User talk:Clarince63/2010

Phil Demmel
Hi there, what is the problem with my edit?--212.86.43.81 (talk) 10:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I checked this, and Clarince63 should have simply checked your source and added it to the article. I went ahead and did this. Hiberniantears (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * In response to your comments on my talk page, please see my response here. Hiberniantears (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Coren has also weighed in at my talk page. The fact of the matter is you exhausted the initial grant of good faith every editor receives. You have now been granted the opportunity to restore that good faith. Hiberniantears (talk) 20:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Mysterious Skin
The movie was first released in the United States & Canada in 2004, not 2005. It was released in the Spring of 2005 in France, and a few weeks later, it was released in the rest of Europe. Australia, NZ, and Japan didn't get it until late summer of 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.169.0 (talk) 21:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This has been corrected back to 2004. Clarence63 should have checked the IMDB source already included in the article to confirm that you were correct. Hiberniantears (talk) 01:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Chelsea FC
Eh? What's the problem here. I update the player apps/goals every couple of weeks and have been doing so for some time now. You're telling me I have to wait until the official website updates them now? This is new. You also gave me three warnings in quick succession before I even had a chance to read them. This is unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.90.191 (talk)

db-author
Hi Clarince and welcome to New Page patrol! I' don't think we've talked before. Would you mind having another look at your message to User talk:Genius787? Normally when an editor blanks an article we just check to see if they wrote it or not, if Genius hadn't been the original author of the article he blanked then your warning to him would have been spot on. However as he was the original author, would you mind revisiting and perhaps withdrawing or rephrasing your message to him?  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:39, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for retracting that message. :)  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Help With the Templates
In order to centre the template, just add the parameter "align=center". Hope this helps.  Set Sail   For The   Seven Seas   202° 11' 45" NET   13:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Mistaken revert / usertalk warning?
Besides being unsourced, what was wrong with edit? . It's not contentious so I don't see why it would be removed like that. The "unconstructive" warning on the user's talk page doesn't make sense either. Google the coach's name and you'll see it's legit, and this site http://www.roorats.org/ --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 21:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and undo my undo if you have not already, I was looking at the constant flow of edits coming in on huggle and I must have thought that it is vandalsm. Like I said go ahead and put it back but make sure you put a reference on it. Sorry for the incontinence. --Clarince63 (talk) 21:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "incontinence". Is that some sort of joke? --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I am so sorry!!, I run all of my posts thru Microsoft Word (To weed out spelling mistakes) and I intended to spell "inconvenience" and I must have picked the wrong one in the list of words! Like I said before I am so sorry for that! --Clarince63 (talk) 21:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Appeal of Roll Back on Shock Doctrine
Hi, I'm new to editing Wikipedia, but the opening paragraph of Shock Doctrine is too long and unclear. The summary of the book should be edited down to not constitute a run-on sentence. Please tell me how I can apply my constructive edit. Osu.mann (talk) 20:03, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Osu.mann

Please be careful!
Hi Clarince! I just wanted to remind you to be careful when rolling back edits. Make sure edits are indisputable vandalism before doing so. Even if it's something like addition of unsourced content, try using a different method of reverting in which you can provide an edit summary. Best regards,  S warm  Talk 21:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's exactly what I was referring to. Huggle performs essentially the same action as rollback, but is much more fast-paced. All the more reason to take care to be sure that edits are indisputable vandalism before reverting them.   S warm  ( Talk ) 21:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't necessarily revert edits just because they add unsourced information. In most cases, you should assume good faith and leave them alone, preferably tagging them with "". If you feel that the edit is original research or biased, you can revert it. Let's say an IP is working on an article and has made 10 pretty good edits consecutively and has spent an hour gathering the information. Their most recent edit adds unsourced information to an article you're not familiar with. You slightly suspect it's original research, but it's not blatant vandalism. By simply clicking "revert", you instantly undo all of their edits with no explanation and automatically warn the user against vandalism. See how that can be bad? An alternative to this is clicking the arrow next to the big red circle button in Huggle and selecting "advanced" from the menu. This can be done by simply pressing the "Y" on the keyboard. This opens a box that allows you to enter an edit summary for the revert. It also has a box to select "only revert the selected revision". If you don't select the box, all of their edits will be reverted as opposed to just that one. It's a good alternative to use when you're not dealing with blatant nonsense or vandalism.   S warm  ( Talk ) 22:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Uncle Meat : "I've Got a Big Bunch of Dick," NOT "I've Got a Big Cock."
I was unaware that correcting incorrect translations is considered "UNCONSTRUCTIVE." For proof, check http://globalia.net/donlope/fz/lyrics/translations/UM.html#Minchia

That's what the fuck is wrong with Wikipedia; too many idiots who think they know it all. When you try to correct them, they revert the edit without checking first to see that I AM RIGHT, and THEY ARE WRONG.

Wikipedia is a worthless source of information, thanks to people like you who are too lazy to do a little research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.180.66 (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Kevin Gillespie (chef)
Please be careful with using Huggle to rollback changes as the edit you reverted on this article probably belonged on the talk page, but it was a legitimate concern about the copyright violations contained in our article and needed to be investigated. It was not vandalism and rollback should only be used in cases of vandalism. Thanks for your efforts and I know it is a unrewarding task, but please be careful. Camw (talk) 01:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikiout
  S warm  ( Talk ) 04:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

NIKI
hello here is you new addition to your wiki family. As you can see i'm lost in space and need a mentor...Please write me at (E-Mail address censored to thwart spam-bots) for now, because i'm blond and need some answers how to start Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragomer (talk • contribs) 19:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Samsonite
Hi, I am responding to your message on my talk page. I was simply clarifying the type of person. The edit was made in good faith, and I don't think I deserve a warning. There are many other examples, where that term was used for disambiguation.BellsFromSeychelles (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for removing your warning.BellsFromSeychelles (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Please
Please tell me what happend in the case when somebody early do some hoax with page and page is deleted in eng wkipedia but i dont know who and why but when i strt create  original article about that on wkipedia fr  wikipedia pt. some contribute today see new page and they found old deleted page on wikipedia en. and put also article on wikipedia pt adn wikipedia fr. to delete also that pages but i put all documents about that i dont know why they do that please help Article is about Danilo Saveljic football player please help|  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.206.191 (talk) 21:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Message
I was just joking about what I edited in Billa (2009 film). I won't do it again to any other article. I promise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.78.94 (talk) 18:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Huggle
Clarince, you seem to be using Huggle in a content dispute. While not a good idea, the edits he is making are not strictly vandalism, as National Socialism is largely identified as the Nazi Party. This should really be discussed on the article's talk page, not reverted and warned over. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Friendly warning
Hi! I was up early this morning and noticed that you had read the warning against continuing to use copyrighted images on your user page, but then you added a copyrighted image to your user page. My first thought was, this is a user who is deliberately breaking not just Wikipedia's rules but also federal laws, and I should block this person from editing. But then I thought, here it is, the start of a beautiful, snowy day... why not give one final chance? I'm going back to bed- it's a snow day! When I wake up, in a few hours, I'll check this user page again, and if there's copyrighted material on it, that's when I'll block it. Have a lovely day. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 10:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Accountant
Why did you revert my contributions on Accountant? 91.155.54.65 (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Restoring Vandalism using Huggle
Why did you restore vandalism, as you did [here]? Honest mistake or what? Outback the koala (talk) 21:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou
I was unaware I put anything on this page but could you tell me what i did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.111.64 (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

suggestion to prevent unintended censorship
Hi,

I appreciate the need for a bot to remove vandalism, but please be VERY careful with it removing good faith edits. I would suggest that this bot not be allowed to revert edits unless the IP or username has previously been declared to vandalize as observed by a human except in the case of brand new accounts with no previous unreverted edits or in the case of a very well defined vandalism algorithm. I am sure this has been discussed before many times about keeping a human in the loop with reverting bots.. good luck and thanks!

cheers, Jamie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.108.77.192 (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Accidental restoration of vandalism
I don't think you really intended to make this edit, did you? TJRC (talk) 21:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you man, that was very reasonable. Have a good life.129.133.193.100 (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Please mark yourself out of 10 for this edit
Philip Trueman (talk) 18:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * If Huggle gives you a message asking you if you're sure you want to perform the rollback, or tells you that you will be reverting to the version of an editor that has already been rolled back, don't do it. That means you're looking at an older revision of the article and the vandalism has already been fixed. ;)   S warm  ( Talk ) 01:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Well thank you for the star!!..nice to know people notice what i do!!!  :) ...Buzzzsherman (talk) 18:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes to adoption
Hello Aaron, I would be delighted to be adopted. Counter-vandalism sounds like heavy stuff. Let me look it up. Regarding adoption, I guess I am looking for how I can learn all the subtleties of Wikipedia in a streamlined way. I have started editing recently, and find that it's an excellent outlet for my research and reading. I know that a good part of learning any new thing is by experience, but hopefully I can learn from the mistakes of others before me and thus avoid a lot of the pain. I think I've actually waded into my first dispute already, actually (before joining Wikipedia I had read a humorous description of it as an "argument generator," I think.) I just compiled a whole list of texts which supported the information I thought warranted inclusion in the Michel Foucault article. I haven't yet heard back from my colleague there. Well, I'm not sure how it goes, so I will await your advice on adoption proceedings. Thanks very much for your enthusiastic and prompt response. --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. You should be able to click "email this user" on my page, then I will know your email. I have some things to ask you about already, actually. A bit confusing. --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism warning
Would you consider striking this warning? The user was trying to add a picture to the article. -- Neil N   talk to me  18:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Clarince, could I ask you to slow down a little bit. This wasn't vandalism. Please only use rollback for blatant vandalism in future. Thanks &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As you have not alleviated my concerns about your use of the rollback tool, I have removed it from your user rights. In order to get it back, you will need to convince me, or another administrator, that you understand that it is only to be used for removing blatant vandalism. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Guestbook
-- iBen (talk) 00:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

In response
I realize that I am going to fast with my huggle editing and I need to slow down and double think the questionable edits and Assume Good Faith. I know accept these warnings by you here and here, at the time I was not thinking clearly and with an open mind, I relize my wrongdoings and apologize for it fully. One of the many lessions I took away from all of this is the respond to everyone asking me a question or alike. I know not to respond to trolling and to respond to legitimate queries. If I did happen to make a mistake I will apoligize for it just as I did here. Thank you for working with me on all of this. --Clarince63 (talk) 11:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have looked at your recent edits and found no incorrect reversions. I have been waiting to see how you would respond to a query on your talk page but the opportunity hasn't arisen. However I am happy to accept your assurances that you will take responsibility for your edits and be happy to explain them to an editor who asks. Thanks in advance for your continued work here. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi
I have seen you revert on Priestnall School, there seem to be several idiots who are gang vandalizing the article. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertMel (talk • contribs) 21:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

My first article
Hello Clarince. It may please you to know that I have created my first article:. Please take a look and let me know what you think. It only has one good English language source at the moment, but I will endeavour to find more. I have contacted an interested editor who may be able to help with research in Chinese later, too. Please tell me any ideas or feedback you have. In particular, I am interested in knowing how to stop it from being deleted. (PS: I would prefer to discuss on Wikipedia if that is okay). Thank you. --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 01:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Very good job on the article and I am impressed to see that you saved the article from being deleted (Chinese history happens to be one of my favorite topics in history, so it is good to see that someone is going to contribute further on the subject) --Clarince63 (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much. Yes, a very interesting topic indeed. I hope to do more to improve the articles about qigong on Wikipedia. --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 04:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Do any ideas for how that article may be improved spring out at you? --TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As I see it you should find some other wikipedia page that relate to the person you wrote about and put a link on those pages so it will not be "orphaned", also some more catagories would be good as well. But other than that very good job on your first article. --Clarince63 (talk) 19:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Good ideas. I will follow up on them. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Cash Now
Adding a COI tag to a user talk page is not vandalism. Now remove the warning from my talk page. 98.248.40.19 (talk) 20:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * This may have been a mistake but can you be a bit more polite?? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I Am Upset
Why did you revert my changes on Where the Wind Blows by James Patterson? I'm sorry if that was rude, but are you the boss of Wikipedia or something? If you aren't, then can you please let the people who made this website handle it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.61.118 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm sorry if I sounded mean or rude. I just wanted something to be clarified. Thank you for telling me, and sorry about being unconstructive. It was a joke, but I understand why people might not think it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.61.118 (talk) 22:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a woman lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.61.118 (talk) 03:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I've already reported his name as promotional.
He's already blocked, it just hasn't happened yet. Half Shadow  19:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Who do you speak of, thank you for reverting vandalism on my talk page. --Clarince63 (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Green Tea Botanicals. Generally with a name that obvious, I just report 'em. No point in warning them for SD removal since they're getting blocked anyway, so... Half  Shadow  19:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note taken, thank for you clarifying. --Clarince63 (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, you know, it's kind of like saying 'Don't do that or we'll block you. By the way; we're blocking you.' Half  Shadow  19:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I was on huggle, reverting vandalism and I did not really look at the user name, but I see where you are coming from, by the way could you sign my guest book? --Clarince63 (talk) 19:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
for reverting vandalism on my talk page! Ham tech  person
 * Your very welcome, as they say if your user or talk page gets vandalized, you are doing something right, keep up the good job, Cheers Clarince63 (talk) 18:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

W.R.T. Vandalism on Loongson
OK. Cluebot doesn't get it. I am unable to report its mistake due to a software error on the reporting page. So I reverted it with a response in the "Edit Summary" field. Here is my whole response. I am going to re-edit the article after some time.

I translated the Chinese "Gou Sheng" from "Dog Leftovers" to "Dog Shit" because:- 1) The phrase "Dog Shit" is an *exact* translation, both in letter and spirit. "Gou Sheng" is as offensive in Chinese as "Dog Shit" in English, and in the same way.  So it is a better translation than "Dog Excrement" and the like. 2) The translation "Dog Leftover" is patently ridiculous. It looks like it has been made by a Victorian spinster with her knickers in a twist. ;-D Height of bowdlerisation.
 * Note: I am *not* 71.184.55.147. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.96.240.128 (talk • contribs)

Yo Suck
You Suck. I am not vandalising Fort Nelson Secondary School I am just stating what I am thinking of it, as someone has done before with the "Girl's team really sucks comment" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.27.12.55 (talk) 20:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I was going to revert the above comment as violating WP:NPA, but given the IP editor's edits (Special:Contributions/142.27.12.55), I thought Clarince63 might want to keep it as a badge of honor. TJRC (talk) 21:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Winter 2009-2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Winter 2009-2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Motto of the Day
Hi there, Clarince63! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By –p joe f (talk • contribs) 11:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Spring 2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Spring 2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...
... for clearing the nastiness from my Talk page. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:27, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
You are welcome. --Extra 999 (Contact me +  contribs) 11:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy delete
Hi Clarince, thanks for keeping an eye open. Are you able to delete Socrates giolias article? I started it but it should have been Giolias. I have now moved the story to Socrates Giolias with a re-direct from Sokrates Giolias. There will gradually be more information to fill the article Mangotreetop (talk) 13:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...
Hello, I'm not sure if you were aware, but you reverted an edit made by IP 72.19.36.171 that was constructive. I have reverted your revert and added a second reference to back up the fact. Are you able to remove your warning from the IP's talk page please? I wouldn't want to discourage a contributor from, well, contributing. Thanks,  Arctic   Night  14:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Infinity Planet Mod.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Infinity Planet Mod.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I saw you pinged Sfan and gave him the "don't template the regulars" spiel. That's fine for most stuff, but for image tagging - like for PRODs, AfDs and so on - everybody gets templated. Well, you wouldn't want not to be told, right? And only in exceptional cases does anyone leave a custom message for images, and that only when it's next stop is a block, or when there are multiple images in question. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Summer 2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Summer 2010 Issue of 2600 Magazine.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)