User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 8
|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
copyvio on new page
Alphachimp, We're attempting to add an article on our Aquarium, the North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores, and I saw that it was already deleted for copyright violations. I'm new to this & definitely missing something. Can you please clue me in? Thanks!
Claire A 15:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Claire Aubel Public Relations Assistant North Carolina Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores
- I have dealt with this matter off-wiki. Alphachimp 06:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Speedy service as usual
Thanks for blocking a vandal (147.188.21.144). He was driving up my wikipressure.--In ur base, killing ur dorfs 15:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- my pleasure. Alphachimp 15:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
AIV
Thanks once again for doing the 'pedia dirty work. It's appreciated. --Dweller 16:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Appreciate it. The real work, though, is in the RC Patrolling. You guys do the hard stuff. :) Alphachimp 16:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Permanently removing an edit
Hi... I'm not quite sure who to put this question to, so since you're quite active I thought I'd put it to you: I recall reading somewhere there's way to permanently remove an edit from an article's the edit history: under what circumstances is that done and how does one request it? Some genius has included a person's phone number in his nonsense vandalism here. The vandalism has been reverted, but the phone number remains in the edit history. Should this edit be removed permanently?
--Rrburke 17:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Good question and great point. We've got two ways of dealing with privacy violations. The first (and most accessible) is for a sysop to simply delete the article and restore it without the revisions in question. I just did that on the article in question. The other is oversight, which allows a few specially selected users to remove revisions so that even admins cannot see them. So yeah, the privacy violation has been deleted. Thanks for the message. Alphachimp 17:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Protection
In my experience, this would not have been deliberate. FYI. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, I've never seen that happen before. Thanks and sorry about that. Alphachimp 22:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick action with Sprotect on the two articles I listed. It was getting silly how often they popped up on my watchlist. Your quick response and decisive action was gratifying :) --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 03:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's actually a bit of a kick in the nuts for me. I had unprotected both of those articles.... Alphachimp 03:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ouch. From one male primate to another...I know that hurts. It's a tough call; with an article like this, there are some legitimate reasons a serious editor might need to contribute through Anon IP. The level of vandalism makes it kinda hard to AGF though. I've only just gotten involved in the Protection process, so I'm wondering how long you normally leave it in place? I'll probably keep it Watchlisted regardless, just because it is such an obvious target. Thanks again. --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 03:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think our typical time between protections is around 3 weeks (check out Wikipedia:List_of_protected_pages#Semi-protection). Articles that are protected long term (e.g. George Bush) get listed on a separate page. The same goes for WP:OFFICE actions. Unfortunately, a lot of the articles we have listed there are quite contentious and often re-protected. They should probably be listed on Wikipedia:List of protected pages/Long-term protection. Alphachimp 06:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree. And since the LTP page doesn't specify any kind of threshold, it seems to be well within your individual discretion to do so. --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 06:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for the compliment on the warning box. I dont like to use it, but if a vandal is repeating, and there name is in the queue to be blocked, I figure i will throw it out there as a last resort. Chris Kreider 16:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
why did u delete sodhani
can u pls tell me why was information on Sodhani deleted by You.
- Please provide me with a link to the article in question. Thanks. Alphachimp 06:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Why am I getting warnings?
I don't understand why I am getting all of these warnings. I am the only one who uses this computer, and I don't even know how to make an edit. Please explain.
THANKS!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.12.116.139 (talk • contribs) .
- Also posted to User talk:64.12.116.139: You're using an AOL proxy server; many people use the same IP address, and that's how we identify you. If you register for an account, you won't see the messages any more. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 18:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Precisely right. Thanks for the answer Jim. Alphachimp 19:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 6th.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 45 | 6 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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 05:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Monkey Caballing
|
The Editor's Barnstar | |
| For your hard work in deleting thousands of invalid images from Wikipedia and keeping your election promises. Monkeys really do have the highest integrity....Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
Anyway, we've been accused of caballing on my talk page. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- haha, thanks so much for the nice message and recognition! That comment is on par with the A-Team accusation a month ago (crz, me, yanksox, and tyrenius). I'm not going to lie, I'm a big fan of clearing the ORFU backlog :). Alphachimp 07:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks....
And here I was having a nice peaceful evening...sheesh. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 07:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- They're so predictable, hang in there. Alphachimp 07:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm an idiot. I didn't even post vandalism warnings on his talk page the first few times, just told him on Talk:George W. Bush to play nice. Sometimes it gets hard to WP:AGF. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 07:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I really wouldn't worry too much about it. You do a great job of keeping up with things. I don't think I've ever had any trouble with your reports. It's probably a bit too early now, but have you considered going for RFA sometime during Q1 2007? I think you'd have a great chance. We always need more vandal fighters. Alphachimp 08:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
It's very nice of you to suggest it, even as a "sometime in the future" possibility. It's obviously very premature to even think about it; I've only been here for a few months, and I don't know how most of the administrative procedures work. But maybe sometime next year. I wouldn't want to even consider it unless I was confident that I was up to it. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 08:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'll bother you again in a few months. :) Alphachimp 03:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Policy question
After you blocked my little friend, I was going to go back and remove the entire Talk:George W. Bush#Infobox - Religion topic, on the theory that trolling should be yanked. OTOH, your posting there is useful too, as a pointed warning to the next troll who might come along. So is there a consensus on which approach is best in general? Leave the trolling thread in place, or yank it? -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 08:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's really a personal call. I'm for just yanking them, but the arguments aren't particularly strong (at least those I've seen) either way. Alphachimp 03:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Limp Bizkit
Please block 194.144.111.210. This user to wage edit war, all users reverted this edition [1]. This user have all caution in discussion [2]. PS. WP:3RR. LUCPOL 12:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's not 3RR, at least from what I can see. Alphachimp 03:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)`
Thank you for your support!
23:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC) |
If I'm a bit pale in the face now, And if in the future |
Spambots
Just RC patrolling and catching your block of a spambot in the changes, and going to inform you of something: Spambots get indef blocks, as they are open proxies (and if not, then we unblock them later on).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'll admit I'm not too knowledgeable on the topic of open proxies. Convince me and I'll change the block (BTW, it is reported to WP:OP). How is a spambot an open proxy? Alphachimp 05:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Erm, go ask Naconkantari >_>—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- They aren't necessarily, but in this case, they are. I noticed a boatload of reports from AlphaChimp earlier, and most of them were open proxies online when googled. Which shouldn't be a surprise. For one computer to be able to make the changes at multiple addresses, it has to use a proxy. I'll bet that if you type the IP address into google, you'll even find an open proxy, or you'll find a host of other sites with that IP registered. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 06:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Sock puppet nonsense
Hey, so long as you're me now anyway, can I have admin buttons? ;) Seraphimblade 05:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- silly me. Just log out and log in as on the chimp account. You'll be fine :). Alphachimp 05:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the party's over there. Nothing like getting blocked to pick up a guy's social life. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 05:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Haha, sure is. Somehow I just know that this won't end good... BTW, thanks for reverting the sockpuppeteer template on my userpage. Alphachimp 06:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I can't take credit for the revert. User:Physicq210 fixed your user page, and User:Akaneon reverted himself on your talk page right about the time I noticed him, so I scooted over to his talk page to ask him to explain himself. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 06:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed that right after I posted. Honestly, I think this is becoming a perfect example of WP:DNFT. Alphachimp 06:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I have a limited supply of good faith for a brand new editor who seems so knowledgeable about Wikipedia terminology the day they arrive. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 06:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'm afraid you may be right-he seemed to be going reasonable for a bit there, but that was just to cite a self-written (and just written) press release as a source. I'm done with the guy, he doesn't seem to have any legitimate interest. I try to assume good faith though-I've seen a few very unlikely ones come around. Seraphimblade 06:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Why does it always have to be you, Alpha? First the 4 musketeers thing, now this. You need to do something really outrageous to quell these nasty rumours. PS Don't let 'em get you down! :) riana_dzasta 08:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I banned the guy, you and I are Tyrenius' sock and no one else's! Yanksox 12:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Grrr. I'm glad somebody finally slammed the door on that one. I was just suggesting you protect, and I see you did. Thanks Yanksox. Alphachimp 12:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yrgggghhh. I had to file a request for an IP check, for more info check out the history of my talk page. Yanksox 12:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I banned the guy, you and I are Tyrenius' sock and no one else's! Yanksox 12:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Why does it always have to be you, Alpha? First the 4 musketeers thing, now this. You need to do something really outrageous to quell these nasty rumours. PS Don't let 'em get you down! :) riana_dzasta 08:36, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Flavor Flav CS Clan has Returned
Please return to the Flavor Flav Page. The CS clan has once again begain spamming their clan. More bans may be needed. Gamer83 22:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I stopped by and reprotected. Alphachimp 07:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I Innocent
I'm really sorry for the confusion but, I really didn't do anything to Over The Edge (album)by The Wipers. Frankly I've never heard of the wipers. Please contact me, thanks
- Read the shared IP message at the top of this page. Thanks. Alphachimp 03:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
RE: Keep Up the Great Work!
Thanks! :) Lupin's Anti-Vandal Tool is proving to be quite useful! Gzkn 13:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Wow, thanks; it was getting hard to keep up! -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Haha. They won't be back anytime soon (give it a month or so). Alphachimp 20:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Block?
I received a message that said I edited something... I have never done that. I have used wikipedia before, but never tried to edit it. I don't understand why I received that message.
I did learn something that I thought to add to an entry. Can you tell me how to go about doing that?
- Check out Wikipedia:Advice to AOL users and the instructions at the top of this page. Alphachimp 00:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 13th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 46 | 13 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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 04:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Keep in mind
Please keep in mind that this is a shared computer on a school campus. Not everyone is vandalizing it (I believe only one person). Could you please tell me around what time the vandalism takes place so I can inform my teacher about it?
~from Period 2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.150.15.246 (talk • contribs)
- You might be interested in checking your contributions, on this page. Please read the message at the top of this usertalk page, and be aware that you can avoid all of these troubles by simply registering an account. Thanks. Alphachimp 20:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Re; Manchester Christian Social Group
What have you done that's "notable" git ? MikeMCSG 14:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
AWB
Thanks for approving the AWB use. STTW (talk) 13:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
[Statement of gratitude]
|
[Your username name, not subst:ed properly], [statement of gratitude] for [your specific vote] in [link to request for adminship], which passed with a final tally of [final tally][percent in parentheses (optional)]. I plan to [statement of intentions regarding admin tools] and [statement acknowledging oppose votes as helpful]. If you [type of desire for help] or want to provide any [type of feedback], feel free to [link to talk page or e-mail]. [Statement of gratitude, again (optional)] [signature of new admin] |
Because people often complain that RfA thank-you messages are impersonal, I thought I'd give you the opportunity to create your own. -- tariqabjotu 05:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks
 |
I'd like to express my huge thanks to you, Alphachimp, for your support in my recent RfA, which closed with 100% support at 71/0/1. Needless to say, I am very suprised at the huge levels of support I've seen on my RfA, and at the fact that I only had give three answers, unlike many other nominees who have had many, many more questions! I'll be careful with my use of the tools, and invite you to tell me off if I do something wrong! Thanks, Martinp23 14:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC) |
Werdnabot subpage exception help
Hi Alphachimp, I need an admin to edit a protected page for me. Details are at User talk:Werdnabot/Subpage Exceptions. The protected page is the usersubpage of the talk page I'm pointing you to. Thanks!--Kchase T 09:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, all done. Feel free to come back if I screwed anything up or you need more help. Regards, Alphachimp 15:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 20th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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 06:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
New Subway Service Information table consensus at WP:NYCS
There is a new subway service table being proposed at the WP:NYCS talk page. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Subway#Subway Service Information and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Subway#Hybrid Icons for discussion details, then go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Subway#Subway Service Information table consensus to cast your vote. I really hope you vote support. Thanks! --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 01:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Blocking 202.124.100.135
Alphachimp,
I asked to appeal your block (on 202.124.100.135) , which was granted by Netsnipe.
However, because the IP address has been used for vandalism so many time, may I recommend using a Soft Block, which will stop unregistered users vandalising the pages, but still allowing users to register and edit pages. This should deter most poorly intentioned students, while letting the well-intentioned ones through. And in the event students do register, you can then isolate and locate who edits the pages
Just my two cents,
rpgsimmaster
- he actually reduced my block by 2 months and made it a soft block. I'm sorry that you were affected. Perhaps you should consult your school administration to stop the vandalism. Schools with long patterns of vandalism should take appropriate steps to curb that vandalism. Otherwise, they should no longer be allowed to edit Wikipedia. Alphachimp 08:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- I had not realized this (about the reduced block and soft block), but thank you for pointing it out. Perhaps this will be enough, however if vandalism continues, feel free to tell me, and I will consult with the appropriate person(s) Rpgsimmaster 17:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
A request for advice that may not be your department
Hey there.
What do you understand the tradition to be involving deleting comments on one's own User Talk page. I put the "Spam" warning template on a non-anonymous user's talk page. It was the only comment ever left, and shortly afterward, the user removed it, effectively blanking the page. Although I was the first to warn the user, the same spam link had been reverted by others about 5 other times. Do you think I should just let this slide, or do you know of any precedent showing that warning messages should not be removed?
-Thanks, Seidenstud 04:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to intervene, but blanking one's user page, whether it's yours or others, is considered vandalism. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 04:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Are you sure about that? On User_talk#Etiquette it doesn't really seem to say that. It says: "Actively erasing non-harassing personal messages without replying (if a reply would be appropriate or polite) will probably be interpreted as hostile." But a warning doesn't really warrant a reply, does it? I am still slightly confused.... -Seidenstud 07:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I think that there are exceptions. If one is getting rid of a vandal or bad-faith comment, then that is counter-vandalism. It isn't recommended to delete non-vandal comments, regardless whether you made them or not. If one needs to make a change of their comments, say, delete it, they should put a strikethrough, for example, This is a test.
Also, periodically, peoplemove their comments and archive them. Even NY newspaper sites do this too. This avoids the clutter on your main talk page in Wikipedia terms.
Therefore, if one consistently blanks or erases comments, subject them as a vandal, and report them to an admin so they can be blocked. Hope this helps. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 18:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Are you still active at WP:NYCS?
- Eh. There's actually a lot of misunderstanding and disagreement about whether or not is is appropriate to blank warnings and other messages. A lot of users hold that it is fairly uncivil (particularly if the message is modified). I personally agree that it is inappropriate, but, to date, the community has reached no consensus that there is anything wrong with removing legitimate warnings. As such, we can't ban people for warning removal. Our old warning templates ({{wr}} -> {{wr4}}) were actually deleted as divisive. Anyway, I hope that helps a bit.
- as for NYCS, I actually took some fairly bad cell phone pics the other night. So yeah, I'm going to be uploading them to subway articles. I'm just fairly busy with real life stuff right now. Regards, Alphachimp 02:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for blocking the IP...He kept vandalising my talk page! Cheers and keep up the good work.__Seadog ♪ 02:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- My pleasure :). Alphachimp 02:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Why as a Matter of Fact I Do...
I'm going to ask you to please revert what yo have done. Just because you don't know of the podcast and or Jay and Jack does not make them unremarkable. The Lost Podcast with jay and Jack has been on iTune's Top 100 Podcasts several times, they have been nominated for several podcasting awards and are subscribed to by thousands of Lost fans. I'm sorry and i don't mean to be offensive, but this kind of deletion is just wrong, and to me comes off as almost abusing power.Ganfon 17:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Realize that I did not have to notify you. I decided to do it as a courtesy. There was no substantive assertion of notability in the original article. It had been deleted once and I noticed that it was recreated. Given your assertions of notability above, I'm recreating the article and nominating it for deletion through the AfD process. Alphachimp 17:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Untitled Section
sorry about that. it seemed funny. It was immature and i apologize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.152.161.38 (talk • contribs)
Blocked
My account has been blocked and there is no message on my talk page. It says I have been blocked due to vandalism - but I have definitely not been a naughty boy. Roydosan 15:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Eh, I don't see that message. If you can edit here, you are not blocked. Alphachimp 14:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
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 01:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
 |
Oh, the humanity!
I had my doubts about a second RfA, but even I couldn't have predicted the way it caught fire and inexorably drifted to the ground in flames, causing quite a stir on its way down. Still, it was encouraging to see the level of support and confidence. Thank you for yours, and I hope I'll still have it the next time around. Kafziel Talk 14:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC) |
- Of course :) Sorry about that. Alphachimp 14:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Confused as for what to do
Hi Alphachimp, I spotted IP 207.190.171.3 by some edits in films (I am from Film Project) and contributions showed he made a series of vandalism. I reverted some and decided to report it. But it took me some time to find out what I should do, finally reported it (possibly not correctly or fully) in Abuse (thinking it may be a school case). In the meanwhile he was blocked. I would appreciate to know, please, if there is any fast way of reporting such serial cases, or if it's not necessary, since I see that he was blocked quite fast and effectively without my intervention. Thanks. Hoverfish 14:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I happened to be reverting vandalism at the time (which is why I blocked him immediately), but a lot of times there aren't any sysops reverting vandalism. (When I revert, I tend to block on sight if there is a pattern of vandalism.) Honestly, WP:AIV is probably the best way to report a vandal. A lot of sysops check it all the time, although there tends to be a bit of a drought of administrators around this time of day. Let me know if you have any further questions, Alphachimp 14:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer, I will report there next time. One thing I haven't figured out yet with IP's: when I click on the IP (in an edit history) I come to User contributions, no to a User page, so I don't know where to place a warning. Do I report IP's in AIV even without warning them? Hoverfish 15:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, you don't want to be putting warnings on a userpage. Warnings (or any messages for that matter) are typically put on their talk page. There are two fairly easy ways to get to an IP's talk page from the history page: 1) you can click the talk link next to the IP address 2) you can click their IP...this goes to the contribs page like you just mentioned...the talk link is near the top left of the page. We'd prefer that IPs are warned before they are reported (see WP:TT for some warnings), but obviously some degree of common sense prevails. Don't hesitate to report someone whom you think is doing a lot of damage to the encyclopedia. Alphachimp 15:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again. Will do. Hoverfish 15:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Untitled section
My edit for the Mike Paradinas page was absoultely constructive, what in the world prompted that reaction? I'm at a total loss here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.185.216 (talk • contribs)
- You changed a title to "rude ass tinker". Alphachimp 15:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Um, that's because it's the name of one of his aliases, which is also in the article you reverted to. All I did was rearrange the titles for order and cleanliness (Rude Ass Tinker is an anagram of Tusken Raiders and are the same band; he had to drop the Tusken Raiders name after George Lucas' lawyers caught on). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.185.216 (talk • contribs)
- I have reverted it to your version and deleted the talk warning. Apologies on the error. Please consider creating an account. Alphachimp 15:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, I passed. I appreciate your input. Please keep an eye on me(if you want) to see if a screw up. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the Wake County IP on November 27, 2006
When I stopped him/her from vandalizing Apex, North Carolina, I thought that one of my old friends from Cary, Shayna Whelan, might have had a sneaky idea and vandalize the page. And you blocked them for a year?! Great job! Now I won't have to put up with their vandalistic edits. Much appreciated -- --D.F. "Jun Kazama Master" Williams 22:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- My pleasure. Glad I could have been of service. Alphachimp 02:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Question about mergeto/mergefrom
Since I put merge tags on a fair number of articles your bot updated... Is it better to add a date when I add the tag, or let your bot do that? --Alynna 02:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's better to just add the date tag yourself (using the date=SOMETHING parameter). If you don't, however, the bot will probably be around to add it within the week. Alphachimp 02:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. I'll do that. --Alynna 02:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I knew there just had to be some admins out there who felt that way! --Dweller 19:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism?
71.255.132.155 01:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Cathy I live in a large apartment building and am using a community computer for this complex. It is unfair that I am being blamed for the mindless nonsense of a person living in this building. I understand the warning but hope this computer will not lose privlages to your site due to such nonsense. I am a student who greatly values the information your site provides and would hate to have that taken away. Thank You
- A vandalism block would only prevent you from editing, not from reading Wikipedia. If you didn't do anything wrong, I wouldn't be concerned for the moment. Alphachimp 14:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)