User talk:Solarra/Archive Jun

Improper revert?
Explain why you made this reversion? — raeky  t  01:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I made it because I felt it was vandalism by looking at the edit diff and the summary. Taken a second look at it now I realize that it was in fact in error and I apologize :-)
 * With Love ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀
 * Doesn't take too many of those to loose access to Huggle.... I trust an audit of your edit history would show these to be exceptionally rare? And I trust you're going to remove the warning and apologize to the user? — raeky  t  02:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand that, in this case it was a pretty strong case for spam, and even now I feel pretty strongly that it still IS spam, but I'm taking the viewpoint of good faith here and assuming the intent of the user was not malicious in nature. I'm sure one can understand seeing a link added to any page about masturbation videos could be easily misinterpreted as spam :-)  Sorry for the mistake <3
 * ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀
 * If read out of context and it wasn't the talk page, then more so, but being a talk page and in a section of the talk page specifically talking about a masturbation video by the person, all it would of taken is an additional 2-3 seconds to read the addition in context of the page, rather than quickly looking at the diff and deciding solely on that. With Huggle you have to read things in context, and this clearly from my experience of reverting vandals would make me pause and read it in context when viewing rather than quickly hitting revert. The user wasn't brand new, had a user page, had an account, was talking on a talk page, used a signature. All these show he probably wasn't a anonymous spammer and makes it more likely it was a legit edit. I trust this would be taken as a warning of using your rollback roles more carefully. Technically one misstep is enough for removal of those roles, and any seasoned editor looking at this edit would give pause before hitting revert and warn. I'll leave this by assuming good faith on your part, and trust that these issues are put to bed. — raeky  t  03:05, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your concern, please monitor my reverts and tell me any possible way I can improve. I am human afterall and prone to mistakes like anyone else <3
 * ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀
 * Just a quick cursory look at your recent edits shows a problem, that revert you warned the user for vandalism, when it clearly does not fit the narrow definition of vandalism (WP:VANDTYPES). At most it could be considered spam, but more likely by AGF, the user probably thought it to be a helpful external link. Improperly warning people for vandalism is a pretty serious concern, specifically when then rollback right is involved. —  raeky  t  03:17, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Another improper warning with this edit, again warned for vandalism, when at most you could construe it as an editing test, does not meet the narrow definition of vandalism. With two on just page 1 of your edit history, I think this is a pretty serious concern and warn you to stop using Huggle at this point until this issue is addressed. — raeky  t  03:20, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * was a link to an project related to the the article, but while informative dubious at best. The user already had a warning on his page for adding links to pages, so is it not vandalism when a user blatantly disregards warnings?  Looking at the page history of several admins shows me that is generally accepted.
 * was reverted by ClueBot NG. The fact that the user continued to add what was obviously a bad edit to the page after a revert to me constitutes vandalism.
 * Generally for cases like these I try to look at the user page to see what their history is before I revert it, while it is true I should use a more pertinent warning, it still looks to me as I am following with the intent of WP:VANDAL and WP:SPAM.
 * Regards <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀


 * is obvious vandalism, not because of the edit itself, but continuing to restore the edit after it has been reverted shows the intent is not in fact to improve Wikipedia, and per the spirit of WP:VANDAL is in fact vandalism. ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀


 * I don't know what linking to an admin's reversion has to do with yours, but there is a quite different scenario here, the user Wtmitchell warned for vandalism is a serial problematic user who has been warned many many times and banned many times for these series of edits, so AGF is probably out the window for these types of edits for that user. But even still WP:VANDNOT clearly states disruptive edits is not vandalism, and markup mistakes are not vandalism. For the edit I linked too the user had only received one warning, an automated bot warning for edit tests, and by repeating edit test type edits afterward does not meet the criteria of WP:VANDAL, please explain where it does if you disagree? Even for Wtmitchell's warning of vandalism, it wouldn't be out of place to say he probably tagged it as vandalism when it shouldn't of been. It happens all the time, and is expected from time to time, but it's expected that you at least understand what is and isn't vandalism by the strict definition of it on WP:VANDAL... ;-\ —  raeky  t  03:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged as vandalism, is it? — raeky  t  04:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged as vandalism as well. — raeky  t  04:14, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * again marked as vandalism, appears to be just adding an acronym for the show? I'm only just a few pages in yet a pattern is emerging... — raeky  t  04:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * marked as vandalism, could of been just an accidental deletion, judging by his other edits I don't see how this fits within WP:VANDAL because of previous edits, the blanking doesn't appear intentionally malicious, why would he make edits that appear to be constructive as well if that was his intention? — raeky  t  04:32, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The key take home here is vandal edits all meet one criteria, malicious intent to disrupt. If you can't clearly see malicious intent in the edits, and AGF does not fit, even broadly construed, then it MIGHT be vandalism, but all of those edits above I don't see how they are vandalism. — raeky  t  04:39, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have taken the liberty of bringing these edits to other editors (primarily in IRC) for another objective opinion as to whether or not be in fact vandalism. All of them have found with complete consensus that all of these edits save  were good reverts of vandalism.  That being said, I appreciate the concern you have and see the issue you are raising.  I take the role of anti-vandal patrolling VERY seriously, nor do I take it lightly.  I rollback vandalism by the question: is this "a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia."  If the answer is yes, I revert the edit, and not always with a vandal warning, as you can see from the talk pages from the users you referenced above.  Of the over 5000 edits I have made since being given rollback less than 1% have been mistakes or not truly vandalism, and in every single case I have made efforts to rectify the grievance or at the very least explain to the user why I felt what I did was justified, something most anti-vandal editors just don't do.  As I said above I will continue to be diligent in making sure what I revert truly warrants reversion, and I again thank you for your detailed and diligent analysis of my vandalism reverts.
 * <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀
 * Hi Solarra! First of all I am happy to see that you managed to run huggle after your report on Feedback page :), in fact, there are many users who are doing mistakes when using huggle and it's mainly because huggle is so fast. I see little point in blaming you for that, but it might be nice if you could give us any recommendation how we could improve the software so that it let people make less mistakes. Thanks Petrb (talk) 08:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Comment from Mariskahls=
... So the mostly positive reviews in front of my edited text wasn't a good source. . . for me saying the song received mostly positive reviews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariskahls (talk • contribs) 03:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Not generally no, saying something doesn't make it true, not to mention there was no edit summary suggesting as much. For information on how to source contributions please see Citing sources :-)

If you'd bothered to have read the rest of the paragraph you'd have found the song did receive mostly positive reviews. All of those reviews had sources. I just assumed that looking contextually at such a minor clarification would be common sense.

The song received mostly positive reviews. All of those reviews had sources. Is that not good enough? Mariskahls (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Some problem...
This Page i made appears to have something wrong with the Grammars. User:Meow didn't did any help to the page. You see, i'm a chinese from Hong Kong, and my English isn't the best, so that's is why i think that there is something wrong with the Grammars...i hope you can do something

Sincerely,  ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk   Contribs 06:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I have copyedited the article and believe it is ready for the article space. If you need any more help please let me know :-)

<3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

Adrian Dullard
Hi, how is correcting a broken link on a Wikipedia page "not constructive"?

I respect the fact that you've got a bunch of cute graphics on your page but I'd have thought leaving a busted external link on a Wiki page is more harmful to the concept than fixing it.

Yours in confusion,

S. Mercado — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermercado (talk • contribs) 11:20, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * To which link correction are you referring to? ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

Talkback
--  ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk   Contribs 12:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

False Tilte
Sorry but I don't want to speak about Norsk Hydro. Someone has changed my article by Norsk Hydro... I want to speak about Technal. It is a translation bof french article Technal. How I can change the title please? Could you help me ? Thank you so much!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azul Prueba (talk • contribs) 12:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * What exactly are you attempting to do? ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

False Tilte

 * I want to add my article "Technal" in english (it is a translation of Technal in french). And when I try to add my translation

someone has deleted my article and add Norsk Hydro. I have the translation in my sandbox, I must to add references. But I can"t to change the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azul Prueba (talk • contribs) 13:33, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Your edit count for June
Hi, I've seen you on IRC and clicked on your edit count. I'm curious, what got you so motivated to contribute this month? Pine✉ 23:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I wanted something to do to something I felt was worthwhile and useful while on summer break. What began as cursory interest has escalated into a full on hobby :-).
 * <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

Oregon Trail Junior High School‎
This edit was not an unexplained removal of content. As stated in the edit summary, I think the jr high school is non-notable and redirected it to its district as I understand to be a common WP:OUTCOMES. If you disagree, at least restore a non-vandalized version. The IP was me, accidentally logged out. Kilopi (talk) 23:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Replacing the name of a school with a redirect requires consensus, not one user deciding the school is not notable. I have cleared the embeded vandalism and taken the liberty of posting and WP:AFD here .  If you wish the content to redirect post it there and see if you can build consensus with other users.  Thank you :-)
 * <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀
 * Thought I could apply WP:BRD and save the bother of an AfD if the redirect was uncontroversial. Since it wasn't, I'll comment at the AfD. The non-vandalized revision will suffice while the discussion occurs. Kilopi (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 'Replacing the name of a school with a redirect requires consensus, not one user deciding the school is not notable': not strictly  true, any  editor  in  good standing  can interpret  a non  notable school  as non  notable and redirect it  per WP:BRD. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * In this case WP:BRD does not apply because this is not a controversial, or high-profile article and/or issue. Even the original editor agrees that the proper process should be followed to make sure that no one has any objections to the redirect.
 * ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀ 11:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Give explanation for reverting "ERODE"
Give explanation for deleting 10,887 words from the page "ERODE" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senthilrockz (talk • contribs) 10:45, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Much content was dubiously changed and made what appeared to be changes to fundamental content of the article that appeared dubious to me. That coupled with the lack of an informative edit summary I felt that the large scale changing of unsourced and unexplained content was possible vandalism.  Because I was not sure I did not warn you and provided you a chance to explain your edit.
 * <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

declined CSD
I'm just  letting  you  know that  I  have declined your CSD A7 on Choi Si won because after reading  the article thoroughly, I  find that  it  makes some possible claims to  notability. The fact that  it lacks references does not affect the potential notability. That said, as it  was totally  unreferenced, I  have BLPPRODed it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:00, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, when I originally tagged that article, it was not nearly the essay it is now all it had was one or two sentences about the individual with no claim to notability.
 * <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

Pax Lodge
Hi Solarra,

I've been trying to make the Pax Lodge page better but everything I do is removed. I'm a volunteer at the World Centre and I want to improve the page because its really dinky and needs help. Also it has all of those notifications at the top about it needing help. I don't know why everything keeps getting deleted, even the simple things like updating the links in London and UK in the info box.

Could you please tell me what I'm doing wrong? I just want to make the page better. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kururigby (talk • contribs) 14:49, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * When you made this edit I believed you were User:Paxlodge who had just been blocked for editing that article with a conflict of interest.  I have restored your edits, if you are looking for specifically how to improve articles on Wikipedia please see.
 * With Love <3 ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀

Declining of my article about SUNNY ZORAWAR
Hi Solarra, i hope you are doing good! Well, I am writing because you refused my article about artist SUNNY ZORAWAR on the basis of notability. He is a Director, Editor, Cinematographer, Colorist and a Actor-Model as well....

I provided the references of places where his work has featured. His documentary was screened at Taiwan Film Fest. His short doc. was featured on numerous portals...

All the references have been provided. Along with the Sony Music Video where he played the lead actor.

Honestly, I feel surprised to see that people who just party get featured on wikipedia, and REAL PEOPLE who do REAL WORLD WORK have to prove their notability.

I kindly request you to see the credibility of the person and approve the article!

Thanks a lot H.J. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjujhars (talk • contribs) 17:39, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Welcome
By the way welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for the copy edit of Trauma (medicine). Am working to improve our 80 top importance medical articles which is to be followed by translation into as many other languages as possible as described here. Wondering if you are interested in getting involved? Doc James (talk · contribs · email)(please leave replies on my talk page) 19:16, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Meetup/Oahu/1 Saturday June 23
Be there, or be unwikified!--Pharos (talk) 17:21, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

IRC
Heey Solarra, I was wondering if we could meet in IRC (#wikipedia-en) to discuss something :). Gime me a shout on my talk page when you can chat. Cheers, Riley Huntley talk No talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here. 18:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been really busy IRL, tell me when is a good time for you :-) ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀