User talk:LonelyBeacon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

[edit] Headline text
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

|}

[edit] Thank you

Please no need to apologize for deletion by an extremist. I should not have indudged him, but I have history with this perso...thing. Thank you very much. It is very much appreciated. - Jeeny Talk 09:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Thank You!

Hey, no problem. I would check out other articles in the school category Category:WikiProject Schools articles by quality, and only use FAs, As, and GAs as good examples of quality work. If you have any questions, let me know I am more than willing to assist however I can. Good luck!--Kranar drogin 03:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] White Sox as Culture

I have explained my reasoning on the talk page. Do you concur? Speciate 02:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Dear LonelyBeacon

I dont mean to be disrepsectful or anything but my edits to the article G-string were definately not vandalism, it came straight from a book i have recieved, and i had permission, from the author to post the info i had posted

Hello Ishiho555!

I received your message on my TalkPage, and I do not interpret your message as any sign of disrespect. Thank you for contacting me, and thank you for being kind with your words.

Wikipedia does encourage being bold when reverting vandalism. Unfortunately, this means that from time-to-time, genuine edits are reverted and accused of being vandalism, when there was no intent. This is especially the case when original edits do not include a reference that can be reviewed. From my personal perspective, the inclusion of proper names can sometimes look like an editor is trying to ridicule someone by including their name in an article where it does not belong.

I encourage you to put your edit back, and please include the source from which your information comes. You have my word that I will not revert it. I am also removing the warning that I placed above, since I was mistaken, and feel that I should not only apologize, but attempt to right the wrong that I have created.

Have a peaceful day! LonelyBeacon 23:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Response to George Brett warning to UserTalk: 66.244.93.186

Thank you, that's all I ask for. It gets tiring getting warnings for vandalism when you don't even vandalize something. I did call Nick Saben a son of a bitch on the Miami Dolphins page, but was it.

[edit] september 2007

I'm not really a brewers fan. I chose that username for other reasons. but I was still rooting for them because they are an appealing young team. And they did, however, improve from previous years. See ya.--Brewcrewer 15:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] White Sox Hall of Fame

I think it's silly (and wouldn't do it in a baseball encyclopedia, much less Wikipedia) but if it's standard practice, I've got no beef.70.113.213.12 02:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ishle yi park & townsend harris high school

hiya,

of course i'll add a citation to that list on townsend harris high school. i made the comment i did in the edit log because your labeling of the edit as having been performed by a "vandal" left me to guess as to why you thought it so. i incorrectly assumed that it was because you considered it a vanity edit or similar, not a falsity. i took my cue from the other items you reverted there, for example the members of the baseball team. i would be surprised to find that that information was untrue; rather, the names of the members of the baseball team are simply unencylopedic.

if the reason you objected to ishle yi park's inclusion was the lack of a citation, perhaps a {fact} tag would have been more appropriate. please realize that labeling something as "vandalism" implies that the person who made the edit is a vandal, which is not exactly a glowing term.

i do not mean to suggest that your rv itself was really inappropriate, merely that you may want to more carefully consider what your criteria are for declaring something vandalism. simply stating more clearly why you are making a change ("vanity edit," "no citation" etc) may spare a lot of people's feelings. i've definitely seen work impeded on wikipedia and other open projects due to far lesser name calling. thanks for looking out... Bgruber 03:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


you wrote me:

"If you check the edit logs on that particular article, I never actually reverted your edit"

to the contrary, here's the last time i re-added park, and here's where you deleted it, labeling me a vandal.

yes, not all cases of vandalism are as clear-cut as say, this random example i pulled from my own contrib history. sometimes people add nonfactual information to articles in an act of vandalism. usually, these acts are identifiable only because there is a history of vandalism associated with the edit or the account. if you had taken but half a second to look at my own contribution history, you may have realized that i am not one of those people. you say that "sometimes it is really difficult to tell the difference;" of course i agree. but by your own admission, you seem to be relying on gut instinct to make the distinction: "For some reason, I really believed you were doing good, so I chose not to delete..."

basically, i'm suggesting that in the cases where it is hard to tell what is vandalism and what isn't, the best course of action is probably not to go and label the other editor a vandal. my personal feeling is that the vigilance you show against vandalism on WP is admirable, but it would be great if you would label these more questionable rvs in the edit summary with some real reasoning. a vandal won't care what you write, a well-intentioned if ill-executing editor may learn what they need to do to make a good edit, and someone like me will fail to be insulted. Bgruber 04:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Helping Eachother :)

We both have reverted vandalisms on eachother's user pages today. I feel I'm a similar member of wikipedia as you, so I'm going to take your phrase about sometimes being a bit hasty at editing. Thanks so much for your help! Alexbrewer{talk} 03:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Romeoville High School' page not yet free from vandalism

I can see you've been in, fixing vandalism to the above page, but it's been reverted to a vandalised state. The newspaper there is not as stated, but the Patriot (or something similar - from speaking to a teacher at the school). Similarly the principal is incorrect, the year in which the school was founded, and the reference to a team having STDs. I'm not sufficiently experienced with editing Wikipedia to know to best avoid this in the future, and do not have enough good knowledge about the school to be able to correct the page, so though I'd instead bring it to your attention. Thanks, Tom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.12.65 (talk) 20:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the warning. I went to the school website, and checked another source and was able to revert the damage. Don't be afraid to edit something if you know it is wrong. Just click the edit button, make the change, check the "show preview to make sure your spelling is correct and that it looks right. Before you hit save, leave a brief note as to what you did in the "Edit summary box". Click save, and you're there! I also understand and appreciate not wanting to correct something, if you don't know what to correct it to. Best of luck! LonelyBeacon 21:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Safe Sex

Hey,

In regards to the safe sex article, the content I removed was content that I had added back in March. According to user TeaDrinker, wikipedia shouldn't be used as an 'instruction manual' and they disagreed with my use of references. As such I just removed the whole passage and will rewrite it later. Thanks and please let me know if this isn't ok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superkevbo (talk • contribs) 05:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Pope John Paul II High School

Thanks for your help on Pope John Paul II High School. I called the school and told them what was happening on their Wikipedia page. I asked if there were someone in their technology dept who was doing this and they were going to investigate and let me know. I have two children at the school and would like to see a nice article in Wikipedia about it. I offered to improve the page if they would provide me with some reference materials that I can use to justify additions to the article and do something to stop whoever is reverting my edits. I hope to make it at least a Good Article. Hopefully, these efforts will head off an edit war and result in a useful Wikipedia article. We'll see. Thanks again for your help in the matter. NancyHeise 14:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem ... I am just intereted in helping to make articles better. From what I have seen, it appears that you have made many positive improvements, but at the same time, if there are legitimate arguments to be heard, they should be heard. I jsut want to give others that chance. Ultimately, if they choose to avoid discussion, then an administrator may need to be called in. I am just hoping to handl things here before that has to happen. LonelyBeacon 20:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Well apparently in order to ensure that a Wikipedia page is not stuffed with pork, you have to register as a user to do that-so I will. First, I have never vandalized the Pope John Paul II wikipedia page, in fact, I myself have made pertinent revisions to it. I repeat, pertinent revisions. Delving into hearsy, unsubstantiated gossip, and irrelevant information should not be allowed. "In 2007, due to declining membership in their religious order, the Carmelites transferred administration of the school to the Diocese of Palm Beach. Fr. Guy is currently president of another Carmelite High School in Chicago."
  • Furthermore having an introductory paragraph that is a page long is dreadfully uncouth as well. Verbosity in sentence structure sounds extremely pretentious. "In its admissions process for ninth graders only, the school gives preference to students from Catholic middle schools first, then Catholics in general, then to alumni and finally to non-Catholics. This preference in admissions does not apply to all other grades." Clearly this sounds neither succinct nor objective.
  • Wikipedia is not meant to serve as a database for all the aspects of Pope John Paul II high school. Instead it provides a space for relevant and important information. Filler information about technology and clubs should not be referenced. The PJP official site is linked for a reason. If making a clone of the Pope offical site was what was right, I could have done that myself.
  • Perhaps what angers me most is how NancyHeise priggishly began editing the site without consulting previous editors yet she expects such consultations on her end. I did not begin, what she called the "edit war". I have only protected the integrity of the site from someone who feels that monopolistic control of the site is conferred on them by divine right.

Yours Truly, adam12399999 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam12399999 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I got your message about the WTC7 article

I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure if this is the main way you send messages to each other. Thanks for the message on the article I was trying to edit. Good point about the commentary, I need to think of a better way to word what I am trying to say. Thanks for pointing that out to me about the source I used. I looked it over when I was trying to wind some sources for what I was saying, but when I went back I noticed that the source wasn't very good and just trying to sell something. I need to look over some things about editing, I found out how to cite sources on the fly, so I'm surprised it worked. On the whole WTC issue I just wish so much of the mainstream research didn't leave out so many important facts. I'll have to get some better sources and spend some more time on editing. Thanks for the advice, and if you have any more feel free to let me know. I believe in the information freedom that wikipedia can offer to the people, so I'd like to help out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Preservefreedom (talk • contribs) 04:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] It's a Simpsons reference, you tard

With regret, this editor was blocked after writing this. The comment has been deleted. LonelyBeacon 14:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you handled it quite well. east.718 at 16:18, 11/6/2007

[edit] Bonny Jain

answered on my p., in order to keep things together. But perhaps you'll accept a suggestion from me--You've been doing great vandal fighting and making good small improvements. Maybe you might want to write some articles yourself: since you are obviously very interested in baseball, a surprising number of major league players do not yet have articles either, for example, in the Chicago_White_Sox_all-time_rosterDGG (talk) 04:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sickles High School

Hi there LonelyBeacon - thanks for doing all the work on Sickles High School! I started cleaning it up before I went out, and I come home to find it all done! (I found it on WP:CU). Cricketgirl (talk) 23:27, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not vandalism

I hope you realise that this is a shared IP address. I didn't vandalize any article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.164.220.47 (talk) 07:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Hello anonymous editor!
Since I'm not sure whom I'm talking to, I'll assume good faith on your part. Of course the warning on an anonymous IP is not directed at everyone, just the individual who is doing the vandalism, which someone (or some people) at that IP is/are doing. Unfortunately, if history is any indication, if it continues, the IP address will be blocked. You shouldn't take that personally, and there is an easy solution. Get yourself an account. Then, you can edit from any IP address, even one that is blocked. LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honda ecu codes

  • I'm adding this note linking to the discussion on my talk page so LonelyBeacon and anyone reviewing his/her contribution sees that LB dealt with a criticism by asking a question and explaining the AfD edit that caused the issue. LB checked a policy-related guideline that I pointed out, and listened to my explanation. I mentioned what WP:AADD says about sounding like a group of sockpuppets/meatpuppets with "per nom" (and "me too" was also implied by LB's AfD edit) without saying what reason the specific case fails our policies or why the specific case is so exceptional that consensus should support overriding a general guideline, and we've resolved the matter to everyone's satisfaction. Absolutely no gripe now with LonelyBeacon's effort to learn the ways of editing and participating in Wikipedia. Barno (talk) 07:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of RRIICCEE

Yo, I'm wondering if you would reconsider your vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RRIICCEE following the sources I have uncovered and the claim of notability independent of reliable sources. Skomorokh incite 13:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Most definitely. I think a case was made for notability, and at least two of the sources were non-trivial enough to begin expansion of the article. I changed my vote this morning. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zachary High School

Nice cleanup, thanks. Mindraker (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Mindraker! LonelyBeacon (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I made edit 68.159.27.160 a couple of months ago and added a lot of the stuff about technology and construction, etc. I'm curious about why you took it all down. For the record, I'm an actual student at Zachary High. Oh and good edit of the scandals and controversies, there was no actual proof that that happened...just a rumor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.149.163.108 (talk) 06:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long to get back to this ..... The exact information you are alluding was reverted accidentally. The reason: It was mixed into a short paragraph with information that did not belong (the name of a non-notable staff member), and something about hte ihump tests, which, uncited, looked like suspicious vandalism. I should have done a better job of selectively editing. LonelyBeacon (talk) 13:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pete Rose.

Thanks for letting me know about your revert. I thought Rose being inducted into a large wrestling federation's Hall of Fame was worthy of mentioning in the intro. rather than way down in the article. It shows he is famous outside of baseball. -- Kevin Browning (talk) 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Good points. I will mention it on his talk page and see if there's a consensus. Thanks for your help. -- Kevin Browning (talk) 00:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

I posted an answer to your question at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Irish surnames starting with AJeepday (talk) 14:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Randy Blackamoor

My reversion was done rather hastily in response to a repeat IP vandal, and that particular reversion should have been investigated a little further. I can understand why he would be upset, but you are correct in reporting him for a breach of WP:Civility, and I would also assume WP:PA. Thank you for your assistance. :) --ž¥łǿχ (ŧäłķ | čøŋŧřīъ§) 14:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question for you

Hey, I'm working on a quizbowl wiki. There used to be a page at Charlie Steinhice that was clearly not suitable for Wikipedia, but contains content that is important for the QBWiki. My efforts to recover the text through internet archives has been futile. Is there any way that you could copy the text of the deleted page and email to me (my email is in my profile)? I'd be very grateful. Stamp paid (talk) 06:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article recovery

It is technically possible to recover deleted material from Wikipedia. Administrators can do this very easily, and in some cases, particularly after a WP:DRV process or a mistaken deletion, administrators restore pages that have been deleted. Ifa non-admin realizes that a deleted article will not get back into Wikipedia but wants material that he did not save on his own computer, he can ask an administrator to send it to him. Administrators are often very cautious with this, however. I hope this helps. Academic Challenger (talk) 07:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I did find it. We should continue this discussion over e-mail. You can e-mail me by going to my user page and going into the E-Mail This User option. Academic Challenger (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Bonny Jain

An article that you have been involved in editing, Bonny Jain, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bonny Jain (second nomination). Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 20:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD discussion of Crispus Attucks Communication and Writing Magnet School

Hello, I know you !voted early, and there have been several changes to the article since you first !voted. Your follow-up comment seems like a retraction of your delete !vote. If this is so, would you be willing to go back and strikethrough your original !vote and replace it with your current !vote? (keep, strong keep, neutral, etc,)? This might make it easier for the closing admin to determine concensus. It would also possibly allow an early close under snowy conditions. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 04:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. It got speedy-closed as keep. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 04:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD discussion of Albert Belle

I quoted two sources for my Albert Belle info: [1] [[2]] I think Albert Belle has been treated very unfairly by the media and the baseball writers. Due to their personal biases, he lost the 1995 MVP to Mo Vaughn, and he received virtually no support in the Hall of Fame voting. Unfortunately there is no accountability, and that affects the game in many areas. I'm not sure if Belle is a Hall of Famer, but he seems to be as deserving as Jim Rice and Kirby Puckett. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpeter (talk • contribs) 02:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I grew up in Cleveland, so I got to see Albert play until he left for Chicago. Albert was one of the fierce hitters I have ever scene. He was definitely the guy I wanted at at with the game on the line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdpeter (talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notiability criteria

Yeah, I'm aware of the guideline. I disagree with it, so I ignore it. I realize that's a bit snobby, but there it is. Eventually, since I anticipate getting more queries like yours, I'll probably write my own thoughts about this in an essay to point people to a more clear explanation of my thoughts on the matter. --Ryan Delaney talk 05:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I wikid around a bit and found this. Not a complete essay, but some food for thought and I basically agree with it. Check it out: Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments#Arguments_against_deleting_articles_for_non-notability --Ryan Delaney talk 05:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] High School

I looked at the article's history, and found that it had been edited multiple times by the author, so took it that it was its final state :S. I'm not too sure, what do you think? Sydney Know It Alltalk 10:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

It can be a tough call sometimes. The rule of thumb I have come to live by: move for an AfD immediately if I think it is a hoax. Otherwise, I tend to give it a few days to see what develops. If nothing comes of it, and notability is not being asserted, check for sources (and post a note at the article creator's Takl Page). Only after that would I go for AfD. I think if nothing else: if you get labeled as someone who jumps the gun on these things, the community may be a lot less willing to support the AfD debate, even if the article really should be canned.
I don't want you to think I am lecturing .... I am not! These are just tidbits of experience. I once started editing an article that had a bunch of issues, only to learn that I was editing in the middle of the article's creation, and the editor hadn't even had a chance to clean up the mess they had made. I at least should have checked the edit log on so short an article to see that. Peace! LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: afd james barker

Thanks for the comment. (and the sports props). It's just seemed like an odd subject for such a fierce debate. Foolish reality stars get threads of 4-5 comments and an olympian gets a huge heated thread. I can see the arguement on both sides, i've !voted one way but i understand the other. It's just the vehemance that took me a bit. (Not you in particular). Just seems like some people are fighting for more then a single article then the olympian James Barker.--Cube lurker (talk) 06:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] I would like my Deleted Page Content

The page 'Robert Fletcher' was deleted on January 8th. I would like the content back so to place on a purchased website space. The content of 'Robert Fletcher' had been upkept for over a year and the information is unlisted on any other resource. Please can you cut and paste the page onto my user profile if you have access to it? Many Thanks if you can. Bobbyfletch85 (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I would do this, were it in my power, but I am not an administrator. I would recommend, for openers, contacting the admin who closed out the article, User:Hut 8.5. I have heard that in some cases the information is able to be obtained, but I am not sure under what circumstances this is doable. LonelyBeacon (talk) 23:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale

There is no reason why the Cincinnati Reds logo, which is a fair use image, and not a free use image, should be used on a page not about it, as per Wikipedia Fair use policies. As such, there is no good reason for keeping it in the Frank Robinson article. If it is placed there again, I will remove it again. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 04:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: Just wanted to place the explanation. Just remember that fair use images usually only get used in one article,

and rarely get used in more than one...as indicated in that image's rationale. (It was also removed from a third article too.) --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 14:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Help Again

I would love to request your assistance again with the article on the Dominican Day Parade. A user by the name of "UnclePaco" and I are arguing about the inclusion of information that I classified as lacking significance to the article. He has made snide remarks that can be labeled as an attack. You were very helpful with the opinion you provided on the article in the past and I thought I would request your help again. Please see the articles TALK page for more information. Many thanks!--XLR8TION (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look at this [3] and this [4] UnclePaco (talk) 03:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

          • LonelyBeacon, thank you. I simply was telling the truth last week when I was blocked. I am a great contributor who will like to see this site reach its' mission as a reliable encyclopedia, but unfortunately trouble comes walking my way and I have to spend time trying to protect an article's integrity by undoing unconstructive edits. UnclePaco (and his many sockpuppet aliases) simply refuses to listen to reason, logic and guidelines. His rogue editing only causes more problems than it helps. I will update you of any troubles that might arise from the Dominican Day Parade article. Many thanks to you and other admins who believed in me. I truly appreciate it! --XLR8TION (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey thanks

I appreciate what you've written on my user talk page. Gnixon has a long history of utilizing wiki-lawyering to attack pro-science editors. Most of the more experienced editors in the science arena basically ignore him. I should, but he attacks me personally so aggressively that I'm not sure how to handle it. I wish someone would block him, because he's trying to drive me off the project sadly. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of CUban Americans

I would like to requets your assistance with the article List of Cuban Americans. A user has reverted my edits repeatedly using sock puppets (InMySpecialPlace24 is his main screen name). I have discussed my changes with reason and logic on the Talk page and he refuses to co-operate. I am heading to another edit war if this keeps on (which is something I prefer to avoid). Please see Talk page and look at edits history to get a better view of what is going on here.--XLR8TION (talk) 14:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Response to "vandalism" on IHSA page

It wasn't vandalism what I did. The "debate" on the website page is of policy debate so I looked at all the policy debate titles and saw that Glenbrook North had more policy debate titles than those other schools and edited appropriately. If this is the wrong forum for me to respond I am sorry I am not well versed on wiki etiquette. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.145.19.135 (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Actually, responding here or on the Article Talk Page is fine. My source on the Debate finalists is the IHSA home page. Do you have a source that shows 12? It is possible the IHSA source is somehow incorrect. If you know where I can look, let;s take a look at it, and see if we can both figure out what is going on. LonelyBeacon (talk) 23:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Catholic Church

I removed the Biblical verse as the source for that image caption because it was original research. An appropriate source would be one that says something along the lines of "The symbol of the Vatican is based on XXX from the Bible". The Bible verse does not say that this is what that particular symbol represents, so it is not a valid citation for that claim. Karanacs (talk) 18:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey, thanks for the support

Oh snap, the DEA is an admin

[edit] Evanston Township High School

Response at my talk Jeepday (talk) 15:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re:Sickles High School

Thanks for adding to the edits at this article. I don't have a problem with you removing the names of the specific coaches and players. you seem to be under the impression, however, that I was the one who put them there. Not being personally familiar with the school I couldn't vouch for the accuracy of any of the information presented. My edits to the article were largely in punctuation, format, grammar and, especially, clarity. (It would seem the students who had been writing/editing the article still have some to learn when it comes to basic English and composition skills.) I didn't add or remove any info. Sean Martin (talk) 23:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Appreciate the advice

LonelyBeacon, I appreciate the advice, and thanks for the concern. I just get frustrated when the project I've worked on since there were about 40 editors is now being invaded by guys like the multiple anonymous IP addresses, and there's nothing really I can do about it. I'll try to tone it down, but I'm getting to the point that I don't care if I get banned anymore. I spend a lot of time and money trying to get good baseball pictures for Wikipedia - I just don't understand why I have to defend them so much from people who simply don't care. Thanks again, Googie man (talk) 23:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update LonelyBeacon - sounds like another typical vandal, who from my guess, is an overzealous Blue Jays fans. Googie man (talk) 12:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I thuaght that was a harmless page blanking. I'm sorry. That was a good faith edit. Cheers.--RyRy5 Got something to say? 07:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Me too. Well, I hope you like it here at wikipedia. If you do have any questions, just ask on my talk page.--RyRy5 Got something to say? 07:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you about 24.0.21.173

(Responding to your note on my talk page.) Many thanks for the quick action on this one. Macspaunday (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the tip about AIV. Have made a few warnings on the user's talk page, and will add more if there's any need for them. (Edit: he's now been blocked.) Best wishes from Macspaunday (talk) 01:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prede and Lord Sesshomaru vandalizing wikipedia pages rules and copyrighted pages-Urgent

These users are vandals and insist to make copyright violations here [URL=http://imageshack.us][IMG]http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3716/gruposraciaisd7oy1.gif[/IMG][/URL] and here http://imageshack.us][IMG]http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6541/shishinnokendg6.jpg. plus they vandalize this article information with unsourced personal opinions like this one reference number 30 ^ "Biographies Tien" (2001). Retrieved on 2008-03-14.-fanboy page here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenshinhan they vandalized the page more than 3 times 1-18:36, 15 March 2008 Sesshomaru (Talk | contribs)2-23:05, 16 March 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs)3-# ur) (last) 20:17, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs) (11,143 bytes) (→Appearance: adding small enlightened part and ref) (undo)

  1. (cur) (last) 20:13, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs) (10,875 bytes) (→Summary) (undo)
  2. (cur) (last) 20:02, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs) (10,653 bytes) (adding new ref) (undo)
  3. (cur) (last) 19:49, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs) (10,430 bytes) (→Reception) (undo)
  4. (cur) (last) 19:48, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs) (10,423 bytes) (→Reception: adding source) (undo)
  5. (cur) (last) 19:45, 4 April 2008 Prede (Talk | contribs)in this page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tenshinhan&action=history-please help me i'm new but these guys are vandals thanks
It was difficult to follow this, but as best I can tell, there is no violation here. I would caution you about calling other editors "hypocrites", as there are some administrators who would consider that a violation of WP:CIVIL. I wish you the bst of luck in your edits. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maine South High School edits

If you had taken 30 seconds to look at the Illinois State report card for 2007 which was cited in the academics section you would have seen that I had edited the page to replace the incorrect information with the latest data from Illinois regarding composite ACT scores at Maine South High School. As you have now twice reverted my edits so that the article contains incorrect information I can only assume you want the article to continue to contain said incorrect information although I believe that is considered vandalism. I'll refrain from trying to contribute anything constructive to the community from here on out since so far my attempts to improve Wikipedia have been met with threats of banning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.89.192.224 (talk) 03:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC) I never changed the graduation rate to 73%. My original edit was to change the stated composite ACT score of 14 to 20.3 which is the Illinois state average that I misread as the Maine South High School average. JaGa then entered further incorrect data at which point I realized my initial mistake and corrected the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.89.192.224 (talk) 04:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expelled

With all due respect, how is that pushing a POV? I will start a new thread on the topic in hopes that we can reach a consensus. RC-0722 247.5/1 20:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

True, there is already a topic aout it. But in my experience, it is sometimes better to start a new thread rather than continue with one near the top, where almost no one will see your comment. RC-0722 247.5/1 04:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You don't have to have the template text on your userpage missing the right brace

Hi, again! I just thought I'd stop by and say hi. When I saw your userpage, I noticed you had several templates pretyped but missing right braces. Well, I thought you might be interested in not having to manually add the right brace. By putting those template codes between <nowiki> and </nowiki> tags, you can prevent the text from rendering as wiki syntax, like this: {{subst:uw-v1|Article name}}

Glad to talk to you again, and I hope this helps. RJaguar3 | u | t 22:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: refusing to block User:Markyodoul

Thank you for the message you left on my talk page [5]. Give me a few minutes to review the situation and I will get back to you. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the contribution history of Markyodoul (talk · contribs), here is what I have found: the editor's last edit was at 14:45 for which MBK004 issued a {{uw-vandalism3}} warning at 14:47. Nearly six hours later you issued a {{uw-vandalism4}} warning at 20:35 then reported the editor to AIV at 20:38.
This is actually rather troubling as AIV criteria #2 states "the vandal must be active now, and have vandalized after sufficient recent warnings to stop." Yet not only had this editor not vandalized after receiving their final warning (despite your AIV report claiming otherwise), but Markyodoul had never even seen the level four warning because he stopped vandalizing after his level-three warning. Was this all just a mix-up on your part with the timestamps? I hope so, as otherwise it looks like you issued an escalated warning in bad faith, then followed it up with a wildly inaccurate AIV report.
Please note that I totally agree with you about how frustrating it is to deal with vandalism on Wikipedia, and I find it especially irritating when people revert vandalism but fail to issue a warning. However blocks are not punitive and our community standards state that editors may only be blocked after being sufficiently warned, which Markyodoul clearly has not been. That said, if this user should choose to ignore a properly issued final warning, I would not hesitate to block him in order to protect the project. --Kralizec! (talk) 02:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
As I noted above, I hope this issue was just a mix-up or misreading of the timestamps involved. I am sorry if you feel that my message was unnecessarily harsh, but blocking is a very serious business and improperly issued warnings and/or AIV reports only serve to damage Wikipedia's reputation by making the rules look arbitrary and randomly enforced. When I have had to write these sorts of messages in the past, I am always delighted if the editor in question says "sorry, looks like I screwed up" and moves on after learning from their mistake. However sometimes they feel unfairly rebuked and quit vandal fighting altogether. I am sorry if you have chosen the later and hope you will reconsider. Regardless I bear you no ill will and wish to thank you for your efforts to date in helping clean up vandalism. --Kralizec! (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note about you not admin-shopping; I appreciate your forthrightness. After a quick discussion regarding this out-of-process block, the blocking admin Kinu (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) agreed to an unblock of Markyodoul. Currently Kinu and I have this editor on our watchlists, so if he choses to ignore my unambiguous warning, I am sure he will be blocked in short order. --Kralizec! (talk) 04:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Vandals can be blocked in as little as four edits, but that only works if they are properly warned every time. It frustrates me intensely when editors revert vandalism but fail to issue warnings. How will the vandal ever learn that their behavior will not be tolerated if we do not tell them? Cases like this -where the editor only got three warnings for ten edits- only serve to encourage people and make them think they might just get away with it. In an ideal world where a vandal gets immediate feedback after each vandalizing edit, I think most vandals would just give up and decide it was not worth their time.
While I am not sure if you have been following any of the brouhaha at WP:AN and WP:AN/I, the Wikipedia community in general and its admins in specific have been taking a lot of flak lately because people (and more than just the disgruntled folks at Wikipedia Review) do not feel that the rules are being consistently and fairly applied to everyone. I am a big believer in the importance of process and I always endeavor to give everyone a fair chance. Does this mean that I never block anyone unless they have received four warnings? Absolutely not, as egregious cases clearly need immediate action in order to protect the project. As an example, despite only having received one warning, yesterday I levied a block against Ambi saba (talk · contribs) when this editor added 30-odd spam links to various articles.
When it comes to the Markyodoul (talk · contribs) issue, the fact of the matter is that this editor stopped vandalizing after receiving a third level warning. As blocks are not punitive, I cannot in good conscience block an editor who seems to have learned their lesson after warning #3. In my opinion we should have hit this stage after Markyodoul`s third edit on May 15th, but that is not this editor's fault, it is the fault of our fellow vandal fighters who reverted his edits and failed to issue any warnings. --Kralizec! (talk) 14:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About Maine South

Hi, not sure if I remember vandalizing the Maine South High School page. Can you link me to the edit I made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.9.200 (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I would be happy to, though I am not certain what you are referring to. Did you use a different IP address? Where did you see the warning? The IP address you just posted from never edited the article, and there were no warnings posted there. Let me know so that I can answer your question as much as I can. LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)