popped straight back to revert to his own idea, should I revert it back in future or let you use vandalproof?(Halbared07:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to leave a welcome! =) I actually do have a Wikipedia ID, but most of the time I can't be bothered signing in before I edit something. Kind of instinctive, you know?
Instead, I think the right option is the one taken by some other editors like Jeffire and Graft: say that you don't see the discussion moving toward a useful change to the article and stop participating. was a better idea in my opinion. You are free to debate him if you wish. Good luck to you and thanks for helping wikipedia. WAS 4.25011:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your opinion on the Polyheme issue. Would you like to, if you have the time and don't mind, rewrite that article? I do not know how to even begin as I'm not at all a good writer.
Thanks again. --Sir Vicious11:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Xyrael, you said I should remind you again about the PolyHeme article rewrite. If you're not too busy that would be a great help, thank you very much. I will be available this weekend so if you need any help researching please feel free to contact me. --Sir Vicious11:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Xyrael :) . If you have or need any info's feel free to leave me a message, there may be a day or two delay but I'll help you where I can :). Sir Vicious03:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I'm Orville Eastland, (I'm not signed in due to a cookie malfunction) and I did the edit for the Doctor Who article The Idiot's Lantern which you corrected. I appreciate the concern, and I apologize for not informing that it was a minor edit. I do have proof for my statement, which can be found by viewing a bit of "The Pitch of Fear" at: [1]72.155.190.6513:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We seem to have both accepted User:Whomp and User:Wizardman's requests to use VandalProof! It was my first set of approvals as a moderator, so naturally I was rather excited. Apologies for ending up doing it twice - at least I got there first! Thanks. --XyraelT18:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In reference to the WeatherBug update that I posted, it was backed up by a link that I also posted in which a WeatherBug representative made the statement that WeatherBug is part of Homeland Security. I'm not sure what it is that you're requesting. Please give me the details on what it is that I need to provide. I will provide whatever it is that you need so that the update I made will remain intact.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your request to join the Mediation Committee was not successful. I encourage you to continue in your efforts to help with dispute resolution on Wikipedia, and to consider running again in the future if you remain interested. If you would like to be considered as a reserve mediator (for those times when we find ourselves shorthanded and are in need of willing and competent volunteers) please let me know. Again, thank you for your interest in the committee, and good luck with your work on Wikipedia. Essjay (Talk • Connect)06:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing me so quickly - guess i'll just have to be a lot more active to get to those 250 - monitoring the newpages and recent changes is an arduous task! --Skenmy14:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, VandalProof requires 250 mainspace edits, not 250 total edits. So, Kevin Breitenstein is actually low. However since he is only ten edits away, it doesn't really matter. In the future keep this in mind. Thank you. Prodegotalk17:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. You can use your discretion, if you think someone with under the limit is trustworthy, you can give the tool. It would be very rare to take it away without discussion though. Prodegotalk17:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
thanks for applying to use the .NET Bot Framework.Your request has been approved, and you should soon receive instructions as to accessing the source code of the framework.
You have also been added to the Spam list for announcement emails regarding the framework. If you do not wish to receive these announcements, please feel free to remove yourself from this list.
Messages sent will involve announcements of new versions, features and other important information.
Thanks, and enjoy your use of the framework,Werdnabot(DNBF)/T\C on behalf of Werdna648T/C\@07:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I don't care one way or the other whether that "fact" is included; I just wondered what made it vandalism, why you made that call. I'm not even saying you're wrong; I'm just curious. -GTBacchus(talk)09:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On startinf 1.2.0., there is a warning about a bug. And advice to download 1.2.1. I downloaded. But cannot figure out how to incorporate that 1.2.1. Please help. I am a new user of vandal proof.--Dwaipayan (talk) 09:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What the fu** are you talking about? If you had an ounce of reason in your scull you would have seen that I just removed a double entry - nothing else.
By the way, there is more of it further down on that page, but I refrained from doing that, as I am not a native speaker.
NB: It is people like you that make life hell for ordinary wikipedians.
You are quick to correct would-be mistakes by others but are slow to recognize and correct your own. 'This user tries to do the right thing'? Trying is not sufficient. 'This user is not a Wikipedia administrator but would like to be one'?! In the interest of Wikipedia, I sincerely hope this will not happen.
What's this about vandalism? That was a genuine example of the use of the name "Aoife". Why would you remove that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.231.46 (talk • contribs)
Thanks for the compliment. Actually, I did it slightly different, as doing it that way *would* be kind of awkward, hehe. I created a subpage of my userpage (at /sig). Each time I want to put my signature in, I type {{subst:User:^demon/sig}}. It drops my full signature with the current time and date. You're more than welcome to copy my text and use it for your signature. Hope this helps. ^demon[yell at me][ubx_war_sux] /11:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You asked that I leave you a messege regarding keKe Wyatt as a mezzo-soprano. She is OBVIOUSLY a soprano. I know this not only from listening to her published music but from also have performed with her and listening to her quite high lying testiturra. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.205.52.82 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 3 June 2006
BrianZ - a vandal applying for VandalProof membership
Please continue to deny BrianZ from any mod/admin posts. He himself is somewhat of a vandal.
He has a history of spamming Internet boards to promote his own site and in addition he only became interested in VandalProof was for vandetta reasons only.
This is the story along with evidence:
1) Brianz attempted to spam his site atkinsalltheway.com onto wikipedia.
2) GraemeL removed his site from the atkins diet section because it was spam ( clearly violated the adding and promoting your own site.
3) Brianz posted to the atkins diet site asking to be included in the site and was quoted with the following:
Sure, we are promoting our sites, I'm not denying it. But by promoting our sites we are helping readers further educate themselves, which is what an encyclopedia truly is. In essence, support forum links are content for this article and should be included under For further information.
from Talk:Atkins_Nutritional_Approach
4)
Brianz has been removing any other link on Atkins Diet site regardless of if it is violation of the external link rules or anything. Even for sites that are in content dispute he continues to remove them wantonly.
5) Brianz also lied to try to make it look like competing sites to his were spam sites.
[GraemeLs talk]
where he states:
This user 207.45.240.31 is adding his support forum site to the Atkins Nutritional Approach and South Beach diet, as well as Low-carbohydrate diet. I check these pages daily and have to remove his edits. I've warned him several times in his talk page and he uses another IP, which I can't seem to find, to stop posting URLs to support forums until a vote has been made concerning my external links argument under discussion in Atkins Nutritional Approach. He's seriously hindering my argument by repeatedly posting changes. He's not bothering to read any talk pages either so it's pointless to try and explain policy to him. He was blocked a few weeks ago by you, but he's back as of last week. His name is Tom and runs many diet sites selling products and such. His adds ARE purely spam. I know this because he runs sites for conflicting diets. I run an Atkins board and I follow Atkins and help others on Atkins. While you are at it, please give me input on my external links discussion in the article. Thanks BrianZ 16:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
This is all untrue. Again this is more truth that the real reason he wants to be included with VandalProof.
Just want to make sure he is not successful with this ploy.
Here is another sample of the kind of person he is:
Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that that you have not made enough edits.. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. --Xyrael T 15:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I understand, I'll continue to make edits and apply again later
Xyrael, I really don't know what to say to all this. This is incredible to me. I'm saddened to think that I was denied VandalProof access because of this user slandering me. I actually signed up because I'm tired of editing this users spam and I'm beginning to really hate vandals. What he said was "not the truth" clearly is. I invite you to simply state Wiipedia policy to Tommac2. He is under the impression that I have a vendetta against him. I do not. I tried to add my site to Wikipedia (again, because it was on the Atkins article for close to a year and I found it deleted) and Graeml deleted it. He then explained policy. I asked why mine was eleted yet others were left to remain. He replied. "I caught you, but I didn't catch them, please delete them if you know they are spam as well." I deleted them and continue to delete them.
I understand that you can't have every support forum linked now and I take care of the article now to ensure no favoritism and a NPOV. Tommac feels his site is not a support forum but a truly valuable resource. It IS a support forum and it is valuable, as is every support forum. He's delusional and just needs an explanation of Wikipedia policy from an Admin. After that, I hope that he understands and becomes a valuable member of Wikipedia. I haven't tried to add my site since Graeml explained policy. I was not a spammer and thought the link was acceptable. The proof is in the history.
I have asked several people, including Graeml, to state policy for him but you seem to be a person that's more active. Thank you BrianZ14:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is the best way to handle a case where there is a content dispute.
There seems to be a user BrianZ who had one of his sites that he was trying to promote using Wiki removed from the external links section of the atkins diet section.
After that he started removing all of the external links for that page as he is on some crusade to proove a point that if his page is not listed in wikipedia then no ones should.
Now he has removed all of the external links even those that are not in any wiki violation.
I have tried to patch what was there but he keeps removing them on a daily basis.
Is there any way to at least have him stop this until the content dispute is cleared up.
I have tried to contact him on wiki and via emails but he has not provided any other reason than he doesnt think it is fair for peoples site to be listed if his cant.
Tom, So you want me to stop and let your link remain while the "content dispute" is resolved? Why? Why can't all external links to support forums be deleted until the "content dispute" is resolved? Oh, I know why - You want all your competitors deleted and have yours remain because you feel yours is the best. You also want the advantage of Google pagerank. Shame on you Tom, You tried to copy my words about admitting link promotion. That's good, at least I admit that part of my reason for adding a link is promotion of a specific audience. If I was so concerned about Google PageRank and was a spammer, I would have kept adding my link until I was banned. Much like you have been in the past before you had a username and should be banned now for your behavior.
The fact that you simply are to angry to comprehend is that this is not a "content dispute". I think all Atkins support forum links should be included which is why I posted in the article discussion in the first place. But I must follow policy until something is changed. if it never does then we must cease to add external links to any Atkins Support Forum. BrianZ14:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let all of the links be there. I dont care. I mean if they are within wiki policy I am fine with them.
Let them all be there until it is resolved. I have never had an issue with anyone elses link being there unless they are being added as spam ... in otherwards a page that is being posted by the user themselves.
I only have interests in this because a link to my web site that has been there well over a year and was originally posted by another member keeps being removed.
Let the links be ... have someone add yours and lets leave it to the mediators to determine.
Thank you for your vote in my recent RFA. At 43/43/14, I decided it was best to withdraw. I will wait until another time for an RFA. Thanks again, ILovePlankton03:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
There seem to be some problems with IRC. There apparently was a netsplit earlier today and since then Bob was ejected. Quick check shows that the ipv6.chat.freenode.net (geekshells.org where he's hosted only give an IPv6 connection) is inaccessible. I didn't have time to ask a staffer to check whether it's FreeNode's fault or is it a problem with the shell. Anyway, you can put WS back until it's sorted out (you'll know it is when Bob will show up in -geeks). Cheers, Misza13TC16:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
