User talk:Ipatrol

Delete Template:PD-law?
I'm thinking of TfDing undefined, which you created. It's an orphan. Not sure we need this when we have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Public_domain#Dedications. OTOH, none of those templates are clearly for use by other than the author putting the image in the public domain. For example, PD-author says "The copyright holder grants ..." (not 'has granted', so there's arguably an implicit 'hereby'.--Elvey (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I made the potato page but sure you can add to it to help me. this is my first page

No idea what you are on about
Luhanskteplovoz - you reverted my edits to my previous edits when I was signed in (I am also User:shortfatlad) - I was adding the correct russian (ukrainian) language abbreviations, as found in the rest of the article. It is not vandalism. Please be more careful before you ascribe the label of vandalism to an act. Thank you.83.100.251.196 (talk) 23:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, you may remove the warnings, sorry about that.--Ipatrol (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No problems, but be careful with that trigger! we're not all vandals honest :)
 * 83.100.251.196 (talk) 23:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Appreciation
I don't appreciate how you instantly revert my edits to Interest Rates, I am only trying to make the article cleaner and more direct. Instead of just reverting articles blindly maybe you should actually make your own contributions. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 23:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Can I have some links to the specific revisions?--Ipatrol (talk) 23:55, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Beacon Fell Country Park
I don't think that User talk:81.154.52.65's edit here was vandalism, as you accuseon their talk page. S/he removed a duplicated heading and reflist, obviously added by mistake. You then removed their entire previous edit which had added substantial content. Please apologise to them for accusing them of vandalism, and be more careful in future. Thanks. PamD (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ipatrol&action=edit&section=153
 * This user, Ipatrol, likes to throw around the word vandalism with no evidence backing it. I think someone needs to be patrolling him. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 00:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Look, there's a saying, "mistakes will be made." Going at 3 pages per second, some things slip or look odd. It's just a simple accident, no worries.--Ipatrol (talk) 00:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * So perhaps you should slow down: falsely accusing people of vandalism is disruptive to Wikipedia. And please apologise to that user, as I asked. PamD (talk) 07:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I sm deeply sorry for the issue, I'll ensure it won't happen again.--Ipatrol (talk) 14:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * So please have the courtesy to go to their user talk page and either strike out your hasty comment or apologise for it (or both). PamD (talk) 23:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

24.62.114.248 is apparently still a vandal, but I removed the other warning.--Ipatrol (talk) 00:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Well there is the problem with IP's that they can change to other people. That vandalism was not from me. I'm not sure if your were awear of that. I just moved into the city.I only edits subject relevent to me and my MBA at harvard But still your hasty acquisitions dont help wikipedia. actually bringing them a step back. why dont you once consider actually bringing someone thing valuable to wikipedia and make your own edits. instead of reverting everyone elses. it's a lot of fun. but you can still apologize. 24.62.114.248 (talk) 07:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixes
This "fix" went awry. BTW, shouldn't the dot be in front of the references tag? Debresser (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess AWB went a little awry, I'll file a bug report.--Ipatrol (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. Thank you, for taking care of the follow-up. Debresser (talk) 21:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * update ref fixes to remove empty   tags. Rjwilmsi  23:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Hood Shooting
I believe that you reverted my edit on the Fort Hood Shooting in error. The number of perps was listed as 3, but the sources cited on the page all say 2. For that reason I removed the citation for the number 3 and requested a citation with that number. I also put this explanation in my edit summary.67.232.231.18 (talk) 22:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Instead of deleting references, please use Verify source to indicate that something's wrong with the source.--Ipatrol (talk) 22:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment
I didn't insult any user. I made a comment about someone's mother. Where is this verboten? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.86.2 (talk) 01:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Is is marked as forbidden here. Tl;dr: Don't insult or joke about others. And this says don't go messing around with pages if you aren't improving them in some way, degrading them is strictly verboten.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned, there is no policy against commenting incisively on users' mothers. I have no doubt, for example, that yours smell likes a month old can of open tuna fish.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.86.2 (talk) 02:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, now you've crossed the line; if you won't take it from me, I will have others tell it to you. Also, see WP:CIVIL.--Ipatrol (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Check out my user page because...
At the very end, your user page is linked to it. It's a questionable honor. --I dream of horses @ 03:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
AHH! Go --I dream of horses @  03:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 23:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Template:srlink
Howdy - I notice you changed this template (admittedly 8 months ago, so apologies if you can't recall) to create internal links when used on the primary wikipedia site, otherwise external links. I've noticed a few problems with (seeingly technically incompetent) mirrors since then, and wanted to ask if you'd mind my changing it back. I know this makes srlink-links not show up on 'what links here' - were there any other reasons for the change ? - TB (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The issues that you describe can probably be fixed by adding ParserFunctions to the MediaWiki program. Most mirrors I've seen already have it, those that don't need to get their heads out of their butts and install it at many templates need it to display properly.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Habnabit/ipatroll
Hello Ipatrol, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Habnabit/ipatroll - a page you tagged - because: Not blatantly an attack page or negative BLP. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 20:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Vacation
Template:Vacation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 08:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Why an Orphan?
Dear lpatrol,

You recently marked my article about the California Fire Safe Council as an orphan. I don't understand. It is referenced by my companion article on Fire Safe Councils. Is there a minimum number of references that are required before an article is no longer considered an orphan? If so, what is it so I can try to create enough references that my article is no longer considered an orphan.

Thank you,

oneroomschool —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oneroomschool (talk • contribs) 19:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The tag was added by ther program AWB, you can ask them what herustic AWB applies for adding orphan tags.--Ipatrol (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Page blanked by author
Hi. Though page blanking is usually vandalism and needs to be reverted, it is worth looking first at the page history, because quite often the author has blanked his own page, as with The burke society just now. In those cases the best thing is to tag it. It can be confusing for an author who realises his page is inappropriate and blanks it, if his page is at once restored and he is accused of vandalism for the blanking and told it was unconstructive. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Them crooked vultures page
i don't see how providing a source for a piece of otherwise unsourced information is unconstructive. surely leaving it there without anything to back it up is stupid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.235.152.99 (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Clifton
I have provided an explanation and a link. Please read, before accusing of vandalism.Jibbyjaba (talk) 02:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

May I see the link?--Ipatrol (talk) 21:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Mediation cabal case on Golan Heights++ ==

Hi theres, a mediation cabal case was recently opened on the Golan heights Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-01-22/Golan_Heights -as you took part in the RFC i wondered if you would like to help participate here?Ajbpearce (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It only took 4 months...
User:X!/ECAPI. ( X! ·  talk )  · @097  · 01:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

So, what prompted you to tell me?--Ipatrol (talk) 01:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Never mind .-- Ipatrol (talk) 01:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism?
What vandalism? I was just trying to help people understand how fascism works. 70.3.55.12 (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not playing games. Apparently a bunch of admins are. I'm just trying to further explain the topics, and I'm being met with rude attacks! 70.3.55.12 (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

size
64.223.235.47 (talk) 00:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)the killer whale also know as an Orca is over 8 times the size of a 6 foot tall man. look at the top picture for evidence. look teacher haha

Thanks
Um, is this really the Appreciation section? Seems like the kind of appreciation I get from my Mother in law. Anyhow, maybe this should be a separate section, but I just wanted to let you know that I FINALLY credited you on my user page. Sorry it took me a very long time to figure out what a talk page was, let alone how to shape up my user page so it wasn't a total rip off. THANK YOU for your help. Only now I want to steal your to-do box. THAT IS SO COOL! Cheers.Riwo (talk) 21:06, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

commenting at afd
just so you know, we do not use symbols next to our !votes, just keep to delete or whatever, in bold. We have the symbols available because some other Wikipedias use then, and we use some of them for some other purposes, such as WP:SPI.  DGG ( talk ) 00:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I have said this innumerable times, I use these pictures in my votes to make them stand out a bit. Please stop complaining.--Ipatrol (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * that is why I am complaining. Your !vote should stand out exactly the same as everyone else's. Why should it stand out more?   DGG ( talk ) 20:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

It's my personal choice and I'm not the on;y one who does it. Just like you decided to make your signature bold.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I just opened a discussion at .   DGG ( talk ) 21:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Notabilty guidelines are met remove speedydeletion from Barbara Hannah Jon Ascton   (talk)  15:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Zelthost.com
When the creator of an article blanks the page, the proper resonse is to add db-author. The improper response is to revert and warn the editor about vandalism. You've been told about this before. 76.102.12.35 (talk) 16:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

BodyBuilding on a Luna Calender
Hello, this is 8newsky and I'm here to tell you that the article i have created BodyBuilding on a Luna Calender was made by me and has been put up on the website i used as a source. I wanted to spread that article so i posted it up on wikipedia to help. 8newsky (talk) 16:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

That's just the proble, you're not supposed to use Wikipedia to do that. We have a purpose and we aren't anyone's free web host.--Ipatrol (talk) 20:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Wolfgang Katzian
Hello Ipatrol, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Wolfgang Katzian - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Beastly (Care Bears)
If you're going to tag an article for speedy delete as a song, you should be sure that the article is actually about a song and not, oh, a character from a kids cartoon that dates back over 20 years. 76.102.12.35 (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Hiridia
You recently presented my contribution to delition. This was my answer on the discussion:

You mean that all what you saw... was wrote by a guy with my name? Sure. Because, as you might imagine, I'm the author of Hiridia. It's 100% true and well written (as far as my english knowledge goes).

Take a second look third reference point. There you can see the short story the text talks about —Preceding unsigned comment added by RevanShan (talk • contribs) 21:45, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lisner Auditorium
Hello Ipatrol. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lisner Auditorium, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Tithonian page edit and new section on discussion your page.
First of all the edit to the Tithonian page can not be considered vandalism as it is a legitimate addition to the paleontology section. As such, I do not see your justification for reverting it. Please explain this.

Secondly, when I tried to mention this to you the first time on this page, you replied that this too was vandalism -despite the fact that this was a talk page and not a dictionary entry that could be vandalized in the first place. I would like to know your reason for referring to an attempt at discussing this as "vandalism." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.102.148.158 (talk) 02:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry; look, things are kinda hectic right now. Some idiots are screwing with us.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Sorry if I jumped to any conclusions too hastily. You wouldn't mind then if I reverted the Tithonian page edits?

Fine. Could you go to Special:RecentChanges, open any suspicious edits, and undo them? Thanks.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.102.148.158 (talk) 02:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Covino and Rich page
I don't understand why my edit to the Covino & Rich page would be commented on when I was simply reverting the page back to what it previously said. Someone changed the page to state the fanbase was in the tens of millions when it is beleived by SiriusXM that the fanbase is in the tens of thousands.

You will notice a large amount of vandalism recently, I am simply reverting changes back to original data. JoshinWinnipeg (talk) 02:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. I have been zooming through so many edits it's hard to tell. Could you please add a citation next time? Thanks.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism reports
Perhaps you can help me. How do I view the status of a vandalism report I've made? JoshinWinnipeg (talk) 02:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You can see that here. - Zhang He (talk) 02:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Once the post I made is gone how do I see what was done? (Sorry, trying to be more diligent and help where I can) JoshinWinnipeg (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Click the history tab at the top and look for it. Also, go to the talk page of the user you reported and see if there's a block template.--Ipatrol (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of Hydrazoic acid article
Was the formula inaccurate that you deleted it? I added it because it said that hydrazoic acid is explosive but it didn't give a formula. Some might be interested in the products. Thanks.--98.221.179.18 (talk) 18:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't have any external sources, but I used the standard electrode potential chart that they have here on wikipedia to figure out the reaction. Hydrazoic acid has a very strong tendency to become oxidized to nitrogen gas, which is what the oxygen does. So one of the products is nitrogen gas and an oxide from the reduction of oxygen. The hydrogen ions and the oxide ions bond to form water. Thats how I figured out the reaction. --98.221.179.18 (talk) 21:33, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
I don't understand why my page is marked for speedy deletion. I have reviewed many, many agency wiki pages and I don't see mine as being any different. Please help as I do not want this to be deleted again!Moraqjo (talk) 19:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Locking pages
Hey there, the page I wrote and regularly update is constantly being hit with vandalism. It is getting rather tedious and time consuming to undo all the edits.

The comments being posted are quite slanderous and are libelous.

Is it possible to have a page locked for a period of time from anonymous users or all users until the vandals get bored and quit trying? JoshinWinnipeg (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response... is this implying that I may be blocked as I am reverting their changes even though they are clearly slanderous and inappropriate?

He doesn't have objections, he is simply making slanderous/libelous comments. JoshinWinnipeg (talk) 01:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
At Sockpuppet_investigations/Haiduc/Archive, you said: "An observation was made that User:Geogre and User:Nandesuka had also been involved in the issue--and had used socks." Who made this observation, and where did they make it? There's nothing on the evidence page explaining this. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. Nandesuka (talk) 01:18, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Rachel Nichols
You've got a lot of nerve touching my edit on Rachel Nichols. I brought up the question of whether anyone had a problem with that being put in several months ago and got no response, and I pointed out how there is precedent for such a thing. No one voiced any issues, so I put it in, and then you think you're going to come in and revert it, and not even give a reason. Get off your high horse, and more importantly, get a life. If you have a valid reason why you think that observation shouldn't be in the entry, even when it had precedent in other entries, then let's hear it. Otherwise, get back in your hole and leave my edits alone. 151.203.124.135 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

As I stated, there is precedent for having this sort of information of interest in an entry; specifically, the entry for Jeffrey Dean Morgan includes how he is very often mistaken for Robert Downey, Jr. and/or Javier Bardem. If the majority opinion is that Rachel Nichols does NOT bear a very striking resemblance to Alexandra Wentworth, then I'll concede that it's my imagination and leave it at that. 151.203.124.135 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC).

As I've said, that sort of information is given in another entry for another actor. If that sort of information doesn't belong, then it should be removed from the Jeffrey Dean Morgan entry, as well. It should be in both or none. I confess I don't really care which of the two, so long as there's consistency. 151.203.124.135 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC).

AfD nomination of Faith-based community
An article that you have been involved in editing, Faith-based community, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Counter-Vandalism Unit
I was reading the talk page of The Counter-Vandalism Unit recently, and I agree that the CVU needs a change, or perhaps a total overhaul. I realize that the topic is a bit old, but I personally believe the collapse of the CVU was due to a lack of order. Therefore, I'd like to propose a few objectives, on which I would love your opinion. Please post your replies here, and leave a talk back on my page. Thank You!

1. Ranking System:Vandalism fighting has become a sort of freelance job, due to the lack of involvement in the CVU. I believe if we added something like a ranking system, similar to that of the military's, we may be able to restore order and interest to the CVU

2. Stars and Stripes I also feel that a sort of incentive may help with interest. Perhaps designing special barnstars or service ribbons?

3. Resurrection of the Task Force and Think-Tank The CVU used to have several core programs that helped add strength to Vandal fighting and Wikpedia itself. I think that resurrection of these programs with integration of the Ranking and Awards systems mentioned above will revive the long-lost collection of editors known as the CVU. Any other suggestions you may have are greatly appreciated. Thank You, Tarheel95 (talk) 16:31, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ideas
First, the task force was centered around "paging" one user at a time, depending on if that user was online. I think that the task force would be more effective if it paged all online members as a whole, in a sort of Twitter-like fashion. Another aspect that may help is implementing a program like Qui onto each Task Force Member's userpage, allowing them to edit their availability status quickly. Secondly, I never saw an organized flow of things at the think tank. Users would simply come up with ideas and the community would voice their opinions. I believe the implementation of an organized system of dealing with a problem or task would help not only with organization, but with interest as well. The main goal now is making the CVU more user-friendly. Any ideas you may have are greatly appreciated. Thanks, Tarheel95 (talk) 23:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

re: WikiAlerter
Sure thing. Let me know what you think :D (if you've already downloaded it, you may want to do so again, since I just updated the sourceforge download) - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Tarheel95 (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Curious your response to my response. Shadowjams (talk) 05:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:Research RFC
Thank you for your interest in WP:Research. I agree that we should re-RFC WP:Research some time, but I think we have more work to do on the issues currently being discussed before that happens. Elehack (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * A question, you added it to Cent with the explanation "as proposed by the WMF"; can you give me a link to that proposal? It would help me understand it. Nifboy (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Neither I, nor anyone else seems to know around here. Some who might include: --Ipatrol (talk) 22:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Catrope
 * User:EpochFail
 * User:Josh Parris

Your GA nomination of Red
The article Red you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Red for things which need to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 09:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Userboxes/Politics by country
Can more userboxes be added to this page or is it read only? Cause I have a couple more I would like to make, but since they are political, they would go on this page. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 03:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Do you use this name at RationalWiki?
Are you the same Ipatrol as at RationalWiki? Lumenos (talk) 05:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes.--Ipatrol (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Autumn
I notice that you reverted edits and left a message "revert vandalism (per Ottava's good-faith suggestion on IRC)" I couldn't find the user Ottava. I'm not sure what IRC is. What I can assure you is that the edits which you reverted were certainly not vandalism.

For a FA, the article was very poor indeed. It read like a student's essay and was written with little understanding and several misinterpretations. The introduction stated that the poem represents the tastes, sights and sounds of Autumn. It doesn't. There is no mention whatsoever of taste. This sentence was written into the original stub, and was, with several other inadequate or poorly expressed sentences, maintained through every more recent edit.

If you had looked at the edit summaries which I left when making the changes, it would have been immediately clear that none of my edits, or the corrections by other editors that were interspersed, were vandalistic. Amandajm (talk) 12:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Ottava rima was banned this year in a complicated incident with several users. As she could not edit she pointed out a revision that included several vandalistic artifacts, including replacing various links with cunnilingus.--Ipatrol (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I hadn't noticed any edit like that! I don't think they are there now. Amandajm (talk) 07:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ipatrol, are you actually serious? Or are you pulling my leg?
 * There was very little vandalism to that article and the small amount that occurred was immediately reverted to the state that immediately preceded the vandalism (in other words, maintaining all worthwhile edits). The word "cunnilingus" was not mentioned anywhere. (I have checked all the stages of the history). At the point at which you made your reversion, none was needed. Your sweeping reversion lost a lot of very carefully considered edits by me, and some valuable corrections by other editors. Unless I'm mistaken, you made this reversion on the say-so of a banned editor, and didn't bother to actually compare the two states of the article.  I cannot imagine why, seeing all those edits with carefull edit summaries, you didn't actually look to find the rude words and leave the bona fide edits intact.
 * Amandajm (talk) 08:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

My edit in question restored large chunks of well-cited information. Your constant edit warring has been well-noted and does not help your case here. I made a single revision and you have reverted no less than five different editors. If you are unable to think and act neutrally on this article, i request that you recuse yourself from the issue and find work elsewhere.--Ipatrol (talk) 19:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:PD-law
Template:PD-law has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Elvey (talk) 04:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Cabals are evil
Cabals are evil, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Cabals are evil and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Cabals are evil during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Extended GCD code
- if this is your own code, please consider contributing it to wikibooks page on extended gcd. Thanks. -- X7q (talk) 02:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WIFC listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WIFC. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WIFC redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, an editor (OK, it was me) has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics by country. The discussion can be found at the redirect discussion. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:00, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Run-page-shutoff
Template:Run-page-shutoff has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Richardson family murders
I have suppressed your recent edit to Richardson family murders as a privacy violation prohibited by Canadian law. You are correct that any consensus regarding this matter is weak, but there is no over-riding public policy reason in this instance to not respect the law of Canada. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User ADHD/humor
Template:User ADHD/humor, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User ADHD/humor and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Template:User ADHD/humor during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dynamic&#124;cimanyD contact me ⁞ my edits 22:02, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Counter-Vandalism Unit/Forum for improvement
Counter-Vandalism Unit/Forum for improvement, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Forum for improvement and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Counter-Vandalism Unit/Forum for improvement during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ebe 123  (+) $talk Contribs$ 09:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Republic of China article
Since you mentioned the Republic of China in your user page, I guess you are interested to share your insights at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012). Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.245 (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

AGF
Dammmmmmn, Brohammed...assume good faith! 98.26.183.221 (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Texas sharpshooter
Please look at the article, it references Bible Code and Quran code. 193.52.24.28 (talk) 01:11, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

It does not. Please look at this: See also

"The links in the "See also" section do not have to be directly related to the topic of the article, because one purpose of the "See also" links is to enable readers to explore topics that are only peripherally relevant." 193.52.24.28 (talk) 01:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Added: I think it is a bit unfair the link to the fallacy is given in Bible Code, yet not in Quran Code. 193.52.24.28 (talk) 01:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Please contact djr013
Hello, this is djr013. Please contact me here or on IRC. djr13 (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI
I un-undone the edition! Good contributions. --201.67.246.99 (talk) 21:27, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Please be careful about what you revert
I noticed that on two different occasions, with this edit and this edit, you reverted an edit for removing content, even though it didn't actually do so. Please be careful about what you revert - you reverted edits that were perfectly constructive and didn't remove anything important. Both of your reverts have been undone; the former by myself and the other by the IP you reverted. Thanks. Lugia2453 (talk) 22:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

RfC: New helper policy
Hello member of ! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".

To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from. Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page. This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of —

Quixotic plea
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. —  06:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:82.148.97.69
User:82.148.97.69, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:82.148.97.69 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:82.148.97.69 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Ipatrol/Userboxes/Politics by country: R–Z
Page User:Ipatrol/Userboxes/Politics by country: R–Z is overflowing with UK and US userboxes.

Currently the three page have the following sizes: Yours aye, Buaidh  22:38, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Ipatrol/Userboxes/Politics by country: A-D – 13279 bytes
 * User:Ipatrol/Userboxes/Politics by country: E-Q – 14853 bytes
 * User:Ipatrol/Userboxes/Politics by country: R–Z – 21690 bytes

Is that size unusual somehow? I don't have any issues with loading it into my browser.--Ipatrol (talk) 06:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society
Dear ,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 22:36, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

An unfinished house is a real problem
Dear Ipatrol:

I'd like to publish the above essay in our "Essay" column in The Signpost on August 30. If you have any objections, please let me know before Friday. BTW, if you'd like to write for The Signpost again, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Smallbones( smalltalk ) 03:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

No objections. --Ipatrol (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Di-no source-auto
Template:Di-no source-auto has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Dylsss(talk contribs) 00:12, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Too many photos
Template:Too many photos has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 17:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Slang
Template:Slang has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Libel
Template:Libel has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 23:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your user page got destroyed!
Sorry to hear that the cabal destroyed your user page! TheTechie (formerly Mseingth2133444) ( t &#47; c ) 15:40, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive
Template:WikiProject Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Counter-Vandalism Unit/fpage
Template:Counter-Vandalism Unit/fpage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)