User talk:Rich Smith/Archive1

You're Too Fast!
Argh! You beat me to  ! Keep up the good work!  Set Sail For The Seven Seas   15° 49' 30" NET   01:03, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "Thank you, come again" - Methecooldude (talk) 01:09, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * hey, how come i didnt notice that :P S ophie  ( Talk ) 01:44, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

RE:Vandalism
The edits I've done to "Santa Cruz Monastery" were all in good faith. I'm trying to help you. I merely corrected a small mistake in the article and yet you blatantly accuse me of vandalism. I tell you this: the one thing you are accomplishing is to become a newcomer biter and (as you most assuredly know) there's no better way of scaring potentially good editors. Regards, 95.93.137.186 (talk) 01:03, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I do apologize for this :( Since it had been reverted twice before, it appeared orange on my Huggle, and since 2 other editors had reverted you, I found it common place to also revert. I would suggest making use of the edit summary box :)- Methecooldude (talk) 01:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, no problem. Thank you! :) 95.93.137.186 (talk) 01:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism on my talk page
If a user or IP address vandalizes my user talk page, will you please revert it?  WAYNE  OLAJUWON 02:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome
I'm new to here, I have been blundering away for a year or two. Your welcome message and the links will help me a lot. Many thanks Jasonnorth57 (talk) 03:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Something to fill in your awards-section :-)

 * Yey, thanks DS2 :) - Methecooldude (talk) 20:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problem. :D DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 09:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Guicho320
I left a message to Guicho320 about the warning message you gave xyr here. --I dream of horses @ 23:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * My apologies -  me the cool dude  Contact 23:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've bitten a few newcomers myself. I've even chased them off Wikipedia entirely (or so they've said).
 * Also, what you did (revert a good faith edit) is something I've done as well, especially with igloo (a huggle-like anti-vandal software). That sort of software takes getting used too.
 * In other words, I kind of figured what you did was, also, in good faith. You might want to apologize to Guicho, though. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @  23:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Patrons_of_Ralston_College
Hello, how are you? I'm curious why there's a problem with this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Patrons_of_Ralston_College

I'm quite new at this, so I may well have done something wrong...not sure what it is though.

Thanks very much,

Tillander 17:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I saw the "Blanked the page" and hence CSDed it, I will remove that now :) -  me the cool dude  Contact 17:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, me again...was just reading more about how things operate here...it appears that I may have inadvertently indicated that I wanted the page deleted. This wasn't my intention. Sorry for the trouble.

Best, Tillander 17:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much.

Tillander 17:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Jerod Impichchaachaaha' Tate. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles 'Annaside' and 'Stub Place'
The above need deleting as they are completely innacurate. I live near the places and they are just farms and not even worth having an article on Wikipedia. Thanks.
 * As I placed on your talk page, please see WP:DEL -  me the cool dude  Contact 11:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I have a talk page?

Why is it that mods on here think they are god-like? Its rather sad to be honest, especially given the amount of innacurate literature on here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.95.131 (talk) 11:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not an administrator, however I am trusted with the rollback rights. Your edits that you made represent vandalism and hence why they got reverted. If you think that there is "innacurate literature" on Wikipedia, why don't you create an account and then do your edits using a full edit summary. -  me the cool dude  Contact 11:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I will. I really think that Wikipedia needs tidying up and I shall play my part. People find Wikipedia quite difficult to edit/navagate/alter/add/remove etc - you get the picture. I wasn't purposely vandalising, I just thought if I added that it should be deleted then it would be. Call me naive. Also, its worth mentioning theres an awful lot of literature to read just to be able to do things on Wikipedia. Sadly, not everyone can be bothered to read it. Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.95.131 (talk) 12:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting those edits on my talk page. I see you made your edit notice after mine. 

Wayne Olajuwon has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

 WAYNE  OLAJUWON 23:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No worrys :) I hope you don't mind me stealing your edit notice :) Thanks for the cookie! - Rich (MTCD) Talk Page 23:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Your welcome but I don't mind, but you should make an edit notice for your user page, too based on my edit notice.  WAYNE  OLAJUWON 23:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

User page
Thanks for reverting my user page, but it was actually me that blanked it, I just hadn't logged in. Good to know people are on the lookout for vandalism! Cheers. Dallas (talk) 12:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok... remember to log in :D - Rich (MTCD) Talk Page 12:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

 * Thank you kindly :) - Rich (MTCD) Talk Page 02:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

On subject of vandalism to the "RedLetterMedia" page
I'm not vandalizing the page. Thanks. That is actually a big part of the character and needs to be mentioned.

24.251.172.207 (talk) 00:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC) 24.251.172.207

I'm going to go edit that part back in now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.172.207 (talk) 00:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 05:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
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 revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was 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 grant you status nor 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 user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and sorry! (phillips curve)
Thanks for reverting that change to the phillips curve page.. it was a test for a buddy that thought edit capability was down and, purely coincidentally i inserted it into a spot that actually made sense, as vandalism. ... I'm not an editor, and you reverted it before I could figure out how. Just wanted to say thank you for making wikipedia such a good source, and sorry for the vandalism. 174.25.153.126 (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)