User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro/Archives/5

MSM

Thanks for reverting the vandalism

Regards ~R

Another rvv thanks & a question

I'd like to second that reverting vandalism thanks to you in regards to John Cafiero. I assume you found it via Recent changes. Hmm..your userboxes say you use VandalFighter. I've been using my browser's refresh and my fingers, but I'll bookmark VF for later possible download. Is there a pros & cons list of VandalFighter vs. VandalSniper and other such programs? TransUtopian 03:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the RVVs

I've started making reversions and I've noticed your name coming up a lot. Specifically, on that one page that says someone else got there first! Thanks to the efforts users like you, Wikipedia isn't complete nonsense. --EricTJ 02:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes heaven

It's none of my business, but I'm curious why you removed your userboxes page. Too misleading with the generalities and labels contained within? I liked that you try to do the right thing, but will admit when you've made a mistake (or something—I only glanced at it); and the Starfleet Academy one. You are/were a Star Trek fan, or previously liked whimsical userboxes. (And thank you for the vandalscript pointers.) TransUtopian 05:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Actually I thought the color background bleeding out from some broken templates was pretty and artistic, but that's okay. :) TransUtopian 22:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

RE: William Anderson

I'm removing the link entirely- he doesn't seem to meet WP:BIO criteria, but feel free to reinstate/tidy up as needed.

Regards,

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 23:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rv

Thanks for the revert on Anti-Mormon! CaliforniaKid 23:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

well...

I wasn't experimenting. I saw it was vandalized, and rather than fixing it because I didn't feel like tracking down the links, I just brought attention to the vandalism by editing the page to say it was vandalized.

"Thank you for experimenting with the page Broth on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. - Y.Ichiro (会話|+|投稿記録| メール) 03:42, 21 September 2006 (UTC)"

William Anderson (again)

Me again,

The editor still protests about his reference's removal: could you take a look at it and ascertain whether or no it's notable/worthy of inclusion please? A second/third opinion would be grately appreciated!

Regards,

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 20:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Arnold Schwarzenegger

I didn't notice this earlier: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arnold_Schwarzenegger&diff=85909965&oldid=85909463 Another vandal slipped in a change just as you were reverting the first one, so your revert went to the wrong version. (Another anon user has since removed the vandalism). -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 21:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

BlankFights

Thanks for your help with the repeated vandalism of my talk and user pages. I've been very heavy into vandal fighting the past few days, reverting and warning quite a few juvenile edits. I suppose it stands to reason that my pages would become a target as well.... -Quintote 04:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk page

Thank you for the reversion. The IP is likely User:Durin's Bane, who is annoyed with me for a AfD I initiated and his banning subsequent to his reaction to it. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page too! Primogen 19:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I just reverted some vandalism on your home page but by the looks of things you have a section specifically for it! amitch 03:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about it... I dont really know what to put on my userpage so i got lazy anyways. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 03:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Your recent closes

Hello. I was led here when I felt that your closing of an article I nominated for deletion was badly off the mark, and woefully perfuctory to boot. I glanced back at your nineteen most recent closes...

1. 04:50, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KranX Productions (Closing debate; result was delete)
   • While it was stated below, you should have made explicit that you were only performing the "paperwork."
2. 04:49, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fairmont Preparatory Academy (Closing debate; result was keep)
   • A non-admin should not be performing closes that are contested or controversial.
3. 04:40, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Sarfati (Closing debate; result was no consensus)
   • If you're having to close as "no consensus" then don't.
4. 04:31, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indus Valley Institute of Art and Architecture (Closing debate; result was keep)
   • Same story... this should have been left for someone else.
5. 04:24, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NaSTA (Closing debate; result was no consensus)
   • The presence of {{Not a ballot}} alone should have dissuaded you from closing this.
6. 04:22, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr.S. Hussain Zaheer Memorial High School (Closing debate; result was keep)
   • With the possibility of repeting myself: Don't close school debates.
7. 04:18, 21 November Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Space - Glory Through Conquest (Second nomination) (Closing debate; result was keep)
   • There was substantial debate, and the "keep" arguments failed to adress (my own!) arguments that were well-founded in policy and backed up by evidence.

I'm going to saved this here, and then removed the ones I reckoned were fine... This accomplishes two things: It assures you I've actually checked all of them, and it also lets you know you're mostly doing fine despite not following the letter of the "non-admin close" thing.

I'd ask that you review these closes, and that in particular you re-open and relist the "Space -Glory Through Conquest" and "NaSTA" on the most recent day's AfD page. If you want, listing these two on Wikipedia:Deletion review would be a second option.

152.91.9.144 07:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Now that you're copping a hiding in the sections below...

I feel I'd be remiss if I didn't reenforce what was tacit in the above: Most of the closes I looked at were fine, and of the above only the two incarnadine ones were worthy of sending to review. The others might have gone down differently if someone else had closed them, but probably not. I encourage you to continue to do the things that you think need to be done, and if you ever are uncertain about a close or want a second opinon leave a note on this IP address' talk page. - 152.91.9.144 23:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr.S. Hussain Zaheer Memorial High School

Hi there,

I'd like to request you have another look at this debate, I think the consensus achieved was actually in the negative. If you consider that the aim of an article for deletion debate is to reach a consensus, not vote on an outcome, the consensus was overwhelmingly for the article's deletion.

But first, this school still spectacularly fails WP:SCHOOLS as follows

The school has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the school itself. No, or none stated which is the same thing. This school has not been the subject of any non-trivial publications in the world at large, it is only notable within one country.

The school has been or was in existence for over 50 years, due to the great likelihood of—but greater difficulty of uncovering—non-trivial historical coverage of that school. This school has existed for 27 years, a little over half of that requirement. Even if we halve the requirement as per WP:SCHOOLS it just makes it.

The school participates in the highest grade of the state, province or regional competitions in at least three extracurricular activities and has won at least two regional championships or one national championship in any of these activities. These can include, for example, sports teams, band competitions, cheerleading competitions, engineering contests, and so forth. Again, no. The article states two fields of endeavour in which it has been successfull. This is again a case of if the requirements set out in WP:SCHOOLS were halved it would still just make it.

The school has a substantial and unique program, structure, or technique that differentiates it from similar schools. My understanding of this (perhaps you disagree) is that the school would have to have something very specific about it that sets it apart. A school which provides for IT industry certifications as part of it's highschool education curriculum, a school which teaches braille or sign lanugage as part of it's curriculum in servicing the blind or deaf, something which sets it apart from highschools. This is another spectacular failure of WP:SCHOOLS.

Significant awards or commendations have been bestowed upon the school or its staff. None. The school has not been awarded any state awards, or had any commendations from notable people as would be outlined in WP:Notability.

The school has notable alumni or staff (e.g. would qualify for an article under WP:BIO or WP:MUSIC) No, or not stated, again the same thing. You could almost consider that it's namesake is notable, but I'd doubt it and I think the other considered arguments for deletion would agree.

The school building or campus has notable architectural features that set it apart from others. No. I assume that this school is not on board a spacecraft, under the sea, at the 150th floor of a building or in a building which has existed for time immemorial as an example of a particular period of architecture.

As you can see this is a failure of WP:SCHOOLS that can not possibly get any worse. Further the debate that was meant to achieve a consensus, only tallied votes. These "keep votes" had such nonsensical explanations as "Weak Keep- Seems to be a notable educational institution. Nileena joseph (Talk|Contribs) 16:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)", or "KEEP. NOT ALL SCHOOLS ARE INDEPENDANTLY NOTABLE, BUT THERE IS AMPLE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THIS SCHOOL IS. RFerreira 05:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)" a cursory counting of heads and people weighing in. There were paragraphs upon paragraphs of weighted, supported, considered reasons for it's deletion.

•Elomis• 08:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Just a note Yamamoto, you have this now listed twice on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 November 16 (at 33 and 155), I'm not sure if that's what you intended to do. 86.20.30.144 22:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Fairmont Preparatory Academy

I came here to question your premature "keep" closing of Fairmont Preparatory Academy, but now that I get here I see you have a history of making improper closes, and strangely, often on school-related AfDs. I would urge you to heed the suggestions given by the editor above regarding these matters. I see no evidence that you did anything on Fairmont Preparatory Academy but count the votes, which is not how it's done. wikipediatrix 14:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Note that I have actually deleted this article. Do NOT close AFDs prematurely unless the verdict is not in question. Proto::type 12:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

why did you delete my comment?

i was asking for follow-up information. you deleted text in a talk page. why? 02:19, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

A request for assistance

Would you support the concept of moving the Earhart "myths" to a separate page or article? The reason for my suggesting this is that the main article should be an accurate and scholarly work while the speculation and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are interesting, they belong in a unique section. Most researchers, as you know, discount the many theories and speculation that has arisen in the years following her last flight. Go onto the Earhart discussion page and register your vote/comments...and a Happy New Year to you as well. Bzuk 05:02 3 January 2007 (UTC).

HIIIII

takeshi is sexy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.147.97.81 (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

User:74.107.165.220 has vandalized several (6) pages, and has been repeatedly warned. Perhaps he should be blocked?--Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 02:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC) -thanks

star wars vandalism

i didnt vandalize, y. ichiro. i was revising for things i saw in a comic book. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.8.200.18 (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

Admin?

Have you any interest in a nomination for adminship? (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's hard to predict the ebb and flow of that crowd, and there are some who will oppose you for being primarily a vandal-fighter. I have trouble wading through your many, many reverts, but if you have some articles you can point to as having created or worked some on, that will definitely help your cause. It will also help that you have what appears to be substantial experience at AFD. I was promoted (although in a different time and thus a different climate) despite not making many substantive contributions myself. I think it's generally hard for rational people to argue that someone as prolific as you could not help Wikipedia more efficiently with the tools to block, rollback, and delete pages. I won't nominate unless/until you want to run, though. Just let me know. (ESkog)^(Talk) 02:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

sorry

sorry —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.169.62 (talk • contribs).

---

Do you mind if I would like to nominate you for the RfA? ↔ ^tz (talk · contribs) 05:35:04, Saturday, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Chepstow Castle

I'm sorry about that. I was trying to revert the vandalized verion, when it was already reverted and I was reverting the good version. Please accept my apologies.--U.S.A. cubed 23:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you an administrator? It looked like it because you were using the Rollback tool, or it looked like it.--U.S.A. cubed 23:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I never remembered to respond to your message about the rollback. It will take some time for me to install and understand, but I'm not currently planning on doing it. I thank you for you offer to help!--U. S. A. 23:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Republic Protests

Please watch this article, it is under heavy vandal attack. -- Cat ^chi? 00:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like the article is getting vandalism anymore, but I added to article to my VF and the IRC watchlist. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 01:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a 3rd planned protest (on 5 May - Today) so it will stay as a current event longer. -- Cat ^chi? 03:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned Comment

Change back silver-tipped myotis .. i have a petition of friends saying to allow that one to work because it broguth humor the the saddened, depressed and thought it was a great idea. why did u delete it ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.55.202.142 (talk • contribs).

Thanks ...

... for reverting that nasty comment. Blocked now :) - Alison ☺ 05:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Anywherebuthere23

Hey, I think you need to relax a bit. This was a tad over the top. All the user did was add "He is a democrat" to the bottom of the page. Sure, it's wrong, but there's no way you can tell from that alone that there was any "blatant vandal" intent. We can keep a watch on him and see what happens, but please, do relax a notch. :-) --Deskana (AFK 47) 19:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

In the vast majority of cases, you'd be correct. However in this case, I'd say {{test}} is the best course of action, as the account had some harmless (though totally useless) edits beforehand, and didn't vandalise GWB by most definitions of the word. Cheers. --Deskana (AFK 47) 19:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!

For clearing up that nonsense on my talk page. Good to know the Wikipedia community is looking out for each other. :) Sicanjal 19:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

Have you considered one day applying yourself for an RfA, to become an administrator? I have seen a ton of work in a short time reverting vandalism, warning users, and reporting vandals af WP:AIV. If you are looking for my opionion, I think if you have WP:AGF and WP:BITE, avoiding to bite the newcomers, I would surely support you.(You have demonstrated that well with me) I probroly wouldn't be able to write up a nomination for you, however. Those directions are not easy to follow, not for me.--U.S.A. cubed 02:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I would write up a nomination, but those directions are hard to understand. Sorry.--U.S.A. cubed 14:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I do have some advice for you. I think it would be a good idea to start with lower level warnings, usually Uw-vandalism1 or Uw-test1, as oppose to subst:blatantvandal, because I think that warning should be reserved for extremly blatant vandalism.--U.S.A. cubed 00:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

For great justice. I mean, vandal fighting.

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I, Heimstern, award you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your consistent anti-vandal efforts and for guaranteeing I have people on AIV to block. Heimstern Läufer 04:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you may have gotten this one before, but I always say you can never have too many. Heimstern Läufer 04:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate it. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 04:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please explain

Please explain your reverts... can I apply to use VANDALPROOF!!!! 72.137.68.110 04:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Get an account, if you are planning to fight any type of vandalism. Wether your using javascript or VP. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 04:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Another thanks

For a run of high quality WP:AIV reports --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 04:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

fucking vandals

Thank you very much for reverting my user page while I was away. I owe you one. VanTucky 04:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I just had to post under this section header. Thanks for all your good work. ··coelacan 04:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Recent Edits

Message

I apologize for accidentally deleting a section from the article. I meant to use sandbox, but clicked the wrong button. I do know how to edit, but I appreciate you catching my mistake. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.139.45.39 (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

No problem, it's nothing big. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 05:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

(Untitled)

I am the author of this page as you can see on the history... i am SHEPHERDS and i want this page to be deleted immediately. There is no such thing as Lord's Shepherds Academy. As you can see it has no reference or even a source. It is also an advertisement even so it is not true. I the creator of this page has just invented such thing like the hot fm and Lord's Shepherds Academy. Please prepare this page and also the one 91.1 Hot FM for speedy deletion. Thanks. Again I say I am the author of this page as I started it and edit all of its content and this page is just an imagination. thanks

--Shepherds 05:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Shepherds Academy

Thanks

thanks for your help ^^ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shepherds (talk • contribs) 05:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

No problem, remember, all the deletion templates and such are listed on WP:TEMP. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 05:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

More thanks

for your catch on the vandalism on Agnes Newton Keith. Jasper33 12:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WDefcon or Vandalism Information

Just for information, level 4 is regarded as normal not 5. Arigato Tswsl1989 16:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

BlueTie Entry

To be clear, the deletion of the posted information was actually a vandalism of the BlueTie site and was detrimental to the companies article. The information was completely false and their is plenty of evidence to support that the aligations that were stated on the latest post were inaccurate. Similar companies wiki's such as Zimbra & Google had the same similar information on their pages and are not allowed to be edited so I would like to know how removing vandalism from the BlueTie page differs from completely protecting a page. It's hypocritical. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.207.132.127 (talk) 01:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 19	7 May 2007	About the Signpost

Four administrator accounts desysopped after hijacking, vandalism	Digg revolt over DVD key spills over to Wikipedia
Debate over non-free images heats up	Update on Wikimania 2007
Norwegian Wikipedian awarded scholarship	WikiWorld comic: "Friday the 13th"
News and notes: Election volunteers, admin contest, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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. Ralbot 06:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned Message

i have a problem,can you help? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamie Bourne (talk • contribs).

KMCI

I corrected the dead link on the KMCI page. The NBC Action News link you reverted to has been dead. It looks that someone changed it to the correct link, www.38thespot.com, yet you changed it back calling it vandalism. It is now correct. KansasCity 07:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I have reverted the vandalism on your user page, and if you have the ability I suggest you blocked the user who did it, as he's been warned over 5 times already :). Pwnz0r1377 02:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 02:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop it! :P

You keep beating me to reverting pages! Now I feel unloved! Whaaa! The Last Melon 22:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		for beating me to the rollback button 4 times today. You are really fast. :) Zucchini Marie → Complain here Please sign! 22:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

... for the talk page revert. Silly death-threats and repeated blocks are a sure way of getting a 1-week block :) Thanks again - Alison ☺ 00:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

My Changes

You recently reverted my changes made under the fax page. Maybe if you took a look at what I did, you'd realize it wasn't a random removal. On that page, there's an overview and capabilites section twice. I simply deleted the second section, as it's just the same 2 sections right after each other. I'm going to do it again, so please don't remove this helpful edit again 206.75.180.35 00:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Like I said, just put an edit summary when you remove a large amount of content, like, rm redundent sections or something simliar in that nature. I would be less likely to make this mistake and other recent change patrollers would also make less mistakes as well. Anyhow, I have reverted back to your edit. Thanks. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 01:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well, seems like you're the only one dumb enough to not read what I did. So maybe you should do that before accusing people of making "random edits". 206.75.180.35 01:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

No one accused you of "random edits". It was a simply an edit with huge content removal. I do not have time to review edits in great detail at the time, which is why this mistake was in the first place. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 01:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you shouldn't be removing edits if you can't take the time to review what was actually done. Seems kinda pointless to me. 206.75.180.35 01:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, 99.99% of the time, huge content removal without an edit summary explaination are actually content removals for no good reason(of course that is not the case here). Anyways, next time I'll becareful as well, rather than aruging over this, let's end this discussion here, it's not productive anyways. --Y.Ichiro (会話) 01:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow

You are really really fast at rving pages and editing the vandal's talk page. I just can't seem to beat you! Good work! Nick Garvey 03:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. If you want to know, this page is very helpful. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 03:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 20	14 May 2007	About the Signpost

Administrator status restored to five accounts after emergency desysopping	User committed identities provide protection against account hijacking
Academic journals multiply their analyses of Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Ubbi dubbi"
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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. Ralbot 03:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

van der Waals equation

What were you doing with the van der Waals equation? First you reverted to P.wormer and then to a Japanese anonymous, why? (See also my msg on the talk page of talk:van der Waals equation).--P.wormer 07:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• The edit may have been in good faith, but probably done by an inexperienced student who overlooked some problems. I already guessed that you changed your mind. Thank you for responding.--P.wormer 14:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Mewtwo Page Problems

You sent me a message about the Mewtwo page, which I edited recently. I apologize for any confusion I may have caused, the "Relationship with Mew" tab had talks about things such as Mewtwo's gender and such, and really should have been put up at the top.

Mewtwo, despite having not been seen in the flesh in any significant capacity since, is viewed by many fans as being male, and Mew as female, due to their colorations, particularly in American posters for the first Pokemon film, leading some fans to speculate on a possible romance between the two creatures, which has been seen repatedly in fanfiction in which the two pokemon are seen in the same story. However, both Mew and MewTwo are referred to as 'it' in the various appearances by either pokemon, though this is also true of most Pokemon in general, and it has been proven that despite being referred to as 'it', that the various pokemon which appear in the anime, manga, and games, all have the normal male/female genders. If Mew is indeed genderless, MewTwo would therefore be equally adrogynous, and thus incapable of any kind of romantic relationship with it's genetic predecessor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.99.174.17 (talk • contribs).

Just want to remind you, there was no problem with your edits. It is valid since it is made in a good faith. However, if you are going to make a huge content deletion, all I'm asking you is to provide a reason in your edit summary. That's all, please be careful next time. Thanks. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 22:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Yamamoto Ichiro, I award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar in apprechiation of your excellent vandal-fighting. Keep it up! Clyde (a.k.a Mystytopia) 01:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

(untitled)

sorry!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.158.3.169 (talk • contribs).

Hi

Great vandal fighting Yamamoto! You often revert vandalism faster than I can - may I ask what tools you use? --Ali 02:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I use combination of tools actually, but I often rely on the blacklisting feature of WP:VF, whenever an admin or someone on the whitelist (usually a vandal reverter) reverts a vandal, the vandal registers on the blacklist automatically. Whenever someone on the blacklist makes an edit, you'll see it in brightyellow and the list is realtime. It also highlights suspecious edits in bold. I would highly recommended but sometimes it can get buggy. I also use Lupin's tool as a supplyment to find more sneakyer vandalism. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 03:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! I have to try that sometime. I use TWINKLE for the time being... it works out pretty well for me, it's just not as fast sometimes. Good luck to you! --Ali 03:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mewtwo Page (again)

Allright, thanks for the words of encouragement, I'll keep them in mind. I've done some of the work on the Lumines Plus page, but I'm still not too fluent with Wikipedia. That one link you left on my talk page really helped. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.99.174.17 (talk • contribs).

No problem, welcome to Wikipedia. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 03:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for rving vandalism to my userpage! Happy editing!--PrestonH^{(Review Me!) • (Sign Here!)} 03:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

What is going on?

I am locked as a vandal?? No way. Over 500 edits and I am trying to build a consistent set for Cincinnati riots 2001. What is going on?? Answer at my user page would be GREATLY appreciated. --Dumarest 21:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

These autoblocks are affecting everyone... not just you. It even affected me. Btw, I'm not an admin so I can't unblock you. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 21:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm consulting the user on their talk page. --Deskana (AFK 47) 21:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks for contacting me, I am a little confused though

Hi, I know this sounds silly, but can you please let me know what you mean by my test? I am the primary user of this computer, I just don't recall editing pages on wikipedia recently, would appreciate it if you could advise. Sorry for any inconvenience I might have caused.

many thanks, again :)

68.148.156.193 22:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I did not send you any message, your talk page is empty. --Yamamoto Ichiro (山本一郎)(会話) 22:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)