User talk:Renamed user 10940912412349/Archive1

Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, Endofskull! I am Gordonrox24 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing helpme at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Gordonrox24 &#124; Talk 02:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

Re: Home Improvement (TV series)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Home Improvement (TV series), please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 12:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that! -Endofskull (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Vanderbilt
Hi,

You reverted my edits on Cornelius Vanderbilt. Could you explain why ?

I provide the source that was asked for after my first edit. Are you questioning the source ?

Thanks. --83.134.116.138 (talk) 18:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello. Yes, the source in question. Thanks! -- Gordonrox24 &#124; Talk 18:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I saw the second edit, and it looked like vandalism to me. -Endofskull (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Menage a 3 vandalism
Why did I receive a warning for vandalising the page Menage a 3? I simply reverted a revert which was contrary to the facts, I'm getting a whole host of messages for no reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmatavka (talk • contribs) 21:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that! It turns out that it's not actually vandalism, it's part of the actual comic, and even if it was, it wasn't from you! I'll undo what I did immediately! Again, I'm really sorry! Endofskull (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Question From IP: 98.148.128.238
What's wrong with informing the public that Union Station already has bypass tracks just outside of it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.128.238 (talk) 02:39, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You're not viewing it from a neutral point of view, meaning, you're making it sound like a bad thing. Thanks! Endofskull (talk) 03:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Jason Knirck
Hi. You reverted the removal of material from Jason Knirck, but if you look at it, it's quite clearly nonsense that should have been removed. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like you blanked it. What's wrong with it? Thanks! Endofskull (talk) 17:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It was the IP who blanked it - it said he died after eating a Pool noodle, and the reference given was bogus. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I never checked the reference, because there was no explanation for the blanking. I probably wouldn't have reverted it if there was an explanation. Really sorry about this confusion, I'll remember to check references from now on. Sorry! Endofskull (talk) 17:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries - it was the "pool noodle" bit that raised my suspicions - people tend not to eat large cylindrical pieces of polyethylene foam ;-) Cheers -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, and I see the article has been deleted now anyway, as non-notable. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay! Again, sorry about that. Endofskull (talk) 17:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Some advice
Regarding Gagetman100: His only edit to IPhone4 was a formatting issue. That edit is not promotional by any definition. User:Mazca says he has deleted a few pages Gagetman100 made, and it appears that if he does something promotional, Mazca will deal with it. (You may want to watch, but not act).

When dealing with promotional accounts, be sure they are using the site for promotion. You may want to see WP:DIFF for ways to provide evidence. You also have to warn them that Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion before reporting them. There are some template messages at Template_messages/User_talk_namespace, that I don't know are included with Twinkle and Friendly (such as subst:uw-coi and subst:uw-coi-username). (Personally, I actually think it's a good idea for everyone to try editing without Twinkle and Friendly for a period of time to get a feel for the system).

Also, the sandbox is meant for test edits, so a cute little ditty is not "inappropriate humor". Wikipedia isn't srs bzniss.

Otherwise, good work here. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:10, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry about that! Thanks for the advice! Endofskull (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

read discussion page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Croatia  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.53.72 (talk) 01:44, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

well I've put note in a discussion page. i think whole tallest structure in Yugoslavia is totally irrelevant as country doesn't exist and of little or no informative value. i am not sure who edits or removed articles on wiki, but i'd recommend that article to be removed.

history of Yugoslavia as in general history of Europe is of interest, but latest strictures or w.e in ex-Yugoslavia are totally irrelevant, this is like we create article on tallest structure in ex Austro-Hungarian empire and than list all current structures, does that many any sense to you, and than the data itself is false and irrelevant that i really see no point in that article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.53.72 (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that, because you didn't put an explanation. Remember to do that, please! Thanks Endofskull (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Polargeo (talk) 14:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.  Jujutacular  talk 16:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Reviewing edits
Hi Endofskull,

It appears you approved this edit, which was the change of a cited number to a different number, without changing the citation. That edit is not an improvement to the article, as it adds false or misleading information to the text (it cites a source to a number where the source does not support that number), and it should not have been approved. Please be careful when approving these types of edits. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester  18:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Firsfron. Yeah, I was iffy about that. By the way, I'm new to reviewing, so it's great to learn about things to deny! Thanks for the advice! Endofskull (talk) 18:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Shi'a view of Abu Huraira
Hello Endofskull. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shi'a view of Abu Huraira, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not nonsense - there is meaningful content. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, okay. What would it be considered though? Was there anything wrong with it? Endofskull (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure it belongs in an encyclopedia, because it seems a little like a religious discourse, but I don't think it qualifies for speedy deletion. You could try PROD or AfD. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I never even realized I could do that with Friendly! Endofskull (talk) 02:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
I guess I was editing just after you sorry-- in te la ti 18:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's cool. Just checking! Thanks Intelati! Endofskull (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Edit_filter#Request_To_Join.
Hi, did you get the wrong person? I'm nowt to do with the edit filter. My only connection is requesting an addition recently. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh! I thought you were involved? Endofskull (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your nomination
Hello Endofskull, thank you for your nomination at WP:ABUSE. Regrettably, I have closed your nomination. Please understand that this is not a reflection on you personally. Given the amount of trust needed for this activity, we are not in a position to evaluate you because of the short duration that you have been contributing to Wikipedia. Again, I do sincerely thank you for your efforts and contributions thus far and hope that you continue to contribute. Sincerely,  Thorncrag    01:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem! That's fine, I understand! So you said I should wait a couple months? Endofskull (talk) 01:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You are more than welcome to nominate again at that time, though I'm not in a position to guarantee success then, though :-)   Thorncrag    01:28, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, of course not. Thanks for the help Endofskull (talk) 01:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Tags
Hi! Thank you for categorising the article as unreferenced. But, before doing so, please understand that it takes at least 25-30 minutes to bring an article into shape and adding such tags within 5 minutes of the creation of an article will only make the life of the contributor miserable, especially if he/she is editing at the same time! I kindly request you to refrain yourself from doing so, again. Rockoprem (talk) 16:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)