User talk:TheRanger/Archive/Archive-Dec2006

Hey Man!

How come you keep changing my edits? I don't think you're being very responsible. Please respond to my message. Sbrown411

Well to start with vandlism that you have posted. You have attacked my talk and user pages several times.TheRanger 01:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• As follow up to this user has been block for vandlism. TheRanger 01:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Russian passport

Excuse me, but can you explain why you reverted what I removed in the topic of Russian passport? 70.55.134.14 01:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Please don't revert what I did in the topic of Russian passport as there is no verified info provided by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Interior Affairs that those info you reverted is accurate. In order to avoid misleading, please don't revert what I removed, thanks! 70.55.134.14 01:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

It was reverted because the summary lacked a reason for taking information off an article that is coman to all passport articles. There was also no talk about this on the article talk page. TheRanger 01:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• thanks for your reply. I will write down the reason on the talk page why I removed the info from that article. 70.55.134.14 01:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Acetic acid

Your recent edit to Acetic acid (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 01:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This is clearly a bot error as we were both working to clean up the same issue. Oh well Keep up the good work BOT and keep the Wikipedia as clean as we can. TheRanger 01:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

no vandalizing

I appreciate your assitance in preventing vandalism on wikipedia. I recieved a warning from you about vandalizing the charles dickens article. There appears to be some misunderstanding as i will not and ndo not valdalize wikipedia, but like you, am attempting to revert vandalism! I would appreciate you removing the warning! Or if you have more information how what I am doing is vandalism, I would appreciate it! Thanks! Chris Kreider - HFF 15:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that please accept my apologies. I saw the problem as soon as I pushed the wrong key it was an error on my part. In fact right after it posted I had removed the warning from your page. Thanks for your understanding. TheRanger 15:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

simultaneous revert

Removing: Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to October 4. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. ... simultaneous reverts - my confusion -- apologies-- Paleorthid 16:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh well they happen. keep up your good work on vandlism, the more on the fight the better. TheRanger 16:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

VP

Did you see to which version you reverted to? Be careful with VandalProof next time. Titoxd^(?!?) 16:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I see what happened, however that was not what I tried to revert I think it was the result of simultaneous reverts. What was shoeing on my screen was the vandlsim being current version. Sorry about that please accept my apologies and thanks for joining the fight to remove vandlism. TheRanger 17:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Shadowrun

Hi there. I removed the content from the Shadowrun page and put it onto the main List of Shadowrun books. This was initially done but over time the list has creeped back onto the main page. All the other books are listed in this List subpage, so the novels should be as well. Ben W Bell talk 18:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I did see what you were doing and removed it in error. I have already changed it back and removed the warning left in error on your talk page. Keep up the good work! TheRanger 18:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Dear TheRanger,

Thanks for restoring the Queercore page to its pre-vandalism state. If I may make a request: the same person, 201.7.38.192, has also vandalised the page of the band Gay for Johnny Depp in a similar manner. If you could revert that as well, it would be much appreciated. Here's another problem, if you have time; someone has redirected the page for the band Fifth Column. They were hoping to distinguish between the band and the military manouver Fifth column, which wasn't nesessary, since the page for the military manouver was spelled with a small case 'c' in column. Now the band Fifth Column has been left with no pages linking to it, whereas it used to have more than 50. As well, this person has capitalized Band (as in Fifth Column (Band)), which as you probably know, is not used on Wikipedia, adding to the confusion. Any help would be much appreciated.

TheEmissary 19:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your your comments, it means a lot to hear from people other than vandals that are attacking my page. As for Gay for Johnny Depp I belive that I have fixed that one all the way now. As to the Fifth Column issue that is one I am looking into it is not something that I have worked with so I am reading up on the correct way to fix this problem.TheRanger 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: AfD for Bankstown Grammar

Hi, just commented on the AfD for Bankstown Grammar School.

This is an exclusive high school, and not a primary shcool. Pursey 02:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I was going based on the listing as well as the name of the school. I am sure that these facts will come out as part of the RfD and maybe someone will work to update and inprove the article as a whole. Thanks for taking the time to get envolved. TheRanger 02:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, you've also recently listen Northholm Grammar School. Once again, (and mentioned clearly in the article this time) this is an Exclusive Private High School. Chances are, if it says Grammar School, it's a private high school. Pursey 04:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I see it was hard to tell from the artile that it was a high school, however that is coming out in the AfD at this time. Seems that other parts of the world use "Grammer School" as grade school were here it means private high school. That is the reason for the RfD process so issue like this can be resloved. Again thank you for getting being part of the process and working to build wikipedia. TheRanger 12:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

If it becomes clear that an AfD nomination was a mistake, you can withdraw it. Similarly, you can withdraw an AfD nomination if an article is improved so much that your additional concerns no longer apply. You might consider doing so for Bankstown Grammar School and Northholm Grammar School. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 13:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I have looked around and can not find anything listed as to how to withdraw the a AfD. Could you point me in the right direction for this process. Thanks for your help. TheRanger 13:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Just return to the AfD article, stroke out the comments that you wish to withdraw (by putting <<s> at the beginning and </s> at the end, and add a comment, "I have changed my mind about this article and I now think that the article should be kept. I would like to withdraw my nomination." --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I have taken care of the issue and ask that the AfD be withdrawed.TheRanger 04:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Adventure Quest

I (User_talk:24.239.66.162) was recently sent a warning for editing the Adventure Quest entry mid-process. I'd been working on a major re-orgization of the crticism section to elimiate unsited sources and redundency inside of it. The edit summery was going to be posted when I had finished the work, but was saving it on occasion to make sure my edits were validly coded(My wiki-experince is somewhat lacking.) Was there some rule I was violating by working first and summerizing once I knew what needed to be changed, or is this a misunderstanding? I'm just trying to avoid future problems.

Well the problem that comes up is when some one is doing recent change patrol for vandlism it is hard to tell what the reason for the large removal of text is with out the summary. So we have to go on what it looks like. A simple few words would make things easy for someone to see at a qwickly. Thanks for helping build Wikipedia with your hard work. TheRanger 04:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Porno

Your recent edit to Porno (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 14:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks to be the result of simultaneous reverts we were both after the same problem.TheRanger 14:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

And the VandalProof override that prevents people from warning the bot isn't in yet... yay :) -- Tawker 16:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Scientific Classification and User:AntiVandalBot

Hi. I noticed you left a {{test}} template regarding Scientific Classification on User:AntiVandalBot's talk page. I also noticed that you reverted AntiVandalBot's edit to the previous version of the article using VandalProof.

I think you are confused. 1. AntiVandalBot is not human. It is a program (a Robot if you will, hence the Bot at the end) that aims to detect and remove vandalism to Wikipedia. There are several of these things around. 2. Looking at the history of Scientific Classification, it seems that there was an article there and User:207.63.107.68 deleted all the text and replaced it with profanity [1]. User:165.91.116.105 then came along and removed the profanity leaving a blank page [2]. AntiVandalBot considers page blanking vandalism, but isn't smart enough to go back two revisions, so reverted the article back to the vandalised one [3]. You came along and reverted AntiVandalBot back to the blank article [4] and warned AntiVandalBot for vandalism. I fixed the article [5].

When using VandalProof, please make sure that you are reverting to a clean, unvandalised version. Do not revert to a blank page, and do not accuse bots of vandalism. Do, however let the Bot's owner know on the bot's talk page that the bot made an error. Thanks. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 16:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Your point is noted, just as the bot makes error I as a human do as well. It is my understanding that this issue is also being by the programers with VP. Thank your direction in this issue. TheRanger 17:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes VP is just wrong :)

Hi, could you please remove the test1 template you put on my page? I was reverting vandalism too ;) To be Honest, I almost warned an other RC patroller on that one too :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 17:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

It's gone now. Not sure what caused that but it was not the way I had it set to revert something must have gone wrong well do the auto post. Oh well, thanks for letting me know and keep up the good work. TheRanger 18:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

The welcome.

Thanks for the welcome. What a swiftness ! Bourrichon 22:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Your welcome I hope you enjoy editing here at Wikipedia.TheRanger 22:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

University of Alabama problem

On the University of Alabama article there is a recurring problem with people posting alleged controversies with the SGA. None of this stuff that is alleged can be proven, it is pure conjecture and has no place in a factual article. This type of thing has no place on an article about our University. If whoever is doing this wants it up, then they should put up this in a seperate article.

Thank you for informing me of this problem, I'll mark it in my watch list and keep an eye on it. Keep up the good work keeping wikipedia strong. TheRanger 23:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sysonby

I'm removing articles written by me which have received criticism (but not anything in them that might have been contributed by others). I've lost the enthusiasm I came here with. It's my fault. I must not have understood wiki very well. My articles are not written as wiki wishes them to be written, but this is how I write. If I don't remove them, or changed them so much they lose all color and interest, I'll just keep geting tagged with "tone." The articles are still there. Others can go in and do as they wish with them. What is it wiki feels a proper reason for removing an article that is tagged for "tone"? ..23:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that you feel that way about editing on wikipedia. I would say don't take other editors questions and concerns personaly it is normally all done with the intent of making the whole project better. Hopefully you will come back and join us soon. TheRanger 23:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Email

FYI, I've sent you an email. JoshuaZ 19:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I recived it thanks for the notice. TheRanger 19:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Your comment on my talk page

I was surprised to see your comment on my talk page advising me that you reversed my revert on Krav Maga and insinuating I don't know the rules of Wikipedia. If you'd glanced over the history of the page, you would have seen that I've been struggling to counter an ongoing campaign of vandalism by a group of people who insist on posting commercial, inappropriate material on this page. I've reported them and they've received bans but they just keep coming back. If you'd like to use your administrative powers to make Wikipedia better, how about giving me a hand instead of reverting my edits and telling me to go play in the sandbox? - Cheers, Perseverantia 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, I'd appreciate it very much if you would restore the page to my last edits, since the page now contains the same material I was trying to remove. Perseverantia 21:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry your effort to inprove the article were reverted. The reason I see looking into this issue was that your edit removed a large section of text with no edit summary to let others including recent change patrolers a reason why it was done. In fact your edit was marked as being "minor" which it clearly was not. Based on that information your edit look to be vandlism so I reverted it. Your help keeping the point of view of the article is great and we are glad to have the help, however with out the summaries filled in and the proper use of the minor edit but your works look like a vandlism trick. Again I am sorry it was reverted in is in no means a personal attack. TheRanger 22:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the clarification, and I can see where the confusion arose. After having reverted so many times to try to deal with the vandalism, I guess I just got sloppy. I will make a concerted effort to properly annotate my edits to avoid a future misunderstanding. I appreciate you responding to this quickly. My best, Perseverantia 22:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

If you want to do so, please feel free to delete this communication once you read it. Perseverantia 22:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Change in Club de Fútbol Monterrey

I saw you reverted some changes I did. Seeing the most recent comment, I realized it may had been a mistake to not write the why. Anyway, I think that it isn't vandalism. Especially in the fact that I added tags, changed the rooster of the team into a template, and corrected some grammar and spelling mistakes. I erased the following complete sections:

  * 2.2 March 24, 1996
  * 2.3 Clasico 6-3
  * 2.4 DAY 4

Because they are better explained, and in a more neutral way in the Clásico Regiomontano article. "The Rivalry" section was done a cleanup by me, and "The Future" was completely erased as there is no source information about it, and in fact, there are recognized sources denying information of that section. I explained forehand my reasons of my cleanup in the article talk page.

Dreyesbo 03:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that looks great, the problem I had was the large removal of sections and no summary edit, sorry I didn't see it in the talk section. This was the result of recent change patrol and keeping up with a busy time of vandlism attacks. I'll remove the warning and thanks for your help building wikipeida. TheRanger 03:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to you for pointing my mistakes. I'll make sure to write the summary edit in further edits ;)

Dreyesbo 03:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalized Again!

Hello TheRanger,

Once again, your help is needed! The Queercore page has been vandalised and needs to be reverted. Thanks in advance, and thanks for your assistance in the past.

TheEmissary 07:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think I got it back to being correct now. I will keep an eye on this page to watch for new problems. Again if something comes up feel free to let me know and I'll do what I can. Thanks. TheRanger 15:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Please revert back to the place I was at

wvbailey here re Counter machine:Reference model: I was in the middle of a movement of stuff around the page and you reverted me way back to Kraus, whom I'm trying to fix. Please revert it back. BTW this is quite upsetting. Thanks, wvbaileyWvbailey 21:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry you were upset by the reverts to this article. The reason the revert was done was for the large removal of text from the page with no edit summary or note on the talk page. After I reviewed the changes I found no reason that the information would need to be removed, so well doing a recent change patrol it was reverted. The goal of the revert is to prevent vandlism and futher the good of the wikipedia as a whole. I'll look into seeing what can be done to revert any changes made if needed. Thanks for your understanding in this issue. TheRanger 21:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I kind of figured this out -- I was doing a bunch of edits fast just to move things about. I reverted it back myself and did some more work. I understand why this happened. Thanks for the quick response. wvbaileyWvbailey

Your warning

I sure hope VP gets fixed soon. Second vandalism warning I've gotten today. First was on an article I've never touched, and now you leave me a note that says I removed content from an article I added a {db-web} tag to. Fan-1967 19:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the error. When I went to remove the warning from your page I saw you took care of it. Thanks for your help building wikipedia. TheRanger 19:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The Mountain Wreath

I think the author of "The Mountain Wreath" article is seriously prejudiced in this matter. The play in question is highly controversial, and I believe that an encyclopedia entry should reflect this. Proclaiming The Mountain Wreath to be about faith in humanity and goodness is a highly interpretative stance. Many would argue that the play is nothing but nationalist progaganda along the lines of Mein Kampf. The Serbs perpetrated genocide, let's not forget that fact, and this play was a contributing factor. I am personally offended at the slant of this article, and would appreciate it if the author attempted to be fair and unbaised, perhaps explaing historical context, and a summary of the play, rather than interpreting themes and providing judgement on the authors meaning.

My edits were done fairly and objectively, I do not think the article should be reverted. In fact, this is such a controversial topic, I think edits should be locked until reviewed by Wiki.

You present a strong case as to why you edits were done, however at the time you made your edits you left no edit summary or note on the article talk page so I had no idea why you deleted a large amounts of text. If you get an account to do your editing with and leave edit an edit summary of what you are editing others would know why things are being done. A big problem on wikipedia is vandalism and I am sorry to say that is what I thought you edit was well doing a recent change patrol. Sorry for the problems the revert caused. TheRanger 13:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Upcoming template changes

Hi, I've just noticed that you recently left a templated userpage message. I'm just bringing to your attention that the format and context of these templates will be shortly changing. It is recommended that you visit WikiProject user warnings and harmonisation discussion pages to find out how these changes could affect the templates you use. We also would appreciate any insights or thoughts you may have on the subject. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 14:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I have been following your project and am aware that you are looking at how the changes would affect tools like vandal proof. I feel that is very inportant as the number of recent change patrolers that use some sort of tool in the process. Thanks for your notice I will keep an eye on the project as I have in the past. TheRanger 16:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Konami Code revert

Not sure why you reverted my anonymous edit to the Konami code page. That stuff is the biggest, most useless collection of trivia on the Wiki, and there are clear arguments on the talk page for removing the whole section. Perhaps you can join the discussion instead of just blindly reverting? --Measure 20:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Your anonymous edit was not blindly reverted by any means. I was doing a recent change patrol and your edit had no edit summary. Well reveiwing the your change I had nothing to go up but the fact it looked to be page blanking which is often the case with anonymous edit that lack any futher information. Sorry your edit was one that was not vandlism and did get reverted. TheRanger 20:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

There is a pretty clear, and lengthy, edit summary. look at the history. --Measure 20:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry my error, I have reverted the changes back. TheRanger 20:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

My Usertalk page

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user talk page.

Atlant 22:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem keeping vandalism at bay. It is nice to hear from people other than the vandals that attack me for cleaning things up. Thanks for taking the time to stop by. TheRanger 23:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Category: Christian Arab Singers

I received a message from you saying that I am removing content from the category Christian Arab Singers. Actually I am the one who created the category. I am not removing content but removing vandalism. Someone is constantly adding nonsense and random text to cause the deletion of the page. I mean some anti-christian lying idiot. Hadoken2000 20:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand that you are the one who created the category and how you could feel that it is your category. However, on wikipedia all content is every ones content and everyone is able to add to and edit everything. The message I left was in regards to you removing a tag of a notice of "Categories for Discussion" which is a process by which the community decides if the article meets wikipedia standards and should be kept or if it does not and it should be deleted. As the notice states the tag must be left on the page and its removal is considered vandalism. That being said I would urge you to participate in the Categories for Discussion stating why you feel it meets the standards to keep, however please do not remove the tag. Hope this helps and thank you for being part of wikipedia. TheRanger 18:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

My Usertalk page

Thank you for reverting the vandlism on my talkpage. DXRAW 01:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Your welcome. Always nice to hear from someone with a positive comment. Your user page just didn't look good with the vandalism. TheRanger 02:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for welcoming me Bigger Beast 03:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Your very welcome, I hope you enjoy wikiepdia and stay a long time. If you ever have a question or need help, feel free to stop by this talk page any time. TheRanger 03:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Welcoming Committee

Hi,

I recently joined the welcoming committee, and I hadn't seen a welcoming message template I liked until you beat me to a newb.... where can I steal yours? TheMadBaron 03:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The one I use is part of VandalProof!the version I am using is 1.3, hope this helps you find what you are looking for, if not feel free to stop back and I'll do what ever I can to help you find it. TheRanger 03:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't want to start using VanalProof just yet (busybusybusy).... if the template's independently available, and if you can easily tell me how to find it, I'd be very grateful.... but don't go to any great trouble, as I'm sure I'll find one I like eventually. TheMadBaron 20:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Right kindly of you to welcome me.

At first I was concerned about my POV UsernameWithoutPILOTGUYWikipediaMayAsWellShutDown 01:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

On that point with you bring up the subject, your user name could present a problem as being a personal attack. User names should not take away from what the goals of wikipedia and that is to be a encylopedia. In that light you may give some added thought to the use of your name. TheRanger 01:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

User talk:68.179.163.250

It's a judgement call, but I'd usually WP:AGF and go with {{test1a}} for a first edit; it's possible that it was a simple slip of the fingers. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 02:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I would agree, nothing in this would have got me to not use a test1 first. Must have been a slip of the fingers on my part. Thanks for pointing it out. TheRanger 02:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcoming

As it happens, I'm a long standing user using a sockpuppet account for legitimate reasons, but nevertheless thank you for your astoundingly quick welcome; if all new users were greated like this, Wikipedia would be a much better place.

Have a well deserved barnstar:

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		message Aaslkdjalskdjlk 04:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very for taking the time to stop by and for the barnstar. I agree with your view on the welcome and try to make it a part of my recent change reviews. TheRanger 04:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Change to Western

Hello. I noticed that on October 28 you edited the Western article so that it is no longer a disambiguation page, but one on a specific company. May I ask why? To me, it makes more sense as a disambig page. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 21:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

In looking into this, I have found that my edits to the page Western were done to revert changes by a user that had been block User:Policyowner who had vandalised that and other pages. For some reason in the edit history it no longer shows the edits make by that user, however I have no postion on the disambiguation of the page, feel free to bring your concern to the pages talk page or make the changes as you see fit. Thanks for all your help building wikipedia. TheRanger 22:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks for the response! --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 22:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

please don't undo my edit

I hope this reaches you, I'm relatively new to wikipedia and am not sure if this is the right place to respond to your message. I posted a longer response on what i guess is my user page (the one where your message appeared saying you'd reverted my edits), but in a nutshell my edits were not vandalism.

the text I removed is duplicate text that is already covered in the article on anarcho-capitalism and is only tangentially related to "American Anarchism" as a whole since it represents one specific debate within anarcho-capitalism - not a debate within american anarchism as such. Accordingly it was an effort to bring the American Anarchism page into line with the other pages on Anarchism that summarize related points and then point the user to a full article on those points for more detail, rather then exploring every debate on every point in every article.

please don't revert my changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.65.151 (talk • contribs)

The revert was done because your edit lacked a summary and I was unable to tell why you were deleted such a large protion of the article. Sorry for the trouble if anything else comes up or you have any questions at all feel free to stop by this talk page and I'll lend a hand. Welcome to wikipedia. TheRanger 02:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Ranger..thanks for the heads up. I didn't mean to delete the whole section but rather paste a new one I added in, but I was in a rush and messed up. I stand by my first edit in the lead sentence, as it was an inacurate representation of his title. I added supporting citations for everything cited in the headlines section i added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.154.168 (talk • contribs)

No problem these things happen. TheRanger 20:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Huy1994

Has been indef blocked. If he blanks his talk page again lemme know and I'll protect it. Keep up the great work :) Glen 17:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

• Ok will do. Thanks for your help in the battle to keep wikipedia at its best. TheRanger 17:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Fully protected now Glen 17:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Good score, TheRanger. :D Beating me to the punch on a few vand reverts from Huy's spree. :-p Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 17:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

		Glen's Anti-Vandalism Barnstar!
		Glen is thrilled to award TheRanger with this small token of appreciation and acknowledgement for exceptional performance in the art of troll extermination, cruft elimination and for ensuring Wikipedia is safe for public consumption... You are a legend, please keep up the great work! Glen 17:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

• Wow thanks this really means a lot.TheRanger 17:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

About your reverting of my edits to Digimon Savers

I was attempting to better merge the pages of Digimon Savers and List of Digimon Savers characters and concepts. You set my entire attempt backwards when I wasn't fully completed yet, and now I've lost almost all of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Razorsaw (talk • contribs)

Sorry for the problem. Looks as if during a recent change patrol it was reverted likely due to large removal of text with out a clear edit summary. I'll look at it and do what I can to restore your edits if possible. Thanks for your help building wikipedia sorry our wires got crossed. TheRanger 04:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'd rather I put it behind me for the rest of the night, and leave it as is. I've lost my focus and I'm not sure I could continue the project tonight. --Razorsaw 04:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I understand again sorry that it got reverted, I removed the warning from your talk page as it clearly was not needed. keep up the good work. TheRanger 04:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Re mothers and various daily products :)

Some how it looks like we were both reverting the same edit, not sure how it came out as it did however I was trying to fix the same problem. Working with a new program to do recent change patrols so I'll keep an eye on it. TheRanger 19:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh I see you actually warned me!! (another user reverted it so I missed it completely). Yikes, you should have received an edit conflict you'd think? Do you use VP/VS or VF or a script...

Sorry about the warning (tho you did add YOUR MOMMA IS PHAT LIKE CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEESE lol) - well looking thru your contribs this is the least I can do: Glen 21:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

		A good ol' Kiwi Pav!
		I, Glen give you TheRanger this delicious traditional Kiwi Pavlova for the same reasons per the barnstar above! Just a bloody legend (who apparently thinks cheese is quite fatty lol) Glen 21:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow thanks for the Pavlova it's great! As for the the tool I was using ws VP 2.01 just started using so I'll have to see if it comes up again. TheRanger 21:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Clydebank

What was wrong with my edit to Clydebank?

I felt the info on the Singer Corporation was interesting a necessary

Sorry my error, I saw the removal of the Employment section and without a summary note as to the edit, I did not see you moved it to another section of the article. I have changed the edit back to the way you had it. Thanks for letting me know and your help building wikipedia. TheRanger 19:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page! Chris Kreider 19:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem just didn't look good with the vandalism. TheRanger 21:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Your warning to 165.95.7.15

You may need to make some adjustment to VP2; you left a warning message for 165.95.7.15 about editing the Sandbox. I thought that is what the Sandbox is for. --Gerry Ashton 22:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow some thing is going wrong with that edit and warning. Thanks for pointing it out. TheRanger 22:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

You said it was the sandbox. I was playing around. Sorry and how the hell did you track me down. You have a tracker on your computer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.124.58 (talk • contribs)

Ok after your comment I looked into the issue. You were revert in your sandbox due to Wikipedia:No personal attacks just because it is a sandbox you are not allowed to post that type attack or any attacks. TheRanger 23:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Answer my question

Do you have a tracker on your computer or not? Answer my question since it's ridiculous to get a message one second after editing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.124.58 (talk • contribs)

We use whatever we can to protect Wikipedia from vandalism. This is just one of the tools that we currently have in use to protect the project.TheRanger 23:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm not asking you to reveal what you use.

I am not experimenting

Please see first the discussion page of the white people article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.153.229.218 (talk • contribs)

If you use the edit summary and leave a note as to what you are doing when you remove a large section of text it makes it easy for people that are reviewing the changes. I'll see what I can do to revert it back. Thanks for your help building wikipedia. TheRanger 03:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Price is Right (Australia)

The official name of the game that the showcase round is based on is called Double Bullseye. "2-Player Bullseye" was the unofficial name it was referred to, since the name of the game was not known until recent information from TPiR's earliest years was revealed.

Ok thanks for letting me know, I have made the changes so the page is now correct. TheRanger 17:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Edits reverted

I was wondering why what I did was considered a 'test'. The edit of Miller Brewing Company's line of Milwaukee's Best being referred to as "Beast" is just a common name for it, so why shouldn't it be added that it is referred to as "Milwaukee's Worst"? Perhaps you are a fan of it, but you do realize that reverting edits would mean you potentially have a bias towards the company, right? Please explain yourself. Zchris87v 04:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the facts of the issue is that I assume good faith in edits and I went based on that. However you comments lack a cite to the information and as to questioning a bias in my editing it is simple not true. TheRanger 04:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Neji Hyuga

I was actually mocking the vandal in the edit summary while reverting, not vandalizing myself, but I can see how the program would mistake that. I do find it odd that your program would jump to a test 4 warning the first time around, though. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I hit the wrong button and saw it right as it happened. I have removed the warning from your talk page. Keep up the good work building wikipedia. TheRanger 20:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for the extra feathers on my wings! Thank you so much, TheRanger, for your support in my RfA, which passed on November 11, 2006, with a final tally of 82/0/2. I am humbled by the kind support of so many fellow Wikipedians, and I vow to continue to work and improve with the help of these new tools. Should you have any request, do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Húsönd 20:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad all went well, keep up all your great work.TheRanger 00:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Treaty of Berlin article changes

Apologies for forgetting to sign my comment on the Treaty of Berlin discussion page (now rectified), but if you'd care to read the comment I made you'd see that the article was inaccurate- hence my correction. As a history student I'm a little worried that whoever wrote the article didn't realise that Bismarck was already dead by that point.

Ok thanks for the heads up I see what you are talking about. Good work! TheRanger 22:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Melancholia 1

Can I recommend that you try reading copy defore reverting it? Johnbod 19:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I see what happened, however that was not what I tried to revert I think it was the result of simultaneous reverts. What was showing on my screen was the vandlsim being current version. Sorry about that please accept my apologies and thanks for joining the fight to remove vandlism. TheRanger 22:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

- No problem; I can't quite see what you mean from the history, but it all seems ok now. Thanks for coming back Johnbod 02:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

		Mike's RfA Thanks
		TheRanger: Thanks very much for your support at my RfA. Unfortunately, it was clear that no consensus was going to be reached, and I have withdrawn the request at a final tally of 31/17/4. Regardless, I really appreciate your confidence in me. Despite the failure, rest assured that I will continue to edit Wikipedia as before. If all goes well, I think that I will re-apply in January or February. - Mike | Talk 04:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear you are staying on a building wikipedia best of luck with everything. TheRanger 18:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your input

Thank you for taking part in my RfA. The RfA was not successful, mostly because I did a pretty bad job of presenting myself. I'll run again sometime in the next few months, in the hopes that some will reconsider.

In the meantime, one of the projects I'm working on is A Wikimedia Administrator's Handbook. This is a wikibook how-to guide intended to help new administrators learn the ropes, as well as to simply "demystify" what adminship entails. If you are an administrator, please help out with writing it, particularly on the technical aspects of the tools. Both administrators and non-administrators are welcome to help link in and sort all of the various policies regarding the use of these tools on wikipedia in particular (as well as other projects: for example, I have almost no experience with how things work on wiktionary or wikinews). Users who are neither familiar with policy or the sysop tools could be of great help by asking questions about anything that's unclear. The goal is to get everything together in one place, with a narrative form designed to anticipate the reader's next question.

A second project, related but not entailed, is a book on wikimedia in general, with a history of how various policies evolved over time, interesting trivia (e.g., what the heck was "wikimoney" about?), and a history of how the wikimedia foundation itself came about and the larger issues that occurred during its history (such as the infamous "Spanish Fork").

Again, thanks for your input on the RfA, and thanks in advance for any help you might be able to provide for the handbook. --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 13:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The idea of the wiki book for admin sounds great. As to that my main concerns were a lack of knowledge of wikipedia policy and that would bring that up as well, looking forward to being able to support your next RFA as this project grows. TheRanger 18:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Guiliani changes

The Ranger:

What's up with you and Rudy Guiliani? I'm assuming you don't live in NYC and are not aware that he openly committed adultery with Judith Nathan. Who are you to decide this shouldn't be included? That's my only question - who put you in charge of deleting that info from the public record? If it is NOT true, then go ahead and delete my changes, but only if you can prove it didn't happen. (Every newspaper, including Guiliani himself, will dispute you.) But like I said, please let me know who made you in charge of this. Thank you.

Joseph S. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.0.14.186 (talk • contribs) .

I don't think the basic facts are in dispute (http://www.google.com/search?q=giuliani+adultery), as long as any such comments are cited and neutral. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 18:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I would agree with the basic facts looking into this a little more, however the POv would need to be watched. It looks as if what my concern was that it was uncited and the type of claim being made that is why it was reverted as well as no edit summary to explain what was going on. I was erroring to protect the person as he is living per WP:BIO. TheRanger 18:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

School Computer

Hi! Thank you for your partolling "Carbohydates"

This IP adress did get your message, but it is a computer in Shaker Heights High School's school library.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.43.197.40 (talk • contribs)

Ok, I understand thanks for taking the time to let me know. TheRanger 18:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

My page that i added

Look the page that I added was not nonsense. In fact I have read through the pages and found things like a dirty sanchez. How gross is that. I only added to the pages was told to me that same day. I felt that I wanted to add something. What do I need to do to show that this is in fact a correct definition and not nonsense? .—Preceding unsigned comment added by Laneywest (talk • contribs)

I am sorry that I was unable to find the edit that you are talking about. The only edit from your user name is this one to my talk page. I tried my best to find what page you added and am unable. If you provide more information I may be able to give you a better answer. TheRanger 15:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Werdnabot problem, a suggestion

I do not see anything wrong with your Werdnabot invokation. But I notice that you have modified all your section headers to use single "=" (equal signs) instead of the usual "==" (double equal signs) on either side of the title. This is an extremely unusual practice; and I vaguely remember reading something that said that one should not do that. Perhaps Werdnabot does not recognize your sections as sections for that reason. I suggest that you try changing some of your older sections back to double equal signs and see whether it then archives them. JRSpriggs 04:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok will give that a shot, I started that to fix a problem with sub numbering at some point but it got out of control. Thanks for your help. TheRanger 05:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk page

Could you explain why you are interfering with my talk page please. --Ian Pitchford 18:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

As I posted to your talk page the removal of warnings from a talk page is vandalism, that is why I restored the warning back to the page and left the warning. TheRanger 18:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

What warning? --Ian Pitchford 18:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

It should be clear what you were removing from the talk page maybe by many questionable, I by this I mean the comments related to you edits to Palestinian pages and the block and other concerns. It is proper to leave them on the page or after they are older archive them and leave a link to your main talk page. TheRanger 18:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Abdul Hamid

I am sorry, but you are mistaken. I reverted vandalism to the article, unless you think that "may allah reward him for his good deeds" [6], in reference to his massacres of the Armenians, is appropriate as commentary for a Wikipedia article. Please restore my changes to the article. -- Augustgrahl 16:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry my error I restored your edit. TheRanger 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Augustgrahl 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Misguide issues

To RexNL or whoever you are.

Your insistence on including Dudut's or Jaworski's other notorious son's exploit in this article is misplaced. Just start your own article about Dudut or his other son if you're so obssessed.

If you just seek to disparage Jaworski's political career then I think you need to know that his short stint in the Senate, mediocre as it may be, is only a small part of what he has accomplished in his lifetime. He represented the country in many an international competition and brought pride and honor to this country many times over. No matter whether you witnessed it or told to you, albeit in a watered down version.

Jaworski deserves a more meaningful tribute in this article and I don't think he should be defined by his son's activities or Political failures of which he played, really a minor part.

Jaworski dedicated a major part of his life to basketball. Politics was just a minor part of his service to the country and shouldn't be used to disparage the guy.

This is why I edited the version! —Preceding unsigned comment added by AyingTorrs (talk • contribs)

First of issue is you need to clearly read WP:CIVIL before posting to anothers user page. Second I am in fact TheRanger and only TheRanger not RexNL or whoever else you claim me to be. I was unable to find the article you are speaking of as you did not include the name or a link to the change that you speak of. However, from the way your comments read I would assume that my changes were made on a recent vandlism patrol of recent changes and if you style is the same in editing as comments you a edit that blanked a large portion of text with out a edit summary, if that was the case your edit looked like vandalism and was reverted for those reasons.

Thanks for you attemp to inprove the base of wikipedia however please use the edit summary when doing so as others will then know that you are working to fix and not creat vandalism when doing so. Also please sign you comments when leaving them on another users talk page. TheRanger 21:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

AFD question

hey, I contributed to 2009 Twenty20 World Championship and got the message "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy." So I'm pretty confused. Why is it being considered for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thugchildz (talk • contribs)

Not sure, someone has listed as they felt that it did not meet the Wikipedia guidelines to be a article. You can reply to it on the page that is linked by the notice. I'll look into and see if I see a reason, however I was not the one who listed it. TheRanger 03:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Userpage Vandalism Revert

Thanks for the revert. :) -WarthogDemon 04:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem glad I was able to help. TheRanger 17:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Brazil Nut

[7] No offense taken; just wanted to point out that this is one of the rare exceptions where use of the n-word was discussed on the talk page for once. Femto 19:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok I see it now after reading the talk page, it look as tho from the history with all the reverts that it was an error as nothing in the recent has comment about it. Thanks for pointing it out.TheRanger 20:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)