User talk:Gangsterphobia

Thank you for making a report on Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again.

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. - Rklawton 19:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. - Rklawton 19:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I find it funny how all of the above clearly violates WP:BITE. Believe me, I am not the stupid average noob. I would suggest you find something better to do then using template warnings to warn me of my so called vandalism. Its evident you also do not know how to use these templates warnings, as Test-self was the correct warning instead of the Uw-test1. You might want to read up on what vandalism is not. You should also Assume good faith instead of making radical statements as you did in your edit summary here. Cheers! Gangsterphobia 19:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Characterizing legitimate warnings as "absurd" and labeling my edit summary as "radical" lacks civility. Based on your edits, it's obvious you are not a novice - which means WP:BITE doesn't apply.  It also renders your test edits inexplicable and worthy of the higher test-edit warnings I gave you.  Rklawton 20:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * However, in accordance with the general rules of Wikipedia n , I am a novice. I am unable to move pages and edit semi-protected pages. I still find your first warning on Minamimatsura District, Nagasaki inappropriate, as it was an edit I reverted. The correct warning should be Test-self. Going along with the fact that I am technically a newcomer, your warnings violate WP:BITE. I am simply being bold. (Off topic, what sort of tool do you use to warn vandals? Its apparently looks like Twinkle, however it does not show in the edit summary that you warn vandals using TW. Just curious.) Still withstanding, you said It also renders your test edits inexplicable and worthy of the higher test-edit warnings I gave you. There is only one higher "test edit" warning, uw-test3, before it goes to uw-vand4. Either of these would be highly inappropriate, as I have only made two "nonconstructive" edits. Then again, uw-test1 is the newer "warning." I'm still a fan of these templates, which could possibly explain my reasoning for Test-self. We will end our "disagreements" now, and may you carry on helping and editing Wikipedia in peace. GP 20:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If it should transpire that you return to editing, kindly point me to these "general rules of Wikipedian" that would appear to indicate all non-administrators are "novices." Rklawton 21:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why certainly I will show you what I am talking about. WP:UAL, Semi-protection_policy, and Semi-protection_policy. Never did I state all non-administrators are "novice." I was referring to new or novice editors inability to edit certain pages or move pages for four days. Being an administrator, it surprised me that I would have to explain this simple "procedure" to you. And no, I am not returning to editing. I'm simply answering your question. I have a question for you as well. How did you know this was true:
 * " Based on your edits, it's obvious you are not a novice - which means WP:BITE doesn't apply."

Sincerely, GP 02:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There's a difference between new accounts and novice editors. This is a new account.  You, on the other hand, are not a novice editor (as you so stated).  What clued me in?  Novice users aren't reporting vandals using TWINKLE by their eighth edit.  Rklawton 03:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would have to agree with your statement. I was using the word "novice" and "new" to describe the account, not my editing levels as an editor. Very true, I have never seen another new account using Twinkle right away. Besides, most new users would simply reply by A) Blanking your user page or talk page, or B) Typing some gibberish nonsense such as "wiKIPEDia SucsKs!!". At least my gibberish nonsense is legible and correctly spelled (generally anyways). You are right as well by stating WP:BITE does not apply to me, as it doesn't (how is that for repetitive?). It speaks directly about "newcomers" and I am obliviously not a "newcomer." This has been a joy, but I must return to my studies. Have fun contributing to Wikipedia! Cheers! Gangsterphobia 04:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)